California farm groups split over June ballot proposition on eminent domain

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."

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.

The bureau "is a strong supporter of creating new reservoirs and we're a strong supporter of property rights protection," said spokesman Dave Kranz.

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 potentially block acquisition of land for pumps, pipes, canals and water storage projects.

The farm bureau says its farm brethren are misinterpreting the measure.

Proposition 98 still allows land to be taken for public use, including for "public facilities" such as water storage projects, according to a legal opinion obtained by the bureau.

While eminent domain has rarely been used to take over farmland, the farm bureau fears that cities, eager to expand their boundaries, might use it more, said Kiran Black, the bureau's manager of political affairs.

"Our members expect us to protect family farms and ranches and we believe eminent domain is a real threat," she said.

Eminent domain became a hot issue in the wake of a 2005 Supreme Court ruling that governments could seize private property for the sake of economic development. In 2006, California voters narrowly defeated a measure that would have put sweeping restrictions on eminent domain. It was strongly opposed by cities.

This year, Proposition 98 is joined on the ballot by Proposition 99, a more narrowly crafted measure backed by the League of California Cities that would bar governments from seizing owner-occupied residences.

About the writer:

• Call E.J. Schultz, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 326-5541.