California Proposition 10, Alternative Fuels Initiative (2008)

California Proposition 10, also known as the California Alternative Fuels Initiative or the Pickens Plan, was on the November 4, 2008 ballot in California as an initiated state statute, where it was defeated.

If Proposition 10 had been approved, it would have allowed the State of California to sell $5 billion in general obligation bonds for a variety of renewable energy, alternative fuel, energy efficiency, and air emissions reduction purposes.

Proposition 10's opponents spent less than 1% as much as Proposition 10's supporters. It was one of two ballot initiatives focusing on alternative fuels to appear on the November 4 ballot in California. The other was Proposition 7 and it, too, was rejected by voters.

Election results

California Proposition 10, Alternative Fuels Initiative
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		7,464,154	59.5%
Yes		5,098,666	40.5%
Total votes		12,562,820	100.00%
Voter turnout		72.6%

These final election results are from the California Secretary of State's election results page.

17,304,091 California residents were registered to vote as November 4, 2008, out of the 23,208,710 who were eligible to register. 13,743,177 of these registered voters, or 79.42%, cast a ballot. The 12,562,820 votes cast for Proposition 10 came to 72.6% of registered voters.

Ballot language

Title

The ballot title was:

Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Renewable Energy. Bonds. Initiative Statute.

Summary

The official summary provided to describe Proposition 10 said:

• Provides $3.425 billion to help consumers and others purchase certain high fuel economy or alternative fuel vehicles, including natural gas vehicles, and to fund research into alternative fuel technology.
• Provides $1.25 billion for research, development and production of renewable energy technology, primarily solar energy with additional funding for other forms of renewable energy; incentives for purchasing solar and renewable energy technology.
• Provides grants to cities for renewable energy projects and to colleges for training in renewable and energy efficiency technologies.
• Total funding provided is $5 billion from general obligation bonds.

Fiscal impact

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

• State costs of about $10 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($5 billion) and interest ($5 billion) costs of the bonds. Payments of about $335 million per year.
• Increase in state sales tax revenues of an unknown amount, potentially totaling in the tens of millions of dollars, over the period from 2009 to about 2019.
• Increase in local sales tax and vehicle license fee revenues of an unknown amount, potentially totaling in the tens of millions of dollars, over the period from 2009 to about 2019.
• Potential state costs of up to about $10 million annually, through about 2019, for state agency administrative costs not funded by the measure.

Support

"Yes on 10" logo

Supporters

• American Cancer Society, California Division
• South Coast Air Quality Management District
• T. Boone Pickens
• Allison Hart, Mitzi Dudley and Thomas Daly filed the initial ballot language.
• Assorted politicians including Barack Obama mentioned that they support the efforts of T. Boone Pickens.

Arguments in favor

The main arguments offered in favor of Proposition 10 included:

• The funding it provides will allow the generation of electricity from renewable sources, and provide consumer rebates for the purchase or lease of "clean alternative fuel vehicles".
• The funding will allow the replacement of older polluting diesel trucks with clean alternative fuel trucks and provide for research into alternative fuels.
• The proposal will reduce dependence on foreign fuel and stop US dollars from going to hostile foreign governments.
• The diesel trucks that could be replaced produce dangerous pollution.
• Significant improvement in California Air quality, reduction of Air Pollution.
• Will provide earth-friendly and cheaper alternatives to high-priced gasoline.

Donors and Boone Pickens

Boone Pickens

$22,720,573 was contributed to the campaign in favor of a "yes" vote on Proposition 10.

Donors of $50,000 or more were:

Donor	Amount
Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (originally called "Pickens Fuel")	$18,647,250
Chesapeake Energy	$3,000,000
Aubrey McClendon	$500,000
Westport Fuel Systems	$250,000

Donor notes:

• Aubrey McClendon lives in Oklahoma and is the co-founder of Chesapeake Energy.

• On August 11, it was disclosed that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is an investor in CEFC.,

• Todd Campbell, Clean Energy's public policy director, in response to criticisms about CLNE sponsoring Proposition 10 because of potential benefits to the company told an 'Associated Press reporter, "I don’t think it’s a given that Clean Energy is going to cash in. I wish it were that simple."

Consultants

Consultants who worked on the "yes" campaign included:

• Forde and Mollrich.
• Wilson-Miller Communications.
• Greenberg Quinlan Rosner

Opposition

"No on 10" website banner

Opponents

The group "No on Proposition 10, Californians against the $10 Billion Lemon" formed and registered with the California Secretary of State.

Arguments against

• Would require taking $10 billion out of the state's general fund over a 30 year period.
• There are relatively few mechanics who know how to fix natural-gas engines and few filling stations offer natural gas.

Donors

$173,218 was contributed to the campaign in favor of a "no" vote on Proposition 10.

Donors of $10,000 or more were:

Donor	Amount
California School Employees Association	$50,000
Consumer Federation of California	$47,994
California Nurses Association	$40,000
AFSCME	$25,000
California Federation of Teachers	$10,000

Polls

2008 propositions
February 5
Proposition 91 • Proposition 92
Proposition 93 • Proposition 94
Proposition 95 • Proposition 96
Proposition 97
June 3
Proposition 98 • Proposition 99
November 4
Proposition 1A • Proposition 2
Proposition 3 • Proposition 4
Proposition 5 • Proposition 6
Proposition 7 • Proposition 8
Proposition 9 • Proposition 10
Proposition 11 • Proposition 12
Local measures

See also Polls, 2008 ballot measures.

Month of Poll	Pollster	In favor	Opposed	Undecided
October 2008	Field	49 percent	39 percent	12 percent

Editorial opinion

"Yes on 10"

• The Bay Area Reporter

"No on 10"

• Contra Costa Times
• The Los Angeles Times editorialized against Proposition 10, saying, "Spending bond money on something as intangible as privately owned vehicles is a terrible idea unless there is a clear public benefit." The Santa Monica Mirror said, "Self-serving Proposition 10 sounds good, should lose".
• Oakland Tribune
• Orange County Register
• Riverside Press-Enterprise
• Sacramento Bee
• San Diego Union-Tribune
• The San Francisco Chronicle was opposed, writing, "The chief backer and bill payer for the measure is T. Boone Pickens, the folksy Texas oilman and apostle for energy independence who founded a firm that just happens to supply natural gas for cars and trucks".
• San Jose Mercury News

Path to the ballot

See also: California signature requirements

As an initiated state statute, 433,971 signatures were required to qualify Proposition 10 for the ballot.

Proposition 10 was qualified for the ballot through a petition drive conducted by Progressive Campaigns, Inc., at a cost of $2,418,178 and Forde and Mollrich, which was paid $660,084 for signatures. The total signature cost was $3,078,263.

See also: California ballot initiative petition signature costs

External links

Suggest a link

• Official Voter's Guide to Proposition 10
• PDF of the mailed November 4, 2008 voter guide for Proposition 10
• November 4, 2008 ballot proposition election returns
• Proposition 10 in the Smart Voter Guide
• Analysis of Proposition 10 from the Institute of Governmental Studies
• Guide to Proposition 10 from the California Voter Foundation
• Summary of donors to and against Proposition 10 from Cal-Access
• Donors for and against Proposition 10 from Follow The Money
• Signature validation sheets (archival)

Advocacy:

• Facts on Prop 10, official website supporting Proposition 10.
• No on 10 Website - A project of the Consumer Federation of California

Additional reading:

• Opinion: Proposition 10 fights global warming
• 2 energy propositions flawed, critics say, San Francisco Chronicle.
• My Take on T. Boone's California Prop 10, by Judy Dugan.
• Political winds buffet California measures on energy, Sacramento Bee, September 15, 2008.
• Why should we vote for Prop 10?
• Prop 10: Fueling a cleaner California