Posted on 07/25/2007 4:57:49 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Not a single Republican voted for California's landmark global warming law when the state Senate passed it last year.
Today, the minority party is taking advantage of the law by using it as leverage during negotiations on the overdue state budget.
Republicans are upset that Attorney General Jerry Brown, a Democrat, has told at least a dozen cities and counties that they must offset the increased greenhouse gas emissions that will be a byproduct of future growth. Republicans say that will hurt cities' and counties' transportation and housing plans, and want language in the state budget to protect local governments from what they see as Brown's overly aggressive tactics.
The attorney general already has sued one Southern California county over the matter.
"The hurdle that's being put forward by the attorney general's lawsuits, we think, is something that needs to be addressed," said Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster.
The land-use spat has emerged as one of the most unexpected and divisive points stalling passage of California's $145 billion spending plan, which lawmakers were supposed to approve in mid-June. Democrats and environmentalists fear that what Republicans really want to achieve through the budget process is a way to weaken long-standing environmental checks on local development.
In April, Brown sued San Bernardino County - geographically the nation's largest county - for adopting a 25-year land-use plan that he said failed to address climate change and air pollution.
He has argued the same point in letters challenging housing developments in San Jose and in Yuba County, as well as regional transportation plans in Fresno, Sacramento, San Diego and Kern counties.
Brown warned the city of Richmond and Contra Costa County, both in the San Francisco Bay area, that planned refinery expansions by Chevron Corp. and Conoco Phillips would emit greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
The dispute that surfaced last week when budget negotiations broke down is centered on a 1970 state environmental statute. Republicans question whether Brown can use the California Environmental Quality Act to demand that local governments offset greenhouse gas emissions related to future growth at the same time state regulators work to implement California's 2006 global warming law.
That law, AB32, seeks to roll back greenhouse gas emissions about 20 percent by 2025.
Republicans have argued that cities and counties are being asked to make land-use decisions years before the California Air Resources Board writes the regulations to implement the global warming law.
Democrats and environmental groups describe what Republicans want as much broader. They view the Republican proposal as an attempt to exempt developers and oil companies from offsetting their potential carbon emissions.
"What this is about is a blatant attempt to blackmail the Legislature into accepting a wish list from the development and oil-and-gas industry," said Kassie Siegel, director of climate programs at the Phoenix, Ariz.,-based Center for Biological Diversity.
If enacted, the Republicans' proposal would stop any ongoing review of greenhouse gas emissions under the California Environmental Quality Act until Jan. 1, 2012, said Siegel, of Joshua Tree.
California's business community for years has sought relief from the state's environmental rules. It now seeks to suspend the latest trend - begun as early as 2001 but elevated by the attorney general's actions - of examining greenhouse gases as a condition of development.
In a June 21 letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a coalition of businesses representing the building, manufacturing and oil industries asked for "urgent legislative action" to counter what it described as "premature and unwarranted" environmental lawsuits. It further said the legal action was delaying new housing construction, transportation and oil-refining projects.
"Lead agencies under CEQA have been given no such authority, nor do they have the expertise to manage the complexity of the issue," the letter stated.
State guidelines that accompany the California Environmental Quality Act also do not reference climate change among the environmental impacts that should be analyzed under the law, said DeAnn Baker, a legislative representative for the California State Association of Counties.
"It's a matter of the cart before the horse," Baker said. "Until we have specific greenhouse gas targets and methods, it's difficult to envision how to address it."
Brown, the former governor, is following his predecessor's action on the issue.
He said local governments do not need to wait for rules under California's new global warming law. Rather, they can take steps now to lessen the effects that future developments and construction might have on global climate change, he said.
Marin and Orange counties, for example, did so before the state global warming law was enacted, Brown said. In addition, Democrats included a provision in the global warming law explicitly stating that it must not interfere with other state efforts to adopt and implement greenhouse gas emission-reduction measures.
"There's no incompatibility here," Brown said. "It's very difficult to reduce greenhouse gases, and we have to start now."
State Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said there might be room to compromise.
Democrats have offered to support a moratorium on any lawsuits related to last year's global warming law. It would not apply to Brown's lawsuit against San Bernardino County or his written requests to other local governments.
But Steinberg said Democrats refuse to tinker with other environmental laws, including the 36-year-old environmental quality act.
"It's one thing to say, 'Let's wait for AB32.' It's another to say, 'Let's weaken the fundamental CEQA law,'" Steinberg said. "Democrats believe that CEQA and it's relationship to climate change is essential."
Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown at it again.
Meadow Muffin
The California Assembly is full of morons equal to the US Congress. God help us all!
Evidently to get elected to ANY public office you first have to be an idiot, a proven idiot...
Meadow Muffin
He said local governments do not need to wait for rules under California’s new global warming law. Rather, they can take steps now to lessen the effects that future developments and construction might have on global climate change, he said.
Ah, take action when there are no regulations and take steps now to lessen the effects that future development “might have”.
So if you take action now that could end up being contrary to future regulations and it turns out that future development has different effects than what thought now, you get sued. If you don’t do anything, you get sued.
Seems there is only one definite outcome in this scenario: you’re gonna get sued! Wonder if some counties have considered secession.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
You left off a few of the current qualifications for public office:
Corrupt
Ego maniac
Power hungry
Live in a dream world
Think of yourself as Royalty
Anti-America
Anti-military
Narcissistic
I’m sure you can add a few more.
I could have sworn they called this "bi-partisan" legislation. How could that be? LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.