By Vanguard Staff
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A coalition of environmental and public health organizations said this week it will campaign against a California Chamber of Commerce-backed ballot initiative that would scale back the California Environmental Quality Act, arguing the proposal would weaken environmental safeguards, reduce public participation and shift cleanup costs from developers to taxpayers.
According to the coalition, more than 200 California organizations signed a letter opposing the measure, which supporters say is intended to address barriers to development and affordability.
Opponents contend the initiative is backed by major corporate and billionaire donors, including more than $14 million in total funding. They said $10 million came from a political action committee founded by Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt.
The coalition said the proposal would limit legal remedies that currently allow courts to halt harmful construction projects, make it easier for developers to challenge local government denials in court, and significantly weaken longstanding state environmental review requirements.
“This is not a reform that will help everyday Californians with affordability. It is funded by corporations that want to avoid paying for their impacts and pollution,” said Howard Penn, executive director of the Planning and Conservation League. “Californians deserve a healthy and safe environment and are willing to fight to protect those priorities.”
Deja McCauley, land use and health program manager for Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles, said weakening environmental review would have direct public health consequences.
“Weakening environmental review means more toxic pollution in the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we live on. We know what that leads to: higher rates of asthma, greater risk of cancer, and more families living next to industrial projects that were never proved to be safe,” McCauley said. “Put simply, this initiative robs the public of essential tools they need to keep their communities healthy and safe.”
Nicole Ghio, California director for Food & Water Watch, disputed claims that the measure is focused on housing production.
“Don’t let the smoke and mirrors deceive you. This is not a housing initiative. It is an industry scheme to get around environmental review, public input, and local government,” Ghio said. “And it would allow industry to sue state and local agencies when they don’t get their way. It eliminates meaningful review and strips families of the strongest tool they have to protect their kids from toxic projects next door. This is simply a way for corporate polluters to build out in our communities with impunity and without oversight.”
Elizabeth Reid-Wainscoat, policy specialist with the Center for Biological Diversity, said changes to CEQA would undermine informed decision-making and public accountability.
“Uninformed decision-makers make bad choices, and that’s what will happen if California continues with this wholesale overhaul of CEQA,” Reid-Wainscoat said. “Eroding CEQA undermines a democratic process that has made California an environmental leader and has protected communities and wildlife from the most harmful impacts of industrial development for decades.”
The coalition also raised concerns about potential impacts on schools and children. Diana Welsh, vice president of Learning Disabilities Association of America California, said reduced oversight could expose communities to environmental hazards.
“As a result of the initiative’s weakening of environmental protections, school sites and children, along with nearby communities, could be exposed to toxic chemicals, polluted air, and contaminated water supplies,” Welsh said. “Studies show these exposures can be contributing factors that harm children’s developing brains and could result in future learning disabilities.”
Sylvia Arredondo, civic engagement director for Communities for a Better Environment, said the measure would favor wealthy backers over impacted communities.
“The CalChamber initiative benefits billionaires and corporations, not Californians. Voters believe we should uphold strong environmental protections for working families, especially communities on the frontlines of industrial pollution,” Arredondo said. “We denounce billionaires spending millions to pass the initiative and we will come together with the strength of people-power to oppose further rollbacks of CEQA.”
Miguel Miguel, director of Sierra Club California, said the initiative would transfer environmental and health costs onto the public.
“Proponents of the initiative call this affordability. It is not. It shifts pollution cleanup costs and healthcare costs from developers onto taxpayers and local governments,” Miguel said. “The initiative guarantees more risk and more cost, not less. As communities continue to feel the stresses of the climate crisis, our solutions should not be led by developers who seek to silence the voices on the frontline of the worst environmental harms.”
The ballot measure is expected to become part of a broader statewide debate over how California balances environmental protections, housing production and economic development.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
