Farm groups split over Proposition 98; some concerned it could block water projects; Metropolitan goes on record as being opposed to Prop 98
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 21, 2008 at 6:21 amFrom the Sacramento Bee:
When it comes to water, thirsty California farm groups normally fight as one. But it is water that is behind a growing split in the agriculture community over an eminent domain measure on the June 3 ballot.
Proposition 98, backed by the California Farm Bureau Federation and an anti-tax group, would prohibit governments from seizing property, including farmland, for private use. But some farm groups – including the Fresno-based Nisei Farmers League and Western Growers Association – fear the measure would block use of eminent domain for construction of long-sought pipelines, canals and reservoirs, including one targeted for east of Fresno.
The anti-98 campaign picked up more steam last week when Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, came out against the measure. The congressman is normally aligned with the farm bureau and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the measure’s other backer. But in a letter last week, he said “serious questions have been raised regarding the impact this constitutional initiative will have on our ability to guarantee a plentiful and safe water supply in the future.”
Full text of the story from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
The Fresno Bee adds this:
The farm bureau — which has spent more than $298,000 on the “yes” campaign so far — is standing by the measure and has support from multiple farm groups, including the California Grain and Feed Association and Fresno Cooperative Raisin Growers Inc.
The bureau “is a strong supporter of creating new reservoirs, and we’re a strong supporter of property rights protection,” said spokesman Dave Kranz. “Those two interests are both well represented in Prop. 98.”
At issue is a single paragraph that would prohibit government from taking private land for the “consumption of natural resources.” The language is meant to keep cities from taking water rights. But Western Growers and other groups said the measure could block acquisition of land for pumps, pipes, canals and water-storage projects.
In the Fresno area, this would add roadblocks to the proposed Temperance Flat reservoir upstream of Millerton Lake, Prop. 98 opponents said. The majority of the targeted land is held by the U.S. government, but portions are under private control, said Mario Santoyo, assistant general manager of the Friant Water Users Authority, which represents east Valley growers. “There’s no question that [Prop. 98] would have some effect on this project,” he said.
The farm bureau says its farm brethren are misinterpreting the measure. Prop. 98 still allows land to be taken for public use, including for “public facilities” such as water-storage projects, according to legal advice obtained by the bureau. “The suggestion that [Prop. 98] would preclude the taking of property for the purpose of constructing a water storage or water conveyance facility because the water stored or conveyed is eventually ‘consumed’ is unpersuasive,” the opinion states.
Full story from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
Apparently, it is not only farm groups that are opposed to Proposition 98, but also Metropolitan Water District. I received this from the No on Prop 98 campaign:
On Tuesday, April 8, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) Board of Directors voted to oppose Proposition 98 and support Proposition 99. At a time when California faces a water crisis that threatens our economy and environment, an MWD staff analysis presented to the board warns that Proposition 98 would have “far-reaching and detrimental effects on Metropolitan’s and other public agencies’ ability to construct water conveyance and other public improvement projects”.
The MWD staff analysis, which can be found at http://www.mwdh2o.com/mwdh2o/pages/board/pdf/08048-7.pdf and is attached here, goes on to warn:
“Whether intentional or just a matter of poor drafting, Proposition 98 could be interpreted to prevent use of eminent domain to acquire land for water conveyance projects and facilities around the state.”
Proposition 98… “would greatly delay public construction projects and increase costs”.
Critically needed water conveyance projects and facilities could be derailed as a result.”
Proposition 98 is opposed by leading California organizations like the AARP, League of Women Voters of California, the Coalition to Protect California Renters, Golden State Manufactured-Home Owners League, Inc. (GSMOL), California Professional Firefighters, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California Teachers Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California Chamber of Commerce, Association of California Water Agencies, Western Growers Association and more than 150 other organizations. For a complete list of organizations opposing Prop. 98 and supporting Prop. 99, click here.
Comments
Leave a Reply