California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Enacted 2 D cosponsors

SB 153 — Industrial hemp.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 838, Statutes of 2019.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 23, 2019. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 78% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 4 sponsors

    1 primary, 3 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (2 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing federal law, the Agricultural Act of 2014, authorizes an institution of higher education, as defined, or a state department of agriculture, as defined, to grow or cultivate industrial hemp under an agricultural pilot program, as defined, under certain conditions. Existing federal law, the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, requires a state desiring to have primary regulatory authority over the production of industrial hemp in the state to submit to the United States Secretary of Agriculture, through the state department of agriculture, a plan, with specified contents, under which the state monitors and regulates hemp production. Existing state law regulates the cultivation and testing of industrial hemp, as defined, and regulates the activities of seed breeders to develop seed cultivars through seed development plans, as defined. Existing law creates the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board. Existing state law requires an entity that is either a grower of industrial hemp for commercial purposes or a seed breeder that develops varieties of industrial hemp for sale or research to register with the county agricultural commissioner of the county in which it intends to cultivate industrial hemp and to annually renew its registration. Existing state law exempts an established agricultural research institution, as defined, from these registration requirements. Existing state law requires the Department of Food and Agriculture to establish a registration fee and appropriate renewal fee to be paid by registrants. Under existing state law, these fees are deposited in the Department of Food and Agriculture Fund and continuously appropriated to the department for the administration and enforcement of this registration program and other provisions regulating the cultivation of industrial hemp. Existing state law requires a county agricultural commissioner to transmit information collected pursuant to these provisions to the department. Under existing state law, a violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Under existing state law, these provisions are operative only to the extent authorized by federal law, as set forth in an opinion of the Attorney General. Before enactment of the federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, an opinion of the Attorney General issued pursuant to existing state law concluded that industrial hemp may only be grown pursuant to these provisions to the extent authorized by the federal Agricultural Act of 2014. Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , added by Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, revised some provisions of state law regarding industrial hemp. This bill would revise the provisions regulating the cultivation and testing of industrial hemp to conform with the requirements for a state plan under the federal Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, by, among other things, revising the definition of "industrial hemp," and replacing the terms "seed breeder," "seed cultivar," and "seed development plan" with the defined terms "hemp breeder," "cultivar," and "variety development plan," respectively. The bill would expand and change the membership of the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board, as specified. The bill would apply the registration requirements to growers of industrial hemp for noncommercial as well as commercial purposes. Upon approval of a state plan, as specified, the bill would apply certain registration and regulatory requirements to established agricultural research institutions, including submission of research plans, as defined, to county agricultural commissioners before cultivating hemp. The bill would impose new requirements on the department and county agricultural commissioners for the handling and transmittal of registration information, impose new testing requirements, provide new enforcement procedures to be operative as of the effective date of an approved state plan, as defined, and impose new conditions on eligibility to participate in the industrial hemp program, as defined. By expanding registration requirements, including payment of registration fees, to some growers of industrial hemp for agricultural or academic research purposes, the bill would establish a new source of revenue for a continuously appropriated fund, thus making an appropriation. This bill would require the Secretary of Food and Agriculture, in consultation with the Governor and the Attorney General, to develop and submit a state plan to the United States Secretary of Agriculture, as provided, on or before May 1, 2020. This bill would specify consequences for a violation of its provisions according to the frequency of prior violations and whether the violation was negligent, grossly negligent, reckless, or intentional. By imposing new registration requirements on some growers of industrial hemp for agricultural or academic research purposes, the violation of which would be a misdemeanor, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend certain provisions of AUMA to further the purposes and intent of AUMA with a 2/3 vote of the membership of the Legislature. This bill would amend AUMA by modifying the definition of "established agricultural research institution" and imposing certain registration and other requirements on these institutions, as of the date on which a state plan for California is approved pursuant to the federal Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the federal Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA. By increasing the duties of county agricultural commissioners who would enforce certain of these new provisions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 838, Statutes of 2019.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2865.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  6. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  7. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 76. Noes 1. Page 3262.) Ordered to the Senate.

  8. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Read third time and amended.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 1.) (August 30).

  12. August 21 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  13. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (July 3). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on AGRI.

  16. Referred to Com. on AGRI.

  17. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  18. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 1221.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  19. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  20. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  21. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1090.) (May 16).

  22. Set for hearing May 16.

  23. May 6 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  24. Set for hearing May 6.

  25. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 748.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  26. Set for hearing April 22.

  27. Re-referred to Com. on AGRI.

  28. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  29. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  30. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 23.

  31. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 118 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Wilk

Co-sponsors (3)

Not signed on (118)

118 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 118 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 40 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 27000
Democratic 10000
Republican 3000
Total 40000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Borgeas — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 76 Yea · 1 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 52000
Democratic 19102
Republican 5000
Total 76102
% of votes cast 96%1%0%3%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Fong — Yea
Salas — Yea
Brough — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Ting — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Levine — Yea
Melendez — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Low — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Wood — Yea
Medina — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Chu — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Weber — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Not Voting
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Nay
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 17 Yea · 1 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4100
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 17100
% of votes cast 94%6%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Fong — Yea
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Nay
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Democratic 3000
Republican 1000
Total 11000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Salas — Yea
Gray — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Levine — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 35 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 24003
Democratic 9000
Republican 2000
Total 35003
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (38)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Borgeas — Not Voting
Morrell — Not Voting
Nielsen — Not Voting
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 6000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 5 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 4001
Total 5001
% of votes cast 83%0%0%17%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 153 do?
Existing federal law, the Agricultural Act of 2014, authorizes an institution of higher education, as defined, or a state department of agriculture, as defined, to grow or cultivate industrial hemp under an agricultural pilot program, as defined, under certain conditions. Existing federal law, the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, requires a state desiring to have primary regulatory authority over the production of industrial hemp in the state to submit to the United States Secretary of Agriculture, through the state department of agriculture, a plan, with specified contents, under which the state monitors and regulates hemp production. Existing state law regulates the cultivation and testing of industrial hemp, as defined, and regulates the activities of seed breeders to develop seed cultivars through seed development plans, as defined. Existing law creates the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board. Existing state law requires an entity that is either a grower of industrial hemp for commercial purposes or a seed breeder that develops varieties of industrial hemp for sale or research to register with the county agricultural commissioner of the county in which it intends to cultivate industrial hemp and to annually renew its registration. Existing state law exempts an established agricultural research institution, as defined, from these registration requirements. Existing state law requires the Department of Food and Agriculture to establish a registration fee and appropriate renewal fee to be paid by registrants. Under existing state law, these fees are deposited in the Department of Food and Agriculture Fund and continuously appropriated to the department for the administration and enforcement of this registration program and other provisions regulating the cultivation of industrial hemp. Existing state law requires a county agricultural commissioner to transmit information collected pursuant to these provisions to the department. Under existing state law, a violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Under existing state law, these provisions are operative only to the extent authorized by federal law, as set forth in an opinion of the Attorney General. Before enactment of the federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, an opinion of the Attorney General issued pursuant to existing state law concluded that industrial hemp may only be grown pursuant to these provisions to the extent authorized by the federal Agricultural Act of 2014. Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , added by Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, revised some provisions of state law regarding industrial hemp. This bill would revise the provisions regulating the cultivation and testing of industrial hemp to conform with the requirements for a state plan under the federal Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, by, among other things, revising the definition of "industrial hemp," and replacing the terms "seed breeder," "seed cultivar," and "seed development plan" with the defined terms "hemp breeder," "cultivar," and "variety development plan," respectively. The bill would expand and change the membership of the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board, as specified. The bill would apply the registration requirements to growers of industrial hemp for noncommercial as well as commercial purposes. Upon approval of a state plan, as specified, the bill would apply certain registration and regulatory requirements to established agricultural research institutions, including submission of research plans, as defined, to county agricultural commissioners before cultivating hemp. The bill would impose new requirements on the department and county agricultural commissioners for the handling and transmittal of registration information, impose new testing requirements, provide new enforcement procedures to be operative as of the effective date of an approved state plan, as defined, and impose new conditions on eligibility to participate in the industrial hemp program, as defined. By expanding registration requirements, including payment of registration fees, to some growers of industrial hemp for agricultural or academic research purposes, the bill would establish a new source of revenue for a continuously appropriated fund, thus making an appropriation. This bill would require the Secretary of Food and Agriculture, in consultation with the Governor and the Attorney General, to develop and submit a state plan to the United States Secretary of Agriculture, as provided, on or before May 1, 2020. This bill would specify consequences for a violation of its provisions according to the frequency of prior violations and whether the violation was negligent, grossly negligent, reckless, or intentional. By imposing new registration requirements on some growers of industrial hemp for agricultural or academic research purposes, the violation of which would be a misdemeanor, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend certain provisions of AUMA to further the purposes and intent of AUMA with a 2/3 vote of the membership of the Legislature. This bill would amend AUMA by modifying the definition of "established agricultural research institution" and imposing certain registration and other requirements on these institutions, as of the date on which a state plan for California is approved pursuant to the federal Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the federal Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA. By increasing the duties of county agricultural commissioners who would enforce certain of these new provisions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Who sponsors SB 153?
SB 153 is sponsored by Wilk, Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. (Democratic), Caballero, Anna M. (Democratic), and Galgiani.
What is the current status of SB 153?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 23, 2019. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 153?
Track SB 153 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 153

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 153

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →