In a recent government meeting, the Board of Supervisors unanimously opposed Assembly Bill 998, following a recommendation from the California State Association of Counties (CSAC). The bill, which has been criticized for its lack of transparency and public input, is seen as detrimental to local governments, potentially leading to significant unfunded mandates and economic challenges.

Supervisor Richard Forster highlighted that the bill could create disparities among local governments, stifle job opportunities, and impose costly compliance requirements without providing necessary enforcement measures. He emphasized that the legislation was developed behind closed doors, excluding key stakeholders from the discussion, which he described as a troubling trend in the state legislature.

The board's motion to oppose AB 998 was supported by concerns that it undermines local control and could lead to increased costs for residents. Forster pointed out that the bill's provisions could disproportionately benefit certain areas while leaving others vulnerable, particularly in the logistics sector.

In addition to discussing AB 998, the meeting also covered various propositions, including Proposition 5, which aims to lower the voter approval threshold for local government financing, and Proposition 35, which seeks permanent funding for healthcare services. The board expressed support for these measures, recognizing their potential benefits for local infrastructure and health programs.

However, the board opposed Proposition 4, which allocates $10 billion for climate-related initiatives, citing concerns over the distribution of funds and the potential for increased state indebtedness. The board's stance reflects a broader skepticism about the effectiveness of such measures in addressing local needs.

The meeting concluded with a commitment to draft a letter to the governor articulating the board's opposition to AB 998, signaling a proactive approach to safeguarding local governance and economic interests.