Group Believes Lawsuits Under CEQA Affect Only a Small Fraction of Projects in the State, and Most Are Unrelated to Housing

Rose Foundation argues that CEQA is a critical tool for protecting Californians from wildfire, promoting environmental justice, and mitigating the public health impacts of polluting projects proposed near homes and schools

Special to the Vanguard

Santa Rosa, CA – Amidst calls for reform of CEQA by the Governor, AG, and members of the legislature, a group called the Rose Foundation, released a new report this week, “CEQA by the Numbers: Myths & Facts,” claiming that they provide empirical evidence proving that CEQA is not a major factor deterring the development of housing in California.

Produced by The Housing Workshop, a housing policy firm, this report demonstrates that lawsuits under CEQA affect only a small fraction of projects in the state and most are unrelated to housing.

In fact, the number of CEQA lawsuits and rate of CEQA litigation have remained consistently very low over the last 20 years, despite a rapid growth in the state’s population.

The report was commissioned by the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment; it is an update of the Rose Foundation’s 2021 report on CEQA, and focusses primarily on CEQA litigation filed in 2019-2021.

“It is essential to review the facts and analyze actual data when evaluating the effects of CEQA,” said Janet Smith-Heimer, Principal of The Housing Workshop and co-author on the report. “Here, despite the many myths about CEQA, the facts show that CEQA is not a major impediment to housing development. Instead, CEQA supports sustainable housing development and addresses harmful, long-term impacts while giving Californians a voice in community decisions.”

The report includes several significant findings, including:

• The number of lawsuits filed under CEQA continues to be low, averaging only 192 lawsuits per year since 2002. This number has remained relatively constant over the last two decades, despite rapid (13.2 percent) population growth in the state.
• The rate of litigation for challenges to projects alleging noncompliance with CEQA is also very low. The rate of litigation from 2013 to 2021 was only 1.9 percent — far lower than some press reports imply. Further, the rate of CEQA litigation has dropped since the publication of the last Rose Foundation report in 2021.
• Less than one quarter of the CEQA cases filed in 2019-2021 challenged housing projects. The proportion of cases challenging new housing units in this period was far less than stated by CEQA critics. Further, for 2019 (the report’s snapshot year for this analysis), the number of units subject to legal challenge equated to less than 10% of the state’s housing unit production that year — refuting some critics’ assertions that petitioners challenge nearly half of the state’s annual housing production.
• The vast majority of housing units challenged in CEQA lawsuits in 2019-2021 were not located in urban infill areas, but on undeveloped land in remote areas. CEQA’s policies discouraging urban sprawl are consistent with other California laws aimed at preserving valuable farmland, forests and habitat and reducing emissions of climate-harming greenhouse gasses.
• The state legislature has continued to adopt CEQA streamlining measures for qualifying housing projects. Since the last Rose Foundation report, lawmakers have adopted extensive new streamlining measures: SB 6, SB 7, SB 9, SB 10, AB 2011, and SB 886. Further, this report finds that cities and counties’ use of SB 35, adopted in 2017, is growing, representing an initiative readily available to accelerate affordable housing production.
• Before the legislature enacts further streamlining amendments, it should evaluate the effectiveness of recent measures and whether they have achieved their goals. When the legislature eliminates environmental review requirements through streamlining provisions such as those authorized by SB 35, there may be no mitigation for public health impacts or other harm, and no opportunity for public input. Lawmakers and policy leaders should carefully monitor existing CEQA streamlining measures before further weakening the law’s environmental protections and evaluate the measures’ effectiveness in increasing housing production (and achieving other policy goals).
• CEQA continues to protect California’s scenic landscapes and historic resources. For example, since the 2021 Report, successful CEQA challenges forced decisionmakers to disclose the impacts of two large developments on water quality in Lake Tahoe, an international treasure. The law also required the state to analyze alternatives to a controversial plan to alter the historic State Capitol Complex, a project that would have significantly impacted the iconic West Lawn.
• CEQA advances environmental justice throughout California. CEQA continues to be the principal tool that vulnerable communities use to protect residents from the public health impacts of polluting projects proposed near homes and schools. CEQA litigation filed in 2019-2021 has forced developers and public agencies to modify warehouse logistics centers, oil and gas drilling activities, and other massive industrial projects to address air and water pollution, increased noise, and traffic safety.
• CEQA has been instrumental in fighting climate change and reducing wildfire risks. Several lawsuits filed in 2019-2021 successfully challenged large, market-rate developments in remote, high fire-severity areas. Courts sent decision-makers back to the drawing board to ensure that these projects reduced their emissions of greenhouse gasses and mitigated impacts on sensitive plant species and wildlife habitat. Settlements in CEQA cases have also resulted in developer commitments to adopt energy- and water-efficiency measures.
• A wide variety of groups and organizations – from public agencies to businesses and tribes – rely on CEQA and will enforce the law in court. While most cases filed in 2019-2021 were brought by environmental organizations and community groups, many other interests have brought court actions to enforce the law. These interests include environmental justice organizations, historic preservation groups, tribes, business interests, and a large number of public agencies. Contrary to reports in the press, labor unions filed very few CEQA cases in 2019-2021 — only 13.

CEQA was signed into law in 1970 by Governor Ronald Reagan. CEQA requires public agencies to identify significant environmental and public health impacts associated with proposed development and to reduce or eliminate such impacts whenever feasible. The law includes provisions to ensure government transparency and invites community involvement in the land use decision-making process.

“CEQA plays a crucial function in protecting public health and the environment in communities of color and low-income communities disproportionately burdened by environmental harms,” said Tiffany Eng, Program Director of the California Environmental Justice Alliance. “Every Californian has the right to clean air and water and a home free from pollution. Without a strong CEQA, residents would lose the ability to participate in the land use process, a process that leads to safer, healthier neighborhoods.”

The report uses current data and case studies from 2019-2021 to provide the following analysis:

• A detailed assessment of the volume and rate of CEQA litigation in 2019-2021.
• A categorization of each CEQA lawsuit filed in 2019-2021, both by type of petitioner and by type of project challenged.
• An extensive, fact-based analysis of CEQA litigation challenging housing projects in 2019-2021. The report compares the total number of units in 2019 that were challenged to the number of units permitted throughout California in the same year.
• The report uses two large, representative counties in California to determine whether the lawsuits are targeting infill housing.
• Numerous cases studies illustrating the effect of CEQA lawsuits in 2019-2021. The report provides an in-depth discussion of cases challenging housing and mixed use developments, industrial and commercial projects, and land use decisions of the University of California.
• An explanation of how CEQA is employed not only to protect environmental resources throughout the state, but also to advance environmental justice and combat climate change.

“When you look at CEQA in its entirety, it’s clear that the law improves projects by shining a light on their significant environmental and public health harms. This important requirement is what makes California an environmental leader,” said Aruna Prabhala, Senior Attorney and Urban Wildlands Program Director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “At a time of unprecedented environmental crisis, we need CEQA more than ever to protect vulnerable communities and ecosystems.”

This is the third CEQA report commissioned by the Rose Foundation. “Each time we have heard complaints about CEQA in the popular press, we decided to see whether there was any basis in fact,” said Tim Little, Executive Director of the Rose Foundation.

“When one examines the data, it turns out that the arguments for weakening CEQA simply do not hold up,” he continued. “In fact, the evidence shows that CEQA promotes water quality and conservation, community equity, environmental justice, and climate resilience.

“We all want more housing in California — especially more housing that people can afford — but critics are mistaken in blaming CEQA for the shortages. Policymakers should focus on the real culprits: high land and construction costs, lack of financing, and restrictive local zoning.”

To read the full report click here.

Categories:

Tags: