California’s image as the Golden State has become tarnished in recent years. The global economic downturn has taken a toll here as it has elsewhere. Now some special interests are trying to leverage our financial struggles to tear apart landmark California laws that protect public health and the environment.
Environmental laws did not lead to the housing crisis or weakness in the job market. As more than one finance expert has pointed out, lack of regulation of the mortgage, banking and securities industries ruined the economy. To connect environmental regulation to this latest economic downturn is disingenuous at best.
Nevertheless, a behind-the-scenes coalition of business and development interests has been quietly working to convince Californians of this false correlation. This group has pursued legislative, judicial, and electoral processes to weaken many environmental protections, but especially a law that protects the values Californians hold most dear: the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The truth is that CEQA ensures, rather than threatens, prosperity in California. It does so in a transparent way. It essentially requires that project proponents reveal the environmental impacts of their proposal and reduce or mitigate those impacts.
These requirements do not prevent growth, but rather ensure that growth happens in a way that does not jeopardize public health and minimizes environmental damage.
Much of the Golden State suffers from some of the nation’s worst air quality, and nearly all of us breathe it at some time in any year. Poor air quality diminishes quality of life in a number of costly ways.
For instance, just east of San Diego in Imperial County, asthma has reached epidemic proportions. As recently reported by The Associated Press, children in the area face countless hospital trips and highly restricted outdoor activities. And taxpayers foot enormous medical bills when children who live near or below the poverty line use public insurance to access medical care. That is one real cost that can be attributed directly to poor environmental quality.
Children – and taxpayers – in San Diego could face a similar crisis in the coming decades if the San Diego Association of Government’s (SANDAG) recently adopted regional transportation plan is allowed to stand. SANDAG’s own analysis shows that the plan will lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050. The American Lung Association already gives San Diego County an “F” grade for its poor air quality.
Sierra Club California, the Center for Biological Diversity, Cleveland National Forest Foundation and state Attorney General Kamala Harris have all filed suit against this plan because SANDAG chose to continue a culture of travel by private car instead of offering San Diegans robust public transit options that, among other things, would provide less-polluting ways for residents to get around.
This lawsuit was filed under CEQA because SANDAG did not adequately examine the environmental impact of its plan or take a good look at realistic alternatives to expanding freeways and highways. SANDAG’s plan front-loads investments in freeways at the expense of investments in transit. Either way, significant public funds would go into building transportation infrastructure in the region. Those funds will support good construction jobs regardless of what type of infrastructure is built.