SOURCE:
By Randi F. Marshall - October 31, 2022
Voters in New York can be fickle about ballot proposals. They voted down an environmental bond act in 1990. And last year, voters put the kibosh on constitutional amendments addressing same-day voter registration and absentee voting.
It is in that context that supporters of the Clean Water, Clean Air, and Green Jobs bond act are trying to raise awareness about the measure on the Nov. 8 ballot.
“This really is a once in a generation opportunity to vote yes for clean water, a more sustainable future, and a healthier environment,” said Adrienne Esposito, executive director of the Citizens Campaign for the Environment at a Monday morning news conference.
She described the proposal to borrow $4.2 billion through the sale of bonds as “not a luxury item, it’s a necessity.” At the Monday event was Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone, who noted that Suffolk was on the “front lines” of the battle against climate change. Patrick Halpin, former Suffolk county executive and current water authority chairman, termed the bond act an “investment,” similar to past efforts to protect the pine barrens or expand sewers. He was one of multiple speakers who termed the issue “bipartisan,” and a previous news conference on the topic included Long Island Republicans such as State Sens. Alexis Weik and Mario Mattera.
Still, those inclined to worry about this year’s bond act are not exactly thrilled by the tightening of polls in the top-ticket governor’s race, or the political focus on inflation. Esposito argued that there won’t be a tax increase associated with the proposal.
Opposition to the bond proposal has not been quite so open, organized, or fervent as the anti-amendment push last year. Only two ballot issue committees show up in the state’s campaign finance database for the year — New Yorkers for Competitive Elections, and For the Many Environmental Action Inc. — with limited spending indicated in the not-very-up-to-date disclosures.
One avenue of attack has been the labor standards included in the bond proposal, including what one blog post from the Empire Center for Public Policy calls its “buy-American provisions.” The post from the fiscally conservative think tank argues that such standards “prevent the purchase of lowest-cost materials, further increasing project costs.” Yet elsewhere, the piece includes praise for some of the “justifiable infrastructure investments” called for in the act.
Another complicating factor is that bond acts fall under the radar in hot political races. While the state Conservative and Libertarian parties have come out against the bond act, Conservative chairman Gerard Kassar told The Point Monday that the party started running radio ads for gubernatorial hopeful Lee Zeldin, but hadn’t done the same against the bond act. “We have limited resources,” Kassar said, “and I focused them all on Zeldin.”
