Major residential, commercial and industrial developments throughout the country are subject to an array of federal and state laws designed to protect the environment. They’re buttressed nearly everywhere by local land-use regulations addressing the community impacts of such projects.

In New York, these regulations are wrapped in the added red tape of the State Environmental Quality Review Act.

In this, as in so many areas of regulatory policy, the Empire State is an outlier. Less than one-third of all states have similarly comprehensive environmental review statutes —and even fewer have laws as broadly applicable as New York’s SEQR.

Given its name, New Yorkers might assume that SEQR is strictly an “environmental” law, like the Clean Air or Clean Water Act. In fact, the law defines the term very broadly, going well beyond actions affecting the natural ecology of air, water, flora and fauna to include “noise, resources of agricultural, archeological, historic or aesthetic significance, existing patterns of population concentration, distribution or growth.”

New York’s law also regulates potential impacts on “existing community or neighborhood character”—a concept that, in some cases, has been construed broadly enough to block projects otherwise permissible under existing environmental and local land-use ordinances

This does little to encourage development and job-creation in New York, aside from generating countless billable hours for planners, engineers and lawyers who specialize in advising project sponsors and lead agencies on how to navigate its twists and turns.

While it would be difficult to quantify SEQR’s role in discouraging investment and job creation in New York, the added regulatory imposition certainly does little to expedite the building of new homes, businesses, factories and civic facilities. As currently written and interpreted, SEQR can too easily be exploited to produce costly delays and uncertainty for the kind of job-creating projects New York desperately needs.

Small wonder that, in its 2011 strategic plan, the Capital Region Economic Development Council described SEQR as “cumbersome, vague, with little certainty on timetables or grounds for determinations.” Several other regional councils have expressed similar views on the law.

Nearly 40 years after its enactment, can SEQR be reformed to strike a better balance between environmental protection and economic growth? That’s a crucial question when much of New York, especially upstate, is suffering from what could be described as a severe development deficit.

Under Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the state Department of Environmental Conservation has been considering rule designed to improve SEQR in response to years of complaints from private-sector developers. DEC says it is aiming to make the process more efficient and predictable “without sacrificing meaningful environmental review.” However, based on the ideas it has floated so far, the agency needs to go further to achieve this goal.

As explained in a new report to be released by the Empire Center Monday, “Streamlining SEQR,” the law should be revised to:

Reduce the potential for undue delays by imposing hard deadlines and incentives to ensure the process can be completed within a year.

Mandate “scoping” of environmental impacts at the first stage in the SEQR review process, but also more tightly restrict the introduction of new issues by lead agencies later in the process.

Eliminate the law’s reference to “community and neighborhood character” as an aspect of the broadly defined environment potentially affected by projects, since the concept already is defined by local planning and zoning laws.

No one would argue with SEQR’s objectives. But as the Capital Region Economic Development Council pointed out, the law “can also have unintended consequences … lessening New York’s ability to win important ‘game changing’ projects.”

State economic development grants get the headlines, but we’ll never be able to jump-start the development we need, especially upstate, if we don’t clear away unnecessary regulatory obstacles to growth—starting with those created by SEQR.

E.J. McMahon is president and Michael Wright is senior research analyst at the Empire Center for Public Policy, Inc.

You may also like

Cuomo’s Buffalo Billion was beyond corrupt

The overarching scandal here wasn’t bid-rigging or the pay-to-play pattern in the developers’ contributions to the governor’s reelection campaign. At the root was a simply awful public policy — corporate welfare on steroids — that neither Cuomo nor most of his critics have definitively renounced, even now. Read More

Fending Off Cuomo’s $15 Fetish

New York has seldom seen an executive initiative as politically radical or economically reckless as Gov. Cuomo’s proposal for a $15-per-hour statewide minimum wage. Read More

Long Island’s Coming Fiscal Crash

Budget deficits papered over with borrowed money and fiscal gimmicks. Unaffordable union contracts. Pension contributions “amortized” into the future. Retiree health benefits promised but unfunded. Corruption probes and whiffs of scandal. Accountability blurred, responsibility shirked, and hard decisions avoided again and again. That litany could describe any number of old, declining American cities—including a few that, like Detroit, actually went broke. But the same dysfunction exists in affluent corners of New York’s archetypal suburb: Long Island Read More

Crocodile tears over NY’s tax cap

Long Island town officials are crying the blues over the budgetary squeeze supposedly created by the state’s property-tax cap. They’re not alone: You’ll hear much the same from town pols elsewhere in the metro region and across New York state. But the thrust of their complaints — that the tax cap is somehow blocking urgent public projects and programs — just won’t hold water. Read More

Corruption cauldron: To fix Albany — term limits

The corruption case against Speaker Sheldon Silver has prompted more calls for reform of the Legislature. Read More

Sticking New York with unaffordable debt

Skyrocketing public-pension obligations have generated concern across the country, especially in the wake of high-profile bankruptcies of Detroit and Stockton, Calif. In New York, an even larger burden looms in the form of lifetime health-insurance coverage promised to state and local government employees. Yet at least one house of the Legislature is considering a bill that would effectively prevent any effort to reduce this unaffordable debt. Read More

Andrew Cuomo’s confused property-tax ‘cut’

Cuomo has, indeed, slapped a cap on local property-tax levies — a real accomplishment. But his budget wouldn’t actually “cut” them. Instead, it would shift a little more of the local tax burden to the state tax base — in the long run promoting more growth in local spending and taxes. Read More

Cuomo’s inflated statistic feeds phony tax cut

Why are New York's property taxes so high? Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo claims it is "because we have 10,500 local governments." That would be pretty alarming -- if it were true. In fact, according to the Census Bureau, New York has 3,453 local governments, a little less than one-third the governor's number. Relative to population, that's not especially large by national standards. Read More

Subscribe

Sign up to receive updates about Empire Center research, news and events in your email.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Empire Center for Public Policy
30 South Pearl St.
Suite 1210
Albany, NY 12207

Phone: 518-434-3100

General Inquiries: Info@EmpireCenter.org

Press Inquiries: Press@EmpireCenter.org

About

The Empire Center is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank located in Albany, New York. Our mission is to make New York a better place to live and work by promoting public policy reforms grounded in free-market principles, personal responsibility, and the ideals of effective and accountable government.

Empire Center Logo Enjoying our work? Sign up for email alerts on our latest news and research.
Together, we can make New York a better place to live and work!