Key state agricultural legislation moves forward

With a July 1 deadline approaching for state legislation to make it through policy committees, representatives of agricultural organizations will work the rest of this month to advocate for or against key legislation affecting farmers and ranchers. Bills that made it through their houses of origin earlier this month now head to policy committee hearings in the other house.

The California Farm Bureau Federation Governmental Affairs Division will track and analyze hundreds of pieces of critical legislation during the legislative session that affect water, labor and employment, energy, environment, land use and more, CFBF Director of Water Resources Danny Merkley said.

"Legislation impacting our water supplies are especially important and emotionally charged during these drought years," Merkley said. "Some bills have a regional impact, where others have statewide significance."

A water supply bill that would benefit farmers and ranchers in Monterey County, Assembly Bill 1585 by Luis Alejo, D-Salinas, would appropriate $10 million from the state General Fund to the Department of Water Resources. The money would in turn be granted to the Monterey County Water Resources Agency to construct a water conveyance tunnel between Lake Nacimiento and Lake San Antonio.

Merkley said the project would help to conserve water otherwise spilled when Lake Nacimiento is full and while Lake San Antonio still has additional storage space.

Monterey County Farm Bureau Executive Director Norm Groot said the project would bring "a number of possible benefits" from increasing storage capacity in the two reservoirs.

"Farmers and ranchers in the Salinas Valley could potentially benefit from additional waters released from the reservoirs during peak irrigation months for groundwater recharge in the Salinas River channel watershed. If we store more water, that means there could be more water for these flow releases," Groot said.

Related to groundwater, Merkley said Farm Bureau opposes Senate Bill 1317 by Lois Wolk, D-Davis, which would require a city or county overlying a high- or medium-priority water basin to establish a process for issuing groundwater well permits. The legislation also requires an applicant for a new well permit to demonstrate that the well would not contribute to or create an undesirable result.

Merkley called the bill premature. He said it would short-circuit implementation of recently enacted statewide groundwater law and erode local authority over groundwater established in the law.

Among bills affecting employment law, SB 1166, by Hannah Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, would make it an unfair employment practice for an employer of 10 or more employees to deny up to 12 weeks of job-protected parental leave.

CFBF Director of Employment Policy Bryan Little called the bill "a substantial, backdoor expansion of existing family- and medical-leave laws," which currently exempt employers of 49 or fewer people.

"SB 1166 would create a situation where very small employers would be required to cope with the cost of litigation, and put very small employers in a situation where an employee could receive 12 weeks of job-protected leave under SB 1166, and another 12 weeks of job-protected leave under state and federal family- and medical-leave laws," Little said.

Another bill to pay attention to is SB 1234, by Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, which would create a state-operated pension system for workers whose employers do not offer retirement savings programs. The bill requires employers to deduct funds from employees' paychecks for the plan, and makes it mandatory unless employees opt out.

"Any time employers are taking money from an employee's paycheck for retirement savings, that potentially triggers substantial potential liability for the employer," Little said, "because the law regards that employer as a 'plan sponsor' who has fiduciary responsibility to that employee for his retirement savings."

Because the program would be entirely under the control of the state government, he said, it would leave employers with responsibility for something over which they have no control, adding, "Farm Bureau opposes SB 1234 unless amended to address these problems."

Farm Bureau-supported legislation that passed out of the Assembly included AB 2223 by Adam Gray, D-Merced, regarding dairy methane digesters, and AB 2714 by Jim Cooper, D-Elk Grove, that would help combat Pierce's disease in grapes.

Gray's bill would set aside $10 million for the California Department of Food and Agriculture to provide incentive loans for implementation of dairy digesters and other dairy methane-reduction projects and practices. The loans must be repaid within 10 years.

CFBF Director of Environmental Affairs Cynthia Cory said the state Air Resources Board proposes to install methane digesters on 500 California dairies via a "short-lived climate pollutant" proposal.

"These digesters cost $2 million to $3 million apiece," Cory said. "There are 14 digesters in the state and they want us to get to 500 by 2030, to get a 75 percent reduction in methane."

Cooper's bill would support the wine sector's now 17-year effort to check the spread of the glassy-winged sharpshooter and Pierce's disease, by appropriating $5 million from the General Fund to the CDFA Pierce's Disease Control Program.

State funding for the Pierce's disease effort was eliminated during the 2011-12 economic downturn. Cooper's bill recommits state funding to combat Pierce's disease and other diseases and pests that affect winegrape production.

Cory also noted the failure of SB 1282 by Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, which would have reduced the enforcement and oversight authority of the Department of Pesticide Regulation by requiring seeds and plants treated with neonicotinoids to be labeled as such when sold at retail. She said the bill would have allowed groups or individuals who oppose the use of pesticides to sue a retailer that had treated-but-unlabeled plants for sale. The bill would also have prohibited consumer sale or use of neonicotinoids.

"Our concern, besides the private right of action and taking away DPR's authority, was that they were going to say you could no longer purchase the neonicotinoids, which are what we use to stop the spread of the Asian citrus psyllid that transmits huanglongbing," Cory said.

(Christine Souza is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at csouza@cfbf.com.)