Farm groups oppose Prop. 87

Initiative would tax oil producers, increasing farmers' fuel costs.

Published online on Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2006

With a backdrop of John Deere tractors, leaders of three key central San Joaquin Valley farm groups Tuesday voiced their opposition to Proposition 87, the November ballot measure that would tax oil producers to pay for alternative energy programs.

They were joined at Fresno Equipment Co. by a Reedley citrus grower, who said the measure would make it more difficult to compete in a worldwide marketplace, and by the manager of a Kingsburg farming operation, who said increased costs for fuel would hurt workers and operators of nonfarm businesses.

"None of us disagrees with the idea of seeking energy alternatives," said Joel Nelsen, who heads California Citrus Mutual in Exeter. "But the idea of putting a tax on our oil and gasoline that will drive up costs is incomprehensible."

Proponents of the $4 billion program point to language on ballots that states producers are prohibited from passing taxes onto consumers.

But costs will be passed to heavy consumers of oil products such as farmers, said Nelsen and others at Tuesday's news conference. Those attending included Barry Bedwell, president of the Fresno-based California Grape and Tree Fruit League, and Manuel Cunha Jr., president of the Nisei Farmers League in Fresno.

If the proposition becomes law, Bedwell said, less oil is likely to be produced in the state and more foreign oil would be imported into the state and refined at higher cost, which would be passed along to consumers.

Yusef Robb, spokesman for the Yes on 87 campaign, said the measure saves farmers money and creates new economic opportunities for them.

"The diesel farmers use to harvest crops is not only outrageously expensive, it has made it so that Fresno has some of the worst air quality in the country," he said. "Fresno has an F grade from the American Lung Association when it comes to air quality."

The American Lung Association of California is among the backers of Prop. 87, which also has won the backing of former President Bill Clinton, who has chided oil companies for the millions of dollars they have pumped into the No on 87 campaign.

Spending on both sides of the measurehas exceeded $85 million, which could put it in the running to set a spending record for one initiative.

Robb said some of the alternative fuels, including ethanol and biodiesel, are derived from farm crops.

"Prop. 87 is about freeing ourselves from the oil company stranglehold to save us money, clean our air and grow our economy," he said.

Farm leaders disagreed, contending that the measure would have negative effects, particularly in rural communities.

"It's not just ag," Cunha said. "It will hurt schools who have to operate buses, other businesses."

Speaking in Spanish, Isidro Martinez said he believes "Prop. 87 would impact money available for important local programs, including education programs, law enforcement and health care clinics."

Martinez, farm manager of Family Tree Farms in Reedley, said farmers would not be able to increase the costs of their produce to meet increases in fuel costs.

Caroline Alfheim, who grows citrus in Reedley, said government mandates in the past have increased citrus growers' costs. "Now, a well-intended but misguided group of people wants to add another tax," she said.