BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair 2015 - 2016 Regular Session AB 264 (Dahle) - Farm products: processors: produce dealers: seeds ----------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Version: July 16, 2015 |Policy Vote: AGRI. 3 - 0, JUD. | | | 7 - 0 | | | | |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes | | | | |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Hearing Date: August 17, 2015 |Consultant: Robert Ingenito | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Bill Summary: AB 264 would (1) remove seeds from the definition of "farm product" under market enforcement provisions regarding produce dealers, thereby removing seed dealers from these provisions, (2) retain one market enforcement provision pertaining to the use of product liens for seed owned and grown by a seed producer and sold to a seed dealer under contract, and (3) add to the California Seed Law the authority for the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to establish methods and procedures to settle disputes regarding financial terms and lack of payment by a seed dealer to a seed grower. AB 264 (Dahle) Page 1 of ? Fiscal Impact: CDFA estimates that the bill would result in a revenue loss of $68,000 (special funds). The department's administrative costs would be minor and absorbable. Background: The California Seed Law (CSL) was enacted in 1967 to ensure that agricultural and vegetable seed is properly and accurately identified taken to market.. Under the CSL, CDFA is empowered to make regulations concerning seed quality, including germination standards for various types of seeds. Seed quality is analyzed through the Seed Services program administered by CDFA. The CSL is generally enforced at the local level, specifically by county agricultural commissioners who enter into cooperative agreements with CDFA to maintain specified statewide compliance levels on all seed sold. In return, county agricultural commissioners receive annual subvention payments for expenses incurred in association with approved enforcement activities. Commissioners and CDFA are empowered to issue "stop-sale" orders to the owner or custodian of any lot of agricultural or vegetable seed that violates provisions of the CSL, as well as prevent the movement or disposal of seeds subject to a "stop-sale" order, or declare non-compliant seeds a nuisance and order them seized. The CSL also empowers CDFA to establish methods and procedures for the resolution of disputes between labelers and others concerning conformance with label statements, advertisements, or other disputes regarding the quality or performance of seed. The CSL requires such disputes to go through these methods and procedures as a prerequisite to pursuing other dispute resolution mechanisms, such as litigation in court. Finally, the CSL requires seed labels to provide the purchaser with notice of the requirement to follow the resolution procedures, as well as of the consequences for failing to follow those procedures. Funding for carrying out programs under the CSL is supported through industry seed assessments and registration fees, which are administered by CDFA. Every labeler of agricultural or vegetable seed offered for sale in California, or any person who sells that seed in California, must annually register as a seed AB 264 (Dahle) Page 2 of ? labeler and pay an annual fee. In addition, those who are registered seed labelers must also pay an assessment based on their annual dollar volume in sales. Proposed Law: This bill would, among other things, do all of the following: Expand CDFA regulatory authority within the CSL to establish methods and procedures to settle disputes regarding financial terms and lack of payment by a seed dealer to a seed grower. Authorize CDFA, should the dispute end in favor of the grower, to require compensation for the estimated value of the seed production services a grower provides to a dealer. If a dealer fails to comply, CDFA may revoke the dealer's registration and prevent the dealer from renewing the registration until the debt has been paid. Exclude flower, agricultural, and vegetable seed from the definition of "farm product" under market enforcement provisions regarding produce dealers, but not processors. Related Legislation: SB 1399 (Galgiani, Chapter 277, Statutes of 2014) extended the operation and repeal dates for provisions of the California Seed Law, including an annual county subvention for enforcement activities necessary to carry out these provisions, until July 1, 2019, and January 1, 2020, respectively. This bill eliminated certain provisions establishing a method of calculating apportionments based on units of activity, and instead requires the amount of the subvention designated to each participating county to be established in a memorandum of understanding between the county agricultural commissioner and the Secretary of CDFA, in consultation with the Seed Advisory Board. AB 264 (Dahle) Page 3 of ? Staff Comments: The Seed Services Program annually receives approximately $1.6 million from fees and assessment collections. As noted above, the funds are used to conduct a statewide compliance monitoring program and administer the dispute resolution process for seed complaints, which occur at a frequency of about one formal complaint per year. Since there has been two cases involving non-payment since 2005, the Seed Services Program does not foresee significant additional costs to administer the dispute resolution for those situations. The Market Enforcement Branch (MEB) would lose approximately $68,000 in annual license fees that it collects from the 199 firms and 207 agents that buy seeds who would no longer need to be licensed under the provisions of the bill; however additional firms involved with seed transactions may require licensing. Licensing of these firms would generate additional potential revenue, the extent of which is currently unknown. Any local government costs resulting from the mandate in this measure are not state-reimbursable because the mandate only involves the definition of a crime or the penalty for conviction of a crime. -- END --