Victor Valley Times

State Senator Scott Wilk has called on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to delay a vote on proposed changes to its Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program. In a letter addressed to CARB Chair Liane Randolph, Wilk and 25 other Republican legislators requested that the board release the costs and benefits of the proposed changes before proceeding with any decision.

Wilk expressed concern about the impact of these changes on his constituents, stating, “The 21st Senate District is home to four of the nation’s top ten highest percentage super commuter cities. In 2022, Palmdale ranked number one with 17% of the population commuting 90 minutes or more each day.” He added, “This proposed policy will be devastating to my constituents. CARB needs to come clean and share the data with Californians before enacting a policy that will make it even more expensive to live here.”

Currently, Californians pay $1.50 more per gallon than the national average in 47 other states. Studies suggest that CARB's proposed changes could add between 65 and 85 cents per gallon next year, potentially reaching an increase of $1.50 by 2035.

Last summer, during public comment sessions, CARB estimated a potential increase of 47 cents per gallon due to the proposed policy. However, after questions arose regarding this figure, CARB retracted it and promised updated estimates before implementing any changes. To date, no further estimates have been released by CARB. The only available projection comes from Dr. Danny Cullenward at Stanford University, estimating an increase of 65 to 85 cents per gallon.

Senator Wilk highlighted the financial burden these increases would place on his constituents: “If the estimates in the study are accurate, my constituents will pay another $10 to $15 every time they fill up their tank. With those long commutes to work, those tanks are filled multiple times a week. This policy will punish people for just going to work.”

Wilk criticized unelected boards like CARB as political appointees who do not answer directly to Californians and argued that such significant policy decisions should be made by elected legislative bodies.