Judge Aspinwall denied Stop QIP’s Chapter 3.5 petition for a referendum, claiming it to be “legally defective.”
Last month, a hearing was held to review Stop QIP’s petition to suspend Chapter 3.5 of the California Food and Agriculture Code. The hearing was presided over by an Administrative Law Judge, and the question being considered was whether or not a referendum could be held to terminate the QIP pursuant to Chapter 3.5. After weighing the arguments from Stop QIP, Save QIP, and United Dairy Families of California, the judge determined that the “Petitioners’ request for a referendum pursuant to Chapter 3.5 is DENIED.”
One of the state’s leading experts on the role of animal agriculture in climate change today urged legislators to oppose Assembly Bill 2959, legislation that would result in more food waste ending up in the state’s landfills.
University of California, Davis Professor Dr. Frank Mitloehner, who has received awards from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Distinguished Service Award for Outstanding Research – University of California Division of Agricultural and Natural Resources, says the legislation would have “devastating” impacts on farmers and the state’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“If AB 2959 passes, the bill will take away a valuable opportunity to upcycle organic waste for animal feed and keep it out of the landfill, where it will release methane,” said Mitloehner, who is also director of the CLEAR Center at UC Davis. “We can’t throw blame at our farmers and producers for impacting warming, while taking away an opportunity for them to do their part.”
According to Dr. Mitloehner, approximately 18 percent of materials that end up in landfills is wasted food. In the United States, about 30 to 40 percent of all food is wasted.
Assembly Bill 2959 would allow municipalities to force restaurants, grocers and others with food waste to utilize large franchise haulers to dispose of their food waste. Currently, most of these establishments contract with smaller haulers that take food waste to farms for use as animal feed. The EPA’s food waste hierarchy cites this is a better use of food waste than turning it into compost or landfill disposal.
The legislation is opposed by a broad coalition. It includes the California Restaurant Association, California Grocers Association, the California Retailers Association, the California Farm Bureau, Western United Dairies, the California Cattlemens Association and more than a dozen other groups.
The bill is expected to be heard by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee, chaired by State Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), within the next few weeks.
United Dairy Families of California —Today, the industry-generated petition to implement a sunset plan to the QIP was qualified by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). The petition qualified with 28% of the number of Market Milk producers operating in California in May 2020.
CDFA anticipates holding a Producer Review Board meeting in August followed by a public hearing to consider the petition.
Dairy Families is grateful to the dairy producers that signed the petition and have supported the process thus far. We have taken a huge step together toward uniting the dairy industry!
Dairy Families submitted a petition to reform California’s historic quota program to CDFA in June. The petition outlines a five-year sunset proposal, which was the result of a process that included input from hundreds of California dairy producers over several months of regional meetings. The Dairy Families’ petition calls for CDFA to bring the producer-generated idea to a referendum.
Almond Alliance of the California — Today, Governor Newsom announced that the State has issued a new Employer Playbook for a Safe Reopening, which contains guidance regarding all of the following:
Requirements employers must satisfy to provide safe and clean work environments. This guidance expands on the existing industry specific guidance and checklists, the most current versions of which can be viewed using the following link: https://covid19.ca.gov/industry-guidance/
What to do if there is a case of COVID-19 in the workplace. Importantly, this section contains the most current guidance to help employers determine when employees should be permitted to return to work after they have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or have been exposed to COVID-19 (pages 13 – 15). Please note that the CDC’s guidance has changed since the last time our office provided our General Guidance materials. In addition to reviewing the standards set forth in the Employer Playbook, you should look at the websites of all Counties in which you operate, as the Counties are permitted to issue varying standards. Employer reporting obligations and employee leave rights (paid and unpaid) are also described in this section. You should document each employee’s COVID-19 circumstance, your response, the employee’s leave rights and standard you used to allow the employee to return to work.
Worker education topics and enforcement of mask requirements. The guidance summarizes the COVID-19-related issues employees are expected to understand, which establishes the criteria for your training obligations. Links are provided to assist in your training efforts. You should also continue to refer to the industry-specific guidance for your operation. Be sure to keep records of all of your training sessions, including who attended, the topics discussed and all written materials distributed to your employees.The Employer Playbook for a Safe Reopening can be viewed using the following link: https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/employer-playbook-for-safe-reopening–en.pdf. The Employer Playbook contains many links to additional websites, which should also be reviewed as applicable to your operation.
As we have explained in previous emails, although the documents issued by the State are described as “Guidance” you should treat the standards described in the documents as Orders and ensure that your operation and employees strictly comply with all applicable requirements. The Labor Commissioner’s Office, CalOSHA, ABC and other agencies are conducting enforcement visits to determine whether businesses are complying with the applicable standards and are issuing citations to those who are not.
Today’s announcements, and the new information contained in the Employer Playbook, is a reminder that the requirements and standards with which employers must comply continue to evolve on a regular basis. Please be sure to always check the relevant websites for the most current information and contact your counsel anytime you have a question about how to respond to a COVID-19 issue in your operation.
If you have any questions regarding this industry alert please contact staff@almondalliance.org.
As we approach the Stop QIP v CDFA court hearing date rescheduled for July 31, we received a lot of questions on the topic and if this proceeding is different than the Chapter 3.5 hearing we went through in June. Below you will find a list of commonly asked questions as well as a few others of interest regarding quota.
If QIP is terminated via Stop QIP’s Chapter 3.5 referendum, will there be a payment to compensate quota holders?
No. The only question before the Secretary is whether to suspend Chapter 3.5 and thereby terminate the QIP immediately.
• What has WUD’s role been through the Chapter 3.5 hearing?
WUD submitted historical, contextual and background information as testimony to the administrative law judge presiding over the hearing. It has been the board’s position that a vote on the QIP should happen the way it did to implement it, following the rules in Chapter 3.0.
• What has WUD’s role been through the Stop QIP v CDFA litigation?
WUD filed an amicus curiae brief to submit historical, contextual and background information in the matter. It has been the board’s position that dairy farmers have the right to decide whether quota stays or not. A law- suit to eliminate QIP without a referendum strips dairy farmers’ voting rights away.
• What is the court hearing date for the Stop QIP v CDFA litigation and how can I listen or participate?
The hearing will take place on July 31 at 10:00 a.m. You will be able to listen to the proceedings live HERE, but participation from individual producers will not be possible. There could be a tentative decision announced as early as Monday. But be aware a tentative decision does not mean this is an official conclusion. The parties still have an opportunity to present argument to the court after a tentative ruling has been announced, and the court may reach a different conclusion or change other aspects of its ruling after the hearing.
• When will the decision be made on Stop QIP’s Chapter 3.5 petition?
We are still waiting on the administrative law judge to announce his decision. There is no set date for a decision.
What is the voting threshold for a referendum to suspend Chapter 3.5?
This referendum threshold is found in Section 62755 of Chapter 3.5: The secretary shall find that producers have assented to the continued operation of this chapter if the secretary finds on a statewide basis that not less than 51 percent of the total number of eligible producers in the state have voted in the referendum and that 51 percent or more of the total number of eligible producers who voted in the referendum and who produced 51 percent or more of the total amount of fluid milk produced in the state during the calendar month next preceding the month of the commencement of the referendum period by all producers who voted in the referendum, approve the continued operation of this chapter. In other words, in order to suspend Chapter 3.5, either (1) fewer than 51% of the eligible producers vote in the referendum, or (2) 49.1% of the voting producers or voting milk vote against continuing the chapter.
• What was the referendum threshold used to vote QIP in?
The referendum threshold is found in Section 62717 of Chapter 3: The director shall find that producers have assented to the plan if he finds on a statewide basis that not less than 51 percent of the total number of eligible producers in the state shall have voted in the referendum and finds one of the following:
(a) Sixty–five percent or more of the total number of eligible producers who voted in the referendum who produced 51 percent or more of the total amount of fluid milk produced in the state during the calendar month next preceding the month of the commencement of the referendum period by all producers who voted in the referendum approve the plan.
(b) Fifty–one percent or more of the total number of eligible producers who voted in the referendum who produced 65 percent or more of the total amount of fluid milk produced in the state during the calendar month next preceding the month of the commencement of the referendum period by all producers who voted in the referendum, approve the plan.
• If the administrative law judge concludes that a Chapter 3.5 referendum does not apply to a petition to terminate the QIP, can the Secretary use her discretion and still hold a referendum with the Chapter 3 threshold instead?
No. The call of the hearing was dictated by Stop QIP’s Chapter 3.5 petition. The Stop QIP petition only requested a Chapter 3.5 referendum to suspend Chapter 3.5 and thereby terminate the QIP; it did not ask for a Chapter 3 referendum.
• Can quota sales occur while we wait for decisions in these matters?
Yes. A farmer can sell quota as long as it was acquired more than five years ago. Exceptions include family transfers or interstate succession. If a farmer sold quota, he has to wait 24 months before he can buy more (same exceptions apply).
• What was the latest quota price?
The latest reported sale was in June and the average was $150/lb. SNF.
On July 17th, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer announced the appointment of 25 new members to serve on seven agricultural trade advisory committees, including some of our friends in California. This will bring a greater voice and trade opportunities for specialty crop growers in California.
The Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee is comprised of senior representatives from across the U.S. agricultural community who provide advice to the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on trade policy matters including the operation of existing trade agreements and the negotiation of new agreements. Members of the six Agricultural Technical Advisory Committees (ATACs) provide technical advice and guidance from the perspective of their specific product sectors.
The newly appointed advisors will serve until 2024. Each committee will be supplemented by additional appointments over the next four years. Applications are encouraged at any time. A complete list of committee members and application information is available at www.fas.usda.gov/topics/trade-advisory-committees.
Following is a list of the new advisors, by committee:
Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee Constance Cullman, American Feed Industry Association David Puglia, Western Growers David Salmonsen, American Farm Bureau Federation
ATAC for Trade in Animals and Animal Products Robert DeHaan, National Fisheries Institute Mallory Gaines, American Feed Industry Association David Herring, Hog Slat Inc./TDM Farms James Parnell, Alabama Farmers Federation Maria Zieba, National Pork Producers Council
ATAC for Trade in Fruits and Vegetables William Callis, U.S. Apple Export Council Casey Creamer, California Citrus Mutual Jodi Devaurs, California Table Grape Commission Jonathan Maberry, Washington Red Raspberry Commission Caroline Stringer, California Fresh Fruit Association
ATAC for Trade in Grains, Feed, Oilseeds and Planting Seeds Peter Bachmann, USA Rice Federation William Gordon, American Soybean Association Derek Haigwood, D.I.D. Farms Patrick Hayden, North American Export Grain Association Dalton Henry, U.S. Wheat Associates Edward Hubbard, Renewable Fuels Association Tina Lyons, Double River Forwarding, LLC
ATAC for Trade in Processed Foods Kevin Latner, National Industrial Hemp Council Richard (Denton) McLane, McLane Global Trading Max Moncaster, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Bernadette Wiltz, Southern United States Trade Association
ATAC for Trade in Sweeteners and Sweetener Products (No new members.)
ATAC for Trade in Tobacco, Cotton and Peanuts Karl Zimmer, Premium Peanut
Jodi Devaurs
Regarding the news, Kathleen Nave from the California Table Grape Commission report, “The appointment of Jodi Devaurs, California Table Grape Commission trade policy director, to ATAC where she will serve as a trade advisor to USDA and USTR is important for the California table grape industry and represents an expansion of its direct involvement in trade matters of import.”
Dave Puglia
David Puglia from Western Growers shared, “I am honored to be appointed to the Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee. International markets are vital to the growth of the fresh produce industry, accounting for more than $23 billion in fruit, vegetable and tree nut sales in 2019. However, tariff and non-tariff barriers continue to restrict access to key export destinations. I look forward to working with USDA, USTR and my committee colleagues to help formulate durable trade policies that benefit our domestic growers.”
Casey Creamer
Casey Creamer from California Citrus Mutual stated, “I’m looking forward to continuing California Citrus Mutual’s service to this important advisory committee. Trade issues have significantly impacted the citrus industry over the years and I’m glad to make sure our growers have a seat at this important table.”
Caroline Stringer
President of the California Fresh Fruit Association, Ian LeMay said, “We appreciate Secretary Perdue’s appointment of Caroline Stringer to the ATAC for fruits and vegetables and look forward to her continuing the long history of representation for CFFA and California agriculture on this important advisory group.”
Congress established the advisory committee system in 1974 to ensure a private-sector voice in establishing U.S. agricultural trade policy objectives to reflect U.S. commercial and economic interests. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and Office of the U.S. Trade Representative jointly manage the committees.
Due to concerns about COVID-19, organizers of the 2021 Unified Wine & Grape Symposium announced the event will be presented online as a virtual conference on January 26-28, 2021. In addition, the Unified will host a virtual trade show throughout the three days, with an additional half day on Friday, January 29, 2021, from 8 to 11 a.m. The Unified was scheduled to occur on January 12 – 14, 2021 at the Cal Expo grounds.
The 2021 Unified Wine & Grape Symposium’s LLC Managing Committee decided to host the show as a virtual online event after consulting with risk experts at Arup, an international design and engineering firm. The Managing Committee believes hosting the Unified as a virtual event is the responsible decision under difficult circumstances. Industry members will be able to access vital business, research and marketing information, while avoiding the many challenges associated with the current COVID-19 pandemic.
“First and foremost, the Unified Symposium is about serving the interests of the people who make the wine industry so special. The decision to host the event online comes at a great cost, but the welfare of our attendees, exhibitors and the people of California is our greatest priority,” said John Aguirre, CAWG president. Aguirre added, “We will deliver an excellent event online and provide the quality of service our attendees and stakeholders expect.”
For 26 years, the Unified Symposium has been the industry’s leading trade show, drawing tens of thousands of guests from all over America and the world to learn about the emerging trends, new products and ways to be more efficient and successful. The 2021 virtual format will allow the same experts to exchange information, while being responsive to the new realities of a world facing a pandemic.
“There has been strong interest in continuing the Unified tradition of starting the new year by accessing this vital information,” says ASEV Executive Director Dan Howard. “We’ve already met with our Program Committee and are confident that we can deliver the same invaluable content in a convenient and safe virtual format. Because of similar interest in the trade show, we’ve included that as well in our virtual format for 2021. It will be different, but in these uncertain times, we have to be flexible and innovative.”
Built with the joint input of growers, vintners and allied industry members, the Unified Symposium serves as a clearinghouse of information important to wine and grape industry professionals. The Unified Symposium also hosts the industry’s largest trade show of its kind, with over 700 vendors displaying their products and services. The Unified Wine & Grape Symposium’s LLC Managing Committee is comprised of representatives from the American Society for Enology and Viticulture (ASEV) and the California Association of Winegrape Growers (CAWG). For additional information, go to www.unifiedsymposium.org.
California’s congressional delegation wants winegrape growers to receive financial relief through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP).
Beginning May 26, CFAP intended to provide up to $16 billion in direct payments to agricultural producers who suffered losses due to COVID-19 related market and supply chain disruptions. Winegrapes were not among the 43 commodities listed under CFAP specialty crops.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has broadly undermined market prices for California winegrapes and we believe the U.S. Department of Agriculture should include winegrapes on the list of specialty crops eligible for direct payments in the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program,” stated a July 6 letter to USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue, signed by 25 representatives and two senators.
The delegation’s letter follows a May 19 letter from CAWG and the California Farm Bureau Federation to Perdue, which also urged USDA to allow winegrape growers access to COVID-19 assistance. The letter cited several factors contributing to growers’ current and future economic losses.
“The letter from the California congressional delegation is a tremendous boost to our efforts to seek vital financial assistance for winegrape growers,” CAWG President John Aguirre said. “We applaud and appreciate the leadership of Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Napa) in crafting the letter and garnering support from his colleagues.”
The Pierce’s Disease & Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter (PD/GWSS) Referendum, conducted this spring, passed with 78 percentapproval of California winegrape growers. All winegrape producer entities that paid the assessment on grapes crushed in 2019 received ballots and 49 percent cast ballots. Assessment funds are used for research, outreach, and related activities on PD, GWSS, and other designated pests and diseases of winegrapes.
“It is heartening to know that California’s winegrape growers continue to see value in the joint effort that we’ve built together with the assessment,” said CDFA Secretary Karen Ross. “Our growers know and understand the importance of research, and – just as importantly – they recognize the value of their ongoing investment in this exemplary partnership between industry and government.”
The Board advises the CDFA on the use of winegrape assessment funds and has invested over $47 million since 2001 on research and outreach. The Board sets the annual assessment rate, with a maximum of $3.00 per $1,000 of value, at its summer meeting. The annual assessment rate has averaged $1.39 per $1,000 of value and was $1.00 for the 2019 harvest.
“In these trying times, we appreciate the support of the industry in passing this referendum,” said Domonic Rossini, PD/GWSS Board chair. “The PD/GWSS Board is always focused on growers’ best interests and ensuring our industry has the best research at its back to protect California vineyards from pests and diseases.”
The PD/GWSS Referendum is conducted every five years by law, and will take place again in 2025. Through the renewal of the assessment, growers’ continued commitment to the industry and government partnership led by the statewide Pierce’s Disease Control Program leverages funding for essential activities, including:
Research
Maintaining and monitoring GWSS traps
Conducting nursery stock shipment inspections
Overseeing nursery stock treatments
Controlling GWSS using area-wide management programs
Operating a biological control program to suppress GWSS populations
A new study, published in the scientific journal Neurology found that a higher intake of plant compounds known as flavonols, is associated with a 48% decreased risk of developing Alzheimer dementia.
Flavonols are a type of bioactive compound found in grapes, as well as other fruits and vegetables. Flavonols are known for promoting beneficial antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities. Grapes of all colors – red, green, and black – are a natural source of flavonols, including kaempferol, myricetin, quercetin, and isorhamnetin. In this study, the benefit observed was most strongly associated with kaempferol, myricetin and isorhamnetin; quercetin was not associated with Alzheimer dementia, although it has been linked to numerous other health benefits.
Other research has linked the consumption of grapes to brain health: in a clinical study conducted at UCLA, researchers found that eating grapes helped protect against metabolic decline in Alzheimer-related areas of the brain.
“The new findings linking higher intake of flavonols to a reduced risk of Alzheimer dementia is very exciting and supports the previous positive findings of the beneficial impact grape consumption can have on brain health,” said Kathleen Nave, president of the California Table Grape Commission. “Importantly,” Nave said, “research indicates that just 2 1/4 cups of grapes a day is all it takes to make a positive difference. With more clinical research in this critically important area of human health underway we look forward to having more positive news to share.”
