With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial
Without Newsom's efforts, major reforms to California's stifling environmental laws would have died on the vine.
Gov. Gavin Newsom isn't afraid to step into the political fray when it comes to standing up to President Donald Trump over national issues that impact California. He's not always wrong when he sues the administration or speaks out against, say, ICE raids in Los Angeles. But most of those high-profile actions seem designed to burnish his national reputation. For your own safety, please don't stand between him and a television camera.
Newsom would have a better national-leadership case, however, had he strategically arm-twisted the state's Democratic-controlled Legislature to pass controversial measures that address California's long-simmering problems of homelessness, traffic congestion, the high cost of living, crime, and sky-high housing costs. The best way to prove the wisdom of the California Way is to, you know, actually run the state in a stellar manner. But maybe he is learning.
As various news sources reported last week, the governor had tied his signing of a budget deal by requiring the Legislature to pass reforms to the state's "landmark" California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)—the 1970 law that has mired construction projects in regulation, environmental impact reports and litigation (or threats of it). The details of the measure were in flux late last week, but it was pitched as being far more aggressive than past housing reforms.
Sure enough, Newsom succeeded. Just in time for the July 1 budget-signing deadline, the legislature overwhelmingly passed the measure, which ended up as two bills. They exempt "nine types of projects from environmental reviews: child care centers, health clinics, food banks, farmworker housing, broadband, wildfire prevention, water infrastructure, public parks or trails and, notably, advanced manufacturing," per a CalMatters report. One of the bills also "restricts legal challenges under CEQA by narrowing which documents courts can consider."
The measures were based on several existing proposals, including Senate Bill 607, which affirms the Legislature's intent "to make changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to ensure the state meets its infrastructure needs and is more affordable for all Californians, as specified, without compromising environmental protections," according to the legislative analysis. Lawmakers in May stripped away specific exemptions, turning it into a non-substantive bill in the face of opposition from the usual suspects.
Without Newsom's efforts, major CEQA reform would have died on the vine. Another late-breaking housing bill was under consideration as part of the budget, but not subject to Newsom's ultimatum—but the Legislature caved in to union demands. The Sacramento Bee reports this bill was roughly based on another measure that "allows developers to bypass CEQA review if they agree to pay a certain minimum wage to construction workers."
Mandating wage boosts drives up the cost of housing construction and weakens the usefulness of these deregulations, but it was an attempt to lessen the degree to which unions use CEQA to slow construction projects to extract concessions. Newsom's failure to overcome union opposition here is a disappointment, but doesn't tarnish an otherwise noteworthy effort. The Bee interviewed Capitol insiders who cannot recall a budget ever before being held up to secure passage of a single non-budget-related bill. More of this, please.
Even sweeter: The governor and lawmakers brushed off the overheated objections of the environmental community. Instead of folding, Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, rebuked the "extreme, unfounded, melodramatic statements" from environmental groups, as CalMatters noted.
Lawmakers routinely gripe about CEQA, but they never do anything to fix it beyond adding a limited streamlining or exemption provision (especially when it comes to sports arenas). The pro-housing YIMBY Law (Yes In My Back Yard) produced a report showing the myriad laws that have reduced CEQA impediments for housing have produced few real-world results. That's no surprise given that they don't go far enough, rarely apply to market-rate housing and always include union giveaways.
Legislators are finally pushing harder for broader exemptions. I rarely agree with them on non-housing issues, but Wiener and Assembly member Buffy Wicks (D–Oakland) deserve praise for doggedly pursuing the issue. And with Newsom using this nuclear option to bring this bill across the finish line, we are finally seeing progress. I feared the final version might be toothless, but it appears substantive. Isn't it time, however, to reform CEQA for every type of project?
It might seem odd that progressives have embraced the pro-housing religion, but consider a study from the Holland & Knight law firm. It found 49 percent of CEQA lawsuits target governmental projects, with infill projects also a particular target. "CEQA litigation abuse is primarily the domain of Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) opponents and special interests such as competitors and labor unions seeking non-environmental outcomes," the study added.
Basically, progressives are finding their own objectives threatened by CEQA abuse. Gov. Newsom is learning that if he wants to look tough—and help address a serious state problem—there no downside for him to use his political capital in such a way.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
