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.

This bill would authorize lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

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.

This bill would authorize lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

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.

This bill would authorize lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider the positive specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

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. Existing law exempts from compliance under CEQA housing projects that satisfy specified criteria.

This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to definitions that apply in connection with the latter provision. authorize lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider the positive economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

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. Existing law exempts from compliance under CEQA housing projects that satisfy specified criteria.

This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to definitions that apply in connection with the latter provision.

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2782

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/20/18

AYES: Wieckowski, Stone, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Skinner, Stern

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-1, 5/29/18 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes lead agencies, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in describing and evaluating projects, to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA.
2. Prohibits a lead agency from approving a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment unless both of the following occur:
   1. The agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect:
      1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
      2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
   2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

This bill authorizes CEQA lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

Background

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, including not approving or carrying out the project (the “no project alternative”).

In general, any significant effects on the environment must be mitigated. However, a lead agency may approve a project without mitigating a significant effect if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This is known as a “statement of overriding considerations,” which is described in Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:

(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”

(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Comments

1. Purpose of bill. According to the author, “The current EIR process does not include considering the negative consequences within an area of a project not being approved. For example, a project that increases density within the area could lead to overall GHG reduction. Without considering all potential negative and positive impacts of a project, the value within a community is diminished, or a careless project can be avoided. It is beneficial to a region for every aspect of a project and its impact to be considered, as part of the final approval or denial of a project under environmental review.”
2. Does the bill create new criteria for evaluating projects under CEQA, or just duplicate existing law and practice? This bill authorizes a lead agency to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.. The CEQA Guidelines update already contains language that is similar to AB 2782:

Ҥ 15124. Project Description. The description of the project shall contain the following information but should not supply extensive detail beyond that needed for evaluation and review of the environmental impact.

(a) The precise location and boundaries of the proposed project shall be shown on a detailed map, preferably topographic. The location of the project shall also appear on a regional map.

(b) A statement of the objectives sought by the proposed project. A clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project and may discuss the project benefits.

(c) A general description of the project’s technical, economic, and environmental characteristics, considering the principal engineering proposals if any and supporting public service facilities.”

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/7/18)

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/7/18)

None received

Prepared by:

8/8/18 10:34:44

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Wieckowski, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: AB 2782

SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act

ANALYSIS:

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA.
2. Prohibits a lead agency from approving a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment unless both of the following occur:
   1. The agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect:
      1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
      2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
   2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

This bill: authorizes lead agencies, in describing and evaluating projects, to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.

Background

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, including not approving or carrying out the project (the "no project alternative").

In general, any significant effects on the environment must be mitigated. However, a lead agency may approve a project without mitigating a significant effect if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This is known as a "statement of overriding considerations," which is described in Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:

(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”

(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author, “The current EIR process does not include considering the negative consequences within an area of a project not being approved. For example, a project that increases density within the area could lead to overall GHG reduction. Without considering all potential negative and positive impacts of a project, the value within a community is diminished, or a careless project can be avoided. It is beneficial to a region for every aspect of a project and its impact to be considered, as part of the final approval or denial of a project under environmental review.
2. Does the bill create new criteria for evaluating projects under CEQA, or just duplicate existing law and practice? This bill authorizes a lead agency to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of, and the negative impacts of denying, the project.. The CEQA Guidelines update already contains language that is similar to AB 2782:

Ҥ 15124. Project Description. The description of the project shall contain the following information but should not supply extensive detail beyond that needed for evaluation and review of the environmental impact.

(a) The precise location and boundaries of the proposed project shall be shown on a detailed map, preferably topographic. The location of the project shall also appear on a regional map.

(b) A statement of the objectives sought by the proposed project. A clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project and may discuss the project benefits.

(c) A general description of the project's technical, economic, and environmental characteristics, considering the principal engineering proposals if any and supporting public service facilities.

SOURCE:

Author

SUPPORT:

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

OPPOSITION:

None received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2782

Author:(Friedman)

As Amended Ver:April 30, 2018

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Authorizes a lead agency, in describing and evaluating a project in an environmental review document prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project, as well as the negative impacts of denying the project, based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA.
2. Prohibits a lead agency from approving a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment unless both of the following occur:
   1. The agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect:
      1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
      2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
   2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, negligible fiscal impact.

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, including not approving or carrying out the project (the "no project alternative").

In general, any significant effects on the environment must be mitigated. However, a lead agency may approve a project without mitigating a significant effect if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This is known as a "statement of overriding considerations," which is described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 as follows:

(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."

(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

This bill authorizes a lead agency to consider two things: (1) broad benefits of a project and (2) negative impacts of denying the project. These two considerations seem to be captured formally in the current EIR process via the statement of overriding considerations and evaluation of the no project alternative.

Analysis Prepared by: Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0003007

Date of Hearing: May 23, 2018

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2782

Author:(Friedman) – As Amended Ver:April 30, 2018

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: N

SUMMARY:

This bill authorizes a lead agency, in describing and evaluating a project in an environmental review document prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to consider specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including the regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project and the negative impacts of denying the project. This bill provides any benefits or negative impacts considered pursuant to this section shall be based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Negligible fiscal impact.

COMMENTS:

Background and Purpose. CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects of applicable projects approved or undertaken by public agencies. For projects that are not exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine if the projects may have significant impact on the environment. If the initial study shows no significant impact, a negative declaration is issued. If the project may significantly impact the environment, a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, including the identification of environmental impacts and required mitigation, compliance and reporting measures intended to reduce the environmental impacts to the extent feasible. CEQA also provides for public process and legal challenges.

In general, any significant effects on the environment must be mitigated. However, a lead agency may approve a project without mitigating a significant effect if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR infeasible, and the lead agency finds specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This is known as a "statement of overriding considerations."

According to the author:

The current EIR process does not include considering the negative consequences within an area of a project not being approved. For example, a project that increases density within the area could lead to overall GHG reduction.

Without considering every negative and positive impact of a project, the value of a project within a community is diminished, or a careless project can be avoided. It is beneficial to a region consider every aspect of a project and its impact, as part of the environmental review process.

This bill authorizes a lead agency to consider the broad benefits of a project and the negative impacts of denying the project consistent with existing CEQA standards.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 23, 2018

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

Al Muratsuchi, Acting Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2782 (

Author:Friedman) – As Amended Ver:April 2, 2018

SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act

SUMMARY: Authorizes a lead agency, in describing and evaluating a project in an environmental review document prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to consider the positive economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project and the potential negative impacts of denying the project.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA.
2. Prohibits a lead agency from approving a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment unless both of the following occur:
   1. The agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect:
      1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
      2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
   2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Background. 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, including not approving or carrying out the project (the "no project alternative").

In general, any significant effects on the environment must be mitigated. However, a lead agency may approve a project without mitigating a significant effect if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and the agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This is known as a "statement of overriding considerations," which is described in Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:

(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”

(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

1. Author's statement:

The current EIR process does not include considering the negative consequences within an area of a project not being approved. For example, a project that increases density within the area could lead to overall GHG reduction.

Without considering every negative and positive impact of a project, the value of a project within a community is diminished, or a careless project can be avoided. It is beneficial to a region consider every aspect of a project and its impact, as part of the environmental review process.

1. Does the bill create new criteria for evaluating projects under CEQA, or just duplicate existing law and practice? This bill authorizes a lead agency to consider two things: (1) broad benefits of a project and (2) negative impacts of denying the project. These two considerations seem to be captured formally in the current EIR process via the statement of overriding considerations and evaluation of the no project alternative.
2. Suggested amendments. The author and the committee may wish to consider the following amendments to make the bill consistent with existing CEQA standards:

21082.4. In describing and evaluating a project in an environmental review document prepared pursuant to this division, the lead agency may consider the positive specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project and the potential negative impacts of denying the project. Any benefits or negative impacts considered pursuant to this section shall be based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association of Realtors

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. /