REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE

ANALYST

DATE: TO: FROM:

June 17,2011 Honorable Members of the Information Technology & Government Affairs Committee Ge~TY ~ille~fl...../J~ F. Chief Legislative Anal;'" Council File No. 11-0002-S9 Assignment No. 11-02-0101

- .........

SUBJECT:

Resolution (Krekorian-Rosendahl) to oppose legislation to subvert or accelerate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process for a National Football League (NFL) stadium in Downtown Los Angeles.

CLA RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution (Krekorian-Rosendahl) to include in the City's 2011-12 State Legislative Program, OPPOSITION to any legislation that would subvert or accelerate the CEQA process for a proposed NFL stadium in Downtown Los Angeles. SUMMARY Resolution (Krekorian-Rosendahl), introduced on February 2, 2011, advises that the City Council is currently considering a speculative proposal to develop an NFL stadium where the Los Angeles Convention Center currently sits. The Resolution further advises that media accounts have speculated that the developers of the stadium, Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG), are currently seeking rei ief or an exemption from the CEQA process. The Resolution advises that the CEQA process provides vital, holistic analysis of development proposals- analysis that the City Council needs in order to have a full and complete debate about the stadium proposal. BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act is a State statute (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.), and its Guidelines for implementation (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.), require state and local agencies to identify the environmental impacts of proposed discretionary activities or projects, determine if the impacts will be significant, and identify alternatives and mitigation measures that will substantially reduce or eliminate significant impacts to the environment, if feasible. The Los Angeles Municipal Code requires discretionary review (including environmental clearance) of proposed commercial/industrial developments with more than 50,000 square feet, or residential projects having more than 50 dwelling units, or a project that generates more than 500 trips. After a project is submitted to the Planning Department, staff conducts a review to determine the type of environmental clearance that will be needed for a proposed development project, such as: Negative Declaration (ND); Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND); or an Environmental Impact Report (ErR). If Planning Department staff determines that a proposed development project will have significant impacts on the environment, then an EIR is required to evaluate those impacts.

City of IndustlY & Environmental Clearance: On October 22,2009, the Governor approved AB SI(Hall), and thereafter, it was chaptered into law by the Secretary of State (Chapter 30, Statutes of2009-10). AB 81 was controversial because for the first time it carved out a one time exception from CEQA that removed the ability of a municipality or private party to challenge the EIR in court, for the proposed football stadium project in the City of Industry', AB SI was approved after an EIR for a "business center" project had been developed, and required all of the EIR mitigations to be applied to that project, and after a Supplemental EIR was prepared that reflected changes to the original project by including a football stadium. AB 81 noted that the stadium project would generate 12,000 potential construction jobs, 6,700 permanent jobs in the Los Angeles region, and over $760 million in annual economic activity, and over $21 million in tax revenues annually for state, county, and local governments. More specifically, AB 81 enacted the following provisions relative to the environmental clearance process: analysis and approval of the project from CEQA since the project had been approved under a prior project that was larger in its proposed footprint (4.S Million square feet instead of 3 Million square feet) and from future litigation from private parties concerning the content of a General Plan or consistency with a General Plan. 2. Required the stadium complex and associated development to comply with mitigation measures contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program adopted by the City of Industry. 3. Provided that the provisions of the bill would apply prospectively and retroactively to any litigation pending at the effective date of enactment into law of AB SI. AB 81 noted that the City ofIndustry adequately identified and planned for mitigation of the environmental effects associated with the stadium project in 2004, when it approved the EIR for its Industry Business Center Project, a 4.8 million square foot project that included industrial, office, and commercial uses. Approval of the project included certification of the project's EIR, which was not challenged. In 200S, the project's developer modified the 2004 proposed project to cover a smaller area 00 million square feet rather than 4.8 million square feet as proposed in the original project. The project's land uses were changed to include a football stadium and related facilities that would be capable of seating 80,000 people and provide parking for 25,000 vehicles. Thereafter, a supplemental EIR was prepared to reflect changes to the original project, instead of preparing an entirely new EIR for the project. Planning Department comments: We asked the Planning Department for their comments relative to the CEQA exemption process allowed by AB 81, and they indicated that it is important to note that this was the first bill of its kind, and was controversial, inasmuch as CEQA has been in place since 1970. Planning indicates that in 2004 an EIR was prepared and certified for the site for an unrelated project. In 2009, a Supplemental EIR was prepared and certified for the stadium. It included mitigation conditions. Thereafter, the City of Walnut, a neighboring city, challenged the project under CEQA. In support of a major economic project, the State legislature carved out a one time exception from CEQA for this project. The bill came after the EIR had been developed, and still required all of the EIR mitigations to be applied to the project. Essentially, AB 81 removed the ability of a municipality or private party to challenge the EIR in court.
1. Exempted the proposed stadium project and the City ofIndustry's

! The City of Industry was incorporated on June 18, 1956. It is located in the County of Los Angeles within a 12 square-mile area with a population of approximately 800 residents. The city is almost entirely zoned industrial or commercial. The City of Industry borders the cities of Diamond Bar, La Puente, Pomona, and Walnut.

CONCLUSION The CEQA exemption allowed by AB 81 came after the City of Industry certified the EIR, and approved the project. It did not preclude the development of an EIR or the implementation of environmental mitigations. However, if a similar exemption were enacted for a project currently in the development review process, it would raise questions as to how it would impact the EIR currently under preparation. As such, it is appropriate to oppose any legislation that would subvert or accelerate the CEQA process for a proposed NFL stadium in Downtown Los Angeles, inasmuch as it would circumvent CEQA, and the developer for the city's proposed stadium is currently conducting public hearings for the EIR and there is no indication that the CEQA process is being accelerated or subverted. DEPARTMENTS City Planning City Attorney NOTIFIED

Attachments: Resolution (Krekorian-Rosendahl). AB 81 (Hall).

12,Ll-o ~.
Roberto R. Mejia Analyst

0t~

GFM:rrm

Wf-Jl,:rUj\~,;, ,illY official position ofthe C:ity olLos ;\ng(:le~; Ivilh respectto IcgicdaUun rules, rcgu i::J! ions Ill' policies proposed to or pending before H locnl, :;I,I(e or Iederul govcrnillCl1(al body or ilgcncy must have Ills( been adopted iii the f<HTnofa !\c;;olullon by the C'ity Council with the concurrence of the Mayor; and

is current Iy conside ri ng ,I spccu Iat i ve propo:;ul to develop [\11:1,stadium where lhe LJ)s Angeles Convention Center currcutly sits: and 'NT-IFlU j\S, rued ia acc( lilill;: Ita vi: ::PGCU latedthat the de velopcrs 0 f such tl stad iurn are currently seeking relief or an exemption from the processes 01' the C,~Hlil(Jiltia Environmental Qualily Acl or CF:QA; and WIIEREAS, (he CL:Ql\ procc~;:) provides analysis that the City Counci I requires
proposals:

WIIF~ PJ':AS, the City Council

<I

10

vital, hoi istic analysis of' development proposals have a full and complete debate about those

NOW. 'II rFF{ I-:FOR 1-:,llr~ rrlrr::SOLVFD that will, the Cl)IlCUITCIIC(: of the Mayor, that by the adoption of this Resolution, the Ci ty 0 I' Los Angeles hereby inc Itide; i II its 20 II and :W12 St<fle Legislative Program opposition 10 any legislation that would subvert 01" accelerate the CI~();\ pmccss I(l! i.l proposed r'-1I:L stadiumin I )ownlmvn Los /\ngck:,:.

PRI':SENfEJ)

UY:

P ;\ II L Kl\ I'.K 0 FI ,L\N

Councilmcmbcr,
21ld

District

Assembly

nm No. 81

CHAPTER 30 An act to add Section 65701 to the Government Code, relating to land use.
[Approved by Governor October 22,2009. Filed with Secretary of State October 22,2009.]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

AB 81, Hall. Land use: City of Industry: stadium complex. (1) 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, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements. Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements. This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31,2009, to the City ofIndustry, if specified requirements are met. The bill would require the city to require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of the exemption,. the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill also would exempt from any legal requirement conceming the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and prohibit those requirements from resulting in the invalidation of, the city's approval of, and decisions regarding, specified actions taken with respect to the stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development. The bill additionally would provide that a consistency determination is not required by the city for any decision with respect to those actions.

97

Ch.30

-2-

(2) The bill would have retroactive application. (3) 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 speeified reason. (4) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution. The people of the State of California do enact asfollows: SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) The state is in the midst of one of the most significant economic recessions in the history ofthe United States, which has dramatically affected the economic health of the state's citizens. (b) The unemployment rate in California, as of July 2009, is at the highest level since World War II, with statewide unemployment at 12.1 percent. As of July 2009, unemployment in Los Angeles County is at 12.5 percent, unemployment in San Bernardino County is at 13.9 percent, and unemployment in Riverside County is at 14.7 percent. (c) State and local government revenues have fallen and many local governments are facing significant budget shortfalls requiring reductions in public services, including essential public services, and staff layoffs and furloughs. (d) The state is addressing the serious economic decline through a number oflegislative, programmatic, and budgetary measures in an effort to address the real need for economic stimulus to generate jobs and economic growth for our citizens, the state, and local governments. (e) The City ofIndustry has approved a proposed stadium complex and associated development project adjacent to State Route 57 and State Route 60, which will provide much needed economic activity in the Los Angeles region, including Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. (f) The proposed stadium complex and associated development represents an approximately two billion dollar ($2,000,000,000) investment in the local economy. The proposed stadium complex and associated development will generate over 12,000 construction jobs and 6,700 permanent jobs in the Los Angeles region. (g) The proposed stadium complex and associated development will generate over seven hundred sixty million dollars ($760,000,000) in annual

97

-3-

Ch.30

economic activity and twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000) in tax revenues annually for state, county, and local governments. (h) In 2004, the City of Industry certified an environmental impact report and approved a project of approximately 4,800,000 square feet on the proj ect site. The 2004 environmental impact report analyzed aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazardous materials, hydrology and water, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, utilities, recreation, and transportation and traffic associated with the 2004 project. The environmental impact report determined that there would be a less than significant impact on any biological resources, cultural resources, mineral resources, and recreation. There was no legal challenge to the 2004 environmental impact report or associated project approvals. (i) In 2008, the City ofIndustry prepared a supplemental environmental impact report for a proposed stadium complex and associated development. The supplemental environmental impact report analyzed aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, hazardous materials, hydrology and water, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities associated with the stadium complex and associated development, and included an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the stadium complex and associated development. U) In 2009, the City ofIndustry certified the supplemental environmental impact report and approved an approximately 3,000,000 square foot project on the project site and a new state-of-the-art stadium. The conditions of approval approved by the City ofIndustry for the stadium restrict the number of events that may be held in the stadium to not more than 45 events in each calendar year, of which a maximum of 30 may be at full stadium capacity, and require compliance with the mitigation measures and project design features listed in the environmental impact report or supplemental environmental impact report for the stadium complex and associated development. (k) The stadium complex and associated development, exeluding the stadium complex itself, comprises approximately 1,500,000 square feet less building square footage than the previous approved project for substantially the same project area. (f) The supplemental environmental impact report for the stadium complex and associated development found that the traffic generated by the stadium complex and associated development would generate substantially less weekday traffic and less traffic annually than the original proposed project at the same site. In addition, the site is served by an existing Metrolink station that is less than one-half mile from the project site. (m) Due to the substantial reduction in permitted industrial uses at the project site and significant decrease in overall automobile trips as a result of the stadium complex and associated development, the stadium complex and associated development will result in significantly decreased diesel emissions and reduced annual overall air quality impacts as compared to the previously proposed project.

97

Ch.30

-4-

(n) Given the economic crisis facing the state, high rates of unemployment in the construction sectors, high rates of unemployment in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and decreased state and local revenues, the Legislature desires to address the economic crisis affecting the state by providing for the ability ofthe stadium complex and associated development to proceed if the project complies with all project design features and mitigation measures provided for in the City of Industry'S project approvals and the environmental impact report or supplemental environmental impact report. SEC. 2. Section 6570 I is added to the Government Code, to read: 65701. Notwithstanding any other provision oflaw, the City ofIndustry's approval of, and decisions regarding, the development, planning, design, location, site acquisition, financing, leasing, construction, operation, and maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval, for which an application for that stadium complex and associated development was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City ofIndustry, and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development, including, but not limited to, roadways and utilities that serve the stadium complex or associated development, are exempt from any legal requirement concerning the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and those requirements shall not result in the invalidation of those approvals and decisions. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a consistency determination is not required by the City ofIndustry for any decision with respect to the development, planning, design, location, site acquisition, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval, for which an application for that stadium complex and associated development was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry, and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development, including, but not limited to, roadways and utilities that serve the stadium complex or associated development. SEC. 3. (a) The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) does not apply to any activity or approval, necessary for or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City ofIndustry, and that meets all of the following requirements: (1) The supplemental environmental impact report for the stadium complex and associated development was prepared and certified by the City ofIndustry within five years before the effective date ofthe act adding this section.

97

-5-

Ch.30

(2) A Metrolink station is located, as ofthe effective date of the aet adding this section, within one-half mile from the project site for the stadium complex and associated development. (3) The supplemental environmental impact report for the stadium comple.x ~nd associated development included an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. (4) The conditions of approval approved by the City of Industry, or the mitigation measures in the supplemental environmental impact report for the stadium complex and associated development, restricts the number of events that may be held in the stadium complex to not more than 45 events in each calendar year. (b) The City of Industry, upon determining that the requirements of paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (a), have been met, shall certify satisfaction of those requirements. (c) Notwithstanding the exemption provided by this section, the City of Industry shall require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. SEC. 4. This act applies prospectively and retroactively to any approvals by the City of Industry with respect to the stadium complex and associated development, and also applies prospectively and retroactively to any causes of action and claims that are pending as of the effective date of this act and for which nofinal nonappealable judgment has been entered prior to the effective date ofthis act. SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV ofthe California Constitution because the stadium complex and associated development will provide unique and urgently needed economic stimulus to the Los Angeles region, including Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and including an estimated 18,700 jobs, seven hundred sixty million dollars ($760,000,000) in annual economic activity, and twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000) in estimated annual tax revenues. SEC. 6. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees,or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. SEC. 7. This act addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation on December 19, 2008, pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 10 of Article IV of the California Constitution.

o
97

ABX3 81 Assembly BILL, 3rd Extraordinary Session - History

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-1

O/bil!/asmlab ~0051-01 00/abx3 ~81~ bi ...

COMPLETE

BILL HISTORY

BILL NUMBER A.B. No. 81 (3rd Ex. Sess.) AUTHOR Hall TOPIC : Land use: City of Industry: stadium TYPE OF BILL : Inactive Non-urgency Non-Appropriations Majority Vote Required State-Mandated Local Program Fiscal Non-Tax Levy

complex.

BILL HISTORY 2009 Oct. 22 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 30, Statutes of 2009-10 Third Extraordinary Session. OcL 22 Approved by the Governor. Oct. 19 Enrolled and to the Governor at 11:30 a.m. Oct. 15 In Assembly. To enrollment. Oct. 14 Withdrawn from committee. Art. IV, Sec. 8(b) of the Constitution suspended. (Ayes 28. Noes 7. Page 266. ) Joint Rule 10.5 suspended. (Ayes 28. Noes 7. Page 267.) Read second time. Read third time, passed, and to Assembly. (Ayes 21. Noes 14. Page 268. ) Sept. 10 In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. Sept. 10 Read second time. To third reading. Art. IV, Sec. 8(b) of the Constitution suspended. (Ayes 58. Noes 7. Page 408.) Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 54. Noes 18. Page 409.) Sept. 9 Read first time. To print. Referred to Com. on A.,E.,S.,T., & I.M. From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (September 9). From committee; Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (September 9).

1 of 1

4/5/2011

1:33 PM

ABX3 81 Assembly BILL, 3rd Extraordinary Session - Status

http.z/info.sen.ca.gov/pub/Ov-I

O/biJ1lasm/ab ~0051-0 100/abx3 ~ 81_ bi...

CURRENT

BILL STATUS

MEASURE: A.B. No. 81 (3rd Ex. Sess.) AUTHOR (S) Hall (Principal coauthor: Lieu) (Principal coauthor: Senator Price) (Coauthors: Adams, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Charles Calderon, Conway, Cook, Davis, Emmerson, Galgiani, Hagman, Harkey, Hernandez, Logue, Mendoza, Miller, Nestande, Silva, Smyth, Solorio, and Torrico) (Coauthors: Senators Calderon, Dutton, and Wright) . TOPIC Land use: City of Industry: stadium complex. TYPE OF BILL : Inactive Non-Urgency Non-Appropriations Majority Vote Required State-Mandated Local Program Fiscal Non-Tax Levy LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 10/22/2009 LAST HIST. ACTION Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter Statutes of 2009-10 Third Extraordinary Session. COMM. LOCATION ASM ARTS, ENTERTAIN, SPORTS, TOURISM, & INTERNET COMM. ACTION DATE 09/09/2009 COMM. ACTION Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations. COMM. VOTE SUMMARY Ayes: 07 Noes; 00 PASS TITLE An act to add Section relating to land use. 65701 to the Government Code,

3D, MEDIA

1 of 1

4/5/2011

1:33 PM

ABX3 81 Assembly BlLL, 3rd Extraordinary Session - Vote Information

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/billlasm/ab

_ 0051-0100/abx3 _ ...

UNOFFICIAL BALLOT MEASURE: ABX3 81 AUTHOR: Hall TOPIC: Land use: City of Industry: stadium DATE: 09/10/2009 LOCATION: ASM. FLOOR MOTION: AB 81 HALL Assembly Third Reading (AYES 54. NOES 18.) (PASS)

complex.

Third Extraordinary

Session

AYES

Adams Beall Bill Berryhill Tom Berryhill Blakeslee Bradford Charles Calderon Conway Cook Coto Davis De La Torre De Leon Emmerson Eng Evans Fong Fuentes Fuller Furutani Gaines Galgiani Gilmore Hagman Hall Harkey Hayashi Hernandez Hill Huber Jeffries Jones Knight Lieu Logue Ma Mendoza Miller Nestande John A. Perez V. Manuel Perez Portantino Ruskin Silva Smyth Solorio Audra Strickland Swanson Torlakson Torres Torrico Villines Bass

Carter

NOES

****
Anderson Caballero Fletcher Nava Niello Saldana Yamada Arambula Chesbro DeVore Garrick Huffman Nielsen Salas Block Feuer Manning Buchanan

ABSENT,

ABSTAINING,

OR NOT VOTING

*********************************

Ammiano Blumenfield Krekorian Bonnie

Brownley Lowenthal

Duvall Skinner

Tran

1 of 1

61912011 10:26 AM

ABX3 81 Assembly Bill - VOTE INFORMATION

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pubI09-1O/biU/asm/ab_0051-0

1OO/abx3 _ ...

UNOFFICIAL BALLOT ME.ASURE: ABX3 81 AUTHOR: Hall TOPIC: Land use: City of Industry: stadium complex. DATE: 10/14/2009 LOCATION: SEN. FLOOR MOTION: W/O REF. TO FILE ABS1 Hall By Price (AYES 21. NOES 14.) (PASS)

AYES

****
Alquist Benoit Cogdi 11 Correa Harman Liu Padilla Price Steinberg Yee Calderon DeSaulnier Maldonado Romero Runner Strickland Cedillo Dutton Oropeza Walters Wright

NOES

Ashburn Ducheny Leno Wolk

Corbett Cox Denham Hancock Hollingsworth Lowenthal Pavley Wyland

Kehoe Wiggins

NO VOTE RECORDED
****************

Aanestad Simitian

Florez

Huff

Negrete

McLeod

1 of I

6/9/2011 10:26 AM