BILL ANALYSIS
SB 140
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 1, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
SB 140 (Corbett) - As Amended: June 11, 2009
Policy Committee: AgricultureVote:7
- 0
Urgency: Yes State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires the California Department of Food and
Agriculture (CDFA) to establish a Citrus Nursery Stock Pest
Cleanliness Program. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires CDFA to consider input from interested parties on
cost, need and practicability when developing the program.
2)Requires CDFA to establish inspection requirements and testing
standards.
3)Provides that new diseases or pests that are a threat to the
citrus industry be included in the program within 45 days of
developing valid and reliable diagnostic practices.
4)Specifies criteria for CDFA to authorize other entities to
test and examine diseases and pests covered by the program.
5) Requires CFDA to establish rates or fees to pay for the
administration of the program.
6)Includes an urgency clause due to the present potential of
invasive pest infestation or disease infection of California
citrus.
FISCAL EFFECT
On-going costs of $350,000 per year to administer the mandatory
citrus pest cleanliness program if the program covers the same
pathogens as the current voluntary program. If additional
pathogens are added, those costs would increase. The costs may
SB 140
Page 2
be fully or partially offset by fees charged to citrus growers.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Proponents state that South America and Florida
citrus growers have been hard hit by agricultural diseases.
This bill establishes a mandatory program to anticipate and
address the prospect of these diseases being introduced in
California.
2)CDFA Voluntary Citrus Program . California has a voluntary
program to test and certify citrus for certain diseases and
pests, and a program to test for Citrus Tristeza virus, which
causes losses in sweet oranges and grapefruit planted on sour
orange rootstock.
3)Related Legislation . SB 1466 (Corbett) in 2008, a
substantially similar bill, was initially held on this
committee's suspense file. The bill was then withdrawn from
this committee and placed on the Assembly third reading file,
where it was never taken up.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081