Protesters want lawmakers to support climate change

0
699
DEMANDING SUPPORT—Organized protestors state their position last week in a rally outside the office of Assemblyman Sebastian Ridley-Thomas. Photo by RL Miller

Environmental organizations across the state are stepping up the pressure on lawmakers who they believe are not fully committed to proposed legislation that addresses climate change and the drought, including Culver City activists.

Lawmakers have until Sept. 11 to approve climate change-related proposals and send them to the desk of Gov. Jerry Brown and its supporters are bracing for possible changes that some fear could water down the legislation.

The 2015 legislative session ends Sept. 11.

A contingent of local and regional supporters of Senate Bill 350 and Senate Bill 32 rallied outside the office of Assemblyman Sebastian Ridley-Thomas (D- Culver City) on Sept. 2 to protest what they say until recently has been a decidedly unfriendly position on the two bills.  Some have accused Ridley-Thomas, the son of county Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, who also represents Culver City, of actively working against SB 350 and SB 32.

SB 350 calls for reducing gasoline usage in cars and trucks by 50%, increasing the state’s use of electricity of renewable sources from 33 to 50% and double the level of efficiency in existing buildings.

On Sept. 9, Ridley-Thomas joined state Sen. Fran Pavely (D- Agoura Hills), the author of SB 32, and other representatives of primarily minority districts at a news conference in Sacramento where he announced his support. Nevertheless, SB 32 failed to pass the Assembly 33-25.

Pavley’s proposed bill would authorize the state California Air Resource Board to adopt interim greenhouse gas emissions level targets to be achieved by 2030 and 2040. The 2006 legislation’s target date was 2020.

According to Capital Public Radio, Ridley-Thomas was the only legislator who spoke about SB 32 after the vote.

“Any plan that is developed by the California Air Resources Board will have to come to the Legislature and we’ll have a certain period of time to have oversight hearings, to have legislative input, and we’ll have an opportunity as well to introduce legislation to give direction and advocate for concerns that we have,” the assemblyman said.

The proposed legislation can still be reconsidered at a later date.

The rallies, phone calls, emails and social media posts are part of a last ditch campaign to salvage SB 350 and prevent business interests from derailing them, says one Culver City resident who helped organize the Sept. 2 protest.

“I’m pretty worried about how bad climate change is getting and how it is making [the]  drought  worse,” said Corky Jackson, adding that he feels that oil and gas interests are “pouring into the pockets of lawmakers, so I’m supportive of [environmental]  groups pushing lawmakers on these bills.

“Weakening the [California Air Resources Board, the agency charged with maintaining health air quality] seems to be the aim of the oil industry, which would be a grave mistake if legislators allow it,” Jackson added.

The Western States Petroleum Industry, an oil and gas trade association has come out strongly against SB 350, authored by state Senate Leader   Kevin de Leòn (D- Los Angeles).  “Legislative mandates to force reductions in gasoline use are not climate change policies.  They are attacks on an important industry in California designed to create conflict and controversy,” Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the association’s president, in an online post. “California’s petroleum producers, refiners and marketers are the source of nearly half a million jobs in California and the products we produce drive industries that comprise the eight largest economy in the world.

“A mandate to reduce petroleum consumption by 50% is an impossibly unrealistic goal.”

The state Chamber of Commerce also opposes the bill.

The stakes are high for Brown and his allies as they consider new amendments to de Leòn’s bill before Sept. 11, which have some environmental groups worried.

Jackson, however, said he supports the amendments.

“They make the bill much stronger by strengthening community-based clean energy and removing [California Public Utilities Commission] bureaucracy to do so and maintain community choice programs to deliver low cost green energy,” he said.

Gary Walker contributed to this story.