Advocacy in Action: Farm Bureau tracks labor bills, applauds Farm Bill House passage

Labor and tech

Multiple bills on labor and technology with significant fiscal impacts were placed on the Assembly or Senate appropriations suspense files last week, reflecting growing concern about their cost and implementation. They include:

• Assembly Bill 1890, which California Farm Bureau supports. By Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, D-Winters, the bill would establish state matching grants to support Napa County Farmworker Housing Centers historically funded through grower self assessments. 

• Assembly Bill 1883,which Farm Bureau opposes. By Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, D-Los Angeles, the bill would significantly restrict the use of workplace safety and management tools, including productivity monitoring and access tracking technologies, while creating new enforcement authority and private rights of action. 

• Assembly Bill 1898, which Farm Bureau opposes. By Assemblymember Nick Schultz, D-Burbank, the bill requires employers to disclose and track the use of artificial intelligence-assisted workplace tools and allows for enforcement through state agencies and litigation. 

• Assembly Bill 1776, which Farm Bureau opposes. By Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, D-Winters, the bill would expand California’s antitrust laws in ways that could disrupt common business practices, including those used by agricultural cooperatives for price discovery. Analysis cited unknown but potentially significant costs related to state enforcement and litigation. 

• Assembly Bill 2321, which Farm Bureau opposes. By Assemblymember Liz Ortega, D-San Leandro, the bill would require Cal/OSHA to refer workplace incidents involving death or disability to local prosecutors for potential criminal charges. While Cal/OSHA already has this authority, the bill would make referrals mandatory. The fiscal analysis estimated implementation costs likely in the tens of millions annually. 

• Senate Bill 1123, which Farm Bureau opposes. By state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, the bill would allow agencies to bypass standard regulatory impact analysis requirements for major regulations if they determine benefits outweigh costs. 

Farm Bureau cited concerns about reduced transparency and accountability in the regulatory process, and continues to actively engage with legislators and coalition partners to advocate on these measures as they move through the process. 

Farm bill

California Farm Bureau welcomed the passage last week of a full farm bill reauthorization by the U.S. House of Representative. The passage marks a significant step forward after years of delays.

Also known as the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567 passed on a 224-200 vote. Fourteen Democrats supported the measure, including California’s Adam Gray, D-Merced, and Jim Costa, D-Fresno, along with Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, and the state’s full Republican delegation.

Despite uncertainty earlier last week due to ongoing negotiations and competing legislative priorities, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pennsylvania, secured enough bipartisan support to bring the bill to the floor.

The bill now moves to the Senate, where its path forward remains uncertain. Passage will require at least 60 votes, and additional changes are expected. Notably, the House removed a controversial pesticide labeling provision that had drawn opposition from some members aligned with the Make America Healthy Again movement while retaining language aimed at limiting the impacts of California’s Proposition 12, the farm animal confinement initiative.

Tax credit

The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation held a suspense hearing last week to consider bills with potential impacts to the state’s general fund.

Two agriculture-related tax credit measures that California Farm Bureau supports were held on the committee’s suspense file. They are Assembly Bill 2427 by Assemblymember David Tangipa, R-Fresno, and Assembly Bill 2192 by Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez, R-Indio. Both bills would provide targeted tax relief for farmers.

While the state continues to provide significant tax incentives to other industries, including film and television production, identifying comparable relief for agriculture remains a challenge in the current fiscal environment.

Citrus greening

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last week approved CarriCea T1, a gene-edited citrus rootstock designed to help trees defend against citrus greening disease, also known as huanglongbing.

The disease has had severe impacts on Florida citrus growers and continues to pose a threat to citrus production nationwide. The new rootstock works from within the tree to improve resistance, potentially reducing the need for certain pesticide applications.

The approval marks a significant development in ongoing efforts to address citrus greening and support long-term citrus production.

In this edition…

• View full issue
• Groundwater law begins reshaping valley
• Warm, dry start of spring sparks fire season concerns
• Cultivate the future through agricultural education
• Recognize signs of distress and when help is needed
• From the Fields: Jeff Colombini, San Joaquin County cherry and apple grower
• From the Fields: Stuart Mast, Calaveras County vintner
• From the Fields: Loren Poncia, Marin County rancher
• From the Fields: Ron Macedo, Stanislaus County agritourism operator
• Hot temps, new varieties boost strawberry volumes
• Young farmers talk policies during Capitol advocacy visit
• Drought, water restrictions drive innovation in tech
• USDA announces $9 million for cling peach tree removal
• Advocacy in Action: Farm Bureau tracks labor bills, applauds Farm Bill House passage