Legislators know that CEQA is a bust, so why don’t they repair it? – Orange County Register

Sacramento – It is not so typical that an acronym for arcane regulation is a clean word, but in California, the term CEQA – declared the search for KWA – is as well known as terms such as OMG and LOL. Signed by Governor Ronald Reagan in 1970, the large status provided a list of terms and conditions on developers of all kinds of construction projects. Ceqa has created a regulatory nightmare, although he still has defenders. Lol indeed.

As the Planning and Conservation League explains, “California Environmental Quality Act… is the first environmental law in California. It allows public agencies to make informed decisions about activities that could degrade public health and harm the environment. It also provides residents of California with the legal framework to keep their official public agencies. ”

It seems so flawless. Who does not want public agencies to make informed decisions and provide members of the community with tools to protect the environment and keep responsible officials? But the reality is very different from what these Civics-Textbook Pollyannaish explanations suggest. California’s legislators refuse to reform the law substantial, but what is the first thing they do whenever they want a particular project built?

You guessed it – they provide an CEQA exemption or rationalization. When the Kings of Sacramento wanted to build a new arena in the city center and prevent the team from leaving the city, the president of the Senate, Darrell Steinberg (then elected the mayor of the city) experienced an exemption. We have seen several examples – or attempts – to reduce the application of CEQA to other professional sports projects, as well as other favored projects, including one linked to Los Angeles efforts to attract the Olympic Games.

It is always a sign of a bad law when it constantly requires exemptions. This reminds me of Bill 5 of the Assembly, which prohibited most independent contracts, but its supporters had more than 100 industries in its grip because it threatened so many livelihoods of people. A recent national example: Donald Trump’s prices have been an existential threat to many companies, so he has exempted certain industries. All these regulatory edicts empower politically connected lobbyists, which can obtain special favors.

So what’s wrong with Ceqa? Whenever the government has a discretionary approval authority, the law obliges the agency to carry out an exam. It generally obliges developers to carry out an in -depth environmental analysis. It triggers an initial study process, then often an expensive and long complete environmental impact report. Agencies can then obstruct sanitation or reject the project. It gives all stakeholders the right to submit legal action contesting the agency’s approval.

As it is now well documented, interest groups often include prosecution that are not linked to environmental improvement. Non -crosses deposit combinations to stop – or reduce the size – of the projects they don’t like. Neighbors can bring prosecution because they do not want more traffic. Unions threaten prosecution as a means of obtaining a leverage to guarantee project project and other friendly conditions. As reported by the Holland & Knight law firm in 2015, “64% of people tabled CEQA are individuals or” local associations “, the vast majority of which have no history of environmental advocacy.”

And if you think that these cynical efforts to gourm the construction process help the environment, then consider this alarming point of this analysis: “projects designed to advance the objectives of California environmental policy are the most frequent targets of CEQA legal proceedings.” These include public transport projects, multifamilial housing, parks, schools and libraries. He notes that 80% of CEQA proceedings are in filling places, where environmentalists want us to build.

Criticism of the CEQA has increased even on the political left thanks in large part to the stifling effect of the law on the construction of new housing. As everyone knows, California is faced with a serious housing crisis, because the median price of the state price has increased by more than $ 800,000 and much more than a million dollars in many coastal metros. This led to massive rent peaks and exacerbated our homeless situation. The legislators have – on their credit – targeted exemptions and rationalization provisions for particular types of housing projects (filling, multifamilial, duplex) but this is not enough.