united states protection agency. this was actually appropriated through 2018-2019 budget process and originally allocated to the construction cost expected to occur in 2020. in fall of 2018, the united states epa asked to build a grant's fund and the administers at the federal level wanted to ensure we were spending the money,es, and epa isn't the most favorable department. in spring of 2018, there was a grant over one million dollars or greater approval by the board of supervisors. after learning about this additional requirement, we asked for this grant agreement before you today to be retroactive approval. >> let's open this up for comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. i would like to move this to the full board with a positive recommendation and we can take that without objection, thank you very much. madam clerk, any other business before us today? >> no further business. >> we are adjourned. [♪] >> i really believe that art should be available to people for free, and it should be part of our world, you shouldn't just be something in museums, and i love that the people can just go there and it is there for everyone. [♪] >> i would say i am a multidimensional artist. i came out o

will allow the state to focus on addressing its air quality problems and finally achieving compliance with epa's ambient air quality standards. california has the worst air quality in the united states. it has 82 non-attainment areas and 34 million people living in areas that do not meet the nax sta standards. that's more than twice as many people as any other state in the country. we hope that the state will focus on these issues rather than trying to set fuel economy standards for the entire country. today's action also clears the way for our final safe rule. our proposed safe rule reflects what we believe is the right approach to national fuel economy standards. right for public safety and the environment and i will give four reasons why. first, revising the standards will reduce the price for new vehicles. the average sticker price of a new vehicle reached 39,500 in the first half of this year. this is simply out of reach for many american families. the current trajectory of the standards is one of the factors driving costs higher. in order to comply with the obama standards, automakers need to sell many more electric vehicles. by some counts they will need to produce lin

we have not gotten the final range figures from epa to certify in the united states yet.uggest a range around 450 kilometers. we are pretty happy with that. we did something to come here to new york. we drove down from niagara falls. the first trip before we charged the car was 240 miles, and we added another 45 miles on the car. you know, so this is something that, from my point of view, is sufficient, especially if you look at the performance potential with the car. and range anxiety, from my point of view, is going to change. people are going to find out that over 90% of instances where you charge your car are at home or at work. jason: you know the car buyer, the car enthusiast, the driver so well. where are we in terms of adoption? what moment are we? klaus: i think we are not at the tipping point. people naturally gravitate towards battery electric vehicles. we are at a point where people get more curious about that type of technology. again, tesla, they have plowed through that environment, and they have started that trend and we have great respect for them. other

have a strong clean energy standard across the united states, and we're going to crack down on corporations that violate our laws. i'm going to appoint an epa administrator that actually believes in environmental protection and then goes and en forces those laws in the next administration. >> you just mentioned cracking down on corporations. when you were secretary, as part of your climate plan, your new climate plan, you said you would empower the epa to pursue environmental justice against corporate polluters. that's what you said. who are the corporate polluters, and how are you going to go after them? >> right now i think there are too many to count. there are many companies across the united states that are basically shoving off the negative cost of their business onto the public by polluting. number one, we would have an epa that actually is going to enforce the clean air act. we would also strengthen the clean power rule. we would ensure that we're able to implement a carbon pollution fee and then use that revenue to make investments that we need to make to get to net zero, and we wouldn't be afraid of taking these folks to court and

epa violations. there is someone who does not believe in environmental protection. it sounds like nonsense. it is unfortunate that the president of the united states is coming to san francisco choosing to attack our city. rather than trying to assist us with more funding. >> reporter: the san francisco mayor issued her own statement. we are focused on advancing solutions to meet the challenges on our streets. if the president wants to talk about homelessness, we are committed to working with the state in federal partners on an actual solution. >>> while the trump administration has promised to intervene, the housing secretary ben carson yesterday toward housing in san francisco has officially rejected the governor's request for any more federal funding. >> they say they are unused the reason why is because the cost in california. we are asking them to address that issue. i suspect that was not his intention. his intention was to take a cheap shot, and use this to demagogue a progressive state. >> secretary carson blames regulations for the states problems and said solutions can be found in private public partnerships. >>> beto o'rourke is in the b

. >>> the epa refeeling the obama era waters of united states. this caused a headache among farmers by the way. let's bring in epa administrator andrew wheeler. good to see you, administrator. how did you untangle all the water regulations some which conflicted with each other? >> it was a problem and we did it, i have to say this was a promise made and a promise kept by president trump on the campaign trail. he promised to undo the 2015 obama regulation and that is the step that we took last week and we will be replacing it at the end of this year with a much easier to understand definition as far as waters of the united states which is what determines property owners having to get a federal permit. david: so is it fair to say that you just had too many layers of regulations? and again they conflicted with each other and made the rule so ambiguous it gave more power to the regulators coming in to tell you what to do with your own property? >> it did and the definition was very encompassing. in fact the obama administration, they had such a broad

epa decision may spark massive new development projects. >> it's an affront to the environment and to the people of the united states that they're taking upne environmental laws that have kept us healthy and safe from pollution. >> director and actor robert red fort wrote an op-ed about it today. he said i am proud to add my name to the list of people including over 60 elected officials and organizations who have already signed letters of support. congratulations to all those bay savers and bay saviors to your perseverance to protect what the spanish explorers called the harbor of all harbors. >>> okay, got an ipad? apple put out an update today. it's the first of its kind. in the past, the ipad used the same program as the iphone. now the tablets can do more like using a mouse like a laptop. also a new gaming service called apple arcade. >>> new guidelines for people with arthritis who want to use medical marijuana. many patients were using medical marijuana, so now it's offering advice on how patients should use it. it's telling them to start with a low dose and then build up over time to find relief. and it's warning people not to use

epa? do you really want to close your eyes to it and pretend it doesn't exist? is that how the united states operates now? is that what we define as leadership? >> of these various -- i think "the new york times" has been tracking i think there is 84 environmental rules that they have, it might be 85 today after the light bulbs, if i'm not mistaken. what stands out as the highest stakes? you were one of the people who oversaw the clean power plant rule. which one matters the most of what they've done here? >> you know, maybe it's more the tenor of the whole thing, the instability it's bringing to not just to the agencies, but to the regulated industry. you know, the clean car rule was one of the ones they wanted to attack right out of the gate. the interesting thing is this is the first time in my recollection that california is the place where the car industries want to go for relief. >> right. >> as opposed to stick with this administration who is trying to tear it all down. and then you have mercury and air toxic standard, which to me is a really personal issue because it's about toxics t

epa, basic protections for people. how are we going to be emerging from this? that's the role of the next president of the united states is going to be taking us out of a really dark time as a country. >> health care is a huge issue for democratic voters. joe biden said that he's glad democrats are having a good debate now on health care. he's a moderate on the issue, but as elizabeth warren and bernie sanders are, you know, pitching their ideas for medicare for all, do you worry that idea of medicare for all is something that's not going to play in the general election? >> i mean i think that, you know, i'm somebody who supports the idea of medicare for all, but i also support protecting and expanding the affordable care act, and i believe we need a strong transition to whatever kind of program that is ultimately going to be the solution that we land on. i think that it is incredibly complicated. i worked on the affordable care act expansion -- i mean implementation in los angeles, and it took us years and years and years to transform a system like this. and doing -- you know, doing the next phase of that is going to

transportation, according to the epa, a typical passenger in the 4.6 metric tons of co 2 per year there were more than 193 million passenger vehicles registered in the united states. more than 890 metric tons of co 2 were admitted from passenger cars this is nearly twice of all the emissions produced by the country of brazil in 2017. for anyone who says driving cars is not the biggest contributor to co 2 emissions is just wrong. most points to this emissions. while the timeline varies between the candidates all of them pledge there will be zero emissions cars that all new cars in the united states will be zero emissions between 2030 and 2035 coming up next, our buildings, they consume energy, too, heat and cool created by our electrical power plant electricity generation was responsible for nearly 1.8 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide co 2 again, the candidates buried in their timeline, they agree we need an emission-free electrical grid by 2050 all of this is going take a lot of efforts and incentives and cooperations between political rival and cooperation between the government and industry. a new president is going to have a mix of executive orders and le

united states is absent from the discussion. and we need to get it back, we need to get it back quickly. >> you were the administrator of the epa. i wonder both in your role there and in your career afterwards if you have relationships with other folks that have similar kinds of obligations in other countries, environmental administrators, and how they view this and how they view their own domestic politics in dealing with it. >> here's the shortest answer i can give. when i talk to people, i always begin with a little bit of an apology for the united states right now because we're not at the table, never mind leading. and then they always say, gina, everybody has had an administration that they're not particularly behind, and maybe not even proud of. but don't do it again. and that's really their answer to me. once is okay, twice is a disaster. and i think that's pretty much the going theme. because we are losing time, we have about 11 years to really make some serious effort on climate change. we have the students out there begging for us to take action. my favorite sign was if the adults can't do it, we will. and that's what

unfortunately you can't see it very well, but it is a chart that the epa put out in 2018 and it shows the growth of our economy since 1970. the united states has actually grown our economy. it has grown almost 300%. our vehicles -- has grown almost 200%. population has grown. energy consumption has grown. but our carbon output has decreased over that period of time. so it is possible to do. we can grow our economy and decrease our carbon output. we have done that since 1970. in fact if you look we have actually decreased the six common pollutants almost 100%. since 1970, while growing our economy, so it can be done. one thing i want to make sure we understand is look, listen to me, this is not a republican or democratic issue, this is an american issue. this is a world issue. it's not united states versus china versus india. all of us have to work on this together. i believe in climate change. i believe the climate has been changing since day one. i'm old enough to remember, you are not, but i'm old enough to remember the early 70s when we felt we were near another ice age. well, has man had an impact on that? yes, we do have an impact. ho

epa put out in 2018. and it shows the growth of you're economy since 1970. . and the united states has actually grown our economy our gross domestic product has grown almost 300%. our vehicles miles traveled grown almost 20 oh%. population has grown. energy consumption as grown. but our carbon output decreased over that period of time. so it is possible to do. we can grow the economy and decrease our carbon output. we have done that since 1970. in fact if you look we have decreased 6 common polluteants almost 100%. since 1970 while growing the economy. it can be done. one thing i want to make sure we understand and see, look, look, listen to me, this is not a republican democratic issue. this is an american issue. a world issue. it's not united states versus china versus india. all of us have to work on this together. i've always -- i believe in climate change. i believe the climate has been changing since day one. i'm old enough to remember you're not but i'm old enough to remember the early 70s we thought we were headed for another ice age. well, does man have an impact on that?

united states under the clean water act. the administration is returning the country to standards put in place in 1986. this comes after d.c.nd a 22 other states filed a lawsuit against then administrato block the epa's new power plant rule the lawsuit argues trump administrations repeal the obama -- of presidt obama's plan violates the epalean air act. >>> a city leader in washington state is proposing a controversial policy to combat the homeless crisis. one way bus tkets for people to get out of town. right now more than 11,000 and people livehen streets of seate and king county. kiounty vice chair reagan dunne is suggesting a one way long distance bus ticket for homeless people to reunite them with their family. >> 4:49 right now. the fbi it'sve inigating a payroll service provider after it closed wndhout warning a stiffed $35 millioie from nts. friday after processingitast payroll d for thousands of businesses nationwide. now the problem is thousands of employees acrossnhe n say they had funds withdrawn from their accounts instead of deposited. >>> oil tycoon and corporate raider t boone pickens has died. he was named as theracle of oil. lypickens was also an ear backer of wind per and clean tie