Phil and Camille bring you the latest discussions in California politics and do their best to crack through the insanity.
On this episode, we discuss the controversial law called the California Environmental Quality Act, aka "CEQA" and discuss how far it has strayed from it's original purpose and has been used to halt all progress in California.
This episode was recorded on 5.9.23
*The California Underground Podcast is dedicated to discussing California politics from a place of sanity and rationality.*
Links Mentioned in Show
CEQA 101
CEQA
https://califaep.org/ceqa_flowchart.php
CEQA agencies
https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Lead%20Agency%20Responsible%20Trustee%202020%20Update.pdf
CEQA fraud?
Law reform needed
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2023/04/california-future-environmental-law-reform/
https://www.ocregister.com/2023/03/02/will-californias-misused-environmental-law-finally-be-reformed
CEQA Hurting Housing
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/signature-environmental-law-hurts-housing/618264/
Unions Hijacking CEQA
How To Make Overdue Reforms to California Environmental Quality Act
Video: How the Abuse of CEQA Contributes to the Housing Crisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4WQArhbr0g
Video: CEQA is the law that swallowed California
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luZFhpwFtS8
Support California Underground on Patreon at www.patreon.com/CaliforniaUnderground
Follow California Underground on Social Media Instagram: www.instagram.com/californiaunderground
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj8SabIcF4AKqEVFsLmo1jA
Substack: https://substack.com/profile/72986149-ca_underground
Shop California Underground Merchandise: https://california-underground.creator-spring.com
Review the Anchor.Fm Privacy Policy: Anchor - The easiest way to make a podcast
00:00:01
What's going on everybody? Thanks for tuning in to another
00:00:03
episode of the California underground podcast.
00:00:05
I'm your host Phil. And as always with me, my trusty
00:00:07
co-host the best and fastest researcher in the west Camille.
00:00:11
How are you doing? It's been a couple weeks.
00:00:14
We were sort of, we are both traveling and this is like the
00:00:16
first live episode we've had together in a couple weeks.
00:00:19
So how's it going? It's been a while.
00:00:22
Yes. Good good how are you?
00:00:25
I'm doing well, we are going to dive into a top.
00:00:30
Epic tonight that people I think have heard about they probably
00:00:36
have heard about different articles and they don't really
00:00:38
know exactly what it's all about.
00:00:42
It's called the California Environmental Quality act better
00:00:45
known as sequa. You hear it a lot people say
00:00:48
well it's equal 0 or this is what blocks everything up.
00:00:53
I'm just going to tell you right now.
00:00:54
We're going to do our best to make this as entertaining as
00:00:57
possible and as digestible as Small.
00:01:00
Because sequa if you want to go down the sequel Rabbit Hole, you
00:01:04
certainly can. There are cases.
00:01:06
I mean there are lawyers in California who specialize in SQL
00:01:10
litigation. It's like a whole thing.
00:01:14
We're not going to do a whole like to our presentation on
00:01:17
sequa. Make it boring like that.
00:01:19
We're going to kind of talk about what sequa is so you get a
00:01:21
better idea and sort of the effects its had on like
00:01:24
affordable housing and stuff like that.
00:01:28
So, how excited are you to talk about?
00:01:29
Out sequa tonight, you know, I to be honest, I didn't fully
00:01:34
understand it. I probably still don't fully
00:01:36
understand it because I don't think anyone does.
00:01:38
But obviously researching for this episode, I learned a lot
00:01:41
more about it and some of these topics seems so boring.
00:01:45
I mean, like, who wants talk about Seco for an hour?
00:01:48
But we do, but as we do dive into it, it actually is
00:01:51
fascinating, it really isn't? It's useful information and
00:01:53
people should know and so I'm a little bit excited, it secret
00:01:58
might be more exciting than Avenue.
00:02:01
That's a bold statement. I mean we do love talking about
00:02:04
noodles and we had that episode last week, we going after him
00:02:09
and gents a key and she's really become the go-to softball
00:02:14
interview. She had another interview with
00:02:16
someone who's like a super softball interview.
00:02:19
So is John Kerry. I think.
00:02:20
And they went for ice cream. Yeah.
00:02:23
And that they were like, oh my god.
00:02:24
Do you want to go for ice cream? And he's like are often Garda
00:02:27
ice cream because he's gay. It's my turn now they left but
00:02:33
you must been naptime for Biden, didn't invite him.
00:02:36
So they went and got I screamed, I was there interview and
00:02:41
hard-hitting, journalism by Jen sake.
00:02:43
She went from the White House secretary to Puff pieces on
00:02:47
MSNBC. So good job for her.
00:02:50
She's reached the Pinnacle of her career.
00:02:52
So, can we eat ice cream on an episode soon?
00:02:57
Yeah, I think we should. We should just sit and eat ice
00:02:59
cream. And talk about stuff.
00:03:02
Yeah. I mean we've been talking about
00:03:05
a this is really getting off topic because we're trying to
00:03:10
I'm trying to like mentally prepare for the amount of stuff
00:03:12
we're trying to tell you about sequa and people are probably
00:03:14
listening and going, what the heck are they talking about?
00:03:18
We were talking about like we want to have like a big like
00:03:22
Roundtable of like a bunch of different influencers.
00:03:25
So that's something that's in the works right now.
00:03:28
And we'll See what topics kind of come up.
00:03:31
It's just going to be sort of like a big round table.
00:03:33
Maybe it won't be California eccentric.
00:03:35
Who knows? It's just an idea that's
00:03:37
bubbling up Camille's, like hearing about a lot of this for
00:03:40
the first time. She's like, sure, whatever we
00:03:44
discuss this the other day. We didn't discuss specifics, but
00:03:47
we talked about maybe a big round table, what we're going to
00:03:51
talk about. We still haven't decided, maybe
00:03:53
I'll be ice cream. We'll just all talk about our
00:03:55
favorite ice cream flavors with a round table of different
00:03:58
influencers and commentators All right, SQL equi-join.
00:04:02
Let's do it. Let's Dive Right In.
00:04:04
If you like, give me a give me an e, okay?
00:04:10
Not, not you serious right now? All right, so the California
00:04:17
Environmental Quality act, better known as sequin.
00:04:19
This is from Wikipedia. So take this with a grain of
00:04:22
salt. I imagine, it's probably pretty
00:04:23
accurate because it's not something right-leaning, is a
00:04:28
California statute, passed in 1970 and was signed into law by
00:04:32
then-governor trivia who was governor of California 1970.
00:04:37
Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan. So this makes it like two laws.
00:04:42
We've discussed recently Lee that Ronald Reagan passed that
00:04:48
have both had lasting impacts on the state of California for like
00:04:51
everybody. Sorry you froze for me for a
00:04:54
moment there. Oh, I was, I was saying this is
00:04:56
now a second law that we've talked about.
00:04:59
Ronald Reagan has passed that had, like, implications on
00:05:04
California for like 40 or 50 plus years.
00:05:07
So, for all those who blissfully kind of overlooked Reagan as
00:05:11
Governor he signed in sequa. So that's fun.
00:05:16
This was shortly after the United States.
00:05:17
Federal government passed their own National Environmental
00:05:20
Policy, Act to Institute a Statewide policy of
00:05:23
Environmental Protection sequence, does not directly
00:05:26
regulate land uses but instead, requires state and local
00:05:29
agencies within California to follow a protocol of anal
00:05:33
analysis, and public disclosure of environmental impacts of
00:05:36
proposed projects and in a departure from knee pain, which
00:05:40
is the federal adopt all feasible measures to mitigate
00:05:44
those impacts. X sequel makes Environmental
00:05:47
Protection. A mandatory part of every
00:05:49
California state and local public agencies decision making
00:05:51
process. It is also become the basis for
00:05:54
numerous lawsuits concerning public and private projects,
00:05:57
which we're going to get into. And let's just put it this way.
00:06:02
I'm going to tease later in the episode.
00:06:04
This law is so bad that you and I are probably actually on the
00:06:10
same side as Scott wiener. I was going to bring that up.
00:06:13
Like this is, this is where I actually do agree with Scott.
00:06:18
We are even though, I told you, I texted you full disclosure and
00:06:20
probably an MV not in my backyard.
00:06:23
For the, you understand the reference like I live where I
00:06:26
live for a reason. I was like, they're not going to
00:06:29
develop around here. I like my my little not of land
00:06:33
for Southern California, which I have a lot of land, but it's not
00:06:35
a lot compared to, but But I'm also not going to be that
00:06:40
person. But it comes down to it.
00:06:43
Like as I'm reading like I told you, I'm like I'm probably
00:06:45
interview but really there's this sequel is it's really
00:06:48
holding up a lot of housing issues for sure.
00:06:53
Hey just check something. Okay, that's weird.
00:06:56
Something's going on with the YouTube stream will have to
00:06:58
check that out later. Anyway so one study found that
00:07:04
85% of SQL lawsuits were filed by organizations with no record
00:07:08
of environmental advocacy. And 80% of SQL lawsuits,
00:07:11
targeted, infill development, acequia is also being used to
00:07:15
block homeless, shelters and affordable housing, projects, by
00:07:17
businesses, to try and block competition.
00:07:19
And unions have used SQL lawsuits or Threat they're up to
00:07:24
force developers to use union workers all governors from 1983
00:07:28
onwards, as well as current governor Gavin Newsom have stay
00:07:32
at that. Sequined needs to be reformed so
00:07:34
that's how bad the law is that from 1983 which is about 40
00:07:39
years. All of them have said seek would
00:07:42
needs to be reformed so each subsequent Governor.
00:07:45
Now they haven't done a lot of Reform.
00:07:47
They've made a lot of like, kind of I would say kind of working
00:07:52
around the margins with sequa and we can talk a little bit
00:07:56
more about that. Good process for sequa.
00:08:01
And I don't really want to get super detailed into this
00:08:06
specifically. Let's see, if I remember how to
00:08:09
do this from the last time. Hold on.
00:08:14
I want to show you the Let's see, here we go.
00:08:23
This is the flow chart for this might be better.
00:08:28
Let me see if I can make that bigger now.
00:08:30
Well, that's just super exciting stuff right there.
00:08:33
Yeah, no cheese. What the heck is going on here?
00:08:37
Come on with me here. Anyway.
00:08:45
I'm trying to find a that's cute.
00:08:47
Here we go, okay? It's really hard to say, but
00:08:51
this is a flow chart for what happens with sequa.
00:08:56
I mean, we can go through a little by little but basically,
00:08:59
it's like, yes, no, yes, no. Start to the public agency.
00:09:03
Just slamming determines whether the activity is a project.
00:09:08
And it started off that sequel was just for public works.
00:09:13
It was just supposed to be for like, highways and parks and
00:09:17
stuff like that. Then they added private projects
00:09:21
into it, which I think is probably what exasperated why
00:09:23
this law got so out of hand is because then everything was a
00:09:30
project. So once private and public were
00:09:33
both part of these projects that turned it into a free-for-all
00:09:37
when it came to sequa. So now they can determine
00:09:39
whether anything is a project most of the time it is a
00:09:43
project. And then this public agency
00:09:45
determines, if the project is exempt, if not then It has to go
00:09:49
down here to turn if there's a possibility project may have a
00:09:52
significant effect on the environment, then they have to
00:09:55
determine which one's going to fall responsive formal
00:09:59
consultation lead agency. So as you can see, it's just an
00:10:03
absolute mess of a process. Now keep in mind this is not
00:10:07
like a linear process and for those of you who are listening
00:10:12
on audio there is a flow chart we're looking at right now that
00:10:14
has a bunch of arrows going all over the place and how to
00:10:18
follow. Flow chart for sequa.
00:10:22
It's not necessarily linear because it can go from one stage
00:10:27
to another and it can go backwards and it can kind of
00:10:30
ping pong around. All of this stuff down here, all
00:10:32
these different requirements down here and this can take
00:10:36
years, because they have to go back.
00:10:38
And this agency is to talk with this agency and have to file
00:10:41
forms, and there's lawsuits to them.
00:10:45
And you were telling me before we have time, we were talking
00:10:47
about this afternoon, about sort of Consultants who Come in and
00:10:52
they say, like well is there a significant impact?
00:10:55
And now they've started to figure out.
00:10:57
You can play games with Consultants.
00:10:59
Who will give you the answer you want, correct?
00:11:01
What were you telling me about that correct?
00:11:04
I have too many tabs open or I'd try to find exact article but
00:11:07
basically a consultant will come in and say, Here's the, here's
00:11:12
the data, here's the environmental factors and then,
00:11:14
you know, up the project manager or the developer, whatever will
00:11:18
be like, no, I don't agree with that.
00:11:19
And they'll go hire another consultant who they can be.
00:11:22
Basically be like here I'll pay you to give us this outcome
00:11:25
based on the same data. Which means that we don't even
00:11:30
know what's true anymore because now it's just there's obviously
00:11:33
some developers are going to be Shady like that they want their
00:11:35
projects going on. Don't blame them and And so
00:11:40
those those projects can get pushed while we're all, you
00:11:44
know, California's pretending like were the leader in some
00:11:47
sort of Environmental Protection.
00:11:49
But it's just, people are being paid to say something.
00:11:53
Yeah. And it's, it has become sort of
00:11:58
a horrible game. We're sorry.
00:12:03
I'm kind of checking out YouTube.
00:12:05
What's going on here? Why?
00:12:06
It's not bouncing up, but either way, it's going to come up on
00:12:09
YouTube one way or the other. Is it and it's become sorry.
00:12:15
Last week we it was like a pre-recorded one, so I'm just
00:12:19
wondering if that's all, I don't know, but right now it's not, it
00:12:25
doesn't want to Riverside is not talking to YouTube right now.
00:12:29
So this is where it would be helpful.
00:12:31
If we had a producer, anybody who wants to apply, to be the
00:12:36
producer of our podcast, you can reach out to us.
00:12:41
We're looking for a producer who wants to help out?
00:12:43
I have no idea why it's doing this anyway.
00:12:45
This flowchart reminds me of the old board game Candy Land where
00:12:49
it's just like whatever you pull random card and they're like,
00:12:52
step back. Six spaces, move on for like,
00:12:56
that's kind of what's going on here.
00:12:58
Yeah, it does feel like it's like Chutes and Ladders almost.
00:13:01
Oh yeah. That's a better examples that
00:13:03
the one you're thinking of Chutes and Ladders where it's
00:13:04
like, you go forward and like you climb up the ladder and then
00:13:07
you fall down the Chute and you can that's like the whole game
00:13:10
is whether you cannot land on our side, even more lat.
00:13:14
Yeah. And it is kind of, I mean it
00:13:20
this is just sort of a basic Understand.
00:13:23
I'm sure there's a lot more to every single one of these boxes,
00:13:28
but it's It's a mess. I mean that's no other way.
00:13:33
To really kind of put it. So, that's sort of a background.
00:13:36
I don't want to get too into the weeds.
00:13:37
I mean Wikipedia it goes on and on and on and on and on and on
00:13:40
talks about all this stuff I want to talk about what is
00:13:44
really a problem with sequin a sequel.
00:13:47
It started off, I guess you could say.
00:13:50
It started off with like the best of intentions where it
00:13:53
wanted to kind of keep an idea of what projects were going to
00:13:57
have an impact on the environment and that was the
00:14:02
original intent and maybe it wouldn't and Ronald Reagan
00:14:04
signed it. That was the original intent.
00:14:06
That's what he wants to do. But it's really become this
00:14:10
weaponized piece of legislation, and it's gotten so bad that a
00:14:13
lot of Democrats. Who are in the state legislature
00:14:18
and stuff like that. Now, all of a sudden starting to
00:14:20
find out, we can't really do anything because we're in a rock
00:14:24
and a hard place where we can't build affordable housing, people
00:14:27
need affordable housing and we can't help build affordable
00:14:31
housing because of sequa. And it's gotten to the point
00:14:34
where we can't maneuver our way around it anymore.
00:14:37
And because Democrats are sort of stuck with this it allegiance
00:14:43
to environmentalism and the Greenies, how do they navigate
00:14:47
around that? So let's talk about this article
00:14:52
from cow matters which came out recently.
00:14:56
So what we're talking about with sequa, it is very relevant, this
00:14:59
stuff has just kind of come down in the past month, or so it's
00:15:03
from Cal matters. It's the future of California at
00:15:05
risk. The longer landmarks EQ,
00:15:06
environmental law remains unchanged Let's see.
00:15:12
Untold volumes have been written about California signature
00:15:15
environmental law and how over the past five decades.
00:15:18
It is metastasized through judicial activism and other
00:15:21
means to become a signature obstacle to progress.
00:15:24
Examples are legion and often ludicrous in the evidence
00:15:27
presented in mountains of research indisputable for all
00:15:30
its good intentions and good outcomes.
00:15:33
Sequel has been increasingly exploited and perverted to slow
00:15:36
or block everything from bike lanes and solar installations to
00:15:40
affordable infill housing and homeless shelters.
00:15:43
And often the reasons have little to do with protecting our
00:15:46
environment and Southern California example, SQL is being
00:15:48
used to block Tejon, send Sentinel a net zero energy
00:15:54
project that includes more than 3 affordable homes, 30
00:15:58
electric vehicle. Charging stations incentives for
00:16:00
15 electric vehicles. So, sequa again, testing the
00:16:07
impact on the environment is blocking affordable homes and
00:16:12
Patrick vehicle charging stations.
00:16:15
Does that sound like? That's actually doing the
00:16:16
purpose of sequa. Well, yes and no because they
00:16:23
want it both ways like they want to save the environment while.
00:16:26
Also obviously we're pushing electric vehicles at this point.
00:16:29
And so it's really bizarre how their own laws keep getting in
00:16:32
their way, which we've talked about that before too.
00:16:36
So now it's not doing a good job.
00:16:39
But it's also, like I said, it's, you know, they want to
00:16:42
save this land. I get wanting to preserve land,
00:16:45
but then we need all these. These charging stations are
00:16:48
necessary for us owning electric vehicles by 2035.
00:16:56
No, it's not doing its job to answer your question but I
00:16:59
wanted to give him a referral answer.
00:17:01
Yeah, I mean, if someone were to look at this sort of on its face
00:17:06
and say, all these electrical vehicle, charging stations,
00:17:09
electrical vehicles, and all fordable housing and it's
00:17:13
blocking that it seems kind of stupid to say it's an
00:17:16
Environmental Quality act. If it's right walking something
00:17:19
that's supposed to help the environment.
00:17:25
And again, we're not going to go into the details of why.
00:17:27
Exactly. Because it, you know, you could
00:17:31
probably go on and on and look at all the applications and why
00:17:35
they filed these lawsuits to stop.
00:17:36
It article goes on to say how could a law designed to protect
00:17:41
our environment against polluters.
00:17:43
Now be used to deny students from attending a university that
00:17:45
is The Fountainhead of our Innovation economy.
00:17:48
So this is they're talking about a lawsuit that just happened at
00:17:50
UC Berkeley in this. It was very recent so this is
00:17:55
sort of what's kicked up a lot of sequa and more criticisms
00:17:59
about to equip, there was an issue.
00:18:03
I want to maybe we'll jump to that right now we'll come back
00:18:06
to this article. So UC Berkeley was trying to
00:18:11
build housing and they were trying to build housing for
00:18:19
students because they have a bunch of students who want to go
00:18:22
to UC Berkeley, not surprising and people came in and sued and
00:18:30
stopped the construction of affordable housing at UC
00:18:33
Berkeley. And their reason for Saying that
00:18:41
this has an environmental impact in the court has really kind of
00:18:43
gone above and beyond. This is from the LA Times.
00:18:48
Now, I say core has given Berkeley's nimbys another gift
00:18:51
more than 50 years after sequence, enacted, and Defiance
00:18:54
of a 1993 Amendment directing courts, not to expand.
00:18:57
The law beyond what is expressly required.
00:19:00
The Appellate Court invented an entirely new sequel, impact
00:19:04
noise, from undergraduate parties.
00:19:07
This arose from the nimbys demand to be protected from the
00:19:11
social noise caused by adding college.
00:19:14
Students neighborhood, students could after all holler or saying
00:19:18
or play music at volumes audible to their delicate neighbors who
00:19:22
were already surrounded by students.
00:19:24
This newly discovered impact is dangerously attributable to the
00:19:28
Future occupants of any unbuilt housing.
00:19:30
So now this court case is come out, they've basically this
00:19:34
court has single-handedly expanded.
00:19:36
What sequa does It has included noise as something to be
00:19:41
determine whether it is an environmental impact.
00:19:44
Nimbys can now argue at the noise that could be caused by
00:19:46
additional student or general population.
00:19:48
Must be adequately analyzed and mitigate before any housing may
00:19:52
be built, of course, excessive noise is annoying and it's also
00:19:56
illegal when it happens after hours of abla.
00:20:01
But nevertheless, young people living away from lenders.
00:20:03
Okay, so that's the controversy that just happened.
00:20:08
This article was published March 2nd, 2023.
00:20:13
What do you think is noise? Does noise have any impact on
00:20:18
the environment? Just noise in general students?
00:20:20
Having a good time partying, having a kegger doing keg stands
00:20:24
playing beer pong. Do you think that has any impact
00:20:26
on the environment? Do I do not.
00:20:30
Do you think that was the original intent of what governor
00:20:34
Ronald Reagan? Wanted this law to turn out to
00:20:37
be ours to stop student housing because of noise due to
00:20:41
partying? No, I do not.
00:20:45
So as you can see, this is probably, this is just the most
00:20:49
recent example. Of how ridiculous sequel has
00:20:53
gotten and we kind of alluded to it before how the law is so bad.
00:21:02
That it's actually put us on the same exact side as one of our
00:21:07
favorite politicians. And we're going to listen to,
00:21:11
we'll listen to what he has to say.
00:21:13
I actually like what he has to say here I do, which is
00:21:16
shocking, we did a whole episode about Scott wiener.
00:21:22
And obviously there's not a lot of things we do.
00:21:26
Like about Scott winner, but he's also preface it.
00:21:32
If you're a fan. Another show.
00:21:33
You also know that we uncovered in the Scott wiener episode.
00:21:37
He is bought and paid for by big real estate.
00:21:39
Like those are his number one, contributor.
00:21:41
So, Take it with a grain of salt.
00:21:44
He's probably saying this because his campaign
00:21:46
contributors are saying, hey, can you go and kind of try and
00:21:50
carve out sequa? So we can build more housing,
00:21:52
right? But let's listen to what he has
00:21:54
to say. Thank you very much.
00:22:04
Madam president, I fully in strongly support this measure,
00:22:08
and I also want to Echo the pro tems remark and express my deep
00:22:13
gratitude to the senator from Berkeley.
00:22:16
For her extraordinary leadership because of her leadership and
00:22:20
the collaborative effort here at thousands of lives of young,
00:22:23
people will be better. So thank you colleagues.
00:22:26
The lawsuit that led to this arbitrary cap of UC Berkeley's
00:22:32
Aunt will harm, thousands of California, young people who are
00:22:36
simply trying to get an education and this emergency
00:22:41
triage legislation will solve that immediate problem.
00:22:45
But we also need to ask ourselves how we got here.
00:22:49
How on Earth did our system of law in California?
00:22:52
Enable people to use and environmental law to dictate?
00:22:56
How many students are allowed to attend a UC campus.
00:23:00
The answer is that tragically a critically important
00:23:03
environmental law. Sequa has been distorted, but
00:23:08
beyond recognition to empower anyone with enough money to hire
00:23:12
a lawyer to delay or block even the most Environmentally
00:23:16
sustainable project, the train wreck that we're resolving today
00:23:21
at Berkeley. Was very high profile and it
00:23:27
made headlines everywhere. Be clear that what happened at
00:23:29
Berkeley was not even remotely unique.
00:23:33
What happened at? Berkeley happens everyday in the
00:23:37
state of California. Not in ways that generate
00:23:39
National headlines or lots of Twitter traffic.
00:23:42
Not in ways that get thousands of people riled up but a much
00:23:46
quieter smaller ways that deeply harm.
00:23:50
Our state in many ways, tragically is the The law that
00:23:56
swallowed California, in addition to SQL, being used to
00:24:00
arbitrarily cap. You see enrollment sequel?
00:24:03
Has been used to stop or delay bike Lanes.
00:24:06
It's been used to stopped or delayed trains and other public
00:24:08
transportation. It's been used to stop clean
00:24:11
energy, Project X. It's been used to stop apartment
00:24:15
buildings, literally right next to a train station.
00:24:19
These are things that are all good for the environment.
00:24:23
These help reduce carbon emissions.
00:24:25
Actions and yes secret tragically has been regularly
00:24:29
used to stop or delay, these climate-friendly projects.
00:24:33
But how could that be? And the answer is that when
00:24:36
sequel was written 50 plus years ago, climate change was not the
00:24:42
focus of our environmental efforts.
00:24:45
Sequel was created when any and all development was considered
00:24:49
bad for the environment when population growth was considered
00:24:53
the top environmental threat. Yet, when limiting growth in
00:24:56
cities, like San Francisco and Berkeley, and Santa Monica was
00:25:00
considered pro-environment, when we now know that that approach
00:25:05
making it harder and possible to build anything anywhere, no
00:25:08
matter how environmentally sustainable, actually fuels
00:25:12
climate change. And as a result by allowing,
00:25:15
anyone who can hire a lawyer to block things, like infill,
00:25:18
housing, Transit, and clean energy.
00:25:21
Sequa tragically is used and abused in a way.
00:25:25
That helps fuel climate change. When sequa is used to stop
00:25:30
dense, Urban infill Development, the people who would have lived
00:25:34
in those apartments they don't evaporate.
00:25:36
They're going to live further away where they have to drive
00:25:39
more and emit more carbon emissions.
00:25:42
When sequa is used to stop sustainable Transportation
00:25:45
projects, people are just going to drive more when sequa is used
00:25:50
to block students from enrolling at UC Berkeley a place where
00:25:54
people don't have to drive very much, they're just going to go
00:25:57
somewhere else. Where they have to dried more
00:25:59
and carbon emissions go up. I want to be clear.
00:26:03
SQL is a critically important law.
00:26:05
I do not agree with those who say that it should be eliminated
00:26:09
or repealed. That would be a bad idea sequel.
00:26:12
Has done many good things in terms of slowing down or
00:26:16
stopping projects. That are actually bad for the
00:26:18
environment and that needs to continue.
00:26:22
But I do agree that sequent needs to be modernized so that
00:26:26
it is intensely focused on climate action.
00:26:30
That is what buyer mental action is about today and that is what
00:26:35
we need sequa to be a tool to achieve.
00:26:39
So let's pass this measure today.
00:26:41
Let's let these students get an education but let's not think
00:26:45
for a minute that this mess was somehow an anomaly.
00:26:50
When it comes to sequa this UC Berkeley train wreck isn't a
00:26:54
bug. It's a feature, I ask for an aye
00:26:57
vote. Okay, so That's our favorite,
00:27:05
Senator Scott wiener. And I agree, they're sort of his
00:27:10
sentiment is some, a lot of things that I would agree with.
00:27:13
I would agree with the fact that it has been used more of a sword
00:27:19
in an aggressive way to stop a lot of things.
00:27:22
It's morphed into something that is not close to what its
00:27:26
original intent. As the one thing I would
00:27:29
disagree with them on is that I think seek, we should just be
00:27:33
Torn up and thrown out and start all over again.
00:27:35
Like that's how bad it's gotten that.
00:27:37
I don't think all these little reforms and little amendments
00:27:40
and stuff like that are going to change anything.
00:27:42
I think you just have to throw the whole thing out and start
00:27:45
all over if you're really serious about it but what did
00:27:48
you think of what Scott weiner said about sequa?
00:27:52
So I do agree with him. They are weaponizing it.
00:27:55
And like you said, it's anyone who can afford to hire a lawyer
00:28:01
and that's what has a Out of these, I was reading about one
00:28:04
project that started in 1974 and I believe they finally got it
00:28:11
through in the last year or two but it was decades of lawsuits
00:28:15
to get it through, and somebody was really determined.
00:28:20
Somebody owned some land, they wanted to develop, and they
00:28:22
fought for like 50 years, to get it through almost 50 years at a,
00:28:28
that's ridiculous. And disgusting here an attorney.
00:28:31
You know how this goes It's it. These things already take a long
00:28:35
time as it is but with housing, we know we need housing.
00:28:40
We know that. Like that's such an issue with
00:28:42
California. We need affordable housing and
00:28:44
then when you do get into these lawsuits, and they do go on
00:28:48
forever and then you have to keep doing all these testing
00:28:51
hiring, Consultants, that's what makes the project cost even more
00:28:53
money along the way rather than they have to charge more and
00:28:56
wrench is to recoup their costs. And so it's a vicious cycle for
00:29:01
sure. You sent me?
00:29:05
Yeah, sorry Claud. I was going to say you sent me a
00:29:08
letter before that had all bunch of like environmental groups,
00:29:13
who were urging. The legislature not to do really
00:29:18
anything on sequa because of the issues and the environment.
00:29:22
So there's a good amount of like environmental groups on that
00:29:25
letter and this is sort of the battle that's going back and
00:29:30
forth between and Similar to the homeless issue.
00:29:34
I think California Democrats have written all these laws
00:29:38
because they've been in power for so long.
00:29:41
Although sequel was back when the state was actually read and
00:29:46
they've created and propagated all these laws and all these
00:29:49
regulations. That now they've kind of backed
00:29:51
themselves into a corner where they need to get things done.
00:29:55
But they're also behold into these groups.
00:29:58
So when you're saying property, all this stuff, it takes a long
00:30:02
time. Time and there's lawsuits.
00:30:03
Those are the groups that are usually out there doing this or
00:30:06
citizens are out there. Suing and stopping a lot of
00:30:09
this. And I can imagine if they're
00:30:11
trying to do any major reform to sequa, just going to be a lot of
00:30:15
pushback from these environmental groups that say
00:30:18
well we don't want you to change or get rid of sequa because of,
00:30:24
you know, because you think there should be more housing.
00:30:28
It's kind of contradictory how in that letter, how they Both
00:30:32
were for equality, but they also don't want you to get rid of
00:30:37
sequel, which makes it harder for for affordable housing.
00:30:41
But anyway, you were going to say something.
00:30:43
I cut you off. Well, on your point I didn't get
00:30:49
to thoroughly, I don't have time to go through every group that
00:30:51
was on there. But I wanted to see who are the
00:30:54
Union's here and who are they donating to that's going to, you
00:30:59
know, in the legislation that's going to keep them happy?
00:31:05
But I asked you earlier, if you had heard about Scott weiner if
00:31:09
he had authored any bills for reform for sequa, there's been
00:31:14
bills that have been authored like what we just saw which
00:31:17
passed which is basically like to get around a loophole or
00:31:21
something and push this project that was passed specifically for
00:31:25
that project. But the only reform that I could
00:31:28
find in the last ten years for sequel was a Democrat that
00:31:32
furthered seek was scope of Of sequence, basically.
00:31:36
And so all these Republicans and Democrats alike right now are
00:31:42
all saying we need reform, renewed reform, but then all
00:31:44
that they're doing is authoring little bills that are just like
00:31:47
specific to a project as opposed to actually pushing to reform
00:31:53
sequa. And so, it's just like once
00:31:55
again, we're it's just a whole lot of thought.
00:31:57
Are, you know, they're, they're not like they, they have the
00:32:01
power, they have the authority, they have the votes, A the
00:32:05
majority. They can quite literally reform.
00:32:08
Sequa and stop crying about it on Twitter, but they don't want
00:32:12
to. Yeah, the like this issue with
00:32:16
UC Berkeley. They didn't really change a lot
00:32:20
about Seco. They just kind of did this like
00:32:22
Rush Amendment and I think they just kind of overruled to court
00:32:25
and said, like, no noise is not an issue so you can go ahead and
00:32:29
build it, right? So yeah, it's they, you're
00:32:34
right. They're only doing I'm like
00:32:36
whenever they hit a snag there, like, okay, let's just carve out
00:32:39
a portion of sequence. So this project and get
00:32:41
completed and then like, they'll get that project, it'll be like
00:32:45
an apartment building next to a trolley or train station in a
00:32:48
city and then like that's it, but they're not like going at
00:32:52
the heart of sequa in. Just saying, this is a disaster.
00:32:56
Let's just get rid of the entire thing and start all over with
00:33:00
their modern goals in place, like Scott weiner saying, That
00:33:05
back then they weren't really talking about carbon emissions
00:33:09
or all that stuff back in the 70s.
00:33:11
They were more worried about like too many people and over
00:33:13
population in California which would have an environmental
00:33:16
impact. So now I guess with the Advent
00:33:19
of public transit and electric cars and all this stuff you
00:33:23
could just completely trash. Sequa start all over with that
00:33:27
goal in mind of keeping people in public transit or near
00:33:30
electric charging stations or something like that.
00:33:34
Tell me that's a whole different discussion wrong.
00:33:37
It seems like a rebuild that they do author and push through,
00:33:40
like, this all has to do with public stuff that benefits the
00:33:45
government but nothing private like they're, they're ignoring
00:33:49
private projects and those ones. Yeah.
00:33:55
Are caught up, you know, getting thrown out, whatever because
00:33:58
people can't afford those lawsuits can't fight it off and
00:34:01
so they're like, well, I mean what liberal?
00:34:04
Doesn't love UC Berkeley. Yeah.
00:34:07
I mean obviously they're going to come to the rescue of UC
00:34:09
Berkeley, but in terms of like how many private projects just
00:34:14
in general get caught up by sequa in the government doesn't
00:34:18
really care. Alright gotta be I don't know
00:34:22
dozens hundred so of projects every year in California that
00:34:26
gets kind of caught up in this stuff and how long it takes this
00:34:31
article from the Orange County Register talking about how
00:34:36
they're actually going to try to get some reform done.
00:34:42
They're talking about, they're trying to get a project on
00:34:46
called Newport, Crossings And the article says, it's
00:34:53
especially troubling, obsequious used to block low income
00:34:56
housing, during this time of, as housing shortage quote, during
00:35:00
my eight years on the Newport Beach Planning Commission.
00:35:02
I witnessed several green mailing attempts to block well,
00:35:06
vetted projects for environmental concerns.
00:35:09
Even though our local environmental groups were not
00:35:11
opposing the project Newport Beach.
00:35:13
Councilman. Eric Wiegand told us in
00:35:16
particular instance, it was clearly obviously, The
00:35:19
Carpenters Union was shaking down the developer in order to
00:35:22
secure work so that's that's private issues going on in
00:35:28
Newport Newport Beach. The project is Newport Crossings
00:35:32
and through interim, 50 apartment, 78 for low-income
00:35:34
tenants. It's entitled Wegman said they
00:35:37
are working on getting their permit.
00:35:39
Issued we all know these tactics, not only delay, a good
00:35:42
project from be built but they drive up the cost of housing.
00:35:45
Another frustrating component Hernandez discussed is how sequa
00:35:48
is tossed. Overboard and bargain Away by
00:35:51
special. Interest from politicians, feel
00:35:53
something must be done in California.
00:35:55
Take for instance, the building of sofa stadium in Englewood or
00:35:58
the golden one Center in Sacramento.
00:36:03
Yeah. So like to your point when it's
00:36:08
beneficial or it looks really good, Sacramento in the lobby
00:36:12
is, Will they'll get it done? It's the issue of like the
00:36:16
normal projects, maybe housing. Unity's stuff like that may get
00:36:22
held up for years or in the developers may just pick up and
00:36:24
leave and go. It's not worth it for us to
00:36:26
build those houses, especially when houses are at such an
00:36:30
all-time premium. I know that firsthand is we went
00:36:33
try to go house shopping this year and we just saw the prices
00:36:37
were astronomical for normal houses here in California, but
00:36:43
it is being abused, especially at the sake of special
00:36:48
interests. And And those who are well,
00:36:50
connected and who get the benefits of their projects
00:36:53
getting done, but other smaller projects, like this thing in
00:36:57
Newport Beach, not getting done so.
00:37:05
Which I think leads us to actually get affordable housing
00:37:10
in Newport Coast later, low-income, housing Newport.
00:37:12
I'm like, I can't even afford low income, housing, a Newport.
00:37:16
Yeah, when I saw this for Newport Beach, I'm like, What's
00:37:20
the low-income? What's what's low income for
00:37:24
Newport Beach? Is that like, you know, here's
00:37:28
some apartments for like four thousand dollars, like, is that
00:37:31
okay? Okay, can you rent it out for
00:37:33
four thousand dollars? It'll just be a studio but it'll
00:37:36
be low income. Yes, you have that can see Diego
00:37:42
low income is four thousand dollars I, well, I would
00:37:47
remember, I was there like a year ago and somebody was
00:37:50
telling us about like, they're like these studio apartments
00:37:52
rent, starting at 4000. Now, they didn't say low income,
00:37:54
but it was just like what? So yeah, that was awesome.
00:37:59
Yeah, I mean, you can get pretty nice Apartments down here for
00:38:01
four thousand dollars. They won't be high.
00:38:05
End, but I'll be pretty nice. Okay, so this video now that
00:38:10
we're on the topic of we came prepared with our our stuff
00:38:14
today, we got a lot of videos and we're going to post
00:38:17
everything in the show notes so that people can go look at this
00:38:21
stuff. As always, we like to post
00:38:23
everything in our show notes, so this is a video from Cato which
00:38:27
is a Libertarian ask pseudo, libertarian, they're like
00:38:33
establishment Ian's so DC, Beltway Libertarians, they put
00:38:38
out good though. Yeah they do put out some good
00:38:41
content but there's some stuff that Cato's a little like I
00:38:44
think it was Cato who they wrote an article during covid about
00:38:49
like why forced vaccination is a good thing.
00:38:52
And for them to say they're Libertarians and say that they
00:38:59
Supported forced vaccination just kind of seems like then
00:39:03
you're not really libertarian. But anyway, this video is good.
00:39:08
So we're going to watch that it discusses how SQL has really
00:39:11
contributed to the housing crisis in California?
00:39:19
The California Environmental Quality Act sequa was enacted in
00:39:24
1970, it's California's first. And in many ways still Premier
00:39:28
environmental law sequel was originally designed to protect
00:39:32
people from pollution, endangered species and Parks,
00:39:36
from new freeways over the last 50 years.
00:39:39
We have kept expanding sequa to cover more and more and more.
00:39:43
For example, SQL initially protected.
00:39:46
Public views over time though. Sequel has protected.
00:39:50
Aesthetics that include private views.
00:39:53
So, sequent keeps getting applied to activities that are
00:39:57
less and less environmentally damaging sequence main use today
00:40:01
is to block housing. Housing is not a noxious
00:40:08
polluting use that cuts down old redwood trees and destroys
00:40:13
natural environments. What housing does do is change
00:40:16
the character of existing communities, there are folks who
00:40:20
don't like that. These tend to be older, they
00:40:23
tend to be wider and they tend to be homeowners and they are
00:40:27
absolutely not affiliated with one versus the other party.
00:40:31
There is a non-partisan NIMBY movement.
00:40:33
That's very, very strong. When housing actually does get
00:40:38
approved one party, one person can sue even anonymously under
00:40:43
sequa to block housing and tie it up for another 34 years.
00:40:49
There is no enforceable deadline to completing sequa.
00:40:53
There's no budget for completing sequa.
00:40:56
There's not even a clear scope of what sequel requires.
00:41:00
We have some examples of the sequel process, taking millions
00:41:03
of dollars and literally decades.
00:41:06
And sometimes the developer applicant just drops the project
00:41:10
because they can't continue to afford to even get to whether
00:41:13
they can get approved. California has long recognized
00:41:19
dating back to the early 80s that were not producing enough
00:41:22
housing. What happens when people get
00:41:25
priced out or simply can't afford to live anywhere near
00:41:28
where they work is they have to live further and further away.
00:41:32
California has by far the nation's highest percentage of,
00:41:35
supercomputers who are commuting three hours a day or more?
00:41:40
I think we need to stop weaponizing sequa against an
00:41:44
environmentally beneficial Choose which is housing,
00:41:49
affordable. Housing in particular, is better
00:41:51
for the environment. The majority of victims of the
00:41:54
housing crisis are minority. The majority of the homeless are
00:41:58
Menorah t-sql, protects the status quo, the status quo works
00:42:02
for an increasingly older wider population and it works to the
00:42:06
detriment of those who need housing and those who need
00:42:09
Transportation solutions. That actually work.
00:42:12
It's a highly racist, highly elitist, abuse of this.
00:42:16
Very honorable 1970, environmental law.
00:42:22
Okay. So again, attack of the nimbys
00:42:28
who use it to keep people, from building more housing, you said
00:42:35
you you really like this video or some points that you took
00:42:37
away from it. Well, I liked the video, I like
00:42:41
what she said, what she did back up, a lot of what Scott weiner
00:42:44
said but This this could be a hold of her topic.
00:42:49
So I won't focus on this but three hours a day commuting.
00:42:54
Dad is not okay. No.
00:42:57
Like as I am fortunate that my husband at works for home, but
00:43:01
if he had to commute 3 hours a day, I would be going.
00:43:05
Absolutely crazy. I'd be pulling out my hair and
00:43:06
I'd be probably screaming at him every day of her.
00:43:08
Like you want just as a parent. My kids are older now.
00:43:12
But when they were younger, I'd be like you.
00:43:13
I can't. This is no, it's not.
00:43:16
Thinking I can't do this all day long and you need to be here
00:43:20
they so that was a little bit like stressful for me it was
00:43:23
Panic inducing. I was just like oh my God how do
00:43:26
these families do it and there and almost families are dual
00:43:29
income and so that is Like time away all day where we're at.
00:43:35
Like, I know you and I are very family focused and we think you
00:43:38
know the family is very important, the family unit and
00:43:40
like it causes a lot of issues to not have the family together
00:43:44
and this is not having the family together and I know
00:43:49
that's not the only factor that causes traffic but It's true.
00:43:53
I know, I mean, I know, I know so many people who do the two,
00:43:56
three, four hour commute, I know that, like, I where I live in
00:44:00
North Orange County and Coronas the next city over.
00:44:03
And so many people live there because it's more affordable in
00:44:05
Orange County. But to get home, I see what
00:44:08
they're sitting and I'm not too far from the freeway and I see
00:44:10
they're just sitting in a parking lot for hours on end.
00:44:14
Day after day. I mean I get I can't imagine I
00:44:18
I'm lucky enough that my commute is like 20 minutes and I feel
00:44:26
like I sometimes get home from work and I feel like I don't
00:44:30
have enough time like family time to sit at home, just spend
00:44:35
time with my wife and just like hang out.
00:44:37
Decompress before you have to go bad and like wake up and do it
00:44:40
all over again. Granted we We go to bed like old
00:44:44
people at 9:00, but whatever. So it's not that much like that
00:44:50
would be. Yeah.
00:44:52
You might eat and be like good night.
00:44:56
Yeah. You'd have no time.
00:44:57
It would have detrimental impact on your marriage and your
00:45:00
relationship or like the opposite is true, which is like
00:45:06
maybe you stay up later. Maybe you don't get good sleep.
00:45:09
Maybe you eat a lot of takeout food because you don't want to
00:45:13
cook. Or stuff like that.
00:45:14
Like it has a residual impact on people's lives when they have to
00:45:20
drive three hours later, even if it's three hours broken up.
00:45:25
So if it's one and a half hours morning and afternoon, that's
00:45:29
still a long time to be driving back and forth.
00:45:32
Every single day, I knew someone who drove from here out to El
00:45:37
Centro is because this is a job they wanted and I think it's
00:45:42
like two hours. Hours each way out to El Centro
00:45:45
from here, in San Diego. And I was like, I can't imagine
00:45:49
what it's like to draw it, you'd have to leave super early in the
00:45:51
morning and by the time you get home, do you spend any time with
00:45:55
your kids? How much time do you spend with
00:45:57
your kids and your husband? Like, A what like are you
00:46:01
eating? Well, or you just eating a lot
00:46:03
of takeout or like you stain up. Super late.
00:46:06
Are you getting enough sleep? So I can imagine all those
00:46:10
people who have to do that. So Yeah.
00:46:13
Seek, we have to literally in Southern California.
00:46:16
We have to plan our lives around traffic.
00:46:18
Well, yeah, especially especially out there.
00:46:21
It's like what's, you know, you're like, well, what, what's
00:46:24
the busiest time for the 405? Like, an you want to avoid, like
00:46:28
the five in the 405 at those times.
00:46:30
Like so not to mention all the other highways that are up there
00:46:35
in Orange County that there's not a lot down here in San
00:46:39
Diego. We got a lot of Highways as
00:46:40
well. I just, I'm lucky enough that my
00:46:42
commute is Against traffic. But anyway, that's sort of the
00:46:46
residual impact of Sequel and the fact that they're blocking
00:46:49
housing and people can't live closer to where they work.
00:46:53
Last thing I want to talk about speaking of establishment,
00:46:57
Republican or establishment, Libertarians reason Foundation
00:47:02
wrote this really good article and they kind of gave a couple
00:47:07
suggestions of what could be dude what you could do to fix
00:47:10
equal? What kind of end on this?
00:47:14
Again we are trying to give you like a bird's eye view of sequa
00:47:16
so you can get an idea. I think we did a pretty good job
00:47:19
of giving people an idea of what sequa is.
00:47:22
So sorry. Uncle says, first the state
00:47:24
could exempt housing projects from sequa.
00:47:27
That would probably be the biggest step.
00:47:28
Like if you could exempt housing projects, that would be a huge
00:47:31
step because people couldn't use it like nimbys and stuff like
00:47:34
that. New housing desperately need in
00:47:37
many parts of the state is not a major contributor to greenhouse
00:47:40
gas emissions. Second, the state should limit
00:47:43
changes to seek with statues to every 10 years.
00:47:46
Environmental review laws were never designed to be changed
00:47:49
every year. In providing the incremental,
00:47:50
overreach as plague, the state would be As that I'm that one.
00:47:56
I don't agree with. I think that's also because my
00:48:00
idea is we should just scrap sequence.
00:48:02
Start all over again. If you're stuck in 10 years
00:48:05
Cycles, like what happens if the law is written poorly and they
00:48:09
can't amend it for 10 years and we're just stuck with right
00:48:13
sequa for 10 years. I think that's probably a bad
00:48:16
way to go about it. Third, California could
00:48:21
introduce quantitative valuation metrics and remove unclear
00:48:26
qualitative. Evaluation metrics currently
00:48:29
used to guide these reviews and policies.
00:48:33
The ACT command eight, major infrastructure, projects undergo
00:48:35
a benefit-cost analysis with requirement 1.5 or higher
00:48:38
benefits to cost need to build sequence analysis.
00:48:41
Need to detail the exact benefits of the proposed project
00:48:45
such as 100 hours of reduce congestion along with the
00:48:47
trade-offs and exact cost. Such as 10, decibel, increase in
00:48:51
noise for ten houses. All right, here we go.
00:48:54
Again, with the noise is always present, I mean, not
00:48:58
environmental related, but finally, California could raise
00:49:03
the bar for filing. Citizen-driven sequel.
00:49:05
Lawsuits in SQL laws, whose prevent needed infrastructure,
00:49:08
and often lead to wasteful loss of time and money.
00:49:11
Lots of should be limited to California circuit courts.
00:49:15
Plaintiff should be required to have a vested interest in the
00:49:18
case, doing away with the Control people and places like
00:49:21
Napa suing to stop a construction project in Orange
00:49:23
County. The lawsuit should also be
00:49:25
required to be environmentally related.
00:49:27
For example, people should not be allowed to use and
00:49:29
environmental law, is the pretense to stop and project
00:49:32
because they want to force the groups involved to use labor
00:49:34
unions or pay union wages. Yeah, yeah.
00:49:39
I mean, I think it makes it much harder.
00:49:41
I think that would make sense. I'm wondering if any lawsuit
00:49:47
should be limited to California circuit courts.
00:49:50
Yeah, I was going to ask you about that deck.
00:49:53
When you, when you read that that stood out to me, the count.
00:49:56
Does that mean? Yeah.
00:49:58
What does that mean? So I won't even ask me, I
00:50:01
believe it. So in California it's like you
00:50:05
have Your trial, level Court, California, circuit courts.
00:50:09
Are like your appellate courts. So the next step up.
00:50:13
So quick, like jurisprudence lesson, basically, all of our
00:50:22
courts are based on three tier system, you have your trial
00:50:25
court, which is like the, the first level of like when you
00:50:28
file a lawsuit federal and state both have the same trial court
00:50:33
area, they're just made up differently.
00:50:36
Next Level Up is like a pellet. So you know relevant news that
00:50:41
came out today is so Donald. Trump was found guilty of
00:50:45
battery and defamation in that rape case.
00:50:49
So that was trial court. Now, he's going to Appellate
00:50:51
Court to see if you can get overturned, then there's a third
00:50:57
level, which is your Supreme Court.
00:50:59
So that's what I thought. So, basically, if they're
00:51:02
keeping it at a pallet that means like once the verdict, Is
00:51:06
they can't appeal it to a higher court.
00:51:09
Is that weird or they will insert a triangle or am?
00:51:13
I totally just. Yeah.
00:51:16
They don't really go into details to why they want the
00:51:19
circuit courts to handle it. Maybe maybe they just believe
00:51:25
like appellate judges and appellate courts are a little
00:51:28
bit different there. They have time to like, really
00:51:32
look at a case in appellate court as opposed to like Trial
00:51:36
court, where you have judges have, like hundreds and hundreds
00:51:39
of cases and they're just trying to get through things.
00:51:43
So maybe that's why they want it in circuit court, but I do like
00:51:48
their idea that, you know, the idea of like people Napa County
00:51:52
suing to stop a construction project in Orange County, like
00:51:56
you should have a little bit of standing.
00:51:58
Like, you shouldn't just be this one person.
00:52:00
It's like, I don't agree with this project and I'm 700 miles
00:52:03
away from it, that's sure. And it has to be environmentally
00:52:08
related. You know, while you're at it,
00:52:10
take away the anonymous requirement to, if you really
00:52:15
believe that, this is something that you feel strongly about,
00:52:18
like, put your name on it, like don't be anonymous like so that
00:52:23
makes it easy for anybody to just file a lawsuit and a
00:52:25
complaint. So I would say I agree with most
00:52:34
of these ice except for the 10-year thing.
00:52:38
So three out of four is not bad. Like is that your block up plan?
00:52:42
Like if we can't just burn it down and start over then at
00:52:45
least these reform ideas or where you start with their a
00:52:51
good start. Yeah I would say it's a good
00:52:54
it's a big step in the right direction.
00:52:57
A lot of this stuff needs to be done.
00:52:59
It's surprising. It hasn't been done.
00:53:01
Democrats have had the power and again Democrats have a
00:53:05
supermajority. They could do this tomorrow if
00:53:08
they wanted to and like they could get it to newsom's desk
00:53:12
and he could sign it and I would be like the big reform for
00:53:15
sequa. I mean, really the only thing
00:53:20
holding them back is probably special interests and their
00:53:24
their adherence, or allegiance to environmental groups.
00:53:29
So it's not Republicans, Republicans, are certainly not
00:53:31
holding Democrats back from doing any sequel.
00:53:34
You reformed, if anything, you could probably get Republicans
00:53:37
on board for a sequel reform. But yeah, this is not bad as a
00:53:41
backup to just burn it down and start all over again, except for
00:53:46
the 10-year thing. What do you think?
00:53:49
I agree even though I'm I'm definitely about burning it
00:53:52
down. I mean that's less government.
00:53:54
And you know, I'm probably as governments for me it's like
00:53:57
okay which is probably why the Democrats don't want to reform
00:53:59
it because reforming it would be backtracking and making it less
00:54:02
government. Which is why the Republicans
00:54:03
would be like yes do it and support them.
00:54:06
But like you said, special interests are probably the
00:54:08
reason it's being held up. I completely agree with that.
00:54:11
They're basically, they're only going to move as far as their
00:54:14
special interest. Want them to, you know, and
00:54:16
they're going to play the game of Yeah, that's really important
00:54:20
to me. I'm going to say this really
00:54:21
important to me so that I sound like I'm good and can get
00:54:24
reelected, but that when the money actually comes in and then
00:54:26
they'll make their move and it won't be much.
00:54:31
Yeah, and it does give politicians like Scott, Weiner,
00:54:35
and Alex Lee who make affordable housing, and Alex, Lee's
00:54:41
instance, like social communist housing a possibility in
00:54:45
California, because they could say, well, we're fighting hard
00:54:48
for affordable housing, and, you know, we're never going to stop
00:54:51
the fight. And it's like, you could ideally
00:54:55
you guys could just fix this right now, but you want to keep
00:54:59
the fight going. Although, with Scott waiter, I'm
00:55:02
surprised he's not more aggressive against sequa.
00:55:07
Knowing how much money he gets from big real estate and
00:55:11
construction, unions and all that stuff.
00:55:13
Who would make a killing on, on more housing being built for
00:55:17
like an extra zero on those donations.
00:55:21
It's like when you guys showed me the big money, I'll show you
00:55:23
the big moves. Yeah, I'll be okay.
00:55:26
Sorry real quick back to him and his video.
00:55:29
I was laughing at, even though I agreed with him, I was laughing
00:55:32
at that. He kept saying the gun people
00:55:34
and I'm like, yeah, you would say, the young people Scott
00:55:36
wiener, it would be all about the young people for you.
00:55:39
Yeah. He's, he loves those young
00:55:40
people, because young people, those young people as opposed to
00:55:45
the Cato video, which was all about hating on older white
00:55:50
people. So yes, those darn older white
00:55:54
people in their nimbyism. So All right, I think it's a
00:56:00
good place to wrap up this episode.
00:56:03
That's sort of sequin a nutshell.
00:56:07
It's a horrible law. I'm not going to mince any
00:56:10
words. There should be torn to shreds
00:56:13
and thrown into the wind and start all over again.
00:56:16
Because at this point, it's not doing anybody any benefits.
00:56:20
I can't think of people who were like outside, like maybe the
00:56:23
environmental groups, I can't think of anyone who's like, Love
00:56:27
sequin what's going on. And like we've said, it's bad
00:56:31
enough that it's so bad that we're on the same side of Scott
00:56:35
wiener. I mean, that's how bad it is and
00:56:37
everybody hates it. I mean, technically, we're on
00:56:41
the side of like Avenue some to even Gavin.
00:56:43
Newsom, doesn't really like sequined believes it should be
00:56:45
reformed. So I guess the question is, how
00:56:48
much reform so it needs to be done?
00:56:53
Like, do they really believe in it enough to reform, or they
00:56:56
just To keep using it as a talking point, correct?
00:57:00
Yeah, and they can keep pretending, like, we need to do
00:57:02
this and we're Champion. Affordable housing, nothing's
00:57:06
holding you back, guys. Literally quite literally
00:57:08
nothing holding you back in California, if if you're not
00:57:13
getting it done. It's because you're not getting
00:57:15
it done or your special special, special interests are telling
00:57:19
you not to get it done. So, any final thoughts on sequa
00:57:24
as a self-proclaimed in be Need to do a deep dive into those
00:57:28
unions and see who's really holding up Seco reform.
00:57:33
Yeah, that's probably a good good, follow-up to let people
00:57:36
know. Who are those unions?
00:57:38
Who are, who are going with sequa, but that's it, that's
00:57:41
equal in a nutshell. I don't know if they're going to
00:57:44
reform. It majorly anytime soon, but
00:57:47
then again, they are pushing hard, you know?
00:57:50
I think it's kind of like, the homeless issue where they're
00:57:54
kind of their backs are against the wall.
00:57:56
They may have to do some radical stuff.
00:57:58
The Democrats like, Who knows what's going to happen with the
00:58:02
homo stuff? They're bringing back.
00:58:04
Any white coats. I could like two for one.
00:58:09
Yeah, crop. I mean you put your shoes and
00:58:11
start making affordable housing and get a lot of these homeless
00:58:14
people off of the streets. Exactly.
00:58:17
So but will they do? That is the question.
00:58:22
So yet to be seen seek will be around for a while longer and
00:58:28
but hopefully not too much longer.
00:58:30
All right. With that said we're going to
00:58:32
end the episode right there. Thanks for tuning in as always
00:58:36
the best. Well I almost spilled my drink,
00:58:38
the best thing you can do to help the show or support the
00:58:42
show. And it's also free as you can
00:58:44
just send it along to somebody else and share it.
00:58:46
Text it message. Somebody apologies about the
00:58:49
live stream tonight. I don't know what happened.
00:58:51
I'll have to look into that a little bit more.
00:58:54
If you're somebody who wants to help produce the show, feel free
00:58:56
to reach out. That's always fun.
00:58:59
You can join us every Tuesday evening.
00:59:00
But until then every Tuesday evening at 8 p.m. on YouTube,
00:59:06
like share, subscribe review, Spotify, all that stuff, and
00:59:11
we'll see you on the next one. Have a good night everybody
00:59:13
later.