California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: In Committee 3 R cosponsors

AB 311 — Environmental quality: Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014.

Last action — From committee: Without further action pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA and a procedure for the preparation and certification of the record of proceedings upon the filing of an action or proceeding challenging a lead agency's action on the grounds of noncompliance with CEQA. The Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (Proposition 1) , approved by the voters on the November 4, 2014, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would require the public agency, in certifying the environmental impact report and in granting approvals for specified water storage projects funded, in whole or in part, by Proposition 1, to comply with specified procedures. Because a public agency would be required to comply with those new procedures, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the public agency to concurrently prepare the record of proceedings for the project. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2016, to adopt a rule of court to establish procedures applicable to actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of a public agency's action in certifying the environmental impact report and in granting project approval for those projects that require the actions or proceedings, including any appeals therefrom, be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 370 days of the certification of the record of proceedings. The bill would prohibit a court from staying or enjoining those projects unless it makes specified findings. (2) 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Without further action pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

  2. In committee: Set, second hearing. Failed passage.

  3. Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  4. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.

  5. In committee: Set, first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.

  6. Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  7. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.

  8. Referred to Coms. on NAT. RES. and W., P., & W.

  9. From printer. May be heard in committee March 15.

  10. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Baker · Cosponsor
  • Bates · Cosponsor
  • Bigelow · Cosponsor
  • Brough · Cosponsor
  • Chang · Cosponsor
  • James Gallagher · Primary
  • Shannon Grove · Cosponsor
  • Harper · Cosponsor
  • Tom Lackey · Cosponsor
  • Mayes · Cosponsor
  • Olsen · Cosponsor
  • Vidak · Cosponsor
  • Travis Allen · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 12 co-sponsors · 109 not signed on · 2 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (12)

Not signed on (109)

109 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 109 →

"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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Reconsideration.

Passed 9 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8000
Republican 1000
Total 9000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Rendon — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Harper — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Williams — Yea
Wood — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 311 do?
(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA and a procedure for the preparation and certification of the record of proceedings upon the filing of an action or proceeding challenging a lead agency's action on the grounds of noncompliance with CEQA. The Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (Proposition 1) , approved by the voters on the November 4, 2014, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would require the public agency, in certifying the environmental impact report and in granting approvals for specified water storage projects funded, in whole or in part, by Proposition 1, to comply with specified procedures. Because a public agency would be required to comply with those new procedures, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the public agency to concurrently prepare the record of proceedings for the project. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2016, to adopt a rule of court to establish procedures applicable to actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of a public agency's action in certifying the environmental impact report and in granting project approval for those projects that require the actions or proceedings, including any appeals therefrom, be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 370 days of the certification of the record of proceedings. The bill would prohibit a court from staying or enjoining those projects unless it makes specified findings. (2) 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 311?
AB 311 is sponsored by Baker, Bates, Bigelow, Brough, Chang, Gallagher, James (Republican), Grove, Shannon (Republican), Harper, Lackey, Tom (Republican), Mayes, Olsen, Vidak, and Travis Allen.
What is the current status of AB 311?
This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 311?
Track AB 311 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 311

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 311

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →