California Energy and Fuel Ballot Props 7 and 10 Will Be Defeated if the Voters Know What They are Voting On

Frank, I love your work normally and your website. But you follow the lead of almost every writer on Prop 7 in simply conceding to the groups in opposition to Prop 7, without doing your own analysis. Prop 7 is in fact quite well-written, albeit complex (by necessity given the complexity of current CA energy policy). In fact, it largely follows the recommendations of a 2006 Energy Commission review of CA's key renewable energy law.

My organization, the Community Environmental Council, has endorsed Prop 7 as, on balance, quite good. We performed an independent analysis, in consultation with proponents and opponents. We have not received any compensation from the Prop 7 campaign, and nor will we accept such compensation.

In quick summary, Prop 7 provides a number of powerful incentives for more renewable energy like wind, solar, geothermal and biomass power. It also provides for potentially higher penalties against utilities for non-compliance. It does provide some additional exemptions from the higher penalties, but because it's primarily about incentives, this shouldn't be viewed as a fatal flaw by any means.

Prop 7 does not, as many opponents claim, exclude smaller renewable energy projects. It makes no change to the eligibility rules. It does create a fast track permitting process for larger projects, and this language has been mis-read to exclude smaller projects from eligibility more generally. But this is not the case.

Is Prop 7 perfect? No. But it is quite good, and it does follow most of the recommendations of the 2006 Energy Commission Integrated Energy Policy Report. It's also been endorsed by three Nobel Prize winners.

NRDC and EDF NOT TO BE TRUSTED: I don't qualify myself to judge the complexities of Prop 7 in relation to California energy law. However in the past I wrote a critical report challenging NRDC's neutrality regarding a highly controversial development of the Ballona Wetlands of Los Angeles -- for example, activists dressed as frogs and protested fundraisers as Steven Spielberg's home -- while NRDC's board members and donors were intertwined with the developer interests, including Hollywood's top moguls Spielberg, Geffen, and Katzenberg. For example, Geffen was a regular generous donor. Also, considering how valuable as an asset are celebrity actors and musicians to NRDC, it makes sense that it would not want to antagonize Hollywood's top directors and producers. ( See the report at http://www.nonprofitwatch.org/nrdc/ ) But where else may NRDC drop the ball or soft-pedal policy out of attention to needs of special interests to which it has ties? Well, for one it supported NAFTA which benefited business interests, including clothing company The Gap, of which a son of the founders and top executive sits on NRDC's board and supports the group financially.

Regarding Prop 7, an anonymous blogger by the handle of SolarCaliGirl slams the ethics and judgment of NRDC and some other major enviros who've been criticizing Prop 7. www.confusedinsolarcalifornia.blogspot.com
I suggest people look at the site for a different perspective than put forth in the mainstream coverage of enviro groups opposing 7. SolarCaliGirl challenges these groups on both their policy analysis of Prop 7 as well as integrity and exposes various financial and personal ties to the electric utilities.

SolarCaliGirl’s blog points out that that NRDC played a leadership role in designing and defending California's electricity restructuring. We saw how well that worked out. Considering that NRDC utterly botched deregulation, setting California up to be manipulated and plundered by the energy companies, such as Enron for which NRDC had gone to bat and dubbed “progressive”, a more self-reflective environmental community would not be assigning trust to NRDC. That CEERT, CLCV, UCS were involved or silent as California was swindled of money, renewables, and even its governor by the deregulation scheme does not inspire my trust in these groups.

Others including respected journalists have made similar criticism regarding NRDC. This information is available but ignored by the mainstream press and most of the blogosphere.

NRDC may have many good-intentioned people on staff, but organizationally I believe NRDC to be too subservient to corporate interests. NRDC certainly pursues various good work, but often constrained if one ponders the vast range of possibilities and the group's historical record, and thus does not justify the areas where NRDC's agenda seems questionable to me from an environmental perspective. NRDC can't even change light bulbs - greenwashing a ten year phase out by General Electric of the traditional climate-damaging incandescent bulbs as opposed to calling for an immediate halt to further production.

With the above in mind as well as considering NRDC's role in greenwashing free trade (supported NAFTA), deregulation, carbon trading, Enron, coal, nuclear power, industrial biofuels and more, I am hesitant to defer to NRDC on major environmental policy, including Prop 7.

Almost forgot: in the past I wrote an extensive and well referenced report critical of the Environmental Defense Fund, another group opposing Prop 7. The report noted EDF's ties to utility interests while the group pursued supportive policies, such as attempting to arrange green brownie points for Enron in its effort to take over a dam from Native Americans and to broker greenhouse credits for an electric utility on account of its nuclear generating capacity. The report highlighted a few board members, such as the man described as a classical pianist by EDF, ignoring that he and his relatives were directly involved benefiting from the family's highly diversified coal company of which he was a top shareholder; the report suggested various policies supported by EDF to the benefit of the company, but not clearly with the environment as the top priority. Another director had defended International Paper for polluting a major lake; this polluter's lawyer was at a law firm whose clients included Exxon. Later I showed the highly troubling connection of EDF to Enron's Ken Lay through a long time top donor and vice-chair of EDF's board of directors who in turn had created a group of which Ken Lay was a founding board member, serving for over six years until at least a year after Enron's collapse; in all likelihood Lay as a corporate chieftan generously donated to the group. Like NRDC, EDF also defended deregulation in California.

bernardo (at) NonprofitWatch dot org

Tam: Thank you for your comment. I have a healthy respect for expert opinion and the many different environmental organizations that have decided to oppose Prop 7, especially since I am not an expert in the rather technical, but important, issues raised. I have discussed this proposition not only with environmental groups and members, but with some other experts whose judgements I trust.

The article was not meant to be an analysis of both Prop 7 and 10, but to discuss the interesting pattern of voter opinion from the Field Poll.

For some reason, your organization was not listed as a supporter of Prop 7--no organizations were listed on the yes on 7 website.

Sorry, but when an out of state billionaire qualifies an initiative with paid signature gatherers, in this case a statute that could have been adopted by the legislature, and fails to get the support of environmental organizations that are longstanding and respected, that is significant to me. Even you admit it is not perfect and I have heard of many drafting errors.

My hope is that a new legislature can enact some of the good features of Prop 7 after they have been vetted and gone through the committee process. Prop 7, if it passes, can only be amended with a two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature. I believe in electing a legislature to make decisions on matters such as this that they can enact by statute unless there is a real uprising of California citizens and a good reason to do so and a well written initiative.

Post a comment

Commenters: You must preview your comment before posting. And please only hit "Post" once; it may take a while, but your comment is being processed. Thanks.