Proposal to cut ag agency draws heat
By Seth Nidever snidever@HanfordSentinel.com
Kings County's state Sen. Dean Florez has raised the possibility of eliminating the California Department of Food and Agriculture. A press release released earlier this week said Florez, the Democratic Senate Majority leader from Shafter, "pledges a cost-cutting review" of the department in light of major cuts looming for education and health care.
California faces a budget deficit of at least $24 billion and will likely run out of cash in July unless a balanced budget is passed quickly.
"On June 16, the Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture will meet to consider whether or not it makes sense for agriculture to remain the only California industry with its own $100 million general fund-backed agency, when most of its functions could be performed by other departments," the release stated.
Bob Alvarez, Florez's chief of staff, said it's likely that at least some of the department's functions will survive.
But he suggested that many could be picked up by other agencies.
Alvarez indicated that the review is part of a prioritization that puts education and public safety above some other governmental functions.
He called the June 16 hearing "an opportunity for people to justify, in a sense, their existence."
"Obviously, we're going to be aggressive. There is a bar that has been set by (Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's) office," Alvarez said.
Florez couldn't be reached for comment.
Local agricultural leaders defended the California Department of Food and Agriculture, saying it's necessary for the industry.
Two-thirds of the agency's estimated $315 million budget is funded by private sources, according to Tim Larson, Kings County Farm Bureau president.
California agriculture is a $44 billion-a-year industry, with triple that benefit to local economies if the multiplier effect is factored in, according to Larson.
He said the agency plays an important role in import-export food safety issues.
"It seems like (Florez's) proposal is very ag unfriendly. Something that's very productive and lucrative, why would you cut it off at the knees?" he said.
"We need a statewide agency to respond to food safety issues and regulation," said Russell Waymire, a local farmer.
Waymire said the department plays a critical role in ensuring the "vitality and viability of California agriculture."
Mark Trezza, a political science instructor at Fresno City College who lives in Hanford and is also a member of the Kings County Democratic Central Committee, thinks Florez's proposal may be aimed at Republicans who frequently claim that Democrats support welfare and social service programs because the recipients of those programs tend to vote Democratic.
Trezza suggested that Florez might be making the same argument for agriculture, which is perceived as a strong supporter of Republicans.
"I think in the bigger picture of government services, I think we could see as a warning to [Republicans] that 'You have constituents that receive government funding, too, and they are on the radar screen,' " Trezza said.
In the press release, Florez is quoted as saying that "in agriculture, there are business considerations, and there are public health considerations, and we already have agencies that serve both of those functions."
Don Larson, a retired Fresno City College history teacher and a frequent commentator on local politics, questioned why Florez would suddenly be suggesting that the agency's functions can be performed by other departments.
"Where has he been all these years? Because those cuts should have been made a long time ago," Larson said.
(June 9, 2009)
|
SJT wrote on Jun 6, 2009 8:25 AM:
The argument is true for those in education, healthcare and others who would say the exact same things. It's a view of selfishness. Take a strong stand to protect that which you posit belongs only to you, and be firm and resolute. Us vs. Them.
There is no climate in which to work together to fix our budget woes. I just hope it doesn't take seeing dozens of families living in their cars in parking lots for us to realize we cannot continue partisan mudslinging instead of sitting down and agreeing on a pragmatic plan to fix our budget with an eye on the long-term (so we don't have to go through this again). "