Legislation Update: Why We’re Supporting SB79 and AB609
California faces a housing crisis that affects everyone—from young families struggling to find affordable homes to workers spending hours in traffic because they can't afford to live near their jobs. Two bills currently moving through the state legislature offer practical solutions to help address these interconnected challenges: SB79 and AB609. Here's why our advocacy group is supporting both.
SB79: Building Smart Growth Around Transit
What it does: SB79, authored by Senator Scott Wiener, would legalize mid-rise housing (up to seven stories) near transit stops and allow transit agencies to build housing on their own land. Think apartment buildings within walking distance of train stations and bus rapid transit lines.
Why this matters for transportation: Every dollar we invest in public transit works better when people actually live near it. Currently, much of the land around our transit stations is zoned only for single-family homes or parking lots. This is like building a highway that nobody can access—it wastes the massive public investment we've already made in rail lines and bus rapid transit.
When people can walk to the train instead of driving to a parking lot, our transit systems become more efficient and cost-effective. Building more homes near transit access reduces housing and transportation costs for California families, and promotes environmental sustainability, economic growth, and reduced traffic congestion.
Why this matters for housing: SB79 isn't just about transit—it's fundamentally a housing bill. SB 79 will make it faster and easier to build multi-family housing near transit stops, like train and rapid bus lines, by making it legal for more homes to be built in these areas and streamlining existing permit review processes. By allowing more homes in the places where people want to live—near good transportation options—we can help address the housing shortage while reducing sprawl.
Why this matters for the environment: Transportation is one of California's largest sources of carbon emissions. When more people can commute by train or bus instead of driving, we dramatically reduce emissions per person. This isn't just theory—it's already happening in places like the Bay Area, where neighborhoods near BART stations have some of the lowest per-capita carbon footprints in the state.
AB609: Stopping Environmental Laws from Blocking Environmental Goals
What it does: AB609, authored by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, would exempt qualifying infill housing projects from certain requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). "Infill" means housing built in areas that are already developed—adding apartments in existing neighborhoods rather than building new subdivisions in farmland or wilderness.
The problem: CEQA was created in 1970 to protect California's environment by requiring environmental review of new developments. It's done important work stopping harmful projects like polluting factories or developments that would destroy wildlife habitat. But over the decades, it's increasingly been misused as a tool to block environmentally beneficial housing in already-developed urban areas.
No more environmental lawsuits for "infill" housing is the straightforward goal. When someone files a CEQA lawsuit against an apartment building in downtown San Francisco or Los Angeles, they're not protecting the environment—they're forcing new residents to move farther out, creating more sprawl and more driving.
Why this gets CEQA back to its original purpose: AB 609 will create a streamlined permitting process for multi-family housing in already-developed urban areas by exempting these projects from the California Environmental Quality Act. The bill defines housing in these areas as environmentally beneficial, consistent with prior state law
The environmental case for urban infill housing is clear: it reduces sprawl, protects natural areas, and cuts transportation emissions. AB609 simply recognizes this reality in law.
Why timing matters: Right now, even when cities approve housing projects, CEQA lawsuits can delay them for years. AB 609, a bill that would exempt qualifying infill housing projects from CEQA review, passed the State Assembly unanimously, showing broad recognition that these delays are counterproductive.
Housing that's legal on paper but takes a decade to build doesn't help anyone. AB609 makes housing not just legal, but timely.
The Bottom Line
Both bills work together toward the same goals: more housing in the right places, better transportation options, and lower carbon emissions. SB79 focuses on transit-oriented development, while AB609 removes bureaucratic barriers to urban infill housing. Neither bill would eliminate environmental protections for truly sensitive areas—they're about recognizing that dense, transit-connected neighborhoods are themselves an environmental solution.
California has spent decades and billions of dollars building public transit and promoting smart growth. These bills would finally let that investment pay off by allowing people to actually live near the transportation we've already built.
The housing crisis, traffic congestion, and climate change are all connected problems. SB79 and AB609 offer connected solutions. That's why we're supporting both.
