BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1157|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1157
Author: DeSaulnier (D)
Amended: 6/1/10
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 6-2, 4/14/10
AYES: Romero, Alquist, Hancock, Liu, Price, Simitian
NOES: Huff, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Maldonado
SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 4/22/10
AYES: Simitian, Corbett, Hancock, Lowenthal, Pavley
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner, Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-3, 5/27/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Corbett, Leno, Price, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Denham, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cox
SUBJECT : Education: Healthy Schools Act of 2010
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill prohibits schools from using the most
highly toxic pesticides, as defined, on school property
unless certain conditions are met, and imposes a fee upon
manufacturers or importers of those pesticides.
ANALYSIS :
CONTINUED
SB 1157
Page
2
Existing law, under the Healthy Schools Act of 2000
1. Requires schools to annually provide a written notice to
staff and parents with the name of all pesticide
products expected to be applied at the school during the
upcoming year.
2. Requires schools to post a warning sign at each area of
the school site where pesticides will be applied.
3. Requires schools to keep records for four years of all
pesticides used at the school site.
4. Prohibits the use of a pesticide that has been granted
conditional registration, an interim registration or an
experimental use permit.
5. Exempts agriculture vocational programs if the activity
is necessary to meet curriculum requirements.
6. Requires the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to
promote and facilitate the voluntary adoption of
integrated pest management programs for schools and
child daycare facilities.
7. Requires DPR to maintain a Web site with specific
information, and requires DPR to ensure that adequate
resources are available to respond to inquiries from
schools regarding the use of integrated pest management
practices.
8. Requires DPR to establish an integrated pest management
training program to facilitate the adoption of a model
integrated pest management program and least-hazardous
pest control practices by schools.
9. Requires DPR to prepare a school pesticide use form to
be used by licensed and certified pest control operators
when they apply any pesticides at a school.
This bill:
1. Prohibits all public schools from using the most highly
toxic pesticides, as listed, on school property.
SB 1157
Page
3
2. Provides that its provisions would not apply to
antimicrobial pesticides; products deployed in the form
of a self-contained bait or trap; or as a crack and
crevice treatment; agricultural uses; or activities
undertaken by participants in agricultural vocational
education, as specified.
3. Authorizes the school coordinator of the integrated pest
management program, or a school designer, as specified,
to use the most highly toxic pesticides, as defined
under certain circumstances, and for a specified period
of time.
4. Requires DPR, beginning January 1, 2012, and annually
thereafter, to set an adequate fee on manufacturers or
importers of the most highly toxic pesticides, as
defined. The fee shall be set in an amount that is
sufficient and limited to reimbursement to the
department for the cost of administering, and school
districts for the costs of implementing this act.
5. Requires the DPR to borrow monies from the DPR Fund to
cover the department's costs in developing and adopting
regulation and establishing a fee for purposes of this
subdivision. The DPR shall repay the loan using monies
from the Healthy Schools Act of 2010 Fund as they become
available.
6. Requires the DPR to use the databases of all of the
following public agencies and international
organizations in order to assess and identify the most
highly toxic pesticides:
A. State Department of Health Care Services
B. United States Environmental Protection Agency
C. United States Department of Health and Human
Services
D. National Institutes of Health
E. World Health Organization
F. International Agency for Research on Cancer
G. European Union
Prior/Related Legislation
SB 1157
Page
4
AB 821 (Brownley), Session of 2009-10, requires all school
districts and non-public elementary schools (with 50 or
more pupils) to purchase and use only environmentally
preferable cleaning and cleaning maintenance products, if
these products exist. This bill was held in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 2865 (Torrico) Chapter 865, Statutes of 2006, extended
the Healthy Schools Act to private child care facilities.
Passed off the Senate Floor 40-0, 8/23/2006.
AB 1006 (Chu), Session of 2004 would have banned public
schools from using the "most highly toxic" pesticides on
school property. This bill was heard in then-Senate
Agriculture and Water Resources Committee but a vote was
never taken.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee analysis:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13
Fund
Interest Loss Approximately $150 to $200,
depending General
on the applicable interest rate
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/1/10)
Parents for a Safer Environment (source)
American Lung Association
Breast Cancer Action
Breast Cancer Fund
California Church IMPACT
California Nurses Association
California School Employees Association
California School Health Centers Association
California State PTA
Chinese-American Political Association
SB 1157
Page
5
Clean Water Action
Coalition for Clean Air
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Environmental Working Group
Mothers of Marin Against the Spray
National Nurses Organizing Committee
Pesticide Watch
Physicians for Social Responsibility, San Francisco-Bay
Area Chapter
San Francisco Baykeeper
Sierra Club California
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/1/10)
Pest Control Operators of California
Western Plant Health Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents argue that many studies
have found serious toxic effects of pesticides at levels
much lower than prescribed on labels for use. The
proponents cite a California State Department of Public
Health, Office of Environmental Health and Hazard
Assessment report published in 2005 that the following
chronic diseases were linked to pesticide exposure: asthma,
reproductive outcomes, cancer, dermatitis, learning
impairments, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and
chronic fatigue syndrome.
Proponents also cite that the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention's biomonitoring program found high levels of
pesticides in children with an average of seven pesticides
in each child. Supporters state that childhood diseases
and conditions linked to pesticide exposure have risen, and
there have been 502 cases of reported pesticide accidents
resulting in acute symptoms from 1992-2007 in California
schools.
Proponents state that "there are over 1,000 school
districts in the state with over six million children
spending on average 6 hours a day at approximately 9,900
school sites. Despite great effort by DPR, there was no
sustained increase in school districts adopting indicator
practices associated with least toxic pest management in
the last four years surveyed. Education is not enough."
SB 1157
Page
6
Proponents believe that "it is crucial that SB 1157 be
passed to ensure an environment in which children are given
a chance to thrive. Every child and school staff should be
able to attend work at school without undertaking
unnecessary risk of a serious disease later in life that
would not only lower quality of life for the individual,
but be of cost to families, communities and our state."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents contend that this
bill is "based upon inaccurate assumptions about how pest
control is performed in and around schools. Pest control
today, especially structural pest control, is vastly
different than it was 25 years ago. Opponents note that in
the findings and declarations, the bill states that many
schools 'continue to use highly toxic pesticides,' and the
operative section of the proposed bill states (section
17615) enumerate several lists of materials that are
proposed to be banned for use in public schools."
According to the Pest Control Operators of California, most
of the material contained in these lists, and certainly the
most highly toxic materials are already prohibited from use
at schools.
The opposition continues to state that "the sponsors of the
bill cite numerous instances of pesticide accidents between
1992 and 2007 in California schools. Prior to 2000, there
was no comprehensive law governing the use of pesticides in
schools. The Healthy Schools Act was passed in 2000,
establishing a new standard for the use of pesticides in
California schools." The opposition asks that the
Legislature review and compare data regarding pesticide
accidents on school sites pre and post 2000. The
opposition contends that, in their experience, the cases
have decreased dramatically.
The opposition believes that anyone using pesticides on
school premises be a licensed applicator to ensure the
safety of the students, teachers, staff and visitors.
However, the opposition insists that it is not in the
public interest and health and safety are not best served
by a complete ban on the use of pesticides in schools.
There are certain instances were it is necessary to use
SB 1157
Page
7
pesticides to protect children from diseases such as
Malaria, yellow fever and West Nile virus.
PQ:do 6/1/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****