Session 2 Journal

Monty Hoggard

I found the California Dairy Leaders session on the state legislative and political process to be informative, interesting and enjoyable. As a class we met many influential people and covered several current topics that are changing the course of our industry.

The class met in the hotel lobby on the evening of June 14 to go to dinner at the Rio City Café in Old Town, Sacramento, where two invited guests joined the group. The first was Gary Conover, a lobbyist for Western United Dairymen since September 1993. Mr. Conover graduated from California State University Chico with a Business Marketing Degree. Mr. Conover explained the role of the lobbyist, comparing it to that of a shepherd, helping a proposed bill find its way through the governmental process. He has worked to help pass numerous bills. During this time he has seen the focus of most bills of interest to dairy farming move from the pooling and pricing issues of past years, to environmental issues of late. Even the nature of the environmental issues has changed, progressing from the defensive, defending the industry from laws that would unfairly regulate agricultural practices, to the proactive, promoting bills that help the industry regulate itself before others do it for them.

The second speaker of the evening was Rich Matteis, a lobbyist for ten different agriculture-related associations, including California Grain and Feed Association. Mr. Matteis has a Masters in Business Administration from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, and has been a lobbyist for 27 years. He spoke of the need for coalition building in agriculture. By working with different associations, we are capable of building bridges to become more powerful and have more resources available. This becomes a great way to develop relationships built on trust with other associations, lobbyists, and public officials.

We rose early the next morning and gathered for breakfast at the hotel. Shortly after, we walked to the State Capitol for a tour of the building and Capitol Park. We met our guide, Ann M. Fry and quickly began our tour. We traveled through the Capitol building first, visiting the Senate and Assembly Chambers, passing portraits of past Governors that were on display along the way, and finishing at the dome. The history of the building, from its groundbreaking in 1860 to its completion in 1874 and remodeling in the 1970s, was awe-inspiring. Thanks in part to historical photos used during restoration, it was possible to return the Capitol to an appearance much like its original form. Outside, the Capitol Park grounds were perfectly manicured and the memorials commemorating various historical events were beautiful. My personal favorite was the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial.

Next, we journeyed back inside the Capitol where we attended the hearing of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources chaired by Senator Michael J. Machado. We listened to many bills being presented by their authors, such as AB 1071, authored by Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews. A consultant, Bethany Westfall, was present to aid the Assemblywoman and answer questions posed by the Senators. Lobbyist Rich Matteis was present as a sponsor of the bill, representing the California Grain and Feed Association. This process seemed to be more beneficial to the class than to the Senators. It appeared as though the Senators had already decided how they would be voting before the hearing began. This might have been due in part to the work of some very good lobbyists who were working the bill.

We departed the hearing for a brief meeting with Senator Roy Ashburn, a candidate for Congress in the next election. Senator Ashburn served as a Kern County supervisor for twelve years before his duties as a state senator. Senator Ashburn was very knowledgeable about issues facing agriculture; he explained that in the future, the industry would be faced with a growing number of environmental issues. His parting words of encouragement to the class were, “Don’t be timid. Don’t back away from leadership roles.”

We moved on to the office of Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews, the author of AB 1071 presented at the hearing attended by the class earlier in the day. Assemblywoman Matthews worked in the grocery industry for 21 years and participated in many grocery associations prior to joining the Assembly. She was an impressive speaker, and seeing her in action earlier in the hearing helped to break the ice and get a dialogue started. The class asked several questions concerning the process of authoring a bill and moving it through the legislative process, which she answered thoroughly.

After leaving Assemblywoman Matthews’ office, we were met for a brief meeting in the hall by Senator Jeff Denham, who had been present at the Agriculture and Water Resources Hearing.

We departed the Capitol for the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) building, where we met the remainder of our invited speakers. The first speaker at the CDFA building was Pete Price, a lobbyist with the Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF). Mr. Price also works with other environmental associations, but with an agricultural perspective. Mr. Price described politicians, the public, and the agricultural industry all as having perception problems. Many politicians, as well as the majority of the general public, lack sufficient background in agriculture to understand the issues that we are asking them to legislate. By the same token, we as farmers need to look through the public’s eyes regarding these issues. Mr. Price took this opportunity to help us expand our minds, not to bash agriculture. Mr. Price went on to talk about sustainable agriculture, of which he is a supporter, and how it could be useful in many areas now, such as reducing the use of pesticides to help air and water quality, without going to the extreme of organic farming.

Next on the itinerary was a meeting with Jim Collin, Lead Consultant for Assemblywoman Matthews. He has been a consultant since January 1997. Mr. Collin was an agricultural lending banker until his employment in the legislature in 1986. As a consultant he is not an elected official, but an at-will employee responsible for analysis of bills, making suggestions, and finding solutions. He left the class with, “I work with the pleasure of the Chair and the Speaker.”

Our next speaker, George Soares of the law offices of Kahn, Soares and Conway, started practicing law in 1972. In 1976, he received a big break for his law office, writing the legal framework for a commission for the avocado industry. At the time, only one commission existed. It was for the table grape industry and was signed by then Governor, Ronald Reagan. Mr. Soares went on to write the structure for many agricultural commissions. Now that some commissions are being labeled as unconstitutional, concern for the fate of the milk industry’s commission is growing. Mr. Soares has advised the California Milk Advisory Board to wait until the CPR becomes law. The CPR is a tool to appoint a new attorney for these commissions, to replace the state Attorney General who is currently responsible for the commissions. We will have to wait to see which one will come first: the CPR, or declaring the commission unconstitutional.

Following Mr. Soares, the Senior Vice President of The Dolphin Group, Michael Boccadoro, joined the class to elaborate on his group’s involvement in the legislative process. The Dolphin Group has helped the dairy industry with issues such as milk standards in the past, and environmental issues recently.

In 1962, California milk component standards were raised to provide a higher quality and more nutritious product. The Shamrock Company of Arizona was bringing substandard milk into California and selling the milk to Californians. The Dolphin Group researched consumer attitudes and used the information to show the dairy industry how they could educate the public about superiority of California milk. Using various media outlets, the group has been able to educate public officials on the difference in California milk, using such campaigns as “California milk does a body better.” With regards to environmental issues, The Dolphin Group has already completed some public polling to understand the public’s concerns and the priority of those concerns. Their research has found that the key issues of concern are air quality, followed by poverty and unemployment. Only the future can tell what effect the work of The Dolphin Group will have on the dairy industry.

Dr. Anita Edmundson from the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) visited with the group as our final speaker of the day to discuss the programs currently under way at CDFA. Dr. Edmundson has worked for the California Department of Food and Agriculture for ten years, focusing on animal health programs. She also explained that funding for CDFA comes from the general fund, and budget cuts do affect the organization. She went on to discuss many of the diseases the dairy industry in California has had to deal with in the past and currently, such as Brucellosis, Tuberculosis, Johne’s disease, and BSE. A national animal identification and tracking system are in future plans within the animal health programs, so that an animal’s history can be traced back to its origin within 48 hours. As of now, there are many issues, such as funding and confidentiality, with the animal identification and tracking system.

We arrived at Simon’s Café later that evening for dinner. A few guests joined us that evening to answer any final questions and to get to know the group better. Those joining us for dinner were Jim Collin, Debbie Murdock, May Vaughn Geurity and Gary Conover.

On Wednesday, we had a final session with Mr. Marsh and Mr. Conover. There was a question and answer period that seemed to help the class better understand much of what they learned during the previous meetings on the legislative process. I would like to suggest that for future class sessions, material is sent to class members prior to the beginning of the gathering. This would allow the class members to better prepare themselves for each session, making them more valuable. I feel that if we had more preparation beforehand, we would have been more able to ask questions of our speakers. Overall, I believe the session was very valuable, helping us to better understand the legislative process and all the work that goes with it.