California 2021-2022 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 168 — California Environmental Quality Act: public higher education: campus population.

Last action — Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

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 (EIR) on a project that the lead agency 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. Existing law makes the selection of a location for a particular campus of public higher education and the approval of a long-range development plan subject to CEQA, requires preparation of an EIR, and requires environmental effects relating to changes in enrollment levels to be considered for each campus or medical center of public higher education in the EIR prepared for the long-range development plan. Existing law makes the approval of a project on a particular campus or medical center of public higher education subject to CEQA and authorizes it to be addressed in a tiered environmental analysis based upon a long-range development plan EIR. This bill would delete the provision requiring the environmental effects relating to changes in enrollment levels be considered in the EIR prepared for the long-range development plan. The bill would provide that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA. The bill would authorize the court, if the court determines that increases in campus population exceed the projections adopted in the most recent long-range development plan and analyzed in the supporting EIR, and those increases result in significant environmental impacts, to order the campus or medical center to prepare a new, supplemental, or subsequent EIR. The bill would authorize the court, if a new, supplemental, or subsequent EIR has not been certified within 18 months of the court's order, to enjoin increases in campus population that exceed the projections adopted in the most recent long-range development plan and analyzed in the supporting EIR, as provided. The bill would specify that any injunction or judgment in effect as of the effective date of this bill suspending or otherwise affecting enrollment is unenforceable. The bill would specify that the above provisions apply retroactively to any decision related to enrollment or changes in enrollment made before the effective date of this bill. This bill would appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the Regents of the University of California for purposes of this act for the 2021-22 fiscal year. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  2. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  3. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (March 14).

  4. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  5. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  6. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  7. From inactive file.

  8. Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Skinner.

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (September 7).

  11. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  12. (Ayes 30. Noes 9. Page 2303.)

  13. Senate rules suspended.

  14. Joint Rule 61 suspended. (Ayes 30. Noes 9. Page 2302.)

  15. Referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  16. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  17. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 56. Noes 18. Page 495.)

  18. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  19. Ordered to second reading.

  20. Withdrawn from committee.

  21. Assembly Rule 96 suspended. (Ayes 53. Noes 17. Page 432.)

  22. Re-referred to Com. on BUDGET.

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

  24. Referred to Com. on BUDGET.

  25. Read first time.

  26. From printer. May be heard in committee February 9.

  27. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

  • Committee on Budget · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 11 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Committee on Budget

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.

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

Do pass

Passed 16 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9001
Republican 2001
Democratic 5001
Total 16003
% of votes cast 84%0%0%16%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Newman — Yea
Min — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Melendez — Not Voting
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5001
Unaffiliated 9000
Republican 3000
Total 17001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Pan — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Newman — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Min — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 168 BUDGET Assembly Third Reading By TING

Passed 56 Yea · 18 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 25200
Unaffiliated 31704
Republican 0901
Total 561805
% of votes cast 71%23%0%6%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Holden — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Salas — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Wood — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Ting — Yea
Low — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Levine — Yea
Daly — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Medina — Yea
Gray — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Chau — Yea
Smith — Nay
Voepel — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Cunningham — Nay
Kiley — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Kamlager — Not Voting
Quirk — Not Voting
Mayes — Not Voting
Frazier — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Nay
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Davies, Laurie Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment education
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 168 do?
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 (EIR) on a project that the lead agency 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. Existing law makes the selection of a location for a particular campus of public higher education and the approval of a long-range development plan subject to CEQA, requires preparation of an EIR, and requires environmental effects relating to changes in enrollment levels to be considered for each campus or medical center of public higher education in the EIR prepared for the long-range development plan. Existing law makes the approval of a project on a particular campus or medical center of public higher education subject to CEQA and authorizes it to be addressed in a tiered environmental analysis based upon a long-range development plan EIR. This bill would delete the provision requiring the environmental effects relating to changes in enrollment levels be considered in the EIR prepared for the long-range development plan. The bill would provide that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA. The bill would authorize the court, if the court determines that increases in campus population exceed the projections adopted in the most recent long-range development plan and analyzed in the supporting EIR, and those increases result in significant environmental impacts, to order the campus or medical center to prepare a new, supplemental, or subsequent EIR. The bill would authorize the court, if a new, supplemental, or subsequent EIR has not been certified within 18 months of the court's order, to enjoin increases in campus population that exceed the projections adopted in the most recent long-range development plan and analyzed in the supporting EIR, as provided. The bill would specify that any injunction or judgment in effect as of the effective date of this bill suspending or otherwise affecting enrollment is unenforceable. The bill would specify that the above provisions apply retroactively to any decision related to enrollment or changes in enrollment made before the effective date of this bill. This bill would appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the Regents of the University of California for purposes of this act for the 2021-22 fiscal year. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Who sponsors AB 168?
AB 168 is sponsored by Committee on Budget.
What is the current status of AB 168?
This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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 168?
Track AB 168 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 168

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 168

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →