HENRY WEDAA : Chairman, South Coast Air Quality Management District governing board

When times got tough for business, the South Coast Air Quality Management District became a big target. While the AQMD implements rules to clean up air pollution, businesses complained that they were being squeezed by the organization’s fines and permit process. Were the complaints exaggerated? AQMD officials have tried to correct misconceptions and to make the district more “user friendly.” South Coast AQMD Chairman Henry Wedaa, a Yorba Linda councilman, talked to Times correspondent Ted Johnson.

*

Why did some businesses target the AQMD?

We are very visible. We’re into 35,000 industries, and people know we are around. Also recognize that we are not a perfect organization. No organization is. The rules that we put out, a lot of them have not been in the greatest, most readable language. We have been focusing on making them much easier to understand. We’re also bringing people from those industries who are responsible for implementing those rules into (AQMD) classes. . . . They get a lot fewer violations because people are being educated. We’d rather have you do it right. We don’t want to take you to court and fine you.

You established the Commission on Air Quality and the Economy, which included business leaders, to come up with recommendations for changing AQMD policies. Has it worked?

I came to the conclusion that air quality regulations play what I perceive to be a small role compared to other things like workers’ compensation, the cost of housing, wages--you’ve heard the whole list. Most of these turn out to be much more important and much more costly. In any event, I decided I should try to get some of the businesses that we regulate to come in and tell us their concerns. Many of their complaints were legitimate, and frankly, many of their complaints had already been solved.

What about the commission’s proposal to have an ombudsman for the business community who reports directly to the AQMD board?

There were a lot of problems with that. We did not decide to do that. The law requires we have someone around here called the “public adviser.” That in my book is a synonym for ombudsman. What we did do is we took the public adviser and made him report directly to the executive officer (James Lents). We also decided to designate someone as a business retention specialist. We now have a half dozen people working in that office, which helps with permit applications, the technical applications, seeing that people talk to the right people within the district and takes up various legislative issues that bother small businesses. We also have a Business Retention Council, which consists of a number of people specifically interested in retaining business by modifying some of our rules. But understand that we only create laws to implement the legislation that someone else devises (such as the federal and state governments). If there are legislative changes that have to be made, we can only recommend them, we can’t make them.

Are you proposing any modifications to existing rules?

Ride sharing is a regulation that was put on us by both the California Clean Air Act and the federal Clean Air Act of 1990. The (laws) require the region to increase its average vehicle ridership, based on emissions. That’s a rule that everyone loves to hate, and it’s difficult to enforce. It’s a rule that we believe requires legislative changes, and I am in the process of gathering various recommendations that people would like to see made and still let us conform to the requirements of the laws. Everybody bitches about the law, but no one has said, “Well, here is what we think you ought to do.” So I would consider what I receive and propose various things to the board, which would recommend changes in the laws.

Businesses have complained about the fees that have to be paid. Can those be changed?

We hear complaints about fees all of the time. But the fee structure is very low around here. As a matter of fact, the studies show that more than 50% of the companies that we regulate pay us less than $500 a year. I think that is a fantastically small sum of money. What we are trying to do is have other fee sources set up so we can reduce some of the fees that are charged on small businesses. For example, one of the things we have started is a DMV program in which $4 is now added to your vehicle registration.

What about targeting the highest polluting vehicles instead of businesses?

It’s really a very legitimate argument because two-thirds of the problem comes from motor vehicles. The Air Resources Board is responsible for testing and finding those 10% (of high-polluting vehicles) on the road. They are developing equipment and technology for that now. But the (AQMD) may ultimately have that responsibility. Still, it’s actually a lot easier to start with the businesses because there’s a limited number. We only regulate 35,000 businesses as opposed to 7 million cars. It’s easier to go after 35,000 as opposed to 7 million. That doesn’t mean those 7 million will get off the hook. They will be taken care of.

Has the criticism subsided?

I think so. I personally think (the criticism) is turning around. I don’t hear nearly as many complaints.

As you review AQMD’s policies, is there enough room to satisfy the business community and still comply with state and federal regulations?

I firmly believe that we can have both clean air and a good economy. Germany is an example of one country that is very conscious of the environment, and it is very competitive. One of the benefits to Orange County and the region is the advancement of so-called environmental businesses. Certainly in Southern California, with world class scientists out on the streets now, we are going to be able to develop a great part of that business.

On receiving the blame for the problems of business in the region.

“Studies are showing that workers’ compensation is the worst and more costly problem. There is a recognition that ‘hey, the AQMD really isn’t that bad.’ ”

On dealing with changes in federal and state laws.

“We’re getting things in place and well understood so that if changes are made, we will be in a position to help small businesses as opposed to hurting them.”

On the Clinton Administration.

“They are going to be much more environmentally concerned and active. We will not find any relaxation of air quality rules.”

On firms that can’t quite comply, but are making the effort.

“Intent is very important. People who are actively and honestly trying to comply, we’re not going to go out and fine them.”