Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09121995 - C171 T g. C.168, C.169, C. 170, and C. 171 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on September 12, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Rogers ABSTAIN: None -------------------- SUBJECT: Correspondence C. 168 LETTER from Larry P. Arnn, Campaign Chairman, Californians Against Discrimination and Preferences, dated August 14, 1995, urging the Board's participation in, and endorsement of, the California Civil Rights Initiative on the November 1996 ballot. **** REFERRED TO-COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. C. 169 LETTER from Donald Blubaugh, City Manger, City of Walnut Creek, dated August 23, 1995, requesting the Board of Supervisors release $69,000 of the County collected Parkland Dedication Fees for development of Arbolado Park. ****REFERRED TO DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR RECOMMENDATION. C. 170 LETTER and PETITION from Nancy E. Whyte, Diablo View Veterinary Medical Hospital, dated August 15, 1995, advising that Contra Costa Veterinary Association has started a fund to support microchip identification implants as a service to pet owners. ****REFERRED TO DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL SERVICES. C. 171 LETTER from Charles Peterson, Supervisor, Fifth District, County of Mendocino, dated August 23, 1995, advising that the Mendocino County Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 95-168, supporting the "California Air Resources Board Mandate For Zero Emission Vehicles" and urging Contra Costa County to adopt a similar resolution. ****REFERRED TO DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR RECOMMENDATION. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations as noted (****) are APPROVED. Ihera, certify thctthis Isatrue and correct Copyof an action token and entered on the minutes of the Board of Su{jjrviso �the detg 13 'e d1., ATTESTED.—� /�,�,�/ I '1 J PHIL BATCHELOR Clerk of the Board of Supervisors GLou*AdmiNritrdw C.C. County Administrator e Community Development , Director Animal Services, Director JOYCE A.BEARD Office Address: CLERK OFTHE BOARD 301 South State Street Ukiah,California 95482 COUNTY OF MENDOCINO Mailing Address: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Courthouse UKIAH,CALIFORNIA 95482 Ukiah,California 95482 Telephone: RECEIVED (7,,0)43-4221 -4245 AUG 25RM August 23, 1995 cLER CBOOAR N IDD OF PE RS STA CO. Dear Chairman and all Board Members: On Tuesday, August 15, 1995, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors voted to adopt the enclosed resolution regarding the California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations relative to "zero emission" vehicles. We have been appalled by the gross misinformation being distributed by the California Manufacturers Association about electric vehicles and the relevant issues. I would like to encourage you to consider adopting a similar resolution, and forwarding it to Governor Wilson and to CARB. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, CN`V Charles Peterson Supervisor, 5th District CP/n1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SEIJI SUGAWARA FRANK McMICHAEL JOHN PINCHES LIZ HENRY CHARLES F.PETERSON FIRST DISTRICT SECOND DISTRICT THIRD DISTRICT FOURTH DISTRICT FIFTH DISTRICT / I RESOLUTION NO. 95-168 RESOLUTION OF THE MENDOCINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD MANDATE FOR ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES WHEREAS, every urban area is struggling to meet federal Clean Air Act standards and frequently fails them. Over 75% of the air pollution is caused by petroleum burning vehicles; and WHEREAS, the inland areas of Mendocino County experience ozone smog just below the state standard each summer; and WHEREAS, cil is a finite resource which will be exhausted in 40 years at current levels of consumption and 99% of California's transportation is fueled by oil; and WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has mandated that 2 percent of all vehicles sold in California be zero emission vehicles by the year 1998 in an attempt to reduce air pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels; and WHEREAS, a concerted effort has been made by the petroleum and auto industry to fight the mandate by disseminating information that is untrue and misleading; and WHEREAS, California's energy policy is supported and signed by Governor Pete Wilson and clearly states that transportation alternatives, i.e. fuels, vehicle efficiency technology and modes be "aggressively pursued"; and WHEREAS, research and development and consequent production of zero emission vehicles will create and is already creating high-tech high-wage jobs needed by the state of California and its people; and WHEREAS, the state of California has a unique opportunity to lead the nation toward clean transportation technology, reduced air pollution and lowering its dependence on a finite resource, while at the same time capturing the economic opportunities that arise from new technology; and WHEREAS, increased use of electric vehicles reduces the threat of offshore oil exploration and development and encourages the development of non-polluting and renewable energy sources. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors supports and endorses a zero emission mandate; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors encourages the California Air Resources Board to stand by its 2% mandate. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors strongly urges the Governor of the State of California Pete Wilson, to support California Air Resources Board in said determination. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is the intent of Mendocino County. to. voluntarily. reflect -the percentages required by the mandate in any new county fleet purchases, with vehicles that meet comparable full cost criteria and performance capability. The foregoing resolution was introduced by Supervisor Peterson, seconded by Supervisor Henry, and carried on this 15th, day of August, 1995, by the following vote on roll call: AYES: Supervisors Pinches, Henry, Peterson, and Sugawara NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor McMichael WHEREUPON, the Chairman declared said Resolution adopted, AND SO ORDERED. ATTEST: JOYCE A. BEARD CHAIRMAN, Board of Supervisors Clerk of Said Board I hereby certify that according to the provisions of Government Code Section 25103, delivery of this document has been made. JOYCE A. BEARD Clerk of the Board By- The yThe foregoing instrument is a correct copy of the original on file in this office ATTEST: JOYCE A. BEARD Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Mendocino. State of California By: sw Deputy . Amok • Big Three Discuss a olnt Crusade wall Street Journal October, 1993 Against California's Electric-Car Rule By OSCAR SURis stop the spread of the California emission GM's Alternative Plan Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL standards, which 12 Northeastern states According to the association's report, DETROIT—The Big Three auto makers { also intend to adopt.In states such as New the auto makqs,are planning to propose to are discussing a collaboration against I York and Massachusetts, the auto makers er strict California clean-air mandates,that have turned to the courts to try and block the Northeastern standard states a federal vehicle emission standard that has been fashioned call for mass production of"zero emissionpassage of the California rules, fearing by GM. The standard would be tougher vehicles," or electric-powered cars, by they would increase the Big Three's obli- than those currently going into effect next 1998. gation to build electric cars. The auto makers may even try to enlist year under the 1990 Clean Air Act,but less the support of Vice President Albert Gore In recent weeks, Big Three executives stringent than those required by that r- nig in their fight against the California pollu- have become more vocal in their protests s low emission vehicle standarrdd that begins to go into effect in 1997. tion measures, according to a document of the California rule. The mandate re- prepared for and discussed at a meeting quires auto makers to dedicate 2% of car The auto makers argue a national Can- last week of the American Automobile sales in that state to zero emmission vehi- darn that is less restrictive than the Cali- Manufacturers Association, a lobbying cles,or electric cars,by 1998.With produc- c r m plan would t, more feasible for the arm of Detroit's Big Three. tion deadlines nearing for such vehicles, car makers to meet, and would_result in a The effort b General Motors reater net reduction in automobile emir. y Corp.,rp., the auto makers have argued that current country. Ford Motor CD.and Chrysler Corp. comes battery technology only permits them to sions across the try. just a month after the Big Three chief build electric cars that are too expensive, "What we are talking about is a con- executives forged a historic, $1 billion or too impractical for most consumers. cept that would be technologically feasible partnership with the Clinton administra- and cost effective,"said an AAMA spokes- tion to develop "clean cars" for the next. Chrysler , Chairman Robert Eaton man about the GM proposal."What we are century. sharply criticized California's electric-car seeking is a way to assist the states. . . . Having thrown their support behind I mandate in a speech last week in Los Wes re working toward the same objec- Mr. Gore's car-of-the-future program, the Angeles. "There is absolutely no economic i a However, air-quality Big Three now want the support of the vice basis for electric vehicles in the world," q Y re gulators from president and California Gov.Pete Wilson. Mr.Eaton said."Not even in Italy,where California to New York are remaining The car makers are seeking relief from the gas is four times the cost of gas in Califor- skeptical of the auto maker's proposal. California rules that would force them to nia."Ford Chairman Harold A.Poling also 'It reflects that the energy and focus of spend billions in the near future to develop expressed strong opposition to the Califor the industry is not to move to the car of the 21st century, but rather to oppose the car functioning,mass-market electric cars. nia mandates in an interview with the Detroit News last week. of the 21st century," said Thomas C. Lawsuits in the Northeast Jorling, commissioner of New York's De- The association has been fighting to partment of Environmental Conservation. Electric Vehicle Facts • Petroleum accounts for 50% of all energy used in the State of California (California Energy Commission,Energy and the Economy, 1994). • Transportation accounts for almost 80% of all the petroleum used in California (California Energy Commission, Energy and the Economy, 1994). • Transportation is currently fueled almost 100% by petroleum{California Energy Commissions Energy end the Economy. 1994). • The world's oil reserves will be exhausted in 42 years at c,urent levels of consumption (Congressional Office of Technology Assessment). • Health care cost related to poor air quality are estimated at $95 billion a year {American Lung Assoc.) • California has the worst air quality problem in the nation. Six of the seven cities with the worst ozone problems in the United States are located in California. Mobile sources of air pollution account for 60% of ozone-forming emissions and for over 90% of carbon monoxide emissions from all sources in the state (California Environmental Protection Agency [CEPA], Air Resources Board [ARB], 1994 Low-Emission and Zero-Emission Vehicle Program Review). Marry areas of California fail to meet federal and state ambient air quality standards (CEPA, ARB). • Atinospheric modeling shows that for California to meet ambient air quality standards, thereby ;providing its citizens with healthful air,emissions from motor vehicles need to approach zero. (CEPA, ARB). • Using the current power mix that generates electricity in the state, which includes out-of-state coal- fired power plants,electric vehicles can reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by about 70% when compared to gasoline powered vehicles. (CEPA, ARB, Technical Support Document Zero-Emission Vehicle Update, April 1994). Electric car Iruths Santa Rosa Press Democrat July, 1994 DETROIT 1T ISS T ® S By NOEL PERRIN Even the math is a little funny Oh,I admit the oil companies are here. When I multiply $600 by 49 getting some support from Detroit. . ,n 1998,New York state is to join people, I get $29,400. I thought the There's a man at Ford,and a very California, Maine and maximum difference was $27,000, high-ranking one, who says that a Massachusetts in requiring auto and the more probable difference decent electric car would -cost makers to begin selling electric !;­ around $10,000. If it's $10,000, the $100,000 to build.Chrysler is selling cars. Not many— just 2 percent of zap per gasoline-car buyer drops to a few electric vans right now. The = the carsa manufacturer sells in the $204. price:$100,000 each.Scary. state that year. But never mind the math. The But that's still too many for the oil whole premise is absurd. Takemy ! But Detroit is not the only place companies,which don't want to lose "'electric Audi, my beautiful, where cars are built. There's any part of their gasoline market. steel-gray commuter car. Last year France, for example, where In their campaign to.prevent the I paid $10,250 for it. I can and do automobiles got their start 100 New York regulations from going drive to work in it,zipping down the years ago. Both Renault and into effect, these companies have ;; interstate at 60 mph. Peugeot Citroen will begin been running scare ads. True, I can't drive very far — production of electric cars next The ads focus on money. They `. about 45 miles before recharging year. Peugeot Citroen plans an could hardly focus on quality, overnight.But that gives me enough initial run of 10,000 cars. because the quality of modern L..power for short trips around town, Now listen to Jean-Yves Helmer, electric cars is too high. I and the cost of recharging is the head of Peugeot's car division. When Popular Science test-drove ,,,negligible. No one has given me a "The production cost of an a General Motors Impact earlier subsidy. electric car is lower than a standard this year, a prototype, it reported Granted,'mine is .an old Audi, car," he said in an interview in that the vehicle was"not so much a built in 1983 and converted to Automotive News this spring. v surprisingly good electric car, but electric in 1992. But it's unlikely I possibly the best handling and could find a 1983 gasoline Audi in Helmer expects to be selling best-performing small car that GM perfect order for$250. electric Peugeots and Citroens in has ever turned out." Or take the current stock in trade France next year for $10,700. He A Mobil ad I saw in June quoted a of Green Motorworks, an thinks he could price them the study asserting that electric cars electric-car dealer in Southern same in the United States. What —could cost at least $10,000 more to California.Its cars start at$9,995. about the scare-figures thrown manufacture than comparable around by Mobil and Ford and gas-powered cars, and maybe as But Mobil isn't talking about used Chrysler? much as$27,000 more. electric cars nor about .converted "Their cost estimates seem to be Who could pay that much? gasoline cars like my Audi, or like highly inflated,"he says,politely. Almost no one. the Electric Leopard at Green And an electric Peugeot at Therefore,the ad maintained,the Motorworks. $10,700 is still not going to be the auto companies will artificially It's talking about new electric cheapest electric vehicle in the reduce electric-car prices to the . cars, built from scratch in 1998. It's i world. There's a company in level of gasoline-powered cars — I claiming they will cost from$10,000 Taiwan that expects to be making and lose money on every one. to $27,000 more than comparable and selling an electric car for just They'll then recoup their losses by cars with combustion engines. under$5,000. raising prices on all other cars. Can this really be true for a car So whom do you believe?The oil The Mobil ad predicted that if the that is simpler in design? companies with their somber .new regulations go into effect, Compare a gasoline engine and predictions? Or Helmer, who will everyone in New York buying a an electric motor sometime and see be ready to sell inexpensive electric gasoiine car in 1990' could get Which has more tilo"virig parts. Cars next year? ...zapped anextra extra $600..Forty-nine Consider which vehicle needs a conventional-car buyers all handing catalytic converter on the tailpipe Noel Perrin teaches over $600 to subsidize one — and which one needs a tailpipe at environmental studies at environmental maniac who wants all, or a muffler, or a fan belt, or Dartmouth College. From the New an electric car. antifreeze,or motor oil. York Times. Electric Vehicle Facts • Electric vehicles will increase efficiency of the state's electric utility capacity by usuig excess power at off-peak hours, thereby allowing more efficient operation of power plants (CEPA, ARB). • Electric vehicle maintenance c6st is about half that of conventional gasoline powered vehicles (CEPA, ARB). • Electric vehicles provide an oppportunity to regain jobs lost in the defense industry, which has done significant research that applies to electric vehicle technology. A skilled work force is already in place to fill arising job opportunities (CEPA, ARB). • The electric vehicle market is expected to grow from$50 million in 1995 to$600 million in 2000. It is expected that this will create 10,000 jobs. Electric vehicle export is anticipated to increase the market to$8 billion in 2003 (CEPA, ARB).