Amador County – Amador County Supervisors last week heard that a recent court ruling on greenhouse gas law could have an effect on the county’s General Plan update.

County Counsel Martha J. Shaver said a ruling May 20 against the California Air Resources Board found fault with the ARB’s creation of the Greenhouse Gas law, and procedures known as Cap & Trade, which establish a bank of emissions credits to trade among entities. Shaver said the ruling in San Francisco Superior Court could have the effect of “invalidating the entire document.” She said the state will either fix that issue, or have to redo its Environmental Impact Report for the Cap & Trade, at further cost to taxpayers.

In the ruling, Judge Ernest H. Goldsmith wrote that the California Air Resources Board (ARB) “committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion when it failed to proceed in a manner required by law by inadequately describing and analyzing project alternatives sufficient for informed decision making and public participation.”

The ruling also said “ARB committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion when it failed to proceed in a manner required by law by violating the informational requirements of (the California Environmental Quality Act) and its own certified regulatory program when it adopted Resolution 08-47 and began implementing the Scoping Plan without first responding to comments, completing the environmental review process and approving the Project.”

The court granted a writ of mandate “regarding the sufficiency of the Functional Equivalent Document’s impacts analysis under CEQA” and also its “alternatives analysis and the timing of its approval under CEQA.”

The ruling said “ARB shall set aside” the Board Resolution and Executive Order “adopting and approving the Climate Change Scoping Plan to Reduce Greenhouse Gasses in California as it relates to Cap & Trade.” The ruling also said ARB shall take no action to the Scoping Plan and FED “as it relates to Cap & Trade, until ARB has come into complete compliance with its obligations under its certified regulatory program and CEQA, consistent with the court’s order.”

The ruling was issued May 20, and the California Air Resources Board filed a notice of appeal May 23. Supervisor Chairman John Plasse during the county joint panel on its General Plan update last week said the San Francisco ruling does address emissions and CEQA studies. He said some people have said they “wish to remove all reference to greenhouse gas” emission from the General Plan, due to the ruling.

He said county counsel advised that the SB32 established CEQA, but SB97 amended it to add requirements to monitor greenhouse gas. The appeal by California Air Resources Board stays the ruling on Cap & Trade.

Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.