Initiative to Suspend AB 32 (the Greenhouse Gas Law) Qualifies for November Ballot

We previously blogged about the initiative to suspend AB 32, California’s landmark law to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Yesterday this initiative qualified for the November ballot. The initiative would require a state unemployment rate be equal to or less than 5.5% for one full year before the government could enforce AB 32. The initiative will take effect if 50% or more of the voters approve it in November.

A key question is how far the initiative would reach, since AB 32 is gateway legislation for many state-wide GHG emission reduction measures. AB 32 (Health and Safety Code 38500 et seq.) establishes a statewide target for GHG emissions and requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop mandatory GHG emission reporting rules and to adopt regulations to achieve maximum technologically feasible GHG emission reduction. Some of the program and strategies to reduce GHG emissions contained in CARB's AB 32 Scoping Plan, such as the state’s million solar roofs program, are based on other regulatory authority (legislation or executive orders). Other programs and strategies in the Scoping Plan, such as the state Green Building Code, were not instituted through separate legislation or executive order.

Would suspending AB 32 also suspend all of the programs mentioned in CARB’s Scoping Plan? This is debatable. For example, we think there is a good argument that GHG emission reduction strategies enacted by separate legislation, such as SB 375 are independent of AB 32. SB 375 was passed by the legislature and requires CARB to establish regional targets for reducing GHG emissions by reducing car travel and sprawl. CARB will be releasing draft GHG targets by June 30, 2010. If it’s true that the initiative does not suspend GHG programs based on other statutes, then even if the initiative passes, Metropolitan Planning Organizations will still proceed with SB 375 and use the GHG targets to formulate regional sustainable communities strategies that guide transportation and land use decisions. The fate of programs not addressed by separate legislation, like the state green building code, is less clear. For more on the effects of CARB’s draft regional targets, see Paul Shigley’s article about the political realities of SB 375 from the California Planning and Development Report.