CEQA 'reform plan' open to shadiness
California's Environmental Quality Act, the decades-old law requiring that the environmental consequences of projects be considered before they can be built, needs an overhaul.
The law that gave citizens a voice in their community's development has been hijacked by special interest groups -- unions using CEQA to stop non-union projects, anti-growth groups using it to stall a development, etc.
But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and a bipartisan group of legislators have cooked up a scheme that does not reform CEQA at all; rather, it opens the approval process to suspect practices.
The primary scheme was born in the wake of the governor and Legislature greasing the regulatory gears for the construction of a Southern California football stadium last year. The stadium was opposed by some nearby property owners, neighboring cities and environmental groups.
To overcome objections, the Legislature exempted the stadium project from legal challenges. Individuals and groups now cannot use CEQA to sue developers to block construction.
It's being sold as a "jobs creator," but the governor's new scheme is likely to become a pawn in the tussle between Republicans and Democrats over California's red-ink budget.
This exemption back door would allow the governor to excuse 25 projects a year for the next four years (100 projects) from CEQA court challenges. These unidentified projects will be scattered about the state -- 10 in Southern California, five in the Central Valley, five in the Bay Area and five in the rest of the state.
Those who are tired of seeing the courts facilitate ploys to stall or stop development might be tempted to yell, "Whoopee!" That's not appropriate in this case. A citizen's right to turn to the courts for protection from government abuse -- in this case, project approval -- ought to be sacred.
And just because an exempted project is in the Central Valley, for example, doesn't mean it is a project we want, or that will be good for us, or that it is proposed by a local developer. Consider:
* In the 1980s, the state of California got the brilliant idea to clean up the McColl Superfund site in Fullerton by hauling hundreds of truckloads of toxic dirt to Kern County and dumping it into an obscure oil field waste plant near Buttonwillow. Kern County supervisors sued the state (yes, under CEQA) to block the plan.
* The county now is engaged in a lengthy CEQA court battle to block Los Angeles from hauling its sludge (human and industrial waste) to Kern County and smearing it onto farm land.
* Just a few years ago, southwest Bakersfield residents fought the U.S. General Services Administration's plans to build a federal courthouse on the outskirts of the city, rather than downtown where it belongs. A CEQA lawsuit loomed until federal officials backed down. Courthouse construction soon will begin adjacent to Central Park downtown.
These are just three examples where lawsuits, or the threat of lawsuits, have empowered citizens and their elected representatives to stop or modify plans to build power plants, waste disposal facilities, shopping centers, housing subdivisions, etc.
To give a governor the power to exempt projects deemed "worthwhile" (worthwhile to whom?) opens the approval door to the highest campaign bidder.
California's Environmental Quality Act should be reformed to prevent its abuse. Creating a new avenue for corruption and abuse is not the way to reform it.
