Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
-
Upload
mail-tribune -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
1/32
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
2/32
Purpose of Presentation
To provide the Board with projected costs forCounty implementation of GMO Measure No. 15-119, Ordinance to Ban Growing of SomeGenetically-Engineered (defined) Plants.
To describe for the Board some of the unique andpotentially significant enforcement challenges theGMO Measure presents.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
3/32
Purpose of Presentation- Qualifiers -
Cost projections necessarily involve estimation ofmultiple enforcement factors including, withoutlimitation, cost variables, frequency ofenforcement actions and difficulty of interpretingand defending the Ordinance.
Cost projections represent staffs best efforts toidentify cost factors associated with enforcementand to estimate costs as accurately as possible.
Because of the significant and complex estimationvariables, I cannot assure ultimate accuracy of thecost projections.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
4/32
Purpose of Presentation- NOT Advocacy Material -
Presentation is NOT intended to promoteapproval or rejection of the GMO Measure.
Staff is NOT urging voters to vote in aparticular manner.
Presentation has been approved by State
Elections staff as not promoting or opposingthe GMO Measure and it is in compliance withORS 260.432. ADV 14-026
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
5/32
Assumptions and
ConsiderationsMany Variables to Consider
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
6/32
Assumptions/Considerations
The Countys enforcement efforts will becomplicated due to undefined terms and vagueterminology used within the proposed Ordinance.
In order to enforce the proposed Ordinance, theCounty is going to have to make policy/legaljudgments on the various terms that are notdefined, increasing the risk of litigation.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
7/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Example #1, Section 635.10 Jurisdiction statesThe circuit court of the State of Oregon shallhave jurisdiction for all violations of thisOrdinance.
Yet, Section 635.20 of the proposed Ordinancestates, This abatement procedure may bepursued as an alternative to the judicial remediesfor a violation of any of the provisions of thisOrdinance.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
8/32
Assumptions/Considerations
These statements are contradictory and it will beup to the Development Services Department,with the assistance of County Counsel, todetermine the meaning of terms and to developa specific enforcement procedure that is differentthan Code Enforcements current procedures.This will be difficult and costly.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
9/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Example #2, Section 635.04 purports to exempteducational or scientific institutes (e.g. OSUExtension) provided the activities are conductedunder secure, enclosed indoor laboratoryconditions with the utmost precautionsto prevent
release [of genetic material]. . .
Utmost precautions is not defined. Does itrequire reasonable precautions or measures
incorporating the most recent technologicaladvancements, or something else?
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
10/32
Assumptions/Considerations
It is not clear that this Ordinance would applyonly to the unincorporated areas of JacksonCounty.
The Jackson County Code Enforcement Division
currently has no jurisdiction withinincorporated cities.
If this will be a county-wide program, it would
be a significant addition of area to cover andwould necessitate the addition of more than afull-time staff person.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
11/32
Assumptions/Considerations
It could create confusion for citizens as JacksonCounty would enforce for a certain type ofviolation within a city limits and the city willenforce for all other violations.
Currently the Code Enforcement Division is, forthe most part, capable of enforcing the CountysCodified Ordinance regulations (identification ofsolid waste, abandoned vehicles, illegal
construction, etc.) without assistance fromoutside agencies or utilizing independentcontractors.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
12/32
Assumptions/Considerations
This will not be the case with enforcement of theproposed Ordinance. Jackson County will requireassistance carrying out the following tasks relatedto enforcement:
Identification and testing of plants. Currentlythere is no place in Oregon that has the abilityto test for genetic modification of plants;
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
13/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Abatement. Section 635.11(i) requires theCounty to ensure that the abatement of thegenetically engineered plants is done in amanner that will minimize geneticcontamination or other harm. The County will
need to utilize an independent contractor toensure that this Section of the Ordinance is metas methods will vary depending upon manyfactors including, but not limited to, the growth
cycle at time of violation, type of crop, andseason;
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
14/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Identification of Utmost Measuresforeducational or scientific institutes (e.g. OSUExtension), or medical researchers, to qualifyfor the enforcement exemptions set forth inSection 635.04;
Expert witnesses for testimony in Circuit Courtor during Hearings Officer proceedings; and
Utilizing County Counsel more extensively thanis currently the case.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
15/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Abatement Costs: Currently, the County doesnot have an abatement program due, in part, toa lack of funding. Abatement is likely to be veryexpensive and there is no funding within theDevelopment Services budget to pay for it.
Appeals on Notices of Abatement 635.21(c) -Notice of the hearing may also be given toanyone the Hearings Officer determines to be
interested.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
16/32
Assumptions/Considerations
Currently the Hearings Officer does not makea decision on who receives notice. This stepwill add cost to the hearing, adds potentialliability, and is procedurally awkward.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
17/32
Other IssuesConsiderations That Affect the Ability to Determine the
Cost of Enforcement
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
18/32
Medical Marijuana
Growing most potent strains of marijuana is nowa crime again under newly enacted countyordinances on Kauai and the Big Island. If MauiCounty follows suit and passes a proposedordinance modeled on the Kauai law, marijuanagrowers will be subject to stiff new penaltiesthere as well. The changes are due to the recentenactment of anti-GMO legislation by countycouncils. In all three anti-GMO bills, gene
doubling is expressly identified as a form ofgenetic modification subject to the law.
The Hawaii Free Press, 12/8/13.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
19/32
Medical Marijuana
The most potent forms of marijuana are modifiedby a primitive genetic modification techniquewhich involves soaking the seeds in colchicines a carcinogenic derivative of crocus bulbs untilthe DNA doubles (or even quadruples), which in
turn doubles or quadruples the production ofTHC. This method produces the highest potencymarijuana varieties and the seeds commonly soldby online vendors.
The Hawaii Free Press, 12/8/13.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
20/32
Residential Grass Seed
Scotts Miracle-Gro is a genetically modified grassseed that has been modified to protect it frombeing killed by Roundup, the weed killer.
The Columbus Dispatch , 01/31/14
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
21/32
*Election Costs Estimate = 40,000
Program Costs
1 FTE Code Inspector 80,000
.1 FTE Office Assistant 7,000
Vehicle (4x4 pickup) 6,500
Direct Materials and Services 15,000Travel and Training 1,000
Hearings Officer 9,400
Contract for Testing/Witness 22,050
County Overhead (chargeback's) 32,366
Departmental Overhead 58,927
**Total program costs = 232,244Hearing Officer Imposed Fines and Fees 12,941
Net program costs = 219,302
Total Projected First Year Cost = 259,302
* Election cost might not be charged out
**Assumes current average rate of compliance
Year One Program Operating Costs
Not Including Abatement
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
22/32
Abatement Cost and
Recovery ConsiderationsConsiderations That Affect the Ability to Determine the
Cost of Enforcement
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
23/32
Abatement Cost Considerations
(i)the County shall thereafter take all actionnecessary to ensure that genetically engineeredplants are destroyed or removed from JacksonCounty in a manner that will minimize genetic
contamination or other harm.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
24/32
Jackson County is Responsible for the Initial
Cost of Providing for Abatement
While this cost is assumed to be born by theviolator, in the case of the Jackson CountyOrdinance, the Development Services Departmentinitially shallbe responsible to pay for the cost ofabatement.
The Board of Commissioners may make the costa special assessment against the propertyinvolved or a personal obligation of the generator.This language does not appear to give the County
a first priority lien and does not appear toauthorize a tax on the property.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
25/32
Recovery of Costs Sections 635.11(j) and 635.23 allow for
recovery of certain costs from violators.
635.11(j) allows recovery of all administrative and abatementcosts if violators are knowingly and willfully responsible for theviolation . . .
635.11(j) also provides that [c]osts of enforcementshall notbe imposed upon any person whose violation is not knowing andwillful.
Definitions of terms (in italics) are not clear.
Cost recovery may be an expensive/difficult process; Noguarantee that violator will actually pay.
Clear that some of the costs will not be recoverable.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
26/32
Ability to Recover Abatement
Costs
According to the Jackson County Assessor, largefarms with very good farm land have a realmarket value of about $1,000 an acre. Farm landwith average soil is about $500 an acre.
Remember that this is highest and best use farmland. These acres are outside the UGB and nofuture development is very likely to occur.
Non farm rural land, say a 5 acre, RR-5 zonedpiece of land, has a real market value of around$20,000 an acre.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
27/32
Ability to Recover AbatementCosts
Examples of developable land inside city limits includeMedford with a real market value of about $40,000 to$50,000 per acre, and Ashland is about $80,000 andup per acre. The County does not enforce in the citylimits so these are not comparable.
Depending on the circumstances, abatement costswill vary. According to information published bySonoma County in 2005, the California AgriculturalCommissioner estimated cost to remove, dispose,and replace the soil of one acre contaminated byGMOs would be approximately $86,915. Other soil
treatment options include chemical soil fumigationand heat treatment with an approximate cost of$15,000per acre.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
28/32
Ability to Recover AbatementCosts
If the aforementioned cost estimates are realistic forJackson County in 2014, and assuming a 20 acreabatement, it could cost the County somewherebetween approximately $300,000 ($15,000 x 20 acres)to $1,738,900 ($86,915 x 20 acres) to abate.
Under the same 20 acre assumption for abatement, thiswould mean the real market value for 20 acres would besomewhere between $10,000 ($500 x 20 acres) and
$20,000 ($1,000 x 20 acres). Even in what would likelybe a best case scenario in terms of value, the case of 20acres of RR-5, the real market value would be around$400,000 ($20,000 x 20 acres).
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
29/32
Ability to Recover AbatementCosts
This could create a deficit for the County with a lowlikelihood to recover costs in the range ofsomewhere between $290,000 to $1,338,900depending on the circumstances required in a 20
acre abatement activity.
It is likely that if abatement requires high costmitigation activities, then Jackson County could not
recover the cost incurred to abate the property,even with a special assessment resulting in anactual payment, and it may result in land beingforeclosed upon.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
30/32
Ability to Recover AbatementCosts
The entire Jackson County Code Enforcementbudget is currently approximately $538,000.
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
31/32
REMINDER- NOT Advocacy Material -
Presentation is NOT intended to promoteapproval or rejection of the GMO Measure.
Staff is NOT urging voters to vote in a particularmanner.
Presentation has been approved by StateElections staff as not promoting or opposing the
GMO Measure and it is in compliance with ORS260.432. ADV 14-026
-
7/27/2019 Presentation on Jackson County's ballot measure to ban GMO crops
32/32Q estions ?