Friday, March 28, 2008

Quiet Week

This turned out to be one of those weeks when there was not much activity in the Legislature relating to agricultural issues. But, starting next week, the pace of legislative action will increase significantly. So for now, at least, “no news…is good news.”

New Ag Secretary Visits

The newly appointed Secretary of the US Department of Agriculture, Ed Schafer, briefly visited Sacramento on Tuesday. He toured the Ag Day Celebration that was held on the west steps of the State Capitol and attended by a couple of thousand people from in and around various state government offices. Approximately 36 agricultural commodity groups and organizations participated with displays and food booths highlighting the diversity and contributions of California agriculture. The Secretary also met with the agricultural advisory committee to the Governor’s Commission on Economic Development. While in Sacramento, Secretary Schafer said the following with respect to the current Light Brown Apple Moth eradication project:
“…I also want you to know that USDA is very concerned about the threat the Light Brown Apple Moth poses to your orchards, fields and forests. And we really are here to help. We are going to continue to work closely with the California Department of Food and Agriculture to eradicate this invasive species from your state… using the safest and most effective means possible. This challenge calls for partnership and resolve. The only responsible course of action is to stop the progress of this species while we can-before it does serious damage to California’s agricultural economy and spreads far beyond the areas where it is today. Left unchecked, this moth could destroy more than $2 billion worth of California crops each year. Government’s job is to protect the nation’s food supply from this threat without putting public health at risk. If we fail to roll this invasion back now, we will not only have to deal with destroyed crops, but we’ll face the risk of new restrictions on California’s exports and growing use of chemical pesticides by producers.
The approach CDFA and USDA have adopted-using pheromones to disrupt the moth’s reproductive cycle-is scientifically sound and environmentally sensitive. The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that insect pheromones are non-toxic and pose no threat to the environment or human health. For the sprays we are looking at using this year, we are taking the additional step of having an EPA-certified laboratory test all their ingredients to see whether any of them could act as irritants or trigger any adverse health reactions. We will put the results of those tests in the public arena and we will continue to keep the public fully informed about what we are doing and why we are doing it...”

The public health information that the Secretary refers to is absolutely essential to CDFA’s ability to use aerial application of pheromones as the primary weapon against the moth. So the Secretary’s statement is extremely helpful and the test results need to be made available as quickly as possible.
 

June Ballot Measures

Given California’s reputation of legislating through initiative ballot measures, the upcoming June Primary is an anomaly because only two measures (Propositions 98 and 99) have qualified and both generally deal with the same subject matter, imminent domain. Prop 98 is the more comprehensive of the two. It prevents state and local governments from taking or damaging private property for private uses. It also prohibits rent control. One of its major sponsors is the California Farm Bureau Federation. Prop 99 is sponsored by the League of California Cities and is more limited. It applies only to owner-occupied residences and does not address rent control. It also has a “poison pill” which says that if both pass, and Prop 99 has the most votes, Prop 98 won’t take effect.

Of the two, Prop 98 is of most interest to agriculture because there is a significant difference of opinion over whether or not it could be used by opponents of water development to block new projects, such as new dams. As one of the sponsors of Prop 98, Farm Bureau has done extensive legal analysis that asserts Prop 98 would not impact water development. Western Growers has its own legal analysis that states the contrary. Without arguing the merits of either opinion, when the state’s two largest agricultural organizations are on opposite sides of the fence, it makes it impossible to achieve industry-wide consensus.

On Wednesday the Public Policy Institute of California, which has been conducting a comprehensive series statewide voter opinion polls over the last 10 years, released its latest poll results measuring voter attitudes towards their government. One section of the survey covered the Propositions 98 and 99. On the general question of whether or not government’s power of imminent domain was in need of major change, minor change, or is fine the way it is:
38% favored major change
33% favored minor change
15% no change
14% didn’t know.

Voters were also asked about local governments’ authority to set rents…is it a good thing or a bad thing?
53% good thing
39% bad thing
8% don’t know

When asked specifically about the two propositions the responses were:
Yes No Don’t Know
Prop 98 37% 41% 22%
Prop 99 53% 27% 20%
There’s still a long way to go, but it will take considerable financial resources for the proponents of Prop 98 to turn these numbers around.
 

Next Issue - Since I’m travelling out of state next week, the next issue will be distributed on April 11.