Hayden, Arbit Adding Millions to Environmental Propositions

Two wealthy backers of environmental causes, Assemblyman Tom Hayden and investor Harold Arbit, have reached deep into their own pockets to come up with millions of dollars in last-minute contributions to two environmental initiatives on the Nov. 6 ballot, campaign officials said Thursday.

In recent days, Hayden, a co-sponsor of Proposition 128, loaned $830,000 of his own money to the campaign for the sweeping environmental measure labeled “The Hayden Initiative” by its opponents. The loan brings to more than $1.2 million the amount of money the Santa Monica Democrat or organizations he heads have contributed to the proposition, also called “Big Green.” Arbit has given the campaign in favor of Proposition 130, the “Forests Forever” initiative, another $3 million of his personal funds, bringing to nearly $5 million the amount that he has spent to finance the initiative designed to preserve California’s ancient redwood forests.

“California is really a unique place and to me the symbol of its uniqueness and natural beauty is the redwood,” Arbit said Thursday. “What I’m trying to combat is that arrogant mentality of the timber industry that they can keep taking and taking until it’s all gone.”

In addition to Arbit and Hayden, Disney Co. President Frank Wells and his wife, Luanne, contributed $1 million to Greenvote, an environmental political action committee, which gave $1 million to the Proposition 130 campaign.

“Luanne and Frank Wells are committed environmentalists, deeply concerned about the depletion of the ancient redwood forests,” said Rick Luskin, executive director of ENVIRONMENT NOW, a group founded by the couple.

The contributions are among the largest personal donations ever made in initiative campaigns. But supporters of the propositions said they still expect to be vastly outspent by industry-backed opposition campaigns.

With less than two weeks before Election Day, the massive personal donations will allow the Proposition 128 and Proposition 130 campaigns to buy more television time to compete with their opponents.

The opposition campaigns are financed largely by oil and chemical companies, the timber industry and other corporations that would be affected by the initiatives. Environmentalists expect them to spend as much as $16 million against each of their measures.

Chevron, for example, gave an additional $150,000 this week to fight Proposition 128, bringing its total contributions against the measure to $545,000. And the Roseburg Resources Co., a lumber company in Roseburg, Ore., contributed $350,000 to the timber industry campaign to defeat Proposition 130.

Bill Schulz, a spokesman for Hayden, said the assemblyman could not be reached to discuss his loan to the campaign because he was busy working on television commercials that will be aired with the money.

But Schulz said the money is in keeping with the $600,000 Hayden and his former wife, actress Jane Fonda, gave to support Proposition 65, the anti-toxics measure approved by voters four years ago.

Because of Hayden’s controversial past as an anti-war radical, opponents have highlighted his role in helping to draft the measure and put it on the ballot.

“More than anything else, it (the loan) kind of underlines the fact that this is the Hayden Initiative,” said Scott MacDonald, a spokesman for the opposition campaign. “We’ve always said that this is his initiative, and it’s obvious that this is extremely important to Tom Hayden.”

But supporters of Proposition 128 said they believe that the strategy of focusing on Hayden has had little effect on the middle-of-the-road voters who will decide the initiative’s fate.

“The polls we’ve seen show the moniker “The Hayden Initiative” isn’t helping them,” Schulz said. “It wasn’t a winning argument.”

Similarly, the timber industry campaign to defeat Proposition 130 has focused heavily on Arbit’s donations. Spokesmen for the campaign have repeatedly claimed that Arbit stands to benefit financially if the measure is passed, but they have provided no proof.

Arbit said he initially planned to spend about $1.5 million to put the measure on the ballot and help win its passage. But he has spent more than three times that amount to combat what he considers to be a deceptive campaign launched by the timber industry.

“The timber industry has spent so much money trying to confuse the voter that if we don’t commit enough money to get the message out to the voters in November, the timber industry will win,” Arbit said.

Times environmental writer Maura Dolan contributed to this story in Los Angeles.