Endorsement: No on Prop. 45, leave state’s landmark environmental review law alone

By Editorial Board

PUBLISHED: October 21, 2026 at 12:30 AM PDT

California voters this year are being asked to make a decision about the state’s landmark environmental review law. Known as the California Environmental Quality Act — or CEQA (pronounced SEE-kwuh) — the 56-year-old state statute forces cities, counties and developers to think about impact before they build anything.

The “look before you leap” rule requires developers and municipalities to study how any project — from a hotel to a waterpark to a 265-acre housing tract — would affect the air and water, animals and people. The public agency in charge of approving the development will create a report card of mitigation measures the developer would have to take to ensure those factors aren’t harmed.

It can be a long, drawn-out process, especially because CEQA provides opportunities for the public to weigh in on the studies and proposed mitigation measures.

The intent behind the law was to protect California’s natural beauty from being destroyed and to ensure neighborhoods were safe from pollution.

However, developers say some groups — environmentalists and NIMBYs alike — have weaponized the law by suing public agencies or developers to challenge reviews they think are incomplete in an effort to block or slow down progress the state really needs, like affordable housing.

Enter Proposition 45. The ballot measure seeks to streamline the current CEQA process by giving agencies 365 business days to decide on the “report card” for projects the measures define as essential, including housing, roads, water, broadband and wildfire mitigation. The measure also requires courts to resolve any cases within 270 calendar days.

The measure would limit public comment to 45 days and limit the scope of alternative projects — which typically arise as a result of the report card of mitigation measures — that must be analyzed in the review process.

The California Chamber of Commerce, which is backing the proposal, argues that time is money with these projects.

Opponents, including the California Labor Federation, California Democratic Party, League of Women Voters and a slew of environmental organizations, say the measure could weaken vital environmental protections. They also share concerns that controversial projects — potentially including data centers — could bypass proper scrutiny.

The Press Democrat recognizes the need to reduce the red tape in development, both at the state and local levels. But Prop. 45 is not the way to do it. The Press Democrat recommends a no vote on Prop. 45.

Sure — the measure would tighten up the environmental review process: It would limit the number of alternative projects required to be studied, a move that takes away a public agency’s power and places it into the hands of the developer. Agencies would have to judge a project’s impacts under standards in place when the applicant applies and would be unable to revise or revisit these standards as new information — say from the public — emerges.

It could also likely shift power away from courts and the public, limiting the time they could respond, giving more control to project applicants.

And, unlike regular legislation, if the ballot measure does pass and flaws emerged, it would required a two-thirds vote to appeal, making it difficult for lawmakers to amend.

Prop. 45 strips away too much of what’s at the core of CEQA: thoughtful review and pubic input. The Press Democrat recommends a no vote on Proposition 45.