# CA - Apiary Commission details



## LSPender (Nov 16, 2004)

As a member of the CSBA (CA State Beekeepers Association) I just recieved in the mail my quarterly news letter.

I will share some specific information to all of you, verbatum from the news letter.

First: My positon, I want to kill this LAW by voting NO.

Second: I believe in and support the CSBA. 


From the Bee Times winter 2010

Page 6 - Minutes of the board of directors meeting 11-15-10

"Apiary Commission - It is now law, and referendum lists are being compiled for a vote in May 2011; the $ 10,000 to fund this referendum will be via donations, per a resolution to be in the annual business meeting. An update for the membership will be given during the convension session. Our website should be linked to CDFA so people can get on the voting list. Talk it up so we can get a position vote."

Page 8

"Resolution #2 - AB 1912 referendum funds
WHEREAS the passage of Apiary Research Commision, AB 1912, requires a producers referendum for implementation, and
WHEREAS the proponents of the commision shall deposit with the Secratary an amount of funds determined by the CDFA Secratary to defray the expense of preparing an eligable producers list for voting, and other costs for conducting the vote, and
WHEREAS the necessary funds will not be returned to the contributors unless the referendum has positive results,
THEREFORE be it resovled the cost of the AB 1912 implementation referendum be collected by voluntary contributions and no funds be used from the CSBA general fund.

The resolution committee moved that we accept this resolution. Gene Brandi moved for adoption, Jackie Park-Burris seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. The PAm website has information on this commission."

Page 10

"Apiary Commission - LeRoy said we have $ 1700 already, and the Board voted to account for it the same way as the Right-To-Farm fund. Carlen will keep a list of who contributed, and in what order. Only 50+ hives will be assessed. Jackie moved that donations to fund the referendum stay with the commission to be used to fund research, if the referendum passes, unless the donor requests his donation be refunded. The motion was seconded and tabled."

Page 1 President's Words Frank Pendell, CSBA President (A excerpt relating to Commission)

The CSBA got legislation passed in Sacramento to set up an industry commission to raise funds for research and education. Our past efforts to do this through the CA Apiary Board resulted in assessments that mostly seemed to fund state bureaucrats, with very little going to bee research. With this commission, we can elect fellow beekeepers to it who will then control commission expenses, how the money is spent, and the assessement rate. While no one likes to be charged for something over which we have no control, this is probably the closest we can get to taxation with representation for the direct purpose of helping our industry, and keep state bureaucrats away from the money. This commission will let us raise money evenly across the spectrum of beekeeping (over 50 hives) in California. It includes both resident and non-resident beekeepers. To fund establishing the commission we are asking for voluntary contributions. We are using this method to respect those who do not wish to see their dues used for political purposes, and to gauge membership support on this effort. We need $ 17,500.00 to get this started, so if you support establishing a commission, please send in a donation with a note it is for the "commission fund"."

That it from the Bee Times.

Link to CA Dept of Food & AG marketing division

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/mkt/mkt/

Thanks,


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

From the Agriculture Dept. link above:

Article 7. Actions and Penalties 


79691. A civil penalty not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) may be levied by 
the commission upon a person who willfully does any of the following: 
(a) Renders or furnishes a false report, statement, or record required by the 
commission. 
(b) Fails to render or furnish a report, statement, or record required by the 
commission. 
(c) Conducts oneself in any way to affect the shipment of pollination units, bees, 
honey, or hive products in order to avoid payment of assessments. 
(d) Secretes, destroys, or alters records required to be kept by this chapter. 

79692. The commission shall establish procedures for the purpose of according 
individuals aggrieved by its actions or determinations an informal hearing before the 
commission, or before a committee of the commission designated for this purpose. 
Appeals from decisions of the commission may be made to the secretary. The 
determination of the secretary shall be subject to judicial review upon petition filed with 
the appropriate superior court. 

79693. (a) The commission may commence civil actions and utilize all remedies 
provided in law or equity for the collection of assessments and civil penalties, and for 
obtaining injunctive relief or specific performance, relating to this chapter and the rules 
and regulations adopted under this chapter. A court shall issue to the commission any 
requested writ of attachment or injunctive relief upon a prima facie showing by verified 
complaint that a named defendant has violated this chapter or any other rule or regulation 
of the commission, including, but not limited to, the nonpayment of 
assessments. No bond shall be required to be posted by the commission as a condition 
for the issuance of any writ of attachment or injunctive relief. 
(b) A writ of attachment shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with 
Section 485.010) of Title 6.5 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except that the 
showing specified in Section 485.010 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not required. 
Injunctive relief shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 525) of 
Title 7 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except that the showing of irreparable 
harm or of inadequate remedy at law specified by Sections 526 and 527 of the Code of 
Civil Procedure is not required. 
(c) Upon entry of any final judgment on behalf of the commission against any 
defendant, the court shall enjoin the defendant from conducting any type of business 
regarding beekeeping until there is full compliance with, and satisfaction of, the 
judgment. 
(d) Upon a favorable judgment for the commission, the court may order that the 
commission be reimbursed for reasonable attorney's fees and other actual related costs. 
Venue for these actions is at the domicile or place of business of the defendant or in the 
county of the principal office of the commission. The commission may be sued only in 
the county of its principal office. 

79694. Any action by the commission for any penalty or other remedy that is 
prescribed under this chapter shall be commenced within two years from the date of 
discovery of the alleged violation. Any action against the commission by any person 
shall be commenced within two years from the date of the alleged violation. 

79695. The commission is not required to allege or prove that an adequate remedy at 
law does not exist in any action brought under this chapter. 

79696. The termination of this chapter shall not affect or waive any right, duty, 
obligation, or liability that has arisen or that may thereafter arise in connection with this 
chapter, release or extinguish any violation of this chapter, or affect or impair any right 
or remedies of the commission with respect to any violation.

Got that? Fines for non-compliance and not giving them the records they demand you to keep. And they can shut down your business. Do we really need this?


----------



## chillardbee (May 26, 2005)

(c) Conducts oneself in any way to affect the shipment of pollination units, bees, 
honey, or hive products in order to avoid payment of assessments.

Does that pertian to beeks within the state of California only or for beeks that are out of state that would've otherwise of moved there bees there for the almonds too? What I'm asking is if an out of state beek decides to not move his hives to California (where as in the past he has), will he be penalized?


----------



## LSPender (Nov 16, 2004)

As I understand it, the Fee is on live hives as of March 1st in CA each year


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Well there you go, your off the hook.


----------



## LSPender (Nov 16, 2004)

For further info on commission please refer to Thread about new CA Tax

Read posts # 22, # 28 & # 30


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Again, the download of the actual law is here:

"CA Apiary Research Commission Advances "

http://projectapism.org/content/blogcategory/1/27/

Everyone who will be affected by this needs to read it.

I hope Larry will keep us updated.


----------



## EastSideBuzz (Apr 12, 2009)

Sorry I will just post the excerpt that makes sense to me. Is there a minimum wage per bee? Do we have to pay workmans comp for them? What next will have to pay.? Can we expense their meals?

California Tax Form 588 for Out-of-State Beekeepers
It appears that in an attempt to find additional sources of revenue to aid a failing state economy, California's Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is going to crack down on out-of-state beekeepers coming to the state to pollinate California crops. If you have income from California, and don't prepare a California tax return, the FTB would like 7% of your income and you may find your grower withholding this. To prevent it from happening, be pro-active, visit www.ftb.ca.gov and learn more about your requirements, fill out the proper forms (Form 588, the Nonresident Withholding Waiver Request), and claim your California expenses against your California income.


----------



## LSPender (Nov 16, 2004)

EastSideBuzz,

This is a whole different issue, the FTB in CA does want your money and yes they can get it.

Probably should start a thread on that, some commerical operators from out side CA have been advised to set up an additional company in CA for tax purposes.


Note: I, 3 years ago's at the CSBA meeting, told all of them that their would be unintended consequenses in their actions of going forward with the Apiary Commission and this is one of them.


----------



## EastSideBuzz (Apr 12, 2009)

LSPender said:


> EastSideBuzz,
> 
> This is a whole different issue, the FTB in CA does want your money and yes they can get it.


Many years ago I had a corporation in CA. I did not file a closing tax return and one day I got a (physical) knock on my door here in WA and it was a CA tax collector looking to go over my tax records. Yes they do want it and do come looking. 

So this year when I do Almonds for the fist time I will defiantly (yes I spelled it wrong) do the exemption form. (http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/)


----------



## svbeeco (Feb 12, 2010)

The Almond Board is a great example of the professional leadership and support to almond growers which can be an example to the beekeeping industry. I have not observed any complaints from growers about the fees they pay to sustain their organization. To the contrary, the positive benefits of the Almond Board to the growth of their industry are obvious!

In 1950 when this organization was started, I’m sure that similar complaints of unfair taxes, government intrusion, and higher costs were expressed just as some of you have written. But time has shown that the great strides in the almond industry have been supported by the farsighted leaders of their day. What were once considered as negatives have reaped huge benefits. 

The same can be true in the beekeeping industry. We should stop and consider the huge positive benefits that can be brought to our industry by giving back to ourselves in a similar unified way. This proposed new commission can usher in a new era of professional growth, development, and support for decades to come. 

If you can, take a look at this Almond Board site and consider what could happen in beekeeping if such a professional organization were put in place: http://www.almondboard.com/AboutTheAlmondBoard/Pages/default.aspx


----------



## borada bee doc (Feb 6, 2010)

Interesting input on the 7% tax. It seems that few beeks are aware of this and fewer growers are letting on that they know anything about it. I don't think people are taking this into account in their contract prices. I have heard that this is only an issue for large entities like Joe Traynor. Has anyone heard differently? Andrew


----------



## LSPender (Nov 16, 2004)

All almond growers raise crop in CA, not all beeks live in ca.

One of the main differences between all 58 other commissions and the apiary commission is that the 58 others are totally operational in CA only. They only raise funds from CA operations for the benefit of ca operating industries.

Industry representation is very important, currently we have 2 national organizations and many state and local organizations, if all beeks did agree that we need representation, who would do it? How do you choose?

Please note that historically we had 1 national organization, but splt up over the National honey Board issue about 10 yrs ago.


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

EastSideBuzz said:


> Sorry I will just post the excerpt that makes sense to me. Is there a minimum wage per bee? Do we have to pay workmans comp for them? What next will have to pay.? Can we expense their meals?
> 
> California Tax Form 588 for Out-of-State Beekeepers
> It appears that in an attempt to find additional sources of revenue to aid a failing state economy, California's Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is going to crack down on out-of-state beekeepers coming to the state to pollinate California crops. If you have income from California, and don't prepare a California tax return, the FTB would like 7% of your income and you may find your grower withholding this. To prevent it from happening, be pro-active, visit www.ftb.ca.gov and learn more about your requirements, fill out the proper forms (Form 588, the Nonresident Withholding Waiver Request), and claim your California expenses against your California income.


I looked at the form 588 and didn't see any way of backing out expenses. There are 5 reasons listed in PART 'V' that would allow a waiver but none deal with expenses. How does this work?
I may decide to scrap California if those socialists continue to tax and regulate us to death.


----------

