Holding The Line Against Wildfires

Yesterday, Sen. Sam Aanestad held a one-sided “Legislative Wildfire Summit” that purported to probe the reason behind the more than 2,000 devastating wildfires that have swept California. Essentially, he explained, more logging in forest areas would lessen the fire problem – and he scolded the governor for not allowing that logging.

The Grass Valley Republican concluded his event by sending out a press release that included the following quote:

“I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore,” said Senator Aanestad. “This didn’t have to happen.”

He’s right: it didn’t have to happen – and it doesn’t have to keep happening. Smarter land-use decisions like those advocated by Sierra Club California priority bill SB 1500 (Kehoe) would give CalFire the chance to develop helpful guidance documents for local government, and offer CalFire a greater role in reviewing and commenting on General Plan Safety Elements as well as projects built in State Responsibility Areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. And SB 1617 (Kehoe), another Sierra Club California-backed bill, would provide new funds for proactive fire protection by assessing a $50 fee on the houses that are already in this fire-prone area – helping to address the problem of fire protection for homes already in unsafe areas.

But Senator Aanestad has voted against SB 1500 and SB 1617, just as he voted against a 2004 bill that increased defensible space requirements, Senate Bill 1369. Now state law, the bill requires clearing 100 feet of defensible space around homes in fire-prone areas – a move the insurance industry has credited with saving homes during wildfire.

A robust fire suppression program to protect lives and homes will always need to be a core part of California’s fire management efforts. Still, 2008’s tragic fires have reminded us all that we can’t address fire with suppression alone – we need to get smarter about how we plan and prepare for inevitable fires, and stop exacerbating the problem by building homes in harm’s way.

We best honor those who have died and suffered in these wildfires not by getting mad, but by pledging to make good planning decisions that keep families and firefighters out of harm’s way.

Please encourage your representatives to support SB 1500 and SB 1617, to protect homes, families and firefighters.

photo by Robert A. Eplett, OES California

RECENT COVERAGE:

Republicans want more aggressive forest thinning (Contra Costa Times)

Lawmakers develop letter to governor on flame prevention (Redding Record-Searchlight)

Conservationists: Fire protection not easily obtained (Chico Enterprise-Record)

Hunters, Activists, Scouts: Kids, Get Active

Sometimes, kids actually teach grown-ups about what’s important.

Sierra Club California, California Waterfowl and the Girl Scout Council of California learned that yesterday during a joint press conference and educational event.

Alarmed by statistics that show kids spend as much as a quarter of the day hooked to TV screens and computer monitors, the three groups have united with dozens of allies to back Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes’ “No Child Left Inside” Act, AB 2989. From health groups to hunters, law enforcement to local government, just about everyone interested in the well-being of California's kids has signed on to this key legislation.

The bill would fund a grant program that would pay for California’s kids – especially at-risk, underserved young people – to learn and play at outdoor educational and recreational spots. Outdoor education and recreation boosts youths’ self-esteem and improves science test scores, according to a study by state education officials. Right now, the “No Child Left Inside” Act is stuck in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Spending time outdoors provided a passageway into a world of wonders, young Girl Scouts told the gathered adults, including Assemblymember Fuentes, several reporters and representatives of California Waterfowl and Sierra Club California. Hiking, caving and adventuring gave them a passageway into a new world, the teens told their audience.

Just as the kids learned how to “play together,” the three organizations and their dozens of allies have joined forces to focus on what matters: getting kids outside.

Carl Pope On The Colbert Report

(Caution: Contains mature content)

Stephen Colbert tries to rattle Sierra Club Director Carl Pope -- as he takes a strong stand against drilling off California's coasts, and in other protected areas!

Fire Protection For The Future

As California’s brave firefighters battle nearly 1,300 blazes statewide, Sierra Club California continues to push for new laws that we hope will create a legal “fire break” for our state.

While they won’t change the state’s current fire danger, they do help shape our future safety – both by changing the way communities plan their growth in fire-prone, state-controlled areas and by holding homeowners to simple defensible-space mandates.

photo by Robert A. Eplett, OES

Join us in supporting these simple steps toward a safer future:

Assembly Bill 2447 (Jones): Requires counties to prove adequate fire protection before approving development in high-fire-risk areas, and ensure that developments are designed safely. Pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1500 (Kehoe): Requires cities and counties to notify state fire officials when they plan to build in state-protected, fire-prone areas (some 31 million acres, statewide), and determine who will provide fire protection for the new home before it's built. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1617 (Kehoe): Assesses a modest $50 fee on homeowners in fire-prone, state-protected areas (State Responsibility Areas) in order to fund fire prevention activities. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1595 (Kehoe): Updates the existing requirement for homeowners to maintain 100 feet of defensible space around their home. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Assembly Bill 2859 (Gaines): Makes it easier to clear areas around homes and communities. Pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.


The Flash Report had good things to say about SB 1500 -- proving that planning for safer homes and ensuring that state taxpayers don't subsidize the cost or rural sprawl isn't a partisan issue.

Your donation helps us promote legislation that protects wilderness and human health.

Girl Scout Testimony Heightens Outdoor Bill

Girl Scout Jenny Reich, 17, brought grins to the faces of California state senators as she testified today in support of Sierra Club California-sponsored AB 2989 (Fuentes).

Although afraid of heights, Jenny testified, she once climbed Mount Shasta with a group of fellow Girl Scouts. The experience taught her a valuable lesson, she told the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water.

“I was able to make it up the mountain, and that really helped my self-confidence grow,” she said. “I think that all kids ought to have the opportunity to get outdoors like I did.”

Studies show that getting kids outdoors not only helps their self-esteem, it also improves their science test scores. Outdoor activity could be one weapon against the rising rate of youth obesity as well.

Jenny’s enthusiasm for outdoor activity charmed the lawmakers.

“It means a lot when young people come to the Capitol,” said Senator Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, who chairs the committee. “I hope we can find the funding – private or otherwise – to support this bill.”

Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes (pictured with Jenny) worked hard on the bill to guide it through the Assembly. Now, support from the Senate is needed to get the bill to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk.

Watch What 'Desperate Housewives' Star Marcia Cross Says About Outdoor Opportunities For Youth (Video)

Learn More About Sierra Club's Efforts to "Build Bridges To The Outdoors"

Your Donation Helps Us Bring California's Youth Into The Outdoors

Big Win For Big Trees!

Some of California's largest "residents" got a special break last week.

Big trees in California's Giant Sequioa National Monument won't be logged, following timber companies' eleventh-hour withdrawal of their lawsuit -- just hours before Sierra Club's team would have clashed with them before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Sierra Club activists, including California's own Sequoia Task Force, challenged the Bush Administration's plans allowing logging within the monument. Sierra Club triumphed in federal court, successfully arguing that Bush's "Management Plan" for the monument really added up to for-profit logging. Following that victory, the Forest Service has begun crafting a new, hopefully better, plan for protecting the monument.

Logging companies appealed the case, but dropped their appeal just before the June 10 hearing. Their decision to back away from efforts to plunder California's wilderness sends a profound signal to those who would cloak outright giveaways of our national treasures in the costume of "management practices."

Sierra Club's National Director, Carl Pope, just sent a note congratulating California activists for their June 10 victory:

"After years of fighting to keep our towering sequoia trees safe from the timber industry's saws, we have finally won. Thanks to this hard-earned victory, our children and grandchildren will be able to stand in awe of these noble giants for generations to come."

Learn more about Sierra Club's historic victory here.

Your donation helps us triumph in court and in the California Legislature.

Real, Live Outdoor Education

Can virtual field trips instill a real-life sense of wonder?

It doesn't seem possible. But a story in today's Sacramento Bee, "Schools substituting field trips with video links," shows schools must settle for video-conference field trips.

That's exactly why California's kids need Assembly Bill 2989. (Felipe Fuentes). Sponsored by Sierra Club California, bill would award grants for outdoor education and recreational opportunities for youth. The Outdoor Environmental Education and Recreation Program it creates would help California kids explore rivers, forests and streams in real life - not virtual reality.

Kids don't need more time in front of an electronic screen. They're already six times more likely to play a video game than to ride a bike. Fewer than 15 percent of them participate in an outdoor education and recreation program.

Young minds expand outdoors. At-risk children who participated in outdoor education programs upped their science test scores by 27 percent, improved their conflict resolution and problem-solving skills and went back to school with better self-esteem and motivation to learn, according to a 2005 California Department of Education study.

AB 2989 will open doors for children, and introduce them to California's natural wonders. Tell your Assemblymember you support this key measure.

Make The May Revise More Sustainable

Every May, California's governors release a "May Revise," a revamped version of the budget that reflects the latest budget projections.

This May, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed budget reminds us of the importance of all types of sustainability.

In his May Revise, the governor proposed several one-time fixes, including borrowing money from the Public Transit Fund.

That brand of unsustainable borrowing could keep Californians from enjoying safe, clean public transportation. Increasing public transit ridership improves air quality – and lowers commuters’ gas costs.

The May Revise offers no sustainable source of funding for AB 32, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act. True solutions to our state’s global warming emissions will emerge when polluters pay for the cost of cleaning up the emissions they create.We’d also like to see the Resources Agency gain a more permanent source of funding, since it’s one of the first agencies to suffer the pinch of budget cuts.

Many bright ideas shine through the smog of today’s tight fiscal times. For example, the governor’s revised budget provides $50 million to help low-income truckers meet state diesel standards early. And our state parks will stay open, following tremendous pressure from outdoors-loving Californians.

Sierra Club California will sustain its efforts to negotiate a budget that protects our air, water, natural resources and communities.

Our advocates comment on the specifics of the May Revise

See what the governor had to say about the May Revise

Stop the Toll Road --- AGAIN!

Not again! The Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) wants to revive their plan to build a toll road that will destroy 60 percent of San Onofre State Park. And this time, they're trying to get the federal government on their side.

The TCA has asked the U.S. Secretary of Commerce to override the California Coastal Commission's NO vote regarding the Foothill-South Toll Road. In a shocking testament to TCA's consistent and repeated failure to address the public's concerns regarding this toll road, they have urged the Department of Commerce to deny the public an opportunity to participate in a hearing on the appeal.

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez is hearing from special interest groups and the TCA's lobbyists. Now he needs to hear from you. Don't let the Bush Administration overrule the California Coastal Commission!

Find out more -- and get a sample letter to send -- from Sierra Club's Friends of the Foothills.

--- OR ---

Draft your own letter, email or fax that lets Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez know you want him to save one of California's most popular and striking state parks.

Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez
Office of the Secretary
Mailstop 61
U.S. Department of Commerce
14th & Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20230

Phone:
202-482-2000

Email:
E-mail Secretary Gutierrez

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.

Getting Kids Outdoors

A Sierra Club California-sponsored bill would connect at-risk youth with nature by funding healthy, educational outdoor and recreation programs run by schools and community organizations.

Assembly Bill 2989 by Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes passed with strong support in the Assembly’s Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee today. AB 2989 promotes a commitment to physically active lifestyles by creating a permanent program within the Department of Parks and Recreation that would award grants for outdoor education and recreational opportunities for youth.

“It’s all about getting kids outdoors,” said Jim Metropulos, Senior Advocate for Sierra Club California. “Many communities have limited or no access to parks and other safe outdoor recreational opportunities for children to engage in physical activities.”

Rising cases of childhood diabetes and obesity make outdoor recreation and education a health care need.

At-risk children who participated in outdoor education programs upped their science test scores by 27 percent, improved their conflict resolution and problem-solving skills and went back to school with better self-esteem and motivation to learn, according to a 2005 California Department of Education study. Yet, fewer than 15 percent of youth participate in an outdoor education and recreation program. And an even smaller fraction of urban, lower-income or ethnically diverse youth have access to parks, rivers or forests.

Sadly, this year’s bad budget situation makes competition for state funds a tough, uphill hike. Although the measure relies mostly on private donations and funding from the Environmental License Plate Fund, it still faces obstacles getting out of the Assembly.

Tell the California Legislature you think getting kids outside is a worthwhile investment.

Please write, call or fax Assemblyman Mark Leno, who heads the Assembly Appropriations Committee.


Assemblyman Mark Leno
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA
94249-0013
Phone (916) 319-2013
Fax (916) 319-2113

Sierra Club California 2008 Priority Bills

Smart Growth/Global Warming. SB 375 (Steinberg) would require certain regional transportation plans to include a sustainable communities strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Would provide incentives for more compact development, reduced driving, greater housing choices and conservation of farmland and habitat.

Clean Energy. SB 411 (Simitian and Perata) would require investor-owned utilities to meet a Renewables Portfolio Standard of at least 33 percent by 2020.

Cleaner Air at Ports. SB 974 (Lowenthal) would charge containers shipped through the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland in order to raise money for air quality and transportation improvements.

Land Use/Fire Protection. SB 1500 (Kehoe) would allow the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to require local governments to guarantee adequate structural fire protection before approving development in high-fire-hazard State Responsibility Areas.

Fire Protection. SB 1617 (Kehoe) would establish a fair and equitable new fee on homes in State Responsibility Areas to fund some of the costs of their fire protection. The fee would be tiered to give incentives for reducing fire risks, and would also fund proactive prevention activities.

Safer Products. AB 1879 (Feuer and Huffman) would give the Department of Toxic Substances Control the authority to establish safeguards to protect people and the environment from consumer products containing known toxins like lead, mercury and arsenic.

Recycling Mercury Thermostats. AB 2347 (Ruskin) would require manufacturers to establish a program for recycling thermostats containing mercury, a potent neurotoxin.

Water Conservation. AB 2175 (Laird and Feuer) would establish numeric water savings targets for urban and agricultural water use and require a 20% reduction in statewide urban per capita water use by 2020.

Outdoor Education. AB 2989 (Fuentes) would create a permanent program in the Department of Parks and Recreation that would award grants to schools and non-profit groups that provide outdoor education and recreational opportunities for youth.

Where have all the salmon gone...

It appears that the relatively healthy stocks of Central Valley fall run chinook are in serious trouble. Today's Sac Bee has the story:

The Sacramento River's fall chinook salmon population is headed for a collapse, according to new federal data, threatening the upcoming commercial and recreational fishing season on one of the country's most important runs.

The fall chinook run in the Central Valley has long been touted as a conservation success story. As many other species declined, fall salmon spawning in the Sacramento River and its tributaries held reliably above 200,000 fish for 15 years.

But in fall 2007, the number of spawners suddenly fell to just 90,414 fish, the second-lowest total since 1973. That includes wild and hatchery-raised fish.

The Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) found two areas of particularly bad news. First, the return of mature Sacramento river chinook failed to meet conservation targets for the first time in 15 years. Second, the returns of younger "jack" salmon (which return to spawn when they are two years old rather then the normal three) were at a record low 2,000 fish, compared to a long-term average of 40,000. This is an ominous indicator for next year's run.

The collapse of these previously solid stocks have PFMC fisheries experts very worried:

Last week scientists questioned whether returns in 2008 could meet the conservation objective even without any commercial or recreational salmon fishing where these fish are found. If returns do not meet the conservation objective, an emergency rule from National Marine Fisheries Service may be required to allow any fisheries.

The reasons for the decline are not entirely clear - both wild salmon and hatchery fish appear to be affected, and the cause is likely related to ocean conditions.

The economic implications for fishermen (and those who love to eat wild salmon) are dire. Sacramento chinook have historically been the "workhorse" salmon run, providing much of the commercial catch. If the population has crashed as severely as it appears, the fishing season next year will be substantially restricted.

The PFMS will meet in Sacramento on March 8-14 to discuss management options, followed by public comment and hearings up the coast. It certainly appears that it will be a painful decision making process.

More information is available at the Pacific Fisheries Management Council web site, including an informative press release.

Sierra Club California, Surfrider State Park Foundation and others, Urge Protection of San Onofre State Beach from the Foothill South-Toll Road

Sacramento, CA – On January 22, 2008, a coalition including environmental groups, campers and surfers spoke out against Governor Schwarzenegger’s recent decision to support a six-lane, 16-mile toll road extension through San Onofre State Beach in Northern San Diego County. Scattered on the capitol lawn were 161 little red tents representing campsites that would likely be abandoned due to the harm the toll road would have on the San Mateo Campground.

“Approval of the Foothill-South Toll Road through San Onofre State Beach would set a dangerous precedent and put all our parks at greater risk,” said Elizabeth Goldstein, President of the California State Parks Foundation. “As California becomes more and more crowded, we are at a turning point. It is our generation that will decide whether state parks are merely warehouses for future development projects or if the lands we cherish will be protected for future generations to enjoy.”

“Because we live in San Bernardino, far from the coast, being able to camp at such a lovely campground near the beach is very important to us,” added Deborah Fry, a teacher whose family camps at the San Mateo Campground several times a year. “Camping together brings my family closer and creates memories that will last a lifetime.”

The protection of San Onofre State Beach from the Foothill South Toll Road is not just an issue of local concern but one of statewide significance as well. If they can put a road through San Onofre, it will set a dangerous precedent and put all of our parks at greater risk. As California becomes more and more crowded we are at a turning point. “Will our parks and natural spaces remain open protected for future generations to enjoy or will they be seen as just warehouses, set aside for future development?” said Jim Metropulos, Legislative Representative for Sierra Club California “Parks should not be looked at as the path of least resistence for developers proposing bad projects."

Early next month, the California Coastal Commission will decide if the Foothill South-Toll Road is compliant with California’s Coastal Act. Last year, the Coastal Commission staff released a 236-page report stating the road violates the Coastal Act in substantive and unmitigable ways. The Coastal Commission will make a decision regarding the toll road extension when they meet on February 6^th in Oceanside.

The proposed Foothill South-Toll Road has long been a source of contention between environmentalists, campers and local citizens and toll road proponents. Environmentalists assert that the road will not significantly reduce the county’s traffic problems and construction of a road through a state park will set a dangerous precedent. The proposed extension would connect the current portions of the Foothill South Toll Road to the I-5 freeway at the Orange County/San Diego border cutting through San Onofre State Beach, the San Mateo Campground and the San Mateo Watershed causing the abandonment of nearly 60% of the park.

Not only would the road ruin San Mateo Campground, but Surfrider Foundation is also concerned the toll road will pollute the San Mateo Creek and alter the natural flow of sediment and cobbles that help form the waves at Trestles. “Why risk ruining a pristine watershed, impeccable water quality, and a perfect wave for a toll road?" asks Stefanie Sekich, Save Trestles Campaign Coordinator for Surfrider Foundation.

From the California Progressive Report: "Who Wants to Camp Under a Toll Road? A Bad Idea for California’s Parks"

From Capitol Weekly: "Coalition rises to protect San Onofre State Beach"

Schwarzenegger Proposes to Close 48 State Parks & Cut Lifeguards at 14 State Beaches

Last week Governor Schwarzenegger proposed cutting $13.3 million from the Department of Parks and Recreation general fund budget in 2008-09, in attempt to close the huge $14 billion state deficit. This reduction would mean the closure of 48 state parks out of 278 existing parks and reduce the number of lifeguards at 14 state beaches in Orange, San Diego and Santa Cruz Counties. The department would also eliminate 136 permanent employees that work in the state park system, including park rangers, maintenance workers, scientists and tour guides.

Sierra Club California strongly opposes any effort to close our state parks. These cuts would be devastating to the millions of Californians who rely on their state parks for recreation, educational opportunities and quiet enjoyment of nature.

Shutting down state parks is out of touch with the priorities of Californians. The 48 parks slated for closure represent some of the most significant cultural, historic, and natural resources in the state. State parks slated for closure include Henry Coe near Morgan Hill, Portola Redwoods in San Mateo County, Sutter’s Fort Historic Park in Sacramento, Del Norte Redwoods near the Oregon Border, Pio Pico in Whittier, and Great Valley Grasslands in Merced.

The 14 state beaches that are slated to have lifeguards removed from their shores are some of the most popular state beaches in California. Proposing that California’s state beaches can go through the summer without adequate lifeguard staffing is a dangerous proposal that threatens the health and safety of Californians. Lifeguards would be reduced at Silver Strand State Beach in San Diego, San Clemente State Beach in Orange County, Sunset State Beach south of Santa Cruz and other locations.

Click here for a list of proposed park closures and lifeguard reductions.

We believe that the Governor’s proposal is the wrong way to go about balancing the state’s budget. The total reductions from the state parks budget would only eliminate one-tenth of one percent of the state deficit.

Sierra Club California is contacting legislators and working with them to oppose the closure of any state parks during the budget process. Soon, we will be asking you to contact your legislators and Governor Schwarzenegger to tell them to keep all of California’s state parks open for everyone.

Jim Metropulos
Sierra Club California

Victory at Long Last for Jackson State Forest!!!

After a seemingly endless saga of court cases, environmental documents and hearings spanning the past eight years, the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection today finally approved a new and improved management plan for Jackson State Forest. Sierra Club has been following this issue since 1996, has been intimately involved with this process, and is very pleased with the outcome.

At nearly 50,000 acres, Jackson State Forest in Mendocino County is California’s largest state-owned forest, and is by far the largest public redwood forest between San Francisco Bay and Humboldt County.

A working group of industry and enviro reps in Mendocino County worked for 18 months to craft consensus recommendations aimed at resolving much of the ongoing controversy surrounding the management of Jackson Forest. The Board, recognizing a historic level of agreement between disparate interest groups, followed nearly all of these recommendations.

The Board of Forestry adopted the new approach to Jackson on an 8-1 vote, with Tom Walz, the representative from Sierra Pacific Industries, opposing all aspects of this historic agreement. We wish we were surprised… On the other hand, we commend Board members David Nawi and Pam Giacomini who comprised the Jackson Forest Sub-committee and put endless hours into this effort over the past few years.

Major kudos need to go to Vince Taylor at the Campaign to Restore Jackson State Forest for his years of work to bring the mis-management of Jackson Forest to the attention of the courts and the public. Check their website Thursday for a more extensive update. We have worked closely over the past several years both at the Board of Forestry and in the Legislature to fundamentally change the management direction at Jackson, and we’ve finally cleared a historic hurdle.

Victories in the realm of state-regulated forestry are few and far between, but this is clearly significant progress on a long-festering issue. Here’s to more successes in the near future.

Paul Mason & Kathy Bailey
Sierra Club California

State of the State Address Misses Opportunities

While we had hoped that Governor Schwarzenegger would use the State of the State to roll out important new programs regarding green chemistry and better fire planning, the speech was largely devoid of details.

As expected, the Governor led with last Fall’s tragic Southern California wildfires. One of the key lessons from those fires is that we need to get smarter about how and where we build. If local governments continue to approve building projects in areas where the state is expected to provide fire protection, costs and loss of life will continue to increase. Rather than describing a vision of proactive planning to protect lives as well as wildlands, the Governor focused exclusively on thanking the heroes. We join in lauding the Californians who stepped up during the crisis, but we were hoping for more proactive planning to prevent future crises.

Unfortunately, Schwarzenegger continues to push for the building of more expensive dams as a solution to California's water problems. The Governor's insistence on new dams has lead to a stalemate with the Legislature, which favors investments in water conservation, water recycling and groundwater cleanup. We hope that the Governor will work with the Legislature on solutions to our state's water problems that do not involve new dams.

On the bright side, environmentalists are always pleased to hear the Governator repeat his promise to sue the Bush Administration as often as necessary to obtain the waiver necessary for California’s clean-car standards to take effect.

Environmentalists who had heard that new initiatives to address toxins in consumer products or the plastics choking our oceans might appear in the State of the State speech were disappointed, as Schwarzenegger missed an opportunity to put those problems high on his agenda. The Governor did make a general promise to put forward “many” legislative proposals on energy and the environment, but offered no specifics as to what they may be. (During his four-plus years in office, Schwarzenegger has so far made very few legislative proposals of his own, preferring to respond to the bills initiated by legislators.)

The Governor’s proposal for a Strategic Growth Council has the admirable purpose of bringing together his administration’s economic development programs with its environmental sustainability concerns; during this and previous administrations, growth and sustainability have too often been considered in isolation from each other. But the administration needs to provide more details on how this council will allocate bond funds, and needs to make sure that it respects the wishes of the voters who approved the bonds and that it works with the Legislature on appropriating the money.

2007 Legislative Session Wraps Up With Some Progress, But on Many Key Issues It’s “Wait ‘til Next Year”

After a highly productive session in the 2006 election year established key new safeguards for the global climate and human health, this year has seen far fewer major new laws enacted to protect California’s environment. Although some key measures found success, on many vital issues our elected officials seem to be echoing the eternal refrain of Chicago Cubs fans: “Wait ‘til next year.”

Bright spots included flood protection, clean air, and endangered species protection. A package of bills negotiated by the Legislature and Governor finally starts to bring some sense to development in flood-prone areas. SB 5 (Machado) requires the state to prepare a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan by 2012. AB 5 (Wolk) reforms, restructures and renames the state Reclamation Board, which is the agency in charge of flood protection in the Central Valley. AB 70 (Jones) would provide for limited shared contribution between the state and local governments when local governments approve new developments in previously undeveloped areas that can increase property damages resulting from a flood for which the state is liable.

The Healthy Heart and Lung Act, AB 233 (Jones), sponsored by Sierra Club California and American Lung Association of California, will improve enforcement of rules that limit toxic diesel emissions, and SB 719 (Machado) will, at long last, reform the San Joaquin Valley’s lackluster Air Pollution Control District by adding expertise and urban representation. AB 118 (Núñez) will raise about $150 million annually for clean fuel and clean air programs.

Governor Schwarzenegger surprised many observers by signing AB 821 (Nava) to require the use of non-lead bullets when hunting big game within the range of the endangered California condor. This state icon is suffering from lead poisoning, because the birds eat bullet fragments when scavenging carcasses.

Speaking of poisons, the Governor has opened a Green Chemistry Initiative to reduce human exposure to toxic chemicals, most of which currently come into our homes and workplaces without being required to demonstrate safety. Legislation to reduce toxic threats fared poorly this year on the whole, but Schwarzenegger’s signing of the Toxic Toys bill, AB 1108 (Ma), will invigorate the Green Chemistry process by keeping hazardous substances away from the youngest Californians. The bill bans pthalates, a plastic softener, from products meant for infants and toddlers.

Unfortunately, the Governor vetoed important bills to make our buildings and fuels greener. AB 888 (Lieu) would have set green building standards for commercial buildings, starting in 2013. AB 1058 (Laird) would have set green building standards for new residential construction, and AB 35 (Ruskin) would have required CAL-EPA to set sustainable building standards for the construction and renovation of state buildings. SB 210 (Kehoe) would have required the adoption of a low-carbon fuel standard by 2010 that achieved at least a 10 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and maintained or improved upon air quality benefits gained by current gasoline and diesel fuel standards.

The Legislature deferred until next year the vital tasks of spurring smart growth, requiring utilities to generate more power from renewables, and cleaning up the filthy air at the mega-ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland. Sierra Club California and our allies had pushed the Legislature to act in these vital areas, but many key bills stalled toward the end of session due to opposition from powerful special interests. SB 974 (Lowenthal), the Clean Ports bill, was deferred until January at the request of Governor Schwarzenegger. Both SB 375 (Steinberg), which seeks to reduce vehicular emissions through smarter land use patterns, and SB 411 (Simitian), which would require utilities to generate 33% of their power from renewable sources, failed to clear the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and AB 558 (Feuer), which would have generated information on the use of toxic chemicals, died by a close vote of the Senate Appropriations panel.

The Legislature’s failure to pass these important bills, along with the Governor’s vetoes of some of the bills passed by lawmakers, leave substantial unfinished business to be taken up next year. Since 2008 is an election year, and our elected officials know that protecting our health and ecology is very popular with voters, we have reason to expect more progress next year.

By Bill Magavern

2007 Legislative Session Wraps Up With Some Progress On Energy, Air And Flood Protection, But Puts Off Important Work On Land Use, Ports And Toxics

The California Legislature has sent to the Governor some important bills to make our buildings and fuels greener, save condors and guard against floods, but deferred until next year the vital tasks of spurring smart growth, requiring utilities to generate more power from renewables, reducing toxic chemical hazards and cleaning up the filthy air at the mega-ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland.

Bright spots of the 2007 session for the environmental cause included:

• Cleaner Fuels: SB 210 (Kehoe) would require the adoption of a low-carbon fuel standard by 2010 that achieves at least a 10 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and maintains or improves upon air quality benefits gained by current gasoline and diesel fuel standards; AB 118 (Núñez) would raise about $150 million annually for clean fuel and clean air programs.

• Greener Buildings: AB 888 (Lieu) would set green building standards for commercial buildings, starting in 2013. AB 1058 (Laird) would set green building standards for new residential construction. AB 35 (Ruskin) would require CAL-EPA to set sustainable building standards for the construction and renovation of state buildings. AB 1109 (Huffman) would require the adoption of energy efficiency standards for all general purpose lights.

• Flood Protection: SB 5 (Machado) would require the state to prepare a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan by 2012. AB 5 (Wolk) would reform, restructure and rename the state Reclamation Board, which is the agency in charge of flood protection in the Central Valley. AB 70 (Jones) would provide for limited shared contribution between the state and local governments when local governments approve new developments in previously undeveloped areas, and thereby increase property damages resulting from a flood for which the state is liable.

• Clean Air: The Healthy Heart and Lung Act, AB 233 (Jones), sponsored by Sierra Club California and American Lung Association of California, would improve enforcement of rules that limit toxic diesel emissions; SB 719 (Machado) would reform the San Joaquin Valley’s lackluster Air Pollution Control District by adding expertise and urban representation.

• Endangered Species: The endangered California Condor is suffering from lead poisoning, because the birds eat bullet fragments when scavenging carcasses. AB 821 (Nava) would require the use of non-lead bullets when hunting big game within the range of the condor.

We are now asking Governor Schwarzenegger to sign these and other green bills. He has until October 14 to sign or veto the measures on his desk.

Sierra Club California and our allies had pushed the Legislature to act in other vital areas, but many key bills stalled toward the end of session due to opposition from powerful special interests. SB 974 (Lowenthal), the Clean Ports bill, was deferred until January at the request of Governor Schwarzenegger. Both SB 375 (Steinberg), which seeks to reduce vehicular emissions through smarter land use patterns, and SB 411 (Simitian), which would require utilities to generate 33% of their power from renewable sources, failed to clear the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and AB 558 (Feuer), which would have generated information on the use of toxic chemicals, died by a close vote of the Senate Appropriations panel. The Legislature’s failure to pass these important bills leaves substantial unfinished business to be taken up next year.