The business community’s campaign to suspend the state’s controversial greenhouse gas reduction law appears headed to the ballot.
The signature-gathering deadline was last week for the initiative aimed for the November ballot. The measure appeared to have gathered enough signatures, which now are being verified by state officials.
Recently, the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small businesses, joined the effort to support the initiative.
But the law’s supporters countered with a campaign that features businesses saying they will benefit from the tough standards.
The greenhouse gas reduction law, known as AB 32, passed in 2006 despite opposition from most of the state’s major business groups.
Among other mandates, it requires such major emitters as oil refineries and food-processing and cement plants to reduce their carbon or other greenhouse gas emissions by about 25% by 2020.
It also authorizes “cap-and-trade” programs for greenhouse gas emissions.
The California Air Resources Board already has adopted a series of “early action” measures to implement the law, including reducing the use of certain refrigerants and instituting a low-carbon fuel standard. These first regulations will kick in in 2012.
Last fall, two Republican lawmakers—Assemblyman Dan Logue of Marysville and Rep. Tom McClintock of Granite Bay—along with Jon Coupal, the president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, launched a campaign to place an initiative on the November ballot to suspend AB 32 as long as the state’s unemployment rate is above 5.5%. (It now stands at 12.5%.)
They argue that AB 32 will result in the loss of thousands of jobs and force major manufacturing operations to leave the state.
The campaign has drawn nearly $1 million in contributions, chiefly from Texas oil companies Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp.
In supporting suspension of the initiative, the National Federation of Independent Business joins the California Manufacturing and Technology Association.
National Federation of Independent Business-California Executive Director John Kabateck said AB 32 would drive up electricity rates for some small businesses by more than 50%, resulting in sharply higher fuel costs and forcing small businesses to lay off workers or even close their doors.
“If rule making and implementation go forward as planned, AB 32 will drive even more businesses, revenue and jobs out of California and make an economic recovery here much slower and harder,” Kabateck said.
In response, supporters of AB 32 have formed their own coalition and last week put forward a Signal Hill business owner who claims the law’s costs to most small businesses will be minimal and more than offset by job gains from the creation of new industries.
Tom Bowman, president of Bowman Consulting Group, which conducts exhibitions and multimedia communications for corporations, said he has installed energy-saving lighting and other technologies at his company that have sharply reduced his energy bills.
“Small companies like mine are proving that AB 32 is good for business, which is why thousands of entrepreneurs, small businesses and large employers oppose this proposition,” Bowman said.
A Field Poll released earlier this month showed that 58% of registered voters supported AB 32; 69% said they believed the state could reduce greenhouse gases and grow the economy at the same time. But the latter figure was down from 74% in 2008 and 83% in 2007.
Fine is a staff writer with the Los Angeles Business Journal.
