> Assemblyman Vince Fong (R-Bakersfield) noted that environmental standards are not being changed. “We are changing what they apply to,” he said. Either the environmental review standards are good and needed.. or they are not. This is post-hoc ruling and I am curious how the court will react. The only thing the opposition needs to do here is run a few pressers with homeless students.
The legislature simply updated the law to make it clear that these types of lawsuits (i.e., over activities which don't directly relate to construction of new buildings even though they may ultimately lead to new construction) are not intended by the original law, and this new law makes that explicitly clear. (The eventual construction of new buildings required by the enrollment increase would be covered by normal CEQA review processes.)
EDIT: From TTOTFL itself: "This bill would delete the provision requiring the environmental effects relating to changes in enrollment levels be considered in the EIR prepared for the long-range development plan. The bill would provide that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA."
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml...