Apple pests: pest and disease prevention.
Summary
Existing law provides that there is in state government the California Apple Commission, comprised of apple handlers and producers, which may recommend to the Secretary of Food and Agriculture maturity standards, enforce laws related to apple production, and promote the sale of apples. This bill, the California Apple Pest and Disease Prevention Act of 2009 (the act) , would provide that no person may handle apples in this state to which certain adopted regulations apply, except as specified. The bill would also provide that it is a crime to handle apples or to fail to meet specified reporting duties or pay required assessments in violation of these provisions. Because this bill would create new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the secretary to appoint a committee of 11 individuals from nominations received from the California Apple Commission to administer these provisions. The bill would provide that the duties of the committee, with concurrence by the secretary, include making recommendations to the secretary of designated pests and diseases not already present or identified in California as of January 1, 2007, and of the adoption of regulations establishing terms and conditions for handling apples to prevent the introduction and spread of designated pests or diseases. The bill would also require the secretary to establish a panel to advise the committee and the secretary by providing information regarding the biology and known control methods for the pests and diseases under consideration by the committee. This bill would provide that the Department of Food and Agriculture may investigate complaints referred by the commission and levy civil penalties against persons who violate the act not exceeding $5,000, as specified. The bill would require the secretary to use all funds received under the act for purposes of the act. The bill would make other conforming changes. Existing law authorizes the commission to establish an annual assessment rate to defray the operating costs of the commission. This bill would instead require the commission to be responsible for all costs associated with the act and require the commission to establish an annual assessment rate to defray the costs of the act if the commission's current assessment is deemed not sufficient to cover the costs of the commission or the department associated with the act. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2009
Committee Review
Aug 2009
Assembly Passage
Jun 2009
Senate Passage
Aug 2009
Vetoed
Oct 2009
Introduced Feb 24, 2009
Vetoed Oct 26, 2009
Floor votes · Senate Aug 31, 2009 · Assembly Jun 1, 2009
How they voted
31–1
Passed · 8 other
Total votes 40
Aug 31, 2009
D
Democratic25
80% Yea
R
Republican15
73% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
30
Key actions
9
Committee
9
Amendments
6
Jan 14, 2010
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
lower
Oct 26, 2009
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
lower
Oct 11, 2009
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 2, 2009
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. (Ayes 75. Noes 2. Page 2901.)
lower
Sep 1, 2009
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 3 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 31, 2009
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-1-8)
senate
Aug 18, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (August 17).
upper
Aug 17, 2009
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jul 23, 2009
Upper · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Jul 7, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 3. Noes 0.) (July 7).
upper
Jun 17, 2009
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on F. & A.
upper
Jun 11, 2009
Committee
Referred to Com. on F. & A.
upper
Jun 1, 2009
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (73-0-1)
assembly
May 29, 2009
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).
lower
May 6, 2009
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 21, 2009
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 20, 2009
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 16, 2009
Introduced
From committee: Amend, do pass as amended, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 15).
lower
Mar 9, 2009
Committee
Referred to Com. on AGRI.
lower
Feb 25, 2009
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 27.
lower
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 443
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 443. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline