![]() |
||





|
The 125 projects would be chosen by a state agency only after the law has passed. The state agency is supposed to consider economic benefits from a project when making selections, without mention of environmental harms, and would likely choose the largest and most environmentally problematic projects for exemption from judicial review. Protecting the high quality of life in California remains the best option for continuing to attract and retain business to our state. Legislation like the ones proposed will increase traffic problems, promote sprawl, and worsen air pollution - all factors that drive businesses away and lower our quality of life. The whole point of judicial review is to keep the preparers of environmental documents honest and accurate, an objective that is often missed even with the possibility of a judge examining them for accuracy. Dropping that review eliminates the incentive for meaningful compliance with CEQA, and the end result may be an even broader attack against environmental protection in California. Please call or fax a short letter to your Assembly Member or State Senator. Click here to find your representatives' phone numbers. Please click on your representatives' name to find their fax number. To see the Committee for Green Foothills letter, click here. Thanks for speaking up for our coastal wetlands and environmental protections! Your voice does make a difference! - The folks at Committee for Green Foothills |
|
||||||||
| Read CGF's blog Read about -- and comment on -- the latest in local open space on our weblog... |
Glossary Just what is an "urban growth boundary" or a "habitat conservation plan" anyway? See our comprehensive online glossary... |
More actions
you can take: |
||||
|
|
|||