Summary:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): What has changed?
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has created significant development barriers, including the requirement to file Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) and the involvement of the California Coastal Commission, which necessitates obtaining permits for coastal development.
These have added monumental barriers and made many development projects economically unfeasible. When environmental groups file a lawsuit against a developer, labor unions are often behind the scenes, attempting to require the developer to use union workers and pay prevailing wages.
California has a history of being overly burdensome for business, particularly for small businesses, private enterprise owners, property owners, and developers. Additionally, productive individuals have been relocating in droves to more business-friendly states, such as Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Tennessee, and North Carolina. Even the abomination known as Hollywood seems to be relocating to friendlier states. Silicon Valley is paying attention, where the wealthy 1% of earners are paying the highest portion of the state's income taxes.
https://itep.org/california-who-pays-7th-edition/
The California legislature has responded with incremental, substantial changes, particularly in reducing the burdens of developing real property. These changes are intended to increase the supply of affordable housing and eliminate single-family zoning.
Five new laws were enacted, heralding a significant shift in the CEQA landscape. These laws, in most cases, streamline the development approval process or broaden CEQA exemptions. This positive change is a breath of fresh air for real estate developers, making the process more efficient and less cumbersome.
Article:
The California Legislature has passed laws that significantly alter the development approval process, shifting it from local municipal jurisdiction to the state level. This has led to the establishment of a new bureaucratic infrastructure to oversee the process. As a result, local municipalities now have limited administrative authority, subject to state-level mandates, which significantly reduces their control over regional development. This shift in power dynamics underscores the urgent need for community engagement, making it a crucial and integral element in the future of housing development, where the involvement of property owners and developers is paramount and valued.
In many cases, government agencies compete and act as a counterforce against achieving results, thereby delaying approvals. These competing forces cause continuous delays because there is no motivation to adhere to the law, but rather to maintain power and authority over the development process.
Many municipalities have not come to terms with the realization that they have lost their oversight authority and can only respond within the framework of state mandates.
In many cases, developers must hire lawyers, file litigation (using the builder remedy), and compel municipalities to comply with the law. The law is clear that if the city does not comply and a limitation is required, it will be required to pay punitive damages and the applicant's attorney fees.
However, the demand for more affordable housing in California is becoming increasingly urgent. The potential for more affordable housing in California is a ray of hope, encouraging stakeholders to continue their efforts in this direction and instilling a sense of motivation and hope.
In many cases, government agencies at the state and local levels compete and act as a counterforce against achieving results, thereby delaying approvals. These competing forces cause continuous delays because there is little motivation to adhere to the law, instead favoring the maintenance of power and authority over the development process.
The purpose of these new laws is strategic: to accelerate real property development, particularly high-density residential housing, and simplify the process of obtaining entitlements and completing projects. This strategic move is a positive step for the industry, aiming to foster growth and development. But the positive step comes with a negative price. The steps are designed primarily to increase the density of residential properties, and to the detriment of single-family residential occupancy.
Nothing in California is what it appears to be: personal freedoms are an illusion.
All actions taken by interested and subversive parties in California are strategic, intended to gain an advantage and to capture a significant portion of the economic upside, thereby transferring it into the pockets of special interest parties. This is not a series of random events, but rather a strategic, non-random sequence designed to gain preference and financial gain at the expense of others, just as a Marxist system would dictate.
Common sense, individual sovereignty, self-sufficiency, and rational thinking have no place in the California Marxist experiment. However, Gavin Newsom and his current legislature are not concerned with common sense. They are determined to reengineer the California economy by effectively taking control of every element of the housing market, food consumption, real estate development, transportation, utilities, and making petroleum fuel unaffordable to ordinary people, thereby limiting their mobility as a control tactic. Additionally, Newsom never enacted a new law regulation that he did not like. Burdensome regulations and theft strangle small businesses, but that is ok, as a method of control and redistribution. Just as is occurring in New York City, the conversation about "seizing the means of production" remains alive and well in California.
Governor Newsom is attempting to disrupt and redistribute the rights, title, and interests of private property by every means possible.
All actions taken by interested and subversive parties in California are strategic, intended to gain an advantage and to capture a significant portion of the economic upside, thereby transferring it into the pockets of special interest parties. This is not a series of random events, but rather a strategic, non-random sequence designed to gain preference and financial gain at the expense of others, just as a Marxist system would dictate.
Suppose the labor unions do not get what they want. In that case, they will file lawsuits and utilize the trial court system to significantly slow down the project, potentially even compromising its economic viability.
On a state, national, and international basis, the same is occurring where dark forces, the transnational ruling class, have declared war against humanity. If they can't kill us, they can control every aspect of your lives and confine us to a tiny footprint of the earth to forage out a meager existence. Our future will be defined by digital everything, which can be controlled and manipulated by the same dark forces in government. The central bank digital currency (CBDC) can potentially issue unlimited "helicopter money," as digital money is essentially limitless. Unlimited money will lead to hyperinflation, resulting in a reduction in purchasing power, and ordinary people will be confined to their tiny, stack-and-pack apartments, with limited access to government-run transportation.
Where California goes, so does America. Gavin Newsom is fully part of the transnational plan.
Carole King: It's Too Late
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqwLrJ6QWho&list=RDhqwLrJ6QWho&start_radio=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkKxmnrRVHo
In almost all cases, the new regulations streamline the approval process or provide for an expansion of exemptions.
California provides for certain exemptions to CEQA:
A study by Holland & Knight Law firm found that 49% of the CEQA lawsuits target governmental projects, with infill projects a particular target."CEQA litigation abuse is primarily the domain of Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) opponents and special interests such as competitors and labor unions seeking non-environmental outcomes," the study added.
Five new bills have recently been passed and signed into law, designed to roll back the egregious oversight of real property developments. SB-4, AB-130, AB-131, SB-131, and SB-607 have been introduced to alleviate a portion of the burden. All this is confusion on purpose. Why didn't the California Legislature place all this in one consolidated bill? New statutes always come with obfuscatory language, roadblocks, and detours; complex language is used intentionally.
We can Invision that the NIMBYs (not in my backyard) have been replaced with YIMBYs (yes, in my backyard).
SB-4: Faith-based institutions and non-profit colleges
Provides a legal framework that facilitates the construction of affordable multi-family homes on land owned by faith-based Institutions and non-profit colleges.
This California legislation is designed to expedite the development process for affordable housing on land owned by religious and educational institutions, thereby significantly boosting the housing supply.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQ does not apply to the ministerial approval of projects.
New regulation, by requiring approval of specific development projects as a use by right, would expand the exemption for ministerial approval of projects under CEQA.
AB-130: Housing
Require that a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project approve or disapprove a project within 60 days, as specified, from the date of receipt of a complete application, if the project is subject to ministerial review by the public agency. The bill would, for a development project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the below-described CEQA exemption for housing development projects, require that a public agency, which is the lead agency for the development project, approve or disapprove the project within 30 days from the conclusion of specified environmental assessments.
Exempt from the requirements of CEQA any aspect of a housing development project, as defined, including any permits, approvals, or public improvements required for the housing development project, as may be required by CEQA, if the housing development project meets certain conditions relating to, for example, size, density, location, and use, including specific requirements for any housing on the project site located within 500 feet of a freeway.
This bill would require a local government to, within specified timeframes, provide formal notification to each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site as an invitation to consult on the proposed project, as specified. The bill would require a local government, as a condition of approval for the development, to require the development proponent to complete a specified environmental assessment regarding hazardous substance releases. If a recognized environmental condition is identified, the bill would require the development proponent to conduct a preliminary evaluation of potential endangerment and implement specified mitigation measures based on that assessment.
Section 7, 21080.43 defines mitigation measures.
CA AB130 | 2025-2026 | Regular Session | LegiScan
AB-131: Public Resources provides exemptions as specified. This means that interested parties must read the bill in its entirety.
New agricultural and farmworker housing projects and projects consisting exclusively of the repair or maintenance of an existing farmworker housing project.
Provide an exemption for projects to provide sewer service to a disadvantaged community served by one or more inadequate sewer treatment systems.
Provides an exemption for prescribed fire, defensible space clearance, and fuel breaks.
Provides an exemption for the right-of-way of a local street or road.
Provides an exemption for planning, design, site acquisition, construction, operation, or maintenance of public parks or nonmotorized recreational trail facilities.
Provides an exemption for day care centers, federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics, nonprofit food banks, food pantries, and advanced manufacturing.
The development, construction, or operation of a heavy maintenance facility or other maintenance facility for electrically powered high-speed rail
The bill would exempt a project from CEQA if it consists of the development, construction, or modification of a proposed passenger rail station, or design changes to an existing passenger rail station, to serve electrically powered high-speed rail, provided specified conditions are met.
Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of some of the above-described exemptions, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Interested parties are required to read the new law in its entirety.
Bill tracking in California - AB 131 (2025-2026 legislative session) - FastDemocracy
AB 131: Public Resources. | Digital Democracy
Bill Text: CA AB131 | 2025-2026 | Regular Session | Amended | LegiScan
Thoughts on AB 131 - Legal Planet
California Legislature Passes Sweeping CEQA Reform Bills - O'Melveny
AB-130 and SB-131: The differences
At least the combination of AB-130 and AB-131 would be classified as a positive step on the Richter scale of development complexity.
On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 130 and Senate Bill (SB) 131 that will streamline the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process for specified housing development projects.
SB 607:
The usual suspects vigorously opposed SB 607, referring to it as a dangerous rollback of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
https://www.psr-la.org/take-action/action-alerts/cta-oppose-607
This new law has introduced changes to CEQA aimed at addressing the state's burdensome infrastructure shortcomings. This bill allows developers to bypass CEQA review if they agree to pay prevailing wages to workers. Labor unions got what they wanted. Mandating union workers and paying prevailing union wages will significantly increase the project's cost.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB607
There is little question that interested parties should obtain counsel from a specialist in the field to help with their particular projects. The information above doesn't give a general overview and remains incomplete until the related bill is read and its meaning is understood.