Republish
UC Berkeley’s problem is poor planning, not CEQA
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
UC Berkeley’s problem is poor planning, not CEQA
Share this:
By Eric Parfrey
Eric Parfrey, a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley, is a retired city planner in Stockton and a former member of the Berkeley Planning Commission.
Re “Berkeley case proves CEQA needs to be reformed”; Commentary, March 15, 2022
It’s no surprise business industry representatives, like the authors of the commentary, blame CEQA for the University of California, Berkeley’s failure to develop sufficient housing for its ballooning student population.
Is it possible UC Berkeley failed to account for the environmental impacts of enrollment growth equivalent to a 9% population increase in the entire city of Berkeley? Is it possible growth on that scale might increase rates of homelessness, strain public services and have other significant impacts worth mitigating?
CEQA didn’t create these problems; the university’s poor planning did. CEQA is simply the messenger. Better planning, not gutting CEQA, is the answer.
CEQA is a living law that has been updated dozens of times. It can, has and should be updated to address the current problems of the day. But it still plays an essential role in protecting public health, and both natural and urban environments.
related commentary
Cutting enrollment at Berkeley would be detrimental on several levels
Another misuse of environmental quality law affects UC students