Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Connolly’s $1M invasive‑grass amendment fails on House floor
Summary
A Connolly amendment to deposit $1 million in a special natural‑resource account for weed‑and‑pest districts failed on a recorded roll call after dispute about whether the request was agency‑driven and whether the funding should be ongoing; proponents cited ranch impacts and chemical costs while opponents questioned sufficiency and prior JAC additions.
Representative Connolly urged colleagues to support an amendment that would deposit $1 million into a special natural‑resource account managed through the Department of Agriculture to help local weed‑and‑pest districts battle invasive annual grasses. "This allocates a million dollars to be deposited in the special natural resource account that was created in a previous statute," Connolly told the House, saying the funds would help pay for pesticide registration, chemicals and distribution to districts across the state.
Connolly described the economic impacts on ranchers — lower carrying capacity, reduced forage, and reseeding costs — and gave a concrete cost example: "when the cost of a chemical costs $1,160 a gallon, our weed and pest districts need all the help they can get." Supporters said timely action is cheaper than delay; opponents, including members on the floor who said they had not seen an agency request, argued the $1 million would be insufficient and questioned whether the funding should be added to a department’s ongoing base budget.
The Assistant Chief Clerk called the roll on the third‑reading amendment; the tally showed 14 in favor, 44 opposed, one conflict and three excused. By that vote the House rejected amendment number eight.
What happened next: the House moved on to other amendments and votes, and the floor record shows repeated concerns about one‑time funding versus ongoing additions to an agency’s base budget. For the weed‑and‑pest districts, proponents said even a modest infusion helps with high per‑unit chemical costs and that the amendment would be administered through the Department of Agriculture.
Why it matters: invasive annual grasses affect forage production, wildfire behavior and long‑term rangeland value in many parts of the state. The debate shows the House weighing targeted relief against fiscal constraints and prioritization questions during final budget passage.
Provenance: floor transcript, third reading (discussion recorded beginning SEG 021 and roll call recorded later).
