FORESTS FOREVER’S RECOMMENDATIONS ON STATE PROPOSITIONS

11/6/06

PROPOSITION 84: FUNDING FOR CLEAN WATER, FORESTS, WILDLIFE
Proposition 84 would cause the state to issue $5.4 billion in general obligation bonds to fund projects that would protect water quality, rivers, lakes and streams, coastal waters, and watersheds, bolster flood control, and help conserve rivers, beaches, parks and forests.

The bonds would provide $450 million for forest and wildlife conservation, including wildlife habitat protection, forest conservation, and the protection of old-growth forests and oak woodlands. Money would also go to the protection of endangered species and conservation of wildlife corridors.

It would provide $54 million for the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, and $400 million for land acquisition and restoration projects in state and local parks.

Forests Forever recommends a “YES” vote on Proposition 84.

PROPOSITION 87: MAKE OIL COMPANIES PAY TO REDUCE OIL USE
Proposition 87, the Clean Alternative Energy Act, would tax oil producers in California to fund a $4 billion program to reduce oil consumption in the state 25 percent by 2017. The program would use funds raised by a tax on oil producers to promote alternative energy such as wind, solar, alternative-fuel vehicles and other clean energy technologies. It also would fund education and training to prepare Californians for the jobs created by these new technologies.

Prop. 87 would fund this program by taxing each barrel of oil produced in California. The tax would range from 1.5 percent to 6 percent of the price, based on the price of a barrel of oil at the wellhead. Oil companies already pay such a production tax in other oil-producing states, such as Alaska, Louisiana and Texas.

Oil companies would not be able to pass this tax along to consumers in the form of higher prices.

Replacing oil with alternative fuels is about more than price at the pump or reducing dependence on foreign sources of oil. Air pollution causes the hidden, unaccounted-for costs of oil production and use: health care costs, lost work time due to ill health, crop and property damage, harm to forests, etc. And burning petroleum products for transportation is a major contributor to global warming.

Using money that would otherwise go to the profit line of oil companies to bring about the new technologies that will eventually replace petroleum is an idea whose time has come.

Forests Forever recommends a “YES” vote on Proposition 87.

PROPOSITION 90: BLACKMAILING THE ENVIRONMENT
Proposition 90 is a proposed amendment to the California constitution that poses as a reform of eminent domain.

But hidden in the fine print are “takings” provisions that would make any new regulation affecting land use too costly to be implemented, and that would force taxpayers to pay developers for obeying the law. It would make it difficult to impossible to enforce new laws that protect California’s forests, open space, wetlands and endangered species.

Prop. 90 would force state and local governments to compensate property owners whenever a new law might affect the future value of their property. The wording of the proposition –“substantial economic loss”– is vague enough to ensure a multitude of lawsuits, hamstringing local and state governments trying to provide services such as schools, roads, and utilities, and costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

Many governments would decide to waive regulations rather than be forced to pay the compensation this law would allow. This would mean an effective end to many kinds of legislation that protect the public against inappropriate development.

Proposition 90 is opposed by many groups across the political spectrum, from the Sierra Club to the California Chamber of Commerce. The proposition would be a disaster for California if passed.

Forests Forever recommends a “NO” vote on Proposition 90.