Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 3.A 08/02/2010`~ ~ L U~t a '~ I85$ DATE TO: FROM August 2, 2010 fl y-evidc'' ItP,vw #3.~1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council John C. Brown, City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution Opposing Proposition 23 -The California Jobs Ballot Initiative to Suspend the Clean Energy and Air Pollution Control Standards of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution Opposing Proposition 23 - the California Jobs Ballot: Initiative to Suspend the Clean Energy and Air Pollution Control Standards of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32). BACKGROUND Assembly Bi1132, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires that California's greenhouse .gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. A Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan was approved by the California Air Resource Board in December of 2008 that holds polluters accountable'fortbeir emissions and outlines a plan to reduce California's carbon footprint by 15%. The implementation of the plan will improve, the environment, reduce dependence on oil, diversify energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health. DISCUSSION Assemblyman Dan Logue authored a ballot measure titled `California Jobs Initiative' that will be on the November 2010 ballot. This measure qualified for the November ballot on June 22, 2010 and is now called Proposition 23 (attached). Proposition 23 requests that:the regulations established in AB32 and the subsequent Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan be suspended until the California unemployment rate is 5.5% or lower for four consecutive quarters. A~uments in Favor of the Ballot Initiative Supporters of the measure claim that approximately one million California jobs would be lost because, manufacturers would be forced to move out of state or use foreign labor to circumvent the regulations established in the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. They also claim that the. State already proposes to cut personnel in numerous State environmental regulatory agencies, and thatimplementing and monitoring compliance with AB32 could cause the State to maintain Agenda Review: Dept. Director City Attorney Finance Director City Manager ., ., . those jobs, thus .putting,.a further burden on the State's budget. Additionally, they argue that California produces only 1.4% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, so efforts to address climate change in California alone would be ineffective and unsuccessful. Arguments in Opposition'to the Ballot Initiative The California Air Resources Board concluded that AB32. would likely have a positive net effect on California's economy; fuel expenditures would drop by 4.9% as a result of greater investment in energy efficiency; and California's economy would g"row by 2.4% per year. California is expected to create about two million jobs by 2020 regardless of whether AB32 is implemented, but AB32 would give the state a small job boost by adding about 1-0,000 jobs in the next ten years. When AB32 was adopted; it was widely supported by businesses, labor groups, environmentalists, and health organizations. It builds on decades of state policies on green energy, putting California in the forefront of the green technology industry. Suspending AB32 regulations would create more air pollution in California and threaten public health as well as harming the newly emerging clean energy industry that is creating new jobs in wind, solar and other renewable energy fields and clean technologies. Opposing the suspension of AB32's clean energy and air pollution. control standards would be consistent with the City of Petaluma's Climate Action Plan acid the goals Petaluma has set to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. >FINANCIAI~ IMPACTS None known at this time. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Proposed ballot measure d" ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSITION 23 -THE CALIFORNIA JOBS BALLOT INITIATIVE"TO SUSPEND 'THE CLEAN ENERGY AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL STANDARDS OF THE GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT OF 2006 (AB32) WHEREAS, on September 27, 2006, the California legislature passed the Global. Waiming Solutions Act of 2006, AB32, a clean energy and air pollution control law that holds polluters accountable for their emissions and requires them to reduce air pollution that threatens human health and contributes to climate change; and WHEREAS, suspending AB32 regulations would create more air pollution in California and threaten public health, and would be harmful to California's newly emerging clean energy industry that is creating new jobs in the wind, solar, and other renewable energy fields and clean technologies that will reduce energy cost and dependence on non-renewable and polluting fossil fuels; and WHEREAS, the suspension of AB32's clean energy and air pollution control standards is opposed. by a broad coalition of businesses, environmental organizations, public health advocates, and various elected officials; and WHEREAS, opposing the suspension of AB32's clean energy and air pollution control standards is consistent with the goals and policies of Petaluma's Climate Action Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Petaluma opposes Proposition 23 and the: suspension of AB32's clean energy and air pollution control standards. 3 ATTAC~~VVIENT 2 09--01 04 ~~~t~atgv~ l~e~s~>re to be S~nbit~ed t® V®ters C~Il~~®>rn~a ~®~s ~n~~~a~~ve SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS A. In 2006, the Legislature and. Governor enacted a sweeping environmental law, AB 32. While protecting the environment is of utmost importance, we must balance such regulation with the ability to maintain jobs and protect our economy. B. At the time the bill was signed, the unemployment rate in California was 4.8%. California's unemployment rate has since skyrocketed to more than 12%. C. Numerous economic studies predict that complying with AB 32 will cost Californians billions of dollars with massive increases in the price of gasoline, electricity, food and water, further punishing. California consumers and households. D. California businesses cannot drive our economic recovery and create the jobs we need when faced with billions of dollars in new regulations and added costs; and E. California families being hit with job losses, pay cuts and furloughs cannot afford to pay the increased prices that will be passed onto them as a result of this legislation right now. SECTION 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE A. 'The people desire to temporarily suspend the operation and implementation of AB 32 until the state's unemployment rate returns to the levels that existed at the time of its adoption. SECTION 3. SUSPENSION OF AB 32 Division 25.6 (commencing with section 38600) of the Health and Safety Code is hereby added to .read: i §38600(a) From"and after the effective date of this measure, Division 25.5(commencing with. section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code is suspended until such time as the unemployment rate in California is 5.5% or less for four consecutive calendar quarters. (b) Whine suspended, no state agency shall propose, promulgate,. or adopt any regulation implementing Division 25.5(commencing with section 38500) and any regulation adopted prior to the effective date of this measure shall be void and unenforceable until such time as the suspension is lifted. ~~®p~osa$~oa~, 23 Initiative Statute 14'54. (09-0104] -Final Random Sample Update - 06/22/.1.0 Sulspends Air Pollution Control .Laws.Requiring PWajor Polluters to Report and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions That Cause :Global 1A/arming Until .Unemployment Drops Below Specified Level for Full Year. Qualified: 06/22/10 Proponent: Thomas W. Hiltachk°'(,916) 442-7757 Suspends State laws requiring reduced greenhouse gas, emissions that cause global warming, until ~ California's unemployment rate dropsto 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters. Requires State to abandon implementation of .comprehensive greenhouse-gas-reduction program that includes increased renewable energy and cleaner fuel requirements, and mandatory emission reporting and fee requirements for major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, until suspension is lifted. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst 'and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Potential positive, short-term impacts on state and IocaC government revenues from the suspension of regulatory' activity, with uncertain .longer-rurr impacts. Potential foregone state revenues from the auctioning of emission allowances'by state government, by suspending the future implementation of cap-and- trade regulations. (09-0104.)