Activities of the Legislature affecting farmers and ranchers in Washington state

Legisletter Home

February 2, 2007

In This Issue

• Hearing Alert -- Flooding and Erosion Bill

• It's Not Too Late to Join Us for Leg Days!

• DC Days Reminder

• Senate Committee Hears Testimony on Ag Protection Bill

• Proposed Government Mandates Could Harm Small Businesses

• Bill Would Add Human Health to SEPA Process

• Health Care "Reform" is Bad Medicine for Association Health Plans

• New Open Space Classification Proposed

• "Budget Stabilization Account" or "Rainy Day Fund" -- Dueling Proposals for Saving Money

• WSDA seeks volunteers for avian influenza surveillance testing of backyard flocks

• Bills of Interest

• Subscription Information

• Information Resources

Hearing Alert -- Flooding and Erosion Bill

The House Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Monday, Feb. 5 in House Hearing Room C on HB 1748, a bill that would allow greater protection against chronic flooding and erosion. 

If you have experienced flooding or erosion damage (or threats of damage) for two or more years, the committee needs to hear how you have been affected.

HB 1748, sponsored by Rep. Brian Sullivan (D-Mukilteo), would require a declaration of chronic danger and the issuance of permits to correct the problems causing the flooding or erosion.

The hearing may also be continued to Wednesday morning so that people traveling a great distance can participate. We will pass on updated information to Leg Days attendees as we learn more about the schedule.

For more information, contact Dan Wood, WFB director of local affairs, at 1-800-331-3276, ext. 109.

Back to the top

It's Not Too Late to Join Us for Leg Days!

Plan now to join hundreds of Farm Bureau members for Legislative Days 2007, Feb. 6-7, at the Red Lion Hotel in Olympia.

This year's program will feature presentations by key legislators, briefings by Farm Bureau staff, and meetings with local legislators. A tentative agenda is available here. To register, fill out the form here or contact Scott Dilley at sdilley@wsfb.com or 800-331-3276.

Back to the top

DC Days Reminder

DC Days 2007 will occur Feb. 26-28. We encourage you to take this opportunity to meet with members of Washington's congressional delegation to discuss federal issues of importance to our state's agricultural industry. To register, please contact Patrick Connor, WFB director of national affairs, at pconnor@wsfb.com or 800-331-3276, ext. 110.

Back to the top

Senate Committee Hears Testimony on Ag Protection Bill

Terry Willis wants to farm her land. She's also involved in fish enhancement efforts and the conservation district.

The sign at her family farm in Grays Harbor County reads "Family-Owned Since 1920." They trace their farming roots back even further, and they want to make sure their grandchildren and others can farm well into the future.

But the threat of buffer set-asides has her worried. So when the Senate Agriculture and Rural Economic Development Committee held a public hearing on SB 5248, a bill sponsored by Sen. Brian Hatfield (D-Raymond) that protects legal agricultural activities on agricultural lands, Willis and other affected farmers testified in support of this crucial measure.

Willis said farmers worry that land-use regulations will make it impossible to continue farming.

The Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development provides "example code provisions" that show model language for buffers of 200 feet, 300 feet, and even entire floodplains. See Critical Areas Assistance Handbook, Appendix A: Example Code Provisions for Designating and Protecting Critical Areas, A-6. (2003).

Grays Harbor County has not yet proposed an update to their critical areas ordinance and does not face an update deadline until December 2008. But Willis doesn’t like what she sees around the state.

Buffers range from as little as 50 feet to as large as 450 feet.

Jefferson County proposed default buffers of 450 feet, which were negotiated behind closed doors to settle a lawsuit from the Washington Environmental Council. Delineating critical areas could reduce the maximum buffer to 300 feet.

Roger Short, a Chimacum farmer and president of North Olympic Counties Farm Bureau, said he cries "because my kids and grandkids won't have what I have loved all my life."

Relaying to the Senate Ag Committee his struggles to diversify and survive, Short told the panel that "intimidation, hassles, and mitigation have financially crippled my farm."

Even small mandated buffers can be devastating, Farm Bureau told the senators. Mandated buffers make the land ineligible for federal conservation programs like the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. The result is a double loss of income, first from not being able to use land productively, and second from not being able to enroll it in compensated enhancement programs.

Buffers also are fertile ground for invasive and noxious weeds like Purple Loosestrife, Japanese knotweed, and Tansy ragwort. Unmanaged in buffer set-asides, these species will thrive and invade neighboring lands.

Skagit County cattle rancher Janet McRae said that the set-asides and management restrictions are too much. When blackberries and knotweed began growing alongside her streams, she said local officials told her that land-use ordinances meant she could only use a "non-motorized handheld device." McRae then said, "I invited them to come over and help me."

Willis was specific about how the CTED model would devastate her farm: She said a 200-foot buffer around the farm's streams and creeks would eat up 97 acres and cost them $108,000 in lost farm income a year.

Such threats to survive make it harder for farmers to engage in voluntary conservation efforts, Willis said. "When you're struggling to pay your grain bill or your tax bill, it's really hard to look at water quality and say 'OK, I'll do this, too.'"

Back to the top

Proposed Government Mandates Could Harm Small Businesses

For small business owners already struggling with a mountain of regulations, the theme of this legislative session may be more government mandates.

Examples include government-mandated paid family medical leave, mandatory U/I contributions for business owners (who are prohibited from claiming benefits unless the business folds), and expanded "disability" definitions that will mandate more benefits for more workers.

In response, Farm Bureau is asking all small businesses owners to work together to say "no" to these new business-killing ideas. We have activated our Legislative Action Center, which enables you to quickly contact all of your elected officials and tell them what you think about a particular bill. We will suggest text or you can use your own, and with a few clicks of your mouse you get to make your voice heard to all of your elected officials. Simply go to www.wsfb.com.

This week's Action Alert:

Mandatory Unemployment Tax for Corporate Officers (HB 1406, SB 5373)

These bills, proposed by our state Employment Security Department, would force anyone who owns more than five percent of a company to pay unemployment insurance premiums, but these individuals would only be eligible to collect benefits if the business ceases to operate.

The legislation, HB 1406 and SB 5373, would especially target small businesses. Small business owners don’t collect unemployment, so why should they be forced to pay this tax? According to the agency, some business owners lay themselves off and continue working at the business while they collect unemployment insurance. Farm Bureau has requested statistics on this "problem."

Farm Bureau suggested a compromise wherein business owners and corporate officers would be automatically excluded from U/I premium payment and coverage, but could elect to "opt in" to the system. The agency has responded by stating that it will consider the opposite -- charging owners unless they affirmatively opt out.

Please take a minute right now, go to the Legislative Action Center at www.wsfb.com, and follow the links to tell your legislators what you think about mandatory unemployment taxes for corporate officers and small business owners.

In other news, next week hearings on workers' comp legislation that will expand benefits and costs for employers will begin. Also up for a public hearing is HB 1658, the mandatory paid family leave bill. Farm Bureau provided a sensible compromise wherein employees could make voluntary payroll deductions into a fund that they could access when not working, but it was rejected by legislators who want to shift the burden to the business owner. We will be testifying in opposition to HB 1658, sponsored by Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson (D-Seattle).

Back to the top

Bill Would Add Human Health to SEPA Process

On Tuesday the House Select Committee on Environmental Health held a public hearing on HB 1355, sponsored by Rep. Marilyn Chase (D-Shoreline). The measure would require human health analysis as part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) analysis done for land development projects. SEPA already includes environmental health in the analysis, but the new bill defines human health as the physical, mental, economic, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. This is a very broad, subjective standard and would likely result in the application of the "precautionary principle," which has hindered land-use activities under the Growth Management Act. This principle means that where there is a lack of science, an agency must err on the side of denying or rejecting an action or project. Thus, a lack of science or knowledge coupled with an overly broad definition of human health would lead to inaction because of uncertainty and undue cost for project proponents.

While testimony was mixed on the measure, many important concerns were raised both by agencies involved in administering SEPA as well as those entities subject to SEPA analysis. Farm Bureau opposes the measure because of the uncertainty it would create. It would be imprudent to stop all action because of unknown or unsubstantiated concerns. Other statutes exist to protect human health. SEPA is primarily designed to protect the physical environment from undue human impact. This measure would expand this focus into that of potential impacts of a project on human health. We encourage sponsors to focus on other statutes to address perceived threats to human health.

Back to the top

Health Care "Reform" is Bad Medicine for Association Health Plans

HB 1569, entitled "reforming the health care system in Washington state," was heard this week during a joint meeting of the Senate Health and Long Term Care Committee and the House Health and Wellness Committee.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Eileen Cody (D-Seattle), is a few short steps away from a universal or single-payer system.

It would create a state-run "connector" that would force the state-subsidized Basic Health Plan (BHP), the state’s high risk pool, all private individual health insurance policyholders, small business health plans covering fewer than 50 employees, and all association health plans -- including our own FB Healthcare program -- into one new group. Members of that new group would be allowed to choose their insurance coverage from among four or five health plans designed by a panel of 14 political appointees specified in the bill.

The connector would be funded by forcing all employers with five or more employees to collect pre-tax dollars from workers through cafeteria plans, placing a surcharge on all health insurance premiums and channeling state dollars currently used for BHP and the high risk pool into it. An individual mandate requiring all Washington residents over 18 to purchase health insurance would take effect in 2012 if this bill passes.

Farm Bureau testified against the bill. Other business groups and most of the state’s health insurers also opposed the bill or raised serious concerns about it during testimony.

Nevertheless, Cody, who chairs the House Health and Wellness Committee, plans to pass the bill out of committee next week. Farm Bureau will continue to work against this legislation.

Back to the top

New Open Space Classification Proposed

Sen. Marilyn Rasmussen (D-Eatonville), chair of the Senate Agriculture and Rural Economic Development Committee, has introduced SB 5810 to create a new "wildlife habitat" open space classification.

The legislation would allow landowners currently enrolled in other open space classes, such as timber and agriculture, to change to the new wildlife habitat status without any additional fees or penalties.

This would be especially advantageous to farmers or small timberland owners wanting to retire but whose children are not yet ready to take over the operation. The land could be transferred into the wildlife habitat designation, thus allowing it to remain in the open space program but not be actively worked.

It would also benefit hunters, bird watchers, and other wildlife enthusiasts by increasing the amount of land that may be available for recreational use if the owner decides to allow entry for those purposes.

The bill has been referred to the Government Operations and Elections Committee. A hearing date has not yet been scheduled.

Back to the top

"Budget Stabilization Account" or "Rainy Day Fund" -- Dueling Proposals for Saving Money

At the request of Gov. Chris Gregoire, a bipartisan group of senators are sponsoring SJR 8206, asking voters to amend the state Constitution to create a "budget stabilization account." Interestingly, the companion House version drew only Democrat sponsors.

Senate Republicans have also introduced their own plan, SJR 8200, asking voters to add a "rainy day reserve fund" to the state constitution.

The bills would set aside one percent of state revenues that could be spent anytime by a 60 percent vote of the Legislature or by a simple majority vote when the economy slows to less than one percent employment growth.

So what is the difference?

The governor's plan would also allow the stabilization account to be tapped with only a majority vote whenever the governor declares an emergency (there have been 12 in the past 18 months) or the Legislature authorizes it by statute. Can't muster 60 percent? Just have the governor declare an emergency or get a majority of both chambers to pass a bill saying one exists. Then only a simple majority is needed to spend those reserves.

The language in SJR 8206 is so loose that an emergency "threat to public property" could conceivably be declared if a professional sports team threatened to leave the state -- or just the taxpayer-financed stadium it occupies.

Until that language is changed, Farm Bureau will oppose SJR 8206.

Fortunately, the governor's office has signaled a willingness to work with both parties to put a truly meaningful proposal in front of the voters in November.

Meanwhile, Farm Bureau supports SJR 8200 and looks forward to weighing in on a bipartisan plan that puts money away for a real emergency.

Back to the top

WSDA Seeks Volunteers for Avian Influenza Surveillance Testing of Backyard Flocks

Officials of the Washington State Department of Agriculture announced today an expansion of its surveillance efforts to detect avian influenza in the state's domestic poultry, particularly backyard flocks that may be exposed to migratory waterfowl.

WSDA is looking for farmers and backyard poultry owners with established flocks who will allow WSDA to take swab samples from live birds or provide eggs for testing. Participants will be reimbursed up to $60 per quarter for providing swab samples or $10 a quarter for providing a dozen eggs to test for the avian influenza virus. WSDA staff will do the quick and painless swabbing and egg pickup during visits to the premises.

"Avian influenza hasn't been found in domestic poultry in Washington, but it will be an advantage to increase the range of our surveillance efforts," said State Veterinarian Leonard Eldridge. "These sentinel flocks will help alert us should avian influenza ever become a problem here. Good surveillance and early detection will allow us to coordinate a rapid response to bird diseases."

The department is particularly interested in testing chickens, pheasants, ducks and geese located near a wildlife or waterfowl refuge, close to commercial poultry operations or within a major migratory waterfowl flyway.

Persons interested in participating in the backyard flock surveillance may contact WSDA through its toll-free Avian Health Hotline at 1-800-606-3056. The hotline also can be used to report sick or dead birds or ask for more information on avian influenza.

As part of a national surveillance program, state and federal agencies continue to test domestic and wild birds for avian influenza, including strains that may transmit to domestic poultry. No case of highly pathogenic avian influenza, which is deadly to birds, has ever been discovered in Washington.

Last year, WSDA sent more than 4,000 bird swabs or eggs to the Washington State University Avian Health Laboratory in Puyallup.

None of the tests showed signs of avian influenza. Commercial poultry operations conduct their own surveillance and testing as part of their normal biosecurity and disease prevention programs.

WSDA is using U.S. Department of Agriculture funds through a cooperative agreement to support voluntary testing and outreach efforts.

Other WSDA activities include making avian influenza sampling kits available to WSU Extension and select veterinary offices, and printing a calendar with avian health information.

The public may also report diseased or dead wild birds, particularly waterfowl or shorebirds, to the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife at 1-800-606-8768.

Back to the top

Bills of Interest

The following is a list the bills we are currently tracking.

• In the Bill column, E = Engrossed (i.e., amendments have been adopted), S (preceding HB or SB) = Substitute bill, HB = House Bill, SB = Senate Bill, JM = Joint Memorial, JR = Joint Resolution.

• In the Position column, S = Support, M = Monitor, N = Neutral, C = Concerns, O = Oppose.

• In the Priority column, H = High.  

• In the Lobbyist column, C = Patrick Connor, F = Dan Fazio, S = John Stuhlmiller, W = Dan Wood.

• Bold indicates a priority bill. 

Health Care  

Labor and Employment  

Land Use  

Other  

Taxes and Budget