2015 legislative session is underway in Sacramento and California
lawmakers have already introduced nearly 2,500 individual pieces of
legislation. CCA reviews every bill to determine its impact on
California beef producers and takes a position to support or oppose the
bill in accordance with CCA’s member-developed policies.
is a short list of bills that CCA has taken or will take a position on
in the coming weeks as committee hearings get underway. This is only a
partial list of bills that CCA has taken a position on. For additional
information, or if you have questions about the status of legislation
not identified below, please do not hesitate to contact Justin Oldfield
in the CCA office.
CCA Currently Supports:
AB 142 (Bigelow) – Wild and scenic rivers: Mokelumne River
bill follows an effort that was defeated by Senator Tom Berryhill,
Assemblymember Frank Bigelow, CCA and other stakeholders last year to
list the Mokelumne River as wild and scenic. This bill serves to preempt
any future attempts to list the Mokelumne River as wild and scenic by
requiring the Natural Resources Agency to complete a report
demonstrating that current and future water supply needs can still be
met if the river is listed, which ultimately can’t be done.
AB 290 (Bigelow) – Game mammals: Big Game Management Account
bill would eliminate the requirement of an individual tag for each
feral hog that is legally taken and instead allow hunters to purchase an
annual “validation” that will allow them to take an unlimited number of
feral hogs for that given year. Provisions related to depredation
permits for feral hogs will remain unchanged. This bill is likely to
become a “two-year” bill.
AB 732 (Cooper) – Cattle inspection: exemption
bill specifically exempts a brand inspection for a business seeking to
add a minority owner. This is largely not a beef cattle issue because
new owners are typically added to registered brands, but it has caused
unnecessary brand inspections for some dairies resulting in thousands of
dollars in fees. The bill does not negatively impact state brand laws
for the beef industry.
AB 1242 (Gray) – Water quality: impacts on groundwater basins – mitigation measures
legislation would require a Groundwater Management Agency, under the
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, to first properly mitigate any
reductions in groundwater pumping associated with the development of
mandatory instream surface water flows.
AB 1249 (Lackey) – Vehicles: motor carriers *CCA SPONSORED
continues to work with CHP and members of the legislature to find
solutions to the permitting, license and regulatory issues that ranchers
face for operating flatbeds and common pickup and gooseneck trailer
combinations to haul livestock. This bill is a spot bill, and if a
solution can be reached prior to the house of origin deadline, this bill
can be used to advance that solution legislatively this year.
AB 1390 (Alejo) – Groundwater: adjudication
bill establishes a streamlined adjudication procedure for those who
seek to delineate their groundwater rights through the court if they
believe their rights are threatened by a Groundwater Management Agency
once the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act is fully implemented.
Adjudicating water rights is a long process, but the courts can provide
better due process if groundwater pumping rates are challenged by a
Groundwater Management Agency.
SB 138 (Fuller) – Physical education: high school rodeo
bill will allow a student participating in high school rodeo events to
be exempt from their physical education requirements similar to what is
offered for other recognized sports.
CCA Currently Opposes:
SB 20 (Pavley) – Wells: reports – public availability
bill will authorize a public agency to release private well logs,
adulteration permits or deepening permits to the public upon request.
CCA has opposed this bill in the past and has been successful in
SB 32 (Pavley) – California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: emissions limits
bill extends the life of AB 32 (Nunez), passed in 2006, and will
require that California achieve an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions relative to levels documented in 1990. Regulations
associated with AB 32 have been harmful to state businesses and SB 32
only seeks to continue that legacy, if not increase regulatory burdens.