WG Board Votes Unanimously to Oppose Arizona Prop 206

October 4th, 2016

Yesterday, Western Growers released a statement announcing the unanimous decision of the Board of Directors to oppose Arizona Proposition 206, a statewide-initiative that would gradually increase Arizona’s minimum wage to $12 by 2020 while also creating a right to paid sick time.

Read the full Western Growers’ Statement

For more information, contact Cory Lunde (949) 885-2264.  

Continued Pesticide Maximum Residue Level (MRL) Violations Jeopardize Export Sales

October 6th, 2016

Japan has notified the United States’ government that a recent export shipment of celery to Japan was found to exceed Japan’s MRL tolerance resulting in a cited violation. Since this is the second time such a violation has been detected on celery within the last few months, Japan has now instituted an intensified inspection program.

This means that regardless of the individual shipper or grower, all U.S. shipments of celery will be exposed to pronounced examination and testing for pesticide residue levels. This stringent inspection procedure will remain in place for all celery shipments for a period of one year until 300 U.S. shipments of celery have been cleared through Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare without a violation.  If less than 300 shipments occur during the one year period, then the increased inspection procedure will remain in force for a period of two years.

Western Growers cannot overemphasize that both exporters and growers must adhere to a strict regimen that includes reviewing spray records on any selected export crop to ensure it will not exceed Japan’s MRL. It is imperative for both exporter and grower to exchange information, identifying all compounds applied on the specific designated export lot, and compare the U.S. MRLs to the MRLs established in Japan. Members can review the Global MRL Database by accessing WGs’ International Trade Assistance Page.

Western Growers has identified the steps members need to follow in preparing a shipment for export. Members need to apply these steps regardless of the foreign market destination.

As an individual exporter, you cannot leave to chance that your shipment will arrive within the limits of the importing country’s MRL simply because it meets the U.S. MRL. An MRL violation does not only impact your company, as indicated in this notification, it can jeopardize the entire industry.

If you have any questions, need additional information or assistance, please contact Ken Gilliland at (949) 885-2267. 

Sign up for Imperial Town Hall on AB 1513 Safe Harbor Compliance October 18

October 11th, 2016

If you live in or near California’s Imperial Valley, you will want to join Western Growers for an AB 1513 Safe Harbor Town Hall being held on Tuesday, October 18, 2016, at 9:00 A.M. at the Farm Credit Ag Center, 485 Business Pkwy, Imperial, 92251. Over the last two weeks, hundreds of representatives from member companies have participated in our AB 1513 town halls and benefitted from the experience.

AB 1513 is the law that defines new wage and hour requirements for piece-rate workers. This event is designed to provide important insights from legal experts and fellow employers to help your company reduce its liability risk and overcome the technical compliance challenges of AB 1513’s safe harbor provisions.

Town hall topics include:

  • Timing of issuing back payments
  • Required backup documentation
  • Working with farm labor contractors to perfect safe harbor compliance
  • Required due diligence for locating eligible workers
  • Utilizing multiple methods of calculating back payments
  • Submitting back payments to the labor commissioner’s Unpaid Wage Fund
  • Dealing with stale checks

REGISTER FOR THE IMPERIAL VALLEY TOWN HALL

Complimentary juice, coffee, and fruit will be offered during break services at the event.

For more information about town hall events, contact Bryan Nickerson at (949) 885-2392. For questions about AB 1513, contact Jason Resnick at (949) 885-2253.

 

DOL Final Rule on White Collar Exemptions to Take Effect December 1

October 13th, 2016

As previously reported in Spotlight, the U.S. Department of Labor’s new FLSA white-collar exemption regulations are scheduled to take effect December 1, 2016. Despite partisan efforts to pass legislation in Congress to repeal or delay the regulations and two separate federal lawsuits seeking to block the regulations, it appears there is no stopping the Final Rule.

The House of Representatives did pass H.R. 6094 in an attempt to delay the effective date to June 1, 2017, but a companion bill is stalled in the Senate. Even if a bill were to get to his desk, President Obama has promised to veto it. There is little chance that Congress could successfully override the veto. Consequently, employers on Non-Ag salary exempt employees should begin preparing now for the December 1 effective date.

For more information, contact Jason Resnick at (949) 885-2253. 

MRL Violations Places Celery on Hold and Test List

October 18th, 2016

Japan issued an advisory requiring all celery shipments to be subjected to mandatory hold and test procedures due to a third maximum residue level (MRL) violation (Bifenthrin) reported on celery. 

All future shipments — including those in transit — will be tested by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare before being released to the importer.

Western Growers cannot emphasize strongly enough that both exporters and growers must adhere to a strict regimen that includes reviewing spray records on any selected export crop to ensure it will not exceed Japan’s MRL. Members can review the Global MRL Database by accessing WGs’ International Trade Assistance Page.

Western Growers has identified the steps members need to follow in preparing a shipment for export. Members need to apply these steps regardless of the foreign market destination.

Celery is a top 10 produce export for the U.S. both to Japan and worldwide. For calendar year 2015, the export value of celery was nearly $5 million, and for the period January through August this year, the export value was at nearly $3 million.  

For more information, contact Ken Gilliland at (949) 885-2267.

Portions of Placer County Quarantined after Psyllid Detection

October 18th, 2016

The California Department of Food and Agriculture has placed 118 square miles in Placer County under an Asian Citrus psyllid quarantine. The move comes following the detection of multiple life stages on citrus trees within the City of Lincoln. 

The quarantine prohibits the movement of citrus and curry leaf tree nursery stock, including all plant parts except fruit, out of the quarantine area and requires that all citrus fruit be cleaned of leaves and stems prior to moving out of the quarantine area. 

View CDFA’s Full Release

AB 1513 Safe Harbor Town Hall Video Now Available for WG Members

October 25th, 2016

Western Growers recently conducted a series of AB 1513 Safe Harbor Town Halls throughout California. Now Western Growers’ members can access a recording from one of those events on our website (WG members must be logged in to the website to access the video). 

AB 1513 is the law that defines new wage and hour requirements for piece-rate workers. The popular Town Hall series provided important insights from legal experts and fellow employers to help members reduce their liability risk and overcome the technical compliance challenges of AB 1513’s safe harbor provisions.

If you have any questions regarding AB 1513, contact Jason Resnick at (949) 885-2253.  If you have technical questions, please contact Ryan Zilker at (949) 885-2249. 

91st Annual Meeting – Please Support Our Sponsors

October 25th, 2016

Sponsors are an invaluable part of our Annual Meeting. Without them, this yearly fun and educational experience couldn’t take place. Their dedication and commitment to this event — many of whom participate year after year — earns them deserved exposure in front of the membership. We ask our members to support them in their own business dealings whenever they can.

Some new sponsors have been added since the last time we plugged them, so here is an updated list of each of our four sponsor levels. As always, please use their products and services whenever you can to thank them for their efforts.

For more information, contact Randy Hause at (949) 885-2265.  

 

Platinum

Anthem Blue Cross

Bank of America

Bayer Crop Science

C.H. Robinson

Crop Production Service

Dow AgroSciences

Farm Credit

Monsanto

Pinnacle Claims Management Inc

Rabobank

Syngenta

Wells Fargo Bank

Western Growers Insurance Services

 

Gold

John Deere Company

Prudential Agriculture Investments

Rynn & Janowsky

Western Growers Financial Services

 

Silver

International Paper

RDO Equipment & Water

Trical Inc

 

Bronze

AMVAC Chemical Corporation

ArmsRx

Bank of the West

Booth Machinery

Braga Fresh Family Farms

CASE IH

Change Healthcare

CropX

Dupont Crop Protection

Emerald Packaging Inc

First Health Network

Gowan Company

Green Rubber Kennedy Ag

Healthstat

IFCO Systems US LLC

iFoodDecisionSciences

ImageNet, LLC

JLT Specialty USA

Konica Minolta

Marrone Bio Innovations

Nelson Irrigation Corp

Netafim USA

North American Pipe

Ocean Mist Farms

Ramsay Highlander Inc

Raub Brock Capital Management

REC Solar

Sambrailo Packaging

Valent USA Corporation

Western Power Products

Western Precooling Systems

WestRock

Wilbur-Ellis

Willowood USA LLC

 

SUPPLIERS

Agrian, Inc.

Barkley Ag Enterprises

Belli Architectural Group

Blue Book Services

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck (WGCF)

Bunzl USA

Buttonwillow Warehouse Company

Calpine Containers Inc

Capitol Advocacy

Cenergy Power

Central Valley Seeds Inc

Commercial Truck Company

English Air Service Inc

Famous Software LLC

Fruit Growers Supply

Greenheart Farms Inc

Grimmway Enterprises Inc

The Growers Company Inc

Headstart Nursery

Holaday Seed Company Inc

HUB International Insurance Services

Hyde and Hyde

JS Ag Packaging

King City Nursery

L&G LLP – Attorneys At Law

LaRiviere, Grubman PC

Law Office of Marion Quesenbery

Law Offices of Shawn E. Caine, APC

Marsh Risk & Insurance Services

Mixtec Group

O M Contracting Inc

Progeny Advanced Genetics

Progressive Packaging Group

R & B Helicopters

Sakata Seed America

Santa Maria Seeds Inc

Santa Maria Valley Crop Service

Sensitech Inc

Skyview Cooling Company

Southern Valley Chemical Co

Sturdy Oil Company

Styrotek Inc

SWIIM System, Ltd

Terkelson Smith & Tyree

Tuttle, Taylor & Heron

U.S. Irrigation

Vegetable Growers Supply

Weather Tec

Western Growers Mexico Providers

Western Growers Opposes Proposition 206

October 4th, 2016

IRVINE, Calif. (October 4, 2016) – The Western Growers Board of Directors has unanimously voted to oppose Proposition 206, the minimum wage and paid time off initiative on the 2016 Arizona ballot.

Tom Nassif, President and CEO of Western Growers, issued the following statement: “Proposition 206 will hurt Arizona’s farmers and the rural economies dependent on these family businesses. Labor is the single largest line item in a farmer’s budget; simple economics dictates that increasing such costs by nearly 50 percent will cause people to lose their jobs. The truth is, many family farmers, still recovering from the recession, will not be able to absorb the added financial and regulatory burdens of Proposition 206 and will be forced to eliminate countless jobs they currently provide to farmworkers. Furthermore, the cost of living disparity between rural and urban Arizona makes a one-size-fits-all minimum wage law fundamentally unfair to farming businesses in rural communities.”

PRESS RELEASE: Western Growers Hires Ken Cooper as Director of Risk Strategy

October 12th, 2016

IRVINE, Calif. (October 12, 2016) – Ken Cooper has joined Western Growers as the new Director of Risk Strategy, where he will head the expansion and implementation of comprehensive risk management strategies. As the lead for the Western Growers Risk Resources Team, Cooper will spearhead the development of innovative on-site and virtual solutions that are customized to meet the loss control and safety needs of Western Growers’ members.

“Ken’s extensive experience in risk mitigation coupled with his exceptional talent for customer service makes him the perfect addition to our team,” said Jeff Gullickson, Senior Vice President of Western Growers Insurance Services. “His expertise and insightful input will be invaluable as we bolster our insurance offerings and bring Western Growers’ insurance brokerage to the next level.”

Cooper most recently served as the Regional Vice President of Claims Consulting at a large national broker, where he specialized in risk management, loss mitigation and strategic planning. Previously, he worked at ESIS and the State Compensation Insurance Fund, providing leadership in negotiations, settlements and claim closures.

“Living in a world that significantly relies on agribusiness, I am reminded daily of the importance of agriculture to our communities and our daily lives,” said Cooper. “I am extremely excited to join the team at Western Growers to help bring the both existing and developing insurance products and expertise to our members and clients.”

Cooper holds a Master of Business Administration from California State University, Northridge and a Bachelor of Science degree in business administration/business economics from California Lutheran University.   

High-resolution image of Ken Cooper is available here.

About Western Growers:
Founded in 1926, Western Growers represents local and regional family farmers growing fresh produce in Arizona, California and Colorado. Our members and their workers provide half the nation’s fresh fruits, vegetables and tree nuts, including nearly half of America’s fresh organic produce. For generations we have provided variety and healthy choices to consumers. Connect with and learn more about Western Growers on our Twitter and Facebook

###

PRESS RELEASE: Six Startups Set to Compete in Western Growers AgTech Innovation Arena

October 19th, 2016

IRVINE, Calif. (October 19, 2016) – Western Growers (WG) has chosen the final six start-up companies who will be competing for invaluable resources to support their growing businesses and advance the development of their innovative technologies that will be crucial to the sustainability of agriculture.

Nearly 50 startup companies applied to compete in this year’s Innovation Arena, more than doubling last year’s total of 20 applicants. After being carefully reviewed by WG’s Food Safety/Science & Technology Subcommittee, six were selected and will now advance to compete at the 91st WG Annual Meeting on November 8, 2016, in Hawaii.  

“This is only the second year that Western Growers has hosted the Innovation Arena competition, and the significant increase in the level of interest from startups to participate just demonstrates the type of positive impact we are having in the development of agtech,” said Hank Giclas, WG’s Senior Vice President of Strategic Planning, Science & Technology. “Through events like the Innovation Arena and our Center for Innovation & Technology, we look forward to further connecting these innovative companies with the resources they need to help solve the industry’s most pressing challenges.”

Each company will pitch their ideas and technologies to the audience and a panel of agricultural industry leaders. Two winners will be chosen to receive a complimentary one-year membership with Western Growers and an opportunity to work with the WG Center for Innovation & Technology in Salinas, Calif. Benefits include prominent networking opportunities with leading fresh produce companies; ample exposure to agricultural-related organizations throughout California, Arizona and Colorado; training and mentorship from industry professionals, including legal, HR, insurance, financial and communications experts; and more.

The six start-up companies selected to compete are as follows:

Agralogics: Agralogics’ Enhanced Irrigation Management technology uses directly observed evapotranspiration to generate real-time irrigation work orders, analyze information from multiple sources on dashboards and enable comparative analytics to improve irrigation efficiency. The technology can observe evapotranspiration anywhere on the planet, on a field-by-field basis and without the need for any sensors.

California Safe Soil: California Safe Soil recycles food from supermarkets that can no longer be sold or donated, converting it into Harvest-to-Harvest fertilizer (H2H), for use in commercial and organic fertilizer and feed and retail lawn and garden markets. New technology—using heat, mechanical action and enzymes— converts a heterogenous food feedstock into a homogenous, high-nutrient liquid fertilizer that stimulates the growth of soil organisms, increasing soil organic matter.

CropX: CropX provides an integrated hardware and software solution for soil moisture monitoring. CropX integrates proven reliable soil moisture measuring hardware with a robust cellular communication system and state of the art mobile applications to create a soil moisture measurement system that is simple, affordable and actionable. CropX offers volumetric soil water sensors that seamlessly connect to the internet, are easy to relocate from field to field and which transmit data to the cloud and onto any connected device providing near real time measurement of soil conditions.

DeepLook: DeepLook builds weeding robots that can go through the field autonomously, distinguish weed from the crop and mechanically remove weeds. DeepLook uses no chemicals and almost zero labor time, thus giving back both time and money to farmers. Vegetable farms who used to rely on manual weeding now have an organic, affordable and scalable alternative. One of the robots can weed up to 4 acres a day and cost only around $50k, which makes it a very competitive alternative for current weeding processes in U.S. vegetable farms.

Harvest CROO Robotics: Harvest CROO Robotics is developing a fully autonomous robotic harvester for fresh strawberries. Strawberry growers will benefit from having a reliable cost effective way to harvest their crops. An automated strawberry harvester would also benefit growers of other crops that are suffering from this shortage by freeing up available labor. The business model is to lease machines to growers on a per box basis to emulate how they do business now, which is to pay humans a piece-rate. 

Trace Genomics: Trace Genomics has launched a genetic test for soil microbes to give growers an unprecedented look into the biology of their soil. Trace Genomics makes it easy for any grower to send in a soil sample and, within just a few weeks, receive an actionable report on both beneficial and harmful microbes that are found in the sample. The information provided by the Trace Genomics test provides the foundational knowledge that enables growers to evaluate their soils for disease pressures, microbial diversity indices that are associated with soil health and resilience, and efficacy of various cultural practices and soil amendment products. 

For full details about the competition, visit the WG’s Innovation Arena website.

About Western Growers:
Founded in 1926, Western Growers represents local and regional family farmers growing fresh produce in Arizona, California and Colorado. Our members and their workers provide half the nation’s fresh fruits, vegetables and tree nuts, including half of America’s fresh organic produce. For generations we have provided variety and healthy choices to consumers. Connect with and learn more about Western Growers on our Twitter and Facebook

###

 

PRESS RELEASE: Western Growers Hires Seasoned Sales Executive to Help Lead Insurance Growth

October 27th, 2016

Matt Luis joins company to further expand insurance solutions in Central Valley

IRVINE, Calif. (October 27, 2016) – Western Growers Insurance Services, Inc., the wholly-owned insurance brokerage of Western Growers, has hired Matt Luis who will be responsible for expanding property/casualty (P&C) insurance services to current and future members in California’s Central Valley region.

“We are thrilled to bring a person of Matt’s caliber and success into Western Growers,” said Jeff Gullickson, Senior Vice President of Western Growers Insurance Services (WGIS). “With Matt’s extensive leadership and sales experience, he will be key in planning and implementing new and innovative sales activities for the company.”

Most recently, Luis worked with Federated Insurance Company as a P&C broker in the Central Valley. Luis worked directly with business owners and their teams to provide a full-service P&C program to protect their companies and help minimize their exposure to loss. Luis’ expertise will be leveraged to develop and execute strategic insurance initiatives for agribusinesses and food clients.

“Growing up in the Central Valley—the agriculture capital of the world—I’ve always had a passion for ag and a desire to work in the industry,” said Luis. “With Western Growers’ rich and deeply rooted history, fantastic mission and outstanding reputation, I am proud to be part of the family. I am truly excited about the opportunity to serve our nation’s leading growers, packers and shippers, and I look forward to being a part of the growth that WGIS has committed to.”

Luis holds a bachelor’s degree from Fresno State University and currently lives in Fresno with his wife and one-year old son.

High-resolution image of Matt Luis is available here.

About Western Growers Insurance Services:
Western Growers Insurance Services, Inc. is the wholly-owned insurance brokerage of Western Growers and offers full-service risk management solutions to agricultural and related industry members in California, Arizona and Colorado. Since first offering health insurance and employee benefits back in 1986, WGIS has expanded to include property and casualty insurance, safety and loss control services and health care reform consulting. Connect with and learn more about Western Growers and WGIS on Twitter and Facebook

###

Water Board Declares Water War on Merced and Stanislaus Counties

October 4th, 2016

On September 15, 2016, the California State Water Resources Control Board staff released a draft proposal to update the Bay-Delta Plan’s water quality requirements for salinity in the southern Delta and water flows in major tributaries to the San Joaquin River (the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers) which drain into the southern Delta.  The draft proposes increasing flows for fish and wildlife; the proposed flow objective is designed to protect at-risk native fish species by leaving more water in the rivers during the February through June time period.  The staff proposal recommends a range of between 30 and 50 percent of unimpaired flow, with a starting point of 40 percent.  As a point of reference, the median percentage of unimpaired flow in the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced Rivers is 40, 21 and 26 percent, respectively.  If implemented, the expected result is the loss of 350,000 acre-feet of water.

 

Assemblymember Adam C. Gray (D-Merced) issued the following statement regarding the revised Substitute Environmental Document for the Bay-Delta Plan update.

“The new recommendation by the State Water Board to require 40% unimpaired flows on the Tuolumne, Merced, and Stanislaus rivers amounts to an economic death sentence.

Since the update to the Bay-Delta Plan began, the State Water Board has spent millions of dollars on staff and consultants rewriting the report.  After all this time and expense, and during one of the worst droughts in California’s history, it appears that the Water Board’s only significant change was to demand even more water.

It is a report which does not reflect the realities of the world we live in and could only be written by a government agency operating behind closed doors which has turned a deaf ear to the communities which will ultimately pay the highest price.  This callous disregard is unprecedented in California history.  To this day, the State Water Board has not responded to the concerns raised by our local schools, businesses, and local governments.

In their report, the State Water Board expresses hope for settlement discussions.  I have encouraged such discussions between the state and local stakeholders.  But it takes both parties, acting in good faith, to conduct them.  Instead, we have a situation where the State Water Board demands that the most economically challenged part of the state decimate its economy to restore salmon, while the California Fish and Game Commission refuses to reduce invasive predators like bass that are responsible for so much of the reduction in salmon populations in the first place.

For settlement discussions to be successful, Chairwoman Felicia Marcus needs to direct her staff and consultants to meet with local interests and discuss in detail their assumptions, data, and conclusions.  There must be an acknowledgment of the significant adverse impacts removing so much water from our area will have on our economy, and there must be a willingness on behalf of the state to mitigate that impact.  Nowhere else in California would a change of such magnitude and consequence be considered without extensive mitigation as part of the discussion.

Despite needing four years to rewrite this report themselves, the Water Board is giving us just over 60 days to respond by concluding the comment period on November 15th.  It is highly unlikely that the local community can conduct an in-depth review of the report and its predecessor, reconcile the assumptions and data, and draft a thoughtful and thorough response if the lack communication and cooperation from the Water Board continues.

If the preference for a settlement is truly genuine, Chairwoman Marcus should address these problems.”

 

Judicial Restraint and Activism, and the Importance of Judicial Nominations

October 4th, 2016

In February of this year, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away suddenly.  In the months since, I have often paused to think about the way the judiciary has changed in my lifetime, especially in my years as a lawyer.  Legal scholars point to the Warren Court of the 1950s and ‘60s as the turning point when the justices moved away from the strict confines of the text of the Constitution and strong deference to prior court decisions, and moved into an era of activism.

Scalia was not one to let this pass silently by.

He will be studied by law students and constitutional scholars for decades to come as perhaps the most articulate and persuasive voice of the “strict constructionists,” justices who believed that their solemn duty is to interpret the law rather than make it.  Some of Scalia’s most powerful opinions excoriated his colleagues for adhering to the concept of a “living constitution” to allow unelected members of the judicial branch to create new law under the guise of constitutional interpretation, and outside the democratic processes that hold the other two branches of government accountable to the people.

There are many passages from Scalia’s opinions, especially his dissents, which capture what might be considered urgent warnings to the American people.  From Morrison v. Olson (1988), a case questioning the validity of a statute granting authority to appoint an agent of the executive branch to a special court, here is Scalia in dissent:

“Once we depart from the text of the Constitution, just where short of that do we stop? The most amazing feature of the Court’s opinion is that it does not even purport to give an answer…Evidently, the governing standard is to be what might be called the unfettered wisdom of a majority of this Court, revealed to an obedient people on a case-by-case basis.  This is not only not the government of laws that the Constitution established; it is not a government of laws at all.”

In Roper v. Simmons (2005), Scalia chastised the majority for basing their decision not on the original meaning of the Eighth Amendment, but on the “evolving standards of decency of our national society.” He concluded his dissent: “I do not believe that the meaning of our Eighth Amendment, any more than the meaning of other provisions of our Constitution, should be determined by the subjective views of five Members of this Court…”

As you might have guessed by now, I count myself among those who favor judicial restraint and adherence to the original text of the Constitution.  For if that document is a “living document,” it is no longer tethered to the principles and guardrails so carefully constructed by our founders.  Respect for our nation’s charter would fall to a lower level of seriousness, subject to the whims of popular culture and rapidly changing politics.

Our next president will shape the ideological direction of our federal court system for a generation.  Since 1971, the average age of retirement for Supreme Court justices has been 79.  Right now, two judicial activists—Ginsburg and Breyer—and the lone centrist, Kennedy, are 78 or older.  Assuming these three justices retire during the next presidential term, and with the vacancy created by Scalia’s death, the remaining court would be divided between three “constructionists” (Roberts, Alito, Thomas) and two activists (Kagan, Sotomayor).

What if we were to add to these ranks four nominees of the same activist philosophy? While the Republican Senate has successfully blocked President Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, I doubt the political climate would permit such resistance during a Hillary Clinton administration, even if the Republicans were able to hold on to the Senate.  Imagine the decisions a six-to-three majority activist Court would render.

However, for all of the attention given to Supreme Court nominees, the highest court in the land accepts relatively few cases each term.  Hundreds of thousands of cases each year are handled at the lower levels of the federal judiciary—the U.S. District Court and U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.  The nominees to these lower courts, collectively, have arguably greater impact on the American Constitution and rule of law.

Consider this fact: When Obama took office, only three of 13 appellate courts had more Democrat-appointed judges than Republican-appointed judges.  Now, nine do.  During a single term, Hillary Clinton might be able to go for a clean sweep.  Remember, these lower federal court appointments are for life, too.

Despite its circus sideshow atmosphere, the importance of this presidential election cannot be overstated.  The ideological makeup of the federal courts for the next 30 years hangs in the balance.

Alexander Hamilton once said, “The judiciary has neither force nor will but merely judgment.” More than 200 years later, the federal courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court in particular, have assumed a power to bypass the elected branches of government, to will their extra-constitutional dictates upon the people.

Personally, this weighs heavily in my thinking about the presidential election.  There are so many serious and even troubling aspects to the two major party nominees, but in my final analysis, this election comes down to curbing judicial activism and preserving the integrity of our Constitution.

ELECTION 2016: Arizona & California Should Follow Familiar Patterns

October 4th, 2016

It’s not an exaggeration to say that all eyes are on the presidential election this year.  Every day brings a different story, different revelation and more news that seemingly drives up the unprecedented unfavorable ratings of both candidates.

Much has been written about that election and seemingly there is nothing more to add.  But that’s not the case with regard to California and Arizona politics.  There are issues on the ballot and important races to cover that have received scant treatment even within their own respective states.  It appears that the national presidential election has sucked all of the air out of the room.  Fewer than 60 days out at this writing, and the political scene within the states is still relatively quiet.

 

Arizona

For agriculture and the business community, the biggest, most impactful race is Proposition 206, which, if passed, will raise the minimum wage almost 50 percent by 2020.  The proposition was declared valid by the courts in August, but a month later there was very little campaigning going on.  “Right now there appears to be no concerted effort opposing it,” said AnnaMarie Knorr, Western Growers Arizona director of government affairs.

She said there was still time for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and other groups to mount a campaign, but without one, she expects the proposition will pass.  Arizona’s minimum wage is currently $8.05 per hour.  Under the proposition that figure would rise to $10 in 2017 and to $12 in 2020.  With worker advocates and union organizers pushing for minimum wage of $15 all over the country, local observers are estimating that a fight against $12 would be hard to win.

Knorr said the same thing, but also noted that there are other provisions in the proposition that the business community will find even more onerous and potentially more expensive.  In fact, the proposition is called The Minimum Wage and Paid Time Off Initiative.  The proposition mandates paid sick leave.  Currently, there is no Arizona law that requires private employers to provide employees with sick leave, paid or unpaid.  Proposition 206 guarantees 40 hours of annual paid sick time to employees of large businesses and 24 hours to those of small businesses.  Employees would be entitled to accrue one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked.

Competing for attention currently is Proposition 205, the Arizona Marijuana Legalization Initiative, which would legalize the recreational use of the drug.  Arizona Governor Doug Ducey is speaking out against this initiative and it appears to be where he expending his influence on the voters.

Though there is national talk that Arizona is a swing state this year and the longtime Republican stronghold could move into the Democrat column, Knorr said the numbers don’t bear that out.  In the past few years, citizens registering as “Independents” topped those in either the Republican or Democrat category.  However, this year, a strong surge in Republican registrations moved the needle back to that designation as the most popular.  “I don’t see how Republicans will lose the presidential election with that advantage,” said Knorr.

However, she did add that the demographics of the state are changing with citizens of Hispanic descent being the fastest growing population sector.  While Republicans have historically done fairly well with the family-oriented Hispanic sector, that wasn’t true in the last election and it appears that Donald Trump will get a smaller percentage of the Hispanic vote than any of his predecessors.  That does not bode well for the future of the Republican Party in Arizona.  Knorr said it will take time for the transition to take hold, but eight years from now, Arizona could be a “Blue State” in terms of registration.

Though the state has two Republican senators, its delegation to the House of Representative is only 5-4 in favor of Republicans and that is subject to change every election as there are many competitive districts in the state.  While the Arizona House of Representatives is firmly in the Republican corner 36-24, the Arizona State Senate could end up 15-15 after this year’s election.  After the last election, Republicans held a 18-12 edge.  They lost one seat in a special election and could lose two more in November for a 15-15 tie.

On the national front, John McCain’s long-held Senate seat appears to be fairly safe as the election looms less than 60 days away.  He fought off a primary battle from the right flank, and his centrist lean seems to play well in a general election, even with Arizona’s changing electorate.  Last month, Western Growers Board of Directors endorsed the senator.

 

California

No one is expecting any major shifts in California’s political landscape, but even a few minor ones can greatly influence legislation for the next two years.  The Democrats have had an extremely tight rein on both Houses for the past two decades.  Interestingly, it was the fallout from an anti-immigrant statewide proposition in 1994, Prop. 187, that has resulted in huge losses for the California Republican Party ever since.  Both the State Senate and Assembly are on the cusp of veto-proof two-third, super majorities.  The Democrats need a two-seat gain in the 80-member Assembly to achieve that status, while they can attain it in the Senate with a net gain of only one member.  “On the other hand the Republicans have no strong opportunities to have a net gain,” said Dave Puglia, executive vice president for Western Growers.  “This year they have to play defense.”

However, Puglia said every election year is different and Republicans should not despair about the future.  He noted that two recently-passed propositions—independent redistricting and the top two primary system—have led to many more districts in which Republicans voters have some say.  A competitive district generally means that the opponents for the office do drift toward a more centrist position.  And the top two system often means that even in heavily Democrat districts, the candidates who appeal to more Republicans gets elected.

Western Growers, in fact, used this dynamic in the last several elections to help more moderate Democrats win primaries.  Puglia expects these types of campaigns to continue to surface.

He noted that in the November elections, it is extremely important that both houses don’t reach that super majority level.  Governor Brown, as a policy wonk, has proven that he will use the veto pen to rein in some outlier votes from the California Legislature.  If the Legislature becomes veto proof, there will be huge pressure on moderate Democrats to toe the line when a veto vote surfaces.  Already, Puglia said activists that play near the left edge have been successful in exercising some political clout and moving some moderates a little bit closer to their viewpoint.

This may all be very important as Jerry Brown completes the final two years of his 16 in the Governor’s office over the last 40 years.  “At this point in their terms almost all governors are concerned about their legacy,” Puglia said, “but what that means in regards to Jerry Brown is impossible to predict.  The only thing for sure about Jerry Brown is that if you make a prediction you will be wrong, 100 percent of the time.”

He noted that Brown has clearly adopted the climate change issue as one of his legacies.  He has moved the state further down that path than the federal government, any state in the union and the vast majority of countries.  The laws he has signed will clearly add costs to the cost of doing business within California.  History will either credit him or blame him for the aggressive stance.  He also wants the Delta tunnels and high speed rail to form part of his legacy package.  California agriculture could benefit from the former if it is done properly.  The state’s farmers are mostly against the high speed rail concept, which will appropriate land throughout the state if it truly comes to fruition.

There are 17 ballot propositions on California’s November ballot covering a host of controversial topics including legalization of marijuana, outlawing the death penalty, upping the cigarette tax and banning single-use plastic bags.  There are no initiatives specifically about agriculture.

With Sen. Dianne Feinstein retiring, California’s two person Senate delegation will change but it will still be all-women and all-Democrat.  Two Democrat women are vying to replace Sen. Feinstein, with California Attorney General Kamala Harris the odds-on favorite to win.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, little change is expected to occur with members of the California delegation.  There are currently a handful of seats in play, but Republicans are having to defend more districts so it doesn’t appear that they have an opportunity to gain any more than one seat and they could lose up to three.  That will only be big news on the national scene if it leads to a change in leadership in the House because of a Democrat sweep of the White House, Senate and House.  Though that is possible, almost all pundits believe that while the Republicans will lose some seats in the House, it won’t be nearly enough to put the Democrats in power.

Ventura County Ag Industry Flexes a Little Muscle

October 4th, 2016

On the November ballot in Ventura County, the citizenry will be able to vote on two different land use propositions because of efforts of the ag community in that county.

The issue dates back to 1998 when Ventura County voters overwhelmingly backed the SOAR Initiative.  SOAR stands for Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources, which is exactly how it was billed back then.  Rob Roy, longtime president of the Ventura County Agricultural Association, said in 1998 the initiative had lukewarm support from agriculture and no major opposition.  It put provisions in the zoning regulations that purported to save agricultural land from development.   It required major zoning changes in open space, which includes agricultural land, to go through a voter approval process.  According to press accounts, over the past 20 years that system has been used about 10 times, with the petitioner seeking the zoning change wining six of those 10 times.

SOAR is set to expire in 2018, but backers of the plan chose to request a continuation vote two years earlier to coincide with the presidential election, which tends to produce a much larger turnout than an off year election.  Roy said SOAR worked well enough that the agricultural community was willing to work with the SOAR proponents on a few changes that the industry felt was necessary considering how the cost of farming has escalated.  Specifically, the industry wanted more opportunities to build structures such as processing plants and water infrastructure on their land.  They argued that while SOAR purported to be against residential development of farming land, it ultimately added more layers of bureaucracy for any building on that land.  Agriculture also wanted the SOAR program to only cover the next 20 years.

Roy said the SOAR backers abandoned negotiations with the ag community and soon had an initiative prepared that extended SOAR to 2050 and did not take into account some of the provisions ag wanted.  “They have created a slow growth land use initiative that has nothing to do with preserving ag land,” he said.

The ag industry, Roy said, was not happy and decided to rise up and do something about it.  VCAA joined together with some other groups and successfully raised enough money to qualify their own land use initiative for the ballot.  Proposition F, Sustain VC, will appear on the ballot, as will Proposition C, the SOAR initiative.  If both pass, the one with the most votes will become law.

In a nutshell, Proposition C extends the SOAR Initiative to 2050.  Proposition F extends the voter approval for zoning changes to 2036, carves out several exemptions for agricultural uses of the land and prioritizes the long-term viability of agriculture.

The importance of the fight from a 40,000 foot level may well be agriculture’s ability to launch the fight in the first place and fund it properly.  Roy said sufficient money was raised from the ag community to put its initiative on the ballot and funding solicitation had raised more than a half a million dollars by the middle of September.  He said that was sufficient to wage a credible battle.

ORGANIC PRODUCTION WG Increases Role in Sector

October 4th, 2016

There is no denying that the organic production of fruits and vegetables has moved well past the fad stage and is a full-blown trend.  In fact, it has been for the past decade. 

Retailers have been realizing double-digit growth for quite some time, though sales started at a very low level meaning it took many years of double digit growth to get up to the blip level.  But in 2015, organic food sales in the United States topped $43 billion, with fresh produce accounting for about one-third of those sales as the dominant category in the sector.    Growers and shippers of virtually every commodity and in every growing region are involved in organic production.  It is no longer an isolated segment of the industry, as it has truly gone mainstream.

In 2015, Western Growers surveyed its members and by extrapolating the data on acreage, it appears that members of the association produce about half of the organic fresh fruits and vegetables grown and marketed in the United States.

“It’s an important segment of the industry and an important sector within our membership,” said Dennis Nuxoll, vice president of federal government affairs for Western Growers and one of several staff members focused on organic issues.

Cory Lunde, director of strategic initiatives and communications for WG, said to help guide the association along this path an ad hoc committee of members from the organic community was put together.  The group is meeting on an intermittent basis to discuss areas of concern to organic producers and how Western Growers can get involved. 

Western Growers is currently representing its members and their organic production in several areas where the association’s expertise is being put to good use. 

In early May, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Western Growers amicus status in a lawsuit challenging the National Organic Program’s (NOP) Guidance 5016: The Allowance of Green Waste in Organic Production Systems. In this lawsuit, the plaintiffs – Center for Environmental Health, Center for Food Safety, and Beyond Pesticides – were seeking to invalidate the guidance on procedural grounds.   They argued that the allowed process was not followed in creating the new guidance.  In effect, the guidance protects certified organic farmers when organic compost contains incidental residues of prohibited substances that the farmer did not cause.  Since the inception of the federal organic program, USDA has recognized compost containing de minimis levels of chemical residues is nearly unavoidable. Under the USDA’s Guidance, compost is allowed on organic farms provided its use does not contribute to contamination of soil, crops or water.  The guidance recognizes there is no analytical testing that can confirm the absence of all disallowed chemical substances, and the cost of trying to conduct such testing is prohibitive and could render organic production economically infeasible. 

In its brief Western Growers asked the court to consider the impact of plaintiffs “zero tolerance” approach on organic farmers, compost manufacturers and consumers before agreeing to invalidate the guidance.

The Organic Trade Association and California Certified Organic Farmers successfully requested authorization to join the case and to join the arguments submitted by Western Growers.

Unfortunately in June, the federal court struck down the five-year-old federal Guidance document allowing the use of composted municipal green waste on organic farms in California.  The court found that USDA did not gather sufficient comment on the 2011 legal guidance and ordered it back to the drawing board.

Since the ruling, Western Growers has been monitoring USDA’s effort to correct the procedural issues and release a new guidance document that passes muster as quickly as possible.  Until that occurs, Nuxoll said organic farmers, who have followed USDA’s lead in good faith for years, don’t know the rules of the road.  Western Growers is concerned that certified organic farmers will no longer enjoy the protections of NOP Guidance 5016 if their organic compost contains incidental residues of prohibited substances that they did not cause and be opened up to potential lawsuits.

On another front, Nuxoll said Western Growers is providing input and monitoring the work of USDA with regard to a national organic checkoff program that would raise funds through assessment for a research and promotion program.  The Organic Trade Association submitted a proposal that is currently working its way through USDA protocol.  If USDA agrees there is sufficient interest in the effort, it will publish a proposed rule followed by a comment period.

“We are engaged in this effort,” Nuxoll said, noting that WG members have expressed both support and concerns.

In general, he said the research aspect of the program is backed universally while a market promotion program needs to be vetted thoroughly before support can be gained.  He said the expenditure of funding and the makeup of the board of this program will also be carefully scrutinized.  “How will the program be crafted to make sure that the sectors that are funding it are getting their fair share of promotion and research,” he said.

He noted that in the original proposal from OTA there was much effort to create geographic diversity on the board but not sector diversity.  In theory the board could consist of dairy growers throughout the country with no fresh produce representation.  He also said there are concerns that geographic diversity won’t recognized the outsized role California producers play in the organic sector.

Nuxoll said Western Growers will carefully vet the proposed rule when it is released.  He said it is impossible to know how soon that will be.

 

A Snapshot of WG’s Organic Advisory Committee

 

At its initial meeting, members of the Western Growers Organic Advisory Committee identified and analyzed many different topics of concern to that sector of the fresh produce industry.  Shortly after this first meeting, the Organic Advisory Committee became aware of and then advocated for WG’s active involvement in the compost litigation. Below are the key areas initially identified as areas where WG’s involvement could be helpful:

 

1.  Organic Imports and Exports

•   It was noted by Committee members that Mexico does not have an equivalency agreement with the United States.

•   Although the U.S. and Canada have an equivalency agreement in place, Canadian requirements can at times be in conflict with the U.S. standards. There is a need to monitor and influence to make sure there are no “kinks” in the system.

     ACTION ITEM: Staff will engage with USDA and U.S. Trade Representative regarding the development of a Mexican equivalency agreement and removing undue burdens from the Canadian agreement.

 

2.  Organic Check-Off Program

•   The committee was in general agreement that the program objectives (i.e. assist transition, research into pest control, consumer education) of the proposed organic checkoff program were legitimate activities.

•   However, the committee expressed the following structural concerns:

     How the funding structure can be fairly implemented (e.g. how will correct payment of assessment be ensured?)

     How the funding will be allocated (e.g. will larger segments of the organic industry—such as dairy—dictate how check-off dollars are spent?)

     How the governing board will be structured (e.g. will there be proportionate representation between size of producers / geographic regions / ideological factions?)

•   Staff also expressed concern over the proposed one person one vote that will be used to determine the success of the checkoff. It was noted that other USDA check-off programs require either a majority of producers representing a majority of the volume to pass a referendum, or require a combination of majority of all votes AND a majority of all production before a check-off is deemed successful. This was something that needed to be monitored.

     ACTION ITEM: Staff will engage with USDA as the proposal moves forward regarding alternative proposals to ensure proportionate representation within the governing body and ensure program funding priorities for produce are appropriately represented.

 

3.  National Organic Standard Board (NOSB)

•   Concern was expressed over a perceived shift in ideological constitution of the NOSB board.

     ACTION ITEM: WG should become more engaged in the NOSB process. Staff will engage with USDA to understand the system and determine appropriate opportunities to engage.

 

4.  NOSB Hydroponic and Aquaponic Task Force

•   The committee expressed concern about the NOSB Hydroponic and Aquaponic Task Force’s intentions to decertify products “not grown on soil.”

     ACTION ITEM: Staff will work to engage in this process as it moves forward to NOSB. (Update: In July, USDA staff submitted a policy recommendation to the NOSB moving the process to the next step of review.)

Legislative Session Ends with Action on High-Profile Bills

October 4th, 2016

The California Legislature completed its annual business on August 31 and members have departed Sacramento for the remainder of the year.  Bills that passed out of the legislature have been submitted to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk.  He has until September 30 to issue his signature or veto.  The 2016 legislative year was extremely active for issues affecting California agriculture.  Below is a brief snapshot of some of the high-profile bills that were acted on this year and the action, if any, that has been taken by Governor Brown at the time of this writing.

Assembly Member Lorena Gonzalez (D, San Diego) introduced AB 2757 in February which would have repealed agriculture’s existing overtime requirements and required overtime to be paid after eight hours in a day and over 40 hours in a week.  There was significant discussion in the Legislature about the double whammy that our members would now be faced with given the decision in April to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2022.  WG played a key role in helping to lead a broad coalition in opposition to this bill.  AB 2757 was ultimately defeated in the Assembly.  Unfortunately, in response to this defeat the author did a “gut-and-amend” of one of her bills in the Senate and reintroduced this issue in the form of AB 1066.  This bill also requires overtime to be paid after 8 hours in a day and over 40 hours in a week.  The provisions would be phased in over a four-year period starting in 2019.  Employers with 25 or fewer employees would have an additional three years before they would have to comply with the new provisions.  In an extremely disappointing move, the governor signed AB 1066.  As WG President and CEO Tom Nassif stated, “The governor has set in motion a chain of events that will cause workers in our fields to lose wages.  It is one thing to dismiss the rationale for a seasonal industry to have a 10-hour overtime threshold rather than an eight-hour threshold.  It is something entirely worse to dismiss economic reality.”

Major air quality legislation opposed by WG also moved forward this year.  SB 32 by Senator Pavley (D, Agoura Hills) was signed by the governor and requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit that is equivalent to at least 40 percent below the 1990 level to be achieved by 2030.  The governor is also expected to sign SB 1383 by Senator Lara (D, Bell Gardens).  SB 1383 would require CARB to approve and implement a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants to achieve a reduction in methane emissions by 40 percent, hydrofluorocarbon gas emissions by 40 percent, and black carbon emissions by 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030.  Both of these bills will have negative consequences for our field and processing operations.

As expected, there were significant policy discussions this year regarding water.  Legislation was introduced that seeks to enhance transfers and create a more functional and transparent water market.  AB 1755 (Dodd) would create, operate, and maintain a statewide integrated water data platform that, among other things, would integrate existing water and ecological data information from multiple databases and provide data on completed water transfers and exchanges.  This measure is awaiting action by the governor.  Water market legislation stalled this year, so we expect to see another attempt to establish transparent water transfers and markets introduced next year.  Clean drinking water continues to be a focus of Governor Brown’s administration.  Because some citizens in the state do not currently have access to clean, affordable, and accessible drinking water, the State Water Resources Control Board has begun to threaten enforcement action against “responsible parties”—landowners whose past or current application of nitrogen fertilizer establishes liability for nitrate contamination of domestic wells.  WG continues to work with the administration, environmental justice organizations, and the Legislature to develop language that protects growers from third party lawsuits if they voluntarily provide alternative drinking water to people served by domestic wells contaminated by nitrates.

On a positive note, our industry dealt with numerous challenges in the crop protection arena this year.  In addition to specific attacks that anti-pesticide groups mounted against individual active ingredients, there were several legislative pushes to make the application of synthetic pesticides more restrictive.  These bills were all defeated in their house of origin.

2016 was a painfully-active year for the California Legislature.  It is too early to predict what opportunities and challenges will present themselves next year, it is clear that our industry needs to further increase our efforts to protect our interests from an increasingly distant and hostile Legislature.

Dark Clouds on the Horizon: Gov. Brown Signs Ag Overtime Bills

October 4th, 2016

On September 12, 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 1066, which will gradually lower the daily and weekly hours of work thresholds for paying overtime to agricultural employees.  Currently, agricultural employees are entitled to be paid overtime when working over ten hours in a workday or more than six days in a workweek.  On the seventh day of work, the first eight hours worked must be paid at 1½ times the employee’s regular rate of pay, and any hours over eight must be paid at twice the employee’s regular rate of pay.

Beginning January 1, 2019, agricultural employees must be paid 1½ times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked over nine in a workday or over 55 hours in a week.  Employers of 25 or fewer employees have a delayed phase-in, commencing January 1, 2022.

Beginning January 1, 2020 (2023 for small employers), the weekly overtime threshold drops to 50 hours in a week.

By January 1, 2021, (2024 for small employers) ag employees will be paid overtime after working eight hours in a day.  And in 2022 (2025 for small employers) ag employees will be on par with most other non-exempt employees, getting overtime after eight hours in a workday or after 40 hours in a week.

The law allows the governor to temporarily suspend the scheduled overtime phase in, if the governor puts the brakes on a scheduled minimum wage increase due to a slowdown in the economy.  If that were to happen, the implementation dates would have to be postponed by one year.  This authority to stall the overtime phase-in would end upon the final phase-in of the overtime provisions (i.e., January 1, 2022) or January 1, 2025, whichever occurs first.

The new overtime rules affect all individuals “employed in an agricultural occupation” which has the same meaning as the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order 14 definition for Agricultural Occupations.  This means that the overtime exemption for irrigators will go by the wayside.

 

Day of Rest Provisions

There is another aspect to AB 1066 that has received little notice.  Under existing law, no employer may cause his or her employees to work more than six days a week.  Any person who violates this provision is guilty of a misdemeanor.  Agriculture has been one of the exceptions to this rule.

Labor Code § 554 specifically exempts agricultural employees from the one day’s rest in seven requirement.  Rather, IWC Wage Order 14 requires that agricultural workers be paid overtime for the first eight hours on the seventh day of work and double the employee’s regular rate of pay for all hours worked over eight on the seventh day of work in the workweek.

AB 1066 likely eliminates the agricultural exemption from the day of rest provisions.  The preamble of the bill suggests it is the legislative intent to eliminate all of the Wage Order 14 exemptions.  There may be one saving grace: Labor Code section 515(b) allows for the continuation of the order’s exemptions, but it is unclear how this could occur and there is little reason to believe the Department of Industrial Relations would make such a decision to maintain the day of rest exception for agriculture after the legislature just declared that ag workers should be treated the same as all other workers, regardless of the economic realities of harvesting a perishable crop.

Another potential out is found in the language of Labor Code sec. 554, which states:

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent an accumulation of days of rest when the nature of the employment reasonably requires that the employee work seven or more consecutive days, if in each calendar month the employee receives days of rest equivalent to one day’s rest in seven.  The requirement respecting the equivalent of one day’s rest in seven shall apply, notwithstanding the other provisions of this chapter relating to collective bargaining agreements, where the employer and a labor organization representing employees of the employer have entered into a valid collective bargaining agreement respecting the hours of work of the employees, unless the agreement expressly provides otherwise.

However, this section provides no comfort to farmers or farm employees who seek to maximize earning potential during the harvest season.  It is impractical under a typical fresh produce harvest season to schedule days of rest equivalent to one day’s rest in seven in a calendar month.  The elimination of the day of rest exception for agriculture will likely result in a reduction to farm employee take home pay, as farmers are forced to reduce hours to comply with the new day of rest requirements.

To make matters worse, the legislative analysis of AB 1066 says the bill “provide[s] that all other provisions of existing law regarding compensation for overtime work shall apply to workers in an agricultural occupation beginning January 1, 2017.”

It is currently unclear whether the day of rest exception for agriculture will be eliminated beginning January 1, 2017 or later with the phase-in of the new overtime thresholds.  The same question remains for the irrigator exception.

If January 1, 2017 is the operative date, it will have a profound effect on small farmers and large farmers immediately.  It is common for harvest workers to work seven days during the peak of harvest—a perishable crop does not rest; it must be picked when it’s ready.  AB 1066 eliminates the flexibility of Wage Order 14 that permits farmers to schedule seven days of work, even though it requires that work be paid at premium rates.

Finally, AB 1066 will likely eliminate Wage Order 14’s “truck driver” exception and modify the current exception for collective bargaining agreements.  It is not yet clear whether certain other employees currently exempt from overtime under Wage Order 14 will continue to be exempt.  These employees include:

•   Employees who are primarily engaged in “intellectual, managerial, or creative” work which requires exercise of discretion and independent judgment for which they earn less than two times the monthly state minimum wage for full-time employment;

•   Parents, spouses, children, or legally adopted children of the employer;

•   Employers who employ fewer than five persons covered by Wage Order 14; and

•   Employees who are covered by Wage Orders 8 or 13; among others.

Western Growers will be working to obtain much needed clarity in the weeks to come. 

EFFICIENT WATER USE SWIIM: A Solution for Water-Starved States

October 5th, 2016

SWIIM’s story begins seven years ago when an entrepreneur, scientist, engineer and businessman came together and conceptualized the idea for a technological solution that would help manage water use more efficiently.

“When we started in late 2009, the concept of ‘AgTech’ didn’t really exist yet so when we were pitching our idea, people thought we were nuts,” said SWIIM CEO Kevin France.

This development-stage company, which began in the basement of a small home in Colorado with zero dollars in the bank, has now flourished into a thriving business that has raised more than $5.7 million and its SWIIM® Certification package is now being deployed on thousands of acres in California, Colorado and Arizona.

 

How it Works

SWIIM (or Sustainable Water and Innovative Irrigation Management) offers a suite of software packages and service offerings that enable farmers, ranchers, municipalities, businesses and conservation groups to plan, manage and track their crop-water budget.  SWIIM makes the argument that most growers spend significant time and resources managing their finances with accountants, CPAs and detailed reporting to know where every dollar is spent on their operations.  They suggest that growers also utilize resources to plan, manage and account for their water allocation—especially these days.  SWIIM claims to accomplish this on a near-real-time basis, with comprehensive planning and reporting tools.

One of the potential outcomes of using SWIIM is leasing (or otherwise being compensated for) a portion of participating growers’ conserved water, to be used by others without damaging the underlying right or allocation.  SWIIM’s turn-key solution allows it to act as its client’s on-farm water accountant, allowing agricultural water users to optimize water rights, monitor the crop water budget, conserve water and increase net income for agricultural operations.

The planner package helps farmers, ranchers and irrigators evaluate farm income and water use, while the manager package enables ditch companies, irrigation districts and water/river system managers to generate water use reports.  These reports aid the growers themselves, regulatory and other agencies in monitoring, managing and optimizing modified water use practices.

With the easy-to-navigate technology, water use is tracked on the farm (and will send off an “alarm” if a user is going outside the projected/approved water usage), inputted into the SWIIM System and the data is sent to individual growers and the respective district in the aggregate for monitoring and reporting.  Owners are afforded the opportunity to increase income by leasing a portion of their consumptive use water rights to municipalities, private industry and conservation groups, without compromising underlying water right.

“The unique thing about SWIIM is that we are a team of ag people who are all about water.  We all have agricultural backgrounds so we understand the sociology of farming and the obstacles farmers face.  Unlike most tech companies, we aren’t coding folk, we are ag folk,” said France.  He speaks about how SWIIM is dedicated to being on-farm water experts, guiding and tracking the entire process—from the time the water leaves the irrigation district, to the time it gets to the head gate, all the way until it gets to the grower’s hands and onto the fields.

 

The Power of Partnerships

Like Rome, SWIIM wasn’t built in a day.  It took years of testing out on the field and in the lab.  “To develop something like this takes a lot of time and resources.  We worked with researchers, ag economists, agronomists, water engineers, geologists, you name it,” France said.

The technology package was developed alongside the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Colorado State University and Utah State University for more than six years.  Their scientists played a key role in conducting innovative research that focused on farm optimization and water conservation.  PhD dissertations and Master’s theses have been written on the science behind the technology, further validating SWIIM as an efficient and profitable solution for fresh water stakeholders.

SWIIM’s technology is especially important in water-starved states like California and the firm has developed a partnership with Western Growers to help farmers conserve more water and simultaneously earn money for the water they don’t use.

“The fact that SWIIM was built on a grower-centric model and Western Growers’ mission being 100 percent grower-based makes the synergy between our two organizations incredibly strong,” stated France.  “Western Growers has helped us identify the most arid regions so that we can go in and deploy technologies that will assist farmers in boosting their production.”

SWIIM’s growth has exploded in the past several months and France attributes the success to not only the company’s own sales and marketing team, but to the support and guidance Western Growers has provided SWIIM in the past year.  France notes that having Western Growers as an advocate and partner has truly set the company apart.

“Key Western Growers staff, and especially Western Growers members themselves, have provided invaluable input on how we can start offering our package to all types of growers to benefit more of the industry,” said France.  Currently, SWIIM’s technology is being implemented by farmers who own large acres of land.  The company hopes to get in a position where they can provide the technology to those who grow on smaller acres.  “We want SWIIM to be in the hands of anyone who wants it,” he added.

 

Expanding the AgTech Space

SWIIM is the latest company to join Western Growers Center for Innovation & Technology in Salinas, Calif.  Based in Colorado, the company is looking forward to having a strong presence in the “salad bowl of the world” and collaborating with other innovators to learn how agtech companies can work together to further advance agriculture.

“Agriculture has been using the same tools for many decades.  We are proud to be part of the effort that will bring new technology to the valley,” comments France.  As a veteran in the agtech innovation space, SWIIM hopes to provide support to new companies just starting to explore the agtech industry, just as Western Growers has done for SWIIM.

“It’s been an absolute pleasure collaborating with Western Growers and working alongside key members of the WG family to fight the good fight,” said France.