More affordable housing? California opens vacant state-owned land to developers
Happy Wednesday and welcome to the A.M. Alert!
CALIFORNIA TO FREE UP MORE STATE-OWNED LAND FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Gov. Gavin Newsom said Tuesday that his administration would open up 23 state-owned vacant plots of land for developers to build affordable housing.
In 2019, he directed the Department of General Services and Department of Housing and Community Development to identify vacant parcels across the state that could be leased and turned into housing. Since then, Newsom said, that effort has led to almost 4,300 housing units across 32 projects in various stages of development, like Sugar Pine Village in South Lake Tahoe and the 58-unit Sonrisa community in downtown Sacramento.
The 23 new parcels announced Tuesday could yield another 2,000 homes to help alleviate the Golden State’s housing crisis, Newsom said. “Today we continue to advance our strategy of transforming underutilized state properties into thriving affordable living communities for Californians,” he said in a statement.
Four of the 23 newly-available sites are in Sacramento County: a Department of Parks and Recreation-owned plot on 16th Street; two DGS parcels on N Street; and a Department of Fish and Wildlife-owned plot in Elk Grove.
Developers interested in submitting proposals for “state excess sites” must apply via a state web portal, where available sites are listed.
LAO: LEGISLATURE SHOULD REJECT EXPANDED CARB POWERS
Lawmakers should reject Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal to grant the California Air Resources Board more authority to tax polluters. That’s according to a report published Tuesday by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, which looked at a handful of proposals from the air board tied to the governor’s proposed 2025-2026 budget.
One proposal would allow the air board “broad authority” to charge fees on the entities it regulates to recoup the costs of coming up with and enforcing vehicle emission standards and others meant to reduce greenhouse gases. The LAO said the Legislature should reject this because the air pollution board did not give a “compelling” reason for why it needed such authority to meet the state’s air quality and climate goals, nor did it say who it wanted to tax and how much.
“CARB is effectively requesting that the Legislature grant it authority to raise additional fees without providing a clear understanding of what those fees would include, which entities would pay them or the amount that would be charged,” Chief Legislative Analyst Gabriel Petek wrote. “Moreover, we find that the proposal would delegate too much legislative control and authority to the administration.”
The air board faced a setback last week when the Office of Administrative Law postponed controversial changes to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which regulates low-carbon fuels and greenhouse gas emissions in the transit sector. The OAL, which reviews state regulations to make sure they’re legally compliant and clear, said it temporarily blocked the changes on technical grounds.
AG LAWSUIT AGAINST BIG OIL TO REMAIN IN STATE COURT
Attorney General Rob Bonta won a minor victory this week after a federal judge ruled that an ongoing California Department of Justice lawsuit against ExxonMobil should remain in state court.
Bonta sued the oil conglomerate last fall in San Francisco Superior Court, accusing the company of deceiving the public for decades by claiming recycling “could solve the global plastic waste and pollution crisis” despite allegedly knowing it could only process a fraction of the waste it produced. In December, the company filed a motion to move the case to federal court, arguing that it should be considered under federal and maritime laws.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg decided in Bonta’s favor in a 15-page brief, ruling that the suit should remain in California state court. The DOJ is seeking an end to ExxonMobil’s allegedly “deceptive” practices and to secure funding to repair the harm inflicted upon local communities by plastics pollution.
“We are pleased with the Court’s decision to remand our plastic deception case against ExxonMobil to state court where it rightfully belongs,” Bonta said in a statement. “At the California Department of Justice, we stand ready to litigate this case, which directly affects California’s laws and its residents, and hold ExxonMobil fully accountable for its role in actively creating and exacerbating the plastic pollution crisis through its campaign of deception.”
“We look forward to demonstrating the capabilities of advanced recycling and defending the company in court,” an ExxonMobil spokesperson said via email. In January, the petroleum giant sued Bonta for defamation, arguing that he was targeting the firm for his own political gain as he eyed a potential run for governor in 2026.
Bonta recently decided not to run, and said he would endorse former Vice President Kamala Harris if she jumps in the race.
Best of The Bee:
- California senators demand answers from Donald Trump’s team. Is anyone listening? via David Lightman
- California vaccine management system’s funding is running out. ‘Incredibly concerning,’ via Kate Wolffe
- Millions will lose health care if GOP budget cuts pass, Sacramento’s Rep. Doris Matsui warns, via Cathie Anderson
- Federal judge blocks Trump administration immigration policy at West Sacramento temple, via Stephen Hobbs
