Structural Pest Control Board votes to oppose AB 2422, asks DPR to lead wildlife-safety training

The Structural Pest Control Board voted unanimously to oppose AB 2422 and instructed staff to submit a letter of opposition to the bill’s author and the chair of the relevant committee.

Board members said they oppose removing rodenticides from the range of tools available to professional applicators and argued that the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) — not the Legislature — is the appropriate venue to sort technical restrictions and training requirements. "I think it should be that this board recognizes this as a public health and safety issue," Board member Curtis Good said during the discussion. "I do not believe this type of bill belongs in the legislature. I think it belongs at DPR."

The board amended the opposition letter to add a statement supporting the availability of industry training specific to wildlife‑protection contexts where rodenticide use could affect non‑target animals. The amendment was accepted by the maker of the motion and the seconder. After discussion the board approved the motion and the amendment; staff said they would draft the letter and submit it to the author’s office before the committee hearing.

Board members debated whether the board had the statutory mandate to weigh in on pesticide policy, with one member saying the issue raised consumer‑protection concerns and another noting that DPR regulates product use and labels. Several board members urged more research into misuse and recommended DPR investigate misuse patterns before legislative bans. "There needs to be further studies," one board member said. "Find out who is misapplying those products and how and where."

Public commenters, including pest control operators and a representative of the fumigation trade, described instances of illegal or excessive bait use (for example on illegal cannabis grows) and warned that removing certain rodenticides could have unintended public‑health impacts. Several industry speakers volunteered to help develop context‑specific training and to work with DPR on outreach and enforcement.

The board recorded the motion to oppose AB 2422, as amended, with a roll‑call vote in which the presiding members voted in favor. Board staff said they and the board president would finalize and file the opposition letter and, if possible, have a representative attend or monitor the legislative hearing.