Climate Propositions and Measures in San Diego County

October 29, 2024

min

Mustafa Al Ghanimi

As climate change and its consequences become increasingly apparent, local governments are urged to take proactive and preventive measures to address its impacts. In San Diego, a variety of propositions and initiatives have been introduced to confront climate challenges, ranging from renewable energy efforts to policies that may entail some focus on climate change-related issues. At Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation (HCSF), we continuously analyze these options to better understand what is best for our community and how we can expedite positive change toward a just and livable future. We believe that it’s essential for citizens to be informed about the options available on this year's 2024 ballot.

Proposition 4

In recent years, environmental groups and renewable energy advocates have pushed for increased investment in climate action, particularly after Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature approved a $54.3 billion plan known as the "California Climate Commitment" in 2022. However, due to budget constraints, this commitment was scaled back to $44.6 billion for the current fiscal year.

Proposition 4 is a significant measure on California's ballot, proposing a $10 billion bond aimed at addressing the state's most pressing environmental challenges. If passed, the bond would provide funding for projects related to drought, flood prevention, wildfire mitigation, and sea-level rise, among other climate-related concerns. The initiative is part of California’s broader commitment to lead in climate action. However, the bond raises concerns about long-term financial implications, particularly given the state's existing deficit.

Key Goals

The largest portion of the bond, $3.8 billion, would be allocated to projects related to drought, flooding, and water supply. These funds aim to improve water availability and quality, reduce the risk of flooding, and upgrade water facilities. Specific initiatives include enhancing water recycling and transforming wastewater into potable water for homes and drinking.

In addition, $1.5 billion would go toward "Forest Health and Wildfire Prevention," focusing on strategies like tree thinning and the removal of overgrown vegetation to reduce wildfire risk, a particularly urgent issue for the state.

Another significant portion, $1.2 billion, would be used to address sea-level rise and coastal restoration efforts. The goal is to mitigate the risks posed by rising ocean levels and to protect coastal ecosystems and fish populations.

Other notable allocations include:
$1.2 billion for land conservation and habitat restoration.
$850 million for renewable energy infrastructure, including offshore wind energy.
$700 million for expanding and repairing local and state parks.
$450 million for reducing the impacts of extreme heat on communities.
$300 million to help farms respond to the effects of climate change and adopt sustainable agricultural practices.

Fiscal Impacts

While the proposed bond addresses a wide range of pressing environmental concerns, the financial implications for California’s taxpayers are significant. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), the state would incur an additional $400 million annually over the next 40 years to repay the bond, potentially increasing the state’s existing deficit. This comes at a time when California is already facing a projected $46.8 billion in its budget.

This could lead to difficult decisions in future budget allocations, as funds will need to be diverted to service the debt from the bond. While the environmental projects are undeniably important, voters will need to weigh these benefits against the financial strain that Proposition 4 could impose on the state’s economy.

Balancing Climate Action and Fiscal Responsibility

Proposition 4 represents a critical investment in California’s climate future, but it also highlights the tension between taking immediate climate action and managing long-term fiscal health. The bond would finance necessary projects to combat drought, wildfires, sea-level rise, and other pressing environmental issues, potentially making California more resilient to climate change. However, the reliance on debt financing raises questions about whether the state can sustain these investments without exacerbating its fiscal problems.

Voters may also consider alternative approaches to achieving these climate goals without incurring additional debt. Options like community-based climate initiatives, rooftop solar projects, and more efficient water management could provide cost-effective and sustainable solutions. Proposition 4’s goals are well-aligned with California’s commitment to addressing climate change, but its reliance on debt may not be the most financially prudent path forward. Voters will need to carefully balance the need for immediate climate action with the state’s long-term fiscal responsibility

Measure E

Measure E is a proposal by the City of San Diego to implement a 1% general transactions and use tax (sales tax) increase. If passed, this would raise the current sales tax in San Diego from 7.75% to 8.75%, with the potential to generate an estimated $400 million annually for the city’s General Fund. Unlike a special tax, which would be earmarked for specific purposes, Measure E is a general tax, meaning the revenue could be used for a wide variety of city services and initiatives.

The additional revenue could be critical for addressing major city needs, but it comes at a cost. The sales tax is regressive, meaning it disproportionately affects lower-income households who spend a larger percentage of their income on taxable goods. For San Diego residents already dealing with inflation and high costs of living, this could add to their financial burden, making the decision about Measure E a challenging one for voters.

Key Goals

The primary goal of Measure E is to generate additional revenue to fund the city’s broad array of public services, including:
Public Safety: Enhancing fire, police, and emergency services.
Infrastructure Repair: Allocating funds for the maintenance and improvement of streets, sidewalks, storm drains, and other city infrastructure.
City Services: Supporting parks, libraries, recreational facilities, and other community resources.

While there are no legally binding restrictions on how the funds will be spent, the city has indicated that the proceeds would be used to maintain or improve upon the existing level of services, rather than replacing current spending.

Fiscal Impacts

If Measure E is approved, the additional $400 million annually would boost the city’s financial resources, providing more flexibility to address both immediate needs and long-term projects. The new revenue would be subject to the same auditing and oversight as other General Fund revenues, with annual reports to the City Council ensuring accountability. This could allow for more sustained investments in infrastructure, public safety, and community programs.

However, the measure has sparked concerns about the potential burden on consumers, particularly low-income residents. Sales taxes are regressive, meaning they disproportionately impact lower-income households, who spend a larger percentage of their income on taxable goods. This could create financial strain for some residents, particularly in the context of economic challenges like inflation.

Balancing Climate Action and Fiscal Responsibility

Although Measure E is not explicitly tied to climate-related projects, the revenue it generates could be leveraged to support the city’s broader environmental and sustainability goals. For example, funds could be allocated to infrastructure improvements that enhance climate resilience, such as upgrading stormwater systems to handle extreme weather or investing in sustainable public spaces.

At the same time, the financial impact on residents must be considered. Sales taxes tend to disproportionately affect lower-income residents, and in a time of inflation and economic uncertainty, some may question whether the tax is the best approach. Still, the measure offers a way for the city to address infrastructure deficits and other challenges without relying on borrowing or incurring long-term debt, a contrast to Proposition 4’s bond-financed approach.
In addition, while the increased revenue could support long-term sustainability and resilience efforts, the regressive nature of the tax could exacerbate financial inequities. As with any tax proposal, voters will need to weigh the potential benefits to the potential city services and infrastructure against the economic impact on households, particularly those already struggling with the high cost of living.

Measure G

Measure G is a proposed half-cent sales tax increase on the November 5, 2024 ballot aimed at transforming transportation across San Diego County. The measure is expected to raise approximately $900 million annually, funding critical infrastructure improvements including fire protection, road maintenance, public transit, and environmental preservation. At Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation (HCSF), we have endorsed Measure G due to its alignment with sustainability goals and its potential to significantly enhance climate resilience.

Key Goals and Fund Allocation

Measure G prioritizes a wide range of transportation and environmental improvements, with funds allocated as follows:
50% toward major public transit infrastructure projects, promoting sustainable transportation and reducing traffic congestion.
27% for capital projects to improve road and highway traffic flow and community safety.
7% for local street maintenance and repair, addressing San Diego’s crumbling infrastructure.
12% for transit operations and maintenance within the Metropolitan Transit System and North County Transit District.
2% for the repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of infrastructure within the rail transit system.
2% or less allocated for general administrative services.

These funds would be placed into a “lockbox,” ensuring that they are used exclusively for the designated projects. If any funds are misused, the oversight committee can refer cases for criminal prosecution.

Fiscal Impacts

If approved, Measure G would raise the countywide sales tax to 8.75%. While this increase may pose a financial burden on some residents, particularly lower-income households, the long-term benefits could include reduced traffic, enhanced safety, and improved infrastructure. By securing additional state and federal matching funds, Measure G would maximize local investments in transportation and environmental sustainability, ensuring a more sustainable and expansive public transportation system.

Balancing Climate Action and Fiscal Responsibility

Measure G includes stringent fiscal safeguards such as independent citizen oversight, public transparency, and annual audits. All funds remain under local control, and for every dollar generated, two dollars in additional funding will be secured from state and federal sources, ensuring billions for local improvements.

At Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation, we endorse Measure G because it offers significant opportunities to advance climate action. The measure’s emphasis on expanding public transit infrastructure, protecting natural habitats, and improving transportation safety aligns with our mission to promote sustainability. It also addresses the increasing wildfire risk by improving evacuation routes in vulnerable areas.

While the proposed tax increase poses a financial consideration, the long-term benefits of improved roads, enhanced transportation safety, and stronger environmental protections make Measure G a vital investment in San Diego County’s future. Whether the measure will fully prioritize climate action remains to be seen, but its potential for positive, lasting environmental impact is undeniable.

With the 2024 ballot offering important decisions on a variety of issues, including those related to climate and infrastructure, it is crucial for voters to engage with the options available. These measures will have long-term implications for how San Diego will address environmental concerns, public safety, and community needs.

At Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation, we encourage all citizens to stay informed and take part in the voting process. Your participation helps shape the direction of our community and ensures that we continue working toward a sustainable future.

For more information on local ballot measures and how to vote, visit the San Diego County Elections website.

‍

All Posts

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Climate activists knee deep in water at the Fossil Fuel Free San Diego press event

Climate Activists Launch the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge Knee Deep in Mission Bay

Advocacy

August 22, 2022

min

Climate Activists Launch the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge Knee Deep in Mission Bay

On August 11, leading climate organizations, elected officials, candidates and local activists stood knee deep in the waters of Mission Bay to demonstrate the effects the climate crisis will have locally and launch the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge. The initiative aims to end the fossil fuel industry’s anti-climate agenda while celebrating and providing transparency regarding where organizations, elected officials and candidates receive funding. Those who take the pledge agree to not accept any fossil fuel money as part of their commitment to an equitable and climate safe future. Speakers at the event included Carlsbad Councilmember Priya Bhat-Patel, candidate Tommy Hough and representatives with San Diego Coastkeeper, SanDiego350’s Youth4Climate, CleanEarth4Kids, Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation and San Diego Urban Sustainability Coalition. Additional attendees included Surfrider San Diego, SD-SEQUEL, candidate Georgette Gòmez and other climate activists.

‍

It’s no secret that fossil fuel companies give funding to nonprofits and elected officials, and activists note that allegiance is often expected in return for those funds. Some nonprofit organizations that have accepted fossil fuel money have publicly supported a fossil fuel company’s anti-climate initiative, even when the initiative conflicts with the organizations’ mission, values and hurts the communities being served by the nonprofit. Fossil fuel companies have also invested billion of dollars to support elected officials and candidates who will vote for policies and laws that continue to benefit polluters.

‍

Locally, two big fossil fuel corporations contributing funds to nonprofit organizations and candidate campaigns are San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) and its parent company, Sempra Energy. SDG&E touts its renewable energy content in its state-mandated renewable portfolio standard program, although Voice of San Diego reported last year that SDG&E Walks Back Claim it Delivers 45 Percent Renewable Energy, citing only 31 percent of energy San Diegans consume is zero carbon. While SDG&E claims to support clean energy, their net energy metering proposal at the California Public Utilities Commission would erode the economics of rooftop solar, making solar out of reach for many Californians while setting what activists say is a dangerous nationwide precedent to rely on dirty energy for a longer period of time. If SDG&E’s net metering proposal is adopted, it would also lessen the benefits that the City of San Diego’s new Solar Equity Program has for San Diegans in communities of concern. Meanwhile Sempra Energy sold off renewable assets and continues to invest heavily in fossil fuels, primarily fracked gas, which accelerates the climate crisis and contributes to various climate injustices in California.

‍

“You cannot buy my destruction. You cannot pay to poison my children. You cannot pay to poison my communities,” said Yusef Miller, a board member of CleanEarth4Kids and a NAACP North County leader, in a passionate message to the local fossil fuel company SDG&E. Miller’s high school aged son also spoke at the event.

‍

With the climate crisis worsening, scientists, leaders and climate activists say it is now more urgent than ever to end our reliance on fossil fuels. Divesting from fossil fuel support and standing behind companies that prioritize clean energy, green jobs and communities of concern has never been more critical. In fact, earlier this year, the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors made the unanimous decision to divest from fossil fuel companies. This allows the County to invest its money in companies that do not detrimentally impact the environment and accelerate the climate crisis.

‍

"The fossil fuel industry has invested millions of dollars towards campaign contributions, organizations and front groups to ensure billions of dollars in subsidies and laws that benefit polluters,” said Karinna Gonzalez, Climate Justice Policy Manager with Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation. “The Fossil Fuel Free Pledge is starting here in San Diego, and it will cut off the fossil fuel industry’s influence so that we can make meaningful progress towards a just and livable future."

‍

Fossil Fuel Free pledgees include SanDiego350, Hammond Climate Solutions Foundation, Bike San Diego, San Diego Coastkeeper, Surfrider San Diego, San Diego Urban Sustainability Coalition, CleanEarth4Kids, Democratic Socialists of America San Diego, North County Climate Change Alliance, SD-SEQUEL, San Diego Bike Coalition, South Bay Sustainable Communities, Climate Reality Project San Diego, Environmental Center of San Diego, University Christian Church, City of San Diego Councilmember Monica Montgomery Steppe, Carlsbad City Councilmember Priya Bhat-Patel and candidates Tommy Hough, Georgette Gómez, Tiffany Boyd-Hodgson and Cody Petterson. All local elected officials, candidates and nonprofit organizations are invited to take the pledge and join the movement for a healthier and more equitable future.

‍

“As we stand here knee-deep in water, I would be remiss if I did not point out that this is our future if we allow fossil fuel companies to donate a penny to the environment while spending thousands to destroy it,” said Lucero Sanchez, Campaigns Manager with San Diego Coastkeeper.

‍

The Fossil Fuel Free Pledge launched targeting nonprofit organizations, elected officials and candidates, however, there are plans to expand the categories as well as the geographic region. For more information or to take the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge or to get involved, visit www.fossilfuelfreepledge.org.

Image of solar advocates protesting at the state capitol

Solar Tax Continues to Threaten California’s Rooftop Solar Progress

Policy

June 22, 2022

min

Solar Tax Continues to Threaten California’s Rooftop Solar Progress

After about six months of near silence from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) they have re-opened the proceeding to get input on some new elements of their proposal. The CPUC is now asking for feedback on charging customers based on self consumption, where the less energy that is bought from the utility because of the solar, the higher the fee. The amount of the fee could be anywhere between $300-$600 per year on average. Local, state and federal governments have encouraged rooftop solar, similarly to promoting energy efficiency, which also reduces a household or organization’s energy use, lessening stress on the grid while minimizing CO2 emissions contributing to the climate crisis. A solar tax that punishes residents for using less energy is like taxing people for growing their own food instead of buying it from the grocery store. The proposed solar tax directly contradicts what the Newsom administration has said is one of their top priorities, addressing the rapidly accelerating climate crisis.

After about six months of near silence from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) since their December 2021 proposed decision that would decimate the state’s rooftop solar agreement, net energy metering, they have recently announced that they are re-opening the proceeding to get input on some new elements of the proposal. Here is what we know:

One of the most criticized elements of the proposed decision was the CPUC’s proposal to impose a fixed monthly charge for all solar customers. Previously, the charge was to be based on the size of the solar system, which would have resulted in $60 per month for an averaged sized residential solar system. The CPUC is now asking for feedback on charging customers based on self consumption - the solar energy customers produce and use at home. The less energy that is bought from the utility because of the solar, the higher the fee. The amount of the fee could be anywhere between $300-$600 per year on average. Local, state and federal governments have encouraged rooftop solar, similarly to promoting energy efficiency, which also reduces a household or organization’s energy use, lessening stress on the grid while minimizing CO2 emissions contributing to the climate crisis. A solar tax that punishes residents for using less energy is like taxing people for growing their own food instead of buying it from the grocery store. The proposed solar tax directly contradicts what the Newsom administration has said is one of their top priorities, addressing the rapidly accelerating climate crisis.

Rooftop solar advocates, climate justice organizations, elected officials, community choice energy programs, houses of worship, nonprofits and schools have openly criticized the idea of taxing solar customers, which has resulted every single CPUC public voting meeting being flooded with phone calls of concerned California residents voicing their strong opposition, which have lasted up to seven hours. The distributed solar and storage industry has been very loud in voicing opposition as well, hosting a number of rallies outside of the CPUC headquarters and turning out thousands of solar workers with one request: don’t kill our solar jobs.

Another upsetting element of the December 2021 proposed decision was the idea to dramatically reduce the amount solar customers are compensated for sharing their excess energy with their neighbors. Unfortunately, a dramatic reduction in export compensation is still on the table, however the question that remains is how quickly those amounts will decrease. The industry has spoken very loudly on this particular issue, stating that a drastic reduction in export compensation would completely halt the growth of solar across the state.

It is clear that both the CPUC and Governor Gavin Newsom have heard the voices of opposition and felt the pressure to distance themselves from the December proposed decision, with the governor stating in a press conference that “there is more work to be done.” It is clear that the CPUC still has plans to make serious changes to net metering, which will undoubtedly slow solar adoption and lead to more climate injustices.

Locally, advocates in San Diego have been very vocal in criticizing the CPUC, and this potential new proposal comes in the middle of San Diego Gas & Electric increasing their rates making San Diego the city with the highest price for energy in the country and resulting in one out of four San Diegans unable to pay their electric bills.

The timeline remains unclear, however a revised proposed decision could come out as early as July, with a vote as early as August. To learn more about how you can get involved to help save rooftop solar in California, visit our toolkit!

Fossil Fuel Free Pledge Launches!

Advocacy

April 4, 2022

min

Fossil Fuel Free Pledge Launches!

Fossil Fuel Free Pledge launches to accelerate climate action and cut off the fossil fuel industry’s influence. The pledge is simple: "We pledge to not take any money from the oil, gas, investor-owned utilities and coal industries, including political action committee contributions, and we pledge to always prioritize the interests of equity, human health, our community, workers and the environment over interests of the fossil fuel industry."

As we enter into Earth Month, we recognize the progress we have made battling fossil fuel companies and the climate crisis, but also understand that there is still much, much more that needs to be done. With this in mind, the Hammond Climate Solutions team, in partnership with other leading San Diego climate organizations, BikeSD, SanDiego350, San Diego Coastkeeper and Surfrider San Diego, could think of no better time than now to launch our newest campaign, the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge.

‍

“We have seen SDG&E and Sempra use funds to erode bold climate policies and push a fossil fuel agenda, which cannot continue as we fight for a just and livable future,” said Tara Hammond, founder and CEO of Hammond Climate Solutions, a pledgee and co-founder of the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge. “The Fossil Fuel Free Pledge will give the public, voters, donors and philanthropists a greater sense of security knowing that the nonprofits and elected officials they choose to support do not stand behind greenwashing and won’t be compromised by a fossil fuel agenda that opposes climate action.”

‍

The Fossil Fuel Free Pledge holds organizations and elected officials accountable for where their funding comes from. By taking the pledge, nonprofits and elected officials vow to not accept funding from fossil fuel companies, illustrating their devotion and commitment to combating climate change.

‍

The pledge is simple: "We pledge to not take any money from the oil, gas, investor-owned utilities and coal industries, including political action committee contributions, and we pledge to always prioritize the interests of equity, human health, our community, workers and the environment over interests of the fossil fuel industry." ‍

‍

The campaign lauches with pledgees BikeSD, SanDiego350, San Diego Coastkeeper, Surfrider San Diego and the Environmental Center of San Diego, along with Carlsbad City Councilmember Dr. Priya Bhat-Patel, the first elected official and candidate to take the pledge. These pledgees have all committed to a transparent and fossil fuel free future.

‍

“We want to lead by example and send a message to fossil fuel companies who think they can buy their way into continuing to pollute our environment,” said Lucero Sanchez, community policy coordinator at San Diego Coastkeeper, a pledgee and co-founder of the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge.

‍

Our pledge will create greater transparency for the public. When an organization or individual takes the pledge, they stand behind divesting from fossil fuels and instead supporting companies that prioritize clean energy, green jobs and communities of concern. In fact, in early March the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors made the unanimous decision to divest from fossil fuel companies. This allows the County to invest its money in companies that do not detrimentally impact the environment and accelerate the climate crisis.

‍

“The fossil fuel industry has used its wealth and political power to mislead the public and stymie climate action and climate justice for over six decades,” said Masada Disenhouse, Executive Director of SanDiego350, a pledgee and co-founder of the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge. “By signing this pledge, organizations and candidates are putting their money where their mouth is and showing the community that they are part of the solution – not part of the problem.”

‍

With the climate crisis worsening, it is now more urgent than ever to say no to fossil fuels and turn to other sources of renewable energy instead. If you are an elected official or part of an organization that would like to take the pledge and join the movement for a healthier and more equitable future, please fill out the form linked here.

‍

We look forward to expanding our impact and helping more organizations, elected officials and candidates commit to being fossil fuel free! To stay up to date on the Fossil Fuel Free Pledge campaign, visit www.fossilfuelfreepledge.org.