Should unelected California regulators call the shot for auto rules in Washington state?

A proposal in Washington state seeks to end the delegation of rulemaking to unelected regulators in California concerning auto standards. HB 1117 attempts to remove this questionable delegation of authority related to California motor vehicle emissions standards to help generate new transportation revenue for the state by reducing administration burdens on the people.

The intent section for HB 1117 notes:

"The delegation of authority related to California motor vehicle emissions standards has caused unintended consequences. Individuals have not been able to register vehicles that meet federal manufacturing standards that they own . . . The state benefits when every vehicle that operates on the public roads is legally registered and when government operates in an efficient manner. The legislature intends to improve the lives of all of the people who had to seek an exemption and all of the workers who do not want to tell people they cannot register their vehicles because of California motor vehicle emissions standards."

As it stands, Washington State is on track to cease the sale of large trucks and motorhomes powered by diesel or gasoline as a consequence of blindly following California standards. Representative Andrew Barkis recently introduced HB 1117 to repeal this delegated authority to California regulators. The bill mentions that the Department of Licensing had to grant 407,541 exemptions from September 2023 to September of 2024. This legislation aims to both reduce the red tape, as well as ensure transportation revenue comes in through vehicle sales tax.

In 2020, the Washington State Legislature passed SB 5811, which adopted the emissions standard set forth by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). With the way CARB set up its model, any legislative body that chooses to assume these standards must do so in its entirety and cannot be modified. The legislature was given the option of choosing between the federal admissions standards or California’s and ended up choosing California’s as they claim it aligned more closely with Washington’s goals.

Involved in the CARB model are the advanced clean truck standards. This requires manufacturers to increase the number of zero-emission vehicles they sell in a given state with target percentages between 4%-7%. Starting next year, zero-emission vehicles are required to make up 7% of all Class 2b-3 truck and Class 7-8 tractor sales, and Class 4-8 truck sales are required to be 11% zero-emission vehicles. By 2023, the sales percentage must be 30% for Class 2b-3 trucks, and Class 7-8 tractors, and 50% for Class 4-8 trucks. In April of 2023, CARB also voted on its advanced clean fleets rule, which will make all new medium and heavy-duty vehicles sold and registered to be zero emission by 2036, and all trucks to be zero-emission by 2042.

In these CARB standards, there is a specific emphasis on the chassis of the vehicle undercarriage that braces the weight and running gear. For RV’s, consumers won’t be able to register Diesel Class Aa and most Super C Diesel motor homes if the chassis on it was built after January 1, 2025. Manufacturers can’t sell dealers in Washington any diesel motorhomes that have a chassis built after January 1, 2025. These new rules are due to major chassis manufacturing companies such as Freightliner, and Spartan, being unable to meet emissions requirements put forward by CARB that a percentage of their chassis to be EV.

Will Rogers, the General Manager at Poulsbo RV in Everett stated:

“We’re trying to keep 2024 chassis available for next year so people can still buy new diesel vehicles, This may just increase demand for used vehicles, which will affect our business."

It was also reported by The RV Industry Association that some manufacturers are already withdrawing from CARB-regulated markets including Washington State.

It's important to note that a major aspect of HB 1117 aims to maintain and increase revenue to the Washington State Department (WSDOT) of Transportation. As it stands, the WSDOT collects a third of 1% of tax accrued by vehicle sales. If the CARB policies remain, there will be a sharp decline in sales of expensive motor vehicles such as RV’s, motorhomes, and large trucks. While supporters of CARB may suggest that these regulations will decrease the carbon emissions put out by Washington State, there is also a real risk of losing revenue and proper funds to build infrastructure for transportation projects such as bridges, roads, etc.

Currently, the transportation budget faces a $1 billion deficit as the costs of recent projects have been underestimated. Representative Jake Fey chairs the House Transportation Committee and admits that they are looking for new ways to generate revenue for transportation projects. Repealing CARB standards for Washington would both increase revenue from the continued vehicle sales and keep business owners and consumers happy. If it’s not repealed, it’s hard to see how these CARB standards wouldn’t put the transportation budget even further into the red.

Another major objection to the CARB standards is the principle of federalism. The Washington State Legislature must have the independence and authority to create its own carbon emission standards. Each state's ecosystem is different, and each state’s electorate is different. It is naïve and irresponsible to assume that Washingtonian's concerns line up perfectly with California’s.

The Citizen Action Defense Fund filed a motion for summary judgment in a suit brought by two members of the legislature making this exact point. Senator Mike Padden and Representative Chris Corry are plaintiffs in the court action challenging the legislation that allowed Ecology to adopt rules that would be passed by an unelected board in California. Former Senator Mike Padden commented:

“We must protect the sovereignty of the state of Washington. Washington state’s elected legislators must make laws in Washington State not legislators from the state of California. Senate Bill 5811 weakens our sovereignty as a state. That is why this lawsuit is so vitally important."

Ultimately, the consumer should be able to decide whether they’d like to buy an EV, hybrid, gas, or diesel vehicle. It is a win-win scenario when the state can generate proper revenue, citizens have actual representation for the rules they are subjected to, vehicle businesses can continue to sell and manufacture, and buyers hold the power to make their own vehicle decisions.