Environmentalists across the Bay Area were depressed Wednesday by the victory of Donald Trump — a man who appointed a coal lobbyist to run the EPA, withdrew from the Paris climate agreement and relaxed dozens of pollution rules last time he was president.
But closer to home, they had a lot to celebrate after Tuesday’s election. Numerous measures to provide funding for parks, wildlife and open space protection passed or seemed headed for victory across the Bay Area and other parts of California.
“There’s a feeling of whiplash,” said Sara Barth, executive director of the Sempervirens Fund, a non-profit group based in Los Altos that preserves redwood forests.
“I got one message from a friend saying ‘what a great day for the environment.’ And I said, yeah, except at the national level,” she added. “It’s a combination of hope and pride that California is leading the way, combined with dread and despair that the federal government is going to be pulling in the opposite direction. But California needs to continue to provide leadership despite what might happen at the national level.”
The biggest prize for green groups came as voters approved Proposition 4, a statewide bond measure to provide $10 billion to thin forests to reduce wildfire risk, expand parks and open spaces, and boost water recycling, groundwater storage and stream restoration for wildilfe.
The so-called “climate bond” is the first parks bond approved by California voters since the $4.1 billion Proposition 68 six years ago. It comes after California has endured drought, record wildfires and punishing storms in recent years, many of which scientists say were made worse by the warming climate.
On Election Day, most of the Bay Area was under a red flag warning due to extreme fire danger.
“Our forests matter,” said Sam Hodder, president of Save the Redwoods League. “Our rivers and streams matter. Access to clean water matters. With the impacts of extreme weather, from fire to drought to flooding, this shows the state isn’t willing to stick our heads in the sand. People are willing to invest in solutions to those realities. It’s a heartening message at a time of divisiveness and polarization that there was such a united voice.”
Opponents of the measure said it was too expensive.
“Proposition 4 places a significant financial burden on California taxpayers, costing us $20 billion over the bond’s lifetime,” said State Sen. Brian Jones, R-San Diego, in a statement. “While I’m disappointed it ultimately passed, I respect the will of the voters and am committed to fulfilling it. As Senate minority leader, I will lead my caucus to ensure these funds are used responsibly and efficiently to deliver the greatest possible benefit to Californians.”
There were other green victories on major Bay Area issues.
In San Francisco, voters were approving by 53-47% a plan to ban cars from more than 2 miles of the Great Highway on the city’s western edges near Ocean Beach and turn it over to bicyclists, joggers and hikers to create a new oceanfront park. Opponents said the plan would divert too much traffic through neighborhoods. But supporters said the idea, which began during the COVID pandemic and continues now on weekends, offered a renaissance for the city, similar to the construction of Crissy Field 20 years ago near the Golden Gate Bridge, or the removal of the Embarcadero freeway after the 1989 earthquake.
In San Benito County, voters embraced a slow-growth measure aimed at curbing Silicon Valley sprawl. Measure A, which would require voter approval before land zoned for farms or ranches could be developed, was leading 54-46%. It was endorsed by Save Mount Diablo, Green Foothills and other environmental groups.
Critics said it went too far.
“It sounds good,” said Donald Wirz, president of the San Benito County Farm Bureau. “I understand the intentions behind it. But it was a flawed measure from very beginning. It doesn’t protect property rights and it is chock full of loopholes.”
In Santa Cruz County, voters were approving Measure Q, an $87 annual parcel tax to provide $7.3 million a year for parks, wildfire prevention, river cleanups and beach projects by a 58-42% margin.
A similar story played out in the East Bay. Voters in Berkeley approved Measure HH, which will set new indoor air quality standards for city buildings and Measure Y, which will fund trees, landscaping and parks by increasing a special tax from 22 cents to 26 cents per square foot of taxable improvements.
Oakland voters also appeared to be giving the green light to Measure MM, which would establish a $99 annual parcel tax in the Oakland Hills to reduce wildfire risk by thinning brush and trees, increasing fire patrols and using goats to graze overgrown areas. It led 70-30% and needs a two-thirds majority to pass.
The only prominent Bay Area environmental measures to fail were Measure GG, a tax on natural gas use in Berkeley and Measure J in Sonoma County, a ballot initiative written by animal rights advocates to prohibit large farming operations, which lost in a landslide, 85-15%.
Voters in Petaluma and Cloverdale also overwhelmingly approved measures to extend their urban-growth line laws, limiting development on farmland around those communities, to 2050 and 2045.
“We’re all navigating our reaction to the national election, and understanding how it plays out for our future,” Hodder said. “But we’re grateful to California voters. California is leading.”
