Skip to main content

BallotQuestions.vote is an independent, nonpartisan tracker. It is not a government website and not an election authority. For official ballot information, contact your state election authority.

Proposition 45

Modifies Environmental Review for Certain Projects

On the ballot

California · November 2026 general election · Citizen initiative · Election day November 3, 2026
Topics: Energy and environment, Housing

In plain language

Proposition 45 would amend the California Environmental Quality Act to speed environmental review for named categories of projects, including most housing, transportation, water, health, wildfire mitigation, educational facility, internet access, and clean energy projects. For those projects it would set deadlines for agencies to finish environmental review and act, allow an expedited review that limits an agency's current duty to consider a range of feasible alternatives, and set deadlines for filing and resolving lawsuits challenging project approvals. It would also limit the evidence courts may consider and the relief courts can order in those lawsuits.

Fiscal impact

Legislative Analyst's Office summary of the estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: "Initial costs for state and local governments, likely in the high tens of millions of dollars annually—potentially exceeding $100 million annually—to implement new project review and court challenge procedures for eligible projects. Fees paid by project applicants and people filing lawsuits would partly cover these costs. In the longer term, uncertain, but potentially more significant positive or negative fiscal effects for state and local governments. The overall effect depends, in part, on how the new procedures change the number of eligible projects that get built and whether those projects have different environmental impacts."

Summarized from the official fiscal analysis listed in the sources below. Figures are the state's, not this site's.

What supporters and opponents say

These are summaries of arguments made by the named organizations, drawn from the sources listed below. They are their claims, not this site's, and this site takes no position on the measure.

What supporters say

  • The ballot argument signed by Ann-Louise Kuhns (California Children's Hospital Association), Jennifer Capitolo (California Water Association), and Jenna Abbott (California Council on Affordable Housing) says permitting delays add more than $75,000 to the cost of a new home and that faster review would lower rents and mortgages.
  • Supporters state in the official argument that delays in building clean energy and electric grid infrastructure raise electricity costs, and that the measure would reduce those costs.
  • Supporters state that lengthy delays cause cost overruns on public projects such as roads, schools, hospitals, water systems, and wildfire prevention, costing taxpayers billions.

Attributed to California Children's Hospital Association, California Water Association.

What opponents say

  • The ballot argument signed by Joe Lyou (Coalition for Clean Air), Jennifer Clary (Clean Water Action), and Matt Abularach-Macias (California Environmental Voters) says the measure would cut public comment that often exposes contamination of air and water and damage to the coast, rivers, and wildlife, so decisions would be made with less information and less public input.
  • Opponents cite the Legislative Analyst's Office warning that Proposition 45 could approve projects resulting in “unintended negative environmental impacts,” and say taxpayers would bear cleanup costs.
  • Opponents state in the official argument that the measure contains no requirement to lower costs, and name Physicians for Social Responsibility—Los Angeles among organizations opposing it.

Attributed to Coalition for Clean Air, Clean Water Action, California Environmental Voters.

Sources

Everything on this page traces to these sources. Follow them to read the original documents.

Last updated . How this page is sourced and corrected is described in the correction policy.