New York State Assembly

1997 Annual Report

Committee on Agriculture

Sheldon Silver, Speaker
William L. Parment, Chairman

Dear Speaker Silver,

The Assembly Standing Committee on Agriculture is responsible for: legislation that relates to the Agriculture and Markets Law; oversight of the activities of the Agriculture and Markets Department, the budget of that Department and additional funds that relate to farming, food, and animal welfare. The Committee works closely with institutions of higher learning to promote agricultural research and development. The Committee also monitors and, at times, mediates policy disputes and conflicts when agricultural issues are involved.

Some of the major topics investigated by the Committee as part of its legislative and oversight functions include, but are not limited to: food inspections and safety; farmland protection; farm product sales and marketing; agribusiness licensing and regulation; humane treatment of domestic animals and pets; kosher laws; and rabies. The Committee can also facilitate the legislative repeal of unnecessary or unenforced laws and programs when it deems such actions to be in the public interest.

The Committee does not have jurisdiction over every issue relating to the farming and agricultural industry. Some issues involve laws which fall under the purview of other Standing Committees, such as Insurance, Labor, or Environmental Conservation. However, the Committee may provide sponsorship, input, and support for significant program legislation referred to these committees.

New York dairy farmers have been adversely affected in the recent years by the excessive fluctuation of fluid milk prices. Approximately 500 farms have closed since the beginning of 1997 year. Current milk prices, set by federal and state regulations, are at their lowest level in six (6) years. As a result, New York dairy farmers are finding it difficult to cover operating expenses to continue milk production.

The current situation has led dairy farmers to demand action by the Legislature to help preserve New York State farms. The impact on small cities and towns throughout upstate New York is due, in large part, to the economic multiplier effect of farm income circulating through local businesses. The loss of farm income results in lost property tax to local governments and school districts, lost sales taxes and higher welfare costs. The Assembly Agriculture Committee has and will continue to examine several options that can be utilized that may help remedy this situation.

 The Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets has the authority to establish a statewide milk marketing order and provide immediate emergency price relief for dairy farmers. An emergency milk marketing order enables the Department to establish a three-month emergency price over and above the monthly price level established by federal marketing order regulations. This measure can not be imposed without a petition signed by 35% of the milk producers of New York. A hearing and approval vote must be held within sixty days of such an order and if 66 2/3rds of farmers approve, the order becomes policy as declared in Section 258-k of the Agriculture and Markets Law.

The Compact, made up of six (6) New England States (Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maine, and New Hampshire) sets the minimum price for fluid milk above federal market order prices. New York, along with five (5) additional bordering states are eligible to join the Compact with required legislative approval. Assembly Bill 3378 (Parment) would allow for New York's entrance into the Compact. As a member of the Compact, New York State would gain representation in the Compact Commission responsible for setting milk prices within the Compact region. This price is determined to better reflect the costs of the farmers in the region. The state would have the option of exempting part of its territory from a Compact over-order price, allowing each region to retain the power to protect its interests.

1. School Tax Credit

The Assembly Agriculture Committee and the farm community joined forces last year to support historic tax relief for farmers. This necessary relief for farmers uses State income tax revenue to provide a credit for real property taxes paid on qualified active farmland. The value of this tax credit is expected to reach 60 million dollars statewide by the year 2000. The passage of this law has been praised by all New York farm organizations as crucial to saving family farms.

Several amendments were made this year to the 1996 Farmers' Protection and Farm Preservation Act in order to better protect New York State farmers. Among them are:

Eligibility for the school tax credit requires New York farmers to obtain 2/3 of their total income from gross farm income. Since many small farms across the state are dependent on off farm income in order to continue farming, the 2/3 income threshold eliminates many farmers from taking advantage of this benefit. Amendments made during this session allow farmers to subtract from their total gross income up to $30,000 of non-farm income in order to verify their eligibility according to the 2/3 income threshold. In this way, a spouse's income and/or pensions are not included in eligibility requirements.

Federal rules for gross farm income disallow three significant sources of farm revenue. These sources include farm produced apple cider, maple syrup and wine. An amendment has been adopted that allows the inclusion of gross sales of maple syrup, apple cider, and wine from a licensed farm winery as gross income from farming.

This provision allows a farmer to reduce his adjusted gross income by the amount of principal paid during the year on secured farm loans. This approach maintains the integrity of the income limitation provision, while including farmers who have committed their families to farming by reinvesting in the farm. Reinvestment in the farm is the most significant indicator of commitment to remain in farming.

Chapter 403, which was reported from the Real Property Tax Committee, requires that one member of the State Board of Real Property Services be actively engaged in the commercial production of agricultural crops, livestock or livestock products with an average gross sales value of ten thousand dollars or more (Real Property Tax Law, Section 200). This individual must be appointed to an eight-year term upon the expiration of an existing term, and shall take office on January 1 of the following year.

The Department of Agriculture and Markets' domestic animal health permitting program assists the Department in detecting, monitoring, preventing and controlling disease in the State's livestock population. The expansion of this program is necessary to cover evolving concerns dealing with disease control problems associated with animals. This is especially important since certain diseases such as tuberculosis can be transmitted not only between like species, but from one species to another, such as from deer to dairy cattle.

This law better controls and prevents the spread of disease in horses by requiring theCommissioner of Agriculture and Markets to confine/quarantine horses apparently exposed to equine infections anemia in the attempt to prevent its spread to other horses.

Equine infections anemia (swamp fever) is spread by flies and has a fairly long incubation period that makes its presence difficult to detect. A horse that contracts the disease will often die soon after the disease is confirmed. Horses that are infected can carry the disease and place other horses at risk of infection. Requiring that apparently infected horses be confined/quarantined will deter this disease from being transmitted to other horses during that incubation period.

The purpose of this law is to correct technical errors in Chapter 91 of the Laws of 1996 affecting the grounds for revocation of horse dealer permits, and in Chapter 367 the Laws of 1996 relating to farm product dealer licenses.

Section 90-e of the Agriculture and Markets Law is amended to reinsert the word "horses" in the list of animals for which violations of rules and regulations governing interstate or intrastate movement constitutes grounds for revocation of a Domestic Animal Health Permit (DAHP).

Section 245 of the Agriculture and Markets Law is also amended to reinsert the word "eggs" in the exceptions to the definition of farm products. This insertion will exempt egg dealers from the licensing and bonding provisions of Article 20 of the Agriculture and Markets Law.

With the recent increase of unprovoked dog attacks that have occurred in New York State, there has been a call for stricter penalties for the owners of dangerous dogs. Dangerous dogs are defined as any dog that attacks a person and causes physical injury or death or poses a serious and unjustified imminent threat of harm to people. This law has several provisions that increase owner accountability. Among them are:

Exemptions to these penalties include dogs that have bitten a person who is committing a crime on the premises of the owner, or a dog that has been tormented, abused or assaulted by the person who is bitten or a dog which was responding to pain or injury or protecting itself, its kennel or offspring.

2. Chapter 79 of the Laws of 1997 (A.2582, Englebright)

In the attempt to assist humane societies, animal shelters, pounds and SPCAs in paying for the care of animals seized from their owners, this law directs that a person from whom an animal is seized and who claims an interest in the animal shall post a security with the county or town clerk within five days of seizure. The security is intended to pay for the care of the animal while in the custody of the designated facility for a period of thirty days. Should the required time of custody exceed thirty days, the facility may require the person from whom the animal was seized, or any person claiming interest in the animal, to post an additional security.

The amount of the security will be determined by the county or town clerk based upon recommendations from the facility providing the care and custody. Should charges against the person from whom the animal was seized be disposed of prior to the thirty days. the individual having been found guilty, the facility may dispose of the animal prior to the end of the thirty days.

The court may also order a person charged with a violation to provide necessary food, water, shelter and care for any animal which is the basis of the charge, without the removal of the animal from its existing location, until charges against that person are adjudicated. Subsequent to the enactment of Chapter 79, various technical amendments were made to the statute through the passage of Chapter 256 of the Laws of 1997.

This legislation would provide comprehensive State support for the expansion and retention of New York agribusiness operations by creating a New York State Center for Agribusiness Development within the Department of Agriculture and Markets.

This center would be responsible for providing a broad program of support for agribusiness in New York State by promoting the availability of funding for improvement of existing facilities or for new construction through: compilation of information on existing programs, assistance in providing review or commentary on applications for aid; and administration of the agribusiness development program in cooperation with the State Department of Economic Development.

After successful passage in the Assembly and the Senate, A.994 was vetoed by the Governor on July 21, 1997.

In 1994, the Department of Agriculture and Markets proposed an amendment to the Cooperative Corporations Law to relieve non-agricultural cooperatives of the burden of filing certain documents with the Department. Such filings were deemed unnecessary from a public interest standpoint and were shown to result in unduly harsh consequences for such cooperatives.

The Department has found over the last several years that the minimal benefit to the Department of maintaining certificates of a corporation and bylaws for agricultural cooperatives is far out weighed by the burden placed on such cooperatives in making duplicate filings with the Department of State.

This legislation relieves agricultural cooperatives from the requirement of filing certain documents with the Department of Agriculture and Markets. As amended, the Cooperative Corporations Law ensures that the Department of Agriculture and Markets has access to specified cooperative corporate documents to confirm agricultural cooperative status on an as needed basis upon request to the Secretary of State.

This legislation, reported out of the Local Governments Committee, revises the formula for the allocation of State money to cooperative extensions. This revised formula will provide a more equitable distribution of State funding, while encouraging continued county support to their cooperative extension associations.

The revised formula provides for a State match of fifty cents on the dollar up to $100,000 during the fiscal year most recently ended and then five cents on each dollar appropriated by the county for extension activities in excess of $100,000. No county cooperative extension association shall receive an apportionment of funding under this section in an amount less than they had received in 1995-96 fiscal year, provided that the annual State appropriation is not less that the State money appropriated in 1995-96 State fiscal year. The new formula replaces a formula which relied upon personal income and percent increase in county appropriations.

The frequency of food inspections has fallen to once a year upstate and approximately once every two years in the New York City area due to record-low staffing levels at the Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Safety and Inspection Unit. The Department of Agriculture and Markets insists that the mere fact that New York State does not have many problems with food-borne illnesses indicates that the Department is doing a good job in ensuring a safe food supply. The number of food inspections is close to a record low with only sixty-eight inspectors to cover 26,000 stores in the State. The Committee believes that this does not represent nearly enough resources to protect consumers from food-borne diseases. Therefore $100,000 was added to this year's State budget to hire additional inspectors.

In response to growing public concern about bacteria-tainted meats and new technologies used in the production of food, the Assembly Agriculture Committee reported legislation to enhance the effectiveness of New York State's food safety programs. Unfortunately, the Senate did not take up any of this legislation.

The recent findings of new strains of bacteria (e.g. E-coli) in food must change the way inspectors look at these commodities during inspection. One way to combat these problems would be to increase the fines for significant failed inspections. If establishments stay in compliance due to fear of heavy fines, then there will be less need to do reinspection. This will allow inspectors more time to do initial inspections.

Assembly bill 6771 (Gunther) would provide increased penalties for violation of retail food store sanitary regulations. This bill would impose a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars or more than five hundred dollars for each and every first offense of a person, association, corporation or their agents who violate retail food store sanitary regulations. The bill would also establish that every subsequent violation will result in a penalty of not less than two hundred dollars or more than one thousand dollars.

Assembly bill 2664 (Nolan) would impose a penalty of no less than five hundred and no more than one thousand dollars per violation upon food retailers who sell or possess food with altered food product dates. This legislation would extend responsibility for the sale of goods with altered dates to the retailer selling such goods rather than just the party who actually changed the date.

Proper refrigeration of fresh products has become the key to food safety from farm processor, to retailer, to the consumer's residence. Any sterile product can be contaminated by the processor, retailer or consumer if not properly stored or prepared. Cross-contamination at the consumer level has a high potential for danger. Proper educational programs for food handlers, cooks and consumers in the storage, handling, and preparation of food is key to avoiding the primary contamination and cross-contamination problems.

Assembly bill 4091 (Parment) would require that the Commissioner of the Department of Agriculture and Markets conduct and have appropriate Department employees attend annual food safety inspection training sessions of at least eight hours. The bill also would specify the minimum training and instruction requirements that would have to be met during such sessions and require that the training sessions be open to private citizens working in the food industry at a fee to be determined by the Commissioner that recovers the actual cost of the training.

Assembly bill 4089 (Parment) would require the Department of Agriculture and Markets to publish a monthly report listing the disposition of cases involving any violations of the Agriculture and Markets Law or rules or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto or the State Sanitary Code as administered by the Department and submit these reports to the Governor and the Legislature. The bill would also specify the information that would have to be included in such reports. It is also important that consumers be made aware of the food safety record of the establishments which they frequent.

Assembly bill 1153 (Polonetsky) would require that the Department of Agriculture and Markets publish violations of Kosher food laws in a monthly report as well as an annual report to be submitted to the Governor and the Legislature. Reports would have to include the name of the violator, date of violation and amount of penalty assessed.

Assembly bill 4090 (Parment) Another piece of legislation aimed at ensuring food safety, would allow inspectors employed by the Department of Agriculture and Markets to examine common carriers transporting food and food products under conditions whereby they may become adulterated. Current regulations exempt common carriers from this provision. This legislation would ensure that all food and food products are transported under the safest conditions at all times.

Finally, Assembly bill 6104 (Gromack) would create a nine member advisory board within the Department of Agriculture and Markets on food safety and inspection programs. Five members would be appointed by the Governor, to include two academic food safety experts and one representative each from the retail and food processing industries and one farmer. The Speaker of the Assembly and President Pro Tempore of the Senate would each appoint one consumer and one food industry representative. This advisory board would advise the Commissioner on the administration and enforcement of food safety laws and regulations, especially the adequacy of inspection and enforcement activities. It would also review existing and proposed laws and regulations and report to the Legislature on the need for changes.

The Committee will continue to focus its efforts on this vital concern in the coming session and will work with the Senate to ensure enactment of this legislation.

In this past legislative session, many bills were signed into law by the Governor which protect New York State's valuable agricultural industry. Pending issues for the 1998 session include:

streamlining and reorganizing the Department of Agriculture and Markets;

milk price reform/North East Dairy Compact;

food safety; and

humane treatment of animals.

Other issues facing the Assembly Agriculture Committee include the development of legal controls and better management practices for manure and sludge application on farmlands, including those located in the New York City watersheds. The Committee also remains committed to enacting legislation establishing a program for sustainable agriculture and organic farming. Finally, the Committee will seek to increase support for biotechnology at the Geneva experiment station which is important to the development of new agricultural practices in the State.

The Committee will be examining these and other issues and will discuss possible legislative solutions with all sectors of the agricultural community and the public.

APPENDIX A