Bill Commons

CA SB 322

in committee

Urban equestrian inclusion zones.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Quick answers

Did CA SB 322 pass?

Not yet. CA SB 322 is in committee as of 2025-08-29 and has not come to a final vote. Latest recorded action (2025-08-29): August 29 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

What is CA SB 322 about?

Existing law, the Urban Agriculture Incentive Zones Act, authorizes, under specified conditions, a city, county, or city and county to establish by ordinance an urban agriculture incentive zone for the purpose of entering into voluntary contracts with landowners to enforceably restrict the use of vacant, unimproved, or otherwise blighted lands for small-scale production of agricultural crops and animal husbandry. Existing law prohibits a city, county, or city and county from entering into a new contract or renewing an existing contract under these provisions after January 1, 2029. This bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county, under specified conditions, to establish by ordinance an urban equestrian inclusion zone within its boundaries for the purpose of entering into enforceable contracts, as described, with landowners, on a voluntary basis, for restricting land use for equestrian activities, as defined. The bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from entering into a new contract or renewing an existing contract under these provisions after January 1, 2029. Existing law, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, prohibits certain counties and cities from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that would have any of specified effects, including reducing the intensity of land use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district in effect at the time of the proposed change, below what was allowed under the land use designation or zoning ordinances of the county or city, as in effect on January 1, 2018, except as specified. Existing law defines "reducing the intensity of land use" for these purposes. This bill would include entering into enforceable contracts with landowners for restricting land use for equestrian activities within the definition of "reducing the intensity of land use." The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

Who sponsors CA SB 322?

Menjivar is the primary sponsor of CA SB 322.

Description

Existing law, the Urban Agriculture Incentive Zones Act, authorizes, under specified conditions, a city, county, or city and county to establish by ordinance an urban agriculture incentive zone for the purpose of entering into voluntary contracts with landowners to enforceably restrict the use of vacant, unimproved, or otherwise blighted lands for small-scale production of agricultural crops and animal husbandry. Existing law prohibits a city, county, or city and county from entering into a new contract or renewing an existing contract under these provisions after January 1, 2029. This bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county, under specified conditions, to establish by ordinance an urban equestrian inclusion zone within its boundaries for the purpose of entering into enforceable contracts, as described, with landowners, on a voluntary basis, for restricting land use for equestrian activities, as defined. The bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from entering into a new contract or renewing an existing contract under these provisions after January 1, 2029. Existing law, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, prohibits certain counties and cities from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that would have any of specified effects, including reducing the intensity of land use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district in effect at the time of the proposed change, below what was allowed under the land use designation or zoning ordinances of the county or city, as in effect on January 1, 2018, except as specified. Existing law defines "reducing the intensity of land use" for these purposes. This bill would include entering into enforceable contracts with landowners for restricting land use for equestrian activities within the definition of "reducing the intensity of land use." The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

Introduced
2025-02-11
Latest action
2025-08-29 — August 29 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
Bill type
bill
Last updated

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Menjivarauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

  1. 2025-02-11

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

  2. 2025-02-12

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 14.

  3. 2025-02-19

    Referred to Com. on L. GOV.

    referral-committee

  4. 2025-03-24

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  5. 2025-04-04

    Set for hearing April 23.

  6. 2025-04-21

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  7. 2025-04-23

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 871.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  8. 2025-04-25

    Set for hearing May 5.

  9. 2025-05-05

    May 5 hearing postponed by committee.

  10. 2025-05-06

    Set for hearing May 12.

  11. 2025-05-12

    From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to consent calendar.

    committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  12. 2025-05-13

    Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

    reading-1,reading-2

  13. 2025-05-15

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 34. Noes 0. Page 1090.) Ordered to the Assembly.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  14. 2025-05-15

    In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

    reading-1

  15. 2025-05-29

    Referred to Com. on L. GOV.

    referral-committee

  16. 2025-06-24

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  17. 2025-07-03

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (July 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  18. 2025-08-20

    August 20 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  19. 2025-08-29

    August 29 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

Versions

  • 02/11/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-11Compare
  • 03/24/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-24Compare
  • 04/21/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-04-21Compare
  • 06/24/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-06-24Compare
  • SB322Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar

    2025-04-23 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Durazo: yes
    • Choi: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Wiener: yes
  • Consent Calendar 2nd

    2025-05-15 · pass · 34-0

    Member-level votes (40)
    • Becker: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Archuleta: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • McGuire: yes
    • Menjivar: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Valladares: yes
    • Hurtado: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Blakespear: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Strickland: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Cortese: yes
    • Allen: yes
    • Limón: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Choi: yes
    • Jones: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Ochoa Bogh: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • McNerney: yes
    • Padilla: other
    • Alvarado-Gil: other
    • Grove: other
    • Rubio: other
    • Cervantes: other
    • Reyes: other
  • Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-07-02 · pass · 9-0

    Member-level votes (10)
    • Stefani: yes
    • Ta: yes
    • Ransom: yes
    • Blanca Rubio: yes
    • Hoover: yes
    • Ward: yes
    • Carrillo: yes
    • Ramos: yes
    • Wilson: yes
    • Pacheco: other

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

Attribution

Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

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=SB 322. 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.