{"id":466402,"date":"2025-05-28T00:01:00","date_gmt":"2025-05-28T07:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/?p=466402"},"modified":"2025-05-27T15:59:23","modified_gmt":"2025-05-27T22:59:23","slug":"california-senate-ceqa-housing-reform","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/_es\/commentary\/2025\/05\/california-senate-ceqa-housing-reform\/","title":{"rendered":"Why did the California Senate shunt a cost-cutting housing bill?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last month, RAND, a prominent think tank based in Santa Monica, published an estudio exhaustivo<\/a> on housing costs that devastatingly proves how California has been undermining its official goal of increasing production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After examining more than 100 multifamily projects in three states, RAND concluded that building them in California is 2.8 times as expensive as in Texas and 1.5 times higher than in Colorado, \u201cwith much of the difference driven by state and local policies that contribute to long permitting and construction timelines, and higher local development fees.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even more shockingly, RAND found that projects for low-income families cost 1.5 times as much to build as market-rate housing in California and four times the average cost in Texas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last week, the California Senate appeared to double down on making housing development more difficult and costly, shunting a bill aimed at making it easier to build housing for lower-income families by exempting some projects from the California Environmental Quality Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Senate Bill 607<\/a>, carried by state Sen. Scott Wiener,<\/a> a San Francisco Democrat, was gutted in the Senate Appropriations Committee, apparently because Senate leaders such as President Pro Tem mike mcguire<\/a> caved into fierce opposition from environmental groups and labor unions, which celebrated the move. The committee announced that SB 607\u2019s contents were being stripped out and replaced by vague language declaring intentions to negotiate further, leaving the fate of the proposal unclear.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n

Obtenga m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n sobre los legisladores mencionados en esta historia.<\/p>\n

\n \n \n

mike mcguire<\/p>\n

Dem\u00f3crata, Senado estatal, Distrito 2 (Santa Rosa)<\/p>\n <\/a>\n \n \n

Scott Wiener<\/p>\n

Dem\u00f3crata, Senado estatal, Distrito 11 (San Francisco)<\/p>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Those who either oppose housing projects on environmental grounds or demand concessions, such as requiring them to use union construction labor, have often used \u2014 or misused \u2014 CEQA as a tool. Over the last half-decade, the Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom have nibbled at CEQA\u2019s provisions, but when SB 607 was introduced, environmental and labor groups drew an opposition line in the sand<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the bill was bowdlerized last week, the coalition praised<\/a> McGuire and other Senate leaders\u00a0\u201cfor recognizing that the language of SB 607 would have created significant unintended consequences on communities and new legal uncertainties.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just days earlier, Newsom had urged the Legislature to pass<\/a> SB 607 and a similar measure, Assembly Bill 609<\/a>, as much-needed reforms to increase housing development<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s time to get serious about this issue, period, full stop,\u201d Newsom said. \u201cIf you care about your kids you care about getting this done. This is the biggest opportunity to do something big and bold and the only impediment is us.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The SB 607 blockage may indicate that Newsom is losing clout with the Legislature as he nears lame duck status. However, he could revive the bill as part of the forthcoming negotiations over the state budget, as a statement by Wiener and McGuire<\/a> suggested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00a0La RAND study reveals why the state is falling behind<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\t\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tLeer siguiente<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Why\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\tComentario<\/a>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

Why is it so expensive to build affordable homes in California? It takes too long<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/article>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t<\/div>\n\t\n\n\n

\u201cCalifornia is significantly more expensive than both Colorado and Texas in every cost category that we examined,\u201d Jason Ward, lead author of the report, said in a statement. \u201cOne way to address California\u2019s high housing costs is to look for lessons from states where it is easier and less expensive to build new housing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The report urges California to emulate a Texas law giving local governments just 30 days to approve or reject projects to reduce California\u2019s 22-month average processing time, to reduce mandatory fees, and to consider modifying California\u2019s strict energy efficiency requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most poignant finding in the report, however, is that \u201cif California had Colorado\u2019s production costs for publicly subsidized affordable apartments the roughly $1.25 billion in recent spending by the state\u2019s four largest funding programs would have produced more than four times as many units.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s what California is giving up as it continues to make housing development more costly than it needs to be.<\/p>\n\n\n\t\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tLeer m\u00e1s<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"California\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\tPol\u00edtica<\/a>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

California lawmakers reject hundreds of bills in rapid-fire hearings<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Newsom\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\tAlojamiento<\/a>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

Newsom picks more housing over CEQA in backing two bills meant to speed construction<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t