help



join the cool folks
and advertise on aroundthecapitol.com

california political news & opinion
california legislation > SB 292

Microsoft Word version




------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 292|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524| |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------


UNFINISHED BUSINESS


Bill No: SB 292
Author: Padilla (D), et al.
Amended: 9/7/11
Vote: 21


PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT

ASSEMBLY FLOOR
: 63-13, 9/7/11 - See last page for vote


SUBJECT : California Environmental Quality Act: Los
Angeles stadium

SOURCE : AEG
Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO


DIGEST : This bill establishes expedited judicial review
procedures and requires implementation of specified traffic
and air quality mitigation measures under the California
Environmental Quality Act for the proposed downtown Los
Angeles football stadium and convention center project.

Assembly Amendments delete the Senate version of this bill
relating to postsecondary education and places the above
issues into this bill.

ANALYSIS : Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), a lead agency with the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
CONTINUED





SB 292
Page
2

discretionary project to evaluate the environmental
effects of its action and prepare a negative
declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or
environmental impact report (EIR). If an initial study
shows that the project may have a significant effect on
the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR. A
lead agency must base its determination of significant
effects on substantial evidence.

2. Authorizes judicial review of CEQA actions taken by
public agencies, following the agency's decision to
carry out or approve the project. Challenges alleging
improper determination that a project may have a
significant effect on the environment, or alleging an
EIR does not comply with CEQA, must be filed in the
Superior Court within 30 days of filing of the notice of
approval.

Specifically, this bill provides for the following:

1. Expedited judicial review

A. Requires a petition challenging certification of
the EIR, or the granting of any initial project
approvals, for the stadium project to be filed with
the Second District Court of Appeal within 30 days of
the lead agency's notice of determination on the EIR.


B. Requires the petitioner to file and serve the
opening brief within 40 days of filing the petition.

C. Requires the respondent and real party in interest
to file and serve the opposition brief within 25 days
of the filing of the opening brief.

D. Requires the petitioner to file and serve the
reply brief within 20 days of the filing of the last
opposition brief.

E. Provides that Rule 8.220 of the California Rules
of Court, which permits the court to grant an
extension of time to file briefs for good cause, does
not apply. Instead prohibits the court from granting







SB 292
Page
3

any extension, except upon showing of extraordinary
good cause, and limits any extension to minimum the
court deems necessary.

F. Permits the court to appoint a special master to
assist with the case. If a special master is
appointed, requires the project applicant to pay all
reasonable costs, up to $150,000. Permits the court
to request additional special master costs in excess
of $150,000 be paid by the applicant.

G. Requires the court to hear and decide the case
within 60 days of the filing of the last timely reply
brief. If the court fails to meet this deadline, the
applicant may withdraw, thereby terminating the case
and the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction and
eliminating the applicant's duty to comply with the
traffic and air quality mitigation measures described
below.

H. Requires a petition to review the Court of
Appeal's decision to be filed with the Supreme Court
within 15 days of the decision, requires parties to
file opposition briefs 15 days after that, and
requires the Supreme Court to decide the case within
the earlier of 30 days of the petition or 15 days of
the opposition brief.

I. Requires all briefs and notices to be served
electronically.

2. Lead agency/EIR procedures

A. Requires the project EIR to include a specified
notice that it is subject to the provisions of the
section added by this bill.

B. Requires the lead agency to conduct an
informational workshop within 10 days of release of
the Draft EIR and hold a public hearing within 10
days before close of the public comment period.

C. Requires the lead agency and applicant to
participate in nonbinding mediation with any party







SB 292
Page
4

who submitted comments on the Draft EIR and requested
mediation within five days of the close of the public
comment period, with the cost to be paid by the
applicant. Requires mediation to end within 35 days
of the close of the public comment period.

D. Requires the lead agency to adopt any measures
agreed upon in mediation. Prohibits a commenter from
raising an issue addressed by that measure in a
lawsuit.

E. Permits the lead agency to ignore written comments
submitted after the close of the public comment
period, with specified exceptions for materials
addressing new information released after the close
of the public comment period.

F. Makes operation of this bill contingent on
completion of the project EIR before June 1, 2013, by
providing that the section added by this bill shall
be inoperative on June 1, 2013, and repealed on
January 1, 2014, if the lead agency files its notice
of determination on the EIR after June 1, 2013.

G. Requires the lead agency to provide all EIR
documents and comments in an electronic format,
certify the record within five days of filing the
notice of determination, provide the record to a
party upon written request, and provide the record to
the Court of Appeal within 10 days of the filing of
petition for review.

3. Mitigation requirements

A. Declares the intent of the Legislature that the
project minimizes traffic congestion and air quality
impacts that may result from private car trips to the
stadium through the existing requirements of CEQA, as
supplemented by the mitigation measures specified by
this bill.

B. Requires the lead agency, as a condition of
approval of the project, to require the applicant to
implement measures to achieve "carbon neutrality"







SB 292
Page
5

(zero net emissions of greenhouse gases from private
car trips) by the end of the first season a National
Football League (NFL) team has played at the stadium.
Requires the lead agency to place highest priority
on feasible emission reduction measures on the
stadium site and neighboring communities. Requires
use of offset credits only after feasible local
measures have been implemented.

C. Requires the applicant to implement specified
measures to ensure that the stadium achieves a "trip
ratio" (cars divided by spectators) that is no more
than 90 percent of the trip ratio at any other NFL
stadium (i.e., 10 percent less car trips than the
best comparable stadium).

D. Requires the lead agency to adopt a protocol to
implement these measures, including criteria and
guidelines to determine trip ratio.

E. Requires the applicant to report to the lead
agency after the second, third, fourth and fifth NFL
seasons, regarding the results of trip reduction
measures.

F. Requires the lead agency, following the fourth
season trip ratio report, to determine whether there
is adequate data to determine whether the 90 percent
trip ratio has been achieved. If data is not
adequate, the lead agency shall collect the data
necessary to make the determination, with reasonable
costs paid by the applicant.

G. If, after the fifth season trip ratio report, the
lead agency determines that the trip ratio is no more
than 90 percent of trip ratio of the other NFL
stadium with the lowest trip ratio, the lead agency
shall require the applicant to implement additional
feasible measures to achieve the 90 percent target.
Any trip reduction measure used at another NFL
stadium shall be presumed feasible. The feasibility
of any mitigation measure not used at another NFL
stadium shall be governed by the substantial evidence
test. The applicant's obligation to pay for transit







SB 292
Page
6

improvements is limited to:

(1) Temporary expansion of transit line capacity
to serve stadium events.

(2) Providing charter buses or similar services
to serve stadium events.

(3) Paying a fair share of a public fixed or
light rail station used by event spectators.

H. Requires the applicant to submit additional annual
trip ratio reports if the lead agency requires
additional mitigation measures, until the lead agency
determines the applicant has achieved the 90 percent
target for two consecutive seasons, or until the
tenth season, whichever is earlier.

This bill states its provisions are severable.

Comments

CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental
effects of applicable projects undertaken or approved by
public agencies. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an
initial study is prepared to determine whether the project
may have a significant effect on the environment. If the
initial study shows that there would not be a significant
effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare a
negative declaration. If the initial study shows that the
project may have a significant effect on the environment,
the lead agency must prepare an EIR.

Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed
project, identify and analyze each significant
environmental impact expected to result from the proposed
project, identify mitigation measures to reduce those
impacts to the extent feasible, and evaluate a range of
reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. Prior to
approving any project that has received environmental
review, an agency must make certain findings. If
mitigation measures are required or incorporated into a
project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.







SB 292
Page
7

Generally, CEQA actions taken by local public agencies can
be challenged in Superior Court once the agency approves or
determines to carry out the project. CEQA appeals are
subject to unusually short statutes of limitations. Under
current law, court challenges of CEQA decisions generally
must be filed within 30-35 days, depending on the type of
decision.

This bill establishes special procedures and requirements
for the proposed Convention Center Modernization and
Farmers Field Project (football stadium) in downtown Los
Angeles. The expedited judicial review procedures
contemplate the Court of Appeal rendering a decision on any
lawsuit challenging the City of Los Angeles' approval of
the stadium under CEQA within 175 days, reducing the
existing judicial review timeline by 100 days or more,
while creating new burdens for the court and petitioners to
meet the compressed schedule. The mitigation requirements
would require the stadium to achieve "carbon neutrality"
for private car trips by the end of the first NFL season
and 10 percent less car trips than the best comparable
stadium over a 10-year period.

FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes

SUPPORT : (Verified 9/7/11)

AEG (co-source)
Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO (co-source)
2nd Call
Ability First
Ability First
American Airlines
Asian Business Association
AVT Event Technology
Black Business Association
California Hospital Medical Center
California Labor Federation
California State Council of Laborers
CDS: Events and Exhibits
Central City Association
CSI
Czarnowski







SB 292
Page
8

Downtown Los Angeles Central Business Improvement District
Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council
Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising
FCI Management
Focus Exhibits & Trade Show Services
Freeman Global Experience Specialists
Greater Los Angeles African American Chamber of Commerce
Greater Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Historic Downtown Los Angeles Business Improvement District
Independent Cities Association
Inner City Arts
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees,
Locals 33, 80, 706, 768, 857
International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental
and Reinforcing Ironworkers
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 11
International Union of Painters and Allied Trades 831 Trade
Show
Ironworkers Locals 300, 416, 433
Juniorversity
Konica Minolta Business Solutions
Laborers' International Union of North America, Local 300
Latin Business Association
LAX Coastal Chamber of CommerceLos Angeles Parking
Association
Leap
Live Church Los Angeles
Living Independently Through Employment
Local Union 250
Los Angeles Business Council
Los Angeles City Franchise Tax Association
Los Angeles Conservation Corps
Los Angeles County Federation of Labor
Los Angeles Opportunities Industrialized Center
Maguire Investments
Make-Up Artists and Hair Stylist Guild, Local 706
Midnight Mission
Millennium Biltmore Hotel, Los Angeles
National Association of Women Business Owners
Net Systems
NetSerce Systems, Inc.
Office Furniture Group
Optek
Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 36







SB 292
Page
9

Para Los Ninos
Pathpoint
People Assisting the Homeless
Peoples Choice Staffing, Inc
Progress, Inc.
Sheet Metal Workers Local 105
Sho-Link
Silverlake Conservatory of Music
South Park Business Improvement District
Southern California Pipe Trades, District Council 36
Southland Partnership Corporation/P.O.W.E.R. Collaborative
Network
St. Vincent Medical Center
State Building and Construction Trades Council
Stuart M. Ketchum Real Estate Investments
SuiteEvents.com
Teamsters Locals 396, 986
Trade Show Contractors Association of Southern California
Union Payroll Agency
Unite Here! Local 11
United Association Locals 78, 250
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Universal Payroll
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
Volunteers of America - Greater Los Angeles
YWCA Greater Los Angeles


ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 63-13, 9/7/11
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Beall, Bill Berryhill,
Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer,
Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Beth Gaines, Galgiani, Gatto,
Gordon, Grove, Halderman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Roger
Hernández, Huber, Jeffries, Knight, Lara, Logue, Bonnie
Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning,
Morrell, Nielsen, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,
Portantino, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torres,
Valadao, Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, John A. Pérez
NOES: Ammiano, Atkins, Donnelly, Fletcher, Garrick, Hagman,
Hill, Huffman, Jones, Nestande, Norby, Silva, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Gorell, Hueso, Mansoor








SB 292
Page
10


DLW:kc 9/8/11 Senate Floor Analyses

SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE

**** END ****