A measure to speed up construction of housing, clean energy and infrastructure projects by overhauling one of California’s landmark environmental laws was trailing Tuesday night.
Proposition 45 had 54.4% voting no and 45.6% voting yes at 10 p.m., with 65% of precincts reporting statewide. The measure needed a simple majority to pass, and the margin by which it was trailing was widening with every hour.
Although it was passing in the Central Valley and many inland counties it was failing in the state’s main population centers: Los Angeles, the Bay Area and San Diego.
With the ballot measure, California voters were asked whether to make changes to one of California’s most significant and controversial environmental laws.
The measure was designed to overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act, commonly known as CEQA, by setting a 365-day limit on environmental reviews for a wide range of projects, including new water supplies, desalination plants, forest thinning to reduce wildfire risk, apartments, housing subdivisions, senior housing, student housing, roads, bridges, public transit, hospitals, medical centers, broadband internet, solar farms, wind farms and battery storage facilities.
It also required courts to rule on CEQA challenges to projects within 270 days.
Supporters said red tape and frivolous CEQA lawsuits have caused needless delay and driven up construction costs across the state for years.
“Prop 45 will help California build the housing, clean energy, water infrastructure, hospitals, schools, and wildfire prevention projects families desperately need, faster and at a lower cost,” said Jennifer Barrera, president and CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, in late October.
Opponents said the measure went too far and could be used to fast-track polluting industries, logging operations and data centers. They cited a Legislative Analyst’s Office report saying it could cost local governments statewide up to $100 million a year at first as they struggled to meet timelines.
“Prop 45 provides shortcuts for data center approval, advances the Trump Administration’s war on California’s environment and will cost the state’s taxpayers $100 million or more per year right out of the gate,” No on 45 spokesman Woody Little said in late October. “There is bipartisan opposition to this overreaching measure funded by polluters, utilities and corporate special interests.”
Prop 45 was endorsed by business groups, including the Bay Area Council and California Business Roundtable; clean energy organizations, including the California Wind Energy Association and Large-Scale Solar Association; and several social justice groups such as the California-Hawaii NAACP and the California League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), along with some housing groups such as the California Council for Affordable Housing.
It was opposed by the California Democratic Party, the League of Women Voters of California, and dozens of environmental groups, including the American Lung Association and Sierra Club California, along with the California Federation of Labor Unions.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Xavier Becerra did not take a position.
Supporters raised $38.6 million through Oct. 22, much of it from groups like the California Building Industry Association. Opponents raised $31 million, with the largest donor being Wendy Schmidt, wife of former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
CEQA (pronounced “see-quah”) has been one of the most influential environmental laws in California for half a century. Former Gov. Ronald Reagan signed it in 1970.
The law requires state and local agencies to study the effects significant new projects will have on wildlife, noise, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, traffic and other factors. The studies create an environmental impact report, and developers must offset or reduce impacts.
Over the past decade, critics from both parties, including former Gov. Jerry Brown and Newsom, say the law has been abused.
Unions have threatened to file CEQA lawsuits to force solar power developers to use union labor. Neighbors in Berkeley delayed construction of a new UC dormitory for three years, claiming the students would create noise pollution. Bike lanes in Oakland, San Diego and Los Angeles have faced CEQA lawsuits.
Neighbors sued to block the construction of a food pantry in Alameda two years ago, saying it was on a “historic parking lot.” In San Jose in 2012, the owner of a gas station sued under CEQA when a competing gas station across the street attempted to add four new pumps, delaying the project for three years and costing its owner thousands of dollars in legal fees.
The Yes campaign roared out of the gate. But then opponents organized, collected more endorsements and focused the race on data centers. The No campaign enlisted the support and donations of major unions. While some Democrats such as State Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland, supported the measure, other leaders, like congressmen Ro Khanna, D-San Jose and Jared Huffman, D-Petaluma, opposed it. Polls showed that, over time the race tightened. By Oct. 28, a PPIC poll found that it had slipped below majority support, with 46% in favor, 50% opposed, and 4% undecided.