The
Orange County Register and the
Los Angeles Times have both had stories highlighting the abuse of the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) process by trade unions who hold up construction projects until PLAs are placed on them. Governor Jerry Brown comes across as a hapless victim to the unions and enviros who run this state and want nothing in the CEQA process to change, because they will get less rich off it.
CFEC's and Labor Issues Solutions' Kevin Dayton also exposed union CEQA abuse
in this Union Watch column that methodically lays out how the unions tried and failed to use greenmail in Kern County. This completely exposes the strategy and tactics of the left (unions and enviros) and is a must read!
Lastly, one of the few sane members of the state legislature, State Senator John Moorlach, tried to stop this abuse of the CEQA process with a bill. Kevin Dayton sums up how the hearing on that bill went in the Democrat dominated California legislature:
The California Senate Environmental Quality Committee and the phalanx of lobbyists that attend its hearings are on the cutting edge of implementing a Vision to Save the Planet. We now know that revealing the true identity of front groups that object to projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is not part of that vision.
At today's Senate Bill 1248 hearing, Senator John Moorlach cited the "Kern County Citizens for Responsible Solar" as an example of why his bill needed to become law. Staff told me that Senator Moorlach chose that example because I had meticulously documented it in a UnionWatch.org article.
Expert witnesses in support of SB 1248 were Andrea Leisy of the law firm of Remy Moose & Manley in Sacramento and I. Andrea made the same points I did but from a legal perspective. I cited some specific cases and reported that I had been tracking this practice since the mid-1990s.
Lobbyists for the California Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the Civil Justice Association of California spoke in support.
The environmentalist and union lobbyists were there in force to oppose us. The Sierra Club claimed that the recent high-profile analysis of CEQA abuse by Jennifer Hernandez of the law firm of Holland & Knight was full of errors. I was shocked that the lobbyist for the Sierra Club didn't seem to understand the intricacies of the law, considering that CEQA is their policy bread and butter. (Maybe they sent an intern to learn the ropes with a bill destined for certain defeat?)
The lobbyist for the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California expressed "strong opposition." He pointed out triumphantly that I admitted I was able to identify some of the CEQA parties through research and therefore proved this bill was "unnecessary." The bill was an effort to "attack and divide the community" dedicated to protecting the environment. The lobbyist for the California Labor Federation noted that witnesses specifically cited union involvement in CEQA.
Senator Gaines said the bill was a matter of transparency and asked some questions. Ms. Leisy answered them. The committee chairman expressed concern about project proponents intimidating citizens who wanted to participate in the CEQA process and also claimed that CEQA litigation isn't very common.
In response I argued that this worry about intimidation needed to be weighed against the right of the public to know who is influencing policies at local governments; for example, residents of Dublin should know that the "Concerned Dublin Citizens" organization objecting under CEQA to BART transit village development is actually the Carpenters Union. I also said that it didn't matter if only ONE front group was submitting CEQA objections; it was wrong and its true identity needed to be revealed for the public.
A majority disagreed with me. The four Democrats voted NO and the two Republicans (Gaines and Pat Bates) voted YES. One Democrat was absent.
I told Moorlach staff that this was a great way to expose phony union tree huggers (the attorney Andrea Leisy loves that name) and we need to think of this hearing as one step in a long-term plan to expose CEQA abuses and reform CEQA. Andrea will let me know when CEQA abuse crosses her desk. (Her firm - especially Jim Moose - has been unusually open about greenmail and I think we're on top of everything they've ever worked on.)
Bill text and analysis: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1248
