Other Cities Rev Up Anti-Malathion Efforts

A day after the city of Pasadena launched a novel scheme to use police helicopters to shadow and ticket the state’s squadron of malathion-spraying choppers, several more Southern California cities moved Friday toward launching their own aerial wars against the state.

The political battle over malathion also heated up Friday in the state Legislature as Assemblyman Mike Roos (D-Los Angeles) unveiled a proposal that would seek an end to funding of the program and make the state more liable for lawsuits arising from the Medfly eradication campaign.

On Friday, Los Angeles City Councilman Robert Farrell introduced a measure similar to the Pasadena ordinance that bans low-flying aircraft over the city. The Los Angeles City Council voted 9 to 3 to hear the measure, but because it fell a vote short of the 10 votes required for emergency consideration, the motion was sent to a council committee.

Azusa city officials also vowed Friday to implement a similar ordinance just a day after they followed Pasadena’s lead and voted to approve their own ban on low-flying helicopters. “We’re not sure whether it will do the job,” Azusa City Councilman Tony Naranjo said, “but it will grab somebody’s attention.”

And city officials in Monterey Park, San Gabriel and South Pasadena also said Friday that they are discussing or scheduling to act on similar ordinances over the next few weeks.

“I think it’s a clear indication of the concern that is shared by all these public officials,” Pasadena City Director William Paparian said. “It is gratifying to see other public officials step forward and take action.”

The Pasadena ordinance aims to stop aerial malathion spraying by banning formation-flying by aircraft under the altitude of 700 feet. On Thursday, that measure had its first test as a Pasadena police helicopter followed state pilots, warning them that they were violating the new law and could face a penalty of up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

The state has attacked the ordinance, saying the city has no authority to regulate air traffic. Pasadena officials responded that they have the right to stop the helicopters because of the potential hazard of a mid-air collision and the effects of the pesticide on residents.

On Friday, Roos joined local efforts to curb malathion spraying by announcing that he will introduce legislation Monday that would remove a one-year statute of limitations, making the state liable for any future injuries or illnesses caused by malathion spraying.

Roos said no one has ever sued the state on those grounds, but added that his measure will ensure that the option remains open if spraying eventually proves to have long-term health effects.

“I’m not saying it’s going to be easy,” Roos said, “but if the governor says there is no danger, let’s remove the one-year limitation.”

Roos, the Assembly Speaker pro tempore, said he has also asked a joint Senate-Assembly committee in charge of approving funds for spraying to “turn off the spigot” until a public hearing is held on the aerial eradication effort.

Meanwhile, Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp also announced Friday that his office is launching an investigation into whether malathion sold in stores should be regulated under the restrictions of the state’s Proposition 65. The proposition imposes strict notification and discharge requirements on the release of toxic chemicals.

Van de Kamp, whose office has been defending the state in lawsuits aimed at stopping malathion spraying, said his investigation will focus on potentially dangerous impurities, such as arsenic, cadmium and lead, that are found in some brands of malathion.

The state released test results Wednesday showing that no chemicals regulated by Proposition 65 have been found in the malathion used by the state in aerial spraying. Van de Kamp said he has asked for a re-evaluation of those test results by an independent body.

Planning to announce his candidacy for governor this weekend, Van de Kamp said even if regulated chemicals are found in the malathion the state is using, his office will not be able to stop the spraying over urban areas because state agencies are exempt from the restrictions of Proposition 65.

Times staff writers Jane Fritsch and Vicki Torres contributed to this story.