Environmental causes boosted by statewide election results
Most voters already know that Gavin Newsom and Dianne Feinstein — who easily advanced to the November general election in their races for governor and U.S. senator — were among the big winners in Tuesday’s California primary election.
But there’s another group also popping the champagne this week: environmentalists.
Across California and the Bay Area, environmental groups had one of their best elections ever. They won nearly every major race they contested, securing billions of dollars for parks, beaches, water projects and public transportation, and at the same time helped kill plans to develop Silicon Valley hillsides and a proposal to change the way the state spends money from its greenhouse gas auctions.
“People want open space and parks, they want clean air and clean water,” said Deb Callahan, executive director of the Bay Area Open Space Council, a coalition of more than 50 parks agencies and land trusts. “And clearly people are willing to pay for it. There’s an understanding that you need to invest in priorities.”
The biggest victory statewide for conservation groups was the passage of Proposition 68, a $4.1 billion parks and water bond that voters easily approved 56-44 percent.
The measure only passed in 27 of California’s
58 counties, but it won by huge margins of 65 percent or more in most Bay Area counties and 61 percent in Los Angeles County, which easily offset “no” votes from the Central Valley and counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino, where it narrowly failed.
Proposition 68 is the first statewide funding measure for parks approved by California voters in 12 years, with about $2.8 billion headed to parks and wildlife, and $1.3 billion going to water and flood control projects, much of it to be handed out by the Legislature and state agencies through competitive grants.
Environmental groups donated $6.4 million on the Yes on 68 campaign, with major funding coming from the Nature Conservancy, Trust for Public Land, Save the Redwoods League and the Peninsula Open Space Trust.
Green groups faced opposition from taxpayer groups but no organized campaign against them. They spent heavily on social media, blanketed farmers markets, ran volunteer-driven phone banks and cultivated events with high-profile supporters such as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.
They also secured endorsements from business groups, including the California Chamber of Commerce, Silicon Valley Leadership Group and Orange County Business Council.
The measure will mean millions for urban parks, soccer fields, baseball fields, basketball courts, bike paths and public swimming pools — with a special emphasis on low-income urban areas. Also slated for funding are trails, beaches, forests, visitor centers and campgrounds at state and regional parks, and new funding for groundwater cleanup, flood control and drinking water treatment plants.
Although business groups regularly battle with environmentalists in other states, many in the Bay Area and Southern California are increasingly finding common ground, said Larry Gerston, a professor emeritus of political science at San Jose State University. That’s because they see parks, recreation, clean air and clean water as a “quality of life” selling point to lure and keep talented workers, particularly in the face of high housing costs and traffic.
“There’s a package,” Gerston said. “It’s salary, it’s benefits, but it’s also the weather and a better environment, and the ocean and parks.”
Among the other big wins by environmental groups Tuesday:
• Proposition 72, a tax break for people who install rain barrels or other systems on their rooftops to conserve water, passed 83-17 percent.
• Proposition 70 went down in a landslide defeat, 64-36 percent. It would have allowed Republicans in Sacramento more of a say in how the state spends the money it generates from the “cap and trade” permits it auctions to oil refineries, factories and other large emitters of greenhouse gases. Environmentalists worried it would mean less money for public transit, solar rebates and other conservation measures.
• Measure B and C in San Jose. An attempt by developers to allow the construction of 910 senior housing units on vacant land in the city’s Evergreen area, failed 5842 percent. The measure was opposed by environmental groups who said it would transform 200 acres of hillsides into a wealthy gated community without environmental review. San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, who also opposed Measure B, led efforts to qualify Measure C, which makes it more difficult to develop open areas in Evergreen, Almaden Valley and Coyote Valley. It passed 6040 percent.
• Regional Measure 3. A $3 toll increase over the next six years at seven bridges that cross San Francisco Bay, but not the Golden Gate Bridge, to raise $4.5 billion for transportation projects, won 54-46 percent. The measure was backed by business groups but also had the support of Save the Bay, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Greenbelt Alliance and the League of Conservation Voters. Although it funds freeway improvements, it also will expand BART, Caltrain, ferry service, buses and bike lanes. “We’ve got to reduce our reliance on cars to cut greenhouse emissions and roadway runoff pollution to the bay,” said David Lewis, executive director of Save the Bay.
• Measure C in Napa County, which would limit the number of oak trees that vineyard owners can cut down on hillsides, narrowly led Friday 50.2 percent to 49.8 percent, despite farmers and the wine industry heavily outspending conservation groups.
• In Davis, Measure H, which renewed a $49 annual parcel tax for parks, bike paths, swimming pools and street trees for another 20 years, was approved 7328 percent.
• In Santa Cruz, 76 percent of voters approved Measure U, an advisory measure that opposes recently announced plans by UC Santa Cruz to expand campus enrollment by 10,000 students to 28,000 by 2040.
Environmental groups may have had one loss. In Martinez, Measure I, which requires voter approval to develop areas zoned for open space or parks, was on pace to pass Friday but by a smaller margin than Measure F, which requires voter approval for such changes but only on publicly owned land. By midday Friday, Measure I had 51.19 percent and Measure F had 52.07 percent of the vote, yet thousands of mail-in ballots in Contra Costa County remain to be counted, so the results could change.