reforming California’s trademark environmental review law
But while environmental leaders agree there’s room for some CEQA reforms, more than 100 organizations wrote in a separate letter Monday that some of Newsom’s proposed changes pose risks to residents, wildlife, water and other resources. And they argue that implementing such big changes now, rather than using the traditional legislative process, doesn’t give Californians enough time to understand and weigh in on potential effects.
In short, CEQA requires public agencies and decision-makers to evaluate the environmental impact of any proposed project, including everything from housing and office buildings to bike lanes and water reservoirs. The law also requires agencies and others to determine if the project in question will have significant effects on environmental quality issues, disclose those effects to the public, and mitigate them as much as is feasible.
However, no lawmaker introduced any of Newsom’s proposals in time to get them through the regular bill process, which required passage in the chamber it was introduced in by June 2. Both the state Senate and Assembly budget committeesbefore that date, saying they didn’t have enough time to fully vet the complicated proposals under deadlines for this legislative session.
Legislators could also try using a so-called “gut and amend” tactic to advance the reforms this year. In that scenario they would gut a bill that’s made it through one chamber by the June 2 deadline, and instead write this bill over the top of it. Then, if the next house also approves the bill by this fall, the changes could take effect Jan. 1.