logout

Store Research

Senate Bill 919 (Dills 1993)

Chapter 1131, Statutes of 1993 - SB 919

Some bill research does not include the Governor's file because at the time we researched the bill, the sitting Governor had not released his chaptered bill file. If the Governor's file is not included with this particular research, please contact our office (1-800-666-1917 or quote@legintent.com) and we will be happy to provide this file at no charge if it is available.

As enacted in 1993, Senate Bill 919 amended sections of the Government and Health and Safety Codes and added sections to the Public Resources Code relating to environmental quality.  (See Exhibit A, #1g)  Senate Bill 919 was introduced by Senator Ralph Dills on March 4, 1993 on behalf of the California Manufacturers Association.  (See Exhibit A, #1a and #12, page 1)

 

Senate Bill 919 was assigned to the Senate Committee on Governmental Organization and the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources where policy issues raised by the bill were considered.  (See Exhibit A, #3 and #7)  The Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means examined its fiscal implications.  (See Exhibit A, #2 and #9)  The Senate amended the bill twice, on April 28 and May 17, 1993 and the Assembly amended it on three occasions, on June 22, August 16 and September 9, 1993.  (See Exhibit A, #1b through #1f and #2) 


 

Following legislative approval by both Houses of the Legislature, Governor Pete Wilson signed the bill on October 10, 1993, and it was recorded by the Secretary of State on the following day as Chapter 1131 of the Statutes of 1993.  (See Exhibit A, #1g and #2)

 

The Enrolled Bill Report of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research described Senate Bill 919 as follows:

 

This bill would exempt from CEQA certain decisions of an air quality management district relative to the application of coatings in an existing automobile manufacturing plant; require responsible agencies to process permits concurrently with a lead agency when sufficient information is available; specify that the provision of highly trained jobs is a factor to be considered when determining whether a project’s economic benefits outweigh its adverse environmental effects; require certain regulatory agencies to perform environmental analyses of foreseeable methods of compliance with proposed pollution control rules and regulations; and limit the breadth of mandated relief in CEQA litigation.

(See Exhibit A, #14, document PE-3)