June 2016: Vote YES on Measure AA for a Clean and Healthy Bay!!!

SFLCV’s Position

Funding is desperately needed to restore San Francisco Bay’s wetlands and help protect the region from the effects of rising seas. This  modest $12 annual parcel tax would be evenly distributed among all parcels in the nine-county Bay Area. Over 20 years, it would raise $500 million to restore wildlife habitat, improve water quality, and create a buffer against storms and sea level rise. VOTE YES ON MEASURE AA on June 7th, 2016!

Summary of the Measure:

The Clean and Healthy Bay ballot measure, or Measure AA, is a region-wide $12 parcel tax that is expected to raise to $500 million dollars for wetland restoration during its 20-year lifetime. Revenue from the tax would be earmarked to restoring wetlands along San Francisco Bay (until the tax expires in 2037). Measure AA requires a two-thirds majority to pass.

Measure AA was placed on the ballot of all nine Bay Area counties by the the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority, a regional agency formed in 2008 to support the restoration, enhancement, protection, and enjoyment of Bay wetlands and wildlife habitat. The parcel tax is being championed by a broad array of supporters, including both environmental and business groups, such as Save the Bay and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. The funds raised will help meet regional wetland restoration goals, which have stalled for lack of funds, and address long-term needs to protect infrastructure and homes from sea level rise.

Arguments in favor

Scientists estimate as much as 90% of the historic wetlands around San Francisco Bay have been lost to development and agriculture. A decade-long goal to restore 100,000 acres of wetlands--to maintain vital bird habitat, enhance water quality, and protect our cities from tidal surges--has stalled in recent years, as funding has dried up. Lands are already available for restoration, particularly in the North and South Bay, but funding is needed to actually do the restoration.

Measure AA would pay for that wetland restoration. It would improve water quality and increase natural habitat for hundreds of species of wildlife, including salmon, Dungeness crab, porpoises, sea lions, and shorebirds.

Restoring San Francisco Bay’s wetlands will also protect shoreline communities from from flooding, which is likely to reach crisis proportions in the coming decades as sea level rises. More than $60 billion worth of homes, businesses, and crucial infrastructure are at risk, including ports, airports, roads, office buildings, and entire neighborhoods at or below sea level. Restoring wetlands will help with this by helping absorb and buffer against rising tides and storms.

Arguments in opposition

Measure AA is generally unopposed throughout the region, with the exception of taxpayers’ associations, which reflexively oppose taxes. The main argument against the measure is that all parcels are taxed at the same rate-- that is, Facebook and Google pay the same as owners of individual homes. Though we certainly support more funding from large tech companies for Bay restoration, the tax is a broadly affordable $12 and will support something that cannot wait--the restoration of our Bay.

November 2015: Our November 3, 2015 Endorsements

The November 2015 election is upon us, and as usual there are several important "Votes for the Environment"! We particularly urge you to vote No on G, Yes on H and for Aaron Peskin for D3 Supervisor. See all our endorsements below, and follow the links for more information. Note that if we did not list a Ballot measure or Race, it is not because it is not an important issue, only because we did not feel there was a clear environmental or good government reason to endorse, as per our mission.

Board of Supervisors, District 3: Aaron Peskin - A long time environmental champion! Yes on A: Affordable Housing Bond - More affordable housing NOW! No on C: Lobbyists Ordinance - Badly drafted ethics reform which will unfairly harm small non-profits Yes on D: Misson Rock Development - On balance, a good development proposal for Mission Rock No on E: Public Meetings - A deeply flawed attempt at more public access which would make our local democracy worse, not better Prop F: Short Term Residential Rentals - A flawed solution to the big problem of short term residential rentals. (Read for why we can neither support nor oppose) No on G: Bad Definition of Clean Energy - A cynical, restrictive & disingenuous attempt to slow down SF's CleanPowerSF initiative. Yes on H: Good Definition of Clean Energy - A measure to protect CleanPowerSF from Prop G. No on I: Mission Luxury Housing Moratorium - The moratorium will definitely make some parts of the Mission's housing problems worse, and very unlikely to make any of them better. Yes on J: Legacy Business Preservation Fund - An interesting effort to support San Francisco businesses that make up our social fabric Yes on K: Surplus City Property Ordinance - Prioritize the City's Surplus Lands for Affordable Housing

Don't forget to VOTE on Tuesday, November 3rd!

November 2015: Aaron Peskin for Supervisor (D3)

 SFLCV President, Amandeep Jawa with Supervisor Aaron Peskin

SFLCV President, Amandeep Jawa with Supervisor Aaron Peskin

The San Francisco League of Conservation Voters endorses Aaron Peskin for the Board of Supervisors for District 3. Aaron is a long-time environmental champion, and we have enjoyed working with him over the years, both on and off the Board. As a Supervisor, and then President of the Board, Aaron took strong positions on protecting the Bay, funding public transit, and enhancing San Francisco’s open spaces. We look forward to working with him again on the Board of Supervisors and urge you to Vote for Aaron Peskin for District 3 Supervisor.

November 2015: NO on Proposition I

No issue in San Francisco seems more acute than our current housing crisis, and to be sure it is an environmental issue. Vibrant, socioeconomically, diverse cities are the best way to prevent suburban sprawl and its attendant environmental problems such as resource-intensive living and habitat destruction. Unfortunately, cities across the country are facing similar problems of housing demand outstripping housing supply. Proposition I is a well-meaning attempt to address part of this crisis in the Mission district, one of the San Francisco neighborhoods most affected. Long term residents and businesses in the Mission are dealing with a dramatic increase in property values which is, in turn, leading to a high number of evictions and a rapidly changing neighborhood character. Prop I would establish an 18 month moratorium on housing projects that do not contain 100% affordable housing (with possibility of a 1 year extension). In that time, the City would be required to come up with a Neighborhood Stabilization Plan which would propose ways to help the Mission reach 50% affordable on new construction going forward.

While we strongly believe more must be done to address San Francisco's housing crisis and the affordability issues it creates, we believe Prop I will likely not improve much and will more likely cause greater harm. By stalling new housing construction, even for luxury units, without addressing demand, Prop I will most likely cause the already sky-high value of existing housing stock to increase, fueling still more speculation, and more evictions. While it is critical to build more affordable housing in San Francisco, and in particular to the Mission, Prop I does nothing to actually address the issue of creating more affordable housing.

In addition to this measure's practical limitations, we also dislike the fact that this is essentially ballot-box planning. However much we may agree with the intentions behind the measure, to protect the City's affordability, socio-economic diversity, and character, we urge you to vote No on Proposition I.

November 2014 Endorsements

Here are our endorsements for the November 4th, 2014 election in San Francisco. Make sure you check back, as we will be posting more information & videos in the following weeks.

A Transportation & Road Improvement Bond YES
B Population-based funding for Muni YES
E Soda Tax YES
F Pier 70 Development Site Height Limit Increase YES
G Surtax on Transfers of Residential Real Property YES
H Requiring Certain Athletic Fields in Golden Gate Park to be Maintained as Natural Grass YES
I Park Code - Children's Playgrounds, Walking Trails, Athletic Fields NO
L Policy Regarding Transportation Priorities in San Francisco NO

Candidate Races:

Race 1st choice 2nd choice 3rd choice
Supervisor D2 Juan-Antonio Carballo (sole endorsement)
Supervisor D6 Jane Kim Jamie Whitaker
Supervisor D8 Scott Wiener (sole endorsement)
Supervisor D10 Malia Cohen Tony Kelly
 
BART Board Nick Josefowitz

Nov 6th, 2012 Endorsements

City Propoaitions:Prop B: Yes Bond Funding to Improve SF's Parks! Prop C: Yes Build MORE Affordable Housing! Prop F: Yes Hetch Hetchy - maybe, maybe not. STUDY better water recycling system? DEFINITELY!!

Board of Supervisors

  • D1: Eric Mar
  • D3: David Chiu
  • D5:
    1. John Rizzo
    2. Christina Olague
    3. Julian Davis
  • D7: Norman Yee
  • D9: David Campos
  • D11: John Avalos

Community College Board: Rafael Mandelman Chris Jackson Amy Bacharach

School Board: Sandra Fewer Jill Wynns Rachel Norton Matt Haney

BART Board: Tom Radulovich

Jun 5, 2012 Endorsements

PROPOSITIONS NO on Prop A:

San Francisco is making great progress towards our "Zero Waste to Landfill by 2020" goal & Prop A could put that at risk. No on A.

YES on Prop B:

Protect Coit Tower from Recreation and Park privatization efforts. Yes on B.

 

CANDIDATES:

Our endorsements are for the Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC.)

AD 17

  • Avalos, John
  • Campos, David
  • Chiu, David
  • DeJesus, Petra
  • Dorsey, Matt
  • Gembinski, Chris
  • Haaland, Gabriel Robert
  • Katz, Leslie
  • Mandelman, Rafael
  • Migden, Carole
  • Morgan, Justin
  • Pimentel, Leah
  • Rosenthal, Alix Amelia

AD 19

  • Alonso, Mike
  • Aragon, Wendy
  • Bard, Kevin
  • Dwyer, Kelly
  • Lauterborn, Mar
  • Mar, Eric

2011 November Endorsements - Propositions

Endorse A - School BondsEndorse B - Road Repaving and Street Safety Bonds No Position C - City Pension and Health Care Benefits Oppose D - City Pension Benefits Oppose E - Amending or Repealing Legislative Initiative Ordinances and Declarations of Policy Endorse F – Campaign Consultant Ordinance Endorse G – Sales Tax No Position H - School District Student Assignment

2010 November Endorsements - Candidates

District 2 SupervisorJanet Reilly

District 4 Supervisor No endorsement

District 6 Supervisor (rank choice) 1-Jane Kim 2- Debra Walker 3-Jim Meko

District 8 Supervisor Rafael Mandelman

District 10 Supervisor (rank choice) 1-Eric Smith 2-Tony Kelly 3-Chris Jackson

Community College Board (3 open seats) John Rizzo Lawrence Wong Anita Grier

School Board (3 open seats) Natasha Hoehn Kim-Shree Maufas Hydra Mendoza

Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting

BART Director District 8 Bert Hill

November 2010 Endorsement Questionnaires

If you are a candidate in the November 2010 Election in San Francisco seeking our endorsement, please fill out the appropriate questionnaire, and get it back to us as soon as possible (contact information can be found on the questionnaire pages below). We will also be contacting candidates directly in the next month.

June 2010 Endorsements

These our the endorsements for the June 8, 2010 Election.
Propositions
YES on Prop G G is a declaration of city policy that the high speed rail terminus should be the Transbay Terminal.
State Propositions
CLCV is NO on 16 (PG&E 2/3 vote). We agree!
DCCC - 12AD
  • John Avalos
  • Michael Bornstein
  • Sandra Lee Fewer
  • Chris Gembinski
  • Elbert Hill
  • Hene Kelly
  • Eric Mar
  • Milton Marks
  • Jake McGoldrick
  • Jane Morrison
  • MelanieNutter
  • Connie O’Connor

District 13

  • David Campos
  • David Chiu
  • Michael Goldstein
  • Robert Haaland
  • Joseph Julian
  • Rafael Mandelman
  • Kim-Shree Maufas
  • Carole Migden
  • Aaron Peskin
  • Eric Quezada
  • Alix Rosenthal
  • Debra Walker

No on Prop D! Pissed Off Voter Guide Release Party!!

Join SFLCV and others at the League of Young Voters' Pissed Off Voter Guide release party. SFLCV is co-sponsoring the event so come on down. The event is Friday night at Gestalt Haus on 16th street in the Mission (3159 16th Street), just a couple blocks from the 16th street BART station. October 23rd at 7-10pm

Why does SFLCV oppose Prop D?

In short its two things: we don't think ads and signs make a neighborhood a better place, and it's bad government. Complex planning code does not belong in the ballot box.

Nov 2009 Endorsements

Yes on A - Budget Reform - This makes the budget biennial. This is a good government issue for us, trying to make the budget process better.Yes on B - Board of Supervisor Aides - This allows supervisors to hire more than two aides. This is another good government issue for us. No on D - Mid Market Special Sign District - While a goal of a vibrant mid market district is a fine one. We are uncertain that more signs and billboards will make it that way. Yes on E - Advertisements on City Property - This prevents there from being a further expansion of the use of city furniture and buildings to be sold as ad space.

Though they are running unopposed, we also support candidates: Jose M. Cisneros for Treasurer and Dennis Herrera for City Attorney.

2008 Endorsements Slate Mailer is on its way!

We are very proud of the fact that in every contested major election cycle, the San Francisco League of Conservation Voters distributes the only regular endorsement slate card representing the environmental community and this year is no different! We are about to start mailing the SFLCV slate cards! They look great!

You can see them HERE. We are mailing 4 different pieces for each of 4 different Supervisorial districts!

 

TO SEE OUR COMPLETE LIST OF ENDORSEMENTS JUST SCROLL DOWN or Click Here.