On October 10, 2025, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 79, authored by Senator Scott Wiener, marking a landmark moment in California’s housing reform landscape. The new law represents Senator Wiener’s third major attempt to advance statewide legislation that upzones land near public transportation, i.e., rail, subway, rapid bus. After prior efforts such as SB 827 (2018) and SB 50 (2019-2020) faced strong opposition and ultimately failed, SB 79’s passage signifies a notable breakthrough in the state’s ongoing pursuit of transit-oriented housing policy.Continue Reading Third Time’s a Charm: Governor Newsom Signs Senator Wiener’s Landmark SB 79 Legislation Into Law
Legislation
California Legislature Enacts SB 79 Expanding Housing Opportunities Near Public Transit, Streamlining Transit-Oriented Development, and Providing For SB 35 Ministerial Approval Process That Would Avoid CEQA Review
By Arthur F. Coon & Miguel Mauricio on
On September 13, 2025, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 79 (“SB 79), authored by Senator Scott Wiener, representing one of the most important land use reforms of the 2025 legislative session, one that is aimed at accelerating housing production in areas served by public transit. Building on Senator Wiener’s record of advancing transit-oriented development (TOD) and housing legislation, and as discussed in greater detail below, SB 79 provides new zoning standards, height and density allowances, and streamlining measures that aim to reduce barriers to housing construction within proximity to rail, bus rapid transit, and other major transit stops.
Although the Governor has not yet taken action on SB 79 and it has garnered opposition from some municipalities due to its restrictions on local land use authority and control, the measure would appear to align squarely with Newsom’s broader housing agenda and policy priorities. The administration has emphasized the need for bold, statewide interventions to accelerate housing production, particularly in infill and transit-rich locations. SB 79’s combination of statewide TOD entitlements, affordability mandates, anti-displacement protections, and enforcement mechanisms would appear to fit directly within those goals.Continue Reading California Legislature Enacts SB 79 Expanding Housing Opportunities Near Public Transit, Streamlining Transit-Oriented Development, and Providing For SB 35 Ministerial Approval Process That Would Avoid CEQA Review
State Budget Bill Includes Landmark CEQA and Housing Law Changes
On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed AB 130 and SB 131 into immediately effective law as budget trailer bills, marking a historic effort to accelerate housing production and to reform the CEQA review process that has been stifling housing and other essential projects across California. These landmark laws effect substantial changes intended to streamline the approval process for infill housing and essential infrastructure projects by establishing clearer timelines, reducing procedural hurdles, and expanding CEQA exemptions tailored to support sustainable development. While AB 130 largely focuses on improving and clarifying the entitlement process for housing projects, SB 131 adds CEQA exemptions and streamlining for a diverse set of projects and actions.Continue Reading State Budget Bill Includes Landmark CEQA and Housing Law Changes
Third District Holds County Could Require Supplemental Environmental Information From Grading Permit Applicant As Condition of Application Completeness Determination Where Permit Submittal Checklist Alerted Applicant CEQA Compliance Would Be Required
By Arthur F. Coon on
Like a gift to land use lawyers that never stops giving, the strange and wondrous interrelationship between CEQA and the Permit Streamlining Act (“PSA”; Gov. Code, § 65920 et seq) continues to inspire litigation and require judicial explication. In a terse 8-page published opinion filed May 30, 2025, the Third District Court of Appeal explained the finer points of the rules governing PSA-required permit submittal checklists and completeness determinations and how they interact with CEQA when the latter applies to the permit at issue. Old Golden Oaks LLC v. County of Amador (2025) 111 Cal.App.5th 794. (And, it can be noted, CEQA should virtually always apply to “development projects” subject to the PSA, which do not include ministerial projects. (Gov. Code § 65928).)Continue Reading Third District Holds County Could Require Supplemental Environmental Information From Grading Permit Applicant As Condition of Application Completeness Determination Where Permit Submittal Checklist Alerted Applicant CEQA Compliance Would Be Required
Senator Wiener and Assembly member Wicks Applaud Governor Newsom’s Support of Their CEQA Reform Bills
By Arthur F. Coon on
On May 14, 2025, Senator Scott Wiener issued a press release stating that, on that morning, “Governor Gavin Newsom announced that he supports the strongest ever reforms of [CEQA],” referring to Newsom’s proposal to include in the budget both Wiener’s SB 607 (which proposes several significant reforms to reduce CEQA abuse, and which I previously blogged on in this March 4, 2025 post) and Wicks’ AB 609 (which proposes a broad CEQA exemption for infill housing projects). Senator Wiener’s release also mentions the California Assembly Select Committee on Permitting Reform Final Report, authored by Wicks, which I also blogged on in this March 17, 2025 post. The full text of Senator Wiener’s press release, which contains both his and Wicks’ statements, along with summaries of their bills, is well worth a read by those interested in CEQA and permitting reform, and can be found here.Continue Reading Senator Wiener and Assembly member Wicks Applaud Governor Newsom’s Support of Their CEQA Reform Bills
Fourth District Invalidates San Diego County’s “Infill” And “Small Project” VMT Screening Thresholds As Lacking Substantial Evidence Support
In a published opinion filed March 27, 2025, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. 1) reversed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition, and held that two screening thresholds of significance for vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts adopted by the County of San Diego as part of its 2022 Transportation Study Guide were invalid because they were unsupported by any substantial evidence. Cleveland National Forest Foundation, et al. v. County of San Diego (2025) 109 Cal.App.5th 1257.Continue Reading Fourth District Invalidates San Diego County’s “Infill” And “Small Project” VMT Screening Thresholds As Lacking Substantial Evidence Support
CEQA Identified By Assembly Select Committee Report As Among Obstacles To Permitting Reform Needed To Meet State’s Housing and Climate Goals
By Arthur F. Coon on
Posted in Affordable Housing, Climate Change/GHG, Energy, Land Use, Legislation, Reform, Uncategorized
The “California Assembly Select Committee on Permitting Reform Final Report – March 2025” (the “Report”), published earlier this month, sounds an alarm bell regarding the need to overhaul the state’s “failed approach to permitting” if it is to have any hope of addressing its interconnected housing and climate crises. Citing a housing shortage of 2.5 million units, 200,000 homeless persons, unaffordable rents, and increasing temperatures, droughts, flooding, and wildfires, the 35-page Report observes that “California will need to facilitate new construction [of housing, clean energy generation, storage and transmission infrastructure, and climate resiliency projects] at an unprecedented scale” – something achievable “only if governments consistently issue permits in a manner that is timely, transparent, consistent, and outcomes-oriented[.]”Continue Reading CEQA Identified By Assembly Select Committee Report As Among Obstacles To Permitting Reform Needed To Meet State’s Housing and Climate Goals
Is Robust and Disruptive CEQA Reform Possible? Senator Scott Wiener Wants to Find Out – His Proposed SB 607 Would Exempt Rezonings Consistent With Approved Housing Elements, Limit The Scope of EIRs for Qualifying “Nearly-Exempt” Projects, and Greatly Strengthen Negative Declarations and Categorical and Statutory Exemptions
On February 20, 2025, Senator Scott Wiener introduced Senate Bill No. 607 (SB 607), a proposed law that is relatively short in text length, but which would engender major CEQA reforms if enacted as currently drafted. The bill would add three new, and amend two existing, statutory sections of CEQA, as discussed below.Continue Reading Is Robust and Disruptive CEQA Reform Possible? Senator Scott Wiener Wants to Find Out – His Proposed SB 607 Would Exempt Rezonings Consistent With Approved Housing Elements, Limit The Scope of EIRs for Qualifying “Nearly-Exempt” Projects, and Greatly Strengthen Negative Declarations and Categorical and Statutory Exemptions
Second District Affirms Judgment Rejecting CEQA And Other Challenges To CARB’s “Technology-Forcing” Emissions-Control Regulation For At-Berth Tanker And Other Ships
By Arthur F. Coon on
Posted in Administrative Record, CEQA Guidelines, Certified Regulatory Program, Climate Change/GHG, Cumulative Effects, Energy, Environmental Justice, Exemptions, Land Use, Lead Agency, Legislation, Litigation, Mitigation, Piecemealing, Resources, Responses to Comments, Standard of Review, Uncategorized
On February 13, 2025, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 7) filed its 71-page published opinion affirming the trial court’s judgment rejecting CEQA safety hazard and cumulative impacts analysis challenges – as well as Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and generic “arbitrary and capricious” writ challenges – to the California Air Resources Board’s (“CARB”) August 2020 decision adopting the “Control Measure For Ocean-Going Vessels At Berth” (the “Regulation,” codified at 17 Cal. Code Regs. § 93130 et seq). Western States Petroleum Association v. California Air Resources Board (2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 938.Continue Reading Second District Affirms Judgment Rejecting CEQA And Other Challenges To CARB’s “Technology-Forcing” Emissions-Control Regulation For At-Berth Tanker And Other Ships
Sixth District Affirms Judgment Upholding Application of CEQA Guidelines Class 32 Infill Development Exemption To Project On Parcel Substantially Surrounded By Urban Uses In Small-Population City
By Arthur F. Coon on
In an important opinion filed October 21, and later ordered published on November 18, 2024 (at the request of the California State Association of Counties and the Rural County Representatives of California), the Sixth District Court of Appeal interpreted key terms in the CEQA Guidelines Class 32 categorical exemption, which applies to “in-fill development” projects that meet specified criteria, including being “substantially surrounded by urban uses.” In doing so, the Court upheld a low-population city’s use of the exemption for a Grocery Outlet project near Highway 101. Working Families of Monterey County, et al. v. King City Planning Commission (Best Development Group, LLC, Real Party in Interest) (2024) 106 Cal.App.5th 833.Continue Reading Sixth District Affirms Judgment Upholding Application of CEQA Guidelines Class 32 Infill Development Exemption To Project On Parcel Substantially Surrounded By Urban Uses In Small-Population City