(April 28, 2008) -- As first Flashed on LBReport.com's front page this afternoon (April 28), at today's meeting of the Assembly Transportation Committee Assemblyman Warren Furutani (D., Carson-LB) removed from reconsideration his bill, AB 2332. that would ban construction/expansion of railyards within 440 yards (1/4 mile) of schools.
The announcement was made without explanation by the Committee chair and Assemblyman Furutani didn't speak.
Following the meeting, Assemblyman Furutani's Chief of Staff, Dean Grafilo, emailed this statement by Assemblyman Furutani to LBReport.com:
Assemblyman Furutani: "I decided to pull the bill rather than proceed to a vote for re-consideration due its lack of support on the committee. Similar to when I first presented the bill two weeks age, the opposition swayed enough members to not support the bill.
"Despite this, either through legislation or negotiation, I will continue to make sure the concerns of improving air quality--in the immediate future--by reducing toxic, diesel emissions from rail yards are at the forefront of any potential expansion in this industry."
On April 14, AB 2332 stalled on a 5-3 vote when the Committee's majority Dems -- including LB Assemblywoman Betty Karnette (D., LB) -- declined to provide the 8 affirmative votes needed to advance it. As reported by LBReport.com, Assemblyman Karnette explicitly requested that she be recorded as "not voting."
Today (April 28), AB 2332 was scheduled for a no-debate reconsideration vote...when the Committee chair announced that Ass'yman Furutani had removed the bill from today's Committee schedule. The action means that the bill is now effectively dead for this session (unless advanced by Dem leadership above the Committee level).
AB 2332 would have prohibited the construction of a railyard within 440 yards (1/4 mile) of a school; prohibit the expansion of a railyard if it results in being within 1/4 mile of a school; and prohibit a railyard as of January 1, 2009, that is located within 1/4 mile of a school to expand those facilities that are within 1/4 mile of the school.
LBUSD's Hudson Elementary School in WLB is within a quarter of a mile from the proposed BNSF [Burlington Northern Santa Fe] "Southern CA Internatonal Gateway" (SCIG) container transfer facility. It would use trucks to haul containers from ships at the Ports of LB/L.A. -- through WLB -- to reach the new rail facility.
The SCIG railyard is supported by the Port of L.A., various port-industry interests and the LB Area Chamber of Commerce. Proponents call the project "near dock" rail and acknowledge its impacts on WLB, but say it will bring regional benefits by getting trucks off area freeways and reducing pollution across the southland air basin.
WLB neighborhood residents oppose the project, calling "near-dock rail" a euphemism for "in-neighborhood impacts"...and note that Hudson Elementary School and adjacent WLB neighborhoods are already enduring very high pollution levels.
An Assembly Transportation Committee legislative analysis listed AB 2332 registered support and opposition to date as follows:
Support
American Lung Association of California
California League of Conservation Voters
Coalition for a Safe Environment
Coalition for Clean Air
Communities for Clean Ports
Long Beach Alliance for Children with Asthma
Natural Resources Defense Council
Planning and Conservation League
Union of Concerned Scientists
Opposition
BNSF Railway Company
California Short Line Railroad Association
Union Pacific Railroad Company
The LB City Council took no formal public position on AB 2332.
In an April 21 legislative update to LB's Harbor Commission, PoLB staff indicated it was "watching" the bill [no public position].
At the April 14 Assembly Transportation Committee hearing on AB 2332, a BNSF RR rep said the SCIG facility will use clean cranes and cleaner trucks...and argued that Assemblyman Furutani's bill would prevent these benefits. A Union Pacific RR rep also opposed the bill, saying his company's planned expansion of its ICTF facility nearby would use measures making it as clean as possible.
Assemblyman Furutani responded at the time that SCIG proponents didn't discuss the increases in volumes that the project would also invite. He indicated that he was open to amendments and acknowledged that the railroads are taking actions they he said would bring future benefits, but he indicated that he's focused on the situation faced by his impacted constituents in the area now.
