45Faster environmental review (CEQA) for "essential" projects

#Key findings

• About 200 CEQA lawsuits are filed each year. Lawsuits filed in 2020 alone challenged about 48,000 approved housing units, and cases take 4–5 years to resolve. The study's lead author backs Prop 45. ^[1]
• 64% of projects challenged on appeal (2013–2023) were infill in existing communities, and nearly 90% of challenged housing was infill. ^[1]
• The 2025 infill exemption (AB 130) is already working: 17,913 units entitled under it since July 2025. California YIMBY is neutral and Greenbelt Alliance opposes. Prop 45 covers all housing, including subdivisions at the metro edge. ^[2]
• Yes $38.6M: the Building Industry Association $7.0M, PG&E $2.4M, plus the CalChamber-led coalition. No $31.2M from labor, health and environmental groups, including Wendy Schmidt with $10M, per Ballotpedia News. ^[3]
• It's broad: roads, utilities, broadband, energy and more. Critics say data centers could qualify; the KQED headline called it a possible "data center loophole." ^[4]

#Track record

#Money and conflicts

• Builders and utilities are funding it, and they're the ones whose projects would move faster. The main study cited for it comes from a land-use law firm whose lead author openly backs it. ^[1]
• Labor, the main funder of the No side, has its own stake in how projects get approved. I didn't find independent reporting quantifying it.

#Does it solve a lasting problem?

• CEQA delay is a documented cost ^[1]. But the Legislature just fixed the biggest piece (infill housing), and early results are strong. Prop 45 goes much wider, to non-housing projects and greenfield development, and as an initiative statute it could be hard for the Legislature to adjust.

#If you vote yes: accountability

Bottom line: Prop 45 sets deadlines for agencies and courts, but no state agency is assigned to track which projects use the fast track or what happens once they're built. ^[7]

#Who decides

• Project applicants choose the fast track. Lead agencies (usually your city or county, or a state agency for state projects) must finish the environmental report within 365 business days. ^[6][7]
• Courts must resolve challenges, including appeals, within 270 days, with one possible 90-day extension. ^[7]
• Eligible project types include housing, water, clean energy, medical facilities, broadband, schools and transportation. High-speed rail, Delta water conveyance, jails and prisons are excluded. ^[7]

#What to watch

• Whether data centers or other large projects qualify through "associated infrastructure." ^[4]
• How many projects use it, how many are housing, and whether the timelines hold.

#Who to press, and what to ask for

• Your Assemblymember and state Senator: require the state to publish a public list of every project that uses the fast track, with its type, deadlines met or missed, and lawsuit outcomes.
• Your city council: when a big project in town uses the fast track, ask at the hearing what was waived or shortened.

#Records to look up

Anyone can file a California Public Records Act request (the state's version of FOIA), with no reason required. Agencies must respond within 10 days, or 24 in unusual cases. ^[8] Environmental documents for most projects are already posted on CEQAnet, the state's database of environmental reviews. ^[9]

To your city or county planning department: Under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.), I request a list of all projects that elected the Proposition 45 streamlined review since it took effect, with the application date, the EIR completion date, and any lawsuits filed.