Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pesticide Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Francisco committee backs resolution urging state to lift pesticide preemption after public outcry
Summary
The Government Audit and Oversight Committee voted to send to the full Board a resolution urging the state to repeal a 1984 law that bars local governments from restricting pesticide use, after testimony from environmental groups, city staff and residents worried about planned aerial spraying for the light brown apple moth.
Supervisor Michaela Alioto Pier introduced a resolution asking the state to repeal a 1984 statute that preempts local governments from restricting pesticide use. She framed the measure around the city's inability to block state-directed aerial spraying to control the light brown apple moth and said the change would let San Francisco regulate pesticides within its boundaries.
The resolution drew sustained public comment and expert testimony. Paul Shramski, state director of Pesticide Watch, told the committee that ‘‘local governments in California have no ability to regulate pesticides within their own communities’’ and urged San Francisco to lead a push for local control. Debbie Rafael, toxics reduction program manager at the Department of the Environment, said the resolution is about ‘‘authority and responsibility’’ and asked the state to give local governments some regulatory power to protect public health and the Bay. Catherine Dodd from the mayor's office said the mayor supports the resolution as a constructive step, noting prior opposition to aerial spraying.
Multiple community organizations and former local officials described past fights with the state and urged repeal. Frank Egger, a former Fairfax mayor, recounted litigation over local notification ordinances and said jurisdictions need the right to protect residents' health. Advocacy groups (Pesticide Action Network North America, Center for Environmental Health, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Breast Cancer Action, Parents for a Safer Environment) emphasized the ubiquity and toxicity of some pesticides and urged local authority to regulate urban pesticide uses and neighborhood notification.
After public comment the committee closed testimony and, without objection, forwarded the resolution to the full Board with a committee recommendation. The item will next appear on the Board of Supervisors agenda for full consideration.
The resolution and supporters repeatedly emphasized that the change sought is legislative (a repeal at the state level), not an immediate local ban. The committee record notes the measure is intended to prompt state action so the city and county can write and enforce local pesticide regulations in the future.
