CA AB 2231
enactedCalifornia Environmental Quality Act: hospital projects.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA AB 2231 pass?
Yes. CA AB 2231 has been enacted into law. Latest recorded action (2026-09-30): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 926, Statutes of 2026.
What is CA AB 2231 about?
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 (EIR) 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 establishes administrative procedures for the review and certification of the EIR for a project and judicial review procedures for any action or proceeding brought to challenge the lead agency's decision to certify the EIR or to grant project approvals. This bill would establish streamlined procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the environmental review and approvals granted for an environmental leadership hospital campus project, defined by the bill as a construction project of a hospital campus in the City of Santa Clara, under certain conditions. The bill would require the city council of the City of Santa Clara to certify the project for the streamlined judicial review, as specified, if it finds the project will meet those conditions. The bill would require the applicant of the environmental leadership hospital campus project to take certain actions in order for those specified procedures to apply to the project. The bill would require a certified project to meet certain labor requirements. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2027, to adopt rules of court establishing procedures requiring actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of the certification of an environmental impact report for a certified environmental leadership hospital campus project or the granting of any project approval, including any appeals to the court of appeal or the Supreme Court, to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The bill would require the lead agency to concurrently prepare the record of proceedings with the environmental review, as provided. Because the bill would impose additional duties on a local agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Santa Clara. 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.
Who sponsors CA AB 2231?
Ahrens is the primary sponsor of CA AB 2231.
Description
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 (EIR) 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 establishes administrative procedures for the review and certification of the EIR for a project and judicial review procedures for any action or proceeding brought to challenge the lead agency's decision to certify the EIR or to grant project approvals. This bill would establish streamlined procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the environmental review and approvals granted for an environmental leadership hospital campus project, defined by the bill as a construction project of a hospital campus in the City of Santa Clara, under certain conditions. The bill would require the city council of the City of Santa Clara to certify the project for the streamlined judicial review, as specified, if it finds the project will meet those conditions. The bill would require the applicant of the environmental leadership hospital campus project to take certain actions in order for those specified procedures to apply to the project. The bill would require a certified project to meet certain labor requirements. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2027, to adopt rules of court establishing procedures requiring actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of the certification of an environmental impact report for a certified environmental leadership hospital campus project or the granting of any project approval, including any appeals to the court of appeal or the Supreme Court, to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The bill would require the lead agency to concurrently prepare the record of proceedings with the environmental review, as provided. Because the bill would impose additional duties on a local agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Santa Clara. 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.
- Introduced
- 2026-03-23
- Latest action
- 2026-09-30 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 926, Statutes of 2026.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Ahrensauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-09-30
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 926, Statutes of 2026.
became-law
2026-09-30
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2026-09-10
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
executive-receipt
2026-08-30
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling.
2026-08-30
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-30
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 6873.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-28
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2026-08-27
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-24
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-21
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-04
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-03
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-07-01
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (June 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-06-24
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 24). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-06-10
Referred to Coms. on E.Q. and JUD.
referral-committee
2026-05-12
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-05-11
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 70. Noes 1. Page 5005.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-05-07
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-05-06
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (May 6).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-04-23
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
referral-committee
2026-04-22
Read second time and amended.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-04-21
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (April 20).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2026-03-24
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
referral-committee
2026-03-23
Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
referral-committee
2026-03-23
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-02-20
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
2026-02-19
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
Versions
- 02/19/26 - Introduced — 2026-02-19Compare
- 03/23/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-03-23Compare
- 04/22/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-04-22Compare
- 08/21/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-08-21Compare
- 09/03/26 - Enrolled — 2026-09-03Compare
- 09/30/26 - Chaptered — 2026-09-30Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
- AB2231Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
Votes
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-04-20 · pass · 14-0
Member-level votes (14)
- Zbur: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Haney: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Pellerin: yes
Do pass.
2026-05-06 · pass · 14-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Solache: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Fong: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Ta: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Krell: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Arambula: other
AB 2231 Ahrens Assembly Third Reading
2026-05-11 · pass · 70-1
Member-level votes (80)
- Jackson: yes
- Lee: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Lackey: yes
- Haney: yes
- Flora: yes
- Berman: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Davies: yes
- Mark González: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ta: yes
- Hart: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Patel: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Fong: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Chen: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Papan: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Bains: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Addis: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Krell: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Ward: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Kalra: yes
- DeMaio: no
- Solache: other
- Lowenthal: other
- Gallagher: other
- Muratsuchi: other
- Michelle Rodriguez: other
- Soria: other
- Celeste Rodriguez: other
- Quirk-Silva: other
- Arambula: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]
2026-06-24 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Valladares: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Allen: yes
- Hurtado: yes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-06-30 · pass · 13-0
Member-level votes (13)
- Wahab: yes
- Niello: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Laird: yes
- Stern: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Allen: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Durazo: yes
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-10-03T17:36:53.234286Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 2231. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.