Bills: SJR12 , SJR81 , SB22 , SB32 , SB241 , SB393 , SB414 , SB458 , SB464 , SB568 , SB583 , SB609 , SB660 , SB664 , SB693 , SB731 , SB732 , SB746 , SB779 , SB783 , SB785 , SB868 , SB897 , SB921 , SB955 , SB1008 , SB1029 , SB1036 , SB1057 , SB1059 , SB1120 , SB1122 , SB1147 , SB1163 , SB1188 , SB1197 , SB1209 , SB1245 , SB1321 , SB1332 , SB1365 , SB1394 , SB1396 , SB1470 , SB1484 , SB1494 , SB1537 , SB1596 , SB1598 , SB1637 , SB1644 , SB1809 , SB1814 , SB1822 , SB1841 , SB1948 , SB2064 , SB2065 , SB2112 , SB2155 , SB2226 , SB2320 , SB2406 , SJR36 , SJR81 , SJR50 , SJR4 , SJR40 , SJR27 , SCR22 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SCR38 , SCR37 , SB1396 , SB1209 , SB765 , SB62 , SB666 , SB888 , SB687 , SB847 , SB1248 , SB504 , SB305 , SB296 , SB284 , SB241 , SB304 , SB1023 , SB204 , SB609 , SB670 , SB850 , SB854 , SB413 , SB1346 , SB1033 , SB1220 , SB1073 , SB810 , SB1539 , SB447 , SB1119 , SB1505 , SB1215 , SB1302 , SB583 , SB673 , SB681 , SB1172 , SB955 , SB957 , SB541 , SB266 , SB1415 , SB53 , SB1352 , SB785 , SB1450 , SB1502 , SB1566 , SB1062 , SB711 , SB746 , SB1404 , SB1448 , SB507 , SB1026 , SB1349 , SB1355 , SB1433 , SB1434 , SB1596 , SB1403 , SB667 , SB1059 , SB1567 , SB310 , SB311 , SB505 , SB1210 , SB1470 , SB264 , SB1358 , SB1364 , SB1569 , SB1376 , SB1228 , SB519 , SB1350 , SB462 , SB827 , SB1585 , SB1484 , SB1273 , SB927 , SB1227 , SB1229 , SB1353 , SB1464 , SB1709 , SB1729 , SB1733 , SB1744 , SB1772 , SB1841 , SB1147 , SB1008 , SB2016 , SB1173 , SB1163 , SB996 , SB1370 , SB1321 , SB1101 , SB860 , SB993 , SB693 , SB1537 , SB1332 , SB1307 , SB963 , SB493 , SB984 , SB619 , SB1122 , SB455 , SB522 , SB1057 , SB1239 , SB1254 , SB1255 , SB1259 , SB1341 , SB1877 , SB1277 , SB32 , SB732 , SB660 , SB731 , SB921 , SB268 , SB1822 , SB1589 , SB397 , SB1058 , SB1267 , SB2112 , SB1930 , SB532 , SB2155 , SB508 , SB292 , SB291 , SB901 , SB1333 , SB1436 , SB1494 , SB964 , SB779 , SB1378 , SB2312 , SB1719 , SB287 , SB2143 , SB1245 , SB261 , SB1247 , SB1948 , SB2406 , SB2407 , SB1882 , SB1814 , SB618 , SB38 , SB393 , SB1371 , SB1394 , SB1365 , SB2243 , SB2226 , SB2039 , SB1919 , SB1895 , SB1598 , SB1493 , SB1810 , SB1791 , SB1706 , SB1644 , SB1238 , SB783 , SB458 , SB22 , SB651 , SB897 , SB1809 , SB1080 , SB745 , SB826 , SB989 , SB1320 , SB1437 , SB2320 , SB2289 , SB1171 , SB664 , SB1637 , SB2064 , SB868 , SB1079 , SB1243 , SB1504 , SB1851 , SB1879 , SB2237 , SB1257 , SB2034 , SB1522 , SB883 , SB249 , SB1318 , SB1151 , SB596 , SB1191 , SB226 , SB570 , SB870 , SB991 , SB60 , SB365 , SB1067 , SB1786 , SB326 , SB1401 , SB1592 , SB1728 , SB1265 , SB586 , SB529 , SB217 , SB209 , SB1923 , SB1559 , SB1839 , SB387 , SB1874 , SB1872 , SB1873 , SB1921 , SB1883 , SB1677 , SB95 , SB1620 , SB1838 , SB2024 , SB2429 , SB1999 , SB511 , SB2309 , SB2166 , SB871 , SB510 , SB33 , SB2420 , SB1860 , SB1541 , SB1316 , SB1314 , SB1313 , SB1426 , SB1398 , SB1869 , SB1750 , SB1871 , SB36 , SB855 , SB1233 , SB760 , SB2425 , SB2037 , SB1758 , SB1759 , SB2365 , SB1924 , SB762 , SB1271 , SB1818 , SB605 , SB1405 , SB1762 , SB1968 , SB1977 , SB2077 , SB2148 , SB2321 , SB1967 , SB1662 , SB1663 , SB2124 , SB2204 , SB1855 , SB863 , SB37 , SB241 , SB1147 , SB1394 , SB1814 , SB1948 , SB2155 , SB1209 , SB1396 , SB609 , SB660 , SB921 , SR373 , SR374 , SR376 , SR377 , SR379 , SR381 , SR386 , SB2332 , SB3040 , SB3041 , SB2332 , SB3040 , SB3041

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, ad valorem taxation, franchise tax credit, personal property, public camping

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a project called Grand Farm.
• Crop insurance means a counter-cyclical safety net that works, keeping the farm in the farm bill.
• Sometimes our farm kids can't get a job back on the farm, can't return to the family farm, but they want
• Farm to Fly. It has been made a part of the draft of both the House and Senate farm bills.
• So who's going to work the farms?

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• For as long as farming farming forever.
• . farm. farm.
• There's two farms that we have buy farm.
• </c> farm-related expenses. farm-related expenses.
• </c> access to farming land. access to farming land.

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Only 4% of the farms, 4% of all farms in the U.S. are in California.
• That's not just acres, though; that's farms.
• It’s not just farms.
• This is our farm-to-school program exactly.
• We have to take care of our farm workers.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My amendment establishes March 31st of each year as Farm Worker Day, specifies that Farm Worker Day is
• We must rename the holiday to Farm Workers Day and continue to honor the Farm Workers' Movement and the
• As farm workers continue... ...respect the farm workers by renaming this day as farm workers continue
• Thank you. respect the farm workers by renaming this day as farm workers continue to fight dangerous
• or our industry's farms.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The question was total number of farms, not just dairy farms, but the trend in total farms.
• and to operate the farm.
• and to operate the farm.
• It's a family farm.
• It's a family farm.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee held a hearing on several bills and announced at the outset that no votes would be taken because the measures would go to divisions later. The first major bill, HB 197, would require the state to pay 7.5% of political subdivision employer pension contributions for teachers, police officers, and firefighters. Representative Mike Edgar, the prime sponsor, argued the state had repeatedly reduced and then eliminated its promised share of retirement costs, shifting the burden to municipalities and property taxpayers. He said the bill would partially restore that commitment and provide relief to local governments, businesses, and taxpayers. Several witnesses testified in support of HB 197, including Representative John Cluder, Bradford selectman Marlene Fryer, the New Hampshire Municipal Association’s Margaret Burns, and Epping representative Mark Fone. Supporters said the bill would help with property tax pressure, school budgets, and municipal hiring, and they emphasized that much of the retirement cost reflects unfunded liability decisions made at the state level rather than by local governments. Committee members questioned whether the bill would change local incentives to control costs and how it would affect hiring and compensation. Burns said the state contribution would function as property tax relief because it offsets existing municipal expenses, and she noted the state is already on a long-term schedule to pay down the retirement system’s unfunded liability. After closing the hearing on HB 197, the committee opened a hearing on HB 97, introduced by Representative Tom Buco. He said the bill would continue funding for delayed and deferred wastewater projects and help municipalities finance expensive wastewater infrastructure, which he tied to housing development and local debt planning. No action or votes were taken on either bill during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've got some representatives here from Lyon County Farm Bureau and McCracken County Farm Bureau.
• </c> recognize the Hardin County Farm Bureau. recognize the Hardin County Farm Bureau.
• </c><00:02:48.120><c> Bureau</c> welcome the Taylor County Farm Bureau welcome the Taylor County Farm
• Bureau, as well as Green County Farm Bureau, as well as Green County<00:03:12.760><c> Farm</c><00:03
• </c> from Farm Bureau that's here with today. from Farm Bureau that's here with today.

Committee: House Agriculture

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:15 HB 195 Discussion: 05:22 HB 195 Roll Call Vote: 16:33 SB 199 Discussion: 18:34 SB 199 Roll Call Vote: 41:25 SB 5 Discussion: 43:50 SB 5 Roll Call Vote: 46:35 HB 687 Discussion: 48:10 HB 687 Roll Call Vote: 50:15, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have more than 1,600 farms certified. The process for those farms is that they are reviewed.
• </c> multitude of factors even on my own Farm multitude of factors even on my own Farm I<00:24:32.679
• farm and ranch members.
• </c> to get this right medicine Creek Farm to get this right medicine Creek Farm Minnesota<00:28:04.440
• </c> disabled people but you know uh Farms disabled people but you know uh Farms have<00:32:03.080><c

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• the entire farm, permitting a compost center on the farm to help with the SB 1383 goals of the state
• Our farm has participated in all of them.
• of farming and food production, right?
• I know the Farm Bureau is doing an amazing job of bringing that forward, our farming associations.
• But when you have a mega farm that is essentially a monocrop with only dairy, and then you have farms

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined how agricultural programs have used cap-and-invest funding and what role agriculture should play in future climate investments. The chairs opened by noting that agriculture had been largely left out of the cap-and-invest reauthorization, despite prior support through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and framed the hearing around climate-smart agriculture, food security, rural vitality, and the need for measurable co-benefits such as water savings, soil health, and air quality improvements. The first panel included CDFA Deputy Secretary Virginia Jamison and LAO analyst Helen Kirsten. Jamison described CDFA’s climate-smart portfolio, including the Healthy Soils Program, SWEEP, the Alternative Manure Management Program, and dairy methane reduction efforts, saying roughly $727 million has supported these programs and produced estimated reductions of 31 million metric tons of CO2e, 1.6 million acre-feet of water savings, and about 4,000 projects. She emphasized technical assistance, oversubscription of the programs, and the need for continued investment and better measurement/verification. Kirsten outlined the cap-and-invest structure, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and the state’s emissions inventory, noting agriculture is about 8% of California’s GHG emissions and that funding for tier-three programs may remain constrained. She also said prior LAO work found the programs have significant reduction potential but that some estimated benefits may be overstated, recommending further evaluation. The second panel featured UC researchers Alexandra Hill and Ermi Kibreab, who presented on the economic importance of California’s working landscapes and on dairy methane reduction pathways. Hill said working landscapes are a major part of the state and national economy, with agriculture driving most of the sector’s sales and jobs. Kibreab explained that dairy is central to methane reduction because it accounts for a large share of agricultural methane emissions, and described herd efficiency, digesters, alternative manure management, and emerging feed additives as complementary strategies. He said digesters and other incentive-supported measures are helping California move toward its methane goals, while noting feed additives such as 3-NOP and seaweed-based approaches could offer additional reductions in the future. The third panel brought contrasting views from environmental advocates, farmers, and industry representatives. Phoebe Seaton argued that further state funding for dairy digesters is not environmentally or economically justified, citing concerns about methane, nitrous oxide, groundwater impacts, odors, and high cost per ton reduced. Brian Shobe of CalCAN supported continued funding for programs like AMP, SWEEP, and Healthy Soils, saying they provide multiple co-benefits and that farmers need stable, incentive-based support to comply with climate and water regulations. Cannon Michael of Bowles Farming Company described his farm’s investments in organic and regenerative practices, composting, drip irrigation, solar, habitat management, and workforce programs, and said consistent funding helps farms plan and remain viable. Tricia Gerringer of the Agricultural Council of California urged funding for FPIP, the Farmer Program, methane reduction programs, and sustainable ag waste management, arguing they deliver immediate, measurable reductions and co-benefits. Members and witnesses debated the relative merits of digesters versus alternative manure management, the role of regenerative agriculture, and whether agriculture should be treated as a distinct policy category. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded with public comment supporting agricultural climate funding and a request to include agriculture in broader cap-and-invest discussions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We moved here in 1991 after farming with our family for 15 years. We bought this farm.
• </c> [snorts] like on a farm. [snorts] like on a farm.
• </c> cereal from the Cascadian Farm brand. cereal from the Cascadian Farm brand.
• </c> cereals in their Cascadian farm brand. cereals in their Cascadian farm brand.
• farm about since uh farm starting this farm about 10<01:50:43.679><c> years</c><01:50:43.840><c> ago

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm from Full Belly Farm in Western Yolo County. We're a certified organic, diversified farm.
• I'm farming stone fruit and grapes in Dinuba, and I like the Farms Together stay on because we have a
• farms in Placer County that have been farming for generations.
• So that small farms like ours can continue their long-time farming traditions and continue to feed their
• , CUSP, CNIP, and Farm to School.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of Department of Food and Agriculture budget proposals, beginning with ongoing funding and trailer bill language for the Farm to School program and related climate-smart agriculture work. CDFA described the program’s goals of linking California producers with schools, expanding access to local and nutritious food, and supporting underserved farmers through technical assistance and outreach. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal as presented because of the state’s budget condition and suggested that some activities might instead be supported through Proposition 98. Members questioned whether the program is reaching the schools and communities with the greatest need, how grants are scored, and whether the proposal’s goals are measurable enough to justify ongoing funding. The item was held open. The committee also discussed CDFA’s climate bond expenditure plan, which would allocate remaining Proposition 4 funds to existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, urban agriculture, fairground emergency response upgrades, and invasive species work, as well as new or developing programs including year-round certified farmers markets, mobile farmers markets, regional farm equipment sharing, and tribal food sovereignty. CDFA said the funds would be released in stages based on program readiness, with audits and performance metrics tied to each program. The LAO found the plan reasonable and consistent with bond requirements. Members asked about audit responsibility, performance tracking, and whether the bond programs should be front-loaded or spread over a longer period. A third CDFA item addressed the elimination of vacant positions under prior budget reductions. CDFA and the Department of Finance explained that the positions were selected because they had been vacant for long periods or were hard to fill, and that departments identified the positions based on their own operational knowledge. The LAO supported retaining the special-fund positions and suggested the General Fund positions be weighed on their merits. Members raised concerns about the impact on core functions such as audits, investigations, milk marketing, and grape pricing reports, and asked for follow-up on how the department determined which positions could be removed. The committee then heard a CDFA IT proposal to add funding and four positions for information technology operations; the LAO had no concerns, and members discussed cybersecurity, legacy systems, and future risks such as AI and quantum threats. The committee took public comment and then voted to approve items 9 through 13, which included CDFA dog importation certificates, livestock carcass disposal, Gambling Control Commission IT support and tribal grant funding, and an ABC district office relocation. The hearing then moved to the Department of Cannabis Control, which presented a request to strengthen enforcement against the illicit cannabis market by adding a North State field office in Redding and three non-sworn support positions. DCC said the illicit market remains far larger than the legal market, with a large backlog of cases and significant public safety and environmental concerns. Finance supported the targeted expansion, the LAO had no comment, and members asked about regional coverage, officer safety, and whether a larger, more transformational enforcement effort might be warranted in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chinook Farms, whose photos I shared earlier, Chinook Farms, whose photos I shared earlier, is home to
• I like to brag about my farm, and so I thought I'd start with a picture of my lovely farm.
• So this is a picture of my farm and my neighbor's farm on December 1st, taken from Governor Greg Ward's
• and regulating farms.
• His farm serves a lot of food banks.

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session on the December 2025 flooding in Washington and its impacts on agriculture, with no public testimony. Emergency Management Division Director Robert Azel described the storm sequence, record rainfall, widespread river flooding, landslides, power outages, evacuations, rescues, and damage to homes, roads, flood control infrastructure, and agricultural land. He said the state was preparing a major disaster declaration request and noted that mitigation investments and interagency coordination helped reduce losses, while debris removal and federal reimbursement remain important next steps. Snohomish County Emergency Management Director Lucia Schmidt focused on farm impacts in Snohomish County, where tens of thousands of acres were underwater. She described damage to equipment, fences, hoop houses, feed, hay, nurseries, and perennial crops, and said many small farms face losses not well covered by existing federal disaster programs. She urged funding for the Washington State Conservation Commission’s disaster assistance program and emphasized the importance of helping small-scale farms recover to preserve the local agricultural community. WSDA Assistant Director Kelly McLean outlined the department’s disaster response role, including food and feed safety, animal health, livestock sheltering, and coordination of resources. She described efforts to keep feed and dairy products moving, support dairies and livestock producers, connect farmers to relief and mental health resources, and distribute food assistance. She also said WSDA is working on a report due in July with recommendations for small and mid-sized farms and noted interest in developing a broader agricultural disaster assessment tool. Washington State Dairy Federation policy director Jay Gordon described repeated flooding in the Chehalis Basin and other areas, praised state and local partnerships, and argued that continued flood mitigation, storage, levee adjustments, and basin-specific planning are needed because these events are becoming more frequent and severe. Committee members asked about debris removal, federal disaster assistance, insurance challenges, farmworker impacts, and future mitigation projects, and the chair adjourned the meeting after thanking the presenters.

Transcript Highlights:

• or farm operation.
• </c><00:15:24.720><c> the</c> farm or Farm operation requires the farm or Farm operation requires the
• We have an 8 by 10 farm stand, too. We actually need a building permit for that farm stand.
• Commercial farming operation, as is defined in 165D-2, which is a Right to Farm Act, okay?
• </c><01:03:45.400><c> or</c><01:03:45.559><c> farming</c> property of a working farm or farming property

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint House Agriculture and Food Systems and Tourism hearing focused on HB 189 and HB 966, both dealing with agricultural tourism. HB 189 would require counties to adopt ordinances governing review and permitting of agricultural tourism as secondary uses on working farms, require the principal agricultural use to pre-exist any tourism-related permit, and limit ag tourism to land where productive agriculture is occurring. HB 966 would create statewide uniform standards for agricultural tourism, require county registration of activities, require ag tourism to coexist with agricultural activity on a farming operation, and end the tourism use when agricultural activity ceases. Testimony on HB 189 was mixed. The Department of Agriculture and Kualoa Ranch opposed the bill, arguing that the proposed restrictions and income-based limits could burden bona fide farms and ranches, reduce flexibility for counties, and harm food production, jobs, and diversification efforts. Kualoa Ranch said ag tourism supports its food sales and community market and warned the bill could cost more than 350 jobs. The Hawaiʻi Cattlemen’s Council also opposed the measure for similar reasons. The Hawaiʻi Farmers Union supported the bill with suggested amendments, including clearer language around agricultural dedication. The Hawaiʻi Farm Bureau supported the intent of the bill but urged caution, saying ag tourism should remain tied to actual agricultural production and that counties need flexibility to address abuses without imposing overly rigid standards. Members discussed how to define a bona fide agricultural operation and whether property tax agricultural dedication could serve as a clearer qualifier. They also raised concerns about how counties would enforce revenue thresholds or separate accounting for tourism and farm income, and whether state law should better target clearly non-agricultural uses such as gondolas or other abusive developments. The Department of Agriculture and Farm Bureau said counties already have authority to regulate ag tourism through ordinances, but that any new standards should avoid unintended burdens on true farmers and ranchers. HB 966 was then introduced, and initial testimony again reflected support for the bill’s intent from some agricultural groups and opposition or caution from others. Kualoa Ranch said ag tourism can help educate visitors and support agriculture, the Hawaiʻi Farmers Union supported county flexibility, and the Hawaiʻi Farm Bureau reiterated concerns about the bill’s income comparison provisions and the need to distinguish legitimate agricultural tourism from misuse. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• That’s through our Office of Farm to Fork.
• I'm from Full Belly Farm in Western Yolo County. We're a certified organic, diversified farm.
• I'm farming stone fruit and grapes in Dinuba.
• We're an organic farm growing...
• farms in Placer County that have been farming for generations.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of budget presentations from the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), and related agencies. CDFA discussed its overall budget, ongoing support for the Farm to School program and climate-smart agriculture, and a proposed climate bond expenditure plan. Members focused heavily on whether the Farm to School proposal should become ongoing, how schools and suppliers are selected, whether the program is reaching disadvantaged and food-insecure communities, and whether the trailer bill language creates new duties. The LAO recommended rejecting the ongoing Farm to School proposal as presented, suggesting the Legislature consider Prop. 98 funding instead, while CDFA argued the program supports children, farmers, and local economies and helps build long-term supply-chain infrastructure. Several members also questioned the bond plan’s timing, program metrics, and workforce impacts, while LAO said the bond plan was generally reasonable and should be guided by legislative input. The committee also discussed CDFA’s proposal to eliminate vacant positions; the department said the positions were largely long-vacant or unfunded and could be reclassified if needed, while LAO recommended retaining the special-fund positions and weighing the General Fund positions on their merits. CDFA’s IT support request for additional ongoing funding and four positions was presented as necessary to address staffing shortages, legacy systems, and cybersecurity risks, and LAO had no concerns. The committee then took public comment and voted to approve items 9 through 13, including CDFA dog importation and carcass disposal items, a Gambling Control Commission IT item and tribal grant fund item, and an ABC office relocation item. DCC presented a request to strengthen enforcement against the illicit cannabis market by opening a North State office in Redding and adding sworn and non-sworn staff. The department said most cannabis consumed in California still comes from the illicit market, that it receives about 1,500 complaints annually but can close only about 400 cases, and that it has a backlog of roughly 4,000 cases. DCC argued that a northern office would reduce travel time, improve coordination with local agencies, and help target cross-county and cross-border criminal networks. Finance supported the request as a targeted investment, and LAO had no comment. Members asked about public safety, office security, and whether a North State presence would increase complaints or referrals; DCC said safety is considered in every office opening and that a local presence would likely improve case development. The director also described the broader regulatory strategy as balancing consumer safety, illicit-market enforcement, consumer awareness, and reducing friction for legal operators. The discussion continued into broader concerns about the size of the illicit market and the long-term goals for the cannabis program.

Transcript Highlights:

• some of the farm as organic and achieving a regenerative certification across the entire farm.
• Our farm is really at the intersection of.
• of farming and food production, right?
• I know the Farm Bureau is doing an amazing job of bringing that forward, our farming associations.
• But when you have a mega farm that is a monocrop essentially with only dairy, and then you have farms

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I ask that you vote yes on this bill so that other farm workers have to be. farms and workers.
• These are multigenerational family farms.
• I'm the executive director with State Family Farming. We believe farm workers have the right to...
• And any of the farms that you represent?
• There were 3,700 farm closures, and we’re concerned with whether this bill could...” “$3,700 farm closures

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 6045, which would place agricultural employees under the Public Employment Relations Commission for collective bargaining, including card-check or election certification, bargaining duties, and interest arbitration. Staff explained the bill’s scope, exclusions, enforcement provisions, and fiscal note, and members asked about the domestic-violence privilege language, the fiscal impact, and implementation timing. Public testimony was sharply divided: labor and farmworker advocates said the bill would correct a historic exclusion of agricultural workers and improve wages, safety, and dignity, while growers and industry groups argued it would raise costs, create coercive card-check concerns, and risk disruptions during short harvest windows. The sponsor closed by saying the bill was a starting point and that she would continue working with stakeholders. The committee then took up Senate Bill 6188, an agency-request bill on asbestos training rules. Staff said it would remove a limit on Labor and Industries’ rulemaking authority so the agency could adopt additional training and certification requirements beyond those specifically required by federal law; the fiscal note showed no fiscal impact. The sponsor and L&I said the change would let the state strengthen worker safety around asbestos removal, while the Building Industry Association opposed it, warning about divergence from federal standards and added costs. The hearing then moved to Senate Bill 6053 on domestic workers, which would create statewide labor protections including minimum wage and overtime, written agreements, notice requirements, anti-discrimination protections, and enforcement by L&I and private actions. Testimony from domestic workers, advocates, and caregivers supported the bill as a needed extension of basic protections, while L&I noted implementation costs and technical amendments. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 5852 on immigrant workers and I-9 audits. Staff described requirements for employers to notify workers within 72 hours of a federal inspection notice, provide copies of results and correction timelines, limit voluntary access to records without a warrant or subpoena, and prohibit retaliation, with enforcement by the Attorney General and private lawsuits. The Attorney General’s office and supporters said the bill would add due process and transparency and reduce fear during workplace raids, while business, hospitality, county, and small-business representatives argued it could conflict with federal law, create heavy compliance burdens, and expose employers to severe penalties and lawsuits. No votes were taken in the transcript; the committee heard testimony and closed hearings on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• to help keep their whole farm more sustainable.
• or adjacent to farms?
• Many of our farmers have off-farm... ...many of our farmers have off-farm income already.
• So it's just an opportunity to help them keep their farm as a farm because they're getting that consistent
• Farms need power to be able to operate.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 3256, a bill stemming from the Massachusetts Cranberry Revitalization Task Force that would remove Chapter 61A barriers for certain renewable energy projects on non-producing agricultural land. Supporters said the bill would let farmers separate adjacent land from Chapter 61A without a municipal right of first refusal, avoid rollback and advance tax penalties, and use small solar or other renewable projects to generate supplemental income while keeping the farm in operation. Testimony emphasized that the proposal is intended to be “farm-first,” limited to marginal or accessory land, and could also produce local tax revenue for municipalities. Some members raised concerns about whether the bill should be limited to solar, the appropriate project size, impacts on other agricultural sectors, and whether future sales or conversion back to other uses should trigger local rights of first refusal. Witnesses said the bill had been reported favorably in a prior session and noted that similar projects typically involve 20-year leases with extensions. The committee also took testimony on S. 2009, which would authorize regional transportation ballot initiatives. MAPC and Transportation for Mass argued that the bill would give municipalities and groups of municipalities a flexible tool to raise local revenue for transportation projects such as transit, roads, bridges, bikeways, and pedestrian infrastructure, with sunset provisions so the revenue ends when the project ends. They said the measure would not raise taxes on its own, but would allow local voters to decide whether to adopt a revenue source, and pointed to examples from other states where similar initiatives funded major transit and infrastructure projects. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony was also heard on S. 1922, which would create a Massachusetts fund allowing voluntary taxpayer donations to the UN Least Developed Countries Fund or related 501(c)(3) nonprofits supporting climate-vulnerable communities. Climate Reality Project representatives said the bill would let Massachusetts residents support climate resilience projects in the world’s poorest countries at no cost to the Commonwealth, and could serve as a model for other states. Senators questioned how recipient countries and nonprofits would be selected, what safeguards would exist regarding countries such as Yemen, and how taxpayers would know where donations would go; witnesses said the fund would be administered through the UN system and that they would provide more clarification. Rep. Michelle Ciccolo also testified on H. 3051, seeking a one-year deferral of the higher interest rate that applies when deferred property taxes become due after the death of a senior or veteran, saying the current jump to 16% can burden heirs and discourage use of the deferral program. The hearing concluded without any votes or committee actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Substitute House Bill 2343 is regarding water quality and game farms.
• To be eligible, the farm...
• The farm had to only employ domestic workers in the 2024 season, and the farm had to be owned and operated
• served, with a larger number of farms interested.
• and farms selling to local markets and schools.

Bills: HB2104 , HB2223 , HB2348 , HB2554 , HB2619

Committee: Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources

Keywords: aviation, wildland fires, funding, disaster relief, emergency response, irrigation, district director, contracts, beneficial interests, agriculture, timber sales, land sales, process efficiency, legislation, department language, tribal rights, fishing rights, salmon management, state-tribal agreements, natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Protecting federal funding for school meals builds a strong food system that connects our farms, our
• As a first-generation daughter of a Dutch farmer, farm to school is deeply personal to me.
• It is estimated that over 15,000 family farms have closed in the last 13 years.
• While some stakeholder groups have raised concerns, I believe that... ...farming practices.
• Richard Filgus with the California Farm Bureau in support. Thank you. Great. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Agriculture met with an initial quorum delay, then heard four items: AJR 6 on protecting federal funding for the Local Food for Schools and Child Care program, AB 732 on abandoned agricultural land, AB 1042 on honeybee health, and consent item AB 1506. The chair reviewed hearing procedures and public comment rules before moving through the file in order. AJR 6, authored by Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry, urged federal officials to preserve funding for local food programs that connect California farmers with school meals and food banks. Supporters, including a farm owner and a school nutrition director, said the program benefits children’s nutrition, helps small farms, and strengthens local economies. There was no opposition, and the committee members who were present voted to adopt the resolution; later absent members were added, bringing it to eight votes and sending it out. AB 732, by Assemblymember Macedo, would give county agricultural commissioners a faster enforcement tool against abandoned or neglected orchards and vineyards by allowing civil penalties instead of relying only on liens. Testimony from growers and a county agricultural commissioner described pest infestations, economic losses, and high abatement costs tied to neglected land, and the bill was presented as a response to SGMA-related fallowing and low commodity prices. The committee voted due pass to the Judiciary Committee, and after absent members were added it also reached eight votes. AB 1042, by Assemblymember Ransom, proposed a Managed Honeybee Health Program with grants, research, technical assistance, and an expanded advisory committee to support pollinators essential to California crops. Witnesses from the fresh fruit and beekeeping sectors emphasized that bee declines threaten crop production and the broader agricultural economy. The committee voted due pass to Appropriations, and the bill ultimately received eight votes. The consent calendar item, AB 1506, was also approved and sent to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• across the entire farm, and permitted a compost center on the farm to help with the SB 1383 goals of
• of farming and food production, right?
• I know the Farm Bureau is doing an amazing job of bringing that forward, our farming associations.
• But when you have a mega farm that is a monocrop essentially with only dairy, and then you have farms
• We don't want to continue losing small farms.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined how California agricultural programs have used cap-and-invest funding and what role agriculture should play in future climate investments. Committee chairs framed the issue as balancing climate goals, food production, rural economic vitality, and the fact that agriculture was not specifically funded in the recent cap-and-invest reauthorization. The first panel from CDFA and the Legislative Analyst’s Office described the state’s climate-smart agriculture portfolio, including Healthy Soils, SWEEP, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and Alternative Manure Management, and explained that GGRF revenues are now more constrained and may not fully support all tiered programs. LAO emphasized that agriculture is about 8% of California’s emissions, that most ag emissions are outside the cap, and that the Legislature should consider program effectiveness, the role of incentives, and GGRF priorities. CDFA testified that roughly $727 million has been invested in its flagship climate-smart ag programs, producing estimated reductions of 31 million metric tons of CO2e, 1.6 million acre-feet of water savings, and about 4,000 projects. The department said technical assistance is essential because farmers face risk when adopting new practices, and noted new Proposition 4 funding for Healthy Soils, SWEEP, and a regional farm equipment sharing program. University researchers then presented economic and methane-reduction analyses: UC Berkeley’s Dr. Hill described working landscapes as a major economic driver, while UC Davis’ Dr. Kibreab outlined dairy methane reduction pathways, including herd efficiency, digesters, alternative manure management, and emerging feed additives such as 3-NOP and seaweed, arguing that incentive-based programs have helped California move toward its methane goals. A later panel featured sharply different views on dairy digesters. Phoebe Seton argued that digesters worsen air and water quality, encourage manure liquefaction, and are an inefficient use of public funds, while CalCAN’s Brian Schobey and agricultural representatives said programs like AMP, SWEEP, Healthy Soils, FPIP, and the Farmer Program deliver measurable emissions reductions plus co-benefits such as water savings, lower energy costs, and improved air quality. Farm and industry witnesses stressed that stable, incentive-based funding helps family farms remain viable, supports co-investment, and should be treated as a partnership rather than a regulatory stick. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing ended with public comment and a continued call for future funding and policy discussion.