Listen To California!

Two out of three California voters believe “we can have a strong economy and a clean environment at the same time.” Nearly two-thirds (63%) say environmental laws shouldn’t be used as bargaining chips in budget negotiations.

That’s according to a new poll commissioned by several environmental groups that are Sierra Club California’s allies in battling efforts to undo environmental protections.

California voters have spoken! So far, though, their voice hasn’t been heard by a minority of legislative Republicans from trying to erode these important existing laws that protect our air, our climate, our lungs and our land.

Among them: regulations that protect Californians from diesel pollution caused by dirty engines; allow affected residents to sue to stop global warming pollution; require environmental review of the sale of state lands; and prevent the use of smog-forming pesticides. Another minority-group effort would tie the hands of California air regulators in an endless loop of red tape.

Of course, governing by poll results isn’t always the best thing to do. But in a time of back-door budget blackmail, the recent poll results provide an important reminder of our democratic process.

Let’s hope they’re listening now.

Want Proof? The Sacramento Bee’s website has an actual copy of these scary budget proposals (PDF)!

See what the SF Chronicle’s “Thin Green Line” blog has to say about the poll

State of the State Misses The Mark

Sierra Club California’s environmental advocates today watched Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s short “State of the State” address with disappointment.

Like most Californians, we are caught up in the pain and worry surrounding the state’s fiscal crisis. Gov. Schwarzenegger’s short speech failed to address those very real concerns by proposing real leadership (Click on the photo at right to watch the speech).

Instead of spinning his wheels with a short address, Gov. Schwarzenegger should be declaring 2009 to be the Year of the Green Jobs, as Director Bill Magavern suggested in a recent KQED radio interview. We have opportunities to create and improve public transit, water supply, affordable housing, flood protection and energy efficiency – all without harming our environment or spending money we don’t have.

California’s legislative leaders, Assembly Speaker Karen Bass and Senate President Pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg, have a plan to stimulate the state’s economy by spending already-approved bond money on “green infrastructure” projects that would improve our state’s economy without affecting its ecology. What’s more, the proposed Green Economic Stimulus Plan looks out for the next generation by providing green jobs training.

Gov. Schwarzenegger also missed his chance to tell California that he’s going to halt his unproductive efforts to suspend California’s environmental laws, after balking at signing a state budget fix that didn’t include enough rollbacks of California’s treasured environmental protections.

As the Governor concluded his remarks today, “Let us resolve the budget crisis, so that we can get on with the people’s work.”

And, we might add, let’s get the Green Economic Stimulus Plan in place, so we can get people to work!

Bad Budget News II: We Are Not Alone!

The governor’s continued efforts to hold out for environmental rollbacks – combined with his proposed cuts for transit – represent a giant step backward for our state’s economy and ecology alike.

But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what some major news organizations statewide had to say about the disappointing proposals sifting through the state Capitol:

• LA Times News Story (1.11.2009)

Schwarzenegger is proposing that the California Department of Transportation forge ahead with some construction projects that are tied up in court over environmental issues. One is a $165-million carpool-lane expansion on U.S. 50 in Sacramento that a judge has delayed because of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions it could generate, among other concerns.Protections would also be lifted on a freeway-widening project through an ecologically sensitive area of coastal San Diego County and on a controversial plan to drill a tunnel into the Berkeley Hills. And Schwarzenegger wants to empower a panel of his appointees to waive environmental rules on other projects.

See the LA Times’ map of the proposed projects

• LA Times Editorial (1.12.2009):

“[T]here's good reason to think a permanent end to public transit funding will be part of future budget proposals. It shouldn't be. California voters have repeatedly shown they want some of their gas tax money to fund transit, and they're even willing to tax themselves more to improve bus and rail systems. Transit agencies, like every other public service, can expect to take a big hit in the next budget, but that doesn't mean their permanent funding stream should be cut off.”

• Contra Costa Times Editorial (1.08.2009):

“[T]he governor was opposed to the Democratic budget, not because of the revenue increases, which he did not criticize, but because he wanted more spending cuts and relaxation of environmental and labor laws to stimulate public works projects.
“On Wednesday, Schwarzenegger said he wanted a bipartisan solution to the budget impasse. In other words, he belatedly has come out against the Democrats' fee-is-not-a-tax scheme, which clearly never would get any GOP support. If the governor opposed the revenue-raising element of the Democrats' budget, why didn't he say so nearly three weeks ago, when it was first proposed?”

• Sacramento Bee Editorial (1.11.2009):

“If you are a business owner, it is likely you belong to the Chamber of Commerce or some other business association. … Here are some questions you should ask yourself: Are the leaders of my association or union acting in the state's interest? Are they even acting in my interest? If I'm a supplier who contracts with the state, do I want a budget resolution delayed so my business coalition can press Democrats to waive environmental reviews of highway projects?”

• San Francisco Chronicle (1.08.2009):

"Now it's back to the bargaining table with the one faction that has been orbiting in outer space while disaster looms in Planet California. The Republican Senate and Assembly members will join Schwarzenegger and the Democratic leaders at a "Big 5" meeting today. The governor said it was time to 'turn the page.' We'll see.
"The GOP legislators continue to refuse to consider any new taxes to fill these deficits. They're seemingly so determined to adhere to their no-tax pledges that your tax refund might get held hostage as a result, and the economy they're claiming to protect will suffer the reverberations of a government breakdown. "

Budget Battles – A More Concrete Plan

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger continues to press for unnecessary big-road-project exemptions to the California Environmental Quality Act. In fact, that’s one of the reasons why he vetoed a proposed budget fix advanced by the democratic leaders in the Legislature.

He’s trying to make something out of nothing. Nonpartisan analysts at the Legislative Analyst's Office have identified problems with Schwarzenegger’s approach. For example, the efforts to roll back California’s environmental protections only would advance many projects by a few months. Other projects may be held back by Prop. 1B limits on spending bond money on project design.

The state’s best hope for economic stimulus may instead lie with investment in rehabilitation and safety improvement projects, such as bridge maintenance, drainage improvements and pothole repair, according to the analysts. Even better, these small-scale projects can be done at less cost, since there’s traditionally more competition for smaller projects.

Such spending could cause true economic stimulus, and offer statewide safety and environmental benefits.

Wouldn’t that be something?

Image courtesy State of California

Putting the Brakes on Bad Budget Ideas

Fed up with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s inaction on the state’s budget crisis, California’s Assembly and Senate leaders have challenged the governor to sign their proposal to help balance the state budget.

So far, the governor has refused to sign a Dec. 19 package of budget-boosting fees, including his own proposal to tax oil companies for the harm they do to California’s air, land and water.

Gov. Schwarzenegger keeps moving back the goalposts. Rather than working to stabilize California’s chilling economy, the governor has been holding the proposals hostage in order to roll back California Environmental Quality Act regulations for a number of massive freeway expansion projects.

Putting the brakes on environmental protections means less consideration for the potential effects of construction: increased global warming pollution; more bad emissions in affected neighborhoods; and potential harm to water, land and endangered species. It also sets a dangerous precedent by removing YOUR voice from projects that could affect YOUR neighborhood!

What’s more, the governor’s budget delay resulted in the shutdown of a number of public works projects, including important habitat restoration work – potentially costing working Californians their jobs!

Sierra Club California joins other environmental groups, workers’ groups and seniors’ advocacy groups in calling for the governor to stop holding the budget hostage – and start working toward a real solution.

Read the LA Times' take on the budget

Gov. Schwarzenegger has threatened to veto the proposals. Read the Sacbee.com story here

Sierra Club California's Paul Mason stands with protesters following a state budget press conference.

Cartoon c. The Sacramento Bee, used for non-profit educational purposes under terms of "fair use" doctrine. Props to Rex Babin.

Banding Together To Protect The Budget

Remember last year’s budget debacle?

California’s legislative Republicans held up the budget for more than a month as they tried to roll back environmental protections – and as everyday Californians rolled their eyes at the lack of leadership they exhibited.

Now, they’re at it again. They’ve already said they plan to postpone implementation of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, roll back diesel pollution reductions and undermine the 8-hour work day. These proposals probably will become a big part of the negotiations surrounding California’s 2008-2009 budget.

So this year, Sierra Club California and its environmental, health and labor allies have taken an early, unified stand against the efforts to undermine our environmental and worker protections.
California needs solid proposals to close a budgetary gap that’s yawned to more than $15 billion.

That’s why the Republican proposals are so shaky: they actually pile on more potential costs. For example, the Republicans want the Legislature to extend deadlines for cleaning up dangerous emissions from the diesel trucks responsible for nearly 40 percent of California’s most toxic diesel pollution.

At what cost? Diesel pollution annually leads to 1,500 early deaths annually, and causes about $12 billion in costs associated with premature death, health care, lost productivity and lost school attendance each year.

There’s even more potential expense associated with a delay in the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act. If we don’t immediately address the pollution that causes global warming, we won’t benefit from the measures taken to reduce that pollution: cleaner air and energy, more efficient cars and appliances and protected coastal areas.

And we might not take in as big a share of the $1.79 billion that venture capitalists poured into California’s green economy last year.

Despite the clear benefits provided by the environmental rules, Sierra Club California advocates fully expect this year’s budget negotiations to once again include a battle to protect our air and atmosphere.

As the minority party, Republicans have the most power during the budget process, since they can withhold the few Republican votes needed to reach the 2/3 super-majority required to adopt the budget. Last year, they tried (and mostly failed) to block the use of the California Environmental Quality Act to address global warming.

Even as the Republicans gear up to attack these critical protections, the state’s most important Republican, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger indicated this month that he wants to keep the Global Warming Solutions Act safe from attack. He’s also made it easier to implement the diesel truck rule, by providing nearly $50 million to assist low-income truckers in complying with the new rules. Legislative Democrats, most notably Senator Alan Lowenthal and Assemblymember Mark DeSaulnier also stand with us. Like us, they’re taking a stand against the potential hijacking of the state’s budget.

Hopefully, when the budget negotiations begin in earnest, California’s working families won’t be rolling their eyes at another Republican tantrum. They’ll be looking forward to cleaner air, cleaner energy and a new, greener future.

See What Sierra Club California Advocates Have To Say About The Budget

Your Donation Helps Us Safeguard The Budget

Halting The Republican Rollback

Sierra Club California responded with outrage today to Senate Republicans’ proposal to delay important measures that will protect California’s air and atmosphere.
Sierra Club California Director Bill Magavern made the following statement:

"Once again, these Senate Republicans are showing why they’re a minority party -- they’re so desperate to please their corporate contributors that they’re trying to roll back vital protections for our air and atmosphere that most Californians strongly support. Their proposal would further delay our state’s achieving healthy air quality by extending deadlines for cleaning up dirty diesel engines. They also propose to delay for a year the implementation of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), even though that law already is driving technological innovation that will fuel California’s economy. Furthermore, we are highly suspicious that when they say 'Streamline the building permitting process,' Republican leaders mean weakening safeguards that protect our quality of life from rampant over-development.

"These same reactionary senators held last year’s budget hostage in a futile attempt to roll back California’s Environmental Quality Act. They are out of touch with the governor and with the voters of all parties, who understand that cleaning up our air and water helps California’s economy."

Sierra Club California calls on both Democratic and Republican elected officials to oppose any proposals to weaken protections for public health and the environment.

Read an April 30 Sacramento Bee story about the Republicans' dangerous budget demands

Your Donation Helps Us Hold Firm On California's Environmental Laws

SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA SUPPORTS GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER’S POSTPONEMENT OF AERIAL SPRAYING WHILE FURTHER STUDIES ARE CONDUCTED

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has ordered a postponement of aerial spraying intended to eradicate the light brown apple moth in 12 California counties. The spraying will not go forward until the completion of additional testing on the efficacy and toxicity of various substances that could be sprayed.

The governor announced the postponement at a meeting today with Senators Carole Migden and Darrell Steinberg, Marin County Supervisor Judy Arnold, Sierra Club California Director Bill Magavern and Paul Schramski, State Director of Pesticide Watch.

Magavern thanked Governor Schwarzenegger for his action, which is consistent with Sierra Club’s call for a precautionary moratorium on the spraying until health effects and alternatives can be fully studied.

A Half-Baked Idea for Half Moon Bay

Would you feel safe on the highway if other drivers could get out of a speeding ticket – or worse -- by simply suspending the state laws?

Assembly Bill 1991, currently pending in the California Legislature, would do a similar thing for environmental protections. It aims to exempt 36 acres of Half Moon Bay from the state’s most important environmental laws, including the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Coastal Act and safeguards for water quality, fish and animals.

Passage of the bill would pave the way for construction of 129 houses on sensitive coastal wetlands near some of the world’s best surfing and wildlife-watching beaches – without giving scientists or the public their say.

There’s no question the city of Half Moon Bay is in a tough spot. A recent legal settlement inexplicably requires the city of Half Moon Bay to pay $18 million to the developer unless this proposed law is passed to allow the so-called Beachwood and Glencree developments evade environmental laws.

But the city vastly overstepped its authority when it committed to sponsor a bill in the California Legislature that strips environmental laws to pave the way for development of these coastal wetlands.

We can’t abandon the rule of law and our state’s rich history of environmental protection whenever a local government finds itself in trouble. Local governments and developers need to know they can’t ransom city budgets to evade environmental protections.


Join Sierra Club California in stopping this harmful bill before it speeds away with our most valuable environmental protections. Write your California Assembly member and tell them you think environmental laws need to stay in place.


Who’s your representative? Find out here.

See what Sierra Club California told the Assembly about this frightening potential precedent here.

Will the California Building Industry Continue to Attack CEQA?

For a number of years, the California Building Industry Association (CBIA) has roamed the halls of the Capitol, shouting “Housing Crisis, Housing Crisis.” This was part of their well-planning campaign to weaken California’s environmental protection and planning laws. Of course, with the median house price in California going through the roof, it was easy to get the attention of legislators who were well aware that more and more of their constituents were being priced out of the housing market.

And because of this valid concern, the developers saw their opportunity. They introduced a series of bills to solve the “housing crisis” by blaming the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the “red tape” a builder had to go through to get new housing approved.

But Sierra Club California was not buying that argument. We testified that CEQA was not the problem, and that industry has perpetrated a myth that the law is used neighbors and environmental groups to relentlessly sue applicants of proposed projects. In reality, hardly any CEQA actions go to court. But that fact did not deter the developers. They kept blaming CEQA and argued that if this law was “reformed” they could build housing in numbers that would make it more affordable to Californians.

The CBIA philosophy is that we can build ourselves out of the housing “crisis.” They imply that if they build lots of houses, more and more families will achieve the “California Dream” of home ownership. But their roadmap is highly flawed. It’s not just about how many homes are built, but where and how. In their world, environmental and social considerations are secondary to home ownership (and builders profits). However, Californians care a lot about quality of life issues, with their number one concern (above crime, pollution, and education) being traffic congestion. It’s a fact that building traditional low-density sprawling subdivisions far from jobs is significantly contributing to commute times and traffic congestion. This exacerbates global warming by increasing vehicle miles traveled and making a permanent commitment to these auto-centric developments, while eating up farmland and open space at an alarming rate.

The vast majority of builders also do not give potential homebuyers much choice in housing. When was the last time you saw a new home for sale in one of these subdivisions that was “only” 1,500 or 1,800 square feet, thereby making the house more affordable? Save for a few infill builders, the industry has promoted the bigger is better model.

We know that the period of 1999-2005 saw the industry build a lot of homes. But did prices go down? No -- they skyrocketed, with double-digit increases in the median house price every year in nearly all corners of the State. The industry made record profits during these years and the stocks of the publicly traded companies went through the roof. They used some of these profits to fund their lobbying efforts at the State Capitol. They also produced a “road show,” traveling around the State holding news events, often with a concerned locally elected official at their side, citing the awful statistics about housing prices and what the Legislature should be doing about it (pass the BIA’s sponsored bills). It was all an orchestrated effort to have CEQA rolled back and to see if they could get the Legislature to neuter local government’s authority over housing approvals.

We fought the legislation they sponsored and at every hearing testified that CEQA had not been made tougher in its 35 years of existence, and that the real culprit behind the huge rise in housing prices was historically low interest rates. We urged the Legislature to not let the CBIA get the upper hand during this period when there was panic about housing prices. Thankfully, the Legislature did that, rejecting almost all of the bills the CBIA backed; with some damage being done around the edges.

While not an economist, I think my arguments about interest rates make sense. But, let me bring in Alan Greenspan, who is an economist. In a recent interview with an Austrian magazine, he said that low interest rates in the past 15 years were to blame for the house price bubble, and that central banks were powerless when they tried to bring it under control. He went on to say that deregulation and the introduction of market economies in the Communist bloc after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 had caused a global boom and a worldwide reduction of interest rates, which both helped fuel the property bubble.

In a Yahoo News story Greenspan said "There is no doubt about the fact that low interest rates for long-term government bonds have caused the real estate bubble in the United States. The Federal Reserve began a series of interest rate increases in 2004. We were hoping to bring the speculative excesses in the real estate sector under control. We failed. We tried it again in 2005. Failure; nobody could do anything about it, neither us nor the European Central Bank. We were powerless."

So, it remains to be seen if the CBIA will attack environmental and planning laws again. If they do, they will be particularly brash given what has happened since July of 2005 when the bubble started to burst. In the aftermath of their record profits, developers all over the State are leaving building permits on the table, not wanting to bring more units into a very slow market. I guess I can’t blame them – if I was a builder, I would bring yet another 2,800 square foot home for $600,000 into the market today?

But let’s hope they don’t point their finger at CEQA once again. Instead, I hope they sit down with environmental groups, local government, and affordable housing advocates and seriously tackle true streamlining of the planning and building process and making new development more efficient. And, I hope that the issue of global warming is front and center in these discussions, as this is the issue that truly trumps all others. The current climate change path we are on will lead to economic chaos in California and not just in the housing sector.

California Budget Finally Approved – Environmental Law (Mostly) Dodges a Bullet

The California Legislature finally approved the 2007-2008 State Budget yesterday – 51 days into the fiscal year and more than two months past the legal deadline of June 15. As has been discussed here and in many other forum’s, one of the biggest hurdles to completing the budget was the demand by the minority party in the Senate to weaken the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), particularly as it relates to global warming pollution.

So how’d it turn out? Though the language affecting CEQA is complicated, and will undoubtedly be litigated, it appears that little damage was done. There is a good post on the California Majority Report blog by Steve Maviglio, Assembly Speaker Nunez’s Deputy Chief Staff responsible for communications, which explains the CEQA deal in plain English.

There is also a particularly good post over at Bill Bradley’s New West Notes blog, which discusses more of the political context of this climate change skirmish.

Both of these articles are worth a read if you’re looking for more details about what played out over the past month.

** UPDATE** If you want to read the actual language of the CEQA exemption (SB 97 - Dutton) including the floor analyses and the vote count, you can find all that information here.

Gang of 14 Republican Senators Holding Budget Hostage at Behest of Oil and Developer Lobbies

Sierra Club California’s Bill Magavern speaks at August 8 press conference with Senate leaders on budget impasse and global warming.


Today I induct the new members of the California Hall of Shame. Senators Aanestad, Ackerman, Ashburn, Battin, Cogdill, Cox, Denham, Dutton, Harman, Hollingsworth, Margett, McClintock, Runner, and Wyland are holding hostage the entire budget for the state of California.

This Gang of 14 privileged white men is obstructing the funding of schools, hospitals, parks and other vital services because the oil and developer lobbies that fund their campaigns want to weaken our keystone environmental law, the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Forget about the fact that this is a policy issue 8 that should be addressed through the normal legislative process -- because of California's bizarre requirement for a 2/3 majority in each house to pass a budget, blocking the budget is just about the only leverage the Republican Caucus has, so the needs of the people who depend on state services will take a backseat to the wishes of polluters.

These 14 Republican senators (their 15th colleague, Sen. Maldonado, broke with the pack and supported the budget passed by Assembly Democrats and Republicans) want to delay for years the Environmental Quality Act's application to global warming pollution. They're clearly not listening to the people of California, who, according to last month's poll by the Public Policy Institue of California, believe in large and growing numbers that it is necessary to take immediate steps to counter the effects of global warming. Eight in 10 Californians believe global warming will be a very (54%) or somewhat serious (28%) threat to California's future economy and quality of life.

Fortunately, Senate President pro tem Don Perata, backed by the entire Senate Democratic caucus, declared today that he will staunchly defend environmental quality and refuse to flinch in the face of the hostage-taking by the Gang of 14.

Bill Magavern
Senior Representative
Sierra Club California