Big Business and Civil Rights Group Protest Newsom’s Climate Proposals

The California Chamber of Commerce and an organization representing civil rights leaders object to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s legislative and regulatory efforts seeking expedited approval of his plan to reduce carbon pollution.

The state Chamber along with numerous local chapters and large agricultural interests oppose Newsom’s legislative package which sets a carbon neutrality standard for 2045, advances the carbon reduction goals set for 2030 by 15%, and requires a setback for oil and gas wells near schools and local communities of at least 3,200 feet to protect public health. They also are against his pending carbon capture and sequestration targets.

“The Administration’s proposals cover a broad swath of some of the most contentious issues in climate policy and environmental regulation,” the Chamber wrote in an Aug. 16 letter to Newsom. They warn that working to get a controversial legislative measure passed just before the end of the session “will provide inadequate time for real input or debate and would undermine the legislative process.”

The day before, a civil rights group striving for homeownership for underserved people of color, called The Two Hundred for Homeownership, sent a protest letter to Liane Randolph, California Air Resources Board chair, and the heads of the Senate and Assembly, Toni Atkins and Speaker Anthony Rendon. The organization, represented by the law firm Holland & Knight, objected to Newsom’s proposed changes to the 2022 state climate plan.

The group asserts the governor’s push for a massive amount of new renewables would be unachievable but nevertheless, the effort would cause energy costs to soar and lead to widespread job loss. They asserted Newsom’s push to enact “extremist climate diktats” on short notice would sideswipe “Legislative policy hearings and public debate.” That includes interfering with the community’s ability to drive to work by seeking to curb vehicle miles traveled.

The 200 Percent filed a demand for all the communication between the Governor and CARB during the two weeks prior to his July 22 letter to air regulators. They note that CARB staff had initially objected to Newsom’s proposal on grounds it was infeasible, very costly and would lead to high job losses.