Lawmakers and farmers urge rejection of proposed agricultural labor board, warn of costs and farm closures

Several representatives used the remonstrance period on the House floor to urge opposition to House Bill 25 48, a proposal that would alter agricultural labor rules and create a state-level board or oversight structure affecting farm employment.

Representative Tom Helfrich opened the remonstrance sequence and said he rose "to oppose House Bill 25 48 on behalf of our agricultural community in The Dalles and Hood River," reading testimony from affected farmers. Helfrich cited a claim that Oregon farm labor costs are among the nation’s highest at $19.82 per hour and warned the bill "adds costs that could close farms, cut jobs, and deepen a crisis."

Multiple colleagues read letters and testimony from farmers and farm operators who said the bill would transfer decision-making to unelected bureaucrats, increase litigation risk, and make seasonal and variable farm labor untenable. Representative Greg Smith moved adjournment later in the day, but the remonstrances included sustained floor remarks from representatives who opposed the bill including Representatives Tramm, Draisen, Yonker, Levy, and others. Testimony cited impacts such as reduced crop variety, lost income from overtime rules, increased compliance paperwork, and potential bankruptcy for nurseries.

Representative Bosa Davis and Representative Bulsar Davis (both read testimony or floor letters) emphasized both support for worker protections and the breadth of existing state and federal labor safeguards; Bosa Davis urged members to "support the good guys, and go after the bad guys" and to use existing enforcement channels for violations.

Representative Mannix used a historical analogy to warn against what he termed government overreach, saying the measure resembled the "first stage of Stalin's collectivization" (floor language). Other members, including Representative Scharf, described practical complications in agriculture, noting the sector grows "over 200 specialty crops" that require flexible, crop-specific labor arrangements.

Speakers described real-world examples: a pumpkin patch that employs up to 200 people in October and uses H-2A guest workers; nurseries that export much of their product and compete against lower-cost out-of-state producers; and small-family farms that would reportedly be forced to reduce workforce or change operations under the measure. Several statements urged lawmakers not to impose a new, unelected board that could set wages and safety rules specific to agriculture.

No final vote on HB 25 48 occurred on the floor during this session; the transcript records remonstrances and constituent letters but not a motion or final disposition on the bill. The floor record indicates strong opposition among several House members and a request that the bill not move forward from committee.

Representative Bosa Davis concluded by recounting testimony of two sisters who had survived family tragedies and a farming accident and warned that the bill would imperil their ability to continue farming. That emotional appeal underscored the tone of the remonstrances: widespread concern from rural districts that the bill would harm family farms, seasonal workers, and local food production.

Quotes from the transcript: • "This bill adds costs that could close farms, cut jobs, and deepen a crisis." — Representative Tom Helfrich (reading constituent testimony). • "Support the good guys, and go after the bad guys." — Representative Bosa Davis (urging enforcement of existing worker protections rather than creating new boards). • "We are being pushed out to the brink of extinction by the contributions and continuous onslaught of legislatures coming in and out of Salem that make farming increasingly impractical, unprofitable, and in some cases, nearly impossible to do." — Letter read by Representative Bobby Levy (constituent testimony).

Outcome: Remonstrances concluded without a floor vote on HB 25 48; members asked committees and colleagues to consider the testimony and implications before the bill proceeds.