The composition of the state Plant Board -- with its longtime mix of members appointed by the governor and others by private agriculture groups -- will get the attention of lawmakers on Monday.
The legality of the board's makeup is before the state Supreme Court, where a decision this fall could determine whether a change in state law is needed when the General Assembly convenes in regular session next year.
The board's composition and "dicamba concerns" are on the agenda for a joint meeting at 10 a.m. Monday of the House and Senate committees on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development.
The Supreme Court has two cases on the issue:
• Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza's ruling in December that part of the 1917 state law establishing the Plant Board and allowing the appointment of private citizens to the board is unconstitutional. Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, filed that lawsuit.
• Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox's decision in March 2018 to dismiss a lawsuit filed against the Plant Board by six Arkansas farmers. The board's composition was among the farmers' complaints. Fox dismissed most of the lawsuit, citing an earlier Arkansas Supreme Court ruling that the state cannot be made a defendant in its own courts.
Both lawsuits were sparked by Plant Board decisions in 2017 to restrict the use of dicamba, a herbicide manufactured by Monsanto and other companies and popular among many farmers but despised by others because of the chemical's tendency to move off target and hurt other crops and vegetation.
The Supreme Court hasn't indicated when, or if, it will decide the cases, CV-20-173 and CV-20-164. All parties in the two cases -- attorneys for Bayer, attorneys for the six farmers and the attorney general's office, which is representing the Plant Board -- have asked for oral hearings.
While often splintered on dicamba regulations over the years, the Plant Board voted 13-0 to appeal the ruling against its composition, which had never been challenged until the lawsuits now on appeal to the Supreme Court.
The board was created in 1917, primarily to deal with an outbreak of cedar rust that was threatening the state's then-vibrant apple industry. That law, and subsequent amendments, allowed the mix of appointments.
Today's board consists of 16 members with voting privileges: seven members appointed by the governor and nine by groups such as those representing aerial applicators, seed dealers, seed growers, horticulture, pest management, forestry and pesticide manufacturers. Two other members represent the University of Arkansas System's Agriculture Division but don't have voting privileges.
"I think the meeting is more of an educational thing," said Rep. Dan Douglas, a Republican from Bentonville and chairman of the House agriculture committee. "Not all our members necessarily know how the different industries in agriculture have someone on the board."
Douglas said "there's been talk" among individual House members that the law on the board's composition should be changed, even without a Supreme Court ruling against the law. "I haven't polled members on it," he said. "There are some who'd like to go ahead and make a change but, for the most part, they want to see how the ruling comes out in the Supreme Court."
While Fox, in his ruling in the lawsuit filed by farmers, didn't specifically address the board's composition, Piazza expressed a mix of sentiment in ruling on the Monsanto case.
He praised the experience and expertise of the state's many boards and commissions, including the Plant Board.
"I don't think you could ever say that the Plant Board was unfair because they, you know, they want to do this right," Piazza said from the bench. "But, for when you're standing in the galley looking up at government, you want to make sure that it's all done properly."
Piazza said he thought a simple fix would be for the private groups to continue to have representatives on the Plant Board, but with representatives chosen by the governor not by their respective memberships.
"Then you feel as a citizen more comfortable that the governor made that choice, it may not be the right choice, but you know that it's being made," Piazza said.
Douglas said he prefers to await a court ruling. "The Plant Board, for the most part, seems like for years it has worked pretty good, but we've had contentious issues come up lately, mainly dicamba," he said. "But just because something worked good in the past doesn't mean it can't be improved, but we also don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water."
The committees also are to discuss the financial crunch suffered this year by county fairs forced to close or severely curtail events because of the coronavirus pandemic; the state's fight against feral hogs; pandemic-related federal funding for the state Department of Agriculture,;and the status of the Grand Prairie and Bayou Meto water-management projects.