S.B. 26 Pest Control Amendments: transcript

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And the other bill. I am a house sponsor on Senate Bill 26 Pest Control amendments. But, uh, Senator Stratton is a landscape, uh, he has that business and he, he knows more about pest control. And there may be questions from the congregation here. The, the, the, those that are attending the meeting either online or, uh, in person. And I'm not gonna try that one. Uh, we'll, we'll, if it's all right with you, Mr. Chair. Right? I would wait, uh, for our next meeting for him. Would you like me to help address that with the department back perspective? You wanna move on? I've got some help that just arrived.

Could we move on to Senate bill 26? After you take a vote, you passed the vote, right?

And so if, if you feel comfortable with the additional bearded help that you have, uh, we can do that. So Yes, he testified, uh, Senate Bill 26 Pest Control Amendments, uh, was an interim committee bill that passed unanimously during the summer and fall. And, and this good gentleman decide of me, uh, was one of the star witnesses on that bill. Uh, so I'm gonna let him address that. There is a small, uh, fiscal note, but, uh, why don't you go ahead.

I'm, I'm Robert Hogart. I'm the Director of Plant Industry with the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. Um, we worked very closely with Senator Stratton on this bill. Um, as mentioned it was, um, in interim and then also now passed the Senate. So, um, we can be, you want me to speak to what's in the bill? Would that be preferable? Yes. Okay. Yes. So, um, this make some technical changes, changes some definitions of a qualifying party removes that requirement of, of a pesticide application business to have a qualifying party to require, um, to do training and those kind of things within the company. That was added to legislation in 2017. Um, the department has seen an increase in violation rates, not a decrease since that has been put into place. Um, the safety, um, has not been, um, we have pesticide misapplications have not increased since that was put into place. The violation rates have increased because of companies not complying with that portion of having a qualifying party. Um, so the department is in support of, of removing that piece of the legislation or piece, piece of that, um, of the statute. Uh, it also then will require or allow for, uh, a pesticide qualified pesticide application, um, assistant associate. And that will allow somebody without a pesticide applicator license to apply general use pesticides that would be listed as caution or warning signal word that would allow them to be able to do that in ornament on turf type applications where there's minimal, there's minimal hazards to humans, those kind of things from a misapplication. And then also one of the things that we worked with, with the senator on this issue is one of the things that we had seen from other states that had tried this is that then people would use a str their start applying to homes or in homes or those kind of things. And that's not a use that we would like to see. And so he was willing to put into place a thousand dollars penalty for each violation of that. So as a way to discourage that from, um, creeping and going someplace you shouldn't. And then there's just changes to language definitions and a few things in there that the department's worked with, with him and the drafting attorney on.

Sir? Um, yes. Bill kind of talks about the salesperson and the amount of training they need versus becoming a completely licensed applicator. Right. Talk about that a little bit because I think it's important 'cause they're answering questions that they may not have had those come around. They may not know what they're talking about.

Yeah. So we, we've had a, um, quite a bit of problem in Utah that, um, these larger pesticide application companies have then recruited people to come and then do pesticide sales. So I enjoy it when they knock on my door. 'cause then I can have a conversation with the salespeople and when they make claims that I know they shouldn't make, I can educate them. Not everybody has that opportunity. Um, so this is to put stuff directly in place that they need to be an employee of the business, not a 10 99 employee. So that way the, the company is responsible for what their salespeople are representing and selling. So that's one of the main reasons for that. We have not had that category in place if we're a requiring somebody to have a sales permit to do this, to do that.

So other than the video, is there any other training that video kind of, I guess must explain? I didn't read the whole, I'm getting into details.

We have not developed that yet. That's something we will work with, with USU to get developed.

Got it. And then that's part of, um, part of what we'll come back and report on with the rule, rule making and those kind of things that the requirement we have to report back by November, that's important for protecting the public. Thank You. Yes. We wanna make sure that's happening.

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we pass out favorably SB 26 Pest Control Amendments. Okay. That is in order. Do you, would you like to speak to it? I, I've, I know I'm still only in my second week, but I think this is a good bill. I think, yeah, I think that's what you call this.

The genesis of this piece of legislation, uh, is reflected in a lot of what we're seeing as we seek to have more waterwise landscaping. And, uh, part of part of that is as we use and, uh, move from traditional forms of landscaping, we, we see a lot of, uh, uh, non turf use in areas and, and a lot of other alternative from our native plants being, being used. And what's happening is we're having a significant, uh, crop up obnoxious weeds. Uh, we have a significant, we traditionally have had a very significant licensing process that we go through for any type of applicator. And it's created a hindrance to, to the process of, of, of using the, the very friendly, uh, weed control opportunities that are available to us in today's market. Environmentally friendly with that. This, this modifies and makes a dual path for those that are applied more, more, uh, concentrated and and challenging types of, of applications and, and streamlines the opportunity to a, a seminar and, and, uh, opportunity to get, uh, licensed to be able to address the challenges that we're seeing in the explosion of noxious Swedes. It also make some technical changes that the department asked with. That'll be glad. Any questions?

Thank you. I'll, I'll waive the summary and move the question.

Madam Reading Clerk Senate Bill 26 Pest Control Amendments by Senator Stratton. This bill was sort in natural resources, agriculture and Environment with a vote of 9 0 5. The House sponsors Representative Albrecht, Representative Albrecht.

Thank you Ms. Speaker. Uh, PE control amendments, uh, provides this bill provides for the permitting of ornamental and turf technicians, uh, addresses the growing challenges we're facing with noxious weeds as we trans transition to waterwise landscaping practices. And it carves out a, an opportunity to have a specific specialized training for turf technicians, allowing them to focus on turf and not turf areas. And it carves out an opportunity to license people who will just be doing herbicide treatments and takes out any barriers for people to enter that. It makes, uh, technical changes and increases the fines for bad actors. Most of all, the bottom line is it introduces specific permits for new roles, ensuring that everyone in the pesticide chain from sales to application is trained, whether they be ornamental and turf technicians, salespeople, everything requires some training. Now, uh, there's a video online. Um, this, this gives more consumer protection and it modernizes the standards of pest control. Mr. Speaker, happy to answer any questions. Thank

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Would the sponsor yield to a question?

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, my husband actually, when we were early on in marriage, did, uh, spraying of lawns and stuff like that. And it was something that was really great for him to like jump into to be able to help our family stay afloat at the time. And I feel like this creates a barrier of entry for people to get into one one of those jobs that is really helpful. I'm also concerned about the permitting part of everything that we keep requiring permits for. And I'm just wondering, do you know how many industries that in the state right now that we actually require permits for and that we have changed in recent years to add more and more permits to, I don't know how many, uh, Mr. Speaker, but I do know that there's bad actors in this industry pest control and we need to make sure that they're doing the right things. Not killing plants around people's homes or, uh, you know, just making sure that what they're doing is, is a standard practice for the industry.

You'd have to ask Doppel about how many are I I couldn't answer that one.

Thank you. Um, mi mr. Speaker, if I may, just a quick comment. It seems as if we have a lot of industries that we're increasingly permitting and, and creating more state oversight too. I think we need to be careful about that. And I also feel like, um, that this sounds like a bill to me, that an industry wants to capitalize on so that other little mom and pop people who are like, I need something to support my family cannot get into. And so I'm gonna be in opposition. Thank you.

I'll waive. Thank you. Commission has been waived.

Adam Reading Clerk