Every excuse, every shrill denial, every exaggeration about our lawsuit by our so-called leaders misses the whole point of the CEQA impacts discovery process.
You cannot manipulate, hide, or ignore data and expect to discover the true impacts of your plan. An EIR lacking real analysis and discovery of impacts is called a NULLITY, because it misinforms and misleads both the public and decision makers. Without real information PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY goes out the window and democracy also becomes a nullity.
In this case, the GHG emissions of the 2050 RTP/SCS were projected to INCREASE by over 700% from the targeted reductions of Executive Order S-3-05. This is the information that SANDAG directors chose not to reveal and not to evaluate. Thus both the superior and Appellate court ruled that SANDAG directors abused their authority in not revealing what the LAW requires.
No amount of Orwellian excuses about “breathtaking” judicial overreach, or exaggerations about shutting down all projects in California, or lack of legal clarity about climate change standards can divert attention from this truth: SANDAG DID NOT REVEAL THE REAL 2050 Regional Transportation Plan GHG IMPACTS, THE REAL HEALTH IMPACTS, THE REAL LAND-USE IMPACTS nor did they MODEL REAL ALTERNATIVES TO REDUCE THESE IMPACTS. That is the truth. That is what the courts ruled.
Let us consider an analogy. An accountant delivers a long term financial report to a company director of a large national manufacturer. The report reveals that the current company plan will result in a 700% decrease in company revenues over the long term life of plan. The director chooses not to reveal the report to the shareholders. The truth is discovered and the director fired.
Tell me, oh illustrious leaders, why you, too, should not be held accountable for your campaign of misinformation and abuse of authority?
Instead of giving us excuses, why not give us your resignation for failing to do your duty?
Read the following facts and tell us why you did not reveal this information to the public!?
“Meeting the EO S-3-05 trajectory in 2050 similarly would require limiting total land use and transportation emissions to less than 5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent ("MMTCO2e") by that date. AR 12605. Under the Plan, however, land use and transportation emissions in 2050 will total 43 MMTCO2e. AR 2576-77. Even "net" emissions (including reductions from renewable electricity, vehicle efficiency, and fuels standards) will be 33.65 MMTCO2e. Id- Total Plan GHG emissions6 in 2050 are thus between six and nine times higher than they must be under a long-term trajectory aimed at stabilizing greenhouse pollution at the high end of the scientifically accepted range. 4R12605” (pg 22).
By: Duncan McFetridge