Schwarzenegger's pale green report card

Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to be known as the greenest governor in America. But his eco-record this year was at best "mixed," according to report cards from several of the state's major environmental groups.

Not only did he terminate the most significant air pollution bill to reach his desk--a measure to assess ship container fees that would be used to alleviate port traffic emissions--but he deep-sixed other green bills strongly promoted by eco-groups.

FIRE SAFETY

The governor vetoed AB 2447, sponsored by Assemblyman Dave Jones (D-Sacramento), which would have required a city or county to certify that new subdivisions have adequate fire protection before approving projects. It would also have required new homes to have fire safety features such as defensible space, emergency water systems and at least two escape routes.

In its report card, the Planning and Conservation League called the bill "the most meaningful measure on the governor's desk related to wildfire danger." But Schwarzenegger contended that it would be too "costly and time-consuming" for the state to verify whether fire standards were being met.

GREEN BUILDING

The governor vetoed AB 2939, sponsored by Assemblywoman Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley), which would have authorized cities and counties to adopt green building standards that exceed those adopted by the state. Schwarzenegger said localities already could adopt stricter standards, and the bill was "unnecessary and overly far-reaching."

Environmentalists also criticized the governor's signing of a bill that gives exclusive authority over green building rules to the Building Standards Commission, instead of sharing authority, as is the current practice, with bodies such as the Califoria Energy Commission and Air Resources Board that have an environmental portfolio. "The commission is a body where industry has more influence," said Matt Petersen, executive director of Global Green, an environmental group that served on the building commission's technical advisory board.

TOXIC CHEMICALS

The governor vetoed SB 775, sponsored by Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles) to increase screening and tracking of childhood lead poisoning. The bill would also have required that information about lead, which can cause retardation, be given to pregnant women.

Schwarzenegger also vetoed SB 1313, sponsored by Sen. Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro), which would have banned two chemicals, perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluoroctanic acid (PFOA), from being used in food packaging. The chemicals have been linked to cancer and developmental problems in children. But the chemical industry says the science is not definitive.

Despite his vetoes, the governor won praise for signing the nation's most comprehensive bills to require future regulation of toxics, an effort to get away from a chemical-by-chemical approach. And he also reinforced his record as an advocate for action on global warming with a bill to control sprawling development that leads to more driving, and thus to more planet-heating greenhouse gases.

--Margot Roosevelt

Photo: Gov. Schwarzenegger signs green chemistry legislation at Los Angeles' Nelson Nameplate Co. Credit: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Matthew]

On your green building comments, I hope to help clarify some of the issues:

Cities already have the authority to adopt green building standards above and beyond the state building codes, which are clearly a statewide minimum standard -- one example is Los Angeles, who just recently did it. San Francisco, and scores of other cities have also adopted local codes more stringent than Title 24. So, what was the actual purpose or need of AB 2939 if its stated intent is already happening throughout the California?

On the second issue, I think you are referring to SB 1473, which clearly does not give the Building Standards Commission "exclusive authority" over green building rules. That is a misrepresentation of what the bill does that was debated and rejected as the Legislature passed the bill. It does clarify that the BSC has the ability to adopt standards when no other agency has the authority or expertise to do so. So, for instance, the Energy Commission clearly has the authority and expertise to propose energy standards, and they will continue to do so.

Also, within the afformentioned bill is a fee that can be collected from developers to help the state educate about green building and implement the new standards. I think that is cause for celebration, or at least a quick mention.

Finally, connecting back to the first issue, SB 1473 contains the following language which further emphasizes that local jurisdictions already have the ability under current law to adopt local code more stringent codes than the statewide minimum: "It is the intent of the Legislature that this act shall not affect the ability of a city, county, or city and county to adopt changes, modifications, amendments, additions, or deletions to the California Building Standards Code, including, but not limited to, green building standards."

I hope this clarification is helpful, thanks for writing about such important issues.

[Mike]

Not only does the chemical industry maintain that the specific perfluorochemicals banned in SB 1313 should not be of concern, but Cal EPA's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment twice rejected petitions from the Environmental Working group to place these chemicals on an expedited docket for review under Prop 65, maintaining that there was not sufficent evidence to do so. A credible link to human health hazards has not been made. In the meantime, OEHHA DID place caffeine on an expedited docket.

[sheila]

why should cities have to separately legislate for long-overdue green building codes, which are primarily a state function??? the point is not that cities "don't have the freedom" to re-legislate the issue, the point is that Schwarzenegger is a Big Developer shill in Green clothing, and needs to be exposed for what he is. If he cared about the environment, he would NOT constantly weaken building codes, veto 90% of pro-planet legislation, and refuse to take a leadership role in policies like Feed In Tariffs. some of us know he is a professional liar (actor), and that his PR machine far exceeds his green machine, but the rest of the world has been fooled.

the more this emperor's new clothes are discussed, the better. he has been lousy for the state, and extremely lousy for the environment. i can't wait till he is kicked to the curb.

[bill magavern]

Another environmental success from this year is a new law requiring the manufacturers of mercury-containing thermostats to take responsibility for their safe recycling. The Mercury Thermostat Collection Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill 2347), authored by Assemblymember Ira Ruskin, will take effect next year on July 1. The sponsors of the legislation, Sierra Club California and the California Product Stewardship Council, appeared with Ruskin today in Palo Alto to discuss its enactment.

Passage of The Mercury Thermostat Collection Act will help consumers, governments and our environment. Since mercury is a potent neurotoxin, and many old thermostats contain three grams of mercury, we need to keep the waste thermostats out of our landfills. Most California consumers want to do the right thing, but until now they have not had the information or opportunity to recycle mercury thermostats.

Furthermore, this mercury thermostat recycling program, passed with the support of the major manufacturers, can provide a new model for dealing with household hazardous wastes in California. Instead of asking our cash-strapped local governments to shoulder the burden, we should require the companies that made and profited from products to take the responsibility for safely collecting and recycling them. The Legislature and Governor should use this thermostat law as a beginning, and move on to extending producer responsibility to paint, light bulbs and other household hazardous wastes.