Two Clean-Air Bills Get Deukmejian’s Signature

Gov. George Deukmejian, under pressure to bring California up to federal clean-air standards, Friday signed legislation designed to reduce smog and strengthen the state’s vehicle inspection program.

Working all day and into the night to meet a midnight deadline, Deukmejian vetoed a bill that would have made catastrophic health care insurance available to hard-to-insure Californians under the age of 65. And he vetoed a bill that would have prohibited the state from issuing liquor licenses to large private clubs that discriminate on the basis of race, religion, ancestry, sex or age.

And the Republican governor vetoed a bill requiring fire sprinklers in high-rise buildings that had generated heated opposition in Los Angeles. Deukmejian, in a letter to the Senate attached to his veto, said he was concerned that the sprinkler bill “would preempt a stronger Los Angeles city ordinance,” as local officials had warned.

The governor said he would support a similar bill next year if it does not interfere with local ordinances.

In other actions on the remainder of the more than 1,200 bills sent to him before the Legislature adjourned for the year on Sept. 1, Deukmejian again vetoed efforts by lawmakers to revive the state’s worker safety agency. He also rejected a $9-million drug prevention education bill that would have created a comprehensive drug abuse and education program.

One of the clean-air bills, carried by Assemblyman Byron D. Sher (D-Palo Alto), is designed to produce cleaner skies by requiring local air quality agencies to take regulatory actions that will bring about a 5% annual reduction in smog. If the local agencies are not successful, the state Air Resources Board could step in and take over local smog regulation.

Detroit auto manufacturers put together a strong last-minute lobbying campaign in an effort to persuade Deukmejian to veto the legislation. They complained about fees of up to $4.5 million they will be asked to pay to compensate the state for costs involved in inspecting and certifying motor vehicle smog equipment.

Oil companies, utilities and major businesses dropped their opposition to the bill after differences were ironed out.

Environmentalists, who along with legislators spent two years drafting and shepherding the bill through the Legislature, threatened to put together an initiative drive if the bill had been defeated.

Sher said he was “delighted” by Deukmejian’s action. Sher said the goal of 5%-a-year reduction in smog levels “will be hard to reach, but it’s possible. I hope this is the beginning of cleaner skies in California.”

Both the Sher bill and a second bill toughening the state’s motor vehicle inspection program were a response to federal pressure to improve the quality of air in California’s large urban areas. State officials said that more than 75% of Californians live in areas that are below federal air-quality standards.

The motor vehicle inspection legislation, carried by Sen. Robert B. Presley (D-Riverside), will prove costly to many motorists, who beginning Jan. 1, 1990, will have to pay a lot more if their cars fail smog tests.

The legislation allows mechanics to charge up to $300 for exhaust emission repairs, compared to the current limit of $50.

Under the bill, repair costs will increase on a sliding scale for cars built between 1972 and 1990. Cars built in 1971 and before would stay within the $50 limit. But mechanics could charge up to $300 for 1990 and later model cars.

Automobile manufacturers will also be required to issue a comprehensive warranty for cars and pickup trucks to cover the cost of repairing any part of a malfunctioning emissions system. Under current law, vehicles made before and including the 1966 model year are not required to undergo smog inspections, but the law allows the state Air Resources Board to decide whether the older cars should be brought into the program.

The bill also will establish an experimental program that would require heavy-duty diesel vehicles such as trucks and buses to be inspected for emissions violations at Highway Patrol weigh stations.

Presley said he hopes the bill will help meet a 25% reduction goal demanded by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

“This legislation is crucial to meeting the pollution reduction goal set for us by the federal government,” Presley said. “Without it, California faced decertification of its vehicle inspection program.”

The catastrophic health insurance bill that drew another Deukmejian veto was supported by an estimated 100 health-related groups. It was intended to provide health insurance coverage to people considered to be high risks because of serious health problems.

Two years ago, Deukmejian vetoed similar legislation because it would have been financed from a payroll tax on workers.

This time around, Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys) deleted the tax, hoping to win the governor’s support. To provide financial support for the program, Robbins proposed using savings from the state’s Medi-Cal program, which currently serves as the state’s insurer of last resort.

But without the direct subsidy, critics said that the insurance would be so expensive only a few Californians could afford it.

Deukmejian said the program’s “rich benefit structure and capped rates are not consistent with an actuarially sound system.”

The governor, in his veto of the private clubs bill, clearly indicated he was worried about how his action might be interpreted. In a lengthy veto message, Deukmejian said he had “worked throughout my career to improve the opportunity of our citizens to reach their highest potential, including freeing our society from the bonds of discrimination.”

But while the governor said he does not believe membership in private clubs should be based on race, gender, national ancestry or religious beliefs, he added that “the fact that some citizens do not adhere to this standard . . . does not by itself warrant the revocation of their right to sell or serve alcoholic beverages.”

The governor’s veto of the worker safety legislation is the latest development in a long-running fight between Deukmejian and Democratic leaders in the Legislature. Deukmejian cut financing for the Cal/OSHA program, in effect turning responsibility for worker safety programs over to the federal government. Since then, Democrats have passed bills, amended Deukmejian’s budgets and gone to court to restore the funding, to no avail.

Labor unions, with the help of Democratic legislators, put Proposition 97 on the Nov. 8 election ballot. Like the bill, the initiative would restore vetoed state money to run the worker safety program. So Deukmejian’s veto does not end the fight.

Deukmejian, alluding in his veto message to the running battle, said: “The ceaseless efforts to revive this duplicative bureaucracy once again demonstrates just how difficult it is to eliminate a government program. It leads one to agree with the often-stated view that a governmental program is the closest thing to eternal life on earth.”

The drug prevention bill, similar to legislation Deukmejian vetoed last year, would have provided $9 million for drug abuse education programs in public school from kindergarten through high school. This would have nearly doubled the amount of money earmarked for school-based drug abuse programs, said the bill’s author, Assemblyman Steve Clute (D-Riverside).

According to Clute, the governor said the bill was “unnecessary and premature.”

“I can’t understand the governor’s reasoning. . . . Drug abuse in our schools and neighborhoods has gotten out of hand, and it’s getting worse,” Clute said.

Deukmejian also signed a package of bills that he said were designed to create more affordable and quality housing in California. Among the bills is legislation that cracks down on property owners who refuse to repair or clean up run-down and unsafe rental housing units by requiring them to pay court costs, attorney fees and enforcement costs for housing law violations that endanger the health and safety of tenants.

And Deukmejian vetoed a bill that would have required local school districts to teach courses in AIDS prevention courses to pupils in public school grades 7 through 12. The governor said the bill by Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara) is not necessary because many schools already have similar programs or intend to begin them in the near future.