Increasingly though, last minute deals are struck between a few powerful players who hope the public isn't paying attention as they try to jam their bill through with maneuvers like rule waivers, "gut and amend" (Sacramento-speak for completely removing the contents of a bill and putting in new language), and rushed committee hearings late at night where legislators and advocates get their first look at actual bill language. More and more, late attacks seem to target environmental and public health protection laws. There were plenty of these attacks in the final hours of this year's legislative session and two harmful bills regrettably made it through. Despite the last minute defense we were forced to play, environmental advocates and our champions in the legislature kept pushing to protect California's public health and natural resources and got some key bills through to the Governor's desk.
Here's a rundown of some of the top environmental bills that we hope the Governor will sign:
Renewable Portfolio Standard: SB 14 and AB 64 would require California utilities to acquire 33 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2020, setting the most ambitious targets in the country.
State Parks: The legislature approved two bills to help protect state parks. SB 372 would prevent "non-park" uses of our parks (like toll roads) and SB 679 would make it more difficult to sell off state parks in difficult economic times.
Global Warming: AB 1404 would ensure that industries required to reduce their global warming emissions could only use offsets for up to 10 percent of the reductions required by California's Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32).
AB 828 would bolster the California Green Building Code by ensuring that the state's public health and environmental agencies have a say in designing green building standards.
SB 406 would help fund public transit operations, which have been zeroed out in the state budget, by allowing regions to add $1 or $2 to vehicle registrations. The bill would also fund efforts to improve pedestrian and bike access and give people alternatives to driving.
SB 728 would also increase transportation options by improving implementation of a "parking cash-out" program. Parking cash-out requires large businesses that provide free parking to employees to also offer those employees the option of receiving the cash value of those parking spaces if they choose to get to work without a car.
There are two bills that we hope the Governor will veto. AB 1318 and SB 827 are blatant misuses of the legislative process to undermine pending NRDC and environmental justice groups' litigation against the South Coast Air Quality Management District over its air emission credit scheme which plaintiffs argue (and the court agrees) need to be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These bills would allow scarce air pollution reduction credits that should be reserved for small businesses and essential public services like hospitals and schools, to be available for power plants that are capable of purchasing the offset credits on the open market. Senator Alan Lowenthal, a legislative champion who joined in the fight against these bills wrote an Op-Ed about the damage that SB 827 would inflict, not only on air quality in the most polluted region in the country, but to the state's decades-old fundamental environmental protection law.
Click through to NRDC's Take Action Page to urge the Governor to sign the good bills and veto the two harmful ones.
Finally, I say the legislature "almost" met its deadline because technically, they should have adjourned before midnight on Friday, September 11. SB 827 wasn't heard in committee until 11:30pm that day. The legislature extended its own deadline a bit and didn't officially adjourn until the early morning on September 12. That's the thing about deadlines. Sometimes extending them makes sense. But sometimes a hard and fast deadline is necessary to stop bad ideas from taking hold.
]]>One face is the Governor who boldly signed groundbreaking global warming legislation, AB 32 in 2006 and SB 375 this year. The other face, though, is the one who vetoes budget bills for being too protective of the environment. NRDC and our partners in Sacramento have been working for weeks to stop environmental attacks that have made their way into budget battles despite having nothing to do with California's fiscal problems. This week, the legislature passed a bill that environmentalists opposed because it exempted large transportation projects from environmental review. It hurt when the legislature passed the bill, but we were shocked when the Governor announced that he would veto the long-sought budget bill because it didn't go far enough to exempt infrastructure projects from California's landmark environmental protection statute - the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). You can read our coalition press release here.
There's no question that California's budget situation is dire and creative solutions are needed. But state leaders can't commit to strong global warming reductions on the one hand and then undermine that commitment by allowing major road construction projects to go forward with no analysis of the environmental and health hazards they create. That makes no sense. We are on the verge of accelerating a clean energy economy. President-Elect Obama has not waivered in his commitment to a stimulus package that invests in efficiency, renewable energy and public transportation. California must stand by its environmental commitments too. If legislators and the Governor make shortsighted decisions now, we will fall short in curbing global warming and protecting public health. And if we fall short, I doubt the Bat Phone will save us.
]]>
The bill, SB 974, would have required owners of cargo that passes through our state's largest ports to pay a share of the cost of cleaning up the diesel pollution they cause. Not the whole cost, just a share of the cost. And according to the state's own estimates, the money raised by the bill would have been only about half of what is needed to address the problems of port pollution. Much of the cargo coming through the ports is toys, electronics and apparel from China. Even if the major retailers pass on the fee required by SB 974 to consumers, it would amount to a fraction of a penny on a pair of shoes and maybe a penny or two on a DVD player.
With this veto the governor sided with corporate interests who acknowledge there's a huge health problem because of port operations, but object to sharing responsibility for the solution. The urgent health crisis remains and the California state budget is so out of whack I can't imagine any money coming down for clean air in the foreseeable future. Instead, the state will continue to pay more on the back end when children who can't breathe are treated in emergency rooms. Opponents may have succeeded in killing the most important clean air bill of the session, but NRDC and our allies will not rest until all of our children breathe a little easier.
]]>