Local Government Streamlining of Oak Tree Permits – Los Angeles County’s Approach

05.27.2026
Corey Alling
Natural Resources, Local, Regional, State, Private Developer

In 1982, Los Angeles County adopted the Oak Tree Permit (OTP) Ordinance, establishing one of California’s first comprehensive protected tree regulations and a model for municipalities across the state. Now, the Los Angeles County Planning Department is updating the OTP Ordinance to streamline permitting, improve mitigation standards, and encourage early project planning with the goals of minimizing impacts to protected oaks and expediting the permitting process. A draft updated ordinance is expected to be released for public review in 2026. As one of California's most influential protected tree frameworks, this update has implications well beyond Los Angeles County.

ClearPath 2.0 in Practice: Lessons from Elk Grove’s Climate Compass

05.11.2026
Corey Alling
Regional, Special District, Climate, Local

How can communities move from static climate action plans to tools that actively support decision‑making, tracking, and public transparency? ICLEI USA, ClimateView, the City of Elk Grove, and Ascent are hosting a free webinar that takes a practical look at how ClearPath 2.0 is being used to bring Elk Grove’s Climate Compass to life. The City of Elk Grove is the first California jurisdiction to implement ClearPath 2.0 in support of a new climate action plan. This session draws directly from that implementation experience, including the choices made during setup, what required iteration, and how the platform was adapted to serve staff, decision-makers, and the public alike.

Streamlining Synopsis: Expedited Environmental Review Opportunities for Wildfire Safety Projects

03.26.2026
Corey Alling
State, Federal, Special District, Environmental, Natural Resources, Local, Regional

With two of the most destructive fires in California history occurring in January 2025, the state acted urgently to prioritize additional measures that would expedite the implementation of projects to reduce catastrophic wildfire risk. In enacting SB 131 (2025), the legislature established a new statutory CEQA exemption for four types of priority vegetation management projects that improve defensible space, increase community safety, and create strategic fuel breaks. In the March 2025 State of Emergency proclamation, Governor Newsom suspended state environmental statutes and regulations (including CEQA, CESA, and the Coastal Act) to speed up critical, near-term fuels reduction projects, and in December 2025 he extended the suspension window to May 1, 2026. New categorical exclusion procedures and emergency situation determinations at the federal level also expedite environmental review, particularly under NEPA.

Federal Compliance Deadlines for Accessible PDFs and Digital Documents Are Approaching

03.09.2026
Corey Alling
Regional, State, Federal, Urban Design + Planning, Environmental, Natural Resources, Climate, Local

For people who rely on assistive technologies like screen readers, inaccessible government documents are more than an inconvenience. They can be a barrier to essential services. A federal rule under Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II is changing that, requiring state and local government websites, mobile apps, and online documents including PDFs to meet Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA standards. Compliance deadlines are approaching fast, with the first arriving April 24, 2027, for agencies serving populations of 50,000 or more. Read on to learn what’s required and how Ascent can help.

Western Joshua Tree Conservation Plan – Comprehensive Management Actions

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife prepared the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Plan to provide a set of management actions to conserve western Joshua trees in California. As a tool to conserve a species that is abundant now but is projected to lose future habitat due to climate change, the Conservation Plan was developed in collaboration with the California Fish and Game Commission, governmental agencies, California Native American Tribes, and the public. The Conservation Plan serves as a landmark commitment by CDFW to integrate co-management principles with the Tribes by incorporating Traditional Ecological Knowledge into species conservation and providing for the relocation of western Joshua trees to Tribal lands upon a request from a Tribe.

Governor Extends Environmental Law Suspension for Critical Wildfire Safety Projects

01.06.2026
Corey Alling
Regional, State, Environmental, Natural Resources, Local

On December 31, 2025, Governor Newsom extended the deadline to submit applications under the State of Emergency Proclamation issued March 1, 2025, which fast-tracks critical fire fuels reduction projects . The Emergency Proclamation suspends numerous state environmental statutes and regulations for certain public safety projects that reduce catastrophic wildfire risk. Qualifying wildfire resilience projects that implement specified environmental protection measures are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California Coastal Act, and other environmental permitting laws and regulations. The deadline for project applications has been extended to May 1, 2026.

CEQA Reform Webinar: Understanding What AB 130 and SB 131 Mean for Your Community

10.29.2025
Corey Alling
Urban Design + Planning, Environmental, Natural Resources, Climate, Local, State

California’s 2024–25 budget trailer bills—AB 130 and SB 131—have introduced significant changes to CEQA, planning and zoning law, and building codes. What do these reforms mean for projects in your community? Ascent’s Erik de Kok, Chad Beckstrom, and Greta Brownlow joined Ali Pezeshkpour from the City of Santa Ana for an in-depth discussion on the practical implications of these legislative changes. The webinar takes a deep dive into the key provisions related to housing development and CEQA reform more broadly.

SB 131 Expedites Housing Projects That Almost Qualify for a CEQA Exemption

California’s SB 131 introduces a groundbreaking “near miss” provision for housing projects seeking to use an exemption for CEQA compliance. The innovation is this: If a proposed housing project qualifies for a CEQA exemption but for a single exemption criterion, CEQA review for the project may be limited to the environmental effects related to that single condition. Limiting the environmental analysis to one topic could slash approval time from years to months and significantly reduce costs, addressing California’s housing crisis while maintaining environmental protections where they matter most.

AB 130’s Game-Changer for CEQA Streamlining of Housing Development—The New Infill Exemption

AB 130 represents a significant step in furthering streamlining of housing development under CEQA, potentially the most significant CEQA revision in decades. This new legislation introduces a comprehensive infill housing statutory exemption that allows qualifying projects to bypass CEQA documentation entirely—no extensive environmental review, complex documentation, or lengthy approval processes. Unlike previous convoluted attempts at expediting housing project approvals, AB 130 provides a clean, broad exemption that applies statewide with no unit caps, minimal labor requirements, and no affordability mandates for most projects.

New CEQA Exemption for Parks and Trails Funded by Proposition 4

08.06.2025
Corey Alling
Environmental, Local, Regional, State, Federal, Special District

On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 131, one of the most substantial changes to the California Environmental Quality Act. Among the provisions of SB 131 is a new CEQA exemption intended to streamline the deployment of public park and nonmotorized recreational trail facilities funded by the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024 (i.e., Proposition 4). As part of our series on the effects of SB 131, we take a deep dive into this new statutory exemption for public parks and nonmotorized trails.

Thinking

08.06.2025

by Adam Lewandowski, AICP; Lily Bostrom; and Nicole Greenfield

Senate Bill (SB) 131 of 2025 includes a new California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption for public parks and nonmotorized recreational trail projects funded by the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024 (i.e., Proposition 4). Specifically, the bill simply states that CEQA “does not apply to any activity or approval necessary for or incidental to planning, design, site acquisition, construction, operation, or maintenance of public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facilities funded in whole or in part by the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024” (13 Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21080.57). This statutory exemption took immediate effect on June 30, 2025, and is available now for agencies developing park and trail projects. We present an overview of which actions are eligible for this exemption, discuss how it compares to other CEQA streamlining options for parks and trails, and provide some practical suggestions for the use of this new exemption.

Which Projects Are Eligible?

The new CEQA exemption is limited to public park and nonmotorized recreational trail projects that are at least partially funded by Proposition 4, and for those public park and trail projects, it offers a broad and powerful statutory exemption. It covers the full range of public parks and trails activities—from acquisition and planning/design through construction, operations, and maintenance. The exemption also does not identify specific environmental eligibility requirements or exceptions for unusual circumstances, which provides great flexibility in its application to projects.

Defining Public Park or Nonmotorized Recreational Trail Facilities

The exemption applies to “public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facilities,” which are not defined in detail in SB 131, CEQA, or Proposition 4. However, other sections of the California Public Resources Code include definitions that can be considered in determining a project’s eligibility. For example, the California Wildlife, Coastal, and Park Land Conservation Act defines a park as “a tract of land with outstanding scenic, natural, open-space, or recreational values, set apart to conserve natural, scenic, cultural, or ecological resources for present and future generations, and to be used by the public as a place for rest, recreation, education, exercise, inspiration, or enjoyment” (14 PRC § 5902). A recreational trail in the context of the State Park System is defined as a “pathway for non-motorized travel, including for bicyclists, hikers, and horsemen” (14 PRC § 5052). In the Recreation and Park District Law, recreational facilities are defined, in part, as “an area, place, structure, or other facility under the jurisdiction of a public agency that is used either permanently or temporarily for community recreation” (14 PRC § 5780.1).

Proposition 4 Funding for Parks and Trails

This exemption specifically applies to public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facilities funded in whole or in part by Proposition 4, a $10 billion bond measure focused on increasing California’s resilience to the impacts of climate change. While the spending plan for Proposition 4 is still being negotiated by the Legislature and Governor Newsom, the Governor’s proposed multiyear spending plan identifies $700 million in bond funds for park creation and outdoor access to be distributed from 2025 through 2040, with $286 million of this proposed for 2025–2026. The Governor proposed to appropriate the bond funds for park creation and outdoor access as follows:

$200 million to the California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR) for the Statewide Park Program
$200 million to the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for reducing climate impacts on disadvantaged communities and expanding outdoor recreation
$100 million to the CNRA and other yet-to-be-determined agencies for enhancing natural resource value and expanding trail access
$175 million to CDPR for deferred maintenance
$25 million to CNRA for nature education facilities

While the details of the spending plan may change, it’s clear there will be a large investment of Proposition 4 funding in the creation of public parks and outdoor recreational access in the coming years. If a public park is developed with Proposition 4 funds, it may also be possible for multi-benefit outcomes in the park to qualify for this exemption. Park and trail projects funded by Proposition 4 could be led directly by state agencies and/or completed through grants to local governments, special districts, tribes, nongovernmental organizations, or others.

The new exemption will likely be used regularly by many agencies throughout California over the next few years. Because this exemption is tied to funding from a specific bond, this exemption should become less common over time as Proposition 4 funding is exhausted. Because the exemption covers maintenance of facilities funded by Proposition 4, it’s possible that an agency could be using this exemption for long-term maintenance of park and trail facilities that were originally funded by the proposition, even if the maintenance project is funded by a different source (although an effective categorical exemption, Class 1 – Existing Facilities, already covers maintenance).

How Does SB 131 Compare to Other Park and Trail CEQA Streamlining Options?

The passage of SB 131 provides a powerful new tool for fast-tracking CEQA for public parks and nonmotorized trails projects funded by Proposition 4. However, other CEQA streamlining approaches are already available for park and trail projects that are not funded by Proposition 4, and those approaches could be better suited to some situations.

Existing Categorical Exemptions

Existing categorical exemptions, such as those for operation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of existing facilities (Classes I and 2), minor alterations to land (Class 4), and transfers of ownership to create parks (Class 16), can and often do apply to small park and trail projects (CEQA Guidelines §§ 15301–15332). To qualify for a categorical exemption, substantial evidence should be available to show that none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. These exceptions prohibit the use of a categorical exemption if there is a reasonable possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment, damage scenic highways or historic resources, or be located on a hazardous waste site. In addition, the Class 4 exemption does not apply in specific mapped sensitive or hazardous areas.

The new SB 131 statutory exemption does not include any exceptions. Qualifying projects need only show that they are a public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facility and are receiving some level of Proposition 4 funding. The new exemption could also apply to larger and more substantial new park and trail projects and to expansions of existing facilities that would not qualify for the existing categorical exemptions. While categorical exemptions are a good option for small parks and trails projects that are not funded by Proposition 4, the new SB 131 exemption provides a stronger and simpler CEQA exemption for qualifying projects.

Existing Statutory Exemptions

Existing statutory exemptions, such as those for emergency projects or feasibility and planning studies, will still apply to certain parks and trails projects and planning efforts. The most similar existing statutory exemption is the recently enacted exemption for nonmotorized public access in Assembly Bill (AB) 2091, which was passed in late 2024. You can read our full analysis of the AB 2091 statutory exemption for nonmotorized public access, which created a new CEQA exemption for park districts and the Great Redwood Trail Agency (GRTA) when providing new nonmotorized public access to existing roads, trails, parking areas, and similar areas owned by the park district or GRTA. The AB 2091 statutory exemption can apply to activities that are not funded by Proposition 4. However, it does not cover park or trail facility construction and is subject to other limitations that do not apply to the new SB 131 exemption.

Use of a Program EIR with Later Consistent Project Streamlining

For public park or trail facilities that are part of a larger project or program, another CEQA streamlining option to consider is preparation of a program environmental impact report (EIR) (CEQA Guidelines § 15168). Program EIRs address the long-term implementation of a park or trail plan, program, or phased project, regardless of funding sources. Under a program EIR, “later activities” in the program, or the smaller implementation projects that make up the larger plan, project, or program, need only show they are “within the scope” of the program EIR and no additional CEQA review is needed. While the SB 131 exemption may apply to an individual project that is part of a long-term program, future projects under that program would not be eligible for the exemption if they are funded by different sources. For park and trail plans, programs, or projects where Proposition 4 funding is uncertain and/or with long planning and implementation horizons, it may be more advantageous to prepare a program EIR to secure long-term CEQA coverage that is not tied to a specific funding source. For example, the program EIR certified in 2012 by California Department of Parks and Recreation for streamlining environmental review of change-in-use proposals on existing state park roads and trails (such as when adding mountain biking) continues to serve the agency well today, including enabling consistency in proposal review and supporting application of standard environmental protections to avoid or minimize effects. (SB 131’s exemption does not list changing trail use as an exempted activity.)

Practical Suggestions for Using the New Exemption

Agencies considering using the new SB 131 exemption should keep a few practical issues in mind. We offer some suggestions below.

Filing the Notice of Exemption

To use this exemption, we recommend that the CEQA lead agency file a notice of exemption (NOE) form with the State Clearinghouse and, if the lead agency is a local agency, with the county clerk of the county where the project will be located. While a NOE is not required, it provides evidence that the SB 131 exemption was used for CEQA compliance and substantially limits the statute of limitations to challenge the agency’s use of the exemption. A discretionary best practice is to prepare a memo explaining why the lead agency determined that the project qualifies for the exemption. The memo could summarize the project, identify the specific Proposition 4 funding source and how it is applied to the project, and describe why the project qualifies as a public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facility. The memo can be considered by the decision-making body approving the project and would become part of the lead agency’s administrative record. No public review, noticing, or consultation with California Native American Tribes is required by CEQA with this exemption. Lead agencies may consider when and how to incorporate appropriate public and tribal involvement, if desired, supplemental to the CEQA process.

Other Regulatory Requirements Still Apply

It’s important to note that while this exemption addresses CEQA, it does not exempt any other state, federal, or local regulatory requirements, such as the California Coastal Act, California Endangered Species Act, CDFW Lake and Streambed Alteration Notification, federal Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, or Clean Water Act. Because the new CEQA exemption covers any “approval necessary for or incidental to” qualifying projects, regulatory agencies should be able to rely on the new exemption for CEQA compliance when approving a qualified project. However, regulatory agencies’ authorities to require permit approvals are still in effect. Lead agencies using this exemption should coordinate with the appropriate regulatory and resource agencies early to confirm permitting requirements and avoid project delays.

Dealing with Proposition 4 Funding Uncertainty

As previously noted, this exemption only applies to public park and nonmotorized trail projects that are funded wholly or in part by Proposition 4; however, the details of the bond funding plan are not yet known. Many agencies are likely hoping to secure funding under Proposition 4 for their park and trail projects. If your project meets the requirements of this CEQA exemption, but has not secured Proposition 4 funding, it’s a good idea to contact the funding agency staff to understand upcoming grant opportunities and to determine whether your project may be a good candidate. If Proposition 4 funding is uncertain, then it may be prudent as a backup to begin assessing other CEQA compliance pathways for your project.

Final Thoughts

This new exemption is a powerful CEQA tool for accelerating the delivery of public park and nonmotorized trail projects funded by Proposition 4. It should substantially shorten the time and resources needed for CEQA compliance for qualifying projects, but it will not be perfect for every situation. Lead agencies should consider the full range of regulatory requirements and the outlook for Proposition 4 funding when developing environmental compliance strategies for park and trail projects. While SB 131 exempts qualifying projects from CEQA, agencies developing Proposition 4–funded public park and nonmotorized trails projects may still need to complete resource assessments, technical studies, and public engagement to develop environmentally sound projects and comply with other regulatory requirements.

If you have any questions about the SB 131 exemption for public park and nonmotorized recreational trail projects, please feel free to contact Adam Lewandowski, AICP; Lily Bostrom; or Nicole Greenfield at Ascent.

Any Questions?

Corey Alling