REVISE MEMBERSHIP OF MICHIGAN BEAN COMMISSION

House Bill 4940 as reported from committee w/o amendment

Sponsor:  Rep. Edward J. Canfield, D.O.

Committee:  Agriculture                                                       (Enacted as Public Act 9 of 2018)

Complete to 10-17-17

BRIEF SUMMARY: House Bill 4940 would amend the Dry Bean Act (the Act) to revise the county representation and create a member at large for the Michigan Bean Commission.

FISCAL IMPACT: The bill would have no fiscal impact on state or local units of government.

THE APPARENT PROBLEM:

The Act created the Michigan Bean Commission, which administers the act, investigates violations of the act, and promotes research on bean varieties and the health, therapeutic, nutritional, and dietetic value of beans and bean products, among other duties listed in MCL 290.560. The commission currently consists of nine voting members, comprising one member from each of eight districts currently defined in the Act and one processor shipper and handler.

According to testimony given September 27, 2017 during the Agriculture Committee meeting, the act seeks to combine Districts 2 and 8, which are the lowest-acreage districts that grow beans among all eight districts, because District 2 has been having difficulty finding a replacement voting member.

THE CONTENT OF THE BILL:

HB 4940 would eliminate District 8, which is currently Saginaw County, and combine it instead with Gratiot County in District 2.

The bill would revise the voting members accordingly, reducing it to one member from each of seven districts and adding instead one member at large. The total number of voting members would remain the same at nine and would still include one processor shipper and handler.  The bill would require the commission's other members to select and appoint the member at large during the commission's annual meeting.

Finally, the bill would make numerous linguistic and stylistic changes throughout the act to reflect updated departmental names and references.

MCL 290.551 et al.

ARGUMENTS:

For:

Supporters of the bill argued that the Michigan Bean Commission needed a fix to help District 2, which has been struggling to find a replacement voting member for some time. Combining Districts 2 and 8 would not only help solve this plight, but it also makes the most sense as those two districts contain the least amount of acreage that grow beans.
In addition, the creation of one at-large voting member would ensure that the number of voting members would stay at nine.

Against:

No arguments were presented in opposition to the bill.

POSITIONS:

Representatives from the following entities showed support for the bill:

·         Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (9-27-17)

·         Michigan Bean Commission (9-27-17)

·         Michigan Agri-Business Association (9-27-17)

                                                                                        Legislative Analyst:   Emily S. Smith

                                                                                                Fiscal Analyst:   William E. Hamilton

■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.