Skip to content
Independent and accessible public media is needed more than ever.
Help us continue keeping communities informed and inspired.
Keep public media independent and accessible
Donate Now

View thank you gift options

CapRadio

CapRadio

signal status listen live donate
listen live donate signal status
listen live donate signal status
  • News
    • topics
    • State Government
    • Environment
    • Health Care
    • Race and Equity
    • Business
    • Arts and Lifestyle
    • Food and Sustainability
    • PolitiFact California
  • Music
    • genres
    • Classical
    • Jazz
    • Eclectic
    • Daily Playlist
  • Programs + Podcasts
    • news
    • Morning Edition
    • All Things Considered
    • Marketplace
    • Insight With Vicki Gonzalez
    • music
    • Acid Jazz
    • At the Opera
    • Classical Music
    • Connections
    • Excellence in Jazz
    • Hey, Listen!
    • K-ZAP on CapRadio
    • Mick Martin's Blues Party
    • Programs A-Z
    • Podcast Directory
  • Schedules
    • News
    • Music
    • ClassicalStream
    • JazzStream
    • Weekly Schedule
    • Daily Playlist
  • Community
    • Events Calendar
    • CapRadio Garden
    • CapRadio Reads
    • Ticket Giveaways
  • Support
    • Evergreen Gift
    • One-Time Gift
    • Corporate Support
    • Vehicle Donation
    • Stock Gift
    • Legacy Gift
    • Endowment Gift
    • Benefits
    • Member FAQ
    • e‑Newsletter
    • Drawing Winners
    • Thank You Gifts
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Close Menu

California Dream

 

A statewide collaboration between Capital Public Radio, KQED, KPCC, KPBS and CALmatters focused on key issues of economic opportunity, quality of life and the future of the “California Dream.”

Series and Project Archive

 We Get Support From:
Become a Supporter 
 We Get Support From:
Become a Supporter 

Is California’s Legacy Environmental Law Protecting The State’s Beauty Or Blocking Affordable Housing?

  •  Ben Bradford 
Monday, July 9, 2018 | Sacramento, CA
Listen
/
Update RequiredTo play audio, update browser or Flash plugin.
Ben Bradford / Capital Public Radio

Maureen Sedonaen, CEO of Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco, stands in the vacant lot where the nonprofit is looking to build new affordable housing.

Ben Bradford / Capital Public Radio

Redwood City approved more than a year ago the kind of affordable-housing project California desperately needs: a 20-unit building, downtown, near transit lines, in the heart of Silicon Valley, where the state’s housing crisis is most severe. The developer was a nonprofit, Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco. But today the lot remains vacant, except for a row of portable toilets, a trailer and a dumpster.

An attorney who works out of a two-story home behind the lot filed a lawsuit against the project last year, and it has since been stalled. He contends the city’s approval of the apartments violated a sweeping, decades-old environmental law, because the building could increase traffic. The Habitat building could also block the view from his home’s rear windows.

Is he using the law to preserve California’s natural beauty, or is he merely denying someone else’s affordable home?

For critics of the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, this case is a poster child for the need for reform. Signed by Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1970 and often referred to as “see-kwuh,” the law calls for “preventing environmental damage, while providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian.”

Environmentalists say CEQA does just that, supplying some of the strongest protection and transparency in the nation.

“CEQA is the fundamental law in California for environmental protection that also protects the right of the public to be informed about projects that are going into our neighborhood,” said David Pettit, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

But critics, particularly developers, say court decisions and opportunists have broadened and weaponized the law so it actively impedes housing, particularly in urban areas.

“This is not about the environment,” said Jennifer Hernandez, an attorney at Holland & Knight and one of the state’s most vocal advocates for change to the law. “This signature environmental law is being hijacked to advance economic interests.

“Conscience Of The Community’’

CEQA requires that new public and private projects undergo rigorous reviews to prove they will not cause significant harm to the existing environment. If they will cause harm, developers can be forced to pay to mitigate it.

Government agencies and planning departments certify projects have complied with the law when approved. But CEQA relies on another, atypical enforcement mechanism that critics call unbalanced: the public.

Anyone can file a lawsuit challenging that a project has violated the approval process, even without disclosing their identities.

Courtesy of California Resources Agency This state chart shows the processes projects must go through to obtain approval, as well as exemptions, under CEQA. Courtesy of California Resources Agency
 

“CEQA lawsuits can be filed anonymously. And they can be filed by people who have only economic competition at stake,” said Hernandez, whose firm is defending Habitat pro bono. “They can be filed by competitors, unions — frankly, racist neighbors. Anybody.”

Hernandez analyzed CEQA lawsuits in the Bay Area over a three-year period and found prominent environmental groups brought only 13 percent of the cases.

The lawsuit against Habitat for Humanity is Geoff Carr’s second, and the fourth he’s threatened. He’s an attorney who specializes in criminal defense, not environmental law. But he’s becoming something of an expert.

Inside his law office, he points out to a high-rise building across the street. “We got in late to fight that one,” he said of his CEQA threat against the apartments, “and we only got a floor off it and a little bit of change.”

Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio Geoff Carr, a criminal defense attorney in Redwood City, has challenged or threatened to challenge several developments in his neighborhood, using CEQA. Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio
 

Across the street from Habitat’s vacant lot, a developer canceled a 91-unit condo project outright. Carr says he threatened a CEQA suit and that once the developer "found out we were going to the mat with him," he pulled the plug.

But Carr is most proud of a building down the block from his office, across the street from Redwood City’s historic courthouse.

The developer in that case, Steve Dostart, wanted to build a large office building. But Carr, who called the original plan "another plastic piece of crap," says they negotiated a smaller, eight-story building.

“We were the conscience of the community,” Carr said. "We gave and they gave, and I think they got an award for that building." Dostart has said that the negotiated building is an improvement on the original proposal, according to a local media outlet.

For Carr, CEQA is the best tool to defend against what he sees as greedy developers and complacent city officials.

“I don’t want to be too pejorative about the City Council of Redwood City, but I hate them,” he said. “They’re small-minded peeves, unfortunately.”

Maureen Sedonaen, CEO of the Habitat for Humanity chapter, says Carr’s actions are not simply impeding encroaching development: They hurt needy residents.

“It’s always easy to think about ‘It’s a lot and it’s a project and we’re stopping it,’ but we’re talking about 20 families being able to permanently stay in the Bay Area,” she said.

Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio Habitat for Humanity received city approval to build a six-story affordable housing project on this vacant lot more than a year ago. The project is stalled due to a CEQA lawsuit. Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio
 

Redwood City has sought to streamline housing approvals downtown in recent years by preemptively performing the in-depth environmental analysis CEQA requires, as part of a larger development plan. The city can declare that projects conform to the plan and are exempt from performing their own analysis — a common tactic by local governments to encourage development.

But citizens can still sue those exemptions.

“The thing that works is you have to find some way where they’re violating their own plan, and it’s not that hard to do,” Carr said.

Hernandez says it’s so easy for plaintiffs to win that a project’s funding will immediately freeze once a suit is filed.

That’s partially because of the law’s sweeping definition of “environment,” which she sums up this way: “The view from a parking lot is a scenic vista protected under CEQA. ... My environment is where I get to park, and what I get to look at through my front window, and if you change that, I’m going to object and I’m going to use CEQA.”

Habitat for Humanity fronts its own money, and Sedonaen says she may greenlight construction on the Redwood City building even before the lawsuit is resolved. That’s a gamble. Losing a CEQA case can force a project to restart the approval process from scratch, sucking up time and money.

In the meantime, she says the price continues to rise anyway. The nonprofit originally estimated the project would cost $13 million. That has now risen to $17 million.

“The delay in this process has cost us several million dollars out of a nonprofits pocket that we could be putting toward another housing development, and shame on the people that are doing it,” Sedonaen said.

‘A Challenge Every Step Of The Way’

Critics contend that CEQA is the most significant factor in California's housing-affordability crisis — but the data does not show that.

UC Berkeley environmental law professor Eric Biber is part of a team researching the barriers to new housing in California. The initial leg of the study looked at projects with five units or more approved in five Bay Area cities, how long it took for their approval, and what steps the cities required.

Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio Eric Biber is an environmental law professor at UC Berkeley, who is researching barriers to housing in California. Ben Bradford/Capital Public Radio
 

In San Francisco, Oakland, Redwood City, Palo Alto and San Jose, Biber says CEQA was not an overriding obstacle.

“I think it probably gets more attention than it deserves,” he said. “I like to think of CEQA as a symptom, not a cause of the underlying challenges we face in producing more housing in urban areas in California.”

Out of 254 projects approved over a three-year period, only seven faced CEQA lawsuits, according to the study’s most recent data, which is still preliminary. Most of those suits also allege other non-CEQA violations of state zoning and planning law.

In other words, the environmental law that has drawn so much ire from developers is used to litigate only a small portion of projects and, without it, those projects would likely end up in court, anyway.

"I like to think of CEQA as a symptom, not a cause of the underlying challenges we face in producing more housing in urban areas in California."

- Eric Biber

Biber thinks the barriers to development are more philosophical: Landowners are often resistant to new development near them.

“The reason that CEQA is both triggered and used as a lawsuit is to respond to underlying political fights at the local level about development,” Biber said. “And those political fights would occur anyway.”

The stalled Habitat for Humanity project in downtown Redwood City conforms to Biber’s findings almost perfectly. The lawsuit alleges violations of CEQA, but also other state zoning and planning law. And the project’s developer, despite building throughout the Bay Area for almost three decades, has rarely faced a CEQA lawsuit. In fact, Sedonaen says this is Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco’s first.

“It’s so unique,” Sedonaen said. “We’ve never had a project stopped for this reason, and we’ve never had a CEQA lawsuit used against us in our history.”

The project faced other obstacles prior to the lawsuit. To win approval from the city, it has shrunk significantly from what Sedonaen envisioned in 2014. The six-story building is less than half the size of the original proposal.

“It’s been a challenge every step of the way,” Sedonaen said.

Biber says paring back CEQA would do little to change the political dynamics that drive up the cost of projects in cities, but could remove a check on development in less densely populated areas of the state. Put another way: It could promote sprawl.

“I don’t think you’d see a major moving of the lever on [urban] development,” Biber said. “But you might open up for a lot more sprawling development that would significantly undermine the state’s climate goals.”

But Sedonaen and Hernandez think his findings do not capture how heavily the threat of litigation weighs on urban developers, starting when they propose projects.

“We have to pick projects where we don’t think this is going to happen,” Sedonaen said.

Studies have tracked the number of approved projects and filed lawsuits, for instance, but not threats of lawsuits used to win concessions or canceled projects.

Hernandez suggests the threats outnumber the actual lawsuits, comparing CEQA abuse to an iceberg. “The filed lawsuits are the tip,” she said. “Underneath the surface is the 90 percent of the iceberg, and it’s why we’ll spend three years trying to get a project approved. And every one of those days adds to the cost of housing.”

The California Dream series is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the James Irvine Foundation.

Follow us for more stories like this

CapRadio provides a trusted source of news because of you.  As a nonprofit organization, donations from people like you sustain the journalism that allows us to discover stories that are important to our audience. If you believe in what we do and support our mission, please donate today.

Donate Today  

    Related Stories

  • Amita Sharma / KPBS

    Do Housing Costs Deserve Some Of The Blame For California’s Plummeting Fertility Rate?

    Tuesday, July 31, 2018
    The state’s fertility rate has dropped to near-record lows, about 1.76 children per woman.
  • Adriene Hill

    One State, Unaffordable

    Thursday, July 12, 2018
    As rents go up and housing prices soar, the California Dream is becoming more and more difficult to achieve. In this special on housing affordability, we put audience questions to the experts.

 CADream

Ben Bradford

Former State Government Reporter

As the State Government Reporter, Ben covered California politics, policy and the interaction between the two. He previously reported on local and state politics, business, energy, and environment for WFAE in Charlotte, North Carolina.  Read Full Bio 

 @JBenBradford Email Ben Bradford

Sign up for ReCap and never miss the top stories

Delivered to your inbox every Friday.

 

Check out a sample ReCap newsletter.

Thanks for subscribing!

Thank you for signing up for the ReCap newsletter! We'll send you an email each Friday with the top stories from CapRadio.

Browse all newsletters

More California Dream Stories

Farida Jhabvala Romero / KQED

Do You Speak Mam? Growth of Oakland’s Guatemalan Community Sparks Interest In Indigenous Language

August 14, 2019

John Osborn D'Agostino / CALmatters

Digging Into The Data: How Attainable Is The California Dream Today?

February 15, 2018

Andrew Nixon / Capital Public Radio

Central Valley Radio Station Stands In As A Cultural ‘Town Hall’ For Local Hmong And Punjabi-Speaking Communities

August 1, 2019

View All California Dream Stories  

Most Viewed

Abortion is still legal in California. Here are answers to questions about access in the state.

California coronavirus updates: Pfizer says tweaked vaccine offers better protection against omicron

Northern California wildfires: Where to find updates on air quality, evacuations, and official information

Sacramento’s homeless population spikes 67% to nearly 9,300 since 2019

California coronavirus updates: Court revives block of federal vaccination mandate

We Get Support From:
Become a Supporter

Most Viewed

Abortion is still legal in California. Here are answers to questions about access in the state.

California coronavirus updates: Pfizer says tweaked vaccine offers better protection against omicron

Northern California wildfires: Where to find updates on air quality, evacuations, and official information

Sacramento’s homeless population spikes 67% to nearly 9,300 since 2019

California coronavirus updates: Court revives block of federal vaccination mandate

Back to Top

  • CapRadio

    7055 Folsom Boulevard
    Sacramento, CA 95826-2625

    • (916) 278-8900
    • Toll-free (877) 480-5900
    • Email Us
    • Submit a News Tip
  • Contact Us

  • About Us

    • Contact Us / Feedback
    • Coverage
    • Directions
    • Careers & Internships
    • Mission / Vision / Core Values
    • Press
    • Staff Directory
    • Board of Directors
  • Listening Options

    • Mobile App
    • On Air Schedules
    • Smart Speakers
    • Playlist
    • Podcasts
    • RSS
  • Connect With Us

    •  Facebook
    •  Twitter
    •  Instagram
    •  YouTube
  • Donate

  • Listen

  • Newsletters

CapRadio stations are licensed to California State University, Sacramento. © 2022, Capital Public Radio. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Website Feedback FCC Public Files: KXJZ KKTO KUOP KQNC KXPR KXSR KXJS. For assistance accessing our public files, please call 916-278-8900 or email us.