SB-958 Was Offered by Calif. Senator Weber Pierson to Allow CEQA Exemptions for Midway Rising
By Katheryn Rhodes
SB-958. California Environmental Quality Act:
“This bill would, for purposes of CEQA, prohibit the environmental impacts that are associated with increased building height alone from being considered significant impacts on the environment, if a project meets specified conditions, as provided. Because a lead agency would be required to determine if a project meets the specified conditions, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program…”
“SECTION 1. Section 21081.5 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 21081.5.
a) For purposes of this division, the environmental impacts of a project that are associated with increased building height alone, including, but not limited to, air circulation, noise and light refraction or reflection, the potential to attract wildlife, or geotechnical or hydrological effects, shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment if the project meets all of the following conditions:
(1) The use and density of the project is otherwise analyzed in a certified environmental impact report.
(2) The project is on a previously graded infill site.
(3) There are no sensitive biological resources physically present on the site.
(4) The project is not an industrial use project.
(5) For a project that is proposed to be constructed on a site that is greater than 40 acres that has an estimated construction valuation that exceeds one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) and that is subject to a project-specific environmental impact report, the project shall create high-wage, highly-skilled jobs that pay prevailing wages and living wages, employ a skilled and trained workforce, and provide construction jobs and permanent jobs for Californians.”
In Section 21081.5. (a) Senator Weber Pierson is still giving political cover and a purposeful legal loopholes to the billionaire Midway Rising developer to build high rise structures on unstable liquefiable soils with a CEQA EIR exemption for geotechnical or hydological effects, such as sea level rise.
When these are the most important public safety and financial issues with the development on liquefiable soils with a low water table subject to the effects of sea level rise on former salt water marsh lands. Super shady. We must address this public safety issue and fight for normal engineering practices, without unsafe and cheap short cuts.
Midway Rising and other developers are still trying to build high rise structures on unstable liquefiable soils with a low water table in the Midway area on a few feet of cheaper mat foundations, instead of more expensive piles to formational material or underground bathtub foundations consisting of at least 2 stories of basements that are best practices on liquefiable soils with a low water table, and to future proof against sea level rise.
Senator Weber Pierson is hiding the safety issue of geotechnical or hydrological effects of building high rise structure on unstable liquefiable soils among less important issues like air circulation, noise, and light refraction or reflection of high rise structures. Very purposeful and creepy.
The City of San Diego and Midway Rising know they have problems with the unstable soils and low water table and do not want them resolved under CEQA, because resolving them costs too much money for the Billionaire developer Stan Kroenke, who is the largest landowner in America.
Besides the purposeful legal loophole for highrises on unstable liquefiable soils, this looks like a win for the public and the Senate Member Weber Pierson has backed down from her free, all inclusive CEQA giveaway to billionaires for Midway Rising. The public has won, especially with traffic mitigation. Big deal. Look at everything she deleted and crossed in red that previously protected Midway Rising. We should thank Senator Weber Pierson for the changes she has made so far, and request she discuss her bill in light of the findings in the Appeal Court determination that the Midway area did not have a proper EIR in relation to high rise structures on unstable liquefiable soils with a low water table when the public voted on getting rid of the 30 foot coastal height limited in the Midway area.
See Pages 24 and 25 of the 10/17/2025 Appeals Court Ruling on Save Our Access versus City of San Diego that required the 30 foot coastal height limit to be back in effect, and the EIR under CEQA to be deemed incomplete and useless due to failure to analyze high rise structures on unstable liquefiable soils, with a low water table.
“Carrying forward potential construction noise and vibration impacts from the PEIR without considering the impacts of constructing buildings higher than 30 feet is inadequate. It is reasonable to assume constructing the foundations of buildings hundreds of feet high will require different measures than buildings limited to a height of 30 feet. For example, according to a seismic and geologic technical report prepared for the MPH CPU, ground improvement and structural design are basic measures to mitigate liquefication concerns. For heavy structures, deep caissons or pile foundations may be necessary to penetrate through liquefiable material.
“Liquefaction-induced ground failure can involve a complex interaction among seismic, geologic, soil, topographic, and groundwater factors. Failures can include ground fissures, sand boils, ground settlement, and loss of bearing strength, buoyancy effects, ground oscillation, flow failure, and complex lateral spread landslides.”
“Liquefaction areas have potential land use constraints and liquefaction assessments must be made for important projects. The depth and intensity of study will naturally vary depending on the location, type, and importance of the project.”
“Construction of buildings taller than 30 feet presumably will require more extensive ground improvement and structural support. But the initial study does not discuss whether the previously identified mitigation measures would adequately address noise and vibration impacts of constructing numerous large buildings throughout the Midway-Pacific Highway area. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence to support the bald conclusion that removal of the height limit would not result in any new significant environmental effects regarding construction noise and vibration.”
Thanks very much for your work on this. It’s an important issue and I appreciate your sharing these details with us. I oppose this legislation that offers an exemption for the developers of Midway Rising
Trying to drill for the cantenary lines near old town for the trolley extension was a watery sandy problem at 15-20ft deep for a stable hole.
Katheryn Rhodes and Helen Fricker (below) both have professional backgrounds and knowledge to know what they are talking about. The developer, city, and state, appear to be putting thousands of future Midway Rising residents at risk.
Helen Fricker was interviewed on PBS (Link in OB Rag) and wrote the following OB Rag article: UC San Diego Geophysicist: ‘Sports Arena Is Going to Be All Underwater in 10 or 20 Years’
STAFF OCTOBER 13, 2022 30 COMMENTS ON UC SAN DIEGO GEOPHYSICIST: ‘SPORTS ARENA IS GOING TO BE ALL UNDERWATER IN 10 OR 20 YEARS’ 0 LIKES 1575 VIEWS
Helen Fricker, from KPBS video
Helen Fricker is a geophysicist at UC San Diego who studies ice sheets, such as the ones in Greenland and Antarctica. Back in August, she stated:
“The amount by which the ice is being added to the ocean is increasing. And we know that from satellite monitoring as well. What we are seeing is we’re actually tracking the high end of the worst case scenario of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) projections.”
Residents of San Diego will see the effects of rising sea levels in their lifetimes, as coastal flooding becomes more frequent and longer in duration, she said. Fricker pointed out that some low-lying areas will soon be underwater, specifically the area around San Diego’s Sports Arena, known as the Midway District.
“So Sports Arena? Honestly, they want to build all this housing on a floodplain, which in 10 or 20 years time is going to be all underwater. I’m really sorry, but the ice sheets are melting!”
Weber Pierson is a profiteering corporate developer sycophant. The project isn’t even in her district & should disqualify her policy prostituting proposal based on jurisdictional issues alone.
Actually it is in her district, District 39.
https://sdmg.senate.ca.gov/sites/sdmg.senate.ca.gov/files/2021/CRC%20Senate%20District_39.pdf
Didn’t realize we got gerrymandered out of not only District 2 for the City, but out of 39 for the State as well here in Pacific Beach. I stand corrected. Totally screwed over by our own party, but corrected. Nothing quite like divide and conquer in order to eliminate any discernible representation right?
Much appreciate the engineering perspective!
I heard from one of Weber Pierson’s staff members who said that ‘amendments’ were made to the legislation. Here are the amendments. They absolutely avoid all rational explanation other than Weber-Pierson has given up her Hippocratic oath to ‘do no harm’ and has been bought by the same developers who went on a shopping spree with Todd and the city council.
Email from Weber-Pierson’s office:
Hi Lisa,
Thank you for reaching out to our office. I’d love to provide an update on SB 958. The bill has undergone extensive amendments and the current language can be found here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB958
The bill passed both the Senate Environmental Quality and Senate Local Government Committees and it is now in the Senate Appropriations.
Chevelle Newell-Tate, MPA
District Director
The ‘Amendments”
SECTION 1. Section 21081.5 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read:
21081.5. (a) For purposes of this division, the environmental impacts of a project that are associated with increased building height alone, including, but not limited to, air circulation, noise and light refraction or reflection, the potential to attract wildlife, or geotechnical or hydrological effects, shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment if the project meets all of the following conditions:
(1) The use and density of the project is otherwise analyzed in a certified environmental impact report.
(2) The project is on a previously graded infill site.
(3) There are no sensitive biological resources physically present on the site.
(4) The project is not an industrial use project.
(5) For a project that is proposed to be constructed on a site that is greater than 40 acres that has an estimated construction valuation that exceeds one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) and that is subject to a project-specific environmental impact report, the project shall create high-wage, highly-skilled jobs that pay prevailing wages and living wages, employ a skilled and trained workforce, and provide construction jobs and permanent jobs for Californians.
(b) For purposes of this section, “jobs that pay prevailing wages” means that construction workers employed in the execution of the project will receive at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for the type of work and geographic area, as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to Sections 1773 and 1773.9 of the Labor Code.
Thanks for this information–it seems highly relevant. I must say that my initial (and now ongoing) concern is that is is just a “LOOK, AN EAGLE!” diversionary tactic with probable payoffs to interested parties.
Senate Bill 958 As Viewed From a Retired Archaeologist. Long before anyone ever dreamed our beloved Sports Arena would be surrendered to housing developers, the land out there had served as a City Dump for trash, old furniture, industrial waste, and certainly lots of places for methane gas to develop. Without a California Environmental Impact Report to identify the old landfill, there will not be extensive plans for remediation, landfill capping, and methane gas remediation systems to ensure public safety. Nor would be there be engineering studies for uneven ground settlement, corrosive environments and regulatory approval for residential use. Assuming coring studies are done to determine the presence of contaminants, volatile organic compounds or worse, these would need to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report and provided to the public for reviews. And the landfill might be old enough to qualify for historic archaeology status, depending on assessments by qualified archaeologists and historians. But hey, the California Legislature could just skip all those messy environmental studies and not worry itself with possible future resident deaths.
Hi Ron. Thank you for your Archaeologist perspective.
I wonder exactly where the Sports Arena or Midway landfill is located?
What I am really wondering is what is lurking under the Navy’s toxic nearby SPAWAR redevelopment site ? On the same liquefiable soils, with a low water table, on reclaimed former salt water marsh lands.
Thankfully under CEQA the landfill and any contaminated soils should be investigated for remediation and proper disposal for Midway Rising. Not sure if SPAWAR will fall under CEQA and have to clean up their toxic mess. Or will they get special exemptions for Federal Lands ?
In the olden days, our Sports Arena was on the normal circuit for all large concerts and tours. Everybody came down to San Diego. Now, all the big names like Taylor Swift skip San Diego due to the lack of a modern billion dollar stadiums and concert halls, with a retractable roof.
Instead of Midway Rising when they were going to use our own money to pay for our own Affordable housing Units as a form of corporate welfare, instead request the Kroenke Group build a us a new +70,000-seat indoor mega-stadium with skylights so we can have a home for a new future NFL Football expansion team, a new NBA Basketball team.
We would also give the Kroenke Group the rights to break the 30 foot coastal height limit and build two hotels: 1 luxury hotel, and 1 low cost visitor serving hotel and stadium employee housing. With public park lands, public running tracks, and rights to use for public regional non-profit events at least 12 times a year.
That will open up the Affordable Housing fund that Midway Rising wanted for themselves. With 100% public financing through State tax credits, and local government funding from the County, and the San Diego Housing Commission (SDHC), with in theory no affordable housing funding coming from Midway Rising. The limited public affordable housing funds can be better used to build affordable housing at the planned City Hall complex in downtown.
As I have told the representatives of Midway Rising my dream for the Sports Arena is to delete Midway Rising as a project consisting of luxury and affordable housing with a small 16,000-sea sports complex; and have the Kroenke Group and Legends put forth an alternative public ballot vote in November 2026 for:
A new +70,000 seat stadium like Sofi in Los Angeles owned by the same Kroenke Group. The new home to the now Los Angeles Chargers, after they left San Diego. Instead of the Chargers, San Diego would get a new expansion team. Or the Chargers can be forced to come home with new owners.
Fair market value to buy the public property from the City of San Diego taxpayer as required by our City Charter to be deposited into the Infrastructure fund in according with City Council Policy.
Promise a full CEQA EIR, Similar to the ballot language where the public agreed to allow SDSU West to buy the old Qualcomm Stadium, renamed Snapdragon Stadium, do the full EIR, including financing and building a bridge over the San Diego River,
Require Caltrans collaboration and approvals. Interstate I-5 and Interstate I-8 Traffic Mitigation including new bridges over the San Diego River, and new on-ramps and off-ramps off Interstate I-8 East to I-5 South.
At least 2 levels of subterranean structural bathtub foundations to future proof against sea level rise and to get rid of the seismic hazard of liquefaction. And to provide underground parking and structural cisterns for storm water capture.
Mine the clean sand and use for beach replenishment along the eroding cliffs of La Jolla and Point Loma.
Underground parking for everyone or build additional parking structures at the nearby Sea World Parking Lot.
Work with the San Diego County Airport Authority (SDCAA) to use normally restricted airport revenue for transportation projects to the airport in according with FAA Regulations and Guidelines. Confirm that San Diego is 1 of 12 Grandfathered Airport on State Tidelands that allow for FAA Revenue Diversions. Confirm that Airport Revenue can fund construction of a cut and cover tunnel and transportation corridor from San Diego International Airport (SDII) then north along Pacific Coast Highway to the Rental Car Center (RCC), SPAWAR, and Old Town, Then connecting underground from Old Town to the 70,000 seat Sports Arena.
Not to mention the arena could host the thunderboats when the sea level rise becomes evident and implement a section for yacht parking and tailgating. As long as we’re dreaming.
Thank you, Katheryn Rhodes, for this technical analysis. I appreciate these concerns and think they should be heeded and given serious consideration in a future EIR and any building plans for this site.
I have a few additional concerns. I don’t think any legislation, especially that regarding environmental impacts, should include a wide open phrase such as “including, but not limited to.” Legislation should be specific and exact and not leave intentional loopholes, which that phrase most certainly does.
Further, I have a problem with this statement:
“(1) The use and density of the project is otherwise analyzed in a certified environmental impact report.”
The fact that the Midway Rising project has a “certified environmental impact report” doesn’t make that report legally acceptable under CEQA law. Not one, but two judges have found two different “certified environmental impact reports” related to the Midway project to be insufficient to meet CEQA requirements, so simply having a certified EIR is too low a threshold to give any project a free CEQA pass.
Finally, Senator Weber Pierson is a doctor, an OB/Gyn if I am not mistaken. She has taken the Hippocratic Oath to “First, do no harm.” As such, she is the last person who should be suggesting any project forego full CEQA analysis that will withstand any legal test to confirm that a given project will protect the health, safety and welfare of not only the project’s residents, but also of those people living in the surrounding communities. Dr. Weber Pierson’s loyalty must be not only to the Mayor, but also to her current and future constituents and their offspring, etc. For a doctor, of all people, to propose legislation to bypass a full CEQA analysis that can survive legal challenges is extremely disturbing and begs the question of what could possibly motivate a medical professional to put political expediency above public health, safety and welfare.
The fact we are now analyzing the wording and arguing about the merits of SB 958 and not about how the courts have ruled against Midway Rising is not good.
SB 958 is not necessary and that’s where the debate should remain.
The developer wheels continue to grind towards their desired outcome.
I reached out to Weber Pierson’s office a few weeks ago to share my displeasure about this bill. They reached out to me via email today to say the bill has been substantially revised. In reading it, it seems they’re now changing it to say:
“This bill would, for purposes of CEQA, prohibit the environmental impacts that are associated with increased building height alone from being considered significant impacts on the environment, if a project meets specified conditions, as provided. Because a lead agency would be required to determine if a project meets the specified conditions, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.”
Here’s a link to the entire bill:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB958
So now it literally has removed any mention of Midway Rising specifically. Reading what they had initially included was wild and so specific to this project that a state bill would be passed because of it.
You’re a model citizen; thanks.
Today, 4/25/26 I received a message from WeberPierson following my comment to her prior to the Senate Environmental Quality Committee vote relative to the Bill’s legislative procedure. Here is her message. Note that she believes this is a Bill for fairness, when it is quite the opposite – allowing for approval in spite of an incomplete EIR when others must so comply. Moreover, in the end, her law will NOT ensure CEQA “works for everyone, including communities.” Please contact her with your concerns. Senator.WeberPierson@Outreach.senate.ca.gov
“SB 958 is about clarity, consistency, and making sure our laws work the way they were intended.
Over time, we’ve seen how different interpretations of the California Environmental Quality Act, both in how it’s implemented and how it’s interpreted by the courts, can create uncertainty. That uncertainty can lead to delays, confusion, and inconsistent outcomes for communities, local governments, and stakeholders.
SB 958 provides clearer guidance moving forward so that everyone is operating with the same understanding of the law.
This bill does not weaken California’s environmental protections. Our state has long been a national leader in environmental stewardship, and that commitment remains unchanged. Instead, SB 958 helps ensure that our environmental review process is consistent, predictable, and focused so it can function as intended.
At its core, this bill is about fairness and clarity. It is about making sure the law works for everyone, including communities, agencies, and stakeholders alike, while maintaining the strong environmental protections Californians expect.”
The letter you received was word for word the letter I received from them today.
The proposed Bill’s language that states one of the provisions for approval: “(1) The use and density of the project is otherwise analyzed in a certified environmental impact report.”
is way too broad to impart CEQA protections as intended.
See the link, which is a 156-pg. letter of 2/26/26 from Chatten-Brown Law Group to the mayor and all councilmembers. It details all of the inadequacies of the Final Suppl. EIR upon which the project has been approved (BUT deemed is not compliant by the Court of Appeal).
Among all the other issues that Court of Appeals denoted, the Chatten-Brown letter includes others. These two sources alone should be Red Flags enough to halt the project until all environmental impacts have been addressed – but for the likes of politicians like WeberPierson and her tactics. The letter discusses the FSEIR inadequacies:
The FSEIR omits required data from Cumulative Impact Analysis of the Large-Scale NAVWAR Project; omits FSEIR Response as Required to Comments Submitted by Caltrans and the additional 27,000 daily trips from the new residences; The Project Fails to Mitigate Significant, Understudied Transportation Delays in the Midway District; The SEIR Fails to Analyze Impacts to Coastal Access Corridors; the Moore St/Int.8 NB ramp delay per lane was found to be over 90 minutes with a queue length of nearly 2.5 miles.. Among other issues, including the soils and structure foundation issues.
https://wpdash.medianewsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/2026-2-26-Midway-Rising-Comment-Letter.pdf
This article by Kathryn Rhodes and all the posts here are very powerful, well-reasoned and well-sourced but Weber-Pierson has continued to ignore us or meet with us.
I sent an email this morning to Weber-Pierson at
senator.weberpierson@senate.ca.gov
demanding she meet with her constituents to give us equal ‘facetime’ that she is gi inv to the Midway Rising development team. I hope each of you will join me in doing the same.
We could book a community meeting at a public library or arrange a meeting at the same time as a CPG meeting.
She must stop ignoring us and meet with us. Nothing less.