Proposition 26 is Bad for the Bay

Proposition 26 is Bad for the Bay

State Senator Mark Leno, San Francisco County Supervisor David Chiu and Bay Area Leaders Explain why Prop 26 is the most dangerous proposition you haven't heard of


SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 21 /PRNewswire-HISPANIC PR WIRE/ — Proposition 26 is flawed and would negatively affect everyone in the Bay Area, from the loss of vital city services to the destruction of our environment. That’s why State Senator Mark Leno and San Francisco County Supervisor David Chiu joined other Bay Area leaders to explain why Prop 26 is the most dangerous proposition on the November ballot.

“Proposition 26 would add another $1 billion to the California budget deficit,” said State Senator Mark Leno, (D-San Francisco.) “That means programs that have been cut to the bone – education, public safety, public health – would be cut even more. San Francisco can’t afford that. Other California cities and counties can’t afford that. The state of California can’t afford that.”

“The San Rafael City Council unanimously passed a resolution of opposition to Prop 26,” said Mark Levine, San Rafael City Councilmember. “We did this because we recognized the initiative would put a new Constitutional choke-hold on our ability to govern effectively.”

Besides creating a $1 billion budget hole and handcuff cities and counties Prop 26 would

— increase the budget deficit by $11 billion over 10 years;

— making it easier for companies to shift the social costs of their businesses onto taxpayers;

— damage environmental programs and strangle AB32, the innovative Global Warming Act, by blocking the adoption of charges on the big oil companies that are destroying our air;

— harm public health and public safety;

— cause a lot of uncertainty for business.

“Oil companies, tobacco and liquor lobbies are trying to escape responsibility for their environmental and health impact on society, and make taxpayers pick up the tab,” said David Chiu, President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. “Prop 26 would cripple local government’s ability to provide critical environmental clean-up and health programs, while lining the pockets of Prop 26’s supporters.”

The oil and tobacco companies are spending millions to protect themselves and hide their true motives — shifting the burden of the societal damage they cause onto taxpayers. Bay Area-based Chevron has donated $2.5 million to the Proposition 26 campaign; other oil companies threw in a $1 million. What kind of company is oil keeping? Phillip Morris/Altria donated $2.5 million – most of the money hidden behind the California Chamber of Commerce and this week the American Beverage Association donated $2 million.

“The Wine Institute and Big Alcohol lined-up early for Prop 26,” stated Bruce Lee Livingston, executive director of Marin Institute. “Anheuser-Busch InBev, a Belgian-owned, Brazilian-run company contributed more than a million for Prop 26 to stick California taxpayers with annual billion dollar tabs for alcohol-related harm.”

Prop 26 will affect every Californian negatively, whether they are conservative or liberal, care about police protection or protecting our coasts. That’s why a broad, bipartisan group has lined up against Prop. 26, including: the Sierra Club, the Planning and Conservation League, the League of Women Voters, California Council of Churches/California Church IMPACT, League of Conservation Voters, Environmental Defense Fund, California State Sheriffs’ Association, California Professional Firefighters, Police Officers Research Association of California, the American Lung Association in California, the American Cancer Society, Health Access, the California Nurses Association, the California Federation of Teachers, the California State Association of Counties, the League of California Cities and many others.

For additional information visit: or

Contact: Heidi Pickman @ 310-392-0211

Michael Scippa @ 415 258-0492

SOURCE No On Proposition 26; Marin Institute

Proposition 26 is Bad for the Bay