The $150 per year fire fee instituted as part of last year's budget solution may be coming to an end, after a surprising 7-2 vote by one Assembly Committee. The Assembly Natural Resources Committee heard testimony on AB 1506 which would repeal the $150 per structure fee. It's a fee that some have called unfair and others have described as unconstitutional. As it stands now, residents in areas that CalFire has responsibility for delivering fire services must pay a $150 per structure fee.

However, opponents of the plan say it is unfair to charge the fee. Many residents already pay local fees and taxes for fire services, and making them pay twice is wrong. Other opponents challenge the constitutionality of a fee they say is a tax. The tax was not approved by a two-thirds majority, and thereby violated the law. AB 1506 would repeal the fee but would exacerbate the deficit in the state budget.

A bill that would instate penalties on unlicensed farm labor contractors (FLC) passed the Assembly Committee this week. AB 1675 (Bonilla) is intended to address unlicensed FLC's. When the bill mandating FLC to become licensed passed, there were no penalties included because they wanted to work with the FLC's to educate them on the laws, labor code and safety requirements. The goal was to legitimize the FLS's, not penalize them. After several years of education campaigns, outreach and seminars, the bill sponsors are stating through this bill it is time to enforce the statute and penalize non compliance.

The agriculture community has embraced licensing FLC's and bringing them into compliance. The association has joined a coalition of ag entities supporting the legislation based on the principle a standardized legitimate labor contracting system helps the employee, the employer and competing FLC's who have followed the rules and requirements. The bill is now headed to Assembly Appropriations Committee.

CGFA's membership committee is pleased to announce a new member recruitment campaign. All Active CGFA Members are eligible to compete in this contest beginning April 1, 2012. As a member, you can get involved and help support & promote our AG Industry's growth and development.  Compete against your friends in the industry and be one of the top three winners for the most new member recruits between April 1, 2012 and December 1, 2012. Prizes will be awarded to the top three recruiters (see contest flyer attached for prize description).

It's easy to recruit a new member! Simply forward the "CGFA Membership Application" to your colleagues and remind them to write your name at the bottom mentioning you as the "Referral / Sponsor" person. Submit the application! (Application)

We hope to see your name in the spotlight! 

Stabenow Shoots for End-of-April Markup - Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D, MI), chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, confirmed media reports this week that her committee is targeting the last week in April to start committee markup of its 2012 Farm Bill, with the committee's goal being a bill ready for the floor by May 1. She further confirmed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D, NV) is willing to bring the bill to the floor as long as it comes out of the committee with "strong bipartisan support." The commodity title remains the biggest hurdle.

Lucas Says House Ag May Try to Cut $30 Billion - In an interview this week with AgriTalk radio, House Agriculture Committee Chair Frank Lucas (R, OK) said he expects his committee will shoot to pare ag spending over the next decade by about $30 billion, somewhat less than recommended in the recently passed House Budget Resolution, but $7 billion more than the $23 billion he and Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D, MI), chair of the Senate ag panel, agreed to last year during the deficit wars. Lucas said the ultimate number is yet to be determined, but he warned that House cuts may have to be deeper than previously thought because of the politics of spending that could block the bill on the House floor. Lucas also acknowledged what Farm Bill veterans lobbyists know: The House and Senate Farm Bills are where damage control is done on program rewrites; it's the conference committee between the two chambers where the ultimate Farm Bill is written.

Conrad, Baucus, Hoeven Introduce Commodity Title Bill - A bipartisan trio of Canadian border state Senators this week introduced their version of a 2012 Farm Bill commodity title, saying their version is friendlier to their farmers and ranchers than the shallow loss approach being examined by the full Senate Agriculture Committee. The bill also contains lower target prices and a disaster program proposal. The three call their bill the Revenue Loss Assistance & Crop Insurance Enhancement Act, and point at the Revenue Loss Assistance Program (RLAP) as its centerpiece, a move that combines the current SURE and ACRE programs. RLAP would kick in on losses of 12-25% on average historic revenue based on individual farm performance, and an eligible loss would be any combination of decreased yields, falling prices or quality discounts. Aid would also be available for farmers with losses on planted acreage at 65% rate, and acreage that couldn't be planted due to weather would get a 45% payment rate, limited to total base acres. The three Senators would continue but modify the commodity loan program and countercyclical programs, but end direct payments and ACRE payments beginning in 2013. Conrad said the bill is "a version of shallow loss and fits hand-in-glove with crop insurance."

Former Ag Secretaries Call for Strong Conservation Compliance Compact - Former Secretaries of Agriculture Dan Glickman and Ann Veneman this week sent House and Senate ag committee leadership a letter calling on them to "renew the conservation compact between taxpayers and farmers." The "compact," the two said, is a provision of the 1985 Farm Bill called conservation compliance that "sparked a decade of unprecedented progress in limiting soil erosion, cleaning up waterways and protecting wetlands." This compact, they said, has protected 140 million acres of highly erodible land and reduced soil wash into streams by 40%

Tax Groups Attack Dairy Market Stabilization Program - A trio of tax activist groups this week sent a letter to House and Senate Agriculture Committees opposing inclusion in the 2012 Farm Bill of any version of the controversial new Dairy Market Stabilization Program (DMSP) being promoted by the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) as reinvention of its current federal support programs. Citizens Against Government Waste, Americans for Tax Reform and the National Taxpayers Union said DMSP is "contrary to the goals of limited government and economic growth" and that "a new federal program that will directly intervene in markets and increase milk prices for everyone is unnecessary." DMSP requires farmers who sign up for a new margin insurance program based on feed costs to also agree to periodic government-set limits on milk production. The three tax groups said DMSP is nothing more than supply control to artificially increase producer prices.

Eight of the nation's largest ethanol interests - under the banner of the Advanced Ethanol Council - this week sent a letter to a Senate Finance Committee subcommittee telling members the council needs to see extension of "key cellulosic ethanol tax provisions set to expire at the end of 2012." The subcommittee is wrestling with how to extend expired and expiring alternative fuel federal tax incentives, and the council wants included in any extension package the cellulosic biofuels producer tax credit and the special depreciation allowance for cellulosic biofuel plant property. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D, MI), chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, has tried twice unsuccessfully to get the broader roster of biofuels tax extenders - including biodiesel and renewable diesel - attached to other legislation. The groups said without the extensions Congress will "drive clean energy investment overseas and put the U.S. behind the eight ball when it comes to clean energy development."

This week EPA proposed carbon pollution standards for new power plants, a move some said is a retreat from previous efforts to regulate power plant greenhouse gas emissions, while others contend this is EPA's backdoor move to get greater control over greenhouse gas pollution. The agency says the new rule simply reflects the nature of the power industry. The proposed final rulemaking applies only to plants to be built in the future, and does not apply to existing plants or those that will begin construction in the next 12 months, EPA said. The agency said the rule is designed, in part, to provide an incentive to utility companies to accelerate an industry trend to "take advantage of American-made technologies, including new, clean-burning efficient natural gas generation, which is already the technology of choice for new and planned power plants." The agency said the rule will also allow plants to burn coal, but to take advantage of a "wide array of available technologies" that reduce carbon emissions.