California’s bedrock environmental law suffered blows from Sacramento.

The California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, requires disclosure of environmental impacts, analysis of alternatives, and mitigation. While it does not guarantee good outcomes, it provides for public input and, through litigation, accountability. EHL has settled CEQA cases with “win-win” outcomes for both habitat and development. Over the decades since enactment, and for many thousands of projects, the value of CEQA-derived project improvements and mitigation is inestimable. 

While compliance with CEQA takes time, only a tiny fraction of projects are litigated. Even so, the law has been unfairly blamed for the shortage of affordable housing. Economic factors overwhelm any role of CEQA here. But a campaign by the real estate industry and some vocal housing advocates has disparaged the law and resulted in a political bandwagon against regulation generally and CEQA particularly.

In the past, “CEQA reform” has exempted projects like infill housing that are generally recognized to have overall environmental benefit, which is justifiable. Or, it has created expedited timelines for certain projects. But this year’s round of attacks was different. 

The goal was to fundamentally weaken CEQA across the board, irrespective of environmental harm. California’s Governor and key legislators pushed a bill to effectively end the production of Environmental Impact Reports, which is the heart of CEQA. This was barely stopped. Nevertheless, damaging exclusions from CEQA review were put in place, including for many polluting industrial facilities. And unlike the case for all prior exemptions, legislators removed safeguards for endangered species and wetlands. 

The attack on CEQA was conducted in backrooms, without good faith negotiation and absent the normal hearing process where thoughtful dialogue and amendments can occur. It is telling that such tactics were the only way these goals could be advanced. Even so – and coincident with Democratic Party dominance – diminished sway of the environmental community in Sacramento was evident. 

Also, during the last two legislative sessions, lawmakers, at the behest of the building industry, unsuccessfully carried bills to increase housing construction in fire zones. This may return.