CA SB 676
enactedCalifornia Environmental Quality Act: judicial streamlining: state of emergency: wildfire.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Quick answers
Did CA SB 676 pass?
Yes. CA SB 676 has been enacted into law as of 2025-10-10. Latest recorded action (2025-10-10): Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 550, Statutes of 2025.
What is CA SB 676 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 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 require, on and after January 1, 2027, for a project, located in a geographic area for which the Governor declared a state of emergency on or after January 1, 2023, that is to maintain, repair, restore, demolish, or replace property or facilities damaged or destroyed by wildfire, and the project is not otherwise exempt from CEQA, as specified, the lead agency to prepare the record of proceeding concurrently with the administrative process. The bill would also require an action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of an environmental impact report, or the adoption of a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration, for the project to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings. The bill would require an applicant to agree to pay the costs of the trial court and court of appeal in hearing and deciding any action or proceeding brought under these provisions, as provided. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to implement these requirements. The bill would require the project to be consistent with the applicable zoning and land use ordinances. By requiring a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the administrative process, 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.
Who sponsors CA SB 676?
Limón is the primary sponsor of CA SB 676, joined by 16 cosponsors.
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 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 require, on and after January 1, 2027, for a project, located in a geographic area for which the Governor declared a state of emergency on or after January 1, 2023, that is to maintain, repair, restore, demolish, or replace property or facilities damaged or destroyed by wildfire, and the project is not otherwise exempt from CEQA, as specified, the lead agency to prepare the record of proceeding concurrently with the administrative process. The bill would also require an action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of an environmental impact report, or the adoption of a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration, for the project to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings. The bill would require an applicant to agree to pay the costs of the trial court and court of appeal in hearing and deciding any action or proceeding brought under these provisions, as provided. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to implement these requirements. The bill would require the project to be consistent with the applicable zoning and land use ordinances. By requiring a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the administrative process, 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.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-21
- Latest action
- 2025-10-10 — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 550, Statutes of 2025.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Limónauthor
- Blakespearauthor
- Cervantesprincipal coauthor
- Corteseprincipal coauthor
- Richardsonprincipal coauthor
- Sternprincipal coauthor
- Archuletacoauthor
- Caballerocoauthor
- Graysoncoauthor
- Pérezcoauthor
- Reyescoauthor
- Umbergcoauthor
- Bryancoauthor
- Macedocoauthor
- Pachecocoauthor
- Sanchezcoauthor
- Zburcoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-21
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,referral-committee
2025-02-24
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.
2025-02-24
Read first time.
reading-1
2025-03-05
Referred to Com. on E.Q.
referral-committee
2025-03-11
Set for hearing April 2.
2025-03-24
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-03
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on RLS. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 635.) (April 2). Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-09
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
referral-committee
2025-04-10
Set for hearing April 22.
2025-04-23
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 836.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-25
Set for hearing May 5.
2025-05-05
May 5 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-05-16
Set for hearing May 23.
2025-05-23
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-05-23
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1209.) (May 23).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-05-27
Ordered to special consent calendar.
2025-05-29
Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-3
2025-05-29
From special consent calendar on motion of Senator Gonzalez.
2025-06-03
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 1453.) Ordered to the Assembly.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-06-04
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
reading-1
2025-06-09
Referred to Coms. on NAT. RES. and JUD.
referral-committee
2025-07-08
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 7).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-07-09
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-07-16
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-07-16
Coauthors revised.
2025-08-20
August 20 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-08-29
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (August 29).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-02
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-09-03
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-08
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3008.) Ordered to the Senate.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-08
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
2025-09-09
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2717.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-17
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-10
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2025-10-10
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 550, Statutes of 2025.
became-law
Versions
- 02/21/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-21Compare
- 03/24/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-24Compare
- 07/09/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-07-09Compare
- 09/02/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-09-02Compare
- 09/12/25 - Enrolled — 2025-09-12Compare
- 10/10/25 - Chaptered — 2025-10-10Compare
- SB676Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- 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(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Rules]
2025-04-02 · pass · 8-0
Member-level votes (8)
- Pérez: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Hurtado: yes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
2025-04-22 · pass · 13-0
Member-level votes (13)
- Allen: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Laird: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Stern: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Niello: yes
- Wiener: yes
Placed on suspense file
2025-05-05 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Wahab: yes
Do pass
2025-05-23 · pass · 6-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Caballero: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Dahle: other
3rd Reading SB676 Limón et al.
2025-06-03 · pass · 39-0
Member-level votes (40)
- Valladares: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Choi: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Becker: yes
- Laird: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Stern: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Niello: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Grove: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Allen: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Alvarado-Gil: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Jones: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Limón: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Reyes: other
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]
2025-07-07 · pass · 12-0
Member-level votes (14)
- Hoover: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Flora: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Haney: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Wicks: other
- Garcia: other
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-15 · pass · 12-0
Member-level votes (12)
- Stefani: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Papan: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Zbur: yes
Do pass as amended.
2025-08-29 · pass · 11-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Elhawary: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Solache: yes
- Sanchez: other
- Ta: other
- Tangipa: other
- Dixon: other
SB 676 Limón Senate Third Reading By Bennett
2025-09-08 · pass · 79-0
Member-level votes (80)
- Addis: yes
- Haney: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Berman: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- DeMaio: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Hart: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Soria: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Papan: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Davies: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Krell: yes
- Chen: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Bains: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Lee: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Ta: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Macedo: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Ward: yes
- Fong: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Lackey: yes
- Flora: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Nguyen: other
Unfinished Business SB676 Limón et al. Concurrence
2025-09-09 · pass · 40-0
Member-level votes (40)
- Richardson: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Jones: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Stern: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Becker: yes
- Alvarado-Gil: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Grove: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Laird: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Limón: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Niello: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Allen: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Choi: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Blakespear: yes
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 676. 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.