Prop 45: What Would It Mean for San Diego
Is CEQA on the ballot? Proposition 45, also known as the Building an Affordable California Act, is on the ballot this November. This ballot initiative could result in the largest reforms to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) since the law’s enactment in 1970. Prop 45’s passing could result in huge changes for San Diegans related to environmental protections, project approval timelines, public participation, and legal review. We analyzed Prop 45 and asked professionals in impacted fields what this ballot initiative means for San Diegans.
Prop 45, as summarized by the California Attorney General, seeks to amend the CEQA to expedite environmental review for certain projects by setting environmental review deadlines and limits to lawsuits challenging project approvals.
Defining Essential Projects
Not all projects are immediately subject to, or eligible for, the CEQA streamlining provided under Prop 45. Prop 45 proposes an opt-in streamline program for applicants proposing “essential projects,” which includes:
- housing projects (including residential developments; mixed-use projects made up of 50% or more residential land uses; transitional housing, emergency shelters, or supportive housing; farmworker housing; group living accommodations; student housing; and senior housing),
- clean energy projects (including renewable energy generation and storage; clean hydrogen; carbon capture; upgrading and/or expanding transmission systems; and microgrid infrastructure),
- water projects (including public water systems and State Water Resilience Portfolio projects),
- public health projects (including medical treatment facilities),
- public safety projects (including first responder facilities and wildfire risk reduction projects),
- broadband projects (including mass market retail service projects that provide wire service,
- wireless service, and/or radio),
- education projects (including K-12 schools; community colleges; California State University projects; University of California projects; and eligible charter and private college projects),
- and road and highway projects.
So what would this mean in practice for San Diego? It’s impossible to know exactly what projects would seek an expedited permit process, but here are two examples of projects that are currently moving that would qualify if Prop. 45 had been passed years ago:
- SR 94/125 auxiliary lanes and interchange improvements: The project is in Spring Valley (unincorporated San Diego County) and the City of La Mesa on SR-94 from Spring Street Undercrossing to Kenwood Drive Undercrossing and on SR-125 from Spring Street Undercrossing to Lemon Avenue Undercrossing. The overall Project includes a Freeway-to-Freeway Connector from Southbound SR-125 to Eastbound SR-94, three auxiliary lanes, and bicycle, pedestrian, and ADA improvements.
- UC San Diego Hillcrest Medical Center Renewal: The next phase includes a roughly 300-bed replacement hospital and a central utilities plant. Prop. 45 includes medical treatment facilities.
Prop 45 specifically excludes certain projects, including high-speed rail, the Delta Conveyance Project, nuclear generation, jails/prisons, immigration detention facilities, and oil/gas facilities. It should be noted that “essential projects” include all related and ancillary infrastructure required by a utility/public agency or included in a project application as part of the whole of the project.
Timelines & Changes to CEQA
Prop 45 sets specific timelines for completeness determinations and environmental analysis at 30 days, or the project is deemed complete by default. For environmental determinations, the timelines are 365 days from completeness determination for certification of Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), 180 days from completeness determination for approval of Negative Declarations (NDs) and Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), and 90 days from completeness determination for CEQA exemption determinations.
Under current CEQA processes, approval timelines are generally agency-led without strict timing standards. Prop 45 allows applicants to enforce strict timelines and request a hearing or a meeting following a missed deadline. If a deadline is missed and a hearing or meeting is requested, the agency has 60 days to complete environmental review, make the final environmental determination and decision on the project.
These strict timelines enforced by individual applicants would encourage quick review of the essential projects identified in Prop 45, including housing and infrastructure projects important to San Diegans. Notwithstanding, because shortened timelines apply only to projects that opt in to the Prop 45 streamlining program, agencies may be encouraged to prioritize these projects based on staffing and timing limitations. Projects that do not qualify or do not opt-in to the streamlining program may fall to the wayside.
Prop 45 limits the CEQA Alternatives analysis to 1.) the project; 2.) one alternative chosen by the applicant; and 3.) the “No Project Alternative”. Additionally, Prop 45 limits the Administrative Record to comments received during the official comment periods and comments received 48 hours before a hearing if comments were not able to be provided during the public comment period (such as in the cases of new information) or if no public comment period was held. The ND/MND public comment period is also shortened from 30-45 days to 20 days under the proposed Prop 45 requirements.
Labor Standards and Consultation
Prop 45 requires applicable projects (except essential housing projects) to utilize a skilled and trained workforce, prevailing wage, and labor agreements. Housing projects would have limited labor standards, including prevailing wage on projects over 85 feet in height. Tribal consultation timelines would be unchanged by Prop 45 and would be applicable to federally recognized tribes that are culturally affiliated with the project area.
Despite these changes, most labor groups in California are opposing the measure. In a statement, the State Building and Construction Trades Council argued that the labor improvements would likely not survive a legal challenge and other provisions of the measure would roll back existing protections.
“The building trades’ defense of the California Environmental Quality Act to a long-term workforce interest: with more than 70,000 union construction apprentices training annually in California, the council has to ensure 30 to 35 years of career opportunity lies ahead for each of them. That requires projects to be sited and built sustainably rather than in ways that trigger moratoriums or shut down future work,” the union argues.
Judicial Review
Previous CEQA decisions have relied on agency guidance, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, expert perspectives, and scientific understanding to determine environmental impact. Prop 45 requires that projects be evaluated in relation to “objective existing laws.” What is considered to be “objective existing laws” under Prop 45 is unclear. However, the CEQA Guidelines as currently written may not be considered to be “objective,” as the Guidelines rely on qualitative, quantitative, and applied analysis to assess impacts related to issue areas such as aesthetic resources, biological resources, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and existing and potential human populations.
Additionally, courts cannot order cancellation of a project approval. If deficiency in environmental review is identified by the courts, additional environmental review is limited to the deficiency identified and all other parts of the project may proceed.Once a deficiency is corrected, no further challenges on that issue are permitted, and minor modifications to the project cannot be challenged. Challenges rely on substantial evidence standard; fair argument standard would no longer be applicable when reviewing NDs and MNDs. Review of compliance with public participation procedures are limited to those resulting in prejudicial error (a mistake that impacted the final outcome).
Professional Perspective
Streetsblog reached out to professionals and advocates in the San Diego region who are familiar with existing CEQA law and Proposition 45 for their recommendations on the measure. The official ballot summary offers a partial list of supporters (California Children’s Hospital Association; California Water Association; California Council for Affordable Housing) and opponents (Coalition for Clean Air; CA Environmental Voters; Physicians for Social Responsibility, LA; National Wildlife Federation).
Below is a more local perspective:
“If it passes, it’s the beginning of the end of CEQA.”
– Andrew Malik, Malik Infill Development
“I oppose Prop 45 because the combination of broad interpretive definitions (§21028[m]) and a narrower substantial-evidence standard (§21022, §21026[b], and §21027[b]) could reduce the ability of agencies and courts to address site-specific environmental concerns that are not already covered by existing laws. Prop 45 includes “related and ancillary” facilities (§21028[m][1][B]) and lets a qualifying component of a larger non-essential project use the chapter (§21014[h][1]). It also encourages interpretation that gives the “fullest possible weight” to the realization of essential projects (§21029[a]). I believe the scope of Prop 45 could be interpreted to cover more projects than the public expects, including projects that could result in environmental harm, while simultaneously making it more difficult to hold those projects accountable.”
– San Diego CEQA Consultant
“California’s permitting delays are a hidden tax on every business trying to build, hire, or grow. Every year a project sits in review adds up to rising costs, stalled jobs, and capital that moves to a different state. We support Prop 45 because faster, more predictable timelines mean lower costs for employers and consumers, and because businesses deserve certainty when they invest in California. Prop 45 doesn’t dismantle environmental regulations; it adds accountability for those using them to slow down housing and energy projects. Businesses create jobs and opportunity, and they deserve a system that builds, not one that stalls.”
– San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
“California needs more housing now, but building is too expensive and too slow. These already high costs and slow processes are too often further compounded by CEQA-driven project delays. The system we currently have does not work. It’s far too easy for parties resistant to new homes to weaponize CEQA to delay or prevent housing. Prop 45 preserves our bedrock environmental laws, but establishes objective review standards, timelines, and guardrails to make it harder for these well-intended environmental laws to be used to delay or prevent housing.”
– Aria Grossman, Policy Manager, Circulate Planning and Policy
“While I support several provisions in Prop 45 to streamline CEQA review, I will be voting NO on Prop 45 due to its broad applicability to “essential projects” that include highways but not high-speed rail, and promises to provide affordable housing without restrictions on pricing. Many agencies, especially small jurisdictions and underserved areas, do not have the resources needed to effectively implement this legislation while protecting their communities from environmental harm. Rather than accepting the oversights of this ballot measure, continued focus by the state legislature on transit-oriented development and CEQA reform would better serve to streamline housing production and other development in locations consistent with statewide climate goals. “
– San Diego CEQA Consultant
“California’s outdated system for approving essential projects such as housing, water, clean energy, roads and healthcare facilities is too slow, too bureaucratic and too costly—driving up the cost of living for all families.
Prop 45 modernizes the state’s outdated approval process to deliver essential projects faster and more affordably—while maintaining California’s strong environmental, tribal and worker protections.”
Streetsblog has migrated to a new comment system. New commenters can register directly in the comments section of any article. Returning commenters: your previous comments and display name have been preserved, but you'll need to reclaim your account by clicking "Forgot your password?" on the sign-in form, entering your email, and following the verification link to set a new password — this is required because passwords could not be carried over during the migration. For questions, contact tips@streetsblog.org.
