ABX3 81 - An Act to Add Section 65701 to the Government Code, Relating to Land Use.

Land use: City of Industry: stadium complex. 2009-2010 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
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, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect,… More
(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, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements.

Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements.

This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry, if specified requirements are met. The bill would require the city to require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of the exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill also would exempt from any legal requirement concerning the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and prohibit those requirements from resulting in the invalidation of, the city’s approval of, and decisions regarding, specified actions taken with respect to the stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development. The bill additionally would provide that a consistency determination is not required by the city for any decision with respect to those actions.

(2)The bill would have retroactive application.

(3)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.

(4)The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008.

This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 

An Act to Add Section 65701 to the Government Code, Relating to Land Use.

ABX3 81 — 2009-2010 Legislature

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, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements.

Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements.

This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry,… More
(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, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements.

Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements.

This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry, if specified requirements are met. The bill would require the city to require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of the exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill also would exempt from any legal requirement concerning the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and prohibit those requirements from resulting in the invalidation of, the city’s approval of, and decisions regarding, specified actions taken with respect to the stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development. The bill additionally would provide that a consistency determination is not required by the city for any decision with respect to those actions.

(2)The bill would have retroactive application.

(3)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.

(4)The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008.

This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Add Section 65701 to the Government Code, Relating to Land Use.
Author(s)
Isadore Hall
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Land use: City of Industry: stadium complex
Major Actions
Introduced9/09/2009
Referred to Committee
Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations9/09/2009
Passed Assembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media9/09/2009
Passed Assembly9/10/2009
Passed Assembly9/10/2009
Passed Senate10/14/2009
Passed Senate10/14/2009
Passed Senate10/14/2009
Passed Senate10/14/2009
Failed passage in Senate10/14/2009
Passed Senate10/14/2009
Presented to the governor (enrolled)10/19/2009
Became law (chaptered).10/22/2009
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
currently selectedAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.9/09/2009This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
13 voted YES 0 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet MediaDo pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.9/09/2009This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media
7 voted YES 0 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 81 HALL Assembly Third Reading Amend By FLETCHER Set #1 Motion to Lay on the Table By TORRICO Third Extraordinary Session9/10/2009This bill PASSED the Assembly
36 voted YES 25 voted NO 19 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 81 HALL Assembly Third Reading Third Extraordinary Session9/10/2009This bill PASSED the Assembly
54 voted YES 18 voted NO 8 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Suspend Joint Rules10/14/2009This bill PASSED the Senate
28 voted YES 7 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Invoke Constitution10/14/2009This bill PASSED the Senate
28 voted YES 7 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Set 110/14/2009This bill PASSED the Senate
22 voted YES 14 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Lay on Table10/14/2009This bill PASSED the Senate
21 voted YES 13 voted NO 6 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Re-Refer10/14/2009This bill DID NOT PASS the Senate
13 voted YES 20 voted NO 7 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateW/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall By Price10/14/2009This bill PASSED the Senate
21 voted YES 14 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced9/09/2009
currently selectedVote9/09/2009Do pass.
9/09/2009From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (September 9). From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (September 9). Read first time. To print. Referred to Com. on A.,E.,S.,T., & I.M.
select this voteVote9/09/2009Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
9/10/2009Read second time. To third reading. Art. IV, Sec. 8(b) of the Constitution suspended. (Ayes 58. Noes 7. Page 408.) Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 54. Noes 18. Page 409.)
9/10/2009In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage9/10/2009AB 81 HALL Assembly Third Reading Amend By FLETCHER Set #1 Motion to Lay on the Table By TORRICO Third Extraordinary Session
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage9/10/2009AB 81 HALL Assembly Third Reading Third Extraordinary Session
10/14/2009Withdrawn from committee. Art. IV, Sec. 8(b) of the Constitution suspended. (Ayes 28. Noes 7. Page 266.) Joint Rule 10.5 suspended. (Ayes 28. Noes 7. Page 267.) Read second time. Read third time, passed, and to Assembly. (Ayes 21. Noes 14. Page 268.)
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Suspend Joint Rules
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Invoke Constitution
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Set 1
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Lay on Table
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall Re-Refer
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage10/14/2009W/O REF. TO FILE AB81 Hall By Price
10/15/2009In Assembly. To enrollment.
10/19/2009Enrolled and to the Governor at 11:30 a.m.
10/22/2009Approved by the Governor.
10/22/2009Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 30, Statutes of 2009-10 Third Extraordinary Session.

Average contributions given to Assemblymembers from interest groups that…

supported this motion

$23,265
$13,146
$49,627
$796
$2,608
$2,735
YES$92,177
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
NO$0

opposed this motion

Municipal & county government organizations [About]
Business services [About]
Average given to Assemblymembers who voted:
$0
$885
YES$885
$0
$0
NO$0
8 Organizations Supported and 3 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Add Section 65701 to the Government Code, Relating to Land Use.: Do pass.

8 organizations supported this motion

Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
California State Association of Electrical Workers
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
California State Pipe Trades Council
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
IAFF Local 1014
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
Los Angeles County Federation of Labor
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
Majestic Realty
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .

3 organizations opposed this motion

American Planning Association
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
County of Los Angeles
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .
Walnut City
(2009, September 10). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from .

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Anything missing?

Help your colleagues by suggesting an organization that took a position on this vote.
How do you know they have this position? Please include a link to a newspaper article, organization's website, or other source.
We will use it only to contact you about this form. Your address will never appear on this site.

MapLight editors may add this organization after checking the sources you listed above. Thank you for helping to improve our site.

Cancel
Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Assemblymembers in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2010.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$74,956$0Not Voting
Charles CalderonDCA-58$88,600$1,500Yes
Connie ConwayRCA-34$19,000$0Yes
Joe CotoDCA-23$0$0Yes
Mike DavisDCA-48$23,550$0Yes
Kevin De LeonDCA-45$127,900$2,000Yes
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$139,300$2,000Yes
Isadore HallDCA-52$100,300$2,000Yes
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$12,350$4,000Yes
Jeff MillerRCA-71$26,750$0Yes
Jim NielsenRCA-2$63,600$0Yes
John PerezDCA-46$302,773$4,900Not Voting
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$178,855$1,000Not Voting
Jose SolorioDCA-69$145,300$0Yes
Audra StricklandRCA-37$0$0Yes
Tom TorlaksonDCA-11$451,650$0Yes

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$74,956$0Not Voting
Charles CalderonDCA-58$88,600$1,500Yes
Connie ConwayRCA-34$19,000$0Yes
Joe CotoDCA-23$0$0Yes
Mike DavisDCA-48$23,550$0Yes
Kevin De LeonDCA-45$127,900$2,000Yes
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$139,300$2,000Yes
Isadore HallDCA-52$100,300$2,000Yes
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$12,350$4,000Yes
Jeff MillerRCA-71$26,750$0Yes
Jim NielsenRCA-2$63,600$0Yes
John PerezDCA-46$302,773$4,900Not Voting
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$178,855$1,000Not Voting
Jose SolorioDCA-69$145,300$0Yes
Audra StricklandRCA-37$0$0Yes
Tom TorlaksonDCA-11$451,650$0Yes

Interest Groups that supported this motion

$ Donated
Construction unions$991,550
Police & fire fighters unions and associations$395,035
Electrical workers/IBEW$261,600
Real estate developers & subdividers$53,950
Labor unions$40,900
Chambers of commerce$11,850

Interest Groups that opposed this motion

$ Donated
Municipal & county government organizations$17,400
Business services$0
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range