Please sign up to get GE (GMO) free alerts so you can help keep GMO preemtion laws from passing.

Date:   9/8/2005 11:53:22 AM ( 19 y ago)

The California Legistors go out o session as of the 15th and so
nothing will likely be happening until January regarding the attempting
deregarding of local democracy in California/ and the bill to preempt
local counties for preventing GMO foods.

The Legislature will take this up again in January.

I feel a proactive campaign to education our legislators in
Sacramento is needed. I would like to see healthy foods in
the Cafeteria...based on idea of better foods, better thinking.

I visited the State Capital in Sacramento once and looked at the kitchen
and their supplies. Nothing very fresh that seemed organically grown.

There is a park right outside the building. I would love to see a garden
there. Who are the organizers in Sacramento, I wonder that are involved
in GE free activity?

We need to stay in touch with the members of the Agriculture Committee.
This is not a bill that goes before the public. They can pass this without
our o.k.


Please make sure you get the
California GE Free alerts...



your eg

__

This came from here:

http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/yolo-announce/2005-June/000229.html

[Yolo-announce] URGENT: California Ag Take Over of Local Control of Seeds SB1056
Sandy Weaver veggiesandy@yahoo.com
Wed Jun 29 09:45:01 2005


* Previous message: [Yolo-announce] Tune in this Tuesday Local Dirt Radio
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

------------------------------------------------------------------------



> Subject: More information on California Ag Take Over
> of Local Control of
> Seeds SB1056
>
>
> Dear Readers,
> I forgot to include Senator Florez's contact
> information.
>
> Be sure to say this is about SB 1056 hearing today
> (Wednesday) at 1:30
> Pacific time.
>
> SENATOR DEAN FLOREZ (Email:
> senator.florez@sen.ca.gov)
> Member of Senate Agriculture Committee
> Senate District 16; Fresno, Kings, Kern and Tulare
> Counties
> Capitol Office: State Capitol, Room 5061,
> Sacramento, CA 95814
> Phone (916) 651-4016
> Fax (916) 327-5989
>
> Dear Readers,
>
> The fight to keep the right for local control of
> seed is in play right
> now in California. An assembly bill (CA AB 1508)
> that was a fairly
> simple bill about labeling seed was apparently a
> "Trojan Horse" when it
> was gutted the day before the hearing and the text
> below was added.
> Fortunately this bill was pulled and it seemed like
> a victory for the
> moment. But---
>
> The fire drill starts again!
>
> Apparently, the attached language is going to be
> amended into a new bill
> tomorrow. Senator Florez (D-Shafter) has decided to
> take the same
> language that was proposed yesterday (and failed to
> be set for a
> committee hearing) and amend it into a bill he has
> in the Assembly
> Agricultural Committee. Unfortunately, this bill
> will be heard tomorrow
> (June 29th) at 1:30pm in the California State
> Capitol. The language is
> not in print, which means you can only refer to the
> attached document to
> see what the language would look like. Senator
> Florez will amend this
> language into his bill, SB 1056.
>
> We desperately need the members of this committee
> to know that what
> they are doing is wrong. There is no due process,
> no warning and no
> time for anyone to argue against this plot by the
> chemical and GE
> companies to subvert local control.
>
> Please take am moment tomorrow morning and call some
> of these committee
> members, especially Senator Florez who is from the
> Frezno area and the
> Chair Barbara Mathhews. Please be reasonable and
> just state that you
> are opposed to this process. If you live in any of
> the districts, be
> sure to give your address. If you are out of the
> area but wish to
> comment, please do so.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Thomas
>
> Committee Members
>
>
>
>
>
> * Barbara S. Matthews, Chair,
>
> Dem-
> Dist. 17, (Merced San Joaquin and Stanislaus
> Counties) , (916) 319-2017
>
> * Bill Maze, Vice Chair, Rep-Dist. 34, (Kern,
> Inyo, Tulare and San Bernardino
> Counties) , (916) 319-2034,
> assemblymember.maze@assembly.ca.gov
>
> * Sam Blakeslee, Rep-Dist. 33, (San Luis Obispo
> and Santa Barbara Counties), (916) 319-2033,
> assemblymember.blakeslee@assembly.ca.gov
>
>
>
> * Joseph Canciamilla, Dem-Dist. 11, (Contra
> Costa County), (916) 319-2011,
> assemblymember.canciamilla@assembly.ca.gov
>
> * Dave Cogdill, Rep-Dist. 25, (Calaveras,
> Madera, Mariposa, Mono, Stanislaus & Tuolumne
> Counties), (916) 319-2025,
> assemblymember.cogdill@assembly.ca.gov
>
> * Nicole Parra, Dem-Dist. 30, (Kern, Fresno,
> Kings and Tulare Counties), (916) 319-2030,
> assemblymember.parra@assembly.ca.gov
>
> * Simon Salinas, Dem-Dist. 28, (Monterey, San
> Benito, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties), (916)
> 319-2028,
> assemblymember.salinas@assembly.ca.gov
>
> * Juan Vargas, Dem-Dist. 79, (San Diego
> County), (916) 319-2079,
> assemblymember.vargas@assembly.ca.gov
>
>
>
>
> ASSEMBLY BILL 1508
>
> AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 27, 2005
> AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 11, 2005
> AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 18, 2005
>
> INTRODUCED BY Committee on Agriculture
> ( Matthews (Chair), Maze (Vice Chair), Blakeslee,
> Cogdill, Parra, Salinas, and Vargas )
> Assembly Members Salinas and
> Arambula
> ( Coauthor: Senator Florez
> )
>
> FEBRUARY 22, 2005
>
> An act to amend Sections 52254, 52260, 52351,
> 52354,
> 52361, 52391, 52451, 52453, 52455, 52481, 52482,
> 52483, 52484, 52487,
> and 52511 of add Section 52251.5 to the Food and
> Agricultural Code, relating to agriculture.
>
>
> LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
>
>
> AB 1508, as amended, Committee on Agriculture
> Salinas . Seed.
> Existing law, the California Seed Law, generally
> regulates seed
> sold in California to ensure that seed purchased by
> the
> consumer-buyer is properly identified and of the
> quality represented
> on the tag or label. Existing law defines
> agricultural seed
> as not including any variety that is generally known
> and sold as
> vegetable seed, for these purposes. Existing law
> provides that
> vegetable seed sold in a container one-half pound or
> less that is for
> sale or sold for sowing purposes shall bear upon it
> the year in
> which it is intended for planting.
> This bill would remove these provisions and would
> instead provide
> that any vegetable seed sold in a container one-half
> pound or less
> shall bear upon it at the time of retail sale for
> nonfarm use the
> viability assurance statement "Packed for the (year)
> season." This
> bill would make numerous other nonsubstantive,
> conforming changes.
>
> Because a violation of these provisions would be
> a crime, this
> bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
> 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.
> This bill would state that the provisions of the
> California Seed
> Law are of statewide concern and occupy the entire
> field of
> regulation regarding registration, labeling, sale,
> storage,
> transportation, distribution, notification of use,
> and use of seeds
> to the exclusion of local regulations.
> Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal
> committee: yes
> no . State-mandated local program: yes
> no .
>
>
> THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS
> FOLLOWS:
>
>
> SECTION 1. Section 52251.5 is added to the
> Food and Agricultural Code , to read:
> 52251.5.
> The provisions of this chapter are of statewide
> concern and occupy
> the entire field of regulation regarding the
> registration, labeling,
> sale, storage, transportation, distribution,
> notification of use,
> and use of seeds to the exclusion of all local
> regulations. Except as
> otherwise specifically provided in this act, no
> ordinance or
> regulation of any political subdivision may prohibit
> or in any way
> attempt to regulate any matter relating to the
> registration,
> labeling, sale, storage, transportation,
> distribution, notification
> of use, or use of seeds. All matter omitted in
> this version of
> the bill appears in the bill as amended in Assembly,
> May 11, 2005
> (JR11)
>
>
>
> Thomas,
>
> On Friday June 24, we learned that there is an
> attempt to amend a
> California state Assembly bill (AB1508) to include
> language that would
> override county authority on the regulation of GE
> organisms, effectively
> preempting existing and future county and city bans.
> AB1508 was in its
> final round of hearings, and this last-ditch
> amendment is clearly an
> underhanded attack by the biotech industry on local
> democratic rights.
> The original author of the bill, Assemblymember
> Simon Salinas (D-28) on
> the Assembly Ag Committee from Monterey, Santa Clara
> and San Benito is
> considering authoring the amendment, but as of today
> has not decided to
> do so, and another author may have to be found. The
> next hearing of the
> bill is on Tuesday morning June 28 in the Senate Ag
> Committee, the last
> committee hearing of this legislative session.
>
> We are working with the Center for Food Safety and
> Pete Price, their
> lobbyist, to develop a "Sacramento strategy". Cal
> GE-Free is also
> planning a grassroots mobilization to complement
> that strategy. In the
> short run, most of the actions we plan to take will
> happen through
> political channels, not grassroots mobilization, but
> there will probably
> be a place for that soon (like next week). The
> message that we want to
> consistently deliver is that this is an assault of
> local democratic
> rights to protect their health, environment and
> economies. This bill
> undermines participatory democracy, strips local
> control, and is a
> threat to citizen participation on issues of
> widespread concern.
>
> As many of you know, 15 states recently have
> introduced legislation
> removing local control of plants and seeds, and 12
> of these have already
> passed into law. The uniformity of the language in
> each of the bills and
> their swift, back-door introduction indicate that
> this is a coordinated
> attempt by industry to undermine the growing
> grassroots movement to
> establish local protections over genetically
> engineered organisms.
>
> Note that even if we win this round and kill or
> stall it in a committee,
> we have to remain vigilant for the even worse-case
> scenario that such a
> provision could be attached to the state budget
> bill, where it would be
> almost impossible to kill.
>
> If you have any questions or ideas, please let us
> know. This bill will
> move fast, and we will keep you updated once we have
> more details.
> Thomas, if you or anyone influential you know in
> Salinas' district can
> call his Sacramento office on Monday morning first
> thing to express
> their opposition to this amendment, I think that
> would help
> tremendously. Kristin, ALBA and Sam are also on it,
> so you might want to
> coordinate with them.
>
> There will be a more widespread grassroots alarm
> call on Wednesday if we
> need it.
>
> Cheers,
> Renata
>
>
> --
>
> Renata Brillinger
> Californians for GE-Free Agriculture
> http://www.calgefree.org
> 15290 Coleman Valley Rd.
> Occidental, CA 95465
> (707) 874-1557 x 222
> Fax (707) 874-1558
> renata@oaec.org
>
>
************************************************************************
> ********************************
> This GMO news service is underwritten by a generous
> grant from the
> Newman's Own Foundation, edited by Thomas Wittman
> and is a production of
> the Ecological Farming Association http://www.eco-farm.org
>
>
************************************************************************
> ********************************
>


 

Popularity:   message viewed 1391 times
URL:   http://www.curezone.org/blogs/fm.asp?i=970329

<< Return to the standard message view