Sorry we're late with the Insider, but when floor session begins, news changes fast (and we have been over at the Capitol making sure it's changing in the right direction!).

PCL Insider: News from the Capitol

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: HIGH DRAMA IN FINAL DAYS OF SESSION

In the battles for sound environmental policy at the state capitol, we win some, lose some, and many still hang in the balance!

The final days of this legislative session are here, and both the Senate and Assembly are considering the bills now before them.  We have no idea when the Legislature plans to adjourn for the year, but until then, we will continue pushing hard for smart environmental policies. Here are some updates on several key environmental bills:

IN RACE FOR FLOOD POLICY REFORM, ONE HORSE NEEDS YOUR HELP!

AB 70, authored by Assembly Member Dave Jones, is an important measure that would promote flood safety through its emphasis on wise land use. 

What would AB 70 do? 

Reduce state taxpayers' liability for flood damage resulting from placing lives and property in unprotected flood prone areas of the Central Valley. The shared liability concept in AB 70 is limited to unreasonable decisions made regarding new developments in currently undeveloped areas of the Central Valley.  AB 70 would not inhibit new development in areas with adequate flood protection.

Why is AB 70 Needed?

A recent court ruling, Paterno v. State of California, forced the state to pay out $500 million for flood damages, even though the state had no control over local land use decisions that contributed to this risk. The Paterno decision means that taxpayers statewide bear all the risks for dangerous development in unprotected areas. 

AB 70, however, is in danger of being voted down on the Senate floor. The measure is opposed by heavy hitters such as the California Chamber of Commerce, California State Association of Counties, League of California Cities, and the California Central Valley Flood Control Association. 

PCL staff has been at the Capitol much of the day working to build stronger support for this bill, and we need your help. 

Please call your Senator & Assembly members NOW (in their Capitol rather than their District offices) and ask them to protect your tax dollars by voting YES on AB 70!

ELSEWHERE IN THE FLOOD RACE – THREE HORSES DASH ACROSS THE LINE

Assembly Member Lois Wolk wasn't wearing her racing silks, but she nonetheless ably "jockeyed" Senate Bills 5 and 17 through a successful Assembly vote last night!  Today, SB 5 received concurrence in the Senate (SB 17 didn't need to go back to the Senate as it has not been amended since it was passed by that house) and so both measures are off to the Governor's desk.

(In the Legislature, "jockey" is the term for a legislator who acts as the "floor manager" for a bill authored by a member of the other house when the bill comes to his or her own house)

Last night, after more than an hour of questions and debate, the California Assembly passed two key components of this year's package of flood legislation:  SB 17, authored by Senator Dean Florez, and SB 5, authored by Senator Mike Machado. Today the Senate passed AB 162, authored by Lois Wolk. Hurrah!

SB 17 offers healthy reforms to professionalize the Reclamation Board – and changes the board's name to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.

SB 5, which in recent weeks has incorporated the key components of Wolk's AB 5, outlines a comprehensive plan for flood control in the Central Valley.  The bill calls for flood control improvements which include "natural infrastructure" features such as setback levees and bypasses that provide both flood control (by increasing the capacity of the system to handle high flow) and environmental benefits (by increasing the amount of land that, when not needed for flood control, has important wildlife or agricultural value). 

SB 5 makes important changes to protect the people and environment of California.  While we would like to have stronger interim measures, as well as better developed guidelines for floodplain management, SB 5 is still good policy and a significant step forward on an issue that has been stalled for several years.

AB 162 calls for flood safety planning to be better integrated into local General Plans. Currently these plans address fire hazards and earthquakes, but flood risks are not adequately considered.

Kudos to Wolk, Machado, Senator Darrell Steinberg, and their staffs for their cooperative efforts in drafting this comprehensive plan with input from many different interests!

Another of our favorite horses, AB 156 (Laird), is likely to dash across the finish line soon.  AB 156, like AB 162, promotes flood safety at the city and county level.  This bill provides for improved mapping of "levee flood protection zones", coordination of maintenance needs between local and state flood control agencies, and conditions funds for levee upgrades on the preparation of a local flood safety plan.  AB 156 has no registered opposition so we expect this horse to be awarded its celebratory wreath of flowers sometime on Monday.

Next week:  Rumor has it that the Legislature may try to finish early Tuesday, in which case we’ll be able to report in the next PCL Insider whether or not the rest of flood legislation passed out of the Senate and Assembly. Then it’s on to the Governor’s desk...

 
PASSAGE OF TOXIC TOYS BILL A VICTORY FOR CALIFORNIA'S CHILDREN!

We are pleased to report that AB 1108 (Ma), the Toxic Toys bill, finally passed the Senate and will now head to the Governor's desk. AB 1108 prohibits the use of phthalates in toys and childcare products intended for children under three. Phthalates are linked to cancer and reproductive damage making them an unacceptable ingredient in teethers and baby toys.  This measure is one of a handful of top environmental priority bills still moving through the process and one of the first to hit the Governor's desk. That's a great victory for the environment and the health of our children! 

GLOBAL WARMING BILLS STILL FIGHTING FOR SURVIVAL

We are still working hard to resuscitate several bills which stalled or died in the Senate and Assembly appropriations committees.  Last week we reported on two of those bills that failed to move, AB 224 (Wolk), which would incorporate global warming into water planning, and SB 375 (Steinberg), which would lead to smarter land use decisions to fight global warming. We also sent out Action Alerts aimed to help these measures move this year. If you have already taken action – thank you! If not, please do so now!

Help save AB 224 and SB 375.

TRUTH IN ADVERTISING? JUST SAY NO TO NEW NUKE INITIATIVE 

At its meeting last week, the PCL Executive Committee took official action to oppose a proposed ballot initiative designed to allow more nuclear power plants in California. The measure would essentially repeal the Nuclear Safeguards Initiative, passed by California voters in 1976. Here’s what it would do:

--Repeal California's nuclear power plant safety protections and permit construction of nuclear power plants in seismically active areas.

--Allow nuclear generation plants in the Coastal Zone.

--Allow construction of nuclear power plants before facilities for permanent, long-term storage of radioactive materials are developed and licensed.

--Redefine permanent storage of high-level radioactive waste to "100 plus years of onsite storage at California's reactors" as the benchmark to be met for the state to lift its moratorium on the siting of new nuclear reactors.

The full text of the proposed measure is available on the Attorney General's website: (link: http://ag.ca.gov/cms_pdfs/initiatives/2007-07-17_07-0027_Initiative_A2S.pdf)

You likely haven't heard much about this dangerous initiative; it's not even in circulation yet. And the proponents, headed by Assembly Member Chuck DeVore from Orange County, would rather you didn't look too closely at the details. Their "spin" is that this is a great way to address our most pressing environmental problem. That's why they want to call the measure "The California Energy Independence and Zero Carbon Dioxide Emission Electrical Generation Act of 2008." Wow! That sounds like a one-stop solution to global warming, doesn't it?

In fact, nuclear power isn't even a zero carbon dioxide power source! Think about the heavy duty equipment that's needed to mine uranium and transport it to the power plant. And then there's the waste disposal – building massive storage facilities and shipping nuclear waste to them creates a sizeable carbon footprint. In fact, this initiative would just make it easier to build unsafe nuclear power plants, and these initiative proponents need to be required to provide a little "truth in advertising." Luckily, Attorney General Jerry Brown got it right. His official title for the measure tells it like it really is: "Nuclear Energy. Removal of Prohibitions on the Construction of Nuclear Power Plants."

That's it! All this measure does is to allow existing safeguards to be bypassed. And that's the main reason why PCL is so strongly opposed. If you see this initiative at a supermarket near you, our advice is just to walk on by!