Sir Nicholas Stern, head of the British Government Economic Service and author of a new report on the economic impacts of ignoring Global Warming

The Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club strongly opposes renewal of contracts beyond 2027 for electric energy from the coal-burning Intermountain Power Plant (IPP) in Delta, Utah, by any of the participating cities (Los Angeles, Anaheim, Riverside, Pasadena, Burbank, and Glendale) because the large quantity of greenhouse gases emitted by this plant contributes to global climate change.

The Chapter urges these cities to implement increased conservation, energy efficiency, and use of renewable energy resources throughout the next 20 years so that by 2027 IPP power is no longer needed to meet each city’s energy needs.

1. Global warming has been recognized by the scientific community as the most severe environmental crisis facing the planet, with projected impacts to include sea level rise, severe weather events, increased wildfires, crop failures, water shortages, spread of tropical diseases, and mass species extinctions. The State of California has enacted AB 32, which requires the state to reduce its total global warming emissions (including electricity generated outside the state) by 25% to achieve 1990 levels by 2020, with further reductions after 2020. Scientists report the planet must get to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 to avoid catastrophic warming.
2. Coal produces more CO2 per kwh than any other fuel, in addition to producing deadly pollution, including mercury, particulates, sulfur, etc. The use of coal as fuel to generate electricity must be phased out as rapidly as possible.
3. It is likely that the next US Congress and President will move ahead to implement the consensus of the scientific community through enacting a "carbon tax" to reduce global warming, which will make coal more expensive than renewables and conservation. Renewable, non-polluting sources of electricity include solar, wind, geothermal and biomass. By 2027 (21 years from now) there will be no problem securing plenty of such clean energy, if we start planning and construction now.
4. SB 1368, which essentially prohibits California municipal utilities from entering into new contracts or renewing existing contracts with coal-burning power plants, takes effect on January 1, 2007. Signing contracts before January 1, 2007, would give the appearance of trying to avoid the clear intent of the governor, legislature and the people of California to take clear, decisive and immediate action to reduce our state’s impact on global warming.
5. Combating global warming is a top priority of the National Sierra Club. The recently approved 2006 ENERGY RESOURCES POLICY states, “The Sierra Club generally opposes additional development of these resources, and supports phasing out existing uses quickly during the clean energy transition: Combustion Coal Power Plants. Sierra Club entities may support public policy proposals that include these resources only if they find that the overall balance of the proposal strongly favors efficiency, renewable energy and greenhouse gas reductions, and that the environmental impacts are insubstantial."
6. The Utah Sierra Club Chapter is opposed to IPP expansion to a third unit that will increase CO2 emissions and other pollutants, which cause death and injury in Utah and other states.

1. Electric power generating by burning coal at this plant is currently the cheapest form of power (about $0.04 per kwh) available to Pasadena and the other California participating cities.
2. In addition, since the bonds issued to construct the Intermountain Power Plant and the Southern Transmission Line from the plant to Southern California will be completely paid off in 2024, the cost of this power to the contracting cities will decline after 2024 (to perhaps $0.03 per kwh). The General Manager of Pasadena Water & Power has been quoted, "It does not make economic sense to abandon your house just when you paid off the mortgage! Likewise, it doesn't make sense to abandon this power plant just when it's paid for!"
3. As an example of the Southern California participating cities, Pasadena currently gets 68% of its power from IPP. The city is taking steps to secure 10% of its power from renewable energy sources by 2010, and hopes to achieve 20% by 2017. However, there are insufficient non-coal base-load sources of renewable power currently available for the city to cease all use of coal-generated power, and there is currently insufficient transmission line capacity to transport such power from diverse sources to Southern California.

1. Global warming has been recognized by the scientific community as the most severe environmental crisis facing the planet, with projected impacts to include sea level rise, severe weather events, increased wildfires, crop failures, water shortages, spread of tropical diseases, and mass species extinctions.
2. Combating global warming is a top priority of the National Sierra Club.
3. Becoming carbon neutral means that the activities of the Chapter office and staff will not contribute to global warming.
4. Becoming carbon neutral sets an example for all chapter members, other chapters around the country and the population of the US. It could lead to thousands of Sierra Club members and others becoming carbon neutral, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the United States.
5. Becoming carbon neutral is inexpensive. To offset all emissions from utilities consumed by the Chapter office plus emissions related to air travel tickets and mileage directly paid by the Chapter will cost less than $500 per year.

1. The $500 per year could be used for other program expense.
2. Some minor bookkeeping will be required.

1. CCC stands for the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee
2. CMC stands for the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Conservation Management Committee

1. The primary role of the CCC is to determine (subject to ExComm approval) conservation policy for the Angeles Chapter. CCC meetings and communications also provide a forum for discussing and communicating conservation information to interested parties in the Angeles Chapter.
2. The primary role of the CMC is to assist the Chapter Conservation Chair, Conservation Vice Chair(s) and staff in implementing the Chapter’s conservation policies.

1. A Conservation Committees or Task Force, to be considered active, must have at least three members, must publish its meeting times in the Chapter Conservation Newsletter and/or the Chapter Schedule of Activities, and must meet at least once per calendar quarter. In addition, it must have a mission statement that clearly states its purpose, and must publish an annual report during December of each year describing its meetings, activities, and accomplishments.

Conservation Committee Voting Criteria

1. Voting members of the Chapter Conservation Management Committee are voting members of the Chapter Conservation Committee (CCC). They may not designate other persons to vote in their place.
2. Each Group’s Conservation Chair is a voting member of the Conservation Committee and may designate an alternate who may vote in his or her place. The designated alternate must be an elected member of the Group’s Executive Committee or an active member of the Group’s Conservation Committee. The Group’s Conservation Chair must notify the Chapter Conservation Chair of any such alternate designation in advance of a CCC meeting at which the alternate will represent the group.
3. Each Activities Section, active Conservation Committee or active Conservation Task Force may send a representative, chosen by its Chair, to represent the entity on the CCC. This representative will have the right to vote provided that a representative of the Section, Committee or Task Force has attended a CCC meeting within the last 4 months. If the representative is other than the entity’s Chair, the entity’s Chair must notify the Chapter Conservation Chair of any such alternate designation in advance of a CCC meeting at which the alternate will represent the entity.
4. Each voting representative specified above who is present in person or by conference call at a meeting of the Conservation Committee shall have one vote.

Chapter Conservation Chair and Vice Chair(s)

Near the end of each calendar year the Conservation Committee will hold an election for the positions of Chapter Conservation Chair and Conservation Vice Chair(s). The results of the election will be forwarded to the Chapter Chair as a recommendation. The Chapter Chair will appoint the Conservation Chair and Vice Chair(s), subject to ExComm approval.

Conservation Management Committee

The Conservation Chair and Vice Chair(s) will be voting members and officers of the CMC. Other voting members of the CMC are appointed by the Chapter Conservation Chair, subject to CCC approval. There are no other officers of the CMC.

Other Conservation Committee Officers

The Chapter Conservation Chair may appoint other officers (e.g. Secretary, Treasurer) of the CCC.

Conservation Grants Committee

The Chair of the Conservation Grants Committee (Grants Chair) will be appointed by the Chapter Chair, based on a recommendation from the Conservation Chair, and subject to approval by the Chapter ExComm. The Grants Chair, Conservation Chair and Vice Chair(s) will be voting members of the Conservation Grants Committee. The Grants Chair may appoint other members of the Conservation Grants Committee, subject to CCC approval.

CCC and CMC Agendas

1. The CCC agenda will be prepared by the Conservation Chair. Approximately 10 days in advance of the CCC monthly meeting a preliminary version will be sent by the Conservation Chair to the Editor for inclusion in the Conservation Newsletter. Two days before the CCC meeting the Conservation Chair will distribute the final agenda on the Angeles-Conservation listserv.
2. The CMC agenda will be prepared by the Conservation Chair and distributed to CMC members two days in advance of the CMC meeting.
3. The agenda for either meeting may be amended by a 2/3 majority of voting members present.

Conservation Interns

1. Conservation Staff, Groups, Conservation Committees and Task Forces (entities) may engage unpaid interns to help with their work, after receiving permission from the CMC.
2. The entity will designate a single point of contact (SPOC) who will have primary responsibility for managing the intern. Advertising for interns must be approved by the Senior Chapter Director. Candidates will be interviewed both by the SPOC and the Senior Chapter Director and may be engaged only upon agreement by both parties.
3. Supervision: Interns will be supervised both by the SPOC and the Senior Chapter Director. The SPOC is responsible for keeping the Senior Chapter Director informed concerning the progress of the internship. In the event of a conflict between the SPOC and the Senior Chapter Director concerning the management of the intern, the Senior Chapter Director shall prevail.

Resolutions by the Central Group for November 15 Conservation Committee Agenda

1. Opposition to Private Leases of Public Park Facilities (Passed by the Central Group, November 8, 2006)

The Sierra Club Angeles Chapter opposes any leases of the MacArthur Park band shell or any other park facilities by the Leavitt foundation or any other private group or non-profit entity.  We are in favor of preserving the historic architecture of all MacArthur park facilities and the preservation of the rest of the park as open space green space.

Background
The Leavitt Foundation of Pasadena has proposed to put $250,000 into restoration and alteration of the MacArthur Park band shell, in return for signing a 50-year lease with the Recreation & Parks Department to name it the Leavitt Band Shell and have exclusive rights to provide free public music programs from June to September, for fifty years with the option of extending the lease indefinitely.

Pro
Park facilities should be available to the community.  Any group should be able to apply for an event permit from the Recreation & Parks Department.

Con
Private funds can sometimes do things faster than public funds, which may take a long time to become available.

2. Preserve Griffith Park Land (Passed by the Central Group, November 8, 2006)

The Sierra Club Angeles Chapter believes that Griffith Park land must be preserved.  There should be no expansion of any buildings located in the park or into the land of the park, such as the expansion of the Autry National Center, hotel, restaurants, parking structures, etc.  We oppose commercialization of the park, parkland should not be leased, or taken over by any private or non-profit entity, and it belongs to the public and should be used as it was intended. 

Background

The Autry National Center has proposed to expand its building in Griffith Park. The draft Griffith Park Master Plan has proposed a hotel, restaurants, parking structures, etc. in the Park.

Resolution from Crescenta Valley Group

Crescenta Valley Sierra Club opposes the developer’s plan to decrease the size of the Verdugo Hills Golf Course and to build condos on the land.

Background:

The proposed impact area is 70 acres in the northwest section of the Verdugo Mountains. This area falls entirely within the City of Los Angeles. Currently, approximately half of the land is being used as a privately owned golf course. Structures were first built on the site by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) in 1933. During World War II, the facilities were used as a temporary internment camp housing Japanese-American citizens being deported to internment camps in other parts of the country. In 1944, the Los Angeles County Probation Department took over 10 acres as a center for male juvenile delinquents.

The buildings built by the CCC and used as an internment camp were eventually torn down.

In 1959, the county sold the property for $54,000 to a group of investors, who turned it into Verdugo Hills Golf Course. Approximately, half the land is being used as a golf course and the other half is undisturbed open space. The natural resources on the site have not been surveyed, but parcel is an important part of the Verdugo Mountain ecosystem.

The developer purchased the property from a group of investors in August 2004 for $7,669,000. The golf course is currently an 18-hole course with a driving range. The developer is proposing clustering 269 condo units primarily in the area currently being used as the golf course and shrinking the size of the course from 18 holes to 9 holes. The condos would be placed in and around the greens rendering the remaining 9 hole course unusable as a golf course. The developer is proposing leaving about half the property as open space. The area that he is proposing to leave as open space is hilly terrain which with the slope would be expensive to develop.

The developer is MWH Development (MWH). The owner of MWH is Mark W. Handel. MWH or its subsidiaries have built dozens of smaller developments in Los Angeles County. Most of these developments are 10-40 units in size. This proposed project is one of the largest developments that MWH is planning or has developed. MWH currently owns the Verdugo Hills Golf Course in an operating entity known as Snowball Investments West.

Different parcels of the golf course are zoned differently. Some land has a maximum density of 2 ½ units per acre. Some land has a maximum density of .2 units per acre or requires 5 acres to build 1 unit. These densities are before the City of Los Angeles slope-density ordinance is taken into account. This ordinance further limits density on steeper slopes or terrain.

The community is concerned about the loss of the golf course as recreational open space. This golf course has great sentimental value to members of the community. As there are many proposed developments or increases in land use in the immediate area including the building of the Canyon Hills Development and other smaller proposals, MWH’s proposal will have a negative impact on traffic and local schools. This development will also negatively impact air quality.

A coalition of concerned citizens and organizations against the MWH development proposal is forming. This includes members of the Sunland-Tujunga Neighborhood Council, Crescenta Valley Town Council, the Glendale Crescenta VOICE, local citizens, and golf enthusiasts. Supervisor Antonovich whose district includes the golf course has written a letter to Councilwoman Greuel officially opposing this development. Councilwoman Greuel has in a private meeting expressed opposition against MWH’s proposal but has not taken a position publicly.

Moratorium on Public Statements on Proposed Eruvs in California

from Bruce Hamilton, National Sierra Club Conservation Director

Please add this issue to the Conservation Committee agenda for next Wednesday night. I believe we DO need to take a position on this issue, and I believe the position that Mark Massara and I have taken is fully backed up by our national public lands and endangered species policies.

Marcia Hanscom

RE: Sierra Club position on the proposed eruv near Venice Boardwalk.

I would like to call for a halt to all public Sierra Club statements by all Sierra Club staff and volunteers on the proposed eruv near Venice Beach. I do not believe that the Angeles Chapter has a position on this proposal, but even if they have adopted one, I feel this is an issue with statewide and national implications that demands broader internal discussion before we take an official position.

I understand that both Mark Massara and Marcia Hanscom have been quoted in AP and NPR stories respectively. Since the Club has no formal position on this specific issue at any level, these public statements are very premature. And since the proposal raises many conflicting issues of relevance to many different Club stakeholders, all the more reason we need to consider and resolve the matter internally before we even consider saying anything in public.

The statewide and national concerns are as follows:

There are other eruvs proposed including one in La Jolla. We need a consistent state and national approach to this issue.

Our Environmental Justice policy states in part:

"E. The Right to Sustainable Environmental Benefits

"People are entitled to enjoy the sustainable aesthetic, recreational, cultural, historical, scientific, educational, religious, sacred, sustenance, subsistence, cultural, and other environmental benefits of natural resources. However, actions that tend to ruin the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community are unethical."

First, for us to deny a religious group use of a public beach could be considered denying them their religious rights. It is far from clear that the proposed eruv, if it is a fishing line strung around areas, in any way ruins the biotic community. Far more intrusive activities are permitted on California beaches under the California Coastal Act.

Second, we actively make use of the doctrine of ritual use of public lands in our efforts to defend public lands from commodity development. Some obvious examples are our fight at the San Francisco Peaks in Arizona about artificial snow. We have also supported, and even litigated under, the American Indian Freedom of Religion Act. We were very upset when the Supreme Court weakened those protections in favor of a logging road.

Especially given the election tomorrow, I would like to insist on a moratorium on any public statements or formal policy public positions on this proposal until we can regroup and sort this out with all the relevant stakeholders. We need to hear from local volunteer leaders, coastal protection leaders, EJ leaders, and Partnerships (religious freedom angle) leaders. We also need to get an official internal recommended chapter position.

Those volunteers who feel that they have a clear personal position may, of course, continue to advocate it, but if they do they must ensure that they do so in a way which does not make use of their Sierra Club affiliation and does not create confusion about the Club's current lack of a position on this proposal.

News Updates for Desert Report Are On-line

Although the most recent issue of the Desert Report announced this new feature, not everyone may have seen this on the seventh page.

It is anticipated that at six-week intervals the New Issues section of the publication will be updated in the on-line edition. Several days ago this feature was initiated, and it is possible to find these up dates at <http://www.desertreport.org> . When you reach this address, there will be a row of buttons along the top of the home page. One of these should be "News Updates," and clicking on this will bring you to the page. The updates from the previous printed issue can still be found by opening the issue that is of interest and paging through it to the section you want.

The purpose of posting updates on line is to make them as timely as possible. Finally, if the home page does not show a button labeled "News Updates" it may be necessary to refresh your browser to bring up the complete picture of the home page.

I (we) hope this will be of interest and useful.

Craig Deutsche (editor)