California legislators made a critical mistake in last year's budget negotiations that could allow hazardous industrial facilities to bypass environmental review, potentially exposing communities to toxic contamination without public input. In a rushed end-of-session deal, lawmakers exempted a vaguely defined category of "advanced manufacturing" facilities from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the state's landmark environmental protection law. Now, state Senator Catherine Blakespear is introducing legislation to fix what many worry could become a public health disaster .

What Went Wrong in California's Budget Deal?

Last year, Governor Gavin Newsom pressured legislators to pass sweeping reforms to CEQA, threatening to block the state's $321 billion spending plan if they didn't comply. In the rush to meet his deadline, lawmakers approved exemptions for several categories of development, including housing, health clinics, food banks, and advanced manufacturing . The problem: they borrowed the definition of "advanced manufacturing" directly from the California Resource Code, where it was designed to identify businesses eligible for tax incentives, not to define environmental policy.

The vague language created a dangerously broad exemption. The definition now includes everything from aerospace and electric vehicle manufacturing to strip mining and chemical recycling. This means facilities that produce toxic chemicals, process raw materials, or handle hazardous substances could potentially skip environmental review entirely .

The consequences could be severe. Just south of downtown Los Angeles, the Exide battery recycling facility spent decades leaking lead and arsenic into soil, sickening children, causing cancer, and creating a nearly billion-dollar liability for California. If Exide were proposed today under the current exemption, critics argue it might receive approval without any environmental scrutiny .

How Would the New Fix Protect Communities?

Senator Blakespear's Senate Bill 954 attempts to narrow the exemption and restore community protections. The proposal would limit the exemption to only the final stages of product manufacturing, excluding raw materials processing and intermediate production. Critically, it would block exemptions for facilities that manufacture PFAS, a group of toxic chemicals linked to cancer and water contamination .

The bill also includes several safeguards designed to protect vulnerable populations. Exempt facilities would be blocked if they're located too close to disadvantaged communities or places where vulnerable people live and work. In areas where air pollution is already excessive, facilities would still go through full environmental review. Additionally, the proposal reinstates requirements for exempt facilities to consult with tribes if their developments affect tribal resources .

One unintended consequence from last year's reforms would also be corrected. Lawmakers accidentally exempted day care centers in industrial areas from environmental review, the opposite of what they intended. Blakespear's proposal would limit the exemption to day care centers proposed in residential areas instead .

Ways to Strengthen Environmental Protections in Your Community

• Understand CEQA Rights: The California Environmental Quality Act gives communities formal input on whether and how industrial facilities are built nearby. Familiarize yourself with your right to participate in environmental review processes and attend public hearings on proposed developments.
• Monitor Local Zoning Decisions: Track proposed industrial facilities in your area by attending city council and county board meetings. Request environmental impact reports and ask questions about potential air quality, water contamination, and health risks before facilities are approved.
• Join or Support Environmental Justice Organizations: Groups like the California Environmental Justice Alliance advocate for communities disproportionately affected by industrial pollution. These organizations provide resources, legal support, and collective voice in environmental decisions.
• Request Air Quality Testing: If you live near industrial areas, contact your local air quality management district to request baseline air quality testing and ongoing monitoring. Document any unusual odors, visible emissions, or health symptoms in your neighborhood.

Why Is This Fight Dividing Industry and Environmental Groups?

The debate over how broadly the exemption should apply reveals a fundamental tension in California's climate strategy. Industry leaders argue that streamlining environmental review for advanced manufacturing is essential for keeping investment, innovation, and jobs in the state. Lance Hastings, chief executive of the California Manufacturing and Technology Association, stated that facilities classified as advanced manufacturing already operate under stringent environmental regulations .

"Facilities classified as advanced manufacturing already operate under some of the most stringent environmental, workplace safety, and public health regulations in the world, even with the CEQA streamlining adopted last year. We have serious concerns about proposals that would undermine last year's reforms," said Lance Hastings, chief executive of the California Manufacturing and Technology Association.

Lance Hastings, Chief Executive, California Manufacturing and Technology Association

Environmental justice advocates counter that existing regulations, while strong, don't give communities a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their health. Raquel Mason, senior legislative manager at the California Environmental Justice Alliance, explained that CEQA levels the playing field between wealthy corporations and grassroots communities .

"It allows us to be on the same playing field as these projects that have so much more money and so much more political capital than environmental justice communities do. CEQA says 'My voice matters just as much as yours does,'" said Raquel Mason, senior legislative manager at the California Environmental Justice Alliance.

Raquel Mason, Senior Legislative Manager, California Environmental Justice Alliance

The stakes are real. One example is Resynergi, a chemical recycling company that claimed it could solve California's plastic waste problem by chemically heating plastic to make new oil. However, researchers noted the process generates toxic emissions. After community pushback and questions from air regulators, the company moved to Texas instead . Business advocates view this as proof California is driving away innovation; environmental justice groups see it as a success story preventing toxic exposure.

What Do Californians Actually Want?

Public opinion strongly favors environmental protection. A recent poll of 600 Californians from political research firm FM3 Research found that 72 percent of voters approve of CEQA, and two in every three people polled opposed exempting advanced manufacturing facilities from its requirements. Almost as many, 64 percent, said they'd be less likely to support a state legislator who backed such exemptions .

This disconnect between public preference and legislative action underscores why the current debate matters. Californians value the right to know about and weigh in on industrial developments near their homes, schools, and workplaces. The question now is whether lawmakers will listen to voters or prioritize industry streamlining when they negotiate the final version of environmental protections.

Senator Blakespear's proposal signals that this year's negotiations are beginning, and last year's reforms may not stand as written. The fight will pit environmental justice groups seeking maximum protection against industry leaders arguing California can't meet its clean energy goals if every new manufacturing facility faces years of regulatory review. The outcome will determine whether communities like those near Exide have a voice in their environmental future .