COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

 

County Manager’s Office

 

DATE:

June 24, 2004

   

BOARD MEETING DATE:

June 29, 2004

 

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

John Maltbie, County Manager

SUBJECT:

County Manager’s Report #8

 

1.

Resolution urging the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations relative to AB 1493 (Pavley, 2002)

 

Recommendation

Adopt a resolution urging the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt meaningful regulations relative to AB 1493.

 

Background

AB 1493 (Pavley, 2002) requires CARB to adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gases emitted by motor vehicles. The bill did not require the use of specific technologies or quantify the emission reduction targets.

 

More information about CARB’s efforts can be found on their website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm

 

Discussion

The American Lung Association in cooperation with the Union of Concerned Scientists are developing grassroots support for CARB to adopt regulations that require significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.

 

The impact of greenhouse gas emissions is significant. Considered the main cause of global warming, carbon dioxide gas levels continue to rise due to the burning of gasoline and other fossil fuels. In 1997, the Kyoto Protocols called for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. While the Clinton Administration agreed to the Kyoto Protocols, Congress failed to ratify it.

 

AB 1493 requires CARB to issue relevant regulations by January 1, 2005. However, such regulations would not impact vehicle projection until the 2009 model year. In reducing the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by motor vehicles, the CARB regulations would begin to address the global warming problem as well as the air quality impacts of concern to the American Lung Association. Other local jurisdictions that have passed similar resolutions include the counties of Contra Costa, Marin, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Francisco, Santa Clara and Sonoma.

 

Vision Alignment

Support for strong regulations calling for the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from California vehicles would further San Mateo County’s commitment to ensure basic health and safety for all and support Goal # 7 to maintain and enhance the public safety for all residents and visitors.

 

Fiscal Impact

Unknown.

 

2.

H.R. 2671, Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal (CLEAR) Act

 

Recommendation

Adopt a resolution in opposition to H.R. 2671, the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal (CLEAR) Act.

 

Background

H.R. 2671 would clarify that state and local law enforcement personnel have the authority to enforce U.S. immigration laws. It would also terminate, within two years of the bills enactment, federal incarcerating assistance funding for those states that do not enact state law permitting the enforcement of federal immigration laws.

 

According to Congressman Norwood, principal author of H.R. 2671, there is a “growing crisis within our borders that has been largely ignored and presents another challenge in securing our homeland that simply must be met.” Referencing the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Congressman Norwood warned in his introductory remarks that, “an estimated 3,800 of these individuals [people scheduled for deportation] are from countries with a known presence of al Qaeda.”

 

In response, the CLEAR Act is intended to make clear that local law enforcement has the authority to enforce federal immigration laws. In addition, the CLEAR Act would end federal incarceration assistance to states that fail to enact, within two years of enactment of the CLEAR Act, laws permitting local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration laws. The Act would also require states and local governments to report information about apprehended illegal aliens and would provide grants and other compensation for the costs of complying with the Act.

 

Discussion

While not addressing the substance of the CLEAR Act, the National Association of Counties (NACo) strongly opposes the Act due to fiscal concerns. NACo notes counties’ fiscal crises and their impacts on jails and jail populations. In addition, NACo expresses concern about the reporting requirements and the adequacy of federal reimbursements for incurred costs. As an example, they reference the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP), which has reimbursed less than 40 percent of all eligible state and local costs.

 

With the threat of losing SCAAP funds, the CLEAR Act effectively requires the enactment of laws regarding enforcement of federal immigration law. Regardless of whether or not local jurisdictions actually enforce such law, the possibility could have a chilling effect on illegal immigrants reporting other crimes. NACo believes that it could affect the ability of local law enforcement to perform their duties.

 

In a slightly similar fashion, H.R. 3722, Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments of 2004, threatened federal funding to county hospitals for the care provided to undocumented immigrants. The bill would have required reporting and documentation by hospitals as a condition of receiving funds. This bill was defeated in committee.

 

As of October 2003, H.R. 2671 is in the House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.

 

Vision Alignment

Passage of H.R. 2671 would threaten San Mateo County’s commitment to ensure basic health and safety for all and would impede the County’s Goal #s 7 and 24 to maintain the public safety for all residents and to encourage residents to accept individual responsibility for contributing to the County’s quality of life.

 

Fiscal Impact

Unknown