Existing law generally designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency with the primary responsibility for the control of vehicular air pollution, and air pollution control districts and air quality management districts with the primary responsibility for the control of air pollution from all sources other than vehicular sources. Existing law authorizes air districts to adopt and implement regulations to reduce or mitigate emissions from indirect sources of air pollution. Existing law authorizes an air district to adopt a schedule of fees to be assessed on indirect sources of emissions to recover the costs of district programs related to these sources. Existing law requires the state board to adopt rules and regulations relating to vehicular emissions standards, as specified, that will achieve the ambient air quality standards required by federal law in conjunction with other measures adopted by the state board, air districts, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This bill would require the state board, if necessary to carry out that duty to achieve those ambient air quality standards, to adopt and enforce rules and regulations applicable to indirect sources of emissions. The bill would require the state board to establish a schedule of fees on facilities and mobile sources to cover the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the regulations and would require the fees to be deposited in the Air Pollution Control Fund and made available to the state board upon appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would require each air district, no later than 120 days after the adoption by the state board of indirect source regulations, to determine if the district or the state board will implement and enforce those regulations within its jurisdiction, as specified. The bill would require the state board to annually prepare a presentation on the impacts and effects of any indirect source regulations that it adopts and to post that presentation on its internet website. Existing law requires the state board to identify toxic air contaminants that are emitted into the ambient air of the state and to adopt airborne toxic control measures to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants. Existing law also requires the state board to designate any substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant under federal law as a toxic air contaminant and to establish airborne toxic control measures applicable to the substance in accordance with specified procedures. Existing law requires each district to implement and enforce an airborne toxic control measure adopted by the state board or to propose regulations enacting airborne toxic control measures on nonvehicular sources within its jurisdiction that meets certain requirements, as specified. This bill would require the state board, for a given toxic air contaminant or airborne toxic control measure, to adopt and enforce rules and regulations applicable to indirect sources of emissions. The bill would require the state board to establish a schedule of fees on facilities and mobile sources to cover the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the regulations and would require the fees to be deposited in the Air Pollution Control Fund and made available to the state board upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law makes any violation of a rule or regulation of the state board relating to nonvehicular air pollution control a misdemeanor. Because a violation of these rules or regulations of the state board with respect to nonvehicular sources subject to those rules and regulations would be a crime, this bill would 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976, among other things, requires anyone wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, except as specified, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission or local government, as provided. This bill, upon appropriation, would authorize the commission to authorize blue carbon demonstration projects, as defined, in order to demonstrate and quantify the carbon sequestration potential of these projects to help inform the state's natural and working lands and climate resilience strategies. The bill, upon appropriation, would, among other things, authorize the commission to require an applicant with a nonresidential project that impacts coastal wetland, subtidal, intertidal, or marine habitats or ecosystems to build or contribute to a blue carbon demonstration project as mitigation for those impacts.
Existing law prohibits a person, a state or local governmental agency, or a public utility from substantially diverting or obstructing the natural flow of, or substantially changing or using any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or depositing or disposing of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake, unless prescribed requirements are met, including written notification to the Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding the activity. Existing law requires the department to determine whether the activity may substantially adversely affect an existing fish and wildlife resource and, if so, to provide a draft lake or streambed alteration agreement to the person, agency, or utility. Existing law prescribes various requirements for lake and streambed alteration agreements. Existing law also establishes various exemptions from these provisions. This bill would, until January 1, 2027, exempt from these provisions, subject to certain requirements, projects to repair or reconstruct a bridge 30 feet long or less or a culvert 70 feet long or less within the County of Sutter that has been damaged or destroyed as a result of fire, flood, storm, earthquake, land subsidence, gradual earth movement, or landslide, between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2024, inclusive, except as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Sutter.
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, until January 1, 2030, exempts from its requirements active transportation plans, pedestrian plans, or bicycle transportation plans for the restriping of streets and highways, bicycle parking and storage, signal timing to improve street and highway intersection operations, and the related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption indefinitely. The bill would also exempt a transit comprehensive operational analysis, as defined, a transit route readjustment, or other transit agency route addition, elimination, or modification, from the requirements of CEQA. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a plan qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. CEQA, until January 1, 2030, exempts from its requirements certain transportation-related projects, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, transit prioritization projects, public projects located on a site that is wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as provided, for the institution or increase of bus rapid transit, bus, or light rail service, including the construction or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, and public projects for the construction or maintenance of infrastructure of facilities to charge, refuel, or maintain zero-emission public transit buses, trains, or ferries, as provided. CEQA requires, except as provided, those exempted projects to be carried out by a local agency and meet certain requirements, including certain labor requirements. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA a public project for the protection and improvement of bus rapid transit, bus, or light rail service, including the protection, operation, and maintenance, public projects for the protection, improvement, institution, or increase of microtransit, paratransit, shuttle, and ferry, and for the protection, maintenance, construction, operation, or rehabilitation of stops that will be exclusively used by zero-emission, near-zero-emission, low oxide of nitrogen engine, compressed natural gas fuel, fuel cell, or hybrid powertrain vehicles, rail or cable cars, rolling stock, or vessels. The bill would, until January 1, 2032, exempt from the requirements of CEQA a public project for the protection, improvement, institution, or increase of microtransit, paratransit, shuttle, bus, ferry, bus rapid transit, or light rail service, including the protection, maintenance, construction, operation, or rehabilitation of stops, stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, if used primarily by near-zero-emission, low oxide of nitrogen engine, compressed natural gas fuel, or hybrid powertrain vehicles, except as provided. The bill would exclude from this exemption certain public projects for the construction or rehabilitation of a ferry terminal, as provided, and, except as provided, public projects for transit services operated by a transportation network company, as defined. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. CEQA exempts from its requirements a project that consists exclusively of a combination of any of the components of specified transportation-related projects. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would, until January 1, 2040, exempt from the requirements of CEQA a project that combines any of those specified transportation-related projects and a housing development project that is either subject to a nondiscretionary approval or is exempt from CEQA, as provided. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law exempts from the requirements of CEQA public projects for the institution or increase of passenger rail service, other than light rail service that is eligible for a specified exemption, including the construction or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, which will be exclusively used by zero-emission trains. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA public projects for the improvement of passenger rail service, other than light rail service eligible for a specified exemption, including the maintenance of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, which will be exclusively used by zero-emission trains, public projects for the maintenance, construction, or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities which will be exclusively used by zero-emission certified Tier 4 or cleaner rolling stock or locomotives, as provided. The bill would exclude from this exemption public projects located in certain air basins for the maintenance, construction, or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities that will be used by certified Tier 4 or cleaner rolling stock or locomotives that are not zero-emission rolling stock or locomotives. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires certain CEQA-exempt projects exceeding specified dollar amounts to meet certain criteria, as provided. This bill would instead require certain CEQA-exempt projects that are, based on the project engineer's cost estimate, anticipated to exceed a specified dollar amount, to meet certain criteria, as provided. The bill would require the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, beginning January 1, 2026, and every two years thereafter, to adjust these amounts to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index, as provided, and publish the updated amounts on its internet website. The bill would authorize the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to implement, interpret, or make specific that provision without taking any regulatory action. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. 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.
Existing law provides various provisions applicable to all public transit and transit districts and includes specific requirements applicable to public entities that operate commuter rail or rail transit systems. This bill would prohibit a public entity that owns diesel-powered on-track equipment from selling, donating, or otherwise transferring ownership of that equipment for continued use after the public entity decommissions the equipment. The bill would exempt the sale, donation, or transfer of the ownership of that equipment from the prohibition if the equipment is deemed to be in one of specified categories of emissions standards designated by the federal government for locomotives, the equipment produces emissions equivalent to any equipment within any of those federal categories, or the diesel engine is removed from the equipment, as specified.
Existing law prohibits gill nets and trammel nets from being used for commercial purposes, except under a revocable, nontransferable permit issued by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Existing law requires the Fish and Game Commission to adopt regulations for the issuance of gill net and trammel net permits as necessary to establish an orderly gill net and trammel net fishery. Existing law prohibits the department from issuing any new gill net or trammel net permits and authorizes the department to renew an existing gill net or trammel net permit. Existing law authorizes a gill or trammel net permitholder to transfer that permit to any person qualified under the regulations adopted by the commission if the permitholder presents to the department satisfactory evidence that they have taken and landed fish for commercial purposes in at least 15 of the preceding 20 years. Existing law also authorizes the transfer of a gill or trammel net permit to another qualified individual upon the disability or death of the original permitholder, as specified. This bill would eliminate the provisions that authorize the transfer of a gill or trammel net permit to another qualified individual upon the disability or death of the original permitholder. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2027, only allow a permitholder to transfer a permit under the other transfer authorization described above to a family member pursuant to regulations adopted by the commission, as specified. After a permit is transferred pursuant to that authorization, the bill would prohibit the further transfer of that permit.
Existing law, the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, authorizes the legislative body of a local agency, as defined, to create a community facilities district to finance specified types of services within an area. Existing law prohibits a territory that is dedicated or restricted to agricultural, open-space, or conservation uses from being included within or annexed to a specified community facilities district without the landowner's consent. This bill would, notwithstanding those prohibitions, specify that for territory that is located within the regional shoreline of the County of San Mateo, the consent of a landowner is not required, if specified conditions are met. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Mateo.
Existing law makes it unlawful to take a bird, mammal, fish, reptile, or amphibian, except as authorized by law. This bill would make it unlawful for a person in California to import, cause to be imported, export, cause to be exported, transport, sell, offer for sale, possess with the intent to sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish, wildlife, or plant that was taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or statute of any state or any law, treaty, or statute of the United States with regard to fish, wildlife, or plants in effect on January 19, 2025. The bill would, upon conviction or other entry of judgment, require any seized evidence be forfeited, as specified. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on December 31, 2031, and would repeal them on January 1, 2032. Under existing law, a violation of the Fish and Game Code is a crime. Because the above provision would be part of the Fish and Game Code, a violation of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) requires the Fish and Game Commission to establish a list of endangered species and a list of threatened species pursuant to a prescribed listing process, and generally prohibits the taking of those species. Existing law requires the commission to publish a notice in the California Regulatory Notice Register upon receipt of a petition to add or remove a species from either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. This bill would require the department to determine if there is a decrease in protections by the federal government for an endangered or threatened species, as defined, and, if so, would require the department to publish written findings in the California Regulatory Notice Register that would add the species to the commission's list of provisional candidate species, as specified. The bill would require the department to report the provisional candidacy determination at the next public meeting of the commission. The bill would prohibit criminal or civil liability for an entity operating under federal authorization for take, as specified, as long as the entities are in full compliance with their federal biological opinion. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on December 31, 2031, and would repeal them on January 1, 2032. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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.
Existing law, the California Endangered Species Act, prohibits the taking of an endangered or threatened species, except in certain situations, including, if specified conditions are met, under a permit issued by the Department of Fish and Wildlife commonly known as an incidental take permit. Existing law also enumerates fully protected species and prohibits the take of fully protected species, except under limited circumstances. This bill would permit the department to authorize, under the California Endangered Species Act, the incidental take of specified fully protected species resulting from impacts attributable to a specified project on State Route 37, if certain conditions are met, including, among others, the conditions required for the issuance of an incidental take permit.
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 exempts from its requirements a change in use approved by a lead agency that is a park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency to allow public access to preexisting paved and natural surface roads, preexisting trails, preexisting pathways, preexisting disturbed areas for vehicle parking, as specified, and rail lines converted by the Great Redwood Trail Agency into trails known as the Great Redwood Trail, in areas used exclusively for nonmotorized recreation, if certain conditions are met, including that the change in use is consistent with a plan adopted by the park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency, as applicable, and does not involve a physical alteration of the affected area. Existing law requires, before making a determination to approve or carry out a change in use that is determined to be exempt from CEQA, the lead agency to, among other things, make a finding that the above-described criteria are met. Existing law requires the lead agency, if the lead agency determines that a change in use is not subject to CEQA pursuant to this exemption and determines to approve or carry out the activity, to file a notice with the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and with the county clerk of the county in which the land is located, as provided. This bill would extend the above exemption to a lead agency that is a county park agency. The bill would remove the condition that the change in use is consistent with a plan adopted by the park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency, as applicable, and would instead require the lead agency, before making the exemption determination, to adopt a natural resource management plan, or equivalent document, that includes appropriate identification of resources and management strategies for the affected area, as specified. The bill would instead require, as a condition of this exemption, that the change in use only involves minimal physical alterations and minimal improvements to the affected area, as specified. The bill would require the lead agency to make an additional finding that there is sufficient funding to implement the natural resource management plan, or equivalent document, and would require the finding, as well as the finding that the above-described criteria are met, to be based on substantial evidence. The bill would provide that its provisions do not apply where it is reasonably foreseeable that the provision of public access within a park or open space area will have a significant or cumulatively considerable effect on the environment. By imposing duties on public agencies related to the exemption, this bill would create 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
