This website uses cookies to analyze site navigation and improve user experience.  We take your privacy seriously, and never collect any personally identifiable information, nor do we ever sell or share anonymized data with any third parties.  Click “Great!” to remove this banner.

Climate Propositions and Measures in San Diego County

Policy

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

Category
Select field
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Californians rally across the state to show support for rooftop solar

On December 1, hundreds of Californians across the state rallied, presumably one last time, to show their support for rooftop solar ahead of the California Public Utilities Commission's December 15 meeting, where they will vote on an anti-solar proposal.

On December 1, hundreds of Californians across the state rallied, presumably one last time, to show their support for rooftop solar ahead of the California Public Utilities Commission's December 15 meeting, where they will vote on an anti-solar proposal.  

Over the course of two years, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has had a proceeding open to make changes to the state’s net energy metering (NEM) program, with the investor-owned utilities and their surrogates on one side of the isle advocating for drastic cuts to the benefits rooftop solar customers receive while environmental and climate justice organizations, schools, churches, nonprofit organizations, unions, Community Choice Energy providers, consumer protection groups and others on the opposite end advocating to keep rooftop solar growing in California and to make it more accessible. 

In December 2021, the CPUC released a proposed decision that included a fee for solar which essentially taxed solar customers simply for having solar interconnected to the grid (and providing local clean energy) and included retroactive changes to current solar customer agreements. Thankfully, our coalition of over 600+ organizations across the state representing millions of people put enough pressure on both the CPUC and Governor Gavin Newsom, which caused the governor to publicly tell Californians that the proposal needed more work. Since then, our coalition has continued to hold numerous rallies, call in to several CPUC voting meetings to make public comments (with some public comment periods lasting over seven hours), hold meetings with elected officials and submitting letters to Governor Newsom. 

Finally, last month, the CPUC released their anxiously awaited revised proposed decision, which is still way too extreme and would send solar off of a cliff. The proposal includes a dramatic 75 percent reduction to the credits customers receive for sharing their excess energy with their neighbors. Cutting these credits means solar will not pencil out for nonprofits, schools, churches and working class families across the state. In San Diego where we pay the highest rates in the nation for energy, rooftop solar is the only way for working class families to alleviate the burden of skyrocketing energy costs. Solar and storage is a clean way to provide reliable backup power when the utilities cut off power, which is happening more and more frequently, helping families maintain needed medical equipment while avoiding potentially wasting perishable food.

At the San Diego solar event today, one of 10 in the state held at 11 a.m., activists and solar installers who are concerned over their jobs rallied in front of St. Stephen’s Church of God in Christ, a church that has been a pillar of the community that has just recently installed solar panels to help with the cost of energy bills and be able to reinvest money back into the community. Pastor Glenn McKinney spoke to the CPUC and state leaders directly, “We should be gathering at churches like ours to celebrate going solar, not having to ask state leaders to halt their efforts to make solar less accessible to everyone, especially communities of concern and nonprofit organizations.” He continued by sharing why it's important for rooftop solar to remain an option for communities of concern. “We do not have a robust tree canopy like some communities and it’s getting hotter and hotter here in San Diego where we pay the highest energy rates in the nation. Without rooftop solar, we have no other options than to pay for expensive energy that’s making fossil fuel companies and their shareholders a lot of money while San Diegans are forced to choose to pay their energy bill or medicine or food”.

The CPUC will vote on the proposal on December 15 and our coalition knows the power we have when we stand together and make our voices heard. Please visit helpcleanenergy.org to see how you can help!      

   

Read more
Senator Schumer discussing the Inflation Reduction Act in public

Breaking Down the Clean Energy Incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act

Last month President Joe Biden signed a bill that secured the largest investment in the United States’ history to combat climate change and invest in clean technologies. An analysis of the bill from Senate Democrats predicts that the bill will help the United States lower greenhouse gas emissions by about 40 percent by 2030.

Last month President Joe Biden signed a bill that secured the largest investment in the United States’ history to combat climate change and invest in clean technologies. An analysis of the bill from Senate Democrats predicts that the bill will help the United States lower greenhouse gas emissions by about 40 percent by 2030. 

The Inflation Reduction Act is 730 pages of not-so-easy to read legislation with topics covering healthcare, energy, electric vehicles, corporate taxes and more. Keeping in mind that reading through federal legislation is time consuming and may not be easy to understand, this blog will break down the key points relating to clean energy from the Inflation Reduction Act from the information that’s available at this time. 

Changes to the investment tax credit 

The tax credit that’s received for installing clean energy technologies has now increased from 26 percent back up to 30 percent and will be in effect until 2032. The tax credit will be available for both residential and commercial projects installed this year and moving forward. The investment tax credit will decrease to 26 percent in 2033 and 22 percent in 2034. 

The biggest change relating to the tax credit is that it includes a direct pay provision for a nonprofit or a state, local or tribal government. Previously, those entities were not able to use the tax credit available so often entered into power purchase agreements or leases to utilize the tax credit. We are excited for our nonprofit Solar Moonshot Program participants, which will now be able to utilize direct pay and own their systems outright from the day their rooftop solar power systems are energized. Unfortunately, residential customers are not eligible for the direct pay provision, however, residential customers who do not have the tax appetite to make use of the tax credit, are now about to transfer or sell the credits. 

There are also a number of adders that may increase the percentage of the tax credit. An additional 10 percent is available if the system is installed in an area with significant fossil fuel extraction or a brownfield. Another additional 10 percent is available for using domestic materials, which requires all steel and iron to be sourced from the United States and 40-55 percent of the value of manufactured products to be from the United States.  Finally, an additional 10 percent adder is available for solar projects that sell their electricity via community solar to low income households. The adders are also stackable meaning if a project has the 30 percent tax credit, a 10 percent adder for domestic materials, a 10 percent adder for being located in a fossil fuel community and another 10 percent for being a community solar project, the tax credits could potentially reach up to 60 percent of the total system cost. 

Prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements 

New employment requirements exist for large clean energy projects 1MW or more. In order to be eligible for the standard 30 percent tax credit, workers installing solar projects must be paid prevailing wages and be part of an electrical apprenticeship program. Violations will not only result in projects unable to claim up to 24 percent of the 30 percent tax credit but also heavy fines of $5,000 for each worker who is underpaid. Furthermore, if the inability to meet the wage requirements is found to be intentional, the fine will double to $10,000 per worker.  

Additional incentives and information

There are many other investments in the bill including tax credits for electric vehicles, electrical panels and more. There are also details that are not determined yet, for instance about the time it will take for direct pay to be paid out, which we’ll update you on as the information becomes available. Sign up for our newsletter to be notified when part two of this blog, which will dive into transportation investments, is available.

Read more
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

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.

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.

Read more