After half a century, California legislators on the verge of overhauling a landmark environmental law
When a landmark state environmental law threatened to halt enrollment at UC Berkeley, legislators stepped in and wrote an exemption. When the Sacramento Kings were about to leave town, lawmakers brushed the environmental rules aside for the team's new arena. When the law stymied the renovation of the state Capitol, they acted once again.
Lawmakers' willingness to poke holes in the California Environmental Quality Act for specific projects without overhauling the law in general has led commentators to describe the changes as 'Swiss cheese CEQA.'
Now, after years of nibbling at it, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature are going in with the knives.
Two proposals have advanced rapidly through the Legislature: one to wipe away the law for most urban housing developments, the other to weaken the rules for most everything else. Legal experts say the efforts would be the most profound changes to CEQA in generations. Newsom not only endorsed the bills last month, but also put them on a fast track to approval by proposing their passage as part of the state budget, which bypasses normal committee hearings and means they could become law within weeks.
'This is the biggest opportunity to do something big and bold, and the only impediment is us,' Newsom said when announcing his support for the legislation.
Read more: 'The law that swallowed California': Why the much-derided CEQA is so hard to change
Nearly the entire 55-year history of the California Environmental Quality Act has featured dueling narratives about its effects. On its face the law is simple: It requires proponents to disclose and, if possible, lessen the environmental effects of a project. In practice, this has led to tomes of environmental impact reports, including volumes of soil testing and traffic modeling studies, and sometimes years of disputes in court. Many credit CEQA for helping preserve the state's scenic vistas and waterways while others decry its ability to thwart housing and infrastructure projects, including the long-delayed and budget-busting high-speed rail.
On the latter point, evidence supports both sides of the argument. One study by UC Berkeley law professors found that fewer than 3% of housing projects in many big cities across the state over a three-year period faced any litigation. But some contend that the threat of a lawsuit is enough to chill development, and examples continue to pile up of CEQA stalling construction of homeless shelters, a food bank and child-care center.
What's clear is that CEQA has become embedded as a key point of leverage in California's development process. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass once recalled that when she worked as a community organizer in the 1990s, Westside land-use attorneys who were successful in stopping development in their communities taught her how to use CEQA to block liquor stores in South L.A.
Organized labor learned to use the law to its advantage and became one of its most ardent supporters, alongside environmentalists — major constituencies within Democratic politics in the state. Besides carve-outs for individual projects in recent years, lawmakers have passed CEQA streamlining for certain kinds of housing and other developments. These fast-track measures can be used only if proponents agree to pay higher wages to construction workers or set aside a portion of the project for low-income housing on land considered the least environmentally sensitive.
Read more: Homeless shelter opponents are using this environmental law in bid to block new housing
Labor groups' argument is simple, said Pete Rodriguez, vice president-Western District of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners: CEQA exemptions save time and money for developers, so some benefit should go to workers.
'When you expedite the process and you let a developer get the TSA pass, for example, to get quicker through the line at the airport, there should be labor standards attached to that as well,' Rodriguez said at a Los Angeles Business Council panel in April.
The two bills now under debate — Assembly Bill 609 by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) and Senate Bill 607 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) — break with that tradition. They propose broad CEQA changes without any labor or other requirements.
Wicks' bill would exempt most urban housing developments from CEQA. Wiener's legislation, among other provisions, would in effect lessen the number of projects, housing and otherwise, that would need to complete a full environmental review, narrowing the law's scope.
'Both are much, much more far-reaching than anything that has been proposed in living memory to deal with CEQA,' said Chris Elmendorf, a UC Davis law professor who tracks state environmental and housing legislation.
The legislation wouldn't have much of an effect on rebuilding after L.A.'s wildfires, as single-family home construction is exempt and Newsom already waived other parts of the law by executive order.
The environment inside and outside the Legislature has become friendlier to more aggressive proposals. "Abundance," a recent book co-written by New York Times opinion writer Ezra Klein, makes the case that CEQA and other laws supported by Democrats have hamstrung the ability to build housing and critical infrastructure projects, citing specifically California's affordability crisis and challenges with high-speed rail, in ways that have stifled the American Dream and the party's political fortunes.
The idea has become a cause celebre in certain circles. Newsom invited Klein onto his podcast. This spring, Klein met with Wicks and Wiener and other lawmakers, including Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) and Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg), the leaders of the state Assembly and Senate, respectively.
Wicks and Wiener are veteran legislators and former chairs of legislative housing committees who have written much of the prior CEQA streamlining legislation. Even though it took bruising battles to pass previous bills, the resulting production hasn't come close to resolving the state's shortage, Wicks said.
'We need housing on a massive scale,' Wicks said.
To opponents of the bills, including dozens of environmental and labor groups, the effort misplaces the source of building woes and instead would restrict one of the few ways community groups can shape development.
Asha Sharma, state policy manager for Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, said her organization uses CEQA to reduce the polluting effects of projects in neighborhoods already overburdened by environmental problems.
The proposed changes would empower public agencies and developers at the expense of those who would be affected by their decisions, she said.
'What folks aren't realizing is that along with the environmental regulations comes a lot of public transparency and public engagement,' said Sharma, whose group advocates for low-income Californians in rural areas. 'When you're rolling back CEQA, you're rolling back that too.'
Because of the hefty push behind the legislation, Sharma expects the bills will be approved in some form. But it remains uncertain how they might change. Newsom, the two lawmakers and legislative leaders are negotiating amendments.
Read more: Newsom suspends landmark environmental laws to ease rebuilding in wildfire zones
Wicks said her bill will not require developers to reserve part of their projects for low-income housing to receive a CEQA exemption; cities can mandate that on their own, she said. Wicks indicated, however, that labor standards could be part of a final deal, saying she's "had some conversations in that regard."
Wiener's bill was gutted in a legislative fiscal committee last month, with lawmakers saying they wanted to meet infrastructure and affordability needs 'without compromising environmental protections.' Afterward, Wiener and McGuire, the Senate leader, released a joint statement declaring their intent to pass a version of the legislation as part of the budget, as the governor had proposed.
Wiener remained committed to the principles in his initial bill.
'What I can say is that I'm highly optimistic that we will pass strong changes to CEQA that will make it easier and faster to deliver all of the good things that make Californians' lives better and more affordable,' Wiener said.
Should the language in the final deal be anything like what's been discussed, the changes to CEQA would be substantial, said Ethan Elkind, director of the climate program at UC Berkeley's Center for Law, Energy & the Environment. Still, he said the law's effects on housing development were overblown. Many other issues, such as local zoning restrictions, lack of funding and misaligned tax incentives, play a much larger role in limiting construction long before projects can even get to the point where CEQA becomes a concern, he said.
'CEQA is the last resort of a NIMBY,' said Elkind, referring to residents who try to block housing near them. 'It's almost like we're working backwards here.'
Wicks agreed that the Legislature would have to do more to strip away regulations that make it harder to build housing. But she argued that the CEQA changes would take away a major barrier: the uncertainty developers face from legal threats.
Passing major CEQA reforms would demonstrate lawmakers' willingness to tackle some of the state's toughest challenges, she said.
'It sends a signal to the world that we're ready to build,' Wicks said.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Chicago Bulls rumors point to trade involving multi-time All-Star
It may be a new offseason for the Chicago Bulls, but it's largely the same story as before. For the third consecutive season, the Bulls' front office is tasked with improving a roster that fell short of reaching the playoffs in the previous year. There are no quick fixes. Unlike the Dallas Mavericks, the Bulls don't have the first pick, they're not in line to land a potential superstar in the 2025 NBA Draft, where Chicago holds the 12th overall selection. Advertisement However, according to Sam Amico of the Bulls will be trying to trade two-time All-Star Nikola Vucevic this offseason. Of course, for basketball fans who have paid close attention, this is nothing new. Vooch has been on the trade block for several years, but Chicago hasn't been able to find a trade partner presenting a respectable offer for their talented starting center. Vucevic is coming off his seventh consecutive season of averaging a double-double, meaning he's still playing at a high level, even at age 34. However, he's also headed into season two of a three-year, $60 million contract and is set to have a cap hit of $20 million in 2025. Chicago is likely seeking at least a first-round pick in exchange for the Swiss native. Whether any team is willing to pay the price remains to be seen. Related: Former top-five draft pick eyes comeback and is drawing interest from multiple NBA teams


Politico
2 hours ago
- Politico
All noisy on the Western solar panel front
Presented by the Stop the Oil Shakedown Coalition. With help from Alex Nieves and Timothy Cama SOLAR WARS: There's enough heat behind California's long-simmering rooftop solar fight that it's boiling over on two fronts this week. On Wednesday, the California Supreme Court will hear arguments from both sides on whether regulators broke the law when they slashed rooftop solar credits for new customers in 2022. At the same time, assemblymembers have a Friday deadline to pass (or not) a controversial legislative proposal to reduce the payments for legacy rooftop solar customers. The multipronged fight shows just how entrenched the two camps are — with rooftop solar advocates allying with builders and real estate agents on one side and utilities with labor unions and ratepayer advocates on the other — and just how willing they are to take their arguments to as many venues as possible. It's a fight that's likely to continue, given that the Supreme Court appears poised to rule narrowly — and perhaps not even on the policy debate itself. Instead, the Supreme Court's clerk and executive officer, Jorge Navarrete, asked lawyers last month to focus on how much the judicial branch should give deference to the California Public Utilities Commission when reviewing its various decisions. A lower court had previously cited deference to the CPUC — one of the rare state agencies created by the California Constitution itself — to reject a lawsuit by environmental groups that sought to restore the rooftop solar subsidies. For the environmental groups, the focus on deference is now an opportunity to take their fight to the agency itself, which some see as too cozy with the investor-owned utilities it regulates. 'Already, there's a gap in checks and balances on the commission,' said Roger Lin, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, which is bringing the lawsuit against the CPUC. 'The implications of this case stretch beyond rooftop solar.' The investor-owned utilities, who otherwise argued in support of the CPUC's decision, declined to weigh in on how much the court should defer to the agency in a filing earlier this year. But Attorney General Rob Bonta's office is defending the agency, arguing in a brief that the CPUC deserves deference because of precedent, because of the agency's expertise and because the Legislature has 'repeatedly tasked the Commission with studying the effects of the NEM tariff and revising it as appropriate.' It's timely, then, to point out that the Legislature is currently considering doing part of the commission's work itself. Assemblymember Lisa Calderon's AB 942 would slash the payments to longstanding rooftop solar customers who got spared by the CPUC's 2022 decision to reduce payments solely for new customers. Calderon agreed this week to exempt farms and schools, which is eliminating opposition from farming groups close to some moderate Democrats. She also picked up support from the CPUC's Public Advocates Office, which said the measure could reduce costs for ratepayers without rooftop solar. But it'll come down to the wire: Some progressive Democrats have already peeled off from the bill in committee votes, citing concerns from their constituents with rooftop solar that the bill would break existing contracts. The Supreme Court will start hearing arguments at 9 a.m. on Wednesday (and it will be livestreamed if you want to follow along). AB 942 has until Friday to pass off the Assembly floor. — CvK Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! MUSK MANIA: Elon Musk has finally returned to his roots — and Democrats are loving it. Musk's departure from the White House, where he was once among Trump's top advisers, took an explosive turn Tuesday as the Tesla CEO ripped Republicans' budget megabill on X, calling it a 'disgusting abomination' that will raise the national debt. As we've noted, Musk's company never stopped stumping for California policies like the low-carbon fuel standard, even as Trump promised to unravel the state's regulations and Republicans blamed state officials for high gas prices. The eccentric billionaire was always expected to eventually butt heads with an administration poised to throttle the electric vehicle transition and eliminate clean energy incentives his company has profited greatly from. While the episode shocked Republicans and drew pushback from House Speaker Mike Johnson, Democrats could barely hide their excitement, Timothy Cama reports for POLITICO's E&E News. 'I haven't spoke to Elon Musk, I'm not sure what the reasons are for this extraordinary statement, but we're in complete agreement,' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said. — AN WE HAVE A BEE PROBLEM: California lawmakers are coming to the rescue of one of nature's most important insects: honeybees. The Assembly unanimously approved Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom's bill today to launch a program within the California Department of Food and Agriculture to monitor the health of honeybee populations. AB 1042 would allow the department, when extra funding is available, to provide incentives and grants for health intervention projects to support the state's managed honeybee population. The critical species is responsible for pollinating crops like fruits and tree nuts that underpin the state's agriculture sector and maintaining natural ecosystems, but are dying in large numbers due to climate change, habitat loss, pesticides and other factors. Commercial beekeepers reported an average loss of 62 percent of their bee colonies between June 2024 and February of this year, according to a national survey by Project Apis m. (honeybees' Latin name). — AN RECYCLE THE REDO: Gov. Gavin Newsom told CalRecycle to redo its plastic waste reduction rules in the name of affordability. Now, the lawmakers that passed the law behind the rules say the redo goes against their intent — and that they were the ones who wanted to make recycling affordable to begin with. Twenty-two lawmakers joined Sen. Ben Allen, the author of 2022's SB 54, in a letter to Newsom, CalEPA Secretary Yana Garcia and CalRecycle Director Zoe Heller last week. Their goal all along, they write, was to lower costs to cities and ratepayers by making manufacturers responsible for recycling their products. The new rules, they argue, stray from their intent by exempting too much food and medication packaging and not preventing hazardous recycling technologies. A coalition of environmental groups including Oceana and Californians Against Waste also blasted the new rules Monday. 'Getting this right is about more than checking a legislative box,' the letter reads. 'California has an opportunity to lead in the global effort to tackle plastic pollution, but not if vague, watered-down language subverts that very goal.' Who is happy: the California Chamber of Commerce, which is arguing that the new rules are more achievable. Spokesperson John Myers shared a takeaway: 'By fostering a regulatory environment that balances ecological responsibility with economic viability, the state sets a precedent for sustainable innovation of a circular economy.' — CvK TWO STRIKES: It's been a bad week for Sable Offshore Corp.'s oil drilling ambitions. Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Donna Geck issued an order Tuesday blocking a waiver granted by the state fire marshal that would allow the Texas-based oil company to restart a crude pipeline off Santa Barbara. That decision comes just days after a different Santa Barbara judge sided with the California Coastal Commission and stopped repairs on the 124-mile pipeline that leaked over 100,000 gallons in 2015. Linda Krop, chief counsel for the Environmental Defense Center, which sued the fire marshal and Sable, cheered the rulings and used the moment to call out Newsom, who has stayed relatively quiet on the issue. 'At the very least, Governor Newsom should demand that his agencies follow the law and do everything possible to prevent another ecological and economic disaster in our state,' she said. — AN — Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has a message for climate activists worried about the White House: roll up your sleeves and "stop whining.' — Southern California is being hit with a triple whammy of thunderstorms, dry lightning and rip tides. — Underground water supplies in the Colorado River basin are depleting even faster than the river itself, according to a new study based on NASA satellite data.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Advocates push for override of governor's veto on repealing ‘free kill' law
Advocates are pushing state lawmakers to override Gov. Ron DeSantis' veto of a bill to repeal the state's so-called 'free kill' law. The bill would have repealed the controversial law that blocks some families from suing if they lose a loved one to medical negligence. One of those protesting the veto was Daryl Perritt, whose son died from a blood clot six months ago. He blames the doctors and hospital, as well as the state. "Because of this law, I can't require, demand or get any answer as to why they waited nearly four days to perform that surgery. Had they performed the surgery in the first 24 hours or 48 hours, he would be here with me today," Perritt. He and others have fought to have it repealed, and they came close when the Legislature voted in favor of getting rid of the 30-year-old law. But DeSantis vetoed it last week, saying it would increase hiring costs for Floridians and make it harder to hire and retain doctors in the state. But that hasn't stopped Perritt's fight. It fueled it. He spent thousands of dollars on billboards calling out DeSantis and lawmakers who don't support a repeal. The hope is that the Legislature will override the veto. It will take a two-thirds vote in the State House and Senate to do so. Lawmakers have said a veto is up for discussion. They think there may be enough votes in the House but not the Senate. Lawmakers are back in Tallahassee, working on the budget. Perritt will be meeting with lawmakers to tell them how important an override will be. 'I don't need money. I need my son. And since I can't have my son, I need answers. That's all. I just need answers to why my son is dead. I don't think that's too much to ask,' he said. Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.