KILLCARB.ORG
Dedicated to Putting an End to a Rogue State Agency

Join Our CARB Awareness Email List
Email:
For Email Marketing you can trust
HOME
Forum
Eve's Corner
Make Your Signs
Make Your Own T-Shirts
Tips for Truckers
The Gov
CARB Payroll
Who is CARB
Hien Tran Fraud
ClimateGate
Reading Room
Links of Interest





CalChamber Exposes Air Nazis on 2010 Job Killer List


Click on the bill numbers below for more information.

Costly Workplace Mandates

AB 482 (Mendoza; D-Norwalk) Expanded Employer Liability
Increases potential liability exposure for hiring decisions by unduly restricting the ability of businesses to use consumer credit reports as part of the background check process.

AB 1994 (Skinner; D-Berkeley) Increased Workers’ Compensation Costs
Inappropriately increases costs to employers by expanding workers’ compensation presumptions into the private sector for the first time by allowing hospital workers to be eligible for various presumptions, including H1N1, MRSA, and other diseases and injuries.

AB 2187 (Arambula; I-Fresno) Expanded Employer Liability
Creates a significant disincentive to locate jobs and operations in California by potentially criminalizing almost any legitimate wage dispute with a terminated employee that takes longer than 90 days to resolve.

AB 2727 (Bradford; D-Gardena) New Liability for Hiring Decisions
Increases potential liability exposure for hiring decisions by restricting the ability of employers to make their decision based on a job applicant’s criminal conviction.

SB 810 (Leno; D-San Francisco) Government-Run Health Care
Creates a new government-run, multibillion-dollar socialized health care system based on a yet-to-be specified ‘premium structure’ — in essence, a tax on all employers.

SB 1121 (Florez; D-Shafter) Harms California Farms and Farm Workers
Places farms at a competitive disadvantage, increases cost of doing business for California farmers, and reduces available resources to invest in workers and farms by removing overtime exemption for agricultural employees.

SB 1474 (Steinberg; D-Sacramento) Increased Agricultural Costs
Undermines the process that now guarantees through secret-ballot elections, a fair vote and the expression of agricultural employees’ true sentiments on the selection of a collective bargaining representative. This act will hurt California’s businesses by driving up costs, making employers less competitive in a global market.

Economic Development Barriers

AB 656 (Torrico; D-Fremont)/AB 1604 (Nava; D-Santa Barbara)/ABX6 1 (Nava; D-Santa Barbara) Gas Price Increase
Increases gas prices and dependence on foreign oil by targeting the oil industry for a tax on only oil extracted in California, in addition to other taxes not levied in other states.

AB 846 (Torrico; D-Fremont) Anti-Business Cost Increases
Significantly increases the cost of doing business in California by placing an automatic increase on fines and penalties without legislative review and encourages state agencies to levy the highest fine and penalty allowed.

AB 1405 (De León; D-Los Angeles) Climate Change Tax Increase
Increases costs and discourages job growth by granting the Air Resources Board broad authority to implement unlimited fees and taxes with little or no oversight.

BILL NUMBER: AB 1405    AMENDED
    BILL TEXT

    AMENDED IN SENATE  SEPTEMBER 1, 2009
    AMENDED IN SENATE  JULY 23, 2009
    AMENDED IN SENATE  JUNE 23, 2009
    AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 1, 2009
    AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 28, 2009
    AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 14, 2009

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Members De Leon and V. Manuel Perez   (Coauthors: Assembly Members Arambula, Caballero, Carter, Coto,  Fuentes, Hernandez, Mendoza, Salas, Saldana, and Solorio)   ( Coauthor:   Senator    Romero   Coauthors:   Senators    Pavley,   Price,   and Romero  )

                        FEBRUARY 27, 2009

   An act to add Section 38597.4 to the Health and Safety Code,  relating to air pollution.


    LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 1405, as amended, De Leon. California Global Warming Solutions  Act of 2006: Community Benefits Fund.
   The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires the  State Air Resources Board to adopt regulations to require the  reporting and verification of emissions of greenhouse gases and to  monitor and enforce compliance with the reporting and verification  program, and requires the state board to adopt a statewide greenhouse  gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas  emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020. The act requires the  state board to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process  to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective  greenhouse gas emission reductions. The act authorizes the state  board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. The  act authorizes the state board to adopt a schedule of fees to be paid  by the sources of greenhouse gas emissions regulated pursuant to the  act, and requires the revenues collected pursuant to that fee to be  deposited into the Air Pollution Control Fund and be available, upon  appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of carrying out the  act.
   This bill would establish the Community Benefits Fund, and would
require a minimum of 30% of revenues generated pursuant to the act,  including the fee discussed above,  other than revenues collected  for administrative purposes,  to be deposited into that fund.  The moneys in the fund would be used, upon appropriation by the  Legislature, in the most impacted and disadvantaged communities in  California to accelerate greenhouse gas emission reductions or  mitigate direct health impacts of climate change in those  communities. The state board would be required to develop a  methodology to identify the most impacted and disadvantaged  communities. The state board  , the State Energy Resources  Conservation and Development Commission, and the State Department of  Public Health   would be required to prepare a report by  June 30, 2011, that describes how this bill will be implemented. The  bill would require the report to provide for the formation of an  independent panel to review, evaluate, and recommend approval of  projects and programs solicited for funding. The state board   would  also  be required to  jointly   develop and adopt biennial plans for the use of funds.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.  State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

   SECTION 1.    It is the intent of the Legislature  that investments made pursuant to this act shall include, to the  greatest extent possible, green collar employment opportunities for  low-income residents of the targeted communities.
   SECTION 1.   SEC. 2.   Section 38597.4  is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
   38597.4.  (a) There is hereby established in the State Treasury  the Community Benefits Fund. A minimum of 30 percent of the   total   remaining  revenues generated each year  pursuant to this division, including, but not limited to, Section  38597,  other than revenues collected for administrative  purposes,  shall be deposited by the state board into the  Community Benefits Fund. The moneys in the fund shall be used, upon  appropriation by the Legislature, for the purposes described in  subdivision (b).
   (b) (1) Funds appropriated by the Legislature from the Community  Benefits Fund shall be used solely in the most impacted and  disadvantaged communities in California to accelerate greenhouse gas  emission reductions or mitigate direct health impacts of climate  change in those communities. Funds appropriated shall be used to  provide competitive grants for projects  that reduce greenhouse  gas emissions  , including, but not limited to, any projects  that do any of the following:
   (A) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while achieving cobenefits  such as reductions in other air pollutants, diversification of clean  energy sources, and improving energy efficiency. 
   (B) Minimize health impacts caused by climate change.
   (C) Assist small businesses to reduce their greenhouse gas  emissions. 
   (D) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the installation or  replacement of equipment.
   (E) Improvements to mass transit that reduce greenhouse gas  emissions, including, but not limited to, subsidies to commuters.
   (F) Clean distributed electricity generation systems that reduce  greenhouse gas emissions. 
   (G) Energy efficiency upgrades for schools, senior centers, or  low-income housing that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
   (H) Emergency preparedness for extreme weather events caused by  climate change. 
   (A) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while achieving cobenefits  such as reductions in air pollution. 
   (B) Increase water and energy efficiency and conservation through  retrofitting, replacing, or weatherizing activities. 
   (C) Install clean distributed generation systems that utilize  locally available renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and  geothermal energy. 
   (D) Initiate or enhance public mass transit, including fare  subsidies to commuters. 
   (E) Incentive low-income, public mass transit-oriented housing  development. 
   (F) Minimize the direct health impacts of climate change and  prepare for emergencies from extreme weather events by taking actions  such as the operation of air-conditioned cooling centers that are  open to the public. 
   (G) Provide community-based greening, forestry, or water-related  projects, such as stormwater capture, tree planting, and water  conservation and efficiency measures that have been recognized to  reduce greenhouse gas emissions and produce cobenefits.
   (2) The state board shall, before June 30, 2010, adopt a  methodology to identify the most impacted and disadvantaged  communities, meeting all of the following requirements:
   (A) The methodology shall identify, through a peer review and  public process, the most impacted and disadvantaged communities as  those areas within each air basin with the highest 10 percent of air  pollution impacts, taking into account air pollution exposure and  socioeconomic indicators.
   (B) The state board shall limit its analysis to a consideration of  only socioeconomic indicators for any air basin where variations of  air pollution exposure within the air basin cannot be determined.
   (C) The air pollution exposure indicators to be considered shall  include, but not be limited to, criteria and toxic pollutant levels,  proximity to sources, and land use, to the extent data is readily  available.
   (D) The socioeconomic indicators to be considered shall include,  but not be limited to, income and poverty level, educational  attainment, linguistic isolation, and vulnerability to air pollution  impacts, to the extent data is readily available.
   (E) The methodology shall be reviewed and updated as necessary  through a peer review and public process along with the update of the  scoping plan required by subdivision (h) of Section 38561.
   (3)  (A) The state board, the State Energy Resources Conservation  and Development Commission, and the State Department of Public Health  shall jointly develop and adopt biennial plans for the use of funds  under this section. 
   (3) (A) Before June 30, 2011, the state board, in an open public  process, shall develop and adopt a report that describes the support  structure and framework for the implementation of this section, the  types of projects and programs to be funded under this section, the  selection and oversight process for the projects and programs to be  funded under this section, and the eligibility criteria for the  projects and programs to be funded under this section. The state  board, in its discretion, may consult with other agencies in  developing the report. The report shall also provide for the  formation and structure of an independent panel to review, evaluate,  and recommend approval of the programs and projects solicited for  funding and the biennial plans required by subparagraph (B).
   (B) Before December 30, 2011, and every two years thereafter, the  state board, in an open public process, shall develop and adopt  biennial plans describing the specific type of programs and projects  to be solicited for funding during the two-year period.
   (C)  The environmental justice advisory committee  convened pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 38591 shall be  consulted in developing the biennial plans pursuant to subparagraph   (A)   (B)  , including in the development  of draft plans. Draft plans shall be submitted to the environmental  justice advisory committee, and the committee shall make  recommendations on those draft plans, that shall be considered prior  to the adoption of the biennial plans pursuant to subparagraph   (A)   (B)  .
   (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, projects  shall only be funded if the state board determines, based on the  facts available to it, that the use of moneys for that project would  be consistent with Article XIII A of the California Constitution and  case law construing that provision. The state board shall ensure in  this regard that no feepayer pays for a disproportionate share of the  climate change harm addressed by this section.
   (c) Costs incurred to implement the requirements of this section  may be recovered under the fee authority described in Section 38597.

AB 1639 (Nava; D-Santa Barbara) Delays Residential Construction Industry Recovery
Hinders the recovery in the residential construction industry by reducing the availability of credit due to delays in resolving delinquent loans by imposing a mandatory mediation program on delinquent residential mortgages.

AB 1836 (Furutani; D-South Los Angeles County) Increased Tax Burden
Harms small businesses, many of whom pay taxes under the personal income tax system, by imposing another temporary personal income tax increase on top of the existing personal income tax increase that was passed in last year’s budget.

AB 1935 (De León; D-Los Angeles)/ SBX6 18 (Steinberg; D-Sacramento) Discourages Business Growth in California
Raises taxes for many companies with significant investments of property and payroll in California by making the single sales factor apportionment method mandatory.

AB 1936 (De León; D-Los Angeles) Creates Inequity in the Tax Structure
Harms struggling small businesses and start-ups by repealing the Net Operating Loss (NOL) carry back deduction, a lifeline that helps employers stay afloat, retain employees, and continue investing in their businesses in an economic downturn.

AB 2100 (Coto; D-San Jose)/ SB 1210 (Florez; D-Shafter) Targeted Tax Increase/Flawed Budget Philosophy
Threatens jobs in beverage, retail and restaurant industries by arbitrarily and unfairly targeting certain beverages for a new tax in order to fund obesity-prevention programs and services.

AB 2171 (C. Calderon; D-Montebello) Discourages Investments
Creates substantial uncertainty for employers and discourages future investment in the state by effectively creating an annual sunset for all investment incentives, including tax credits, deductions and exemptions, and caps how much can be claimed each year.

AB 2492 (Ammiano; D-San Francisco) Higher Employer Property Taxes
Undermines Proposition 13 protections and could result in higher property taxes for small businesses by creating an arbitrary and unfair standard for determining that a business property has changed ownership and needs to be reassessed.

AB 2641 (Arambula; I-Fresno) Discourages Investments
Creates uncertainty for California employers making long-term investment decisions by requiring all future-enacted investment incentives to sunset after five years, and eliminating existing incentives that provide no “measurable benefit” without defining how that benefit would be measured.

ACA 6 (C. Calderon; D-Montebello) Discourages Investments
Discourages investments in jobs and operations by imposing an automatic sunset of seven years on any new or extended tax credit, exemption or deduction.

ACA 22 (Torlakson; D-Contra Costa) Targeted Tax Increase/Flawed Budget Philosophy
Exacerbates state budget problems and harms tobacco industry by unfairly targeting it for a new cigarette tax, a declining revenue source, to fund new government spending programs.

SB 967 (Correa; D-Santa Ana) Restricts Business Options
Limits choice and drives up prices for consumers and for state and local government by providing a preference to bidders who commit that 90 percent of the work will be performed by California employees.

SB 974 (Steinberg; D-Sacramento) Undermines Economic Development
Threatens California’s economy and economic recovery by effectively gutting the California Enterprise Zone (EZ) program hiring tax credit and in turn increasing employer taxes in order to fund a new education tax credit.

SB 1113 (Wolk; D-Davis) Undermines Taxpayer Rights
Makes it more costly and difficult for taxpayers to fight meritorious disputes and gives the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) the upper hand by allowing FTB to request a new court trial of tax cases it loses at the administrative level.

SB 1272 (Wolk; D-Davis) Discourages Investment
Creates uncertainty for California employers making long-term investment decisions by requiring all future-enacted investment incentives to sunset after seven years.

SB 1275 (Leno; D-San Francisco) Delays Residential Construction Industry Recovery
Hinders the recovery in the residential construction industry by reducing the availability of credit due to delays in resolving delinquent loans by requiring lenders to determine a borrower’s eligibility for a loan modification prior to the filing of a notice of default.

SB 1316 (Romero; D-East Los Angeles) Employer Tax Increase
Places California out of step with federal law and creates a disincentive for multi-state companies to invest in California by making it the only state to impose a tax liability when a company needs flexibility to exchange a California property with one owned in another state.

SB 1391 (Yee; D-San Francisco) Creates Employer Tax Credit Uncertainty
Eliminates the incentive effect of future-enacted tax credits by requiring employers to repay the state for credits claimed in years where their businesses experience a net loss of employees, whether or not the reduction of employees was connected to the effectiveness of the credit.


Expensive, Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens

AB 479/AB 737 (Chesbro; D-North Coast) Expanded Waste Bureaucracy
Exposes employers to new requirements that are not cost effective or are unworkable by giving government broad new authority to impose programs that achieve a statewide solid waste diversion rate of 75 percent by 2020.

AB 2138 (Chesbro; D-North Coast) Unworkable Mandate
Imposes new and costly mandates on California’s food service industry by imposing an unworkable framework aimed at reducing marine debris.

AB 2578 (Jones; D-Sacramento) Inappropriate Price Control
Reduces health care choices, access and quality by creating additional bureaucracy to impose price controls on health insurance policies while failing to address the major cost drivers of rising medical costs.


Inflated Liability Costs

AB 1680 (Saldaña; D-San Diego) Interferes with Contractual Agreements
Burdens businesses with unnecessary litigation costs and slows resolution of disputes by prohibiting enforcement of voluntary arbitration agreements if someone is being sued for a hate crime.

AB 2773 (Swanson; D-Alameda) Undermines Judicial Discretion
Unreasonably increases business litigation costs by removing judicial discretion to reduce or eliminate exorbitant legal fees in fair employment and housing cases.