California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB975

Introduced
2/20/25  
Refer
3/10/25  
Report Pass
3/18/25  
Refer
3/19/25  
Report Pass
4/10/25  
Refer
4/21/25  
Report Pass
4/21/25  
Refer
4/21/25  
Report Pass
4/30/25  
Refer
5/5/25  
Report Pass
5/14/25  
Engrossed
5/23/25  

Caption

Lake and streambed alteration agreements: exemptions: culverts and bridges.

Impact

The implications of AB 975 on state laws centers on the flexibility it provides local authorities in managing post-disaster repairs. The current law mandates extensive notification and procedural requirements aimed at protecting fish and wildlife resources when altering streams and lakes. By allowing expedited processes for small-scale repairs to critical infrastructure, the bill aims to facilitate quicker recovery efforts in instances of natural disaster, particularly in the County of Sutter. This step is aimed at balancing ecological considerations with urgent public safety needs, particularly for communities vulnerable to such disasters.

Summary

Assembly Bill 975, introduced by Assembly Member Gallagher, proposes an exemption for specific projects in the County of Sutter from certain provisions related to lake and streambed alteration agreements as outlined in the Fish and Game Code. Specifically, the bill permits the repair or reconstruction of bridges 30 feet long or less and culverts 70 feet long or less that have been damaged or destroyed due to natural disasters such as floods and landslides that occurred after January 1, 2021. This exemption is set to expire on January 1, 2029. The intention behind this legislation is to expedite the repair processes for essential infrastructure in rural areas that are often pivotal for evacuation in emergencies.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding AB 975 appears to be supportive from a range of local stakeholders who recognize the necessity of timely repairs to transportation infrastructure. The bill underscores the unique challenges faced by rural counties like Sutter, where quick access to emergency routes is crucial. However, there may also be concerns from environmental advocates regarding the potential for negative impacts on local ecosystems, as expedited alterations to stream and lake beds could contravene existing protective measures. As such, while there is a compelling argument for emergency response efficiency, it is coupled with the need to ensure environmental safeguards are not overlooked.

Contention

A notable point of contention surrounding AB 975 is the balance between environmental protection and the urgent need for infrastructure repair. Proponents argue that the special exemption is necessary given the unique geographical and climatic challenges in Sutter County, making it impractical to adhere strictly to existing regulations in every case of disaster damage. Conversely, critics may contend that the bill sets a worrying precedent for bypassing established environmental protections, potentially leading to long-term damage to vital natural resources in pursuit of expediency.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1458

Fish and wildlife protection and conservation: lake and streambed alteration agreements: exemptions

CA AB830

Lake and streambed alteration agreements: exemptions.

CA AB2060

Lake and streambed alteration agreements: exemptions.

CA AB357

Coastal resources: coastal development permit application: higher education housing project.

CA AB623

Fire prevention projects: California Environmental Quality Act: coastal development permits: exemptions.

CA SB741

Coastal resources: coastal development permit: exemption: Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor.

CA SB375

Wildfire prevention activities: Endangered Species Act: California Environmental Quality Act: California Coastal Act of 1973.

CA SB1461

State of emergency and local emergency: landslide.