There is a provision in this year’s budget that is a tremendous win for making housing affordable and accessible to all in our Central New York community and across the state. It is based on a bill I wrote and passed through the Senate last year, to reform the State Environmental Quality Review process for multifamily housing developments. These reforms are timely at this moment, when we anticipate accelerated growth in our region, because they will streamline the permitting process and remove an important barrier to building much-needed housing more quickly, more affordably, and in the places where it is most needed.

When the State Environmental Quality Review Act was passed half a century ago, it put New York at the forefront of assuring that large construction projects did not damage our water, wetlands, soils, air quality, endangered species, or public health. That is important, and we are preserving that goal in our legislation.

However, SEQRA also gave individuals the ability to sue to stop or delay projects they did not like. Frequently these lawsuits came from wealthy individuals who just did not want smaller homes or apartments near their mansions, or from affluent communities that did not want apartment buildings that might bring lower-income families into their school districts.

According to one study, the cost of SEQR review itself, plus the elevated cost of financing through lengthy legal delays, adds 10%-17%, on average, to the cost of building housing, and it stops many projects in their tracks. For example, after a lawsuit filed against a 100% affordable housing complex in Sag Harbor scared off the developer, the village mayor said, “It’s not representative of any broad base in this community. These are all people living in million-dollar or more homes. They don’t represent the grassroots segment of our community.”

Ironically, the result has been to undermine environmental protection. The threat of lawsuits scares developers away from town and village centers, places with municipal infrastructure, public transportation, and other public amenities. Instead, they build new developments out on former farmlands or forest spaces, where there are no neighbors to complain. This kind of sprawl development is immensely expensive to municipalities, because it requires miles of new roads, water and energy infrastructure, public safety coverage, and more. And it is devastating environmentally, as formerly open lands are paved over and new residents have to drive farther and farther to get to schools, playgrounds, shops, and workplaces.

If you ask millennials and members of Gen Z where they want to live, most will say they want walkable, lively neighborhoods, not cul-de-sacs. If you ask seniors what their ideal retirement home looks like, they want to stay in their communities but downsize to manageable, accessible apartments or town homes. If you ask employers what they need for attracting workers, they ask for workforce housing that is attainable to a median income worker, and within half an hour’s commute of their workplace. By reforming the SEQR process, we are empowering communities to get the varieties of housing all these constituencies need, in places where they will do the most good.