Yes on 1C, 1D, 84, 87, 89; no on 85 - and especially - no on 90!

Sierra Club California has taken positions on a number of measures on the Nov. 7 ballot that directly relate to the issues we care about. Some of these measures are very controversial, and the stakes are high.

Neutral on Prop 1B - transportation bond

This $19.675 billion bond measure is to fund new lanes and other `improvements' on congested highways, new bridges, more mass transit, including rail, and improvements to port operations. Some in the Sierra Club laud the over-$4 billion for mass transit, while others criticize paying for highways with general-obligation bonds rather than user fees.

Yes on Prop 1C - housing bond

This $2.85 billion bond measure will facilitate affordable housing, and will provide money to local governments for infrastructure for transit-oriented development and planning for infill development. Both of these can help advance our statewide growth-management guidelines.

Yes on Prop 1D - schools bond

Prop 1d is a $10.4 billion bond measure to modernize schools and reduce school overcrowding. Like the housing bond, this is consistent with our growth-management guidelines, as the schools that need this money the most are in urban and older suburban areas.

Neutral on Prop 1E - levees and flooding bond

This $4.1 billion bond measure includes $3 billion for the fixing of deteriorating levees in the Sacramento River system and the Delta, and another $800 million for projects in other areas of the state. The bonds would fund levee improvements as well as modifications to the flood-control system. This could include building new bypasses to carry floods around urban areas, relocating flood-threatened structures, and building setback levees. The bond, however, contains few requirements or spending priorities for how the money would be spent. It would not pay for expanding the footprint of the levees, but it would allow shoring up of existing levees even at locations without existing development. It could thus potentially induce sprawl in these areas.

Yes on Proposition 84 - water-supply/quality and parks bond

Prop 84, a $5.3 billion bond, would allow for improving the quality of local drinking water; increased purchase of parks and conservation easements for conservation of open space, streams, and forests; and water-quality work for clean beaches. This omnibus measure seems to have something for everybody - including money for Bay Area parks including the East Shore State Park - and a diverse group of entities supports it. Monies from the park-bond measures passed by voters over the last eight years are nearly gone.

No on Prop 85 - parental notification of abortions

Population growth is an environmental problem. With more than 6.5 billion people on the planet, health, quality of life, and global natural resources are already severely challenged. Women must have the right and means to control their own fertility, or we cannot hope to slow this trend.

Prop 85 would amend the California Constitution to require doctors to notify the parents of women under 18 before performing an abortion.

The Sierra Club has long-standing policies supporting comprehensive and unrestricted access to family-planning services, including abortions. While Prop 85 is not an outright ban on abortions in California, it would jeopardize the health and safety of pregnant adolescents.

The Sierra Club champions the rights of all families to maternal-, infant-, and reproductive-health care, and the empowerment and equity of women.

Yes on Prop 87 - the Clean Energy Initiative

Prop 87 will fund a $4 billion dollar effort to reduce California's dependence on gasoline and diesel by 25% over 10 years, through incentives to make alternative-fuel vehicles and alternative fuels more widely available and affordable to consumers and by funding research to bring clean, renewable energy and energy-efficiency technologies to the marketplace more quickly. The money will be raised by a tax on every barrel of oil extracted in California.

Yes on Proposition 89 - Clean Money Initiative

Prop 89, sponsored by the California Nurses Association, would enact public financing of political campaigns and set new limits on political contributions and expenditures. This initiative proposes to remove corporate wealth as a major factor in elections through a voluntary system in which candidates may receive public campaign funding from the Fair Political Practices Commission in amounts varying by elective office and type of election. Prop 89 also sets new limits on campaign contributions to state-office candidates and campaign committees and new restrictions on contributions and expenditures by lobbyists and corporations.

Arizona and Maine, where Clean Money systems have been operating for six years, have proven it works. Clean Money candidates now hold nearly 80% of the legislature in Maine and 10 out of 11 statewide offices in Arizona, including the governorship. Voter turnout and participation has increased significantly as confidence in government has risen. Legislators elected with Clean Money in Arizona and Maine have much better environmental voting records than legislators elected with private money.

The primary revenue for the Clean Money Fund is generated by an 0.2% increase in taxes on corporations and financial institutions.