Friends of the San Francisco Estuary
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Board of Directors
    • Staff
    • History
    • Annual Reports
  • Awards
    • 2019 Creative Environmental Project Awards
    • 2017 Awards
    • 2015 Awards
    • 2013 Awards
  • Freshwater Flows Program
    • Background
    • What's at Stake
    • What's Being Done
    • Resources
    • Events
    • SF Estuary Resolutions
    • Comment Letters
  • News
    • Water News Updates
    • Blog
  • Take Action
    • Join
  • Donate

11/8/2018

Proposition 3: Loss or Opportunity?

0 Comments

Read Now
 
Picture
Voters rejected Proposition 3, “Californians for Safe Drinking Water and a Clean and Reliable Water Supply,” at the ballot box on Wednesday. The $8.8 billion general obligation bond would have provided $200 million to restore San Francisco Bay wetlands, funded clean, safe drinking water in the Central Valley, and helped to extend water supplies through wastewater recycling, urban and ag conservation projects. It seemed to have something for everyone, so why didn't it pass?  A few thoughts:

- Distaste for "pay to play": Voters didn’t like the earmarked funds for specific improvements that would benefit the business groups who financed the bill. Although proponents asserted that every part of the state would benefit from the bond, over $1.2 billion of the bond was dedicated to funding improvements in 4 specific regions: San Joaquin Valley between Fresno and Bakerfield, San Francisco Bay, Oroville Dam, and Napa and Solano counties. And, in fact these areas were some of the only counties where the proposition passed (see www.mercurynews.com/2018/11/08/election-2018-heres-how-california-counties-voted-in-the-midterms/).
Picture
- Water Bond fatigue: the third related general obligation bond in 5 years; voters may have grown tired, for now, of feeling like they were throwing money at the problem. And with memories of the recent historic drought fading, the issue took a back seat to the many other measures on the ballot, including homelessness and highways.

- Too ambitious: even Prop. 1, which passed in 2014 after eight years without a water bond, was only $7.5 billion. The sizeable price tag may have put off voters, particularly on top of the other points above.
Picture
What’s next?

If California sinks back into drought, voter interest could be piqued once again. But it will probably take a few years before voters are ready for another water bond. A measure introduced by the Legislature with fewer specific earmarks could receive a more favorable response if the timing is right.

California needs to invest substantial funds into water infrastructure improvements to improve drinking water quality, restore habitat, and develop alternative water supply sources like rainwater capture and advanced treatment. These needs cannot be resolved entirely at the local level, so at some point there will be another water bond on the ballot.

Share

0 Comments
Details

    Authors

    Friends staff, interns, and Board members.

    Archives

    November 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    December 2016
    November 2016
    May 2016
    August 2014
    July 2014
    February 2014

    Categories

    All
    BDCP
    Coequal Goals
    Delta
    Habitat Restoration
    SF Bay

    RSS Feed

Friends of the San Francisco Estuary
P.O. Box 791
Oakland, CA 94604
friendsofsfestuary@gmail.com


Contact Us
© Friends of the San Francisco Estuary. All rights reserved.
Friends of the San Francisco Estuary is a 501(c)(3) organization
Tax ID#: 68-0265026

Donate
Picture
Web Designer: Mark Bentivegna
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Board of Directors
    • Staff
    • History
    • Annual Reports
  • Awards
    • 2019 Creative Environmental Project Awards
    • 2017 Awards
    • 2015 Awards
    • 2013 Awards
  • Freshwater Flows Program
    • Background
    • What's at Stake
    • What's Being Done
    • Resources
    • Events
    • SF Estuary Resolutions
    • Comment Letters
  • News
    • Water News Updates
    • Blog
  • Take Action
    • Join
  • Donate