(1) Existing federal law establishes the federal Sentinel Landscapes Partnership, as part of which the United States Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the United States Secretary of Agriculture, the United States Secretary of the Interior, and the heads of other federal departments and agencies that elect to become full partners in the program, are authorized to establish and carry out a program to preserve and restore sentinel landscapes. Existing federal law authorizes federal departments and agencies to give to any eligible owner or manager of land within a designated sentinel landscape priority consideration for participation in any easement, grant, or assistance program and to coordinate actions between their departments and agencies and with other federal, state, interstate, and local agencies, Indian tribes, and private entities. Existing federal law defines "sentinel landscape" as a landscape-scale area encompassing one or more military installations or state-owned National Guard installations and the publicly and privately owned lands that serve to protect and support the rural economy, the natural environment, outdoor recreation, and the national defense missions of a military installation or state-owned National Guard installation. This bill would enact the California Sentinel Landscapes Act and would require the Natural Resources Agency to designate a Sentinel Landscapes Program Manager to coordinate state participation in the federal Sentinel Landscapes Partnership, as prescribed. The bill would require state agencies that have conservation grant or easement authority, to the extent feasible and consistent with their existing statutory authority, to cooperate with the Sentinel Landscapes Program Manager. This bill would authorize the Wildlife Conservation Board to provide grants for habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement projects that are located within a federally designated sentinel landscape, as prescribed. The bill would create the California Sentinel Landscapes Fund, into which the Wildlife Conservation Board is authorized to deposit federal funds, grants, and gifts and donations, including interest earned, that are designated and required by the donor to be used exclusively for purposes of these projects. The bill would continuously appropriate to the Wildlife Conservation Board moneys in the fund to implement these projects, thereby making an appropriation. This bill would authorize the Department of Conservation and the Strategic Growth Council, in evaluating applications for grants pursuant to the Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation Program, the State Coastal Conservancy, and Sierra Nevada Conservancy, in evaluating applications for grants, to give priority consideration to projects within a federally designated sentinel landscape, as prescribed. This bill would require the Natural Resources Agency, in collaboration with the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, Department of Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Board, State Coastal Conservancy, Sierra Nevada Conservancy, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other relevant state entities, to regularly consult on how to align conservation opportunities with state and federal landscape protection goals. The bill would provide that implementation of the California Sentinel Landscapes Act is contingent upon the availability of federal funds, grants, gifts, donations, or other non-General Fund resources for its purposes. (2) Existing law establishes the California Farmland Conservancy Program Act, to be administered generally by the Department of Conservation. The act creates the California Farmland Conservancy Program Fund and requires moneys in the fund from federal grants, gifts, and donations, as specified, which are continuously appropriated to the department, and other moneys in the fund, upon appropriation, to be used for the purposes of the California Farmland Conservancy Program. The act authorizes the program to offer financial assistance for projects and activities on agricultural lands that support agricultural conservation and sustainable land management, including, among others, acquisition of agricultural conservation easements or fee title to protect the land's agricultural use or capacity that meets certain requirements. This bill would authorize the department to give priority consideration to applications for projects that are located within federally designated sentinel landscapes. To the extent the bill would expand the purposes for which those continuously appropriated moneys may be used, the bill would make an appropriation.
The Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act prohibits any person or public agency from importing into the state, exporting out of the state, or taking, possessing, purchasing, or selling within the state, a western Joshua tree or any part or product of the tree, except as specified. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife to permit the taking of a western Joshua tree if specified conditions are met, including, but not limited to, that the permittee mitigates all impacts to, and taking of, the western Joshua tree through measures that are roughly proportional in extent to the authorized taking of the western Joshua tree. The act authorizes, in lieu of completing the mitigation measures, a permittee to elect to satisfy the mitigation obligation by paying fees pursuant to a specified fee schedule, as provided. This bill would authorize the department to permit the taking of a western Joshua tree without payment of fees or other mitigation upon demonstration to the department that the taking of a western Joshua tree is related to the maintenance, operation, or construction of a life-sustaining service connection to a single-family residence or multifamily residence, including distribution infrastructure, as specified. The bill would require the department to grant or deny that permit within 30 days of a request, or within 10 days of a request to address a threat to health or safety. The bill would allow the permittee 60 days to complete the taking authorized by that permit and the department may extend this 60-day period at its discretion.
The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a state or local public agency to authorize a governmental entity, a special district, a nonprofit organization, a for-profit entity, a person, or another entity to hold title to and manage an interest in property held for mitigation purposes, subject to certain requirements. Existing law authorizes a governmental entity, special district, or nonprofit organization that holds the property as described above to hold an endowment conveyed for the property, except as specified. Existing law subjects the holder of an endowment to certain requirements, including that the holder certify to the project proponent or the holder of the mitigation property or a conservation easement and the local or state agency that required the endowment that it meets specified requirements. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2027. This bill would delete the above repeal date, thereby extending those provisions indefinitely. Existing law establishes the Department of Fish and Wildlife in the Natural Resources Agency. Under existing law, the department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. This bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2030, and every 5 years thereafter, to post on its internet website a summary table providing information on the status of certain endowments held as described above, as specified. The bill would require the summary table to include specified information with respect to each such endowment, including, among other things, the name of the endowment holder.
Existing law vests the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with full possession and control of the state highway system and requires Caltrans to improve and maintain the state highways. Existing law requires Caltrans, in consultation with the California Transportation Commission, to prepare a robust asset management plan to guide selection of projects for the state highway operation and protection program (SHOPP) . This bill would require the department, in connection with each revision of the asset management plan, to prepare and publish a supplemental list of wildlife connectivity improvements on the state highway system, as specified, and would require the department to submit the supplemental list to the commission for review and comments before the final list is published. Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature that Caltrans review the full extent of the state highway system, as currently maintained, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with opportunities for the public to provide data input for consideration, to develop a comprehensive approach to address wildlife connectivity needs throughout the state with the goal of implementing measures that protect, conserve, and improve the state's unique wildlife, landscapes, and natural resources. This bill would explicitly require Caltrans to undertake this duty, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with opportunities for the public to provide data and input for consideration, as specified. Existing law requires Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and other appropriate agencies, to establish an inventory of connectivity needs on the state highway system where the implementation of wildlife passage features could reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions or enhance wildlife connectivity, and to update the inventory on a biennial basis, as specified. This bill would instead require Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and other appropriate agencies, to assess potential barriers to wildlife to establish an inventory of connectivity needs on the state highway system where the implementation of wildlife passage features could reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions or enhance wildlife connectivity. The bill would require the biennial update to the inventory to be based on an analysis of transportation assets within priority route segments identified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The bill would require Caltrans to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife on the development of each update to the inventory, as prescribed. Existing law requires Caltrans to prepare a State Highway System Management Plan (SHSMP) , which includes a 10-year rehabilitation plan for the rehabilitation or reconstruction by the SHOPP of all state highways and bridges, and a 5-year maintenance plan that addresses the maintenance needs of the state highway system, as provided. Existing law requires the SHSMP to include specific quantifiable accomplishments, goals, objectives, costs, and performance measures consistent with the asset management plan described above. Existing law requires the SHSMP to be updated every 2 years. This bill would require Caltrans to include wildlife connectivity as an objective in the SHSMP.
Existing law grants to the City of Martinez all right, title, and interest of the state to 4 specified parcels of land in the County of Contra Costa, to be held in trust by the city, as trustee, for the benefit of all the people of the state for purposes consistent with the public trust doctrine, including the protection of maritime or water-dependent commerce, navigation, and fisheries, and the preservation of the lands in their natural state for scientific study, open space, wildlife habitat, and water-oriented recreation. Existing law authorizes the city to lease the trust lands under specified conditions for purposes consistent with the trust grant for limited periods, not to exceed 49 years. Existing law requires the city to reimburse the commission for all expenses incurred in administering these provisions. This bill would instead authorize the city to lease the trust lands for up to 66 years, or, subject to State Lands Commission approval, for a term longer than 66 years if the commission finds that a longer lease term is in the best interest of the state. The bill would expressly require the city to bear the costs of any study or analysis that the commission undertakes, reviews, or requests in consideration of whether a longer lease term is in the best interest of the state, as provided.
(1) The California Coastal Act of 1976 requires any person wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, as defined, 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, as provided. The act requires each local government lying in whole or in part within the coastal zone to prepare a local coastal program for that portion of the coastal zone within its jurisdiction. The act requires a land use plan of a proposed local coastal program to be submitted to the California Coastal Commission for certification. The act authorizes the commission to extend, for a period not to exceed one year, certain time limitations relating to local coastal programs for good cause. This bill would authorize the commission to retroactively extend, for good cause and a period not to exceed 5 years, a time limitation established for a local government to act on the commission's suggested modifications to a land use plan amendment that would authorize approval of an affordable housing development, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes the Natural Resources Agency and vests the agency with jurisdiction over various public resources. Existing law establishes the California Environmental Protection Agency and sets out its mission for programs, policies, and standards. Under existing law, various state entities, including the California Coastal Commission, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife have responsibilities with respect to coastal permitting and development. This bill would require the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with the Secretary for Environmental Protection, to convene a Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group for the purpose of developing a Coastal Resilience Permitting Roadmap for coastal resilience projects proposed in specified areas. The bill would require the Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group to consist of representatives from federal, state, and local agencies, including, among others, the California Coastal Commission, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The bill would, on or before July 1, 2028, require the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to submit the Coastal Resilience Permitting Roadmap to the Governor and the relevant fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature. The bill would require, on or before April 1, 2027, the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in collaboration with the California Coastal Commission, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Water Resources Control Board, and representatives from the Regional Water Quality Control Boards to convene a Coastal Resilience Permit Advisory Group to support the deliberations of the Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group.
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 certain projects. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, exempt from CEQA critical fuels reduction projects that address extremely flammable species, are conducted in communities located in high fire threat districts or very high fire hazard severity zones, and remove specified nonnative species or common species. The bill would require projects exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption to comply with the best management practices under the 2025 Statewide Fuels Reduction Environmental Protection Plan, as provided. The bill would require a lead agency carrying out a project exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, as provided, and to, within 90 days of project completion, submit a notice of project completion and a final compliance determination regarding the 2025 Statewide Fuels Reduction Environmental Protection Plan to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency and the Secretary for Environmental Protection, as provided. The bill would require, on or before March 1, 2028, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to, in consultation with the Secretary for Environmental Protection, submit a report to the Legislature with specified information summarizing the implementation of these provisions during the preceding calendar year. 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. 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.
The California Endangered Species Act requires the Fish and Game Commission to establish a list of endangered species and a list of threatened species and to add or remove species from either list if it finds, upon the receipt of sufficient scientific information, as specified, that the action is warranted. The act prohibits the taking of an endangered or threatened species, except under certain circumstances. The violation of the act is a crime. This bill would prohibit the imposition of a civil, administrative, or criminal penalty for a violation of the take prohibition if the defendant used necessary and reasonable force to protect themselves, a member of their family, or any other individual from immediate bodily harm from a species listed pursuant to the act. The bill would require a person who committed a take, or an attempted take, of a species listed pursuant to the act under these circumstances to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife within 24 hours after the take. Because a violation of this requirement would be a crime, the 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.
The Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act prohibits any person or public agency from importing into the state, exporting out of the state, or taking, possessing, purchasing, or selling within the state, a western Joshua tree or any part or product of the tree, except as specified. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife to permit the taking of a western Joshua tree if specified conditions are met, including, but not limited to, that the permittee mitigates all impacts to, and taking of, the western Joshua tree through measures that are roughly proportional in extent to the impact of the authorized taking of the western Joshua tree. The act authorizes, in lieu of completing the mitigation measures, a permittee to elect to satisfy the mitigation obligation by paying fees pursuant to a specified fee schedule, as provided. Existing law authorizes the department to include permit conditions that require the permittee to relocate one or more of the western Joshua trees, as specified. Existing law requires the department to adopt guidelines and relocation protocols, based on the best available science, to relocate western Joshua trees successfully. This bill would authorize the department to authorize, by permit, and without payment of fees or other mitigation, the relocation of up to 10 individual western Joshua trees from a parcel, as provided. The bill would require a person seeking a relocation permit to submit a permit application to the department and meet certain conditions including, among other conditions, that the tree identified in the application would be relocated within 2.5 kilometers of its original location and that the relocation be consistent with the guidelines and relocation protocols adopted by the department. The bill would require the department to maintain a list of relocation permits issued pursuant to this authority and sufficient information regarding each relocation to be able to assess the success or failure of the relocation and the factors contributing to that success or failure.
Existing law, the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act, prohibits a person or public agency from importing into the state, exporting out of the state, or taking, possessing, purchasing, or selling within the state, a western Joshua tree or any part or product of the tree, except as provided. Under existing law, the Department of Fish and Wildlife may authorize, by permit, the taking of a western Joshua tree if certain conditions are met, including, among other conditions, that the permittee mitigates all impacts to, and the taking of, the western Joshua tree. Existing law authorizes the department to enter into an agreement with a county or city to delegate to the county or city the ability to authorize the taking of a western Joshua tree associated with developing single-family residences, multifamily residences, accessory structures, and public works projects concurrent with its approval of the project if certain conditions are met. Existing law authorizes a person or public agency receiving a take authorization for a project to pay specified fees in lieu of satisfying the mitigation obligation on several bases, including if the project receives a permit issued by a county or city. Existing law requires the department to annually adjust those fees and, by December 31, 2026, and every 3 years thereafter, to adopt and subsequently amend specified regulations adjusting the fees. This bill would additionally authorize the department to enter into an agreement with a city to delegate to the city the ability to authorize the taking of a western Joshua tree associated with developing commercial and industrial projects. This bill would additionally authorize a person or public agency receiving a take authorization from the department to pay specified fees in lieu of satisfying the mitigation obligation for (1) the removal of no more than 10, or the trimming of, western Joshua trees by an owner-occupant of an existing single-family residence if the western Joshua trees are within 30 feet of the existing single-family residence or 15 feet of an existing accessory structure, or within the construction footprint, or 15 feet of the construction footprint, of a new accessory structure that is proposed to be constructed for the existing single-family residence or (2) the removal of no more than 40, or the trimming of, western Joshua trees by the proponent of a public works project if the western Joshua trees are within the construction footprint, or 15 feet of the construction footprint, of a public works project to repair, rehabilitate, replace, or maintain an existing structure. The bill would authorize a county or city operating under an agreement with the department to authorize, by permit, without mitigation and subject to a fee to cover the administrative costs of issuing the permit, a project described above in (1) or (2) . The bill would require a property owner or proponent of a public works project seeking a permit to submit a request to the county or city, as applicable, that includes specified information. The bill would require, within 60 days of receipt of a request for a permit, the county or city, as applicable, to either notify the property owner or proponent of the public works project that the county or city will issue the permit or to deny the request if it does not meet the above-described requirements. The bill would, until the department certifies a certain programmatic environmental impact report, as specified, or until January 1, 2032, whichever occurs first, exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act the issuance of a permit by the department, a county, or a city for a project described above in (1) . This bill would delay from December 31, 2026, to June 30, 2027, the date by which the department is required to adopt regulations adjusting the fees for the taking of a western Joshua tree paid in lieu of mitigation. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1927.8 of the Fish and Game Code proposed by SB 1062 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1062 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
