No on Proposition 10 – Californians Against the $10 Billion Lemon is Sponsored by the Consumer Federation of California
520 S. El Camino Real, Suite 340
San Mateo, CA 94402
Phone (650) 375-7841
Fax (650) 343-1238
Email: mail@stopprop10.org
FPPC ID# 1311406
“Little bang for five billion bucks…The wrong road toward cleaner vehicles.”
— Sierra Club CA
“Billionaire Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens…really, really wants your money…His natural-gas fueling company has shelled out 3.2 million to further the reprehensible scam known as Proposition 10.”
— Los Angeles Times editorial
“Proposition 10… could increase global warming emissions.”
— Mary Nichols, Chair, CA Air Resources Board
“The measure (Prop 10) adds to the state’s fiscal problems, lines the pockets of the plan’s billionaire sponsor, and provides taxpayers nothing of lasting value – just a promise of clean air, with no requirements to make sure the promise is fulfilled.”
— California Taxpayers Assn.
“Proposition 10 is harmful to California’s financial health.”
— State Treasurer Bill Lockyer
"...a special interest giveaway…that promises no environmental benefits.”
“Prop 10 is biased towards investments in natural gas technology— over cleaner alternatives such as wind and solar technology—while draining California’s already over-committed general fund."
“The attempt by California's Prop 10 to legislate into existence a market for natural gas vehicles would unnecessarily add pressure to drill and is a poor investment in times of scarce public dollars."
“Proposition 10's key flaw is that it is a blatant scam by natural gas investor T. Boone Pickens to help him reap riches from his investment..”
"We're outrageously in debt. It's lunacy to even consider taking on even more debt. The losers will be state taxpayers with less money for services they value."
“California needs low-polluting alternative fuels in its future. But voters shouldn’t be misled to think this measure is a balanced answer. Vote no on Proposition 10.”
"Using your general fund tax dollars to subsidize...a fleet of natural gas vehicles...would be irresponsible. Vote no."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"The purposes of this bond are not an appropriate use for state-issued, bond-generated revenues."
“The reduction of greenhouse gases is a priority for our state, however this measure is not the most cost effective way to achieve reductions. Proposition 10 does not allow all technologies to compete for taxpayer dollars.”
“This is another attempt to use tax funds to benefit a billionaire...The Press Democrat recommends a no vote on Proposition 10.”
“On the basis of market distortion alone, this is crazy. There's already a federal subsidy for natural gas vehicles, which Pickens is lobbying to be continued through 2018.”
— Environment California
— California League of Conservation Voters
— Natural Resources Defense Council
— San Diego Union Tribune editorial
— Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.
— San Francisco Chronicle editorial
— San Jose Mercury News editorial
— League of Women Voters
— California Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Allan Zaremberg
— Santa Rosa Press Democrat editorial
— Judy Dugan, Consumer Watchdog