Activities of the Legislature affecting farmers and ranchers in Washington state

Legisletter Home

Past Issues

Download Latest Bill Tracking List (.XLS)

March 23, 2007

In This Issue

• Skagit County Proposes 150-Foot Buffers

• Senate Committee Hears House Critical Areas Ordinance Bill

• House Committee Schedules Hearing on Senate Critical Areas Ordinance Bill

• Flooding and Erosion Bill Scheduled for Hearing

• Budget Revives Dead Bills

• Are Lawmakers Being Duped about Paid Leave?

• Workers' Comp Minimum Benefits Bill Update

• Bills of Interest

• Subscription Information

• Information Resources

Skagit County Proposes 150-Foot Buffers

On Thursday, March 22, Skagit County officially unveiled its proposal to remove nearly 5,400 acres of farmland through new buffers. The county claims that the program is a "voluntary" approach.

The proposal establishes multi-year goals for farmers to voluntarily sell their land to the county, with funding coming from a new tax paid by all Skagit County property owners. The tax, if approved by voters, would provide about $1 million per year for buffer acquisition.

The proposal makes it clear that the county will take the property -- without compensation -- if not enough farmers voluntarily sell their property to the county.

This is like an armed robber asking you to voluntarily hand over your wallet unless you want him to take it from you.

Until now, Skagit County has fought long and hard to protect its agricultural base. In the last 10 years, the county has spent about $3 million in legal costs to defend against lawsuits brought by tribes and environmental organizations under the Growth Management Act.

The proposal does not settle the case now pending before the state Supreme Court. It does not settle any other challenges or appeals. It does not preclude any additional regulations on farmland. It does not prevent any future appeals of county decisions.

KIRO news reported this morning that Skagit tribes have said the proposal does not provide enough regulation of farmland.

Farm Bureau has joined Skagit farmers in expressing grave concern about the proposal.

Back to the top

Senate Committee Hears House Critical Areas Ordinance Bill

The Senate Government Operations Committee heard testimony Thursday on HB 2212, a bill sponsored by Rep. Brian Blake (D-Aberdeen) that would provide a two-year "timeout" from new Growth Management Act regulations on agriculture while negotiations occur at the Ruckelshaus Center.

In its current form, the bill would not include Skagit, Island, Clallam, and Jefferson counties in the timeout provisions.

Farm Bureau has been involved in almost daily negotiations on the legislation. We have insisted that all agriculture in our state must be protected, and there must be more certainty than just a two-year delay in enacting regulations that could devastate agriculture across the state.

Many Skagit farmers came to Olympia to tell legislators how devastating the new Skagit County proposal would be for their farms. Some farms would lose 40 to 100 acres. In some cases, up to 25 percent of the farm would be lost.

In addition to the loss of productive land, farmers expressed concern about noxious weeds growing on the large buffers and then spreading to nearby managed farmland.

Many farms would not be able to survive under these drastically changed conditions.

Grays Harbor farmer Terry Willis told the committee that a similar buffer applied to her farm would be enough to drive her out of business. Her family has been farming for about 100 years and has plans to keep farming into the future, but taking away that much land could bring those plans to a halt. As a result, the farm would be sold as multiple parcels, and the new owners may not have the experience or motivation to be good stewards of the land like farmers are.

Back to the top

House Committee Schedules Hearing on Senate Critical Areas Ordinance Bill

The House Local Government Committee will hold a public hearing on SB 5248 at 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, March 27, in House Hearing Room E of the John L. O'Brien Building.

SB 5248 is sponsored by Sen. Brian Hatfield (D-Raymond) and was brought forward by Washington Farm Bureau to extend to the Growth Management Act the same protections for agriculture that exist currently in the Shorelines Management Act. 

The bill says that legally existing agricultural activities cannot be prohibited by new regulations.

That means you could keep farming what you are farming now.

It is important that legislators understand the impact of buffers on farms. Members from across the state are encouraged to join us at the pre-hearing lunch and then go to the hearing to tell legislators how you would be affected by mandatory buffers.

In advance of the hearing, Farm Bureau will host a pizza lunch at the Washington Farm Bureau Professional Office Building from 11:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The office is located at 975 Carpenter Road NE in Lacey. Please email sdilley@wsfb.com to let him know you are coming, so we can have an idea of how many people to expect.

To get to the Farm Bureau office, exit I-5 at Martin Way (Exit 109). If you were northbound on I-5, turn right onto Martin Way. If you were southbound on I-5, turn left onto Martin Way. Continue on Martin Way for almost one mile. Turn left onto Carpenter Road, go one-tenth of a mile, and turn left into the parking lot. 

Back to the top

Flooding and Erosion Bill Scheduled for Hearing

On Monday, March 26, the House Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on SB 5733, dealing with chronic flooding and erosion.

Currently, in a single flooding or erosion event, a county has the option of declaring an emergency, which would then trigger a mandatory expedited permit from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. That option for the local governments would not change under the terms of SB 5733, which is sponsored by Sen. Val Stevens (R-Arlington)

The bill would address ongoing situations where an emergency has not been declared. In situations where flooding or erosion occurs for two or more consecutive years, the county would have to declare a chronic danger, and the department would issue a permit under the normal time frames for issuing hydraulic permits.

Back to the top

Budget Revives Dead Bills

The axiom in Olympia that "nothing's dead until sine die" proved accurate this week, as bills that are of major concern to farmers and ranchers were revived in budget provisos after failing to be voted out of the chamber of origin by the appropriate cutoff day.

For example, the House budget released Tuesday contains two separate provisions regarding HB 1806, a bill regarding pesticide use near schools, and a similar proviso for HB 1810, a pesticide drift monitoring study bill. Neither bill made it to the House floor for a vote. Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D-Seattle) sponsored HB 1806, and HB 1810 is sponsored by Rep. Zack Hudgins (D-Tukwila).

The House budget spends $29.8 billion, $300 million more than the governor’s proposal, and projects approximately $144 million in surplus, leaving a rainy day fund of $644 million.

Here are some budget highlights:

• $378,000 for WSDA to implement HB 1806;

• $245,000 for the Department of Health to implement HB 1806;

• $538,000 for the Department of Health to implement the failed HB 1810, examining airborne pesticide concentration levels in agricultural areas of the state;

• $150,000 for a pilot pesticide notification project similar to the rule that WSDA scrapped last year;

• $450,000 for a WSDA study to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Washington's agricultural industry;

• $9.5 million for the Washington State University unified agriculture research initiative;

• $4 million for WSU Tri-Cities to develop new products from processed agricultural waste;

• $225,000 for the Ruckelshaus Center to identify/mediate/discuss/resolve land-use and property-rights conflicts;

• $37 million in tax breaks to 20 different industries;

• $37 million to fund the Puget Sound Partnership;

• Increasing state funding to local health departments by 42 percent;

• Funding insurance coverage for 38,000 children from low-income families;

• Many education initiatives, including $1 million for the "Field of Dreams" agricultural tuition assistance program; and,

• A 5.2 percent raise for state workers by 2008.

The House spent much of the week working on amendments. It is widely anticipated that budget work will be complete in the House this week. The budget will most likely be voted out of the House on Monday, and the Senate will begin deliberations and make its changes next week.

Farm Bureau thanks Washington Friends of Farms and Forests for their hard work on many budget items and for providing some of the content above. 

For labor-intensive agriculture, the budget was a mixed bag. HB 2082, the Field of Dreams Tuition Assistance program for students aged 16 through 21 who work on farms, was funded for $500,000 each year. However, SB 5723, the farm worker vocational training program, requested $250,000 but was not funded. HB 2082 is sponsored by Rep. Bruce Chandler (R-Granger), and SB 5723 is sponsored by Sen. Marilyn Rasmussen (D-Eatonville). 

Several commodity-specific programs received funding.

Meanwhile, the assault on the workers' comp trust fund continues. This year, almost $1 million in new appropriations were added to fund programs unrelated to workers' comp. These diversions include $484,000 for more farm labor contractor inspectors, $337,000 for online upgrades to the apprenticeship programs, and an additional $139,000 for wage-and-hour complaints. It appears that it will take a lawsuit to stop the continued misappropriation of workers' comp funds.

One of the biggest winners of the session was the state legal services program, known as Northwest Justice Project. This program received a 32-percent funding increase, and the biennium budget now exceeds $22 million. In the 1997 biennium, state fund expenditures for this program were $6.8 million. In the past 10 years, program funding has increased a whopping 229 percent. Farm Bureau believes that the Washington civil indigent legal services program is the most highly funded of any state, on a per capita basis.

Below is a graph demonstrating the out-of-control funding for this program. Please note that the almost $22.5 million biennium appropriation does not include another $5 million or so that each year goes to Columbia Legal Services, another indigent legal services program. Washington is one of a handful of states that has two indigent legal services programs. Columbia Legal receives the bulk of its funding from a Supreme Court fund that derives its income from the interest earned on real estate escrow accounts and attorney trust accounts. In denying a request from Farm Bureau to limit the activities of this group, the Supreme Court decided that funds appropriated to Columbia Legal could be used for lobbying and other political activities.

The lesson for farmers and ranchers: you may soon be sued by government funded lawyers!

Back to the top

Are Lawmakers Being Duped about Paid Leave?

Proponents of Paid Family Leave, 2ESSB 5659, are billing it as just like the California disability leave program, but lawmakers at the committee hearing on Tuesday were surprised to learn that Washington's proposed Family Leave Bill is much more onerous than the California Temporary Disability Insurance program.

Proponents testified that they need a source of income when a leave of absence is required to care for an ill spouse or to bond with a newborn. If that is all the bill did -- provide a source of funds when a person is forced to take a leave of absence from work -- it would be very similar to the California law.

But it's not.

2ESSB 5659, sponsored by Sen. Karen Keiser (D-Des Moines), also contains a complex new employment regulation because it would require employers to either reinstate the worker, in the case of large employers, or fund unemployment, if a job is not held open for the worker.

Amazingly, an employee could be hired today and demand paid family leave the next day! After the paid family leave expired, the worker could ask to be reinstated or begin collecting unemployment insurance -- which could be charged against the employer where the worker worked for the one day or some other employer who did absolutely nothing to cause the unemployment.

The new Washington Family Leave Act is a state-mandated insurance policy and an onerous new employment regulation with a guarantee of re-employment. As such, it must be integrated with the current Family Medical Leave Act, the Washington Family Care Act, unemployment insurance laws, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Combining the time off available under each of these programs, it is possible for a worker to demand 20 weeks or more of leave each year, and force the employer to keep the job open or be charged for unemployment.

It is absolutely imperative that all employers use the Farm Bureau Legislative Action Center at www.wsfb.com to urge legislators to vote NO on 2ESSB 5659, the Family Leave Act.

Back to the top

Workers' Comp Minimum Benefits Bill Update

This week the House Commerce and Labor Committee conducted a public hearing on SSB 5675, the workers' comp minimum benefits bill sponsored by Sen. Rosa Franklin (D-Tacoma). The bill would guarantee a minimum benefit that could exceed 100 percent of an employee's take-home pay.

The bill proposes a floor of workers' comp tax free disability benefits set at 15 percent of the state average wage or 100 percent of an employee's gross pay, whichever is less. Since gross wages are almost always greater than take-home pay, this bill sets up the interesting scenario in which workers could receive more in workers' comp time-loss than they received at work.

The bill would apply to employees who work on a reduced schedule or work for a season of four months or less. Approximately 1,000 workers each year would qualify for the increased benefits, which would cost employers roughly $1.8 million each year.

Farm Bureau was the only agricultural association opposing the bill. We were joined in testimony against this measure by the Washington Retail Association. 

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 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

Water, Energy, and Environment  

Back to the top

Subscription Information

To subscribe to LegisLetter by e-mail, contact Scott Dilley at sdilley@wsfb.com. 

Back to the top

Information Resources

Washington Farm Bureau: www.wsfb.com 
Legislative Information: www.leg.wa.gov 
Governor's Bill Actions: www.governor.wa.gov 
Legislative Hotline: (800) 562-6000

Back to the top