Advertising displays: redevelopment agency project areas.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 684 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 684.
You're tracking SB 684
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 684 — Advertising displays: redevelopment agency project areas.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 544, Statutes of 2013.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2013. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 7 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
Existing law, the Outdoor Advertising Act, provides for the regulation by the Department of Transportation of advertising displays, as defined, within view of public highways. The act regulates the placement of off-premises advertising displays along highways that generally advertise business conducted or services rendered or goods produced or sold at a location other than the property upon which the display is located. Under the act, advertising displays advertising businesses and activities within the boundary limits of, and as a part of, an individual redevelopment agency project may, with the consent of the redevelopment agency governing the project, be considered to be on premises, as specified. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. The Community Redevelopment Law authorizes the establishment of redevelopment agencies in communities to address the effects of blight, as defined. Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies, as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies. This bill would provide that an advertising display advertising businesses and activities within the boundary limits of, and as a part of, an individual redevelopment agency project, as the project boundaries existed on December 29, 2011, may remain and be considered an on-premises display, until January 1, 2023, if the advertising display meets specified criteria. This bill would authorize, on and after January 1, 2022, the applicable city, county, or city and county to request from the department an extension for good cause, as specified, beyond January 1, 2023, not to exceed the expiration of the redevelopment project area. The bill would require a specified certification of a local agency authorizing one of these advertising displays, and would require the local agency to ensure that the display conforms to the bill's requirements. By imposing a new requirement in that regard on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. By imposing new conditions on a redevelopment project advertising display to remain lawfully erected, a violation of which would constitute a misdemeanor, this bill would also impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/04/13 - Chaptered Current pdf October 04, 2013
- Enrolled 09/17/13 - Enrolled pdf September 17, 2013
- Amended 09/06/13 - Amended Assembly pdf September 06, 2013
- Amended 08/13/13 - Amended Assembly pdf August 13, 2013
- Amended 05/15/13 - Amended Senate pdf May 15, 2013
- Amended 04/01/13 - Amended Senate pdf April 01, 2013
- Introduced 02/22/13 - Introduced pdf February 22, 2013
- SB684 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 544, Statutes of 2013.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 1 p.m.
-
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2372.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
-
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 3140.) Ordered to the Senate.
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. (Page 2942.)
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
From consent calendar.
-
Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.
-
From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 21).
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 12).
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 7). Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.
-
Referred to Coms. on G.O. and H. & C.D.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 34. Noes 0. Page 968.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Ordered to second reading.
-
Read third time and amended.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
-
Set for hearing May 13.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0. Page 759.) (April 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing April 30.
-
Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on T. & H.
-
Set for hearing April 9.
-
Referred to Com. on T. & H.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 26.
-
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Hill · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Hill
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 71 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 78 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (78)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Mansoor | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Bocanegra | — | Yea |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Garcia | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Fox | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Bocanegra | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 15 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 0% | 0% | 12% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Not Voting |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 31 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Total | 34 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 87% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lieu | — | Not Voting |
| Price | — | Not Voting |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Not Voting |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Not Voting |
| Roth | — | Not Voting |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 0% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Not Voting |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 684 do?
- Existing law, the Outdoor Advertising Act, provides for the regulation by the Department of Transportation of advertising displays, as defined, within view of public highways. The act regulates the placement of off-premises advertising displays along highways that generally advertise business conducted or services rendered or goods produced or sold at a location other than the property upon which the display is located. Under the act, advertising displays advertising businesses and activities within the boundary limits of, and as a part of, an individual redevelopment agency project may, with the consent of the redevelopment agency governing the project, be considered to be on premises, as specified. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. The Community Redevelopment Law authorizes the establishment of redevelopment agencies in communities to address the effects of blight, as defined. Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies, as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies. This bill would provide that an advertising display advertising businesses and activities within the boundary limits of, and as a part of, an individual redevelopment agency project, as the project boundaries existed on December 29, 2011, may remain and be considered an on-premises display, until January 1, 2023, if the advertising display meets specified criteria. This bill would authorize, on and after January 1, 2022, the applicable city, county, or city and county to request from the department an extension for good cause, as specified, beyond January 1, 2023, not to exceed the expiration of the redevelopment project area. The bill would require a specified certification of a local agency authorizing one of these advertising displays, and would require the local agency to ensure that the display conforms to the bill's requirements. By imposing a new requirement in that regard on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. By imposing new conditions on a redevelopment project advertising display to remain lawfully erected, a violation of which would constitute a misdemeanor, this bill would also impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
- Who sponsors SB 684?
- SB 684 is sponsored by Hill.
- What is the current status of SB 684?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2013. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 684?
- Track SB 684 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 684
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 684
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →