ON THE TOWN:Surprisingly: Thanks, Eric Bever

Had you asked me a week ago what the chances of my voting for Costa Mesa City Councilman Eric Bever for anything ever again, I would have replied something along the lines of “slim to none.”

But that was then. This is now.

Now, I could be tempted to vote for Bever for county supervisor for in the span of one week, Bever is promoting a new set of rules for Costa Mesa buildings that he calls “efficiency incentives.”

Bever can call it whatever he wants — I’ll call it overdue, fabulous and forward-thinking.

According the report in the Daily Pilot, Bever is still gathering information. But that information gathering will likely result in a proposal to increase the number of environmentally sensitive structures by providing developers and others with incentives to be green, or at least greener.

This is exactly the type of progress that we should come to expect from our leaders, and I cannot applaud Bever enough for his position.

It should be noted that Councilwoman Katrina Foley also had a green proposal in mind, but that concern is something one would expect of her.

With Foley, it’s part of her fiber. With Bever, it’s cause for celebration.

Concern for our environment is the biggest issue facing all of us. It is more important than the war on terrorism, more important than the abortion debate and more important than illegal immigration.

A deteriorating environment affects us all — white, brown or purple. It affects Christians, Jews, Muslims and Hare Krishnas.

Unfortunately, there are those in positions of influence and power who are still pooh-poohing the idea of global warming. Earlier this week, one syndicated columnist tried to make the environment a left-right debate, as though a warmer climate or dirtier air would somehow miss those who believe it’s nothing to be concerned about.

Local Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is also still in the dark about global warming. In a recent congressional committee meeting on a landmark report on the environment, Rohrabacher said about heating and cooling cycles, “We don’t know what those other cycles were caused by in the past. Could be dinosaur flatulence, you know, or who knows?”

I’m wondering what difference it makes. I’m wondering why someone in that position does not understand that there are substantive actions that human beings can take to reduce the effects of global warming and that we should be executing those actions now because we have a lot of catching up to do.

In a way, Rohrabacher’s comment is progress, for he has moved from a position of discounting the theory entirely, to acknowledging that it exists, though he’s still holding fast to the notion that it’s not the fault of humans.

The environmental debate takes a stranger turn when we read the comments of those who worry or complain about the cost of cleaning up the planet, as though the price were an option.

I wonder why they do not understand that cleaning up the environment is not a cost, it is an investment. It is an investment in the future of the species, and if we do not spend the money, there will be a downhill run to a sad future.

So that you know, it’s not just me talking, all you have to do is read the online summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to understand why we have to do something locally now.

That’s why I appreciate Bever’s initiative. I do not believe that any substantial progress on the environment is going to come out of Washington. The changes we need to make will come state by state, county by county and city by city.

I am proud that Costa Mesa is at least discussing its environmental options. Thanks to Bever and Foley for wanting to invest in our future.