TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Ryan J. Alsop, Chief Executive Officer
REPORT BY: Andrew M. Mize, Legislative & Policy Analyst
SUBJECT: Senate Bill 299 - Proposed Letter in Support
RECOMMENDATION
title
Discuss and approve for transmission a position letter in support of California Senate Bill 299, related to CEQA review of proposed child care facilities. (No Fiscal Impact)
body
BACKGROUND
This matter is before the Board by referral to the Chief Executive Officer at its January 27, 2026 meeting. This item is on the Board’s administrative calendar upon the request for a five-signature letter in support by the referrer. In 2025, the California Legislature passed, and Governor Newsom signed, SB 131, a sweeping CEQA reform bill. Among the provisions of SB 131 was an exemption for day care centers not located in residential areas, Public Resources Code § 21080.69. SB 299, authored by Sen. Chris Cabaldon, creates a new CEQA exemption for day care centers and family daycare homes located on parcels of land zoned exclusively for residential use, Public Resources Code § 21080.68.
Under current law, most childcare facilities in residential are exempt from CEQA using “existing facilities” (Class 1) and “infill” (Class 32) exemptions, or are likely considered “by-right” facilities, meaning they are not subject to CEQA at all. (Cook, Brynn, Analysis of SB 299 for Senate Committee on Environmental Quality, prepared for hearing on 1/13/2026, pp. 3-4.) But the use of these exemptions requires the project proponent to demonstrate how their project meets the criteria for these exemptions, and this rationale is subject to challenge.
SB 299 provides a CEQA exemption that has fewer eligibility requirements than the Class 1 and Class 32 exemptions. (Sen. E.Q. Analysis, p. 6.) The requirements of this exemption are straightforward, requiring only that the project meet statutory definitions of a day care center (Health and Safety Code § 1596.76) or family daycare home (Health and Safety Code § 1596.78) and be on a parcel zoned exclusively for residential use. As such, the exemption proposed by SB 299 would be difficult to challenge. (Sen. E.Q. Analysis, p. 6.)
Passage of this bill would substantially restrict grounds for neighbor challenges to child care centers in residential areas on the basis of a project’s nonadherence to CEQA exemption eligibility requirements. Challenges would have to stem from other, non-CEQA grounds.
In addition to its broad impacts on the County’s incorporated cities, areas of unincorporated Napa County with significant residential development that will be most impacted by this bill are Vichy Springs, Silverado, Circle Oaks, Berryessa, Angwin, and Pope Valley.
Requested action: Authorize the transmission of position letters in support of SB 299 to the committee currently considering the proposal, and to future committees to which the bill is referred for vote.
FISCAL IMPACT
|
Is there a Fiscal Impact? |
No |
|
Is it Mandatory or Discretionary? |
Discretionary |
|
Discretionary Justification: |
The Board has broad discretion to take positions on state and federal legislation. This requested action represents an exercise of that discretion in support of improving resident access to affordable child development services. |
|
Consequences if not approved: |
No letter in support of SB 299 will transmit from the Board. |
|
Additional Information |
Strategic Initiatives: Build Healthy, Connected Communities. |
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed action is not a project as defined by 14 California Code of Regulations 15378 (State CEQA Guidelines) and therefore CEQA is not applicable.