Is Schwarzenegger reneging on curbing sprawl?

When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the nation's first law a few weeks ago to cut global warming emissions from sprawl development and transportation, he made major compromises with the state's powerful building interests, causing several key environmental groups to withdraw their support.  Under Senate Bill 375, certain projects, if included in regional climate plans, were exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a law requiring a detailed review of environmental consequences.

Now, according to sources in the state legislature, the Schwarzenegger administration is proposing to waive all greenhouse gas and pollution restrictions for large transportation and flood projects as part of the "economic stimulus" package proposed for the legislature's special session, convened last week.

Under the administration's proposal, any transportation project funded "in whole or in part" with bond funds would be exempt from comprehensive environmental reviews. That would include most new roads and freeway expansions, which will facilitate millions of new car and truck trips, adding tens of thousands of tons of planet-warming carbon dioxide and other pollutants to the atmosphere.

The proposed exemptions have shocked environmentalists, concerned by the fact that 38% of the state's global warming emissions come from transportation, much of it from the rapid growth of driving. The state has committed to reducing its greenhouse gas pollution by 15% below today's level in the next 12 years -- a goal that policymakers say will require curbing sprawl.

But  builders want the exemptions so they won't be subject to environmental lawsuits. Recently, the state's transportation agency, Caltrans, lost a lawsuit challenging a major east/west highway into the Sierras because it failed to consider resulting greenhouse gas emissions.

-- Margot Roosevelt

Comments

[sheila]

"The proposed exemptions have shocked environmentalists..."

that is hilarious. maybe "environmentalists" need to stop reading Mr Shwarzenegger's press releases and start reading his RECORD. nothing even remotely shocking about his utter contempt for the environment, his unwavering allegiance to his paymasters in Big Energy and Big Development, and his total failure to enact any meaningful reform, while vetoing everything environmentally sound that has passed our legislature, and while boasting non-stop about his green credentials. he is the ultimate trojan horse, so how long are these idiots going to keep believing him when he puts on his "green costume" and trots out the same old sound bytes?

sorry, folks. this guy has done more to BLOCK environmental progress than anyone else in the state. because he PRETENDS he's all for it then he sabotages it. it's called acting, and that's what you get when you hire a professional liar.

[Amy Kober]

Jettisoning clean air and clean water protections is not the way to boost the economy. It will take the state backward, and it will end up costing the state more money in the long run.

What we should be doing is investing in smart solutions like green infrastructure. Green infrastructure works with nature to supply clean water, reduce polluted runoff, stop sewer overflows, and protect communities from floods.

It creates good jobs in many sectors, including plumbing, landscaping, engineering, building, and design. Green solutions also support supply chains and the jobs connected with manufacturing of materials from rain barrels to permeable pavement.

In this time of economic instability and soaring deficits, it is vital that we invest in solutions that accomplish more and solve a broader range of problems for less money.

We will make a terrible mistake if we fall back on old 19th and 20th century approaches to managing our environment. We must use this transformational movement to embrace new, green 21st century solutions that help both the economy and our environment.

[Alex Colovic]

Maybe Gov. Schwarzenegger should work on preventing forest fires in his home state first.
How much did 1.5M acres burned so far this year in=2 0CA contribute to green house gas emissions?
This constant smoke cloud has probably been around the world a few times by now.
A fraction of the $800M CA spent to fight fires could have been spent more wisely by working year round to create fire breaks, remove dead trees and shrubs and enforce local fire regulations. Instead he would rather "pose" at each large fire and act as he will single handedly "terminate" these fires. Then he goes and speaks about our neighbors not doing the right thing. Let's get the Gov. to lead the world by example and not with hot air!