Difference between revisions of "California Proposition 135, Regulation of Pesticides (1990)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - '* [http://holmes.uchastings.edu/cgi-bin/starfinder/0?path=calprop.txt&id=webber&pass=webber&OK=OK Hastings California I&R database]' to '* [http://library.uchastings.edu/library/california-research/ca-ballot-measures.html Hastings Californ)
m (Text replace - "http://library.uchastings.edu/library/california-research/ca-ballot-measures.html" to "http://library.uchastings.edu/library/guides/california-research/ca-ballot-measures.html")
Line 38: Line 38:
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
  
* [http://library.uchastings.edu/library/california-research/ca-ballot-measures.html Hastings California I&R database]
+
* [http://library.uchastings.edu/library/guides/california-research/ca-ballot-measures.html Hastings California I&R database]
 
* [http://www.lalawlibrary.org/research/ballots/1990/1990.aspx Los Angeles Law Library, 1990 ballot propositions]
 
* [http://www.lalawlibrary.org/research/ballots/1990/1990.aspx Los Angeles Law Library, 1990 ballot propositions]
 
* [http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/90_gen_sov.pdf November 1990 election results] (pages 9-10)
 
* [http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/90_gen_sov.pdf November 1990 election results] (pages 9-10)

Revision as of 08:46, 12 November 2012

California Proposition 135 was on the November 6, 1990 ballot in California as an initiated state statute, where it was defeated.

Proposition 135 would have made changes in how the state monitored and regulated pesticides.

Election results

Proposition 135
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No5,015,92869.6%
Yes 2,191,301 30.4%

Ballot summary

  • Expands state pesticide residue monitoring program for produce, processed foods.
  • Establishes state training, information programs for pesticide users.
  • Mandates review of cancer-causing pesticides.
  • Creates, modifies pesticide-related state advisory panels.
  • Creates state-appointed advocate to coordinate pesticide policies.
  • Eliminates some industry fees for pesticide regulatory programs.
  • Restructures penalties, system of fines, for regulatory violations.
  • Provides for state disposal of unregistered pesticides.
  • Appropriates $5,000,000 annually through 1995 to fund pesticide-related research.
  • Provides that between competing initiatives regulating pesticides, measure obtaining most votes supersedes components of other(s) dealing with pesticide enforcement for food, water and worker safety.

Fiscal impact

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

  • One-time state General Fund cost of approximately $4 million, and annual costs of approximately $5.5 million, for pesticide and food safety programs.
  • Estimated annual state revenue loss of approximately $1.5 million due to repeal of industry fees.
  • One-time state General Fund cost of approximately $20 million, unknown annual costs, to fund collection and disposal of unregistered pesticides.
  • State General Fund cost of $25 million over five years to support pest management research, and annual General Fund cost of up to $600,000 for purchase of sterile fruit flies.
  • Additional state administrative and regulatory costs ranging from $200,000 for Environmental Advocate to, possibly, several million dollars annually for other programs.

External links