The PCL Insider: News From The Capitol

STATE BUDGET SIGNED BY GOVERNOR: ENVIRONMENTAL SPENDING STRONGER THAN USUAL

Last Friday, Governor Schwarzenegger signed the final state budget for 2007, after making several modifications from the version the Legislature approved earlier in the week. While a number of environmental programs and agencies did not receive the level of funding sought by the environmental community, overall the final budget is stronger on environmental spending than those of the past several years.

For example, the Department of Fish and Game will see a more than 100 percent increase in their allotment from the General Fund, including over $34 million to address shortfalls in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund and $14 million for the Salmon and Steelhead Restoration program. The Department of Parks and Recreation will receive $250 million for deferred maintenance of park facilities. The Budget also provides $30.4 million for a multi-agency effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote alternative transportation fuels.

There were a few casualties in the budget negotiations. We were disappointed to see that an effort by Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara) to study alternatives to a damaging toll road through San Onofre State Beach in southern California did not pass out of the Legislature's budget conference committee.  The road is proposed to run directly through San Onofre State Beach, irreparably damaging one of the most-visited state parks in California.  Although the study did not make it in this year's state budget, supporters of the state park continue to look for ways to find traffic alternatives to the toll road. Also, we were saddened to see that the Governor removed $35 million from the Legislature's budget that would have supported programs to address air quality at the California Air Resources Board.

While environmental spending remains a tiny fraction of the overall state budget, the funding increases in the final budget should be heralded as an impressive victory, bringing relief to essential programs hampered by shoestring budgets. 

CABLE-VIDEO BILL POSES ENVIRONMENTAL DANGERS, PROVIDES BROAD EXEMPTION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Even bills that look benign at first glance can have serious negative impacts on the environment. Today's example: AB 2987, authored by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, which would allow cable and video service providers to eliminate local regulation by obtaining a state franchise. This bill has been one of the most actively lobbied bills in the current legislative session, and passed the Assembly with no dissenting votes.

PCL is worried that the pressure to pass this bill (and that pressure is certainly being felt in the Legislature) may result, later, in significant environmental problems. Here are the concerns that PCL has raised in its recent letter to the Speaker:

As currently written, AB 2987 would allow a video or cable services provider to construct facilities anywhere in the state without any environmental or permit review. Many construction projects, of course, would not cause environmental damage; for instance, projects which essentially consist of placing wires or other transmission facilities in areas already used for such purposes. Unfortunately, AB 2987 will apparently exempt all construction activities, anywhere, from all permitting and environmental review. This is unjustified and unsupportable, and puts our natural environment, and community concerns, at great risk.

Here is why this problem exists:

- AB 2987 establishes the state franchise as a "ministerial" permit, and to emphasize just how ministerial the issuance of a state franchise really is, the state must issue the franchise within 14 days of the date that a complete application has been submitted.

- Because the issuance of a state franchise is "ministerial," no CEQA or other environmental review is permitted, and no state or local entity can require any other permit, which might be discretionary, and which would therefore require environmental review.

- The "state franchise," which the state must issue upon receipt of a completed application, authorizes the "construction and operation of a cable system in public rights of way."

- For AB 2987, the "public right of way" is given a special definition, and means "the area ... along or across any of the waters or lands within the state." This means that for the purpose of this bill, "public right of way" includes every part of the state's natural environment, no matter how sensitive.

When the "details" are examined, it is clear that AB 2987 will allow the construction of any facilities required to deliver cable or video services, anywhere, without regard to any environmental review, and without the ability of any agency, including the state itself, any city or county government, or the Coastal Commission to impose any condition whatsoever. Because the facilities associated with cable services can include and require pole lines, large equipment boxes, trenching, cutting, filling, tree removal, and other activities that may have a community or environmental impact, the effect of AB 2987 is to exempt this species of project from normal environmental and other community review procedures.

PCL hopes that this effect is unintended. If it is, the bill should be amended to eliminate this effect. That can be accomplished in a number of ways. Eliminating the expansive and misleading definition of "public right of way" is one immediate example of a change that is needed. And in fact, the bill should affirmatively provide for environmental review, at the local level, for projects that do not have de minimus impacts.

PCL Insider recipients should contact PCL's Gary Patton (gapatton@pcl.org) if they would like a complete copy of our letter, which provides the legal references. Contact your State Senator and Assembly Member if you're concerned about the "unintended environmental consequences" of AB 2987.