Farm equipment repair bill passes committee; heads to House

Farmers don’t have the luxury to wait for their equipment to be fixed, so a bill approved by the House Agriculture, Water and Natural Resources Committee will give them leeway to do their own repairs, or at least take the equipment to an independent repair shop.

House Bill 1011 won a 9-4 party-line vote and is now awaiting review from the full House. The bill is sponsored by Representatives Brianna Titone, D-Arvada, and Ron Weinberg, R-Loveland.

Under the bill, equipment manufacturers would be required to provide parts, software, firmware, tools or documentation to either the owner of agricultural equipment or to independent repair shops and at a fair and reasonable price, defined as the suggested retail price. 

The issue of “right to repair” raises plenty of issues: manufacturers worry about illegal tampering, repairs that can void a warranty or that would grant access to proprietary source codes. Manufacturers, however, have acknowledged that farmers can fix 95 percent of the problems on even the most modern equipment.

Not surprisingly, manufacturers such as John Deere and CNH Industrial (which owns Case IH) are opposed to the measure, as is the Colorado Livestock Association. 

On the other side, almost every agricultural organization in Colorado supports it: wheat, wool and fruit and vegetable growers; the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association and the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. 

Not taking a position: Colorado Farm Bureau, because the American Farm Bureau last month signed an agreement with John Deere granting right to repair for Deere ag equipment. 

“It’s the farmers and their team who deliver our food and are our constituents,” not the dealers, Titone told the ag committee.

She addressed the John Deere agreement, calling it a “major endorsement” of the right to repair. 

Titone was one of the sponsors of a right-to-repair bill in 2022, dealing with wheelchairs.

Weinberg, a first-year lawmaker, told the committee he talked to farmers in Larimer and Weld counties and that farmers told him they feel “ripped off.” They buy a half-million-dollar tractors and when a sensor or part can’t get replaced, they’re stuck, he said.

“When you purchase something, you own it. At what point in time are we being stripped of our right to own something?” he asked.

Farmers told him they’re buying third-party illegal software from Russia or China and fix the equipment themselves. They’re fixing their own problems but voiding their own warranties, he said. “This gives them the avenue to not break the law.”

This is not going to be a hit to John Deere, Weinberg told the committee. 

The agreement between John Deere and American Farm Bureau is not an absolute nor is it legally binding, claimed one witness.

Russell Ball, who has a John Deere dealership with eight locations on the Eastern Plains, testified that said they support right to repair but not the right to modify equipment as it relates to safety and clean air. John Deere already supply an abundance of tools to repair what a customer owns, he said. Owners can download manuals and free diagnostics, and if the equipment is online, they can see diagnostic codes online or even on their phones. 

“Often these repairs can be made without sending a technician to the field,” Ball said. All parts and tools are available to customers, he added. This bill goes beyond the scope of repairs and gives customers access to manufacturer’s intellectual property, Ball explained, and could lead to the reprogramming of controllers, which he said can lead to illegal tampering, resetting of engine horsepower, speed limits and emissions control systems. 

Any repairs out of warranty would also impact the resale value of used equipment, several dealers testified. 

Most of those testifying in the two and a half hour hearing were equipment dealers. 

Dale McCall, the past president of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union and who runs a farm north of Yuma, testified about the problems he’s had with hay baler equipment.

In 2019, McCall Farms bought two new balers. They didn’t work properly and were out of service for half of the time in May and June and couldn’t get timely repairs. “We lost money because we couldn’t get the baling done and then it would rain.” They also lost money because the dealers didn’t have enough technicians, and lost money because their hay buyer pays more for higher quality and delays cost them quality.

The dealer blamed the manufacturer, the manufacturer blamed the dealer, McCall said. The repairs cost them $6,000. Their hay buyer threatened to cancel the contract for the next year. 

Finally, his son got in touch with someone at the corporate office and they got the codes. It took 90 minutes to get the balers back into operations. “I don’t understand embedded codes, but it cost us a lot of money.” Eventually, they returned the leased equipment and went to another dealer who he said would work with them. 

“We don’t want to mess with the tractor; we know that could violate the warranty. But on these simple things, where you could diagnose that you had to change a sensor, we ought to be able to do that,” McCall said.

Danny Wood, who farms in Peetz, said he bought a 2020 Case tractor in 2021. The tractor’s software couldn’t control the fertilizer and they spent $8,500 for someone to come out to fix a code. It worked for two days.

After that, the dealer had to send a technician, in the middle of planting season, resulting in another three-day delay and charged them $950 for another code. “We just want to be able to fix the small things,” Wood said.

Kyler Brown, a potato farmer and rancher in the San Luis Valley has a Case tractor, but there are no longer any Case dealers in the valley; the nearest one is in Pueblo, he said. Once they had to go to Garden City, Kan. for a part. He’s looking to buy a new tractor and said he won’t be looking at John Deere. 

The bill was amended to exempt agricultural aircraft, self-propelled vehicles used to transport people and powersports equipment.