Some Big Gains, Some Telling Losses Mark 2015 Legislative Session
Weigh in to Stop Dam Funding
Annual Legislative Report Card Released
Some Big Gains, Some Telling Losses Mark 2015 Legislative Session
By Kathryn Phillips
The headline-making environmental story coming out of the legislature this year was passage of new legislation to combat climate change.
Senate Bill 350, co-authored by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León and Senator Mark Leno, established a new goal for electricity retailers to produce 50 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2030, and doubled the goal for energy efficiency in buildings by that year.
However, before the Assembly would pass it, the authors had to strip the bill of a provision that would have established a goal of reducing oil use in transportation by 50 percent by 2030. Oil industry lobbying and deceptive advertising managed to hold up votes of so-called moderate Democrats.
The legislature also passed a bill (SB 185 by de León) that requires the two state employee pension funds to divest from thermal coal investments, and a bill to help increase availability of rooftop solar in multi-family affordable housing (AB 693 by Eggman).
Taken together, these three bills send a strong signal that California is committed to assertively cutting pollution that creates climate change and transitioning rapidly to clean energy.
The legislature also passed—and the governor signed—bills to ban microbeads in cosmetics and health care products (AB 888 by Bloom), regulate the environmental impacts of legal marijuana grows (AB 243 by Wood), and ban the sale of ivory (AB 96 by Atkins).
The governor also signed bills that add two new members to the California Air Resources Board. That addition is expected to help increase representation of people living in disadvantaged communities that are hard hit by air pollution. And he signed legislation that will automatically register eligible residents to vote when they apply for or renew their driver’s license or state identification card at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Unfortunately, the governor vetoed several bills designed to reform the California Public Utilities Commission. However, he indicated in veto messages that he would be willing to work with the authors on similar bills in the next legislative session.
Several bills with strong environmental support did not make it out of the legislature this year. A number of those had one thing in common: strong opposition by the oil industry. Among these was SB 788 (McGuire and Jackson), which would have closed a loophole in the law that allows new oil drilling in state waters in a biologically rich region off the coast of Santa Barbara. Senator McGuire has pledged to try again to close that loophole through legislation in January.
Sierra Club California tracks hundreds of environmental bills each year, and takes positions on a majority of them. You can see a list of our top priority bills and their status this year on our website.
By Kyle Jones
Whether California relies on unproductive new dams or instead invests in innovation for water storage rests with how the California Water Commission (CWC) develops its regulations between now and the end of November.
The $7.5 billion dollar Water Bond that passed in 2014 contained $2.7 billion that is to be used for water storage projects, guided by the CWC’s regulations being developed now. Eligible projects include two dams Sierra Club California opposes: Sites and Temperance Flat Reservoir.
Based on early drafts of the regulations, it appears the Commission won’t take climate change into account when quantifying the impacts of water storage projects. That means the regulations will likely favor outdated projects, like Sites and Temperance Flat, that don’t consider changing temperature and precipitation patterns.
But California has an opportunity, through these new regulations, to invest in water storage infrastructure that can better adapt to climate change and prepare for future droughts. Forward-thinking projects, such as groundwater recharge, conjunctive management, and even smaller local rainwater capture projects could be funded instead of dams.
The regulations are entering the final stretch of the development process before being submitted to the Office of Administrative Law. These regulations need to be responsive to the environment and accurately account for the impacts climate change will have on California’s hydrology. This will help the CWC see that when you do the math correctly, dams just don’t hold water.
Sierra Club California staff have been advocating at the CWC to ensure that public money isn’t wasted on useless 19th century relics, like Sites and Temperance Flat. We have argued that using historical data to show how these projects will impact rivers is misleading. Climate modeling should be incorporated to appropriately guide which water storage projects should be funded.
We’re actively commenting on the regulations, but the CWC should hear from the public as well. Write them to let the Commission know that the regulations should accurately account for climate change. Let the Commission know that you oppose destructive dams, and instead favor innovative investments in our future.
Send the California Water Commission an e-mail at CWC@water.ca.gov.
Or write a conventional letter to the Commission at:
California Water Commission
P.O. Box 942836
Sacramento, California 94236-0001
Annual Legislative Report Card Released
Sierra Club California’s annual report card on how legislators voted on key environmental bills is now available on our website.
Check it out now to see how your legislators performed, and then call or write them to let them know what you think about their environmental record.
Follow Us:
  |
Thank you for being a part of our work! You may securely donate online or by sending a check to Sierra Club California at 909 12th Street, Suite 202, Sacramento, CA 95814.
