Yesterday’s Sacramento Bee featured an Op-Ed column by Friends of the Earth vice president Russell Long and MoveOn co-founder Joan Blades on Assemblymember Mark Leno’s efforts protect Californians from toxic fire-retardants:
Babies are especially vulnerable because they crawl or climb on furniture and carpeting treated with fire retardants, and they also absorb these from their mothers’ breast milk, which in California represents the highest levels found anywhere in the world, according to scientists.
This is especially troubling in light of recent studies that link fire retardant exposure to cancer, birth defects, autism, hyperactivity, learning disabilities such as attention deficit disorder and a host of other problems.
At the same time, fire statistics don’t show that these chemicals are actually saving lives, which explains why firefighter organizations throughout the state are supporting the elimination of the brominated and chlorinated fire retardants used in furniture and bedding products.
In marked contrast to the California’s national leadership on other environmental issues such as global warming or automobile smog, state regulations on fire safety have actually caused a national problem. This is because furniture makers find it uneconomical to carry two sets of inventory, so many build only California-compliant furniture regardless of where it is sold in the United States.
Clearly, the state needs to go in a new direction.
Indeed. And it is great to see the support this legislation has been receiving.
A precedent-setting bill by Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, that would ban brominated and chlorinated fire retardants in furniture, mattresses and bedding is being heard in the Senate. Supported by professional firefighters, furniture makers, and environmental groups, this bill is a good first step toward making our homes and our children safe from toxic chemicals.
Also, Sacramento Bee recently editorialized in favor of Assemblyman Leno’s Complete Streets legislation:
They’re the blight of suburbia and many city neighborhoods — multilane streets and boulevards that accommodate only cars. They have no bike lanes. No sidewalks. No pull-outs for bus transit. No trees. No medians or crosswalks so kids and other pedestrians can safely cross to get to schools, shops or retirement villages.
You can see these types of streets all over the urbanized parts of Sacramento County and in many other California communities. These high-speed blacktops are one reason that, each year in California, cars kill about 700 pedestrians and injure 14,000 others.
These boulevards of death now have a polite name — incomplete streets. In a perfect world, incomplete streets would be outlawed and phased out of existence. Yet short of such bold action, lawmakers could take action this year to encourage more complete streets as communities plan for future growth. They could enact Assembly Bill 1358, by Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, which requires local governments to accommodate all users of the road when revising the circulation element of their general plans.
This important legislation deserves bi-partisan support:
Leno’s bill passed the Assembly, but it was a party-line vote, with nearly all Republicans opposed. This is mystifying. Last time we checked, Republicans walked on two legs and occasionally rode bikes. Why the opposition to this bill?
Legislative analysts say it would cost a mere $150,000 for the Office of Planning and Research to develop “complete street” guidelines mandated by AB 1358. The total cost for local governments to follow these guidelines would be about $500,000 in some years. Here in our region, Sacramento, Davis, Roseville, Folsom and other communities are already building complete streets.
As California’s population gets older, alternatives to the automobile will become even more important. At the moment, about one-fifth of California elderly don’t drive, either because they can’t or choose not to. The population over 65 is projected to double by 2030, which is why the California Chapter of the American Association of Retired Persons supports this bill.
AB 1358’s next stop is the Senate Local Government Committee. This bill deserves to pass without a single nay vote. There’s no reason why protecting kids, the elderly and other people afoot should be a partisan issue.
