There is a twist, though: Residents often do not even have a chance to vote.

Once 15 percent of eligible voters have signed a petition, a project qualifies for the ballot, and local elected officials can call a special election or accept the proposal without negotiating changes. Officials often approve the project to avoid paying for a special election that could further strain tight budgets.

Supporters of the ballot measures say they allow residents to override a broken system in which lawsuits and environmental reviews can delay projects for years.

But environmentalists argue that the arrangement grants special privileges to developers, even if only a relatively small fraction of residents support a project. And land-use experts say the strategy will become more common unless the state government steps in to curtail it.

So far, the issue has failed to attract much attention in Sacramento.

“We’ve ended up with a warping of direct democracy to defeat strong environmental laws,” said Douglas Carstens, a lawyer specializing in land use and the environment. “It’s ramping up. Within a year or two, people will realize what a bad situation this is.”

Developers have complained for decades about the California Environmental Quality Act, which is far more exacting than federal regulations. The state law requires them to identify and mitigate the environmental effects of their projects. No state agency oversees the law; it is enforced only by lawsuits. Written broadly, the law allows almost anyone to sue, claiming environmental harm that can range from destroying animal habitats to blocking a view. The litigation can add years and millions of dollars to a project’s cost.