Opinion ID: 1408898
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: governmental responsibility

Text: The board is granted quasi-legislative powers the exercise of which may have a profound effect on our society, including health, social and economic matters. Common sense dictates that in the absence of the clearest showing of legislative intent to the contrary, the matters to be considered by the board in exercising its powers should be commensurate with its responsibilities. The board is charged not merely with determining the need for regulation but must determine the best methods of regulation and the extent of regulation. To do its job responsibly it must consider the consequences to health and the economy of the proposed regulations. By ignoring the consequences of its own regulations, an agency runs the risk that it may cause more mischief than it cures. Obviously, ambient air quality standards adopted by the board may have major effects on our economy, possibly substantially limiting industry and employment. In a closely related code section, the Legislature has recognized that clean air regulations may have important economic effects and made clear its intent to require the board to consider the economic impact of its regulations. Providing that the board shall adopt emission standards for new motor vehicles, the Legislature stated: Prior to adopting such standards, the state board shall consider the impact of such standards on the economy of the state, including, but not limited to, their effect on motor vehicle fuel efficiency. (§ 43101.) The language of the section, impact ... on the economy, is not substantially different from effects on the economy in section 39606, and the additional words of such standards in section 43101 do not warrant a distinction because section 39606 is concerned with matters to be considered in adopting standards. Motor vehicle fuel efficiency is an economic matter, and section 43101 tells us that it is included in impact ... on the economy. Effects on the economy likewise should be read to include relevant economic concerns. Automobile emissions are a major cause of air pollution. The legislative determination that impacts on the economy are to be considered in adopting emission standards reflects not only legislative concern that the standards adopted might have undesirable effects on the economy but also legislative belief that the agency can effectively consider those effects with the health hazards of air pollution. [2] The trial court recognized that unless economic impact of proposed standards was considered by the board, there was a danger that the standards adopted would be disastrous to our economy. Because the board refused to consider evidence as to economic effects, we do not know whether the standards adopted will have the effect of crippling some industries, causing widespread layoffs, and preventing the normal growth of industry.