Prop 45 would make major changes to CEQA. But many CEQA reformers don’t support it

By Joe Garofoli, Political Columnist

Oct 21, 2026

Some California leaders who have spent years spearheading changes to California’s landmark environmental protection law either haven’t taken a position on or are opposing Proposition 45, which would take even bigger chunks out of the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA.  

CEQA was created in 1970 under then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to protect the beauty and vibrancy of the state. It requires developers to disclose potential environmental impacts of their projects, and work with communities to blunt those impacts. But for decades, CEQA has been weaponized to jam development by everyone from NIMBYs to construction unions to wealthy suburbanites. A 2024 study of CEQA litigation by the Little Hoover Commission found that on average, “litigation adds almost two years to project time frames. In the face of such lengthy delays, financing can vanish, stopping a project even if it would eventually have survived the CEQA process and been approved.” Preparing an environmental impact report can take a year or longer and cost up to $1 million.

Powerful labor interests have balked at changing CEQA, because unions have long used the law to extract wage concessions from developers. Wealthy suburbanites have used it to halt unwanted development. The same study found that 78% of CEQA litigation “may disproportionately challenge housing in higher-income neighborhoods.”  

Prop 45, backed by the California Chamber of Commerce, local chambers around the state, developers and affordable housing advocates, aims to expedite development by imposing strict deadlines on certain categories of infrastructure projects described as “essential”: housing, water, clean energy, healthcare, public safety, wildfire mitigation, broadband internet access, education and transportation.

Yet some key CEQA reformers are concerned about its unintended consequences, in particular that its provisions to loosen regulations could lead to more suburban sprawl — developments far from urban centers that destroy forest or agricultural land and force residents to drive everywhere, increasing air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and exacerbating the climate crisis. So-called infill housing, meanwhile, is denser and typically enables residents to walk or take public transit to work. Many of California’s leading CEQA reformers oppose suburban sprawl and advocate for infill development, particularly near public transit. 

Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, one of the architects of some of the Legislature’s most consequential CEQA reforms over the last decade, isn’t taking a position on the measure. Neither is one of his top allies, California YIMBY, which advocates for building more homes to ease California’s crippling housing crisis. Environmental advocate Tom Steyer supported CEQA reforms crafted in the Legislature, but opposes Prop 45. It “goes way beyond any common-sense reforms to CEQA and is using the law to circumvent the public process and due process,” he wrote on Substack.

Other top Democrats have ducked taking a position.

On Monday, when a reporter asked Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for governor, about Prop 45, he spent nearly a minute talking about his support for Proposition 1 before saying he “hasn’t weighed in on a lot of the other initiatives.” He said nothing about Prop 45. 

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has signed several key CEQA reform measures, announced his position on 12 of the 14 measures on the Nov. 3 ballot, but not Props 45 or 42, one of two measures designed to invalidate Prop 40, the billionaire tax, if it passes.  

Wiener told me that he believes that CEQA is still in “serious need of reform.” And while he believes Prop 45 “advances some very positive reforms like setting clear and firm timelines for permitting,” it also contains “problematic provisions like streamlining sprawl development.” “As a result, I’m not taking a position on the measure,” he said.

Wiener is in a close race to succeed Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi in a San Francisco House race and may not want to further antagonize organized labor, which largely opposes Prop 45 and supports his opponent, Supervisor Connie Chan. 

California YIMBY is focused on infill development, and its leaders say Prop 45 does little to help those projects.

“The reason we have no position is because it’s not a pure-play housing thing,” Matthew Lewis, director of communications for California YIMBY, told me. “We are CEQA reformers for housing, and we reformed CEQA for housing” through legislation.  

Likewise, SPUR, the San Francisco nonprofit think tank that has supported other CEQA reforms, stopped short of backing Proposition 45 because it “would make broader changes that conflict with SPUR’s vision for urban growth. The measure could accelerate desirable projects, such as infill housing near transit and zero-emission energy infrastructure, but it could also streamline development that contributes to sprawl or environmental harm, including subdivisions on the urban edge and polluting energy facilities,” the organization wrote of its position, which is “No recommendation.”  

In a sign of how the measure has scrambled traditional party loyalties, Prop 45 has even split California Republicans, who have long complained about regulations slowing housing production. Steve Hilton, the GOP candidate for governor who advocates building 10 more California cities, largely through the construction of single-family homes in sprawl-like developments, has said supportive things about Prop 45 but hasn’t taken a position. The California Republican Party has endorsed Prop 45, but a half dozen local Republican Party groups oppose it, including the Marin County Republican Party. 

Marin County Republican Party Chairman John Turnacliff said his members were worried that Prop 45 could lead to “crony capitalism.” 

“Let’s say some big data center developer comes in and takes care of some people in the Legislature with donations, and then all of a sudden they’re pushing for those guys to be qualified for this Proposition 45 benefit of not having to go through all the CEQA stuff, and then they get a fast-track deal,” Turnacliff said. 

But other leading CEQA reformers are backing Prop 45, including Assembly Member Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland, who authored a bill signed by Newsom last year that exempted most infill housing projects from the environmental reviews required under CEQA. 

“What Prop 45 represents is a thoughtful way to actually get the projects (completed) that are essential for our communities,” Wicks told reporters Monday at a housing-related campaign event for Becerra in El Cerrito. “It still requires (projects) to go through CEQA. It just puts important shot clocks on it.” 

Housing Action Coalition, another frequent ally on CEQA reform legislation, is also breaking ranks to back Prop 45. The organization felt that there were gaps in some recent reform legislation in Sacramento — like the ability to quickly build housing on parking lots at dilapidated shopping mall sites —  that weren’t covered by existing legislation, said Ali Sapirman, the group’s advocacy and policy manager. Even though Housing Action Coalition typically doesn’t support legislation that could lead to sprawl, it is confident that existing CEQA laws could be used to stop unwanted sprawl projects. 

“And those gaps are real in terms of numbers,” Sapirman said. “The permitting delays add more than $75,000 to the cost of a new home, and that was really critical to our members.” 

But those gaps weren’t enough to convince other CEQA reformers to back Prop 45. 

“There’s a bunch of stuff that 45 could do that we’re like, ‘Well, that would not be a great outcome,’” said Lewis. “But there’s some stuff that it would do that could be a good outcome. We weighed those against each other, and we were like, yeah, they kind of cancel each other out. We’re not going to weigh in on this one.”