AB 1322: Agricultural commissions and reports.

(1)The Clare Berryhill Grape Crush Report Act of 1976 requires every processor who crushes grapes in this state, on or before January 10 of each year, to furnish to the Secretary of Food and Agriculture a report that includes specified information, including the total number of tons of grapes purchased by the processor in California during the preceding crush within each grape-pricing district and the total number of tons of each variety of grape crushed within each grape-pricing district. The act requires the secretary, on or before February 10 of each year, to publish a preliminary summary report on the preceding crush, and, on or before March 10 of each year, to publish a final summary report that contains the data furnished to it by the processors, as specified.

This bill would require those processors to furnish those reports on or before January 31, rather than January 10, of each year. The bill would require the secretary to publish the preliminary summary report on or before March 15, rather than February 10, of each year and, on or before April 30, rather than March 10, of each year to publish the final summary report.

Existing law requires certain assessments to be paid to the department annually by January 10.

This bill would require those assessments to instead be paid to the department annually by January 31, rather than January 10.

Under existing law, a violation of the Food and Agricultural Code is a misdemeanor, except as otherwise specified.

Because the above provisions of this bill would be part of that code, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law specifies the duties of the secretary and county agricultural commissioners with respect to the sale and control of nursery stock, as defined. Existing law requires a person to hold a valid license in order to sell nursery stock.

Existing law establishes the California Grape Rootstock Improvement Commission to maintain and regulate grape rootstock in the state.

This bill would authorize the secretary, after investigation and hearing, to refuse to issue or renew a license, or to suspend or revoke a license, if the secretary determines that the licensee or the applicant has violated specified provisions relating to the California Grape Rootstock Improvement Commission.

(3)Existing law establishes the California Avocado Commission to efficiently develop and manage the marketing of avocados and provides requirements for membership to the commission, including for alternate members, as specified.

The bill would, among other things, expand specified provisions regarding membership to the commission to alternate members, require the assessment established by the commission to be as a fixed rate or percentage of value rather than as solely a fixed rate, and require any remaining assessment funds to be distributed for the benefit of the avocado industry into any state or federal programs in the event of termination or suspension of the commission.

(4)Existing law establishes the California Apple Commission to efficiently develop and manage the marketing of apples, as specified. Existing law authorizes the commission to recommend to the secretary the adoption of maturity standards authorized pursuant to the California Marketing Act of 1937, as specified.

This bill would authorize the California Apple Commission to recommend to the secretary quality standards and product labeling standards, and to engage in any other activity, authorized by California Marketing Act of 1937.

(5)Existing law establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California to efficiently develop and manage the marketing of olive oil, as specified. Existing law defines the terms handler and producer for purposes of these provisions.

This bill would specify that handler and producer include persons that toll process olives for olive oil. The bill would define toll processor for purposes of these provisions, as specified.

(6)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.