Moving past CEQA

It’s bad public policy, with its unintended consequences going far beyond what the original architects of the law intended. In fact, since 1983, every governor, a bipartisan group, has cited the need to reform the law, particularly in light of the state’s acute cost-of-living crisis. In practice, what was intended as a modest environmental protection became, at times, a de facto veto by driving up the costs of housing in our communities, with the mere threat of CEQA litigation, or delays through multiple iterations of studies, holding up even projects with broad public support.

That’s why our representatives on the Peninsula should support AB 609, and residents who care about not just housing, but also the future of our environment and our planet, should make their voice heard on this crucial matter.

AB 609 represents good environmental policy, exempting developments from CEQA for infill housing — that which has either already been developed, or is surrounded by existing urban uses. Any parcel meeting this exemption would also be required to be consistent with local zoning.

As author David Owen highlights in Green Metropolis, the most sustainable communities in the United States, with the smallest per capita greenhouse gas and carbon emission production, are denser. That’s because rather than having to drive 10 miles to the grocery store, for example, neighbors can walk, bike or even drive down the street. In one study, a one-fold increase in density was found to correlate with 48% and 35% lower environmental impacts on travel and energy usage, respectively. Infrastructure, from water to sewage to broadband, is either already supported or more quickly improved compared to sprawl.

The Peninsula is rich in open spaces, which past generations have fought to preserve. The bill would help with preserving existing open space, and even expanding it, which becomes more sustainable when growth patterns support infill development rather than sprawl. That’s why, for the environment as well as for our precious open spaces, and preserving the unique character of our communities, AB 609 is sound public policy.

The bill isn’t perfect; while “environmentally sensitive” and “hazardous” sites would not receive the CEQA exemption, these categories could be better defined. Throughout the region, many of our more rural communities, and even some of our urban ones, are in high wildfire risk zones. This language should be updated in the legislation, including to either explicitly disallow high-risk wildfire zones as a “sensitive” or “hazardous” area or to add them as a third category. AB 609 will soon be heard in committee, and our representatives should use their voice throughout the legislative process to strengthen the legislation.

AB 609 would also still allow for local control and voice on new developments, since any projects receiving a CEQA exemption would still have to meet existing zoning standards. Municipal governments would still conduct CEQA studies for documents such as the housing element and general plans, preserving the role of local voice.

The Peninsula has a long and proud history as a national and even global leader in environmentalism. On a bipartisan basis, our region has been a bastion of environmental protection. To preserve our environmental legacy and leadership while tackling our cost-of-living crisis, we should support AB 609.

Sergio Lopez is a delegate to the California Democratic Party for Assembly District 23, which includes the coastside, Peninsula and parts of Santa Clara County including Campbell. He is also vice president of the Peninsula Division of the League of Cities, a director of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and chair of the Valley Transportation Authority. He is mayor of Campbell.