Governor Schwarzenegger and the environment - the first year

How did Arnold do on environmental bills in 2004?

He came into office saying, "the environment? That will be no problem for me," or something to that effect. He went on to say he believes that a strong economy and healthy environment are not in conflict - nice words to hear from a Republican leader.

When a group of representatives from the environmental community finally got to meet with him on Aug. 11, he said "I am your friend." (How many groups he has said that to?) - He was a good listener as the various environmental advocates raised a variety of issues with him. On a few, he spoke out and agreed that these items should be priorities for the state.

Meanwhile, since he took office, he has been piling up huge corporate contributions. He has appointed a very mixed bag of people to high posts that affect the environment, and has come out in support of Proposition 64, which we strongly oppose. In the budget last summer, he failed to get more fees from polluters. He pushed the Hearst Ranch deal through the state agencies. Recently, it has been revealed that his Department of Finance and the Public Works Board are holding up purchases of any new park land, even though the state has voter-approved bond money for this purpose. So, his intentions may be good, but his actions are not revealing him to be very "green".

Another measure of how he is doing could be how much of his "Environmental Action Plan" he is implementing. This plan was devised when he was campaigning for governor, the main author being Terry Tamminen, now secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency.

The governor has been very busy this year with the budget, the March election (big bond measure), and worker's-comp reform, and so he didn't get far into the environmental issues. And to be fair, his action plan was not intended to be finished in a year. We can look for him to introduce a major housing and land-use initiative in his State of the State address in January. The hydrogen highway, one of his campaign promises, is not going away. Our hope is that he will become more of a leader next year, and make it "safe" for Republicans to support environmental bills.

By the end of August, the legislature had put a number of environmental bills on his desk for signature. None of these were blockbusters, but there were some significant measures that we wanted him to sign. The result? A mixed record. As far as legislation is concerned, his first year was better than any recent Republican governor, but not as good as, say, Gray Davis' first years.

So - the Sierra Club lobbying team in Sacramento will continue to work with his administration, pushing him to be true to his Environmental Action Plan, to expand that Plan, and to bring his party along on environmental issues. It won't be easy, given his fundraising proclivities, the pressure from his party, and the philosophy of some of his key advisors. But, as David Brower said, "Politicians are like weather vanes; our job is to make the wind blow." We are pursing our lips.

Signatures and vetoes

Below is a summary of key bills that the Club supported and that reached the governor's desk.

AB 923 (Firebaugh) raises significant new money for the "Carl Moyer program", which sets up a fund to mitigate the air-pollution impacts of diesel engines. SIGNED.

AB 2042 (Lowenthal) would have prohibited air pollution at the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles from exceeding baseline levels. VETOED.

AB 2683 (Lieber) repeals the 30-year rolling exemption that applies to the Smog Check and Smog Check II programs; therefore, cars built after 1974 will never be exempt from smog regulations. SIGNED.

SB 1478 (Sher) would have made numerous changes to the California Renewable Portfolio Standards Program and the Renewable Energy Program. VETOED.

SB 1648 (Chesbro - Sierra Club California was a sponsor) would have reformed the management of Jackson Demonstration State Forest in Mendocino County. VETOED.

SB 1369 (Kuehl - Sierra Club California was a sponsor) increases the requirement for defensible space from 30 feet to 100 feet in the most fire-prone areas of the state. SIGNED.

SB 391 (Florez) requires the perpetrators of pesticide-drift poisonings to compensate the victims. SIGNED.

AB 338 (Levine) would have required Caltrans to use increasing levels of rubberized-asphalt concrete made from recycled tires. VETOED.

AB 1369 (Pavley - Sierra Club California was a sponsor) bans sale of mercury-added thermostats for residential and commercial use after Jan. 1, 2006. SIGNED.

AB 2901 (Pavley) requires the sellers of cell phones to take them back from consumers for recycling. SIGNED.

AB 2093 (Nakano), AB 2672 (Simitian), and AB 471 (Simitian) tighten up regulations on air and water emissions from cruise ships entering state waters. SIGNED - all three.

AB 2055 (Wolk) would have strengthened the open-space element in general plans, including emphasis on agriculture, urban parks, and habitat issues. VETOED.

AB 2476 (Wolk) would have required the Delta Protection Commission to look at land-use impacts on key resource areas. VETOED.

AB 2572 (Kehoe - Sierra Club California was a sponsor) requires water meters to be installed in Central Valley cities not covered by last year's bill, including the city of Sacramento. SIGNED.

SB 1459 (Alpert) restricts bottom trawling in state waters. SIGNED.

AB 2600 (Laird and Leslie) creates the Sierra Nevada Conservancy. SIGNED.

Bill Allayaud, state director, Sierra Club California

Sign up to receive our web-based legislative action alerts at http://cal-legalert.sierraclubaction.org