Maureen Sedonaen

Maureen Sedonaen

It was 14 months ago when the lawsuit dropped on the mat of Habitat for Humanity’s head office. Reading through it, it was clear that our newest project to build 20 affordable family homes in San Mateo County had to be stopped. It was in the crosshairs of local opponents and was heading to court.

Just hours before, the mood was one of excitement, hope and possibility. The entire Habitat family was thrilled to be building more homes in Redwood City and proud to have received wide community support. Only one month earlier, the City Council had unanimously approved the project after hearing from a room full of neighbors who were fully supportive of the need for more affordable homes. We were set to move forward.

Recommended for you

Recommended for you

(7) comments

jameslee

If we want to talk about "homeowner groups, NIMBYs, and malcontents" supposedly weaponizing CEQA, lets talk about how real estate lobbying groups, YIMBYs, and developers have been teaming up in recent years to weaponize a naturally progressive issue (the genuine need for more affordable housing) in order to water down landmark, important pieces of environmental legislation as part of a for-profit agenda.

I feel for Habitat for Humanity, but in some cases the reverse of their situation has occurred, in that people have used CEQA lawsuits as an attempt to STOP the replacement of affordable housing with larger, upscale housing that few but the upper class can afford. So while CEQA may not have worked in H4H's favor in this instance, it can be used to protect the stock of affordable housing units in a community, even if that wouldn't be the grounds for filing CEQA lawsuit itself, but just a side consequence of a successful suit.

Fred Sahakian

For the past 5 years, I have studied CEQA and its impact on non-environmental projects, and it is a problematic piece of legislation that can be used for non-environmental agendas. For those who wish to change CEQA and have it focus more on environmental concerns (as originally intended), the conversation has to be constant and there needs to be more diverse voices involved. Most of the time it seems like it is just land developers that speak up about CEQA (especially during economic downturns) and want change, but there are many non-profits such as religious organizations that have also faced CEQA litigation, and lost. The voices need to join together somehow and speak up.

vincent wei

Truth about the matter.......CEQA has been used in California mainly by environmentalist groups ever since it's inception. In fact, the environmental groups were the basic authors of CEQA, including the Sierra Club, Green Belt Alliance, Committee for Green Foothills and the California Coastal Commission.

Eaadams

As with all things the people who "mainly" use something aren't the ones who ruin it for the rest of us. CEQA has repeatedly been used as a hammer against affordable housing and schools. NIMBY's use it to stop, delay and obfuscate issues. Organized labor uses it to greenmail projects into excluding merit based contractors from projects. CEQA needs massive reform.

Milly

Note that the author isn't saying "abolish CEQA", just scale it back to what it was intended for: projects that "cause harm to the natural environment or public health".

JordanG

You're right, Vincent: environmental groups have used CEQA to pursue the noble goal of preserving open space. Unfortunately, homeowner groups, NIMBYs and malcontents have weaponized CEQA in attempts to delay and block housing of all shapes and sizes. That needs to be corrected.

Eaadams

^ Yes

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!

Want to join the discussion?

Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.

Already a subscriber? Login Here