Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pesticide Application Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee hears bill to extend pesticide application safety committee through 2035
Summary
The Washington State Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks Committee heard Substitute House Bill 1294, which would extend the pesticide application safety committee through July 1, 2035, and remove a restriction on an advisory subgroup holding in‑person meetings.
The Washington State Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks Committee heard Substitute House Bill 1294 on a statutory committee created to study pesticide application safety and related data-sharing.
Committee staff Elena Becker said the pesticide application safety committee was created in 2018 "to explore how the departments of agriculture, health, labor, and industries, and the Washington Poison Center collect and track data." Becker said the substitute bill would extend the committee’s expiration date 10 years, to July 1, 2035, and would remove an existing restriction on an advisory subgroup conducting in‑person meetings.
Representative Tom Dent, prime sponsor, said the committee grew out of a 2018 study group and has produced a report and recommendations. "I have to say I'm not always really high on these things but this one has worked very well and was good success," Rep. Dent said, describing the panel’s work on drift, applicator safety, multilingual education and shared data.
Becker summarized the fiscal estimate included with the bill: a little over $600,000 in the 2025–27 biennium, with roughly $550,000 anticipated from the Model Toxics Control Operating Account. No additional staff-level changes were specified in the hearing record.
Senators asked why the original statute carried a sunset clause; Dent said the panel’s work was interrupted in part by COVID and that a 10‑year extension would allow continued study of best management practices and new application technologies. A committee member asked whether past committee dysfunction was a reason for sunsets; Dent declined to engage in that line of debate.
Committee staff reported no in-person testifiers and recorded 62 written responses in support and none in opposition for the bill. No formal committee action or vote on the bill was recorded in the hearing transcript.
The hearing record shows the committee will move on to the next bill on the agenda following public comment; any amendments or votes appear not to have occurred during this hearing.
