If you don't like the science, ignore the science

It is accepted as fact by most serious scholars of urban planning, public policy, and environmental policy that suburban sprawl is bad for the environment--more water to keep individual lawns green, more energy for heating and cooling, more air pollution and traffic congestion because everyone needs to drive a car to get anything they need.

That's why people seeking to address the issues of air pollution, global climate change, water resource sufficiency, traffic congestion, and energy conservation all want to adopt policies that stop subsidizing individual homeownership and start creating incentives for transit oriented and mixed use development.

Of course, if your whole reason for existence as a council member is that you are opposed to policies that would save energy and water, reduce traffic congestion, and combat global climate change, well, the last thing you'd want to see is those policies actually be implemented and be proven successful.

It also explains (well, sort of) why Steven Ly wants to take up city council time to get their support for a meaningless set of resolutions he wants to present to the League of California Cities.

Cleaner air, reduced energy usage, reduced water usage, and combating global climate change are things we should be working towards, but it's always easier to campaign against things that will produce diffuse benefits to future generations when you can instead grandstand about opposing government regulation and unfunded mandates.

Some examples of unfunded mandates: The Americans Disabilities Act. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its amendments (including the ADA). The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (and amendments). The Clean Air Act. The Safe Drinking Water Act. Etc., etc. If people always did the right thing, we wouldn't need unfunded mandates. But because we know that many people will discriminate if they're allowed to, and polluters will pollute if they're allowed to, and the free market doesn't care about negative impacts on common property resources (like oceans, air, and global climate), unfunded mandates are sometimes necessary to promote the general welfare. There are plenty of situations where unfunded mandates are good, and basing your opposition to those policies on the empty shibboleth of unfunded mandates is just plain bad policy.