California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB99

Introduced
1/10/19  
Introduced
1/10/19  
Refer
1/24/19  
Refer
1/24/19  
Refer
3/26/19  
Refer
3/26/19  
Refer
4/3/19  
Refer
4/3/19  
Refer
4/3/19  
Refer
4/8/19  
Refer
4/8/19  
Refer
4/9/19  
Refer
4/9/19  
Refer
4/10/19  
Refer
4/10/19  
Report Pass
4/25/19  
Report Pass
4/25/19  
Refer
4/25/19  
Engrossed
5/16/19  
Refer
5/30/19  
Report Pass
6/20/19  
Refer
6/24/19  
Refer
6/24/19  
Report Pass
7/3/19  
Report Pass
7/3/19  
Enrolled
8/12/19  
Chaptered
8/30/19  
Chaptered
8/30/19  

Caption

General plans: safety element: emergency evacuation routes.

Impact

The bill significantly impacts California state laws concerning local planning and disaster preparedness. By enforcing these requirements on local governments, SB99 aims to reduce risks associated with geologic hazards, flooding, and wildfires. The law reflects a commitment to community safety and resilience, requiring local agencies to take proactive measures in their general plans to mitigate the effects of emergencies. However, by imposing these additional duties without providing reimbursement to local agencies for the costs incurred, it could strain local resources and impact service delivery.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 99, known as SB99, aims to enhance the safety measures in local government planning by ensuring that emergency evacuation routes are adequately addressed in general plans. Specifically, it mandates that upon the next revision of a city's or county's housing element on or after January 1, 2020, local officials must review and update their safety elements to identify residential developments within hazard areas that lack at least two emergency evacuation routes. This adds additional responsibilities to local agencies in planning for community safety against various natural disasters, including flooding and wildfires.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB99 appears supportive among safety advocates and environmentalists who recognize the need for enhanced emergency preparedness and climate resilience. Nonetheless, there is some contention among local government officials who may view the requirements as an unfunded mandate. Critics argue that the bill does not allocate necessary funding or resources for implementation, thereby limiting its effectiveness and potentially hindering local decision-making autonomy.

Contention

Notably, a critical point of contention relates to the lack of reimbursement mandated by the state for the costs incurred by local agencies in fulfilling the bill's requirements. This could lead to disputes regarding budget allocations and prioritization of safety projects. Additionally, the bill raises questions about how local agencies will balance these new duties with existing responsibilities, especially in areas already facing resource constraints.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB499

General plan: land use element: uses adversely impacting health outcomes.

CA SB295

Personal income taxes: Fire Safe Home Tax Credits.

CA SB1035

General plans.

CA SB182

Local government: planning and zoning: wildfires.

CA SB1117

State Public Defender: grants.

CA SB1070

Land use: general plans.

CA AB1775

False reports and harassment.

CA AB747

Planning and zoning: general plan: safety element.