HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPB agenda 112205ENVIRONMENT
N�
COUNTY OF ORANGE
AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: Agricultural Preservation Board
From: David Stancil, E &RC Director
Date: November 22, 2005
9C��II 1 NOV Z 9 2005 �
I�
Re: November 30th Meeting L---
Please find attached the agenda for our next meeting, a combined meeting for the
months of November and December, scheduled for:
The agenda features special guest speaker Gerry Cohn of American Farmland Trust,
who will discuss the new Agricultural Development & Farmland Preservation
Enabling Act legislation. We will also have recommendations for the upcoming 2006-
08 Lands Legacy Action Plan, the new VA District brochure, and membership issues
to consider.
Please contact Carol Melton (245 -2590) by the Monday before the meeting if you
will be unable to attend.
Copies: Dianne Reid, Economic Development Director
Fletcher Barber, CES County Director
Brent Bogue, District Conservationist
Phyllis Ruth, Farm Service Agency Director
Tina Moon, Preservation Planner
Noah Ranells, Agricultural Economic Development Specialist
AGENDA
November 30, 2005
Planning and Agricultural Center
Revere Road, Hillsborough, NC
7:30 p.m.
Time Pate AGENDA ITEM
7:30 1. CALL TO ORDER
7:31 2. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
7:32 01 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — (September 21)
7:35 05 4. GUEST SPEAKER
(Gerry Cohn, American Farmland Trust)
Agricultural Development & Farmland Preservation Enabling
Act (Attachment 1)
8:15 15 5. ITEMS FOR DECISION
a. Lands Legacy Action Plan 2006 -2008 — Farmland
Preservation Objectives recommendations (Attachment #2)
b. New Voluntary Agricultural Districts Brochure
(Attachment #3) (page 27)
8:40 29 6. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
a. Membership Matters under new ordinance (Attachment #4)
b. Ag Center Work Group status report / 2006 Agricultural
Summit (Attachment #5) (page 33)
C. "The Future of Food" — local strategies?
d. Updates to Mission Statement agenda page (Attachment #6)
e. Annual priorities for Board of Commissioners Retreat
(Attachment #7) (page 46)
8:55 56 7. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
a. Farmland Preservation Report
b. "Farms, Communities and Collaboration — A guide to
resolving farm - neighbor conflict ".
c. Michigan legislature "Right to Farm Act"
d. News article "County, Public get to plan for growth "
9:00 8. ADJOURNMENT
DRAFT MEETING SUMMARY
AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION BOARD
September 21, 2005
MEMBERS PRESENT: Elizabeth Walters, Louise Tate, Gordon Warren, Marty Mandell, Vickie Brown, James
and Patricia Wynn
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tony Kleese, Bob Strayhorn, Don Johnson and Whit Morrow
GUEST: Matthew Roberts, VAD candidate and Andrew Branan, North Carolina Farm Transition
Network
STAFF: Environment & Resource Conservation Director David Stancil, Preservation Planner Tina
Moon and Carol Melton, staff
ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER
Stancil called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. as the Vice Chair Kleese was absent.
ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
Stancil requested an addition to the agenda regarding the status of the APB Chair since RanelIs
vacated the position.
ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 15, 2005
Stancil entertained motion for approval of the August meeting minutes.
MOTION: Warren motioned approval of August 17, 2005 meeting minutes. Seconded by Wynn.
VOTE: Unanimous approval.
ITEM #3a: APB CHAIRMAN VACANCY
Stancil reported that even though Vice Chair Kleese had previously served two consecutive terms
as chair, the county commissioners' office ruled that he could continue to serve as the chair for
the remainder of the year as he did not succeed himself. It was also noted that Kleese could run
for chair position at the upcoming election. Another option, the APB could hold a special election
for a chair this fall to carry through until the regularly scheduled election time, in February.
Members discussed options for filling the chairman position for the remaining term of office and
agreed to ask Vice Chair Kleese to continue in the chairman role.
ITEM #4: SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
a. Andrew Branan — North Carolina Farm Transition Network
Branan described the NC Farm Transition Network's mission - -to ensure that working farms
remain in agricultural production by connecting retiring farmers with aspiring farmers to ensure
that active farms will transition from one generation to another. Effective farm business
transitions require advanced and sustained planning, a process many farm families have yet to
undertake.
Branan said that it is equally important to help young or beginning farmers overcome the barriers
they face starting and operating a profitable farm business. These entering farmers need creative
equity building strategies to acquire land and equipment as well as management skills to run a
successful operation. Branan noted that the 2002 Census confirms that North Carolina's farm
community is aging. Since the late 1970s the average age of a North Carolina farmer has
steadily increased to about 56 years old. Roughly half of North Carolina farmers are over 55, and
about half that number are over age 65. These statistics point to an enormous transfer of farm
assets over the next two decades. If steps are not taken now to plan for their continued use, a
large amount of North Carolina's most valuable asset, land, will be permanently removed from
production.
DRAFT September 21, 2005 Agricultural Preservation Board Meeting Summary Page 1 of 3
U ,a
The transition of a farm business from one generation to the next carries a number of challenges
that can affect the incoming farmer's chances of business success. These challenges and risks
include:
• Planning to meet the financial needs of the senior generation without liquidating the farm
assets,
• Assuring adequate incoming sharing between generations,
• Meeting the inheritance expectations of off -farm family members without giving them
alienable interests in farm assets,
• Transferring farm assets to the succeeding farm operator without prohibitive tax liability,
• Passing farm management responsibilities to a successor in a manner that cultivates
solid farm management skills.
The NC Farm Transition Network (NCFTN) gives informational presentations on subjects such
as, legal, financial and human resource risk management, at county extension centers, growers
association and cooperative meetings.- They also provide no -cost consultation to farmers and
their families in areas relating to generational transition, estate planning, business entity
formulation, lease and purchase arrangements and assessment of conservation funding
opportunities. The network also assists farmers in search of non - family business partners,
managers and employees. Brannon described five task areas focused on by the FTN as:
1. Delivering educational programs, and no -cost individual education on farm business
succession planning;
2. Creating a network and working partnerships among farm business professional
advisors that result in effective farm transition plans;
3. Developing a Farm Mentor and Apprentice Program to pass the experience and skill
of our senior generation of farmers to the next generation;
4. Creating a web -based market place for farm business opportunities, including
employment, partnership, and land for sale or rent as farm assets; and
5. Developing of a web -based library of farm business succession resources for farmers
and their families.
Branan said that he would be glad to work with Orange County and make presentations. He
suggested investigating different programs and on in particular called "Farm Beginnings" in
Minnesota.
ITEM #5: ITEMS FOR DECISION
a. Roberts VAD application
Moon provided a brief update on the Roberts' VAD application, which was submitted in January.
The application included two tracts of just over 55 acres each. When the APB first considered the
application, only one tract was in the Present Use -Value program and it was under the 80 -acre
minimum acreage requirement. The amendments to the program, adopted in June, lower the
acreage threshold to. 20 acres. Neither tract has a farm management or erosion plan through the
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Warren explained the process for getting a
farm plan and the APB tabled the application pending the completion of the NRCS farm plan.
ITEM # 6: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
a. House Bill 607 — Agricultural Development and Farmland preservation Enabling Act
Stancil reported that the bill has now been ratified and suggested the board review and discuss
the new legislation at its October meeting to provide sufficient time for discussion. Branan
recommended inviting Gerry Cohn, from the American Farmland Trust, to the meeting since
Gerry was involved in getting the new legislation passed.
b. Agricultural Center Workgroup — September 19 Status Report
Moon provided a short summary of the Agricultural Center Work Group's last meeting. The group
divided into two subcommittees to work on various research topics, which would lead to text for
the group's final report. One subcommittee is working on short -term issues for farm service
agencies such as office space and parking. The other subcommittee is working on long -term
goals to help preserve the future of local agriculture 10 -20 years down the road. Noah Ranells,
the new Agricultural Economic Development, is going to begin to draft an outline for the final
DRAFT September 21, 2005 Agricultural Preservation Board Meeting Summary Page 2 of 3
report. Phyllis Ruth offered to include the survey identifying short -term issues in the Farm
Service Agency Newsletter. The group is also working on a presentation to be used for public
outreach efforts are on goin The trip to Blue Ridge Ventures in Candler, NC, has been
scheduled for September 30 h.
C. Communications /Meeting with other Ag Boards (status) including plans for outreach to
share information on the changes to the Voluntary Agricultural Districts program.
At earlier meetings the APB agreed to have a joint meeting with all of the agricultural boards
(government) to develop partnerships and to collaborate their efforts into a unified voice for
Orange County agriculture - -the first step in the "Ag Intra- Agency Communication" goal of the
board. Members discussed topics for the joint meeting agenda - -the farmland mapping project,
the agricultural center recommendations, efforts to pool resources to preserve farming in Orange
County and beginnings of an "Orange County Agricultural Strategic Plan." Staff was requested to
prepare a draft agenda, setup meeting details and relay the information to members of the other
boards.
Stancil reported that a poll of the stakeholder groups concluded that November 1 st would be a
date for the joint meeting. Staff was requested to move forward with meeting preparations and to
share a draft agenda for discussion at the October 19 APB meeting.
d. Priorities for Lands Legacy Action Plan 2006 -08
Stancil asked members to be prepared to discuss possible ventures for consideration in the
annual Lands Legacy Action Plan for 2006 -08 at the October meeting.
e. Natural & Cultural Systems Element, Agricultural Chapter
Staff should learn, in the near future, if the Recreation and Parks piece will be its own element or
a chapter of the Natural and Cultural Systems Element. The Agricultural Preservation Board
would take the lead in preparing the agricultural chapter of the Natural and Cultural Systems
Element, from the planning stage, to public outreach, to the actual preparation of text. Staff will
have a better sense of the schedule for the NCS Element in the near future and will share that
information with the APB once it become available.
ITEM #7: Informational Items
a. Intervale — Burlington, Vermont
b. Agrirama
c. Land for Tomorrow
d. Senate Bill 681 Forestry
e. News Article "Agricultural Legislation, Hartford, C7
Next meeting October 19tH
MOTION: Warren motioned to adjourn at 9:15 p.m. Seconded by Tate.
VOTE: Unanimous approval.
DRAFT September 21, 2005 Agricultural Preservation Board Meeting Summary Page 3 of 3
0.7 ���
American Farmland Trust Southeast Regional Office.A�h
Southeast Regional Office
, nie.:rioa,, far sl x7, '1 °rt t NORTH CAROLINA
NC Enacts Major Changes to Farmland Preservation Act
In August, North Carolina passed its first major changes to the state's Farmland Preservation
Act since 1986. H607, Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural Districts, expands the state's definition
of agriculture, creates an advisory board and a broader array of tools for the state's purchase of
agricultural conservation easements (PACE) program and establishes a new tier of benefits in
the agricultural districts program. Crafted by a diverse coalition, this legislation reflects the
changing nature of agriculture in the state, the importance of farm profitability in family
farmers' future vision for their land, and the challenges and opportunities resulting from the end
of the federal tobacco program.
H607 combines two bills aimed at updating and expanding the NC Farmland Preservation Act
(GS 1o6 -745). The North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(NCDA &CS), under the leadership of Commissioner Steve Troxler, outlined its vision for
protection of the family farm in a plan submitted to the General Assembly in March. The plan
emphasized the importance of an expanded definition of agriculture to reflect the multiple
enterprises and activities that are sustaining many family farms.
The NCDA &CS also sought to revamp and revive the state's Farmland Preservation Trust Fund,
the primary source of funding for the PACE program. The program has only received $2.6
million since its inception and no allocation since 2003. With the new legislation, the fund is
now called the Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund, with a 19
member advisory committee to provide recommendations to the Commissioner of Agriculture. It
also is expanded to fund a range of conservation agreements and enterprise programs that could
improve profitability for the farming operation.
H607 creates an expanded tier of options for participants in the popular Voluntary Agricultural
Districts (VAD) program, which allows counties to adopt farmland preservation ordinances and
to provide benefits to farmers willing to restrict development on their land for a 10 -year period.
For farmers willing to forgo their right to withdraw from the VAD program before the end of the
10 -year agreement, the new legislation provides them with additional conservation cost -share
assistance and priority for future state benefits. It also allows them tosell some non -farm
products and maintain their agricultural zoning exemption.
H607 also allows municipalities to adopt VAD ordinances and for cities and counties to amend
their ordinances within their planning jurisdiction so they can provide benefits through an
enhanced VAD program to promote continued agricultural land use. According to Paul Meyer,
assistant general counsel for the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, "This
legislation will be helpful in strengthening the viability of working lands."
The ideas for this new set of benefits arose from the Agricultural Viability workshops co-
sponsored by the NCDA &CS and American Farmland Trust in December 2004, where farmers
and local leadership identified the tools and incentives that would help them create a more
stable investment climate for agriculture.
Commissioner Troxler sees the partnerships created through this legislation as improving
opportunities for family farmers throughout the state. "Passage of House Bill 6o7 is a major step
in recognizing agriculture and rural communities as an economic force for the future of North
Carolina," said Commissioner Troxler. "Agriculture is not a disappearing part of our heritage.
Agriculture is transitioning to new crops, bringing new business opportunities and becoming a
stable, viable choice for young farm families and their children."
http://Yvww.fannland.org/southeast/nc—h607.htm
'J
09/12/2005
1 "
Uf U
H607 [Ratified]
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA
SESSION 2005
HOUSE BILL 607
RATIFIED BILL
Page 1 of 8
J 9
AN ACT TO RENAME THE FARMLAND PRESERVATION ENABLING ACT AND FARMLAND
PRESERVATION TRUST FUND AS THE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND FARMLAND
PRESERVATION ENABLING ACT AND THE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
FARMLAND PRESERVATION TRUST FUND AND TO AMEND THE ACT TO ESTABLISH A
CATEGORY OF ENHANCED VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS THAT OFFERS
ADDITIONAL BENEFITS FOR FARMLAND WHEN THE OWNER OF THE FARMLAND IS
WILLING TO ENTER INTO AN IRREVOCABLE CONSERVATION AGREEMENT FOR AT
LEAST TEN YEARS AND TO CREATE AN AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
FARMLAND PRESERVATION TRUST FUND ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Whereas, North Carolina's 53,000 farms provide food, fiber, economic activity, wildlife habitat,
natural resource protection, open spaces, cultural heritage, and fiscal savings to the citizens of the State; and
Whereas, a productive and stable agricultural sector is important to farm families, rural
communities, local economies, and the State of North Carolina; and
Whereas, the Voluntary Agricultural Districts program is a popular, low -cost, locally driven
option that links farmers, elected officials, county staff, and the general public in understanding and
supporting the needs of agriculture; and
Whereas, landowners are looking for a wider range of options to help them develop sustainable
and profitable farms and pass them along to future generations; and
Whereas, expanding the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act and authorizing counties and cities
to establish a new category of agricultural district, an enhanced voluntary agricultural district, will provide
counties and cities with a wider range of options to protect farmland from nonfarm development by
providing programs within their jurisdictions that promote the growth, sustainability, and profitability of
farming operations; Now, therefore,
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
SECTION 1. The title of Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the General Statutes reads as rewritten:.
"Article 61.
Agricultural Development and Preservation of Farmland."
SECTION 2. G.S. 106 -735 and G.S. 106 -736 are recodified as Part 1 of Article 61 of Chapter
106 of the General Statutes, to be entitled "General Provisions ".
SECTION 3. G.S. 106 -737 through G.S. 106 -743 are recodified as Part 2 of Article 61 of
Chapter 106 of the General Statutes, to be entitled "Voluntary Agricultural Districts ".
SECTION 4. G.S. 106 -744 is recodified as Part 4 of Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the General
Statutes, to be entitled "Agricultural Conservation Easements ".
SECTION 5. Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Part
to read:
"Part 3 Enhanced VoluntgU Agricultural Districts.
106 - 743.1. Enhanced voluntary agricultural districts.
(a) A coun1y or a municipalfity municipal m4y adopt an ordinance establishing an enhanced voluntgjy
agricultural district An ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part shall provide:
W For the establishment of an enhanced voluntary agricu` ltural district that initially consists of
at least the number of contiguous acres of agricultural land, and forestland and horticultural
land that is part of a qualifying farm under G.S. 106 -737 or the number of qualifying farms
deemed appropriate b the governing board of the county or city adopting the ordinance.
For the ormation of the enhanced voluntary agricultural district upon the execution of a
http: / /www.ncga. state. nc. us / Sessions / 2005 /Bills/House/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
)7 [Ratified] Page 2 of 8
conservation agreement as 'defined in G.S. 121-35, that meets the condition set forth in
G.S. 106-743.2 by the landowners of the requisite acreage to sustain agriculture in the
enhanced voluntary agricultural district.
That the form of the agreement under subdivision (2) of this subsection be reviewed and
approved by an agricultural advisory board established under G.S. 106 -739, or other
iaoverniniz board of the county or cily that adopted the ordinance.
That each enhanced voluntm agricultural district have a representative on the agricultural
advisory board'established under G.S. 106 -739.
The purpose of establishing an enhanced voluntary agricultural district is to allow a county or a
T to provide additional benefits to farmland be and that available in a volunta agricultural district
iblished under Part 2 of this Article when the owner of the farmland agrees to the condition imposed
ter G.S. 106-743.2. The county or city that adopted the ordinance may take any action it deems
)ropriate to encourage the formation of these districts and to further their purposes and objectives.
(cj A county ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part is effective within the unincorporated areas of
county. A city ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part is effective within the corporate limits of the city.
,ity may amend its ordinances in accordance with G.S. 160A -3 83.2 with regard to agricultural districts
:hin its planning jurisdiction.
A county or city ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part may be adopted simultaneously with the
ration of a voluntary agricultural district pursuant to G.S. 106 -738.
106- 743.2. Conservation agreements for farmland in enhanced voluntary agricultural districts;
limitation.
A conservation agreement entered into between a county or city and a landowner pursuant to
S. 106-743.1(a)(2) shall be irrevocable for a period of at least 10 years from the date the agreement is
.cuted At the end of its term, a conservation agreement shall automatically renew for a term of three
irs, unless notice of termination is given in a timely manner by either par1y as. prescribed in the ordinance
ablishing the enhanced voluntary agricultural district. The benefits set forth in this Part shall be available
the farmland that is the subject of the conservation agreement for the duration of the conservation
reement.
106 - 743.3. Enhanced voluntary agricultural districts entitled to all benefits of voluntary
agricultural districts.
The provisions of G.S. 106 -739 through G.S. 106 -741 and G.S. 106 -743 apply to an enhanced voluntary
ricukdral district under this Part to an ordinance adopted under this Part, and to any person, entity; or
mland subject to this Part in the same manner as they apply under Part 2 of this Article.
106 - 743.4. Enhanced voluntary agricultural districts; additional benefits.
O Property that is subject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106 -743.2 that remains in effect
W receive up to twenty -five percent 25 %0 of its gross sales from the sale of nonfarm products and still
alify as a bona fide farm that is exempt from zoning. regulations under G.S. 153A- 340(b). For purposes of
S 153A- 340(b), the production of any nonfarm product that the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
rvices recognizes as a Goodness Grows in North Carolina product that is produced on a farm that is
bject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106-743.2 is a bona fide farm purpose. A farmer seeking to
nefit from this subsection shall have the burden of establishing that the property's sale of nonfarm products
1 not exceed twenty-five percent 25% of its gross sales. A coun ty may ado t an ordinance pursuant to
is section that sets forth the standards necessary for proof of compliance.
Nothing in this section shall affect the county's authority to zone swine farms pursuant to G.S. 153A -340
o
O A person who farms land that is subject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106 -743.2 that
mains in effect is eligible under G.S. 143-215.74(b) to receive the higher percentage of cost -share funds
r the benefit of that farmland under the Agriculture Cost Share Program established pursuant to Part 9 of
-ticle 21 of Chanter 143 of the General Statutes for funds to benefit that farmland.
U State departments, institutions, or agencies that award grants to farmers are encouraged to give
iority consideration to any person who farms land that is subject to a conservation agreement under
.S. 106 -743.2 that remains in effect.
106 - 743.5. Waiver of utility assessments.
Ca) In the ordinance establishing an enhanced voluntary agricultural district under this Part, a county
a city may provide that all assessments for utilities provided by that county or city are held in abeyance,
ith or without interest, for farmland subject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106 -743.2 that remains
effect until improvements on the farmland property are connected to the utility for which the assessment
as made.
((b) The ordinance may provide that, when the period of abeyance ends, the assessment is payable in
Lp: / /www.nega.state.ne.us/ Sessions / 2005 /Bills/House/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
H607 [Ratified] ;; 'J � Page 3 of
L+
accordance with the terms set out in the assessment resolution.
(c Statutes of limitations are suspended during the time that any assessment is held in abeyance
under this section without interest.
O If an ordinance is adopted by a coun1y or a city under this section then the assessment procedures
followed under Article 9 of Chapter 153A or Article 10 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes,
respectively, shall conform to the terms of this ordinance with respect to qualifying farms that entered into
conservation agreements while such ordinance was in effect.
(e� Nothing in this section is intended to diminish the authority of counties or cities to hold
assessments in abeyance under G.S 153A -201 and G.S. 160A -237. "
SECTION 6. G.S. 153A- 340(b)(2) reads as rewritten:
11(2) Except as provided in G.S. 106 -743.4 for farms that are subject to a conservation
agreement under G.S. 106 - 743.2, bona Bey -fide farm purposes include the production and
activities relating or incidental to the production of crops, fruits, vegetables, ornamental and
flowering plants, dairy, livestock, poultry, and all other forms of agricultural products
having a domestic or foreign market. For purposes of this subdivision, the production of a
nonfarm product that the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services recognizes as
a "Goodness Grows in North Carolina" product that is produced on a farm subject to a
conservation agreement under G.S. 106 -743.2 is a bona fide .farm purpose."
SECTION 7. Article 19 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new
section to read:
"$ 160A- 383.2. Voluntary agricultural districts.
A city m y amend the ordinances applicable within its planning_ jurisdiction to provide flexibility to
farming operations that are located within a city or county voluntary agricultural. district or enhanced
voluntuy a ricultural district ado ted under Article 61 of Cha ter 106 of the General Statutes. Amendments
to applicab e ordinances may include provisions regarding on -farm sales, pick -your -own operations, road
signs, a�ritourism, and other activities incident to farming For purposes of this section, the term "farming"
shall have the same meaning as set forth in G.S. 106 - 581.1.
SECTION 8. G.S. 143- 215.74(b)(9) reads as rewritten:
"(9) When the a plicant is either (i) a limited- resource Rwffier farmer, (ii) a beginning
farmer, or (iii) a erson farmin land that is located in an enhanced volunta a icultural
district and is subject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106 -743.2 that remains in
effect, State funding shall be limited to ninety percent (90 %) of the average cost for each
practice with the assisted farmer providing ten percent (10 %) of the cost, which may
include in -kind support of the practice, with a maximum of one hundred thousand dollars
($100,000) per year to each applicant. The following definitions apply in this subdivision:
a. Beginning farmer. — A farmer who has not operated a farm or who has operated a
farm for not more than 10 years and who will materially and substantially participate
in the operation of the farm.
al. Enhanced voluntaragricultural district. — A district established by a county or a
city by ordinance under Part 3 of Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the General Statutes.
b. Limited- resource farmer. — A farmer with direct and indirect annual gross farm
sales that do not exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) and with an
adjusted household income in each of the previous two years that is at or below the
greater of the county median household income, as determined by the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development, or two times the national poverty
level based on the federal poverty guidelines established by the United States
Department of Health and Human Services and revised each April 1.
C. Materially and substantially participate.
1. In the case of an individual, for the individual, including members of the
immediate family of the individual, to provide substantial day -to -day labor
and management of the farm, consistent with the practices in the county in
which the farm is located.
2. In the case of an entity, for all members of the entity, to participate in the
operation of the farm, with some members providing management and some
members providing labor and management necessary for day -to -day activities
such that if the members did not provide the management and labor, the
operation of the farm would be seriously impaired."
SECTION 9. G.S. 106 -735, as recodified by Section 2 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"$ 106 -735. Short title and purpose.
http: / /www.ncga.state.nc.us/ Sessions / 2005 /Bills/House/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
)7 [Ratified]
(a) This
Lbling Act."
(b) The purpose of this Article is to authorize counties and cities to undertake a series of programs to
ourage the preservation of fiwft4ftft4- qualifying farmland,-as defined herei-n herein, and to foster the
lopment, and sustainability of family farms."
SECTION 10. G.S. 106 -7365 as recodified by Section 2 of this act, reads as rewritten:
[06 -736. A ricultural-Develo ment/Farmland preservation programs authorized.
A county or a city may ordinance* establish a farmland preservation program under this Article.
ordinance may authorize qualifying farms, as defined in G.S. 106 -737, to take advantage of one or more
he benefits authorized by the remaining sections of this Article.
A coun1y or a ci1y mgy develop programs to promote the growth. development, and sustainabili
Earmina and assist farmers in developing and implementing _plans that achieve these goals. For purposes
his Article, the terms "agriculture "agricultural ", and "farming" have the same meaning as set forth in
>. 106 - 581.1."
SECTION 11. G.S. 106 -737, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
106 -737. Qualifying farmland.
In order for farmland to qualify for inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district or an enhanced voluntary
icultural district under Part 1 or Part 2 of this Article, it must be real property that:
(1) Is participating in the farm present- use -value taxation program established by
G.S. 105 -277.2 through 105 -277.7 or is otherwise determined by the county to meet all the
qualifications of this program set forth in G.S. 105 - 277.3;
AALI .11L
Page 4 of 8
e- Article shall be known as "The. Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation
(3) Is managed in accordance with the Soil Conservation - Service detmect erosion control
practices that are addressed to highly erodable land; and
(4) Is the subject of a conservation agreement, as defined in G.S. 121-35, between the county
and the owner of such land that prohibits nonfarm use or development of such land for a
period of at least 10 years, except for the creation of not more than three lots that meet
applicable county zoning and subdivision regulations."
SECTION 12. G.S. 106 -738, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
106 -738. Voluntary agricultural districts.
(a) An ordinance adopted under this Attiele -Part shall provide:
(1) For the establishment of voluntary agricultural districts consisting initially of at least the
number of contiguous acres of agricultural land, and forestland or
horticultural land that is nart of a uali ing farm or the number of qualifying farms
deemed appropriate by the ,governing board of the county
or ci adopting the ordinance;
(2) For the formation of such districts upon the execution by the owners of the requisite
acreage of an agreement to sustain agriculture in the district;
(3)- That the form of this agreement must be reviewed and approved by an agricultural advisory
board established under G.S. 106 -739 or some other county board or official;
(4) That each such district have a representative on the agricultural advisory board established
under G.S. 106 -739.
(b) The purpose of such agricultural districts shall be to increase identity and pride in the agricultural_
mmunity and its way of life and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other negative impacts on
Dperly managed farms. The county or city that adopted an ordinance under this Part may take such action
it deems appropriate to encourage the formation of such districts and to further their purposes and
j ectives.
(c) A county ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part is effective within the unincorporated areas of
county. A cfty ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part is effective within the co orate limits of the ci
citv may amend its ordinances in accordance with G.S. 160A-383.2 with reaar to agricultural districts
p: / /www.ncga.state.ne.us/ Sessions/ 2005Bills /House/HTNIL/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
H607 [Ratified] E Page 5 of 8
within its planning jurisdiction."
SECTION 13. G.S. 106 -739, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"§ 106 -739. Agricultural advisory board.
An ordinance adopted under this Part or Part 3 of this Article shall provide for the establishment of an
agricultural advisory board, organized and appointed as the county or city that adopted the ordinance shall
deem appropriate. The county or city that adopted the ordinance may confer upon this advisory board
authority to:
(1) Review and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of
agricultural districts;
(2) Review and make recommendations concerning any ordinance or amendment adopted or
proposed for adoption under this Part or Part 3 of this Article;
(3) Hold public hearings on public projects likely to have an impact on agricultural operations,
4 Aparticularly if such projects involve condemnation of all or part of any qualifying farm,
dvise the governing board of the county or city that adopted the ordinance
on projects, programs, or issues affecting the agricultural economy or way of life within the
county;
(5) Perform other related tasks or duties assigned by the governing board of the county
.or city that adopted the ordinance."
SECTION 14. G.S. 106 -740, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"§ 106 -740. Public hearings on condemnation of farmland.
An ordinance adopted under this Part or Part 3 of this Article may provide that no State or local public
agency or governmental unit may formally initiate any action to condemn any interest in qualifying farmland
within a voluntary agricultural district under this Part or an enhanced yoluntaryagricultural district under
Part 3 of this Article until such agency has requested the local agricultural advisory board established under
G.S. 106 -739 to hold a public hearing on the proposed condemnation.
(1) Following a public hearing held pursuant to this section, the board shall prepare and submit
written findings and a recommendation to the decision- making body of the agency
proposing acquisition.
(2) The board designated to hold the hearing shall have 30 days after receiving a request under
this section to hold the public hearing and submit its findings and recommendations to the
agency.
(3) The agency may not formally initiate a condemnation action while the proposed
condemnation is properly before the advisory board within these time limitations."
SECTION 15. G.S. 106 -742, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"§ 106 -742. Waiver of water and sewer assessments.
(a) A county or a city that has adopted an ordinance under this Part may provide by ordinance that its
water and sewer assessments be held in abeyance, with or without interest. for farms, whether inside or
outside of a voluntary agricultural district, until improvements on such property are connected to the water
or sewer system for which the assessment was made.
(b) The ordinance may provide that, when the period of abeyance ends, the assessment is payable in
accordance with the terms set out in the assessment resolution.
(c) Statutes of limitations are suspended during the time that any assessment is held in abeyance
without interest.
(d) If an ordinance is adopted under this section, then the assessment procedures followed under
Article 9 of Chapter 153A of the General Statutes or Article 10 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes,
whichever applies. shall conform to the terms of this ordinance with respect to qualifying farms that entered
into conservation agreements while such ordinance was in effect.
(e) Nothing in this section is intended to diminish the authority of counties or cities to hold
assessments in abeyance under'-'.'. ' `4 " '"" :G.S. 153A -201 or G.S. 160A- 237."
SECTION 16. G.S. 106 -743, as recodified by Section 3 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"§ 106 -743. Gox -Local ordinances.
A county or a cily adopting an ordinance under this Part or Part 3 of this Article may consult with the
North Carolina Commissioner of Agriculture or his staff before adoption, and shall record the ordinance with
the Commissioner's office after adoption. Thereafter, the county or ci shall submit to the Commissioner at
least once a year, a written report including the status, progress and activities of ' its farmland
preservation program under this Part or Part 3 of this Article."
SECTION 17. G.S. 106 -744, as recodified by Section 4 of this act, reads as rewritten:
"§ 106 -744. Purchase of agricultural conservation eftseme easements establishment of North
Carolina Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund.
http: / /www.ncga.state.ne.us/ Sessions/ 2005Bills /fIouse/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
)7 [Ratified] -' Page 6 of 8
(a) A county may, with the voluntary consent of landowners, acquire by purchase agricultural
lservation easements over qualifying farmland as defined by
G.S. G.S. 106 -737.
(b) For purposes of this section, "agricultural conservation easement" means a negative easement in
iss restricting residential, commercial, and industrial development of land for the purpose of maintaining
agricultural production capability. Such easement:
(1) May permit the creation of not more than three lots that meet applicable county zoning and
subdivision regulations; aura
(1 a M4y permit agricultural uses as necessa to promote agricultural development associated
with the family farm; and
(2) Shall be perpetual in duration, provided that, at least 20 years after the purchase of an
easement, a county may agree to reconvey the easement to the owner of the land for
consideration, if the landowner can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the county that
commercial agriculture is no longer practicable on the land in question.
(c) There is established a "North Carolina Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust
rid" to be administered by the Commissioner of Agriculture. The Trust Fund shall consist of all monies
.eived for the purpose of purchasing agricultural conservation easements or funding_ programs that
)mote the development and sustainability of farming and assist in the transition of existing farms to new
m families, or monies transferred from counties or private sources. The Trust Fund shall be invested as
)vided in G.S. 147 -69.2 and G.S. 147 -69.3. The Commissioner shall use Trust Fund monies forre -for an
the following:
H2' The purchase of agricultural conservation easements, including transaction eas#�acosts.
Public and private enterprise programs that will promote profitable and sustainable family
farms through assistance to farmers in developing and implementing_ plans for the
production of food, fiber, and value -added products, agritourism activities, marketing and
sales of agricultural products produced on the farm, and other agriculturally related
business activities.
(3) To fund conservation agreements to bring into or maintain farmland in active production of
food, fiber, and other agricultural products.
(4 The costs of administering the program under this Article, including the cost of staff and
staff support.
(c 1) The Commissioner shall distribute Trust Fund monies for such purchases, including transaction
sts, as follows:
(1) To a private nonprofit conservation organization that matches thirty percent (30 %) of the
Trust Fund monies it receives with funds from sources other than the Trust Fund.
(2) To counties according to the match requirements under subsection of this section.
(ems} c2 _ A county that is an enterprise tier four county or an enterprise tier five county, as these tiers
defined in G.S. 105- 129.3(a), and that has prepared a' countywide farmland protection plan shall match
teen percent (15 %) of the Trust Fund monies it receives with county funds. A county that has not prepared
; ountywide farmland protection plan shall match thirty percent-(30 %) of the Trust Fund monies it receives
th county funds. A county that is an enterprise tier one county, an enterprise tier two county, or an
terprise tier three county, as these counties are defined in G.S. 105- 129.3(a), and that has prepared a
untywide farmland protection plan shall not be required to match any of the Trust Fund monies it receives
th county funds.
(ems} c3 The Commissioner of Agriculture shall adopt rules governing the use, distribution, investment,
d management of Trust Fund monies.
(d) This section shall apply to agricultural conservation easements falling within its terms. This
ation shall not be construed to make unenforceable -any restriction, easement, covenant, or condition that
,es not comply with the requirements of this section.
This section shall not be construed to invalidate any farmland preservation program.
This section shall not be construed to diminish the powers of any public entity, agency, or instrumentality
acgre by purchase, gift, devise, inheritance, eminent domain, or otherwise and to use property of any
.-id for public purposes.
This section shall not be construed to authorize any public entity, agency, or instrumentality to acquire by
linent domain an agricultural conservation easement.
(e) As used in subsection (el) c2 of this section, a countywide farmland protection plan means a
in that satisfies all of the following requirements:
(1) The countywide farmland protection plan shall contain a list and description of existing
agricultural activity in the county.
p: / /www.nega.state.nc.us/ Sessions/ 2005Bills /House/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
H607 [Ratified] Page 7 of 8
(2) The countywide farmland protection plan shall contain a list of existing challenges to
continued family farming in the county.
(3) The countywide farmland protection plan shall contain a list of opportunities for
maintaining or enhancing small, family -owned farms and the local agricultural economy.
(4) The countywide farmland protection plan shall describe how the county plans to maintain a
viable agricultural community and shall address farmland preservation tools, such as
agricultural economic develo ment, including farm diversification and marketing
assistance; other kinds of agricultural technical assistance, such as farm infrastructure
financing, farmland 'purchasing, linking with younger farmers, and estate planning; the
desirability and feasibility of donating agricultural conservation easements, and entering
into voluntary agricultural districts.
(5) The countywide farmland protection plan shall contain a schedule for implementing the
plan and an identification of possible funding sources for the long -term support of the plan.
(f) A countywide farmland protection plan that meets the requirements of subsection (e) of this
section may. be formulated with the assistance of an agricultural advisory board designated pursuant to
G.S. 106 -739.
(g) There is established the Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund
Advisory Committee The Advisory Committee shall be administratively located within the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services and shall advise the Commissioner on the prioritization and allocation of
funds the development of criteria for awarding funds program planning, and other areas where monies from
the Trust Fund can be used to promote the growth and development of family farms in North Carolina. The
Advisory Committee shall be composed of 19 members as follows:
The Commissioner of Agriculture or the Commissioner's designee, who shall serve as the
Chair of the Advisory Committee.
2 The Secretary of Commerce or the Secretary's designee.
3 The Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources or the Secretary's designee.
Three macticinsz farmers, one appointed by the Governor, one appointed by the President
Pro Tempo re of the Senate, and one appointed by the Speaker of the House of
Re resentatives.
(5j The Dean of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at North Carolina State
University or the Dean's desi nee.
The Dean of the School ot Agriculture and Environmental Sciences at North Carolina
Aaricultural and Technical State Universijy or the Dean's designee.
(7) The Executive Director of the North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center, Inc.,
or the Executive Director's designee
The Executive Director of the Conservation Trust for North Carolina or the Executive
Director's designee.
The Executive Director of the North Carolina Farm Transition Network or the Executive
Director's designee.
10 The President of the North Carolina Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts
or the President's designee.
11 The Director of the Southeast Regional Office of the American Farmland Trust or the
Director's designee.
12 The Executive Director of the North Carolina Agribusiness Council or the Executive
Director's designee.
H 14The President of the North Carolina State Grange or the President's designee•
The President of the North Carolina Farm Bureau Federation, Inc., or the President's
designee.
15 The President of the North Carolina Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association or the
President's designee.
16 The President of the North Carolina Forestry Association or the President's designee.
17 The Executive Director of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners or the
Executive Director's designee.
The Advisory Committee shall meet at least quarterly. The Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services shall provide the Advisory Committee with administrative and secretarial staff. Members
of the Advisory Committee shall be entitled to per diem pursuant to G.S. 138 -5 or G.S. 138 -6, as
appropriate The Advisory Committee shall make recommendations to the Commissioner on the distribution
of monies from the Trust Fund at least annually. The Commissioner shall take the recommendations of the
Advisory Committee into consideration in ma iniz decisions on the distribution of monies from the Trust
http: / /www.ncga.state.ne.us/ Sessions/ 2005Bills /House/HTML/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
)7 [Ratified] Page 8 of 8
Fund.
(i� The Advisory Committee shall report no later than May 1 of each year to the Joint Legislative
emission on Governmental Operations and the House of Representatives and Senate Appropriations
)committees on Natural and Economic Resources regarding the activities of the Advisory Committer e, the
iculture easements purchased, and agricultural projects funded during the previous year."
SECTION 18. G.S. 106-581.1 reads as rewritten:
106- 581.1. Agriculture defined.
For purposes of this Article, the terms e ftft4 ftgrikeiii.diI "agriculture ", "agricultural ", and
rming" sital4-refer to mall of the following:
W The cultivation of soil for production and harvesting of crops, including but not limited to
fruits, vegetables, sod, flowers and ornamental l ants•
p
2 The planting and production of trees and ;timber.
3 Dairying and the raising, management, care, and training of livestock, including horses,
bees,, poultrv, deer, elk, and other animals for individual and public use, consumption, and
marketing. ^ ,
4 Aquaculture as defined in G.S. 106 -758.
(5j The operation, management, conservation, improvement, and maintenance of a farm and
the structures and buildings on the farm, including building and structure repair,
replacement, expansion, and construction incident to the fanning operation.
"a riculture ", "agricultural", and "fanning" also include the
When performed on the farm, g gr
marketing and selling of agricultural products, agritourism, the storage and use of materials
for agricultural purposes, packing, treating,-Processing, sorting, storage, and other activities
performed toad value to crops, livestock and a icultural items produced on the farm
and similar activities incident to the operation of a farm ."
SECTION 19. The first report required pursuant to G.S. 106- 744(i), as enacted by Section 19 of
act, is due on or before 1 May 2006.
SECTION 20. This act is effective when it becomes law.
In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 23rd day of August, 2005.
►proved .m. this
Beverly E. Perdue
President of the Senate
James B. Black
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Michael F. Easley
Governor
day of
2005
p: / /www.nega.state.ne.us/ Sessions / 2005 /Bills/House/HTNM/H607v5.html 09/12/2005
A17AVAENr �Z
ORANGE. COUNTY
NVIROI�IMENT AMID RF—SOURC5 CONSERVATIOI�I D PARTIVI
MEMORANDUM
To: Agricultural Preservation Board
From: Dave Stancil, ERC Director
Rich Shaw, Land Conservation Manager
Date: September 14, 2005
Subject: Lands Legacy Action Plan for FY 2006 -08
Every two years our department works on developing a new "'Action' Plan" for the Lands
Legacy Program. The plan will identify natural and cultural areas that the County will
on protecting through Lands Legacy during upcoming two fiscal years (FY 2006-08)
As in previous years, the ERCD staff will work with advisory boards to identify projects to
p Commission for the
include in the plan: Agricultural Preservation Board (prime farmland);
Environment (natural areas /wildlife habitat, riparian buffers); Historic Preservation
Commission (cultural & archaeological); Recreation & Parks Advisory Council (parklands).
Input from the APB can be in the form of specific projects, general guidance or at a
Recommendations from the APB should be finalized by your November meeting so h
draft Action Plan can be submitted to the BOCC for consideration at its Dec /Jan retreat.
Initial Thoughts for FY 2006 -08
The following are key points for the APB to consider in making recommendations:
➢ Another 500 acres of farmland (on three farms) will be protected by conservation
easements by the end of 2005 or by early 2006, and four other farms are scheduled
to have lands put under easement in 2006.
➢ The County's funds that were used over the past three years to purchase
conservation easements (and to receive federal matching funds) has been depleted;
the remaining funds have been earmarked for seven farmland easements in process
➢ Parks and Open Space bond funds (approved 2001) are still available to acquire land
with natural (and cultural) resource significance through Lands Legacy Program;
those funds may not be used to acquire land or conservation easements where there
would be no public access allowed
During the first five years of the Lands Legacy Program, Orange County acquired 758 acres
for new county parkland and nature preserves, and protected another 820. acres of privately
. p � [--A- IAM-k .- r,nconiitinn Paraments.
Environment ano Keseu1 c:u liV1 1,->U1 v v
PO Box 8181 / 306 -A Revere Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 245 -2590
ii
I� P�
IJ
APB Recommendations for the 2004 -06 Action Plan
In 2003, the APB recommended that the County do the following:
➢ Continue purchasing farmland conservation easements from willing sellers,
focusing on active farms in the Cane Creek, University Lake, Upper Eno, Little
River and Back Creek watersheds
➢ Work on building a critical mass of protected farmland communities
➢ Continue to pursue grant funds (e.g., USDA Farm & Ranch Land Protection
Program) in cooperation with partner agencies such as OWASA and the
NRCS /Soil and Water Conservation District.
➢ Continue outreach to the farm community
Environment and Resource Conservation
PO Box 8181 / 306 -A Revere Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 245 -2590
For the period July 1, 2004 -- June 30, zuub
Introduction
The Lands Legacy Program was adopted by Orange County in April 2000. Administered
by the Environment and Resource Conservation Department (ERCD), the program's mission
is to help protect the county's most important natural and cultural resource lands before
they are damaged or lost to incompatible development activities. The program is guided by
an Action Plan developed by ERCD and adopted by the Board of Commissioners. The
biannual Action Plan guides Lands Legacy acquisitions and protection for the specified years.
The process of developing the Action Plan begins with staff identifying potential projects
and asking for initial guidance. Staff then meets with advisory boards for their input on
development of priorities for the upcoming years. Using the advisory board
recommendations, a draft Plan is prepared for distribution to the Board of Commissioners at
their annual goal - setting retreat. The Action Plan is finalized with the CIP process.
The following is an Action Plan for the fiscal years 2004 -2006. The plan incorporates
comments from four advisory boards, coupled with the continuation and completion of goals
and objectives from the previous action plan. The Action Plan contains goals, a summary of
advisory board comments, specific action objectives, and a priority list of land acquisition
and protection projects for the coming two years. Also attached is brief Performance
Report for the first four years of the Lands Legacy Program (2000- 2004).
(Note; Plans to continue to pursue grant funding for County projects are implicit.)
1. Upper Eno and Upper New Hope Riparian Buffers: Continue to protect riparian
buffers in the Upper Eno River watershed critical area (including additions to Seven
Mile Creek Preserve) and the Upper New Hope Creek watershed.
2. Faucette Mill and Halls Mill Historic Areas: Continue efforts to acquire
conservation easements that would protect properties with historic structures and
archaeological sites in the Faucette's Mill area. Identify locations for proposed future
efforts to protect historic properties and archaeological sites in the Halls Mill area.
3. Agricultural Conservation Easements: Work with willing sellers (and partner
entities) to acquire agricultural conservation easements in priority watersheds, in
conjunction with the federal Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program.
4. New Park Sites: Identify locations for potential land acquisition to establish
community parks in the White Cross area (Bingham Township) and in north- central
Orange County -- the last remaining parks identified in the 1988 Master Recreation and
Parks Plan. Reassess specific park needs for the north- central region given the current
park development plans for the county's Northern Center Park (Cedar Grove
Township) and the new Little River Regional Park (Little River Township).
Lands Legacy Action Plan 2004 -06
adopted 9/21/04
5. .Natural Areas and Prime Forests: Protect the highest priority natural areas and
prime forests identified in the Orange County Inventory of Significant Natural Areas and
Wildlife Habitat (2004 update) and the Landscape with Wildlife; Part II (1999).
6. Complete Stewardship Plans: Develop stewardship plans for both County -owned
nature preserves (McGowan Creek Preserve and Seven Mile Creek Preserve).
7. Heritage /Scenic Corridor Pilot Easement: Complete the "pilot project" scenic
easement along a high - priority viewshed of the historic St. Mary's Road corridor.
8. Joint Town /County Open Space: Continue collaborating with the towns and other
entities in acquiring land for establishing or expanding rustic trails or greenways
identified in town plans that tie together important County -wide open spaces.
9. Continue working with Duke University and the University of North Carolina on
the protection of natural areas on university -owned property through state registration,
state nature preserve dedication, conservation easements or other means.
A. Commission for the Environment (CfE)
Continue efforts to protect Upper Eno riparian buffers (including Seven Mile
Creek), Mason Farm Oak - Hickory Forest (M10), and University natural areas.
Expand efforts to protect Jordan Lake Macrosite, as defined by NC Natural
Heritage Program. Work with partners to protect Sevenmile Creek Sugar
Maple Bottoms (E06), Occoneechee Mountain (E07), Bolin Creek corridor
(B01), and proposed Cane Creek to Crabtree Creek wildlife corridor. Explore
potential pilot project to reconstruct a piedmont prairie site. Protect all high
priority Natural Area sites and consider all opportunities to protect riparian
habitats and associated natural areas throughout the County.
B. Agricultural Preservation Board (APB)
Continue purchasing farmland conservation easements from willing sellers.
Focus on active farms in the Cane Creek, University Lake, Upper Eno, Little
River and Back Creek watersheds — working to build a critical mass of farm
easements in those watersheds. Augment County funds by pursuing grants
(e.g., FRPP) in cooperation with partner agencies (e.g., OWASA, MRCS /Soil
and Water Conservation District). Continue outreach to farm community.
C. Recreation and Parks Advisor/ Council (RPAC)
Acquire land for establishing community parks at the remaining areas
recommended in 1988 Master Recreation and Parks Plan: White Cross and
North - Central Orange.
D. Historic Preservation Commission (HPC)
Work with the owners of the Holden -Hill House, Halls Mill House (particularly
dam and mill site), and the Faucette Mill area to. protect the historic features
N
Lands Legacy Action Plan 2004 -06 adopted 9121104
on those properties. Pursue the protection of other important historic and
archaeological sites (e.g., Murphey School) whenever possible. Protect
"heritage corridors" and other areas of cultural /scenic value (e.g., St. Mary's
Road). Acquire sites with historic structures as long as Orange County can
allocate adequate funds to ensure proper stewardship of those structures.
Involve the HPC in matters concerning historic structures on County lands.
The following are more specific acquisition objectives developed from existing plans,
discussions with land conservation partners, in some cases expanding upon or
refining advisory board recommendations. These are not listed in priority order.
A. Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat
• Work with partners to protect (through acquisition or other means) the higher
priority Natural Areas as identified in the Inventory of Significant Natural Areas
(2004 update), including Mason Farm Oak - Hickory Forest (M10)
• Protect the highest priority prime forest areas identified in A Landscape With
Wildlife: Part 2 (Wiley, Ludington and Hall, 1999)
• Work with the Eno River Association and others to protect (through acquisition
and other means) critical land for the Seven Mile Creek Preserve and a wildlife
corridor that connects to the Cane Creek reservoir
Work with the Eno River Association and others to protect (through acquisition
and other means) other priority riparian lands and upland habitats in the Upper
Eno River watershed critical area and lands adjacent to Eno River State Park
• Work with Triangle Land Conservancy and others to protect (through acquisition
and other means) priority riparian lands and central county prime forest lands
located in the Upper New Hope Creek watershed
• Work with the Town of Carrboro, University of NC and the Friends of Bolin Creek
to identify priority lands for potential protection (through acquisition and other
means) the Bolin Creek corridor (B01).
B. Farmland Preservation
• Work with the USDA /Natural Resource Conservation Service and Orange Soil and
Water District, and OWASA to identify and prioritize willing seller(s) and donor(s)
of conservation easements in Cane Creek, Upper Eno River, University Lake,
Little River and Back Creek watersheds. (Where possible, build a critical mass of
contiguous farm easements in these watersheds.)
• Preserve farmland that also contains riparian buffers to help meet multiple
conservation objectives
• Work with USDA /Natural Resource Conservation Service to secure grant funds
from the federal Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program for acquiring
conservation easements
3
Lands Legacy Action Plan 2004 -06
C. Parklands and Open Space
adopted 9/21/04
• Using existing plans and the comprehensive resource database, identify potential
locations for future acquisition of park site in north - central Orange County for a
community park (re- assess the needs for this proposed site, previously titled
"Cedar Grove - Little River Park
• Acquire key "missing link" properties for proposed Northern Chapel Hill Township
Rustic Woodland Trail (linking Chapel Hill /Carrboro /County parks with the New
Hope Creek corridor, including Duke Forest, and eventually Eno River State Park)
• In all acquisitions, be cognizant of the potential for meeting other objectives of
protecting riparian buffers, natural areas and historic /archaeological sites .
D. Cultural and Archaeological Sites
• Work with landowners in the Faucette Mill area to protect the combination of
historic and natural features in that historic area
• Identify locations for proposed future efforts to protect historic properties and
archaeological sites in the Halls Mill area.
• Conduct archaeological surveys of county properties acquired for future parks
and nature preserves (e.g., Blackwood Farm, McGowan Creek Preserve)
• Work with the HPC and others to accomplish preservation of cultural and
archaeological sites associated with land acquisition projects .
E. Watershed Riparian Buffers
•. Work with the Eno River Association and others to protect riparian corridors in
the Upper Eno River protected watershed; pursue grant funds from NC Clean
Water Management Trust Fund and the Ecosystem Enhancement Program for
protecting specific high - priority buffer lands in this watershed
• Work with the Eno River Association and Triangle Land Conservancy to identify
and protect priority areas in the Little River watershed
• Work with New Hope Creek Corridor Advisory Committee and the Triangle Land
Conservancy to identify and protect priority areas in New Hope Creek corridor
• Work with the Morgan Creek Valley Alliance and others to identify priority areas
for protection in the Morgan Creek corridor
• Work with the Friends of Bolin Creek, the Town of Carrboro, the University of
North Carolina, and others to identify priority areas for protection in the Bolin
Creek corridor
• Attempt to accomplish preservation of buffers in other water supply watersheds
through parkland acquisitions and agricultural conservation easement projects
rd
O
Q
O
0
N
0
Q
v
J
Rj
a
C
,O
V
a
O
1
O
O
N
s
E
D
LO
4-
,a
L
L
R
L
46
a
i
C
L
Q
Q
i
s
n
U
L
G
bU)
03
U
Op
U)
ai
a) bb
O
°
H
.-l'
10 U
U U
>>
Q
,�
>,
3 J N y
U
U d Uj
v� t'�
.
0
a� U
o 0 0 4
bb C)
z o
'b cli
O
a
p N
P4
r,
c,3 En
� d O 'n O ,
� O
v
'
O ~ O
ON
' ° C U
+-4 O. �-' >
U >O
O U
FU W H
O
O U O
-C-114 N D
U PO U U `✓
U
i-d-� N C's c
U O C's a
U Q, a) N
En
d —' En b U
O 4-.
cis,�
ow`"
in OL)
b,� tea;
a�
Ub
�w
A,
~'
a a
o
o
w }' W
;j CDj
o
p Or4 b ,
bD O vi p
W> v' a U
0 a 0
N
Cd
In
O
O
N O cd
6g U O
O -- 4 cd U p
O U cd • , ,
�
O v'
O U U N
v�
O ;. cd L 'i �;
. cn , ,
O 1/ .. 4 c�
In
O U , >, cd
bl
`n M
o � r
° � .
a o O
�
rte ►- a fs, 0 10 (3
>, �a P-, ca � PQ
Gs U P-4
U 0
SOP -� W w
U Cd
U r
R d�z�0
��b°uo
w d
En In
d t4-4
w
o��
;:s •'-4
a� En
+�o��Y�
.�
U °
U
P
U
(1) Q �
p
0
a
g ' b
P a,
-' O
d �
`4 N `n U
cn
C13 d
vi
0
+
�O -+
O •
a O
` r, b C13 C 3
d b b
i P.
4� �,
a� ;-4 o
U
o
o
" CjJ
'd
U Q, o
a o o
v
O Po
�
P••r
d �; O O
P-, at U U
o
R-,
P-4,
f
U
4 �
�;
^
p
d
.41
r.
vs
P4 v,
� U P.
b a�
d En
In U
o. -d
O
H
a
_ G
a� o, �' 0
o o'i �
p
' cat 5 ,� rd
•'"
b U +� . cd b
a) U o
R, 0
d o
°
� o
a �
o � LI
- o �
W d
� ° •� � �
v� U 'P. U o P�
o o
+ +, P.
C',
F� P� r-4
0 0
E-� a
ti ti
H
Ln
0
ti
obi
a
Q
0
0
0
N
a
0
v
C
v
o
`r
o
W
0
•�..�
cis
0 - o p U
o
(°
U 0. "
U a) U Q
� i
O �i �°
ao L �.
.
c ?,o
o o
°''"Q
En
i o00
'd °
.b�
,4
��
a Cd
a �'`�
�b
3W U
�
? ti
p,
'o
. 03 t-4
o
� U)
C a.., �,
a�
�
cd C3 bn
N
O 0
'� '��'
En ct
UU,
y �-' O
'00
G � bOA
'Cj
U
O O
°p
O O
U
rd ° O N
° U a Z
ca N
.5
G
bb
U)
41
°'
�,o
C> PQ u.
c,3 U
o o U)
►-� (y (4
En w�
�+
° o o a� b
O iU+ +d�+ U
�
o cd
►-� O U
U
Cd 0 0 "
o U . r.,
o P.. U . �
[ ., U
0 . -�
o r,9 0
� a) 0
� U
a) -0
� a) cu p U w
�. P� Z
sS o a�
0 � o
o �•
A-+
�
0
0
,4
o
°
�
o '
o Z
oo
.
b
t
�.
°
o O 0 ai
p
°^ °� c�i `�
�n p,
o U °j
`� p o
�
�0 0
a ��aU
�v°' Q,�b
�P4
o cd
4, 0 3
0
b
'n °' cd
a� i
Cd
-41 ' Q.0
°�' °�
4-A
c) °�' °
.4 °b
r
ors
U
o 4
P,
o U cd� vi
�. a�
B� v� �.
� �y ;
�. �+�-+ r�
o
DO O
4
r, �
�.
a bb � o
En . � o
N) o
� .
� .
r.
', 0
o
Cd 3
0
1
O
�, p.
o —4
O Q. U
P.
� o
;�; U cd .
C,
P., cd
a�
p
bD o�
C L/)
i bb
rd
1-4 a�
a
U) (13 C13
—
bA °
. oa)
a
y
4-4 ' b
G
U' U cd
U
,.4 a 0 E d
o b ,b
¢•
P- Cd U ti-+
4-.4 o PA U
• �. a� b
P-4 cd c+-+
Q
0 C,3 4-a
(4-4
� o '
�
a�
aa)
C-) Z o
o 0
d. (� o
0
U
.� �
0 0 .. - ?
b o + �
Cd
o
x•� c
U) .
o
`� � P. °�
Z Q o >�1
� W
�,�
`� a co
W o W
cd
0 41
C13
'n
p W
U
U o .� o
�Do �
o
rl P-4
U�
U �Pa
P;;�P-4 P.
lci
m
ti
Q
O
Jq
O
I
A
O c+-a U
N O
y
G)
O
vi
ca
bo
U c �
U
U
A
U
O
U
'�
0
C's cd
3
b
U O
. cd
'd
'bO
W
p
pU
�U
�
0
••
U) O
UN
bA
� U
b
cd O
�'p ct
0
O
U
cd
O
'b
N
ti
c,3 s,
?, t-,
O
o °.�.wa
-`�
bU
�.�
�U
4'-
o rd
U)
-1 �. U
ti
o
°H' p
��
U
°
_
Z
- Fi,
� 3w
a., �°Zww
�o
'^
as
b
�.
L.
F1
U
4-4 N
U p'
0
v�
.�"
C
Or
•�
N O
o U
U O
P
- V�
0Cd�
� .�
En
Cd
AW .
o
cd
o'+
Cid
O
42
C)
d
x+
J
o . -
C)
'.°
raa�
C's
o
shy .3.
Lands Legacy Action Plan 2004 -06
Planning and Strategy:
2004 -2006
In addition to specific acquisition
objectives, the following actions and
strategies will be needed to facilitate
long -term land conservation:
1. Work with advisory boards to
develop a Natural and Cultural
.Systems Element to the
Orange County Comprehensive
Plan, incorporating the results of
the 2004 update to the county
Inventory of Significant Natural
Areas and Wildlife Habitat.
2. Convene Orange County Land
Conservation Alliance twice
annually to discuss progress and
potential opportunities for
collaboration with conservation
partners.
3. Explore potential pilot project to
restore /reconstruct a piedmont
prairie site on suitable lands in
partnership with others (e.g., NC
Botanical Garden, universities,
NRCS.).
4. Conduct outreach with civic
organizations, neighborhood
groups, and others to discuss
the Lands Legacy Program and
conservation options.
5. Compile land acquisition inquiries
and potential opportunities from
landowners and other partners,
and present to the Board's for
direction on whether to pursue
acquisition.
Conclusion
The first four years of the Lands
Legacy Program 'saw tremendous
strides in the protection of priority
resource lands, with 1,055 acres
permanently protected (as of June
30, 2004) and several more projects
in the works.
The FY 2004 -06 Action Plan will build
on projects from previous years, and
includes additional projects in each
of the Lands Legacy priority areas
(natural areas, parkland, cultural/
historic resources, prime farmland
and riparian buffers in potential
wildlife corridors and public water
supply watersheds.
This Action Plan will further the use
of 2001 parks and open space bonds
funds to protect high priority
resource lands in Orange County.
ERCD will also continue to pursue
grant funds from a variety of state
and federal sources.
j
0
U
a�
d
U
bJ)
LO
O
O
N
O
O
O
N
N
C3
to
c
i-
V
Q
'b bA O
Cd
, ° o r-I y ;..4 � >' O Q
U bA U p r P, 'd U O ►-�
Lo US
;d
'Cj N 'b � H bD Cd
Ilzi 'd a� U b o b �� rd d�� 0 Cd 0
t cd ° b U � Cd 4~ ° ¢' a) 1&1 c� U
U3 U) J�4
`�
cd
C-) C 0 `� U .� v U o w `d U b
1-4 a� ,ti '
a w -° � w H ►-a �, U a
� r-- ,. --- ,
•r± ° N O O p N
N
v. N O O
4,J
U
� 03 CCU
Cd ;j a a�
( L .° � o H
a
;-4 W (� `d
� U
cld
p v .N
U O CIS O
N
4-a
O
4)
an
Cd
P,
0
N
h
W
M
0)
bb
�o
U u,C)
N
O a�
o
Q C,3
a�
cd 'd >
�n c�
d o
�,•, o W
0
N o 0
0
..-,
Q) b
C,3
rd �
U `n
0
O t -'
P4 ?, o
+�
Cd
au
Q)
> O
o
Z
N
w.
a
�.�
o
,-,
rd
�-+
U
3 U �
O ►-
b
. _;
�
U U'+'
-+
cad'
� -
O .0
o
W
3
o
°
Cd° W
�,Cd
�'�°
d
°
4 -
>
C)
n 0
o
4
�
U
do ?
.
d 0
U
.
.
r '
` ,� 0 4O �
�O 0
�O �—+
N N
---I
U
x
�
2b
�
b P,
a� o
W
�
r�3
r 3�.�
.�,,
O O
U
COO
o
O;
cd U
4
o
�
p '
O O "'D
0
O
O
aUi 3
a`�i d
b
U
o
0 CO
o
o
a�
U;
•'--�
cn
0
O 4a O
O
b
+ U
+
+cd
+� a�
4)
U
Q,
U
U
ct8
cd �
o
o 4)
o
'�
o
o o 0�
a
` °
°
o
'o
o
Cd
U c
i u
i
U
•
U cn
-
U
i U
p
Ui
O
U .b
0
L.0
+-+
vC/)
O O O
.-�
p
UW
Cd
..-4
b
.� 0
VU.000
c�
O
-,P-4
cod
cd
P-+
oU
a�U����U
o °o
00
00
0
0
o
N
0
Nom,
0
N
0
N
0
O
O N
N
N
0
�y
`r
p
N
Cld
N
n
�
N
�
'0
o
0
v
� o
AQ
w
w
w
N
cld
�--4
Cld
*rj
N
P-,
.o
W 0
W
°� p4 CJ �
c��
V W ° W
�'
-rl
o
o
w
U
C a w
p4 w
V
x o
W
M
0)
bb
�o
U u,C)
N
O a�
o
Q C,3
a�
cd 'd >
�n c�
d o
�,•, o W
0
N o 0
0
..-,
Q) b
C,3
rd �
U `n
0
O t -'
P4 ?, o
+�
Cd
au
Q)
> O
o
Z
N
w.
a
A T4 1�3
Participating Farm
Orange County
Voluntary Agricultural District
Agricultural Preservation Board
Board Membership, Under New VFPO Ordinance
1. At -Large Members
Vickie Brown
At -Large
1st Term (ends 6/30/08)
Tony Kleese
At -Large
2nd Term (ends 6/30/06)
Marty Mandell
At -Large
2nd term (ends 6/30/08)
Whit Morrow
At -Large
2nd term (ends 6/30/07)
Gordon Warren
At -Large
2nd term (ends 6/30/08)
Mari Troisclair
At -Large
unexpired term (ends 6/30/06)
(vacant)
(at- large)
2. Members Representing Voluntary Agricultural Districts
Cedar Grove Voluntary Agricultural District
Louse Tate
Caldwell Voluntary Agricultural District
Vacant (Lee Miller farm is in district and eligible)
High Rock/Efland Voluntary Agricultural District
Elizabeth Walters
New Hope /Hillsborough Voluntary Agricultural District*
Bob Strayhorn (1)
James Wynn
Schley/Eno Voluntary Agricultural District*
Don Johnson
Bob Strayhorn (2)
Cane Creek/Buckhorn Voluntary Agricultural District
Vacant (no participating farms)
White Cross Voluntary Agricultural District
Vacant (Maple View Farm is in this district and eligible)
3. BOCC Liaison
Commissioner Barry Jacobs
*One of the New Hope/Hillsborough or Schley/Eno VAD members may need to move to at-
large, or sit in a vacant district (until such time as an appointment cane be made).
A%q A-+
� rn c
xz
O
w c)
00 �`
Q-
r.,
n CD
J O
� ,.� W
Oo oo
�
�-
►O N �
�n W
�
� ,�
oo
�
�
O o p <
1
Ol �N! CJ1
W --� rO-�
�O �D a
�O -t -•
(D C]
-t
(�
<
C�CD
cU
° f�
�aC)
a
�
0
o0
w
cv a Q
0 0 �
w
�• �
�
N
a N
0
Ow
C31) o� N
Op
Op
N C�
N
w
Z
W °• W
�
W
W
z
0
p.
(D
oo
J
N cn
(D
J J
W W
0°
al �
uj
opo uj
O,
O
�
p
C
O
d �
d
CD
D'
cn
�
o
(D
� rn c
xz
O
w c)
00 �`
Q-
r.,
n CD
xrr0
�71
O �
cr
w
o
�
�
oo
J
a
CD
�d y
° oOd
O y �
z
o ��O
d H
C•
n
x
CD
y
O
�
O
00
Oy
C•
n
x
CD
y
O
�
�
Oy
�71
O �
CD
�
oo
J
CD
sr -•
LL }.
y
Oy
�71
O �
y b
z
y
sr -•
LL }.
z
O
z
O
A� O
N O O
~
(-A
,� '—'
N W
A 00
C1 O\ O
W Ng--:
C)
(�
u'
O
W
O
W~
W
N
'�'
� O
W
H
W
.
V.
CD
�
CD
�
(D
O
'� � �
,_.
N
N �t
W O
�
,_,
oo
-P
N
„
� • r+
z UG �'
N �
N �i
.P P
O �
00
oo
N
N p
�' •
N
cD
�
J
o
�71
'
000
r`b
0
o
o
° �
C
N
� W
C)
�
N
J
D1
O�
Z
o
Z
o
Z
O
Uh
m
CD
a1 �'
�. .
ry
o,
a
w
A•
N
oo
N n
0
v'
N
W
N
O
CN p
p+
�t
O
C
C
�
CJ�,
d�,
lJ� �
�
�•�, a
bbd
�.�
Q,
�xz
b � �
O � �
O
z
y
O
~o
~zy O
zHt�J
��o Z
z
d y
41
d�� y
r
H
z
50 O
z
O
H
Oy
yO
�d
H
H
Orange County Agricultural Center Work Group
25 October 2005 at 7:30 pm
Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, NC
Members present: Betty Tom Davidson, Spence Dickenson *, Tony Kleese, Vickie
Brown, Marty Mandel (* arrived after 7:35 pm)
Guests: Sally Goerner, Robert Smith, Mike Senkpiel
Staff present: Fletcher Barber, Dianne Reid; Tina Moon, Noah Ranells, David Stancil (*
arrived after 7:35 pm)
Meeting was called to order at 7.34 pm by Betty.
Guests included individuals from a "sustainability hub" that were invited by Spence:
Sally Goerner, Robert Smith, and Mike Senkpiel. Sally indicated her interest in a
sustainability community network that restores grassroots economics and community
webs and wants to support getting farmers the facilities that they need. Mike indicated
his interest in the Blackwood Farm. Robert works with Leaflight, a non - profit working on
local ag and hunger relief through research, planning, policy education, and outreach.
Minutes
The Ag Center Work Group (ACWG) schedule for final report submission to the Board
of County Commissioners was discussed. Based on the initial charge to the ACWG, the
report was due "by January 22, 2006. At the previous ACWG meeting, Commissioner
Jacobs had indicated that submission of the report in April would be acceptable. Based
on this information, a formal motion was made by Tony, seconded by Marty, and
unanimously approved by the member present to submit the final report in April.
Blue Ridge Food Ventures
A brief slide presentation by staff shared photos of the trip to the Blue Ridge Food
Ventures facility in Candler, NC. The attached summary of the BRFV facility was
provided by staff. During the discussion several issues were noted. There was limited
use of the facility by local farmers, and this may be due to the fact that it is a new
facility. Other food entrepreneurs were processing local farm products in the facility. The
members were reminded that the initial interest of the ACWG was to visit a "community
kitchen ".
Options for obtaining a facility included the use of an existing or new school facility. If it
were built, who would manage it? Would it have a wet kitchen? A dry kitchen? Vickie
asked how farmers are currently operating in Orange County. Do they have the facilities
that they need?
Fletcher noted that a facility would definitely enhance the current situation and
encourage additional users. Currently, products are not processed to the degree
required by institutional buyers. Milk is the only readily marketable product.
Tony noted that a feasibility study was done early on. BRFV may not be our answer. But
something like it may be exactly what we need.
Noah noted that BRFV benefits from a good relationship with the Asheville Culinary
Institute. Would a similar possibility be available here in Orange County as Durham
Tech builds their satellite campus in Orange County? Fletcher noted that Alamance
Community College (ACC) already has a culinary arts program. It may be difficult to get
Durham Tech involved with a culinary institute given preexisting programs at ACC.
Marty noted that Wake County ag center didn't appear to offer a lot of services for
farmers and she wanted to be sure that Orange County offered the programs that may
be needed.
Sally noted that a needs assessment might be beneficial.
Spence shared thoughts on the relevance of the New Orleans floods after the hurricane.
What would Orange County residents do for themselves if government did not provide
necessary resources? Could we feed our people in this community? How do you get
food systems coordinated? How do you preserve it? If you want food for restaurants,
schools, and the public, what would need to be in place to provide food?
Fletcher noted that Mike Lanier of his staff is very interested in food security issues.
Spence indicated that Mike shared a study paper that asked, "Can NC provide for its
own food needs ?" What do we consume? If we produce it, how much is being
consumed? Spence also noted the issue of reliance on cheap oil and the products that
corporations are currently providing.
Betty noted that there are lots of environmental impacts and that Orange County is very
concerned with developing an appropriate crisis management plan. To the extent
possible, our thoughts may be articulated on paper to offer our recommendations
related to emergency situations and food security. At times of emergency, it is important
to know where to go for assistance and where food will be available.
Tony noted that the next step would be to seek a grant for a feasibility study and
suggested that staff resources be marshaled to accomplish a feasibility study. He added
that it is critical to perform a needs analysis.
Robert noted that there are creative ways to dig up data on food sales in Orange
County. There are a lot of food dollars spent in Orange County but only 0.5% goes to
Orange County farmers. In addition, there are a lot of value added products in
supermarkets, grocers, and fast food establishments. He suggested that additional folks
are needed to discuss this issue, and noted that Southern Season cooking classes
would be an excellent venue. He inquired as to the long -term goals and how this would
be a sustainable effort. What are our benchmarks? Are we out to develop a food
portfolio or increase income for farmers? How soon are needs to be identified?
PA
Betty shared that this group was not specifically addressing the food problems of
Orange County, but rather what needs could be addressed by an Orange County Ag
Center. Tony added that short term needs have been identified by current agencies and
that the long -term needs are currently being studied.
Sally suggested that it would be beneficial to use the community food security issue to
help justify an ag center. She added that an ag center could help develop education
programs, help farmers with resources, and perform community outreach. Linking with
other groups such as SEEDS in Durham as well as local Orange County organizations
could include large numbers of citizens that might be interested in using the facility.
Short Term Needs Report
There was no Short Term needs report.
Long Term Needs Report
There was no subcommittee meeting. An email was sent out to the members of the
subcommittee that notes 6 areas where additional study may be needed. Spence
provided additional comments to Tony's original outline and provided copies to all at the
meeting. Staff indicated that it could help facilitate a meeting of the long term needs
group. Tony inquired if the subcommittee is asking the questions or providing answers.
It was noted that the charge indicated that these questions needed to be answered.
Betty noted that based on general consensus, a report would be developed from the
short term and long -term committees. She advised a narrow focus that addressed
issues noted in the charge to the work group and suggested that general committee
questions without answers, questions with answers, and questions with possible
solutions could be contained in the final report. She requested that the long -term
subcommittee narrow the focus. When the subcommittee report is offered to the full
work group, it can be debated and accepted by the full work group.
Robert asked if this would go to the Board of County Commissioners. Staff indicated
that the report by the Ag Center Work Group would be an independent report and that
the Ag Preservation Board of County Commissioners requested that this work group be
initiated.
Vickie noted that the report must include overarching goals and comments related to
sustaining agricultural activities, maintaining rural character, and preserving and
protecting farming communities. She added that support is needed from vested
constituencies and that related values that are very important to residents of Orange
County. A result of broad support may be sufficient to support tax dollars for an ag
center, that directly and indirectly affects all citizens of the county.
Spence noted that soil issues needed additional protection and that there is a lot of
dumping of food waste in to the landfill. As an alternative, certain wastes can be
3
I
collected and used to produce compost. Some current practices are hurting the land
and may be wasteful, such as dumping of woody material.
Tony asked for focus and Betty suggested narrowing to three or four topics. Dave noted
that an outline structure is needed for the report and offered to assist in developing an
outline. Betty noted that the work group would be offering advice to elected officials and
that the Board of County Commissioners may use the document to implement some of
the recommendations of this work group. There is a desire to gain momentum to move
the county forward towards an ag center.
Tony noted that it is difficult to consider what the future of ag will look like in Orange
County and preliminary evidence is that ag needs to change in a big way. He suggested
that some analysis of the situation is required. Fletcher noted that this group is serving
to create a research agenda.
Spence asked about the needs and uses of an ag center. How would an ag center
support food security? Support farmers? Educate public to have future farmers? He
asked `What is agriculture ?' and suggested that is includes composting, butchering, and
processing. The ag center is needed to support facilities that enhance transition to the
future food systems. Fletcher noted that if we can do what we are saying — we would be
out ahead of both land grant institutions.
Vickie noted that if certain questions do not currently have answers then ask the
questions and the staff can be charged to answer them. Betty suggested revisiting the
charge to the work group and that an outline is needed for both subcommittees to move
forward and complete their reports. These subcommittee reports can help to focus effort
of the work group. In addition, she requested that Fletcher provide a review of the needs
outlined in the previous report.
Robert asked if the input phase of this work group is done. Betty indicated that there is
an outreach plan. The long -term materials submitted by Tony and Spence will be
included in the next agenda packet.
Outreach
Noah provided a draft survey that would be sent as part of a Farm Service Agency
newsletter to all farmers. Additional possible distribution points are at Farmers markets.
Vickie noted that it is important to get completed surveys from other landowners and the
non - farming population. Betty suggested that the Commissioners provide some
guidance.
Robert asked about the survey methodology and cautioned the challenges to
summarizing survey data. Dianne noted that Chapel Hill News recently assisted in a
survey and that it might be possible to get media partners. Tony suggested sharing the
survey with Weaver Street Market to share through their newsletter. Dave suggested
that the advisory boards be mailed the survey. Spence suggested providing the survey
at local ag supply centers. It was also noted that the survey needs a return address and
F.
it may also be distributed at the botanical garden. Sally asked about including
sustainability issues in the survey. Noah will provide the full membership of the work
group an opportunity to review the next draft of the survey. Lack of responses will be
considered a yes vote. The survey will also be shared with at least one commissioner.
Betty, as chair, will approve the final survey.
The meeting was concluded following a motion to adjourn by Tony, a second by Vickie,
and unanimous approval of all those present.
5
6j
Ag Center Work Group
Charge and Mission
1. Investigate and explore potential need and uses for an Orange County
Agricultural Center, utilizing new information and current/future agricultural
needs.
2. Develop process whereby all stakeholders have an opportunity to provide
meaningful input into the Work Group deliberations
3. Develop report on the findings of the Work Group discussion and investigation,
to be submitted to the Board of Commissioners within one year of appointment of
the Work Group.
4. Review recommendations of the previous Agricultural Center work group (1989).
Activity
Proposed Date
BOCC
Ag Center Work
Group Schedule
BOCC agrees to create Work Group
Feb 2005
-
Work Group appointments made
Mar 2005
-
Work Group meetings to develop
public participation process, explore
need, visit other centers, and explore
potential uses
Apr to Oct 2005
Apr 2005 thru
Jan 2006
Meeting
12 Apr 2005
Meeting
9 May 2005
Tour of Wake & Johnston County
Ag Centers
18 Jun 2005
Tour of Spence's Farm
18 Jul 2005
Meeting
18 Jul 2005
Meeting
15 Aug 2005
Meeting
19 Sep 2005
Tour of Blue Ridge Food Ventures
30 Sep 2005
Meeting
24 Oct 2005
Meeting
28 Nov 2005
Meeting
200?
Outreach Meeting
Jan 2006
Final Meeting
2006
Development of Work Group report
Oct to Dec 2005
Jan thru Mar 2006
Report transmitted to Board of
Commissioners
Min 1 yr of formation
Apr 2006
Guidinq Principles
The Work Group should use the following guiding principles in its discussion and
deliberations:
1. The intent of this process is to generate a "fresh" look at the concept of an
Agricultural Center and the needs and uses of same in the years to come.
Previous reports and efforts may be useful as background but should not keep
the Work Group from exploring new ideas and concepts for appropriate uses of
an Agricultural Center in the year 2005 and beyond.
2. Discussion of the potential uses of an Agricultural Center should include (but not
be limited to): demonstration and meeting space, a potential value -added
processing center (County or regional), office space for farm - related agencies,
demonstration farm plots and community farm fields, new and innovative
agricultural concepts such as Farm Land -Link opportunities and Community -
Supported Agriculture (CSA), and an Agricultural Heritage Museum.
3. The Work Group process should use broad public outreach efforts to engage all
citizens interested in this topic and ensure that all interests and stakeholders
have the opportunity to be heard
4. The Work Group report should assess needs and potential uses of a Center, as
well as identify potential outside funding sources for such a building.
5. The Work Group report should focus on uses and needs for a Center, and need
not specify a specific location for a proposed center.
6. The Work Group should be aware of land use and environmental standards in
considering the potential of uses for the Center.
7
Orange County Ag Center Work Group Survey
In April 2005, the Board of County Commissioners charged the Ag Center Work Group to
"investigate and explore the potential need and uses for an Orange County Agricultural Center,
utilizing new information and current/future agricultural needs."
We need your help! Please consider taking a few moments to complete this survey to ensure that
your thoughts are shared with the Orange County Ag Center Work Group. Surveys returned by
20 JAN '06 will be tabulated and presented at the Public Outreach Meeting to be held in early FEB.
1. I am a (circle if appropriate)
Crop Farmer Livestock Farmer Crop & Livestock Farmer Consumer Gardener
2. Age: 5 to 18 19 to 25 26 to 40 41 to 60 60+
3. Land use OWN <2 acres 2 to 10 ac 11 to 50 ac 51 to 100 ac >101 ac
RENT <2 acres 2 to 10 ac 11 to 50 ac 51 to 100 ac >101 ac
4. 1 believe that Orange County needs a new agricultural resource center. YES NO
If you answered yes, please indicate those features you would like to see included in an
agricultural resource center.
(Show priority using H = high priority; M = medium priority; L= low priority).
a. Small meeting rooms for up to 30
people
b. Medium meeting rooms for 30 to 75
people
C. Large meeting room for up to 250
people
d. Vegetable and fruit processing facility 1
community kitchen (multi- county)
e. Meat processing facility
f. Outdoor urban horticulture learning
facilities
g. Ag Heritage information
h. Outdoor environmental education
learning lab
i. Outdoor facilities for events, fairs,
gatherings
j. Learning activities to teach children
how to grow and preserve food
k. Opportunities for learning about farm
animals
I. 4 -H program opportunities
M. Equine exhibition facilities
n. Sustainability Resource Center that
addresses energy and food systems
o. Other
P. Other
q. Other
5. What agriculture - related action can local government take to ensure that Orange County has an
active farming community in the year 2020 (Use other side if necessary)
6. ❑ Yes, I want to stay informed about this effort (Provide name & address / email)
Name / Address / Email
Send completed surveys to:
Ag Center Work Group, Economic Development Commission, 110 W. King Street, Hillsborough, NC 27278
A ITA44
H
CD �d
M CD
n o
r+- p
CD'
I �mw
O-W
N
0
0
ul
4�A(,q -f 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairs, County Advisory Boards and Commissions
FROM: Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
DATE: November 22, 2005
RE: County Commissioners' Annual Planning Retreat
The Orange County Board of Commissioners will hold its annual planning
retreat on the currently scheduled date of January 21, 2006 (location as of now is
Southern Human Services Center).
We ask that you communicate to us the top one or two priorities of your
Board or Commission for the next fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006. We recognize that
your top priorities may be continuing functions or needs which have not been addressed
or new ones which have come to your attention.
Whether or not you choose to submit something from your
board /commission, please, at the minimum, complete the attached form and return it
to Donna S. Baker no later than January 6, 2006. Your comments will be helpful to
the County Commissioners in finalizing priorities.
While the agenda has not been set for the retreat, if you would like to
address the County Commissioners please so indicate on page one of the form by
printing the name of the person who may speak and their telephone number. We ask
that you keep your comments to 5 minutes.
The County Commissioners thank you for volunteering your time in
service to. the citizens of Orange County and we welcome your views in our policy
making process.
cc: Department Heads
Staff Support
ORANGE COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
INPUT FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ANNUAL PLANNING RETREAT
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Southern Human Services Center
The Board of Commissioners welcomes input from various advisory boards and
commissions in preparation for its annual planning retreat. Please complete the
following information, limited to the front and back of this form. Other
background materials may be provided as a supplement to, but not as a
substitute for, this form.
Board /Commission Name:
Person to address the BOCC at Retreat (if an and phone number:
Chair's Name:
Chair's Phone:
Chair's E -mail:
Chair's Fax:
Primary County Staff Contact:
Brief Statement of Board /Commission's Assigned Charge and Responsibilities.
What are your Board /Commission's most important accomplishments?
List of Specific Tasks, Events, or Functions Performed or Sponsored Annually
,..
Describe this board /commission's activities /accomplishments in carrying out
BOCC goal(s), if applicable.
Identify any activities this board /commission expects to carry out in 2005 -2006 as
they relate to established BOCC goals.
What are the concerns or emerging issues your board has identified for the
upcoming fiscal year that it plans to address, or wishes to bring to the
Commissioners' attention?
Describe any training related to its primary responsibilities that this
Board /Commission has received during 2005, either collectively, or for individual
members.
f ��
ORANGE COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMI,
REVIDU5 �t�►�
INPUT FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ANNUAL PLCe
Saturday, January 22, 2005
The Board of Commissioners welcomes input from various a
commissions in preparation for its annual planning retreat. P_____ _
information, limited to the front and back sides of this form. Other background materials
may be provided as a supplement to, but not as a substitute for, this form. .
Board/Commission Name: Agricultural Preservation Board
Person to address the BOCC at Retreat (if any) and phone number:
Chair's Name:
Chair's Phone:
Chair's E -mail:
Chair's Fax:
Primary County Staff Contact: David Stancil
Brief Statement of Board /Commission's Assigned Charge and Responsibilities
To encourage the voluntary preservation and protection of farmland from non farm
development, recognizing the importance of agriculture to the economic and cultural life
of the county.
What are your Board/Commission's most important accomplishments?
• 'Development of revisions to existing Voluntary Farmland Preservation Ordinance
to reflect new State model ordinance, revisiting acreage limitation for Voluntary
Agricultural Districts (VAD's) to allow small /alternative operations to qualify,
and re- examining the nature of districts (a draft is being reviewed by the County
Attorney)
• Developed proposal for Agricultural Center Work Group (approved by BOCC in
November 2004)
• Assistance with February 2004 Agricultural Summit
• Develop draft resolution on water and sewer assessment abeyance for VAD's
• Proposed Agricultural Resources Element of the Comprehensive Plan
• Review new Voluntary Agricultural District Applications, and encourage already -
approved but not enacted district owners to enter program.
• Conduct public outreach programs for Voluntary Agricultural Districts and
Lands Legacy.
• Support programs that preserve farmlands through agricultural profitability
• Continue work with other farm agencies on farmland mapping project first draft
complete 2104).
nil
VV�
List of Specific Tasks, Events, or Functions Performed or Sponsored Annually
• Review and make recommendations on the form of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation
Program Ordinance, and amendments thereto
• Review and make recommendations concerning the establishment of Voluntary Agricultural
Districts
• Assist in the production of the annual Agricultural Summit
• Hold public hearings pursuant to the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Ordinance
• Advise the Board of County Commissioners on projects, *programs or issues affecting the
agricultural economy or activities within the County that will affect agricultural districts
• Perform other related tasks or duties assigned by the Board of Commissioners
What BOCC adopted goal(s), if any, does this board/commission have a role in carrying
out?
• Agricultural Preservation (part of Rural Character goal)
• Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan
Describe this board/commission's activities /accomplishments in carrying out BOCC
goal(s), if applicable.
As listed above under accomplishments
Identify any activities this board/commission expects to carry out in 2005 -2006 as they
relate to established BOCC goals.
• Participate in Agricultural Resources section of Comprehensive Plan (proposed
Natural and Cultural Systems Element)
• Participate in Agricultural Center Work Group
• Complete farmland mapping project with USDA
• Complete identification of Agricultural Priority Areas
• Consider possible incentives for VAD's
• Continue to make recommendations regarding agricultural conservation
easements for Lands Legacy
• Renew public outreach effort, after changes made to Voluntary Agricultural
Districts program, to enroll new farms in the program
• Assist in planning for annual Agricultural Summit
What activities does this board/commission contemplate, and/or what issues does this
board/commission foresee at this time, that could lead to a proposed new BOCC goal(s)
for 2005 -2006?
All activities should fall under existing goals
?keV100S CFA
What are the concerns or emerging issues your board has identified for the upcoming
fiscal year that it plans to address, or wishes to bring to the Commissioners' attention?
• Due to the success and high interest level in the agricultural conservation
easements portion of Lands Legacy, there is concern that this component of Lands
Legacy will soon be out of funds
• The Agricultural Center Work Group
• The creation of an Agricultural chapter of the Comprehensive Plan (Natural and
Cultural Systems Element), as suggested in previous October correspondence.
• The need for additional incentives for VAD's, and closure on proposed changes to
the program to make it more open and accessible
• The effects of the 10 -acre lot exempt subdivision on the County's farmland
• Greater coordination between agricultural agencies and staffs
Describe any training related to its primary responsibilities that this Board/Commission
has received during 2004, either collectively, or for individual members.
Members have engaged in substantial training relative to either their commodities
(livestock, other) and /or profession (organic, other agricultural programs and
conferences).
go
T
U
o
Ln
TC
■
O
0
Q
CL
O
�.i
�
c
o
o
ti 00
N
w
N " N M
cp " N c�1
W
N
v
-�
u
N
L�
N
�-
00 k
F+ ti ti N
N
(G
Ncr�
�I co N N
aJ
E
C
�'
.G E+ ti N
N
aJ
E
Q)
0
V)
M ti G��j
N
N
E
v
O
z
00
L ti N N
V)
I
Q. Cz M O
Q N O" N M
M O%
Q co ti N N
Ln
YriH ;:yWr..Yi£b'KSitYIlKXdfkblYF4 tii3.' .ti ?r%n3f.:FnkkY:e?it::- ^xi?....
— /
cq
M ccq �
ti c
M '� N
N;
E� N� ^�+ N M
V
tij N O
ti oo cV
U
o
O
�
0
O
'cl
N
�
N
�.i
�
c
o
o
ti 00
N
w
tij N O
ti oo cV
Cv O co
U) � +4 -4
co M O
� C1 0)
�tiy
('mil
l` Cl N
'cl
N
}
lti ^�' TM
co O t�-
F+ co " N N
c
O
M cy cvy
ti 00
N
k
N " N M
cp " N c�1
W
N
v
-�
u
N
L�
N
�-
00 k
F+ ti ti N
N
(G
Ncr�
�I co N N
aJ
E
C
�'
.G E+ ti N
N
aJ
E
Q)
0
V)
M ti G��j
N
N
E
v
O
z
00
L ti N N
V)
00 ko
v ti N
Q. Cz M O
Q N O" N M
M O%
Q co ti N N
N O !t+ +•y
CCoo M -4 ^i N M
YriH ;:yWr..Yi£b'KSitYIlKXdfkblYF4 tii3.' .ti ?r%n3f.:FnkkY:e?it::- ^xi?....
cq
M ccq �
ti c
M '� N
N;
E� N� ^�+ N M
h cc ti N N
x
C� NC� N
N N
.0 cV
N co
�, ti N
N
ti ti N
M N
ti
i^
l� ti N N
ELI rJ+ ti ti N
ti N N
!!
v co " N N
,,?'
-4 C14 M
-4 N N
r = =.
ti ti N
N o� ti N Co
f
3
>
0
Z� ti N
r M l N
Ncp� -co 4 N M M O
co O l�
N N
F+ N O " N
s
F1 ti 00 ^i N N
C-I kc-5 " N
cq
*� 00 .y N
N N
00 kt�
` rN N
cq N
E� M °� ccq M
N c,j
co ti N
.
o o� CO
0
d Ncr� co
N
0 ti oo kx�
ti N
y
v N C
o �-r 00 ti N N
&
"3:d+ •• �di3AiYeX 'Gb!mm"ifF» <33#'�.oS:Y,"v�...
...::: ":. :':::::::. Sr�i>".' Y' isi.: isdSA' ti»': 4: bf: 6Yri:".arol"..Yf�Yi3':'l'cf&'::.K � ,C •�`iiro... .... SC: isS» 3iiki4: 4�: iki3?:: �t' TX?i.4<e6r.Y'.�i-Yd�JK.ik'k>iXK
. R' �RiiS3YAta: iv' i? NN# iiW
Uj l� cq N
co ti N N
N "I N M
co -4 N N
k ti ti N
oo
KI ti 00 ti N N
rr ti Oo
N co
h -4 N
h rr N
h �. �-, N N
M ti N M
`.� co ti N N
N
O l� rr
M ti N M
h N O N°
L
N O O
Cam+ ti N
N O N
"+ 00 ti
Q., ti N
t3 cV
ti 0o ti N N
:i
m 114 " 00
t.- ti N Cl
z
0 O 11-P
fn r-O CO ti c
0
c
.v
W
N
v
-�
u
N
N
ti
.Q
LL.
N
�-
N
�'
Q
N
(G
N
O
aJ
E
C
�'
N
Q
N
aJ
E
Q)
0
V)
N
O
O
N
N
E
v
O
z
N
v
E
v
0
V)
0)
c
m
�u
L
c
c
• V
�T
` V
E
Q.
O
N.
4-JTT
�V
v
Ln
v
V.
z
�T
Cy)
O
L
0
2
W
O
m
E
O.
U
v
L
4-
O
U
Informational
Material
Agricultural Preservation
Board
November 30. 2005
991ft imam
iiarmliatid
I '
Coverrrg the policies, practices and Initiatives that save farmland
NNPW P AW IM
Flo %J rt Since 1990 — Deborah Bowers, E&tor
1: 1101
REPORT BY NEW JERSEY FUTURE
Bustling NJ economy masks big troubles
TRENTON, NJ — New Jersey's high- octane
economy may not be what it seems, according to
New Jersey Future, a smart growth advocacy
organization that studies land use and urban issues.
The state's apparent wealth, the group states in
a report released Oct. 18, masks underlying prob-
lems that will cripple towns and cities unless changes
are made in housing, transportation and land use.
Release of the report, titled "Four Ways to
Genuine Prosperity," was announced at a confer-
ence by New Jersey Future executive director
George S. Hawkins Oct. 18.
According to the group, farmland and open
space preservation is threatened by outdated and
inflexible land use laws, lack of effective municipal-
level planning, rising land costs, and eroding tax
bases that would eventually make open space
acquisition and maintenance a low priority.
Towns should be required to base zoning on
carrying capacity, the report states. More restrictive
zoning in agricultural areas and increased density in
areas suitable for growth should be pursued, and
towns should be allowed to mandate clustered
development in conjunction with a farmland preser-
vation plan, according to the report.
Continued on page 2
Iowa
County offers tax rebate to go organic
SIOUX CITY, IA— Last spring when he was hired program. Marqusee was told by the Organic Farm -
as rural economic development director for ing Research Foundation that Woodbury County
Woodbury County, Iowa, Rob Marqusee figured
there were two things that could be done about the
decline of small towns and unprofitable farms. The
farm economy could either become more service
oriented, or, farms could get smaller. The only way
smaller farms could make money, he thought, was to
go organic, and so there needed to be some incen-
tive to get farmers to check out that option.
That's when he thought of the county offering a
property tax rebate to any farmer willing to take the
plunge. Marqusee was hired in March. The tax
rebate of up to $10,000 per farm over five years
was enacted in June. The county has committed
$50,000 annually for the next five years to the
was the first to offer such an rebate.
"We're a county without tons of cash lying
around... I just stumbled into this thing. It wasn't like
`I am going to do something no one has done
Continued on page 6
VOLUME 16, NUMBER 1 OCTOBER 2005
LTA to select accreditation commission- p. 4
Winners, losers under Williamson Act - p. 4
Green payments AFT's top priority - p. 5
Spotlight: Bob Berner - p. 6
Jobs digest /Conferences - p. 8
R�
l
Page 2
NEW JERSEY
farmland preservation report
Many localities in
fiscal `trouble zone'
Continued from page I
The state should "be strategic in preservation
planning and land buying," the report states.
Getting more strategic with preservation
The state's farmland preservation program will
soon be more strategic if the State Agriculture
Development Committee adopts recommendations
from a committee that has been reviewing the state
program process, according to SADC executive
director Susan Craft.
Since becoming director last January, Craft said
she has pursued a more strategic approach to
statewide land protection. One of the biggest chal-
lenges in farmland preservation in New Jersey is the
size of farms coming into the program. The median
size of farmland assessed parcels is just 25 acres.
"It's very administratively intense," Craft said.
"In the stateside part of the program we are being
more proactive, setting county by county standards
farmland preservation report
is published monthly exceptforAugust &December by
Bowers Publishing, Inc.
900 La Grange Road
Street, Maryland 21154
Telephone: 410 692 -2708 Email: bowerspub @hotmail.com
www.farmlandpreservationreport.com
Deborah Bowers
Editor &Publisher
Tom Daniels
Senior Contributing Editor
Robert J. Heuer
Contributing Editor
CELEBRATING OUR 15TH YEAR!
Subscription rate of $205 includes index & hotline services. ISSN:
1050 -6373. Copyright 02005 by Bowers Publishing, Inc. All rights
reserved. Reproduction in any form, or electronic' forwarding of this
material requires permission from the publisher.
October 2005
to pursue the bigger farms in each county."
To do that, SADC is proposing to use GIS to
"target large, contiguous, high - quality ground... I
want to go into a county and say `if we could
preserve 10 farms, which ones would they be ?'
Then we would do solicitation through public
meetings."
An incentive grant program designed to encour-
age localities to assemble clusters of applicant farms
was established in 1999. The current proposal
would use the same strategy when the state buys
easements directly.
Craft, formerly program administrator for
Burlington County, said the state plan has had an
impact on planning in every county, but many
municipalities are taking state money to purchase
easements without doing anything to protect that
investment.
"They are still chasing commercial ratables
without knowing you have homes to go along with
it. If the state is to be serious, you have to hit
[municipalities] in the wallet... does the state plan
need more teeth? Yes. Perhaps we need to get
serious about carrots."
Meanwhile, the purchase of development rights
has preserved 139,000 acres in New Jersey,
working with a $500 million commitment since
1998. But rising land values are taking a big bite out
of that, Craft said. "There was an annual goal of
20,000 acres, but financially I don't think that's
possible anymore." Small farm size is also a factor in
that, she said.
Under current regulations and policies, New
Jersey will be the first state in the nation to reach
build -out, according to the New Jersey Future
report.
The cost of living in New Jersey is among the
nation's highest; sprawl has created skyrocketing
land values and commutes that are long and getting
longer, the study said. Commute times in the state
have been ranked as the third longest in the nation.
In addition, the cost of housing has created a class
society of workers segregated by income and race,
according to the group.
Sprawl type growth is continuing to threaten
towns with decline brought on by diminished
October 2005
farmland preservation report
property values and rising property taxes, further
spurring relocation to newer areas, the report said.
The report lists 100 communities with "unsus-
tainable tax rates. They include Camden, one of the
nation's poorest cities, and Haddonfield, Newark,
Maplewood and Trenton.
"We have the nation's highest property taxes,
and a growing number of communities in the `trouble
zone' of fiscal distress," the report's summary stated.
The New Jersey State Development and
Redevelopment Plan, first adopted in 1992, "needs
to be better implemented," said New Jersey Future
project director Chris Sturm. According to Sturm,
the report does not indicate the state plan's goals of
revitalization, conservation and adequate housing are
not moving forward.
"We're not saying that at all... we are promoting
that towns [embrace the plan] . We are right in the
middle of a third round of cross - acceptance," the
process of making local plans compatible and in line
with the state plan, Sturm said.
The plan called for compact development and
establishment of five planning area designations,
from metropolitan, the most densely developed, to
suburban, fringe, rural and, last, environmentally
sensitive. The state plan was the end product of a
long process the legislature mandated in the State
Planning Act of 1985. It has gone through several
updates, the last in 2001.
According to Hawkins, the market is demon-
strating an increased demand for urban redevelop-
ment and traditional communities that include
apartments, condos and "tear- downs," the purchase
of older homes for rebuilding with greater
floorspace.
Public policy, however, despite the state plan,
still favors detached single- family homes, the 20-
page study said.
Call for statewide housing policy
The report calls for a statewide housing policy
and has specific proposals for reaching a goal of one
in five homes being in the "affordable" category. The
group calls for directing infrastructure spending to
favor redevelopment projects. A redevelopment tax
Page 3
credit is also proposed.
Nearly two- thirds of New Jersey communities,
many in the central portion of the state, saw no
multi - family housing during the 1990s. During the
same period almost one -third of all housing units
were large, "executive" homes, defined in the study
as having more than nine rooms.
The report states emphatically that New Jersey
is facing a housing crisis. Most of the state's new
jobs are in places without enough available housing
for entry -level professionals or lower - income
workers.
Older suburbs that were booming just a genera-
tion ago are becoming saddled with declining tax
bases, the study states: "As our older cities remain
impoverished, communities once considered havens
from urban decline now face the same disinvestment:
places like Morristown, Lawrence Township and
Piscataway saw the real value of their taxable
property decline between 1990 and 2003, by 19,
13, and 5 percent, respectively (residential and
commercial property values combined, and adjusted
for inflation)."
The group's call for property tax reform has
hard realities behind it: Real values of taxable
properties have dropped below 1990 levels in three
of every 10 communities, while property taxes rose
to as much as 45 to 47 percent of all state and local
revenues. The national average is 30 to 32 percent.
The group is also calling for transportation
reform, urging a dedicated funding stream for the
state's transportation trust fund, which has become
an account used to service the debt on money
borrowed for highway maintenance rather than a
capital program. The Monmouth County Board of
Freeholders has echoed the call for dedicated
funding, urging in a resolution passed Oct. 11 that
the legislature reauthorize the trust fund.
Two years ago a Blue Ribbon Commission on
Transportation declared that unless there is a major
infusion of new, constitutionally dedicated revenue
that is adjusted for inflation, the fund would become
insolvent.
For more information, see njfuture. org.
Page 4 farmland preservation report
news briefs
Land Trust Alliance announces move
to appoint accreditation commission
WASHINGTON, DC - The Land Trust Alliance Board
of Directors announced this month it will appoint in
February a commission made up of diverse land trust
professionals that will establish procedures for
accreditation of the nation's land trusts.
The commission will work on procedural matters
in 2006, test its product with an initial round of
applicants in 2007, and begin full accrediting in 2008.
The commission will operate independently and will
be a subsidiary of LTA and incorporated as a
509(a)(3) organization. There will be "a firewall of
confidentiality" between the two entities.
"The commission will be responsible for ensuring
the highest level of accountability for the accreditation
program and operating a system that is fair, consistent
and responsive to participant needs," stated a letter
from the LTA board.
Cost of accreditation, according to LTA, will., .
likely range from about $2000 to $4000 for LTA
members, and the accreditation term will be five
years.
Beginning next spring, LTA will offer training,
developed from the organization's recently published
standards and practices. The first course to be
offered in a web -based training format will focus on
ethics and conflicts of interest.
Loudoun County without PDR relies on
tax incentives, new farm enterprises
LEESBURG� VA - That it ever had a purchase of
development rights program may be a distant memory
in years to come, but Loudoun County, while discon-
tinuing its farmland preservation program last year,
kept its rural economic development plan intact, and
its agricultural development officer Louis Nichols on
the job.
"We're all disappointed we don't have a PDR
program," Nichols said. But limited funding dimmed
prospects for its success, he said.
Without PDR, Loudoun has to rely on landowners
staying in the state Agricultural and Forestal District
Program, which protects 60,000 acres in 25 districts
October 2005
throughout the county. Properties of less than 20
acres must demonstrate the property is being used for
some kind of production, "and we are offering
counseling on what to do," Nichols said. Nichols is
also working with the soil conservation district "to
come up with a natural resource plan, even for
wildlife, so then the rule would be, if it's under 20
acres you have to have a plan."
The county offers, as a bump -up from use -value
assessment, a 50 percent property tax deferral of five
to 10 years and a 99 percent deferral for 10 to 20
years in return for development restrictions.
Nichols' day to day work is designed to keep the
county's ag production -- including activities on the
3,000 -plus acres preserved through PDR -- moving
forward and in many cases transitioning to higher
value products.
.Loudoun is part of the Blue Ridge Rural Innova-
tion Forum, along with Clark, Fauquier, and Frederick
Counties in Virginia, and Jefferson County, WV. The
group focuses on the latest technologies for starting
or improving ag enterprises.
Some winners, some losers in county
actions under Ca. Williamson Act
SACRAMENTO, CA - While one county is moving to
end agricultural use -value tax breaks for certain
recipients under California's Williamson Act, another
county is looking to attract new applicants following
an amendment to the act signed by Gov.
Schwarzenegger Oct. 6.
Santa Clara County is cracking down on
Williamson Act abuses, and as many as 1,000 prop-
erty owners could lose their tax breaks. County
officials identified 279 prime land Williamson Act
parcels below the 10 -acre minimum, and 893 non-
prime properties under 40 acres. Many of the
undersized properties have become home sites and
have no agricultural use. According to the state
Department of Conservation, which administers the
Williamson Act, the number of suspected violations
in Santa Clara is "significant," and the county is
taking appropriate measures.
Meanwhile, Santa Cruz County is gearing up to
be among the first counties to offer Williamson Act
tax breaks to greenhouse and nursery operations,
now qualifying under an amendment to the law.
About 2,000 acres will be newly eligible.
October 2005 farmland preservation report Page 5
Switching from commodity to green
Agricultural Preserve
subsidies in farm bill AFT's top priority
state briefs
Board director Rich
Doenges reported in a
WASHINGTON, DC - Pushing for reform in U.S. farm
In Virginia ... Fauquier
correction to FPR, that
the number of appraisals
policy has become the top priority for the American
County's local PDR
ordered for the upcoming
Farmland Trust, according to administrative director
program, while focusing
round of offers is 89, not
Jimmy Daukas.
on a target area consist-
ing mostly of dairy
188, as reported in FPR
The only farmland protection advocate organization
operations in the
last issue. We regret the
error. York County
in the nation's capital, AFT has always taken the lead in
Y
southern part of the
Commissioners voted to
promoting sustainable agriculture and farmland protec-
county, accepts
go forward with the
tion in the farm bill, which is reauthorized every seven
ere ia-
tions from anywhere n
the county, said program
purchase, through
p 9
ears.
eminent domain proceed-
In 1995, AFT testified on commodity program
Pickering in a clarification
acres to create a park
reform and was successful in getting farmland protec-
to FPR.
overlooking the
tion included the 1996 farm bill, authorized at $35 million
Democratic candi-
date for governor
Susquehanna River. Part
«
annually for protecting topsoil by limiting nonagricultural
Timothy Kaine said last
of the farm is enrolled as
an agricultural security
uses of the land." It was the first time federal funds
month he supports
area, which will require
were made available to state and local farmland pro-
creating a permanent
additional layers of review
grams.
fund for land acquisition.
and approval.
In the next farm-bill in 2002, farmland protection
According to campaign
spokesperson Hari
In Illinois ... Kane
became the third highest funded conservation program,
Sevugan, Kaine also
County has preserved
2,700 acres and has
with $985 million authorized, a sum 28 times higher than
` supports the growth of
3,000 more on a waiting
in 1995.
the purchase of develop-
list for the program with a
"We've been talking about the need to support
ment rights." The PDR
program, created in
$2 million annual budget.
conservation on private lands instead of production of
2000,- remains unfanded.
Acres are concentrated in
two townships. The
certain crops for a while," Daukas said. "That's taken
Republican candidate for
program is supported by
on more momentum because of the pressure of trade
governor Jerry Kilgore
casino revenues.
negotiations. That has led us to the 2007 farm bill. It is a
said he favored a tax
In Michigan ... The
tremendous opportunity to shift the U.S. farm policy
incentive approach for
land preservation. A tax
Michigan Agricultural
toward conservation, stewardship and green payments,"
credit for easement
Preservation Fund
(MAPF), signed into law in
Daukas said.
donation is in place in
2000 as Public Act 262,
Following series of forums AFT held nationwide
g
Virginia.
has at last had its first
Daukas said the group saw three primary areas of
In New Jersey q
y ' '
build -out analysis of
application cycle. Since
concern to farmers:
Burlington County "s
2000, an extraordinarily
complicated and anemic
1) risk management: the need for a safety net;
Upper Freehold Town-
agriculture recapture tax
2 stewardship: he Conservation Stewardship
P� P
ship, presented last
has been accruing to its
Program of 2002 had insufficient funds to establish the
month by the township's
current $1.3 million. But
program as envisioned, according to Daukas; farmers
4 found 37
planner, .
percent of the
what has also happened
« ��
say they will lobby fora rewards system;
township's 47 square
since 2000 is that 15 local
government entities,
3) new markets: trade liberalization is a big part.
miles is preserved, with
consisting of townships
According to Daukas, interest among farmers in
6,774 of those acres in
and counties and some
changing the reasons for farm subsidies has come about
farmland preservation.
The township can
joint efforts of both
because of a desire for true market enterprises, dollar
expect 3,561 additional
levels, have adopted PDR
ordinances and generated
amounts that are meaningful, and a desire to see more
homes to be built under
local matches to become
efficient use of taxpayer dollars.
current zoning. Eighty-
eligible for state funding.
"We use to justify farm programs based on rural
five percent of the
The state PDR program
development, but that doesn't pan out," Daukas said.
township`s remaining
buildable land is in the
operating in conjunction
AFT will be part of a larger coalition of organiza-
agricultural zone.
with the MAPF, has
protected 16,500 acres.
tions working for significant changes in farm policy in
In Pennsylvania ...
the next two years.
Lancaster County
Page 6 farmland preservation report
October 2005
� operations seen
p
ht on e09
spotlight
p g
s local a incubator
a g
Bo b Berner
Executive Director
Continued from page 1
Marin Agricultural
before.' I think it hasn't been done before because it was too simple of
Land Trust
an idea," Marqusee told FPR.
The property tax rebate program, enacted as the Organics Conver-
Bob Berner has been leading the nations
sion Policy, will go into effect Jan. 15, 2006. "I know I have a few
top agricultural land trust since 1984, in
takers," Marqusee said.
Marin County, California. Just over the
bridge from San Francisco, Marin has a
But he is not leaving the future of the tax credit to chance. He is
decidedly rare character. It is a metropoli-
putting together a "Local Food Purchase Policy in an effort to foster an
tan county where farmers themselves
entrepreneurial ag economy with a ready market.
sought to retain agriculture by urging the
adoption, at an early date (1972) of 1:60
"We know there's $320 million in local grocery sales, and only one
agricultural zoning and later creating the
percent of that is locally produced. If we could increase that to 10
Marin Agricultural Land Trust. FPR
percent, we'd have $32 million" i n locally produced gross sales,
while he was
caught up with Berne r w
attending the Land e Trust Rally in Madison.
Marqusee said. "We're trying to create a process to buy local food, to
provide further incentive for organics." A guaranteed local market, he
said, would bring local producers into business.
FPR: Well Bob, i know you're at the
Land Trust Rally. What did you hear
The Local Food Purchase Policy would require that all county food
today that was interesting?
facilities purchase oca ly grown rooOLWnenever availaoie; iT iut avaii�
BERNER: It's been an interesting Rally
then typical outside suppliers would be used. The county food
with good sessions. Robert Kennedy Jr.
able,
service contractor would provide a "demand matrix" and a local food
was here. He is a very articulate and
charismatic speaker.
broker would provide a "supply matrix" to determine availability in
FPR: What did he have to say in
advance.
particular about [land conservation ?]
BERNER: He made points about what
Marqusee's office has been putting together the first annual Organic
this administration is doing, looking at
Growers Conference, focusing on the economics, markets, and "how-
environmental conservation from a
to" of organic farming to take place next month featuring successful
variety of viewpoints — economic, religious and spiritual and making the case
organic producers sharing their ideas and experiences.
that what's happening in this
One of Marqusee's rallying points for fostering an organics trend in
administration is contrary to any
his county was research that showed that organic farms strengthen local
thoughtful consideration or belief about
our children and the future.
agricultural economies.
FPR: Sounds like a rallying speech.
According to Luann Lohr, of the University of Georgia Department
BERNER: It was.
ofAgricultural and Applied Economics, "counties with organic farms
FPR: Bob, you've been in the land
conservation field for a long time,
have stronger farm economies and contribute more to local economies
since at least 1980...
through total sales, net revenue, farm value, taxes paid, payroll, and
BERNER: Well, I started with MALT in
purchases of fertilizer, seed, and repair and maintenance services."
1984, but I was with The Nature
Conservancy in the early 70's.
Just as important to Marqusee was what organic farm operations
FPR: So what can you possibly learn
could mean to the future rural culture of Woodbury County in terms of
at the Rally?
being a place to live and work. Lohr's 2002 research found that "court-
BERNER: You never know everything...
there's always something to learn. It does
ties with organic farms have more committed farmers and give more
get harder as time goes by, but there are
support to rural development with higher percentages of resident full-
still interesting ideas — since I'm
time farmers, greater direct to consumer sales, more workers hired, and
involved in a locally focused program, it's
higher worker pay. Contact. Rob Marqusee, 712- 279 -6609. Also,
always interesting to get out and talk to
other people and hear what they're doing,
see www. organ icconsumers. org and www woodburyiowa. com.
because there is probably something to
October 2005
farmland preservation report
learn. So I always come back with some ideas.
FPR: I just came upon a new idea writing
for this issue of the newsletter. A county
in Iowa has enacted a property tax rebate
for any farmer converting to an organic
operation...
BERNER: I don't know if a tax credit would
be sufficient incentive to dairies in Marin to
convert to organic. There is an organic dairy
in Marin, it was the first organic dairy in the
west, I believe — the Straus Family
Creamery. It is now buying and processing
organic milk from a couple other dairies in the
county so its business and its need for raw
milk has grown. They have their own
processing facility and produce other
products.
FPR: Most of the farms in Marin are
either dairy or other grazing ...
BERNER: In terms of land use, yes, the vast
majority – our basic product is grass – dairy,
beef cattle and some sheep. But we have a
growing number of small organic operations,
some independent of traditional operations
and some that have become part of it. So in
terms of gross revenues, organic crops are
becoming a somewhat larger and growing part
of the industry. In terms of land area it's not .a
big change. We had one dairy family go out of
the dairy business and they are now growing
over five acres of organic strawberries. .
There's another dairy making farmstead
cheese that's being marketed nationally. So
there are ways to get out of the commodity
business and get into value added, where they
get better prices and have more control over
the price they are paid.
FPR: You've got about 40,000 acres
preserved. You also have more restrictive
zoning than anywhere here in the east.
How is that playing out on the ground?
BERNER: Well the county zoning has largely
made subdivision and nonagricultural
development pretty much nonexistent. We
have A -60 zoning, but the average size ranch
is about 600 acres, so there is a theoretical
potential for that average size ranch to be
divided into 10 parcels. That has almost never
happened because the county has other
policies that make it very difficult to do that.
However, because of our location on the edge
of a 7 million - population metropolis where
there is a huge amount of wealth means that
agricultural land values have nevertheless
escalated far above any values related to
agricultural income and that's the principal
problem. So the principal market for
agricultural land in our county is not
subdivision and development, it is for,
basically, estates. People who pay several
million of dollars for large rural properties to
use as a. second home or a horse property,
Page 7
s
omething along those lines .
Fortunately the vast majority of
fi our agricultural families have no
interest in selling. Nevertheless,
the few sales that have taken
place continue to take place at
high and escalating values.
FPR: So it is happening
somewhat. When does the
easement program come into
4_ play?
BERNER: Well... when ranching
7'77
Y and farming families don't want to
wry= sell but for one reason or another
they have to deal with the land as
3 a financial asset and not just a
natural resource, whether that's
t
estate taxes or family and estate
planning or buying land or buying
out partners, because of these
y Sr high market values its very
difficult to deal with these
problems when there is so much value locked up in the land, which is providing an
extremely low income return. So our ability to purchase conservation easements
enables farming and ranching families to liquidate a significant part of the value of
their land without having to sell it, and in that way to face whatever need they are
facing ...
FPR: Right. You recently did some easements and that cut into your funding
quite a bit, you said, so much so that I put zero on how much money you
have. So you're starting a new capital campaign. How do y_ou think that's
going to go when you've been asking for money, for quite a while? Do you
still have sources to go to?
BERNER: Well we haven't been in the capital fundraising mode for two or three
years except for the grants we applied for from public agencies... but as you said
we completed three projects in the first part of this year and spent a total of over
$8 million. About half of that was provided by grants from public agencies and
private foundations. The other half was provided by funds we had raised in the
early part of this decade. But those projects exhausted our capital reserves, so
while we'll continue to seek grants from the State Coastal Conservancy and the
State Department of Conservation and private foundations, we are going to have to
initiate a large capital fundraising campaign because those sources will not provide
anything more than about half of what it will cost to sustain this program...
FPR: Bob, you're one of the chief veterans in farmland preservation. How
did you get started in the field?
BERNER: I fell into that sort of accidentally ... I answered an ad for someone with
my background and it turned out to be The Nature Conservancy and I was
eventually offered a job. It was there I got myself involved in this business and
decided that that's what I wanted to continue to do. It eventually led to MALT,
and I've been there ever since.
FPR: Tell me what you like to read, Bob. Do you have time to read books?
BERNER: [laughter] Occasionally I have time to read at night. Primarily I like
novels. I like to read things that are pretty much unrelated to my work, when I'm
away from work. The most recent one was a novel called The Shadow of the Law,
by a man named Kermit Roosevelt, a sort of legal thriller if you will. If you like
that kind of thing, I recommend it.
FPR: [Our senior contributing editor] Tom Daniels reads those kind of
novels all the time. He likes murder mysteries.
BERNER: Really? I just saw Tom – today, and yesterday ... I'll have to compare
notes with him.
FPR: I just finished The Dante Club. You might like that one, too. Well, it
must be dinnertime there, Bob. Thanks for your time, I really appreciate it.
BERNER: OK, nice talking with you, Deborah.
jobs digest
For full information on these and other
jobs, see Ita.org.
Brandywine Conservancy (PA),
Associate Planner - experienced
land planner for Land Stewardship
Program. North Branch Land Trust
(PA), Executive Director - 12 -year
old land trust located in NE PA seeks
right person to build an impeccable
reputation for the organization that
inspires broad community participation
and strategic partnerships. Natural
Area Preservation Association
(TX), Land Stewardship Director -
oversee 32 preserves and direct
monitoring of more than 40 easements.
Fox Valley Land Foundation (IL),
Executive Director - This 14 year old
land trust in NE Illinois is looking for a
motivated manager -work with 11-
member board to take the organization
to its next level of growth. The primary
area of focus is Kane County, a rapidly
developing collar county of Chicago.
conferences
Nov. 16, New Brunswick, NJ: Farm
bill forum hosted by Rural
Development Undersecretary Tom
Dorr, 9:30 - 12:30. See usda.gov.
Written comments can be submitted at
usda.gov /farmbill.
Dec.14, Harrisburg, PA: Future of
Our Food and Farms Summit. See
www.foodfarm.org.
Jan. 26 -28, 2006, Denver: Fifth
Annual Conference of The New
Partners for Smart Growth. Cutting -
edge smart growth issues, latest
research. See Smart Growth Network
website.
publications
Reinventing Conservation
Easements -- A Critical
Examination and Ideas for
Reform, by Jeff Pidot - Policy
Focus Report released by the
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 2005.
Reviewed by Deborah Bowers
The Lincoln Institute held a
symposium last February on
conservation easement issues,
during a time when land trusts were
watching the drama of Congressional
farmland preservation report
October 2005
Evatgrie4m Capital Advisors
Financial advisor
to governmental
farmland
preservation
programs
.1 ,2 Nassctti Street
E:'ri
rice Lon, New.fersey .08542
tch (60c)) 179-00('1
f%tt: (6or)) 2- 9 -oOO5
www.evergeei1ca Cc:ll]1
Daniel Patrick O'Connell
Land Evaluation & Site Assessment
Plan Development
Consultant to Local & State Governments
LLOYD E. WRIGHT
301681 -7764 Cell: 301221-3423
LEW52841 @aol.com Fax: 301681 -3260
11307 Baritone Court, Silver Spring, Maryland 20901
hearings on questionable conservation
easements take place. Author Jeff Pidot
was a visiting fellow at the Lincoln
Institute at the time, and was on leave
from his post as chief of the natural
resources division of the Maine
Attorney General's Office, his 15th year
in that position. Pidot has also been
active in land trusts in Maine.
This attractive 40 -page booklet
gives added perspective and order to
the issues and events that have led the
conservation community to an
admittedly uncomfortable spot. With
hundreds of thousands of acres
reportedly under easement by land
trusts, there has been no standard
instrument for the creation of these
thousands of easement documents,
and, while the protection is called
perpetual, the quality of stewardship
along the way is anything but certain.
Pidot addresses the policy context,
the public stake in easements, gives a
brief history of recent trends, and then
offers in -depth treatment of selected
issues paired up with potential reforms.
It unfolds in a well organized fashion,
and is "peopled" with quotes from well -
known experts and veterans.
Pidot asks a perplexing question,
and in so doing, raises eyebrows by
referring to "increasing numbers of
unsupervised land trusts." The question
is, are these "unsupervised land trusts"
good for our future? If they are not,
then what reforms might make these
BERKELEY
510- 841 -9190
SACRAMENTO
916 - 649 -8010
DENVER
303 - 623 -3557
www.epsys.com
Providing financial analysis and implementation
strategies for farmland preservation and habitat
conservation projects.
entities and their activities acceptable
and up to the task of dealing with
something as numbing as.perpetuity?
Supervision of course, must be carried
out not by a person, but by a thing -
namely, the law. What shape should
new laws take, and, who will enforce
these laws, remains to be seen.
The issue of transparency, or
public participation in placing an
easement, will also raise some
eyebrows. This is one of the suggested
potential reforms Pidot airs. Since
conservation easements "involve a
public investment and charitable trust,
the public should have a role in their
formation." Some would argue that
many potential donors would close the
book on conservation easements
before page one if this were the case.
But for the most part, Pidot's
treatment of issues and solutions is
sound and this report is good reading
for everyone involved in easements.
For ordering, see www.lincolninst.edu.
Farms, Communities, and Collaboration
:. �� o._`�ly Va�n.a �vQ���__a�.ez.
or
clff
fl
ti� ti A
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education
program of United. States Department of Agriculture
Grant No. ENE -99 -50 Manual published Summer 2003
Design: Julie Manners
Farms, Communities, and Collaboration:
A Guide to Resolving Farm-Neighbor Conflict
By
DAVI[) KAY
FxteTlSion Associate;
Cornell Local Government.Prograrn,
DepartMent of Applied Economics and Management,
Cornell U-niversity (Principal lnvestigator )
MARALYN Emi)
Senior Extensi.OTI -Associate-,
Industrial and Labor Relations School, Corn.ell University
JUDITi-f A. SAUL
E'xecutiue Directoi;
(.' o77jrn.unJII'3,, Dispute Resolution Center (Ithaca, NY)
LEE TELEGA
Senior Extension Associate,
IW-DAIRY Program,
Animal Science De-partMent., Cornell University
i�
7
his manual i.s a guide to resolving the kinds
of conflicts that arise when farniers and non -
farmers live together in rural communities:
conflicts over farming practices, life styles, land
use, the environment, We designed the manual
to help farmers and neighbors, regulators, local
government officials, environmental advocates,
and interested citizens become familiar with the
process of colhiborative problern solz,7irig. Collab-
orative problem solving draws on inediation
anti /or facilitation skills and involves an ap-
proach to conflict that engages participants in
resolving differences constructively. Equally im-
portant, the process helps build socially strong
and economically vital communities.
The manual that follows reflects the authors'
varied professional expertise as well as our
experience workiiig with communities around
the state as they grappled with farm - neighbor
conflicts. We have divided the manual into four
chapters that provide the context and the con-
cepts that can help you reach accord on critical
matters. An appen.di.x of contact information
with "VVeb addresses (The Resources, p. 35) ap-
pears at the end. The chapters are:
4 ']"he IssI.l.es, page 4
4 The Rtzr•Cil Landscape, page 7
–1 The Laws and Regulations, page 14
The Process, page 26
3
i�
We would like to thank the Sustainable Agri-
culture Research and Education program of the
U.S. Department. of Agriculture for funding this
project Grant No. ENE- 99 -50) and for patiently
awaiting its conclusion. We would also like to
thank Barbara Bellows, agriculture specialist
at Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural
Areas, Larry Fisher, senior program manager
at the U.S. Institute for F..nvironmerital Corifli.ct
Resolution, and lI ahnee Robertson —who were
at Cornell durincy the project's formative stag-
es —for their leadership; Cathy Sheils, director
of NY FarmNet, R. David Smith, C:ALS Professor
of Agriculture and Food Systems Sustainability,
and Bob Somers, chief of the Agriculture Pro-
tection Unit at the Department. of Agriculture
and Markets, for their high standards in re-
viewing this manual; the Cornell Center for tl:i.e
Environment for administrative support; and
a.11. the farmers, neighbors, Cornell Cooperative
Extension educators, dispute resolution center
niedia.tors, and agency representatives who ;give
of their time and their knowledge to loin us In
this collaborative journey.
Finally, the authors acknowledge the contribu-
tion. of an excellent earlier Cornell. publication,
C.;tzltivti.tirtg Plarin Nl igh.bor and Corrtrrtu.rti.ty Re-
la.tiOTIS (see The Resources). The document is a.
useful companion to ours and offers a particu-
larly helpful list of ways farmers might promote
good j.-wig Libor relations.
.... ......
worry a.bout...
! Odors and
air pollution
1 Dust a:nd. dies
1 Well and ground.
water contamination
M Peace and quiet
0 property va.l.u.es
1 Quality of life
The Issues
'ffiroughout the Northeast, suburban life is spilling over into rural
communities. City dwellers and suburbanites seeking serenity, open
space, and fresh air are moving to the country. Oftentimes they locate
right next to a tarrn or within a fari- niri.g community. For many, farm-
ing is only vaguely familiar:
ti getcZ
files,
. , r sgtxe -,artdS , t �
Plea s arit apes
Zr
But suddenly, these new neighbors are face to face with the stark re-
alities of farming:
manure spreading -+ pesticide spraying -4 equipment noise -+ odors & dust
housing for migrant labor -► slow- moving tractors on roads
"What are you guys doing over there ?"
tL��'��15�'s
�AVI
,�jjese. Ale-
0
co -6y r
S�
yell•
ray 'frtl-lt n" h a ve st .
ilhotil.
ancl
see sot2c3 t'trt3rkers.
neell_4s
�ef
Pert,l . "0 bP
And then farm - neighbor conflicts erupt. Some even grow to the
point where the entire community is involved. Polarization may
crowd out com inunication.
of course, not all farm- neighbor conflicts involve newcomers. Some-
times concerned neighbors are farm families themselves. Sometimes
the changing nature and scale of. agrictilture in. a given place leads to
conflict.
W
And when conflict ex•upts, many of us turn to the law. Laws and
regulations are meant to impose order, to balance competing rights
and cla.irris. Laws and regulations are supposed to protect all parties.
1. armers, for example, have certain legal rights to farm and an inter-
est in preserving their livelihood. Neigitbor.s, meanwhile, have certain
legal rights to clean air and water and an interest in preserving their
peace and quiet.
Btzt laws and regulations are not always sufficient. Because rights of-
ten clash. Arid because rights don't wash away anger or worries. And
angry, worried. neighbors find ways to express their displeasure.
h-4
,
n 1 or
"Can he get away with that?
"I'll take hint to Court."
"I'll coniplairt to ttte town supervisor."
"I'll start a protest movement."
Offended and exasperated, some farmers feel attacked,
Jfo
yY
t, 'Mori" AL O- dFr !"45
"Can he get away with that" ff
"'phis is my land and no one can
tell me wli.at to do.,,
" I'm just trying to make a living,."
"I was here first."
5
si t✓
at-e concet.neci about...
i Making a li.vin.g
0 Keeping good land .
i.n production
R Planting and.
harvesting on time
► Growing high
quality produce
P Providing nu.tr.ients
for crop production
1 Controlling '
diseases and pests
Fnvironme.ntal.
regulations
Adequate supply
of labor
y� ,M
0 =7
. . e ��sexe' �e
I� I1zs i tz st Make hi � 4(d), f�f .�5ex.,> C, 1 s erable,
ak nable, I f
W4, _ Me' « , 1��s 11
�.�.s 1� . � �1 � u Q ���11 '
11 j��.st 1'serc3b << ue life rn.lserab�e,
le,
Conflicts over interests. Conflicts over concerns.
Conflicts over the interpretation of laws and
regulations. Each party believes its interests and
corlcern5 a.re parain.otl.n.t. Each party believes Its
facts are accurate, its take on the situation. true
and clear. Farmers and neighbors often do n.ot
talk to each other about the problem.
Or... One party is not. satisfied with the response
of the other.
Or... One party doesn't understand the other's
point of -view or the other's fears.
And sometimes both sides think about escalat-
ing., which in. turn raises the specter of reprisal.
But farmers and neighbors have more con-
structive options besides ignoring each other,
shouting, or threatening . They can build under-
standing and work on reconciling their differ-
ences in a way that leads to win -win outcomes.
Because doing so...
saves time
saves money
saves aggravation
i avoids hurt feelings
3 builds trust
i builds relationships
-� builds communities
3 generates outcomes more
likely to meet everyone's needs
6
So, -Mien a conflict threatens to spin out of
control, what. can you do "?
Try a different approach to resolving conflict.
.Empower yourself and your conimtin.ity. Reach
out to people with collaborative problem-solv-
ing skills. People like mediators or facilitators
who can help .parties in conflict move beyond
accusations, anger, and frustration to instead
focus on issues, mutual interests.. a ld problem. -
solving strategies.
t
communa-,
proD.tenn!.-
r
helps fariners and neighbors resolve conflicts
in a rnanner that l)uilds trust and enliances
coIninunity understanding.
to
learn
more,
read
on...
The Rural Landscape
NEW YOR.Ks AGRICULTURAI, SECTOR
Farming is a big deal in Neur York: a $3.5 billion
industry that accounts for t1iousands of jobs on
farms, in proceSSing plants, in supplier operations,
and in retail stores and restdtlrants. We have
about 37,000 dairy fruit, vegetable, horticulture,
hog, poultry, and other livestock farms, which
cover 25% of the state's land mass. Our farms
supply us with more than mist food: in particu-
lar, lush landscapes of rolling green. fields, care-
fully tended orchards, and serenely grazing cows.
Diversity reigns. Dairy farms with 1,000 cows
and 20 employees and dairy farms with 40 cows
and one part -time employee. Fresh market crops
like apples and sweet corn, processed crops like
cabbage and beans, and value added products
like goat's milli cheese and. table wine. Full. -time
and part -time operators. Farms that have been
in the family for generations and farms operated.
by first generation farmers. Products sold. directly
to superi-riarkets, to commodity buyers, and to
consumers on the roadside or in farmers' mar-
kets. Products for export and products for do-
mestic consumption.
Although New York ranks in the middle range
nationally for cash farm receipts, we're near the
top in several key categories:
7
Fanners must be doing really well. Right! ?!
TA /ell, riot quite.
Farming is a tough and risky business. There
are many factors farmers can't control:
Weather
Cost of supplies
Product prices etlt.an
Global aid domestic comp
'0leigl 1 policy
Trade al' yYeS
Other factors add stress to farmers' lives:
i Environmental concerns
1 Caomi-minity relations
1 Complex .fi.nancial. arrangements
1 Unstable and sometimes inadequate labor,
supply
1 Changing technology
0 Pests and disease
1 Uncertainty over federal. farm policy
0 Interpersonal dwiamics of a family business
Here's the bottom line. Some farmers run prof-
itable operations and enjoy a comfortable stan-
dard. of living. Others earn i.-nore modest returns
and count on outside income froi.n a spouse or a
second job. Still others may have trouble paying
farm expenses. Most farmers will tell you they
love their work and way of life, even with the
challenges-and stresses. Btlt regardless of size,
profitability, or product, farming is a 24/7 com-
mitment.
New York farms have Become more productive
over the years while the total amount of acreage
farmed has declined. More than 225,000 farms
were spread across an expanse of nearly 23 mil -
lion acres in this state at the turn of the 20th.
century. By the end. of the century, fewer than
40,000 farms were left covering about seven
million. acres of land. Most lanai released from
farming has reverted to forest. The rest has
been "urbanized."
What accounts for these trends?
1 Poor fi..n.ancial. returns
1 Marginal soils
1 No heirs to take over
1 High price offered for l.a..n.d.
(e.g., alternative use as housing or
commerci,U devel.o.pment)
1 Physical and mental exhaustion
1 Technological change and globalization of
markets
0
Meanwhile, the number cif large. farms
has increased. 'T'echnolagy tends to favor ex-
pansion by letting farmers benefit from econo-
mies of scale. Farmers save on labor and time
by making greater use of their machinery
in:iagine a highly automated milking parlor.
Witli the latest equipment and up -to -date de-
sign, one person*can milk 120 cows an hour.
But a milking parlor can cost close to $1 mil-
lion, which means the farmer needs a minimum
of several hundred cows to justify the invest-
ment. Now consider a more traditional, lower -
tech barn. Given tl..).e equipment and design
limitations, one person may be able to milk 40
to 50 cows an hour. It's hard to keep a large
herd with this kind of setup.
Bigger h.a.ppens to be preferred. by many
food processors and retailers as well. In the
fruit and vegetable sector, priority is often given
to producers who can consistently deliver pre -
determined quantities of product while meeting
quality, size, and packaging specifications.
But guess what? (And this is a neat paradox.)
The number of small farms
in New York lia.s also jumped-
in recent. gears.
Think organic letauce and eggplant, baby car-
rots and zucchinis, artisan.al cheese from Bel-
gian sheep. Small - scale operations, devoted to
high value -added and niche products aimed at
affluent urban and suburban markets, offer a
fresh counterpoint to the Standardization that is
typical of large- scale enterprises.
c
w5
FARMERS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Farmers are part of America's heritage. 'They
opened tarp vast tracks of land in New York State
and on the Arnericarr frontier. Agriculture was
the bedrock of our early state and stational.
economies. Today, American farmers feed a na-
tion of 285 million people and a sizeable portion
of the world population, as well.
Today's farmer Yesterday's
feeds more than (1960) farmer fed
ee�►�e+�eeeeere �
�eeeeeee�reee�
e�eee�►eeee�ea e
ee�e�ree�►e�r+�e+r
�►ee.ee :+�e�e+r�r p
people-
people
Most farmers also try to be stewards of the
land. As they fertilize and seed and harvest,
they help our society preserve and protect the
land for current and. future gertera.tions.
And yet, they sometimes face a d.ilc inma: how
to balance concerns abort conservation and
the environment with concerns about economic.
viability. To farmers, these often seem like
competing interests. Finding the right rnix can
weigh heavily.
"I need to make a profit off my land. I don't
need the government or nosy neighbors tell-
ing me what to do."
9
r
ei�
011V
Ac
"My farm abuts a stream and I certainly don't
want to pollute my own drinking water."
"I'm mindful of the regulations and my neigh-
bors' concerns. I spend a lot of time trying to
follow the regulations without goitrg broke."
"If I don't protect and care for my land, .I'll
lose my biggest investment."
The pressure is om-Since the mid- 1980s, the
environment and personal health have been
li.n.ked in consumers' minds. That means closer
attention to the impact of farming practices on
the air we breathe, the water we chink, and the
food we eat.
"I'm OK with a. worm in an occasional ear of
corn. But pesticide —no way!"
Most farmers are mindful of these concerns.
Even as they use chemicals to help protect their
crops, many also follow environmentally sound
"best management. practices" such as:
4 stria cropping
grass buffers gear strums
$ integrated best management
4 secure manure handling sIrsterns
'They work with Cornell Cooperative Extension
educators, and with consultants, government
agency representatives, farm suppliers, arid.
bankers to find and irnple.rnen.t cost effective
methods that pass environmental muster.
"I follow a strict nutrient management plan
that tells me the best time to spread manure
on my fields. It's cheaper than buying fertil-
izer. It's also more natural."
r, .`
J.
A
But problems can arise because technology is
not foolproof.
"Yuck. The odor from your Melds is awful.. And
that lagoon really stinks even if you just in-
stalled the latest storage and handling equip-
ment."
Technology also keeps changing.
"How do I know the best time to invest in
some new machine or process? Every time I
turn around, there's a newer and better idea."
Moreover, new technology is expensive. Farm-
ers in environmentally sensitive areas, such as
watersheds that contain fi.sli spawning strew. €ns
or reservoirs filled with drinking water, may
qualify for government assistance through
matching funds or grants when they install
new equipment or update their practices. But
farmers outside these priority areas may be less
likely to receive cost -share funds. Without Borne
financial support, farmers i7:iay not have the re-
sources to invest.
"if I have to buy that new sprayer, you know,
the one with `eyes' that see the trees and let
me cut down on excess chemical use, I might
as well chop down the whole orchard."
Farmers, like the rest of us when faced with too
much uncertainty and too many choices, may
opt out for a while, watching and waiting until
the technology is proven by others and becomes
more affordable.
10
NEIGHBORS AND FARM LABOR
Another sort of environmental conflict some -
times arises in rural areas. That is, conflict -
over a changing community environment.
"IIV*h.at is happening to this town? Who are all
these people ?"
"Apples don't ripen at my convenience. They
need to be picked now Those workers help
me harvest the crop."
"We just added another 200 head. These folks
have a job to do; they milk and feed our cows."
.Foreign workers are increasingly common on
New York farms. In some communities, conflict
arises over th -eir presence. Neighbors may re-
sent the flood of new arrivals who come for jobs
that last from several weeks to several months
and others who settle in for what seems to be
the long haul. They may have concerns about
whether farmworkers are .laid fair wages and
provided adequate housing. Neighbors also
worry about how these workers fit (or don't)
into the commurd -ty.
It used to be that farni families supplied almost
all the labor needed on the farm. As farms
grew larger, farm operators began hiring labor
from. the local community. During peak season,
farmers turned. to friends and neighbors for
help. By the mid -20th century, some farmers in
New York State were recruiting African- Ameri-
can workers who migrated from southern states
to work the harvest.
But times have chanced. I..ocaI residents a.ren t
as eager to take farm jobs as they once were,
and southern workers have found work back
home. Still, farms are getting larger and farm-
ers' demand for labor keeps growing.
"My dairy farm employs two full -time milk-
ers. When I was a kid, my dad managed with
my mom, my sister and me."
"Since we bought that vegetable farm down
the road, we can't handle the work load
ourselves. Every summer I have to bring in
crews from out-of-state."
Mexican - Americans, Mexicans, Guatemalans,
and others from Central America .now supply
an increasing amount of the labor to New York
family
Workers
from other
states
fr. ie.n.d.s/
neighbors
migrant
workers
local
from o ther
ent5
residents
countries
f
Cie
fig t k:.
:,.
farms. And they are changing the social envi-
ronment in many rural communities. These im-
migrants, legal and illegal alike, work and usu-
ally live on local. farms. They shop in town and
send. their children to local schools. Some stay
in the state year round and others come for the
harvest season only. They bring their language,
their customs, and their own group cohesion.
Both new and long -tine residents Ynay have
t:a•cauble adjusting. For some, the look and feel
of the community are no longer familiar. They
may be suspicious of "foreigners." They Ilaay
worry about the impact on property values, on
educational quality, on crime rates, on the de-
mand for social services.
"All these Ilispanics in the stores and wander-
ing around town. They don't speak English.;
they look scruffy; their camps are an eyesore."
"Who's going to pay for that new rni_grant
health clinic? I ,sure can't afford higher taxes."
Likewise, farmworkers may not feel welcome in
local communities. They, too, may have trouble
adjusting, The culture, the language, the laws,
the surroundings. All nexlr, all different.
"I just want to buy some food. Why is every-
one staring at me?"
"I work hard for my money. And I save a lot,
too. My family in Mexico depends on me."
Neer York agriculture needs workers to keep
production going. And with local labor in short
supply, farmers will continue to look beyond
the state's borders for help.
y �
THE RURAL -URBAN INTERFACE
The face of rural New York is changing. Here,
as elsewhere in the U.S., the siren song of coun-
try living cells loudly to city dwellers and sub-
urbanites. They come seeking open spaces,
quiet, and. a. slower-paced lifestyle. This demo-
graphic shift is most noticeable in the Hudson
galley, the lower Catskills, and the greater
Rochester area.
But when these newcomers arrive, they find
"Their cow broke azy fence and
wandered into my yard."
"Do you believe it? The farmer
next door was running some gi-
ant piece of equipment at full
throttle —and the flood lights were
shining right in my win.doty —at
one in the morning!"
themselves smack in the midst of rural real-
"I can't drive down the road without
ity that is not always trouble free:
running into some tractor or run -
ning over some cow dung."
Manv are shocked. Many get angry. �1.anV
are unfamiliar with the customs of the
"'The guy across the way is actually
community. They have no long - standing
dropping weed killer from an air
relationship with long -term residents.
plane. It's not safe to breathe around
They lack knowledge of commonly ac-
here."
cepted farming practices and relevant
laws and regulations. What they do
"That manure is polluting my well. I'm
know is that their expectations about
going to file a lawsI.tit."
life in the country are being violated.
So the neighbors voice their concerns.
"I can't even go outside. We're being as-
Loudly. They t:illl the town board.
sainted by flies. That farmer is looking
'They call state and county regulators,
for trouble."
The }r cell the Soil and Water Con-
servation District. They call Cornell
"I moved .here for my kids. But a.11 that's
Cooperative Extension. They write
happened is, we traded city traffic for
letters to the local newspaper. They
noisy equipntent. Now we worry about pes-
circulate petiti.ons..An.d sometimes
ticide drift instead of exhaust furrl.es and
they call a lawyer.
wandering livestock instead of lost pets.
And don't get me started on the illegal im
But are protests, court proceed-
migrants. has got to stop!"
in.gs, and harassment th.e best way
to resolve the problerrl`7 Probably
not. All too often, the farmers
get. defensive. The neighbors
feel frustrated. Communication
stops. Community relations fray.
12
Neighbors respect the economic and social context of tar- 7lia:ig.
All. parties seep to c:ORIProniise on a practice or intended out -
collie and allow for a reasonable transition period.
paa -iners and neighbors call upon social a.Iicl ecc)nami.c sup-
ports, illcluClillg individuals and organizations, that can assist
thein through a potentially difficult conflict I.rianagenlerit pro -
cess. This may involve facilitation and conflict resolution pro-
grains and resources that can assist farmers and neighbors in
finding a Inuttlally acceptable resolution of the problem.
:l. 3
a �
"w.,Y�r
^@ s ,
w :,� " t D_C � � .�.
This model can be
turned into reality.
Here are a fever suggestions -for
And you. can make niost
prodUctive farmer-neighbor Ir1teI "aGtIC?i1S:
of it happen on your own.
The last two suggestions,
Farnl.ers provide neighbors c�Ti.th infor- Ilatic)Ii about the farm
which often require otlt-
:'::- ' (hold an open house; send newsletters) and how to contact the
side assistance, are dis-
far -n owner with questions and concerns.
cussed in Chapter 4, The
Process. but first,re'll
Neiglll }c)rs contact ct the farmer i. i�.Ixleci.ia:tely and directly whey.
explore one other prelimi-
prolJl'.IIlS aI'iSe at'tcl treat the farl.I:ier with respect When .char ing
nary topic: the la'�'tfs gov-
el "ni.Iig agriculture. The
concerns or asking question.
next cliapter contains an
farmers and neighbors openly and calmly discuss '�'tifhat consti-
itl.tl'oclLlCtion to tlicl legal.
and regulatory framework
tutes noI and acceptable farming praCticeS•
rl.):ici
witll.in wllich so Iriany
conflicts unfold.
g I _ J'ariners are mindful of neighbors' concerns and anxieties..
W . If'.igllhC)rs tlliclersicll:icl tile. financial and teclinical cofistraints
' £ that -nay a.ttect the farmer's ability to address their. concerns.
Neighbors respect the economic and social context of tar- 7lia:ig.
All. parties seep to c:ORIProniise on a practice or intended out -
collie and allow for a reasonable transition period.
paa -iners and neighbors call upon social a.Iicl ecc)nami.c sup-
ports, illcluClillg individuals and organizations, that can assist
thein through a potentially difficult conflict I.rianagenlerit pro -
cess. This may involve facilitation and conflict resolution pro-
grains and resources that can assist farmers and neighbors in
finding a Inuttlally acceptable resolution of the problem.
:l. 3
The Laws and Regulations
Note to readers of tlii.s manual.: The following is not a legal document. It provides brief summaries of
several relevant laws and some hypothetical situations that are intended only as examples to liven lip
the text. If you have any questions or concerns about farming practices or neighbors' actions, please
contact any of the resources noted on pages 35-36 or call an attorney
Farming is an art and a science. Ask any
farmer hoer lie or she decides which. fields to
work first, wlien a. hay crop is ready to bale, or
wl:tether an animal needs some TLC. The farm-
er is likely to shrug and say soi:nethin.g about
soil drainage and which fields face south, tlie
velocity of wind and intensity of sun, and the
look in the eye and sound of the moo of a fa-
vorite cow. But the very same farmer is stare go-
ing to use exacting instrumentation to test the
sweetness and crispness of the .fall apple crop,
to measure proportions for a. pesticide applica-
tion, to count bacteria in the milk tank.
Fanning is also hu.n:tariity's oldest econ.orriic
activity. Like other human pursuits, farming
generates its share of byproducts, some of great
value and some we'd. like to be rid of. The de-
sirable offshoots include the food we eat and
the country landscapes we enjoy. The undesir-
able but occasional side effects can range from
noise, odor, and di.Ist to polluted streams from
nnanure and. drift from pesticides wl:iose c hen d-
cal components marry of us can't pronounce.
It. is these unwanted effects that i:riost often lead
to complaints by neighbors and demand. for
regulatory controls.
"lVe shouldn't have to worry about n.oxioas
fumes in the air and Unclean drinking i:vater."
"The fcz.rrners think they own the roads cz.rou.nd
.1.4
here. They drive their- equipment from field to
field at five miles an how- arid you can't get
past therri."
"These farmers just ignore us. It's time for the
totilll to do something about these problems."
Not surprisingly, a host of laws and regula-
tions governing ag rieulture 'liave been adopted
over the years. Most try to balance the art and
the science of farming without undermining
its economic viability. In other words, the laws
recognize variance in conditions and practices
within this diverse profession while respecting
the precision that modern technology makes
possible. In doing so, they also seek to balance
the competing interests of farmers, neighbors,
and society as a. whole.
"This is my farm and you can't stop me from
building a new barn."
"I want to enjoy my weekends and you're tak-
ing away rrzy peace and quiet."
"I don't want to find blemishes on, the apples or
bugs in the lettuce."
The primary objective of state and federal laws
governing farming is to protect the environ-
ment and the health and safety of communities.
Other state laws, as well as local laws, mean to
preserve farming as a preferred use of land re-
sources and a viable sector for rural economies.
This second set of laws are corninonly known. as "right- to- farin„
laws, and in New York Mate, at least, they limit most efforts on the
part of local residents to "unreasonably restrict sound farming" ac-
tivities in identified farming zones.
CA-FEt:TORIES OF LEGAL CLAIMS
Still, neighbors have their share of complaints. And sometimes
their concerns and worries about farming practices turn into legal
claims. 'T'hese legal challenges generally fall into four categories:
0 Negligence
1 Trespass
1 Violation of environmental laws
1 Nuisance
NEGLIGENCE
"Haste makes waste" as the old adage goes, and it can certainly get
a farmer into trouble. Neighbors affected by what they perceive to
be lax farming practices inay decide to file a claim of negligence -in
court. Negligence is a cause of action ag a.inst a farm that can arise
from careless actions or failures to act that result in injury to a. per-
son or damage to property.
"That farmer is so laz)4 He didn't bother to rebuild the broken fence
in the pastLVe so the whole herd broke f ee and trarnpled Uly rasp -
berry bushes. Arid that crop was corning in real good; it would have
tarouglit me hundreds of ` dollars down at the f ariners" rntarket."
If a court finds the farmer guilty of negligence, the judge will require
financial payment to the injured neighbor for damages Gosses sus -
tained) and may levy an additional fine to punish and deter similar
behavior in the future. Examples of negligence are inadequate super-
vision of employees, allowing cattle to stray, and failure to maintain
egi0pment or facilities.
4 r13 ....s
.........................
:l. 5
:_ X
E'
� k
TRESPASSING
'Die meaning of trespassing seems fairly straightforward: Walking
onto someone's property without his or her permission. This kind of
trespass in farm country is most often a complaint by farmers about
nonfarmers.
"Hey! Didn't you see the sign on that gate? It means `keep out.'
Now get out before I call the sheriff.."
But trespassing in an agri.cultu.ral setting can mean something more.
R.ecei:lt court rulings lla.ve declared that tl }e movement of chemicals,
soil, or aziiinal waste across property lines also constitutes a trespass.
Such. a determination is almost certain if the incident deprives a per-
son of the use or enjoyment of his or her property.
"The spring thau) hit pretty fast this year Mud from Bill's field over there
washed into my yard, killed my grass and went right into my pool."
Farmers beware. Herbicide drift, sedimentation from an eroding
field, and liquefied I-nanure washing across the property boundary
can constitute a trespass. If a court finds the farmer guilty, the judge
can award monetary damages, require actions to prevent future tres-
passes, impose a punitive fine, or even order jail time.
VIOLATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
Concern about. the environment has been a hot political, social,
and economic issue for several. decades. In response, federal, state,
and Local governments have enacted. many kinds of environmental
laws with a. variety of environmental goals. The laws' most basic goal
is to maintain or improve the quality of air, water , and wildlife habitats
by reducing the flow of contaminants into the environment that re-
sults from human activity. And yet, cities and towns, real estate de-
velopers, residents and consumers, manufacturers, farmers, and nat-
uralists all continue to be embroiled in tussles over the environment..
"The' factoi -y up the hill is belching smoke as black as tar. The smell
is unbearable and everyone around herd is coughing like craze."
t6
"The birds don't come around any longer and the whole ecosystem.
seems out of whack. I don't know a.rtythirtg about fanning but .I'll bet
it's because of all the herbicide the farmers are using."
Environmental laws are violated when the damage is noticeable or
when the risk of da.i- i-w.ge to natural resources has increased. Convicted .
violators are charged. for the value of damages sustained and for clean-
up costs. They must also pay a penalty for breaking the law and
sometimes an additional fine for the legal cost of prosecuting the case.
Farmers have often been the target of environmental suits. I_.ivestock
operations generate manure, which can run into a creek if it is not
properly stored and applied to cropland. Orchards require pesticides,
which may poison wildlife if handled carelessly and instructions
on the label are not followed.. Note to neighbors and farmers: Even
where states and localities pass laws to protect farmers' general right
to farm, environmental scofflaws are made to pay.
NUISANCE — PRIVATE AND PUBLIC
Tara ing is not always meat and tidy. No matter how careful and
particular a farmer may be, acceptable and sound farining practices
sometimes generate odors, noise, and dust.
"Irritants, all! What are we g:Oirrg to do ?"
Indeed, there is a long- standing rela.tionsliip between nuisance
claims anti, agriculture. From. a legal perspective, a nuisance is an
activity that catises unreasonable and substantial interference with
another's quiet u.se and enjoyment, of his or her property. ItI rural
areas, odors are the most common cause of nuisance claims. Noise,
flies, and dust may also be problematic.
"I' don't oiz.In a clothes dryer and etiery spring I ha.zie to worry about
hanging rrty laundry outside. The dust kicked up by the farmer's
plow always rrtesses up rrty clean sheets."
The doctrine of nuisance is a common law- concept that evolved over
the centuries as Judges settled disputes between individuals. It cen-
.l. 7
FVVV`ti
3� � e� pp... �,a¢� � �� JNj7•
,fig{` '� 6
<<?
tern around two corresponding property owner-
ship principles:
4 property owners have the right to use and
enjoy their property tree of unreasonable in-
terference by others
4 property owners cannot use th.ei.r property in
a manner that may cause iiljury to others.
Nuisance law makes it possible to sire a neigh-
bor whose actions adversely affect your prop -
erty. The suit can ask that the neiglibor stop
the activity and /or reimburse you. for lost value
(i.e.., da.Inages). Activities that a court finds to
be "unreasonable" for the local area and cause
"substantial interference" with neighboring
land are considered nuisances,
generally involves two parties.
"I don't know tvlzat he's burning down there,
but lie's got a ft re going et)e7 1 night and I can't
stand the smell."
is interference witli the rights of a substantial .
portion of the community. Oftentimes, the nul-
sance is believed to threaten the health and /or
safety of community residents. The plaintiff in a
court action alleging a public nuisance lni:tst. be
a public entity, such as a town board or county
or state prosecutor.
"Don's and Carol's farm may be the only one
left around here, but were all up in arras
abort the workers they bring in every surnnier:
The noise level at night is awful, especially on
Saturday. That camps a nuisance; the neigh-
bors -want it closed down."
The di.Ienima is obvious. Farmers trying to do
their work and neighbors trying to protect their
property and lifestyle. What's to be done? I'hey
could talk it over. "Fhey could complain to the
to�vll supervisor. 'I'11ey might even take the con-
flict to court.
"',No judge will let you get away with. t1tat! Your
f(ITM has caused me nothing but aggravation.
Since I moved in here."
"We're not doing anything illegal. I have the
right to plow my fields, hire workers, and
keep animals. Get off my bask."
i III SL I . Nuisance suits are often Just that:
angry and desperate atteixipts to change some-
thing you d.on't like, even if it's legal. But many
states arid. localities have decided that farming
is a land use that generates value and is worth
protecting. To ward oft nuisance suits that would
otherwise interfere with farmers' right to farm,
many communities have passed legislation pro-
1.9
t
tecting tarins troin. private nuisance suits so
long as the farm's practices fall. within some
rlorin or industry standard. Farmers are riot
similarly protected from public nuisance claims.
RiGHT-TO-FARM I..,AwS
Starting in the 1950s, the appeal of life in the
urban fast lane began to wane. People moved
from the city to the suburbs in large numbers. The
suburbs soon filled to overflowing and spread
into rural areas. Some people even skipped over
they suburbs altogether and headed straight for
the coulitry. Others bought weekend and sum-
mer retreats in remote villages and towns.
"The scenery is stunning out here. And I just
love waking up with the sun."
"I feel really close to nature now. I can. smell the
grass, hear the birds, and watch the dear feed
in my yard. And the best thing is, its safe!"
With more people came demand for more hous-
es. Soon houses were eating tip farmland.
> An.d th-en, C01-ifticts a-rose.
"Do we put
another strip
inall here
rind housing
development
there ?"
Tntich tax rev
en tie we'll zet )
"Do we preserve
open space and
farmland""
(and help SUStairt
the viability Of ale
local agricultural
ecnrzon� y and the
natural beauty of
our landsc CIPO)
Trying to find the middle ground between
these two positions, all SO states have adopted
right -to -farm laws. Right -to -farm laws recognize
the unfairness that nuisance law can impose on
farms when people unfamiliar with farming prac-
tices move into traditionally agricultural areas.
"The animals sure look peaceful, but boy do
they smell. I have to hold my breath. when I
go outside. I'm going to demand the town do
something about this."
"Who does she think she is? My family's been
farming here for 60 years and she just waltz-
es in and thinks she's going to impose her
city ways on a s. She's got a lot of nerve!"
R.iglit -to -farm laws generally override other
laws on farm property usage. Here in New York,
riglit -to -farm laws are very supportive of sound
farming practice; more so, in fact, than in some
other states. Parts of Iowa's ri(--Yht -to -farm law,
for example, recently were deemed "an uncon-
stitutional taking of property rights." The Iowa
court was concerned. about the law's broad
protections of farmers in the absence of clearly
defined due process. By contrast, the New York
law requires a case- by -ca.se determ.iifatioT7 of
sound agricultural practices. The New York
State Supreme Court- Appellate Division ruled in
1993 that the right -to -farm lave did not violate
procedural due process. (Pure Air &, Water; Inc:.
v. Davidsen, 246 A.D.Zd 786; 668 MYS,2d 248;
1998 MY App. Div, I.,EXIS 294; appeal denied
9.1 N.Y 2d 955; 694 N.E.2d 885; 671 MY.S.Zd 716;
1.998 MY LEXIS 97 5)
Article XIV of the New York State constitution
declares:
"The policy of the state shall be to cons °erUe and
protect its natural resources and scert.ic beauty
and encourage the development and ilrIprove-
rnent of its agricultural land for the productio71
of food and other agricultural products."
In other words, the legislature is obligated to
provide for the protection of agricultural lands.
Even so, farm practices that are unsound, un-
safe, unreasonable, or illegal are not protected
by right -to -farm laws.
20
NEW YORK STATE
Ac7RICULTURAL DIS'T`RIc -rs LAW'
rMe Agricultural Districts Law, Article 25 -AA
of the Agriculture and. Markets I...aw, is the cen-
terpiece of state and. county attempts to preserve,
protect, and encourage agriculture. The agricul-
tural districts program is based on a combination
of landowner incentives and protections designed
to discourage the conversion of farmland to non -
agricultural uses. County legislatures can set tip
agricultural districts and lai-id.owners can enroll
their farms in these districts. Eligible farmers
make their own. decisions about participating.
"Here we go again— another layer of govern-
ment bureaucracy. Count me out."
"You might want to reconsider. There are good
reasoris to sign up."
Ir:ideed there are. One way farmers benefit from.
the Agricultural .Districts Law is through relief
from property taxes. The law stipulates that
C) r e a. s
♦ real property assessments for en-
agri ✓i. ltti.ra distrtct: rolled farms must be based on -the
ad's value for a rictiltural produc-
td relief and
protection. from tion rather than on. its development
value. The law even has a special
nuisance suits provision allowing farms outside of
agricultural districts to apply for this
benefit. The New fork State Department of Agriculture and Markets
estimates that participating farmers collectively save more than $70
million a year in tax payments to local governments.
Perhaps the primary motivation for registering a farm is the protection
farmers het from nuisance suits. Section 308 of the Agricultural Dis-
tricts .Law is the right-to-farm provision, whictl states that sound. ag-
ricultural practices undertaken in an agricultural district shall not
constitute a private nuisance. Farms not enrolled in. an agricultural
district, however, do not qualify for this protection. So before calling
a lawyer, neighbors should make sure the farmer is really- doing some-
thing he or she shouldn't be doing. Otherwise, if the farm is regis-
tered in an agricultural district, there is no basis for a "nuisance" le-
gal action. (See The Resources at the end of the manual for places to
contact about ahricult Lira I districts and sound farming practices.)
"1`17ink about all those chemicals floating in the Cllr every time they
spray the coat. It Taust be dangerous. I've told theTn. to cut it out.
INOW I'M going to file a snit, aTzd then they'll have to stop What
they've been doing all these years."
"Not so fast. The farmer has the right to grow that corn, even if
it means spraying the fields to keep out the bugs. If this is a nui-
sance claim, don't waste your time."
Well tlien, how do neighbors know if their complaints are valid?
For starters, they can talk to the farmer and ask for information. They
can contact the local Agricultural Farmland Protection Board (AFPBs
advise county government on agricultural issues and develop plans
to preserve arid. protect agriculture) or the local Cornell Cooperative
Extension office to learn more about the farming practice in question.
21
Sew f�
If neighbors are still not satisfied, they can send
a written. request outlining their concerns to the
Agriculture and Markets corninissioner. With the
permission and. cooperation of the fanner in-
volved, the commissioner will investigate the
situation (.and may solicit opinions from agri-
cultural experts) before deciding whether the
practice is sound. Each decision is made on a
farm -by- farm, case -by -case basis. The commis-
sioner follows four guidelines when making a
determination:
1 the practice must be legal
1 the practice niust not cause bodily harm or
property damage off the farm
1 the practice should achieve the results intend-
ed in a reasonable and supportable way
1 the -practice should he necessary for contin-
ued operation of the farm.
.Public nuisance claims are another matter.
The Agricultural Districts Law does not explic-
itly protect farms from a- claim of public nui-
sance. I {arm practices that pose a safety or
health hazard to the community may wind tip
in court if a government entity is willing to
bring charges against the farmer. Local politics
often affect the course of public nuisance com-
plaints.
"Have you noticed the number of kids who get
sick every spring? I'll bet it has something to
do with the farm outside of town."
"147e'll just pass a law that says farmers can't
raise pigs. If that doesn't work, we'll go to the
22
local prosecutor. She's usually sensitive to the
farmers' view, but this tiTne we'll apply a little
pressure and maybe she'll go to bat for us."
Not so fast. Section 305 -a of the Agr.icu.ltural
Districts Law, and Section 283 -a of Town. Law
and Section 7 -739 of Village -Law, set limits on
local government actions. These sections pro-
tect farming by prohibiting local governments
from enacting and administering comprehen-
sive plans and ordinances that would unreason -
ably restrict farm operations in an agricultural
district. The Agriculture and Markets commis-
sioner would have to make a clear determina-
tion that such ordinances would eliminate a
threat to the public's health or safety before any
restrictive laws could tape effect.
"What gives Albany the authority to tell us
what to do? "
In. recent years, application of Section 305 -a has
raised questions about the extent to which farm
practices are protected in agricultural districts.
"'I lome rule„ is a strong governing principle in
New York State. Counties, towns, and villages
have broad powers to enact laws governing
their own affairs. Home rule is exercised under
the Agricultural District Law when a county
legislature first votes -to participate and then
renews its agricultural district every 8, 12, or 20
years. Section 305 -a, however, is one example
in which state law restricts local government
authority. Several times in the past few years,
local efforts to address complaints about farms,
particularly those concerning, size, odor, and
manure handling, have been overridden by this
section. of state law.
WATER QUALITY
LAWS A.ND REGULATIONS
Mie federal. Clean Water. Act is the primary
piece of legislation regulating large livestock
farms. It specifies livestock farms of certain
sizes and meetin certain. conditions as c:entrated animal feeding operations" (CAFOs).
The act defines CAFOs as "point sources" of wa-
ter pollution and requires them to operate under
a state or federal discharge permit.
"The 250 cows in my herd couldn't possible
cause enough pollution to concern anyone.
I have new storage equipment and plenty of
acreage for spreading the manure."
"You. rn.ay be doing a good job but what about
the poultry farrn down the road? He.'s got thou -
sands of birds in his .flock arid Chicken manure
is really raunchy."
In New York State., the General Perra t CAP- 99 -01.
for CAFOs became available in July 1.999. The
regulation requires all poultry and livestock
farms with animals whose combined body -
weight equals more than 300,000 pounds to
operate under a permit. (Dote: The rules will
change in 2004.)
Say what? In everyday language, that's about 200
milk corers, 750 finishing pigs, 15,000 egg layers
or 37,500 broilers. Don't forget horses, cattle, veal
calves, heifers, and ducks. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has a headcount equiv-
alent for tl:iese anima is as well. Any farm meet-
ing these rninim.ums n:Iust register with the state's
Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) and operate under a CAFO permit.
23
.f
The permit spells out several obligations. Cov-
ered farms must:
maintain an ongoing professional relation -
sliip with a state - certified agricultural envi-
rorimental planner
develop a comprehensive nutrient manage -
irien.t plan that meets specific standards
4 maintain records demonstrating the opera-
tions are within the plan.
The plan must also address treatment of
wastewater and contaminated runoff from the
farmstead, erosion control of cropland., and ap-
plication of manure and fertilizer to cropland.
Compliance inspections of CAFOs occur on an
ongoing basis.
Water quality is also a state concern, The
New York State Environmental Conservation
Law prohibits discharge into lakes, rivers,
streams, and the like that degrades or damages
natural resources. Conservation officers are re-
quired to investigate reports of slick, foa.i.i:iin.g,
or discolored lakes, rivers, and streams, fish.
and wildlife kills; and other obvious signs of
.pollution. DEC has several enforcement options
-for dealing with illegal polluters.
"It's really dark tonight. No one will ever
know I dumped this stuff out here."
"Oh., rnan.. SOTneone must hac1e emptied barrels
of Chernical poop into the lake. See the globutes
floating on the surface? We Aced DEC to Cheek
it out."
D1 .... .....
/ r
conic ei.,itratt'd
Arlii-nal- Feeding
0 )rations.
�CIA F 0s)
of -lit so0 rces for
I "I:I I10 t
cad Ono
;Tick, foilming
cal' c.11scolore�
lakes, rivers
and streams
hsh kills
polluted. wells
aninial
excrement
enut s
(ItII 1.10,111(`1
c:olllbip.es with.
a 1`id
1.11.hr -ti o xi le
fol'rn.s
. ._,f fat c 3
result.111 III
poor air qua:iity
PESTICIDE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Ilse Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act establishes
procedures for registering pesticides with the U.S. Department of .Ag-
ricu.lture. it also requires the EPA. to regulate the use acid sale of pes-
ticides to protect human health and the environment. in order to use
certain restricted pesticides, farmers and professional applicators must
be certified; they can earn this certification by attending courses, pass-
ing a certification. test, and maintaining con.tinuirrB education credits.
FEDERAL .AIR QUALITY LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Many of us take the air we breathe for granted. If you can't see it,
smell it, or taste it, it's probably Oil. Or so you think. Tiny particles
of dirt and toxins can waft through the air undetected by most folks.
Tire .Federal dean Air Act is supposed to insure the ou.tcorxre sug-
Bested. by its name.
.Farn:rinB has historically benefited from a. broad exemption from
the act. Odors have been the major air quality issue involving agri-
culture, and odors are not included in air quality standards. More
recently, tlrou.Bh, concerns about particulate. matter have raised ques-
tions about the farming exemption. The recent renewal of the act set
standards for fine particulate matter emanating from human activity.
Common culprits: vehicle exhaust, coal -fired power plants, and mu-
nicipal waste treatment facilities.
"See that It.aze? That',s a rot of f ne particulates floating through the
air. Too lrt.ari)7 little particulates a71 -d some folks may luxve respiratory
problem.s."
Agriculture is a human activity, so ammonia emissions may fall tin-
der the new air quality regulations. Ammonia,-a compound released
fron-r animal (anal 1-winan) excren:rerrt, combines in the atmosphere
With. sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide to form fine particulates. Live-
stock manure and fertilization of crops are the major sources of emit-
ted ammonia. Recent court rulings in California may force strin.gertt
controls on these farm emissions hi the future.
24
"Hurrumph. Just one more thing for me to
worry about, pay for, and. argue about with
my neighbors."
Ac�fkICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Recall the discussion from the -previous chap-
ter. Most farmers try to be stewards of the land.
Most try to protect and preserve their land and
respect the surrounding environment. But solTle-
tirnes, economic and other factors interfere with
this goa 1.
"Prices are way down this year but my costs
keep rising. How can I. afford to focus on the
environment when I can barely pay my bills ?"
New Fork State has given farmers at least a par-
tial answer to that cluestion. The Agriculture and
Environmental Management (AEM) program, up
and running since 2000, is an incentive -based
program that helps farmers operate environ-
mentally sound and economically viable busi-
nesses. The program coordinates existing; agri-
cultural and enviroll.Illen.tal corlservation
consultants and public programs for olle -stop
shoppitig for services such as cost - sharing or
technical advice about co.i:lservation practices
on the farm.
"Now I can make just one call and get the an-
swers I need."
"Cost -share funds let us improve our barnyard
and make it easier to properly handle our
manure and keep runoff out of the creek."
25
Farmers work with these professionals to iden-
tify and address environmental. concerns
around their farmsteads and. in their fields.
"i knout that farmer is trying to do the right
thing. 1-fe's been talking to all as neighbors
about the consultant's suggestions and how
his new plan will protect the enviromn.ent."
The federal EPA has hailed'AEM as "an innova-
tive state. program that has plat NYS in the fore-
front of the national effort to help farmers iden-
tify and address agricultural nonpoint source
pollution." (FYI: Nonpoint source pollution
occurs when water moves naturally across the
landscape picking tip pollutants, and its place
and time of origin cannot be determined.)
CONCLUSION
"So this is what farmers must deal with '4/7.
All these rules and regulations. .1 didn't know.
Maybe if we had just talked about this anti
shared some information, there wouldn't be so
much. misunderstanding."
"Well, the neighbors have their complaints
and concerns but I have my rights. There's
got to be some way we can manage this."
The next chapter will give you some pointers.
v' 4
The process
Conflict is no stranger in our personal or
"business lives or in the life of our communities.
It often has a way of catching us unaware. A
series of seemingly harmless comments. A rush
of annoying behaviors. A string of offensive
actions. Sudd.erily everything explodes. Anger.
Frustration. Resentment. Helplessness. Rage.
"I'm just fit to be tied. First she says the tour
guide won't answer her questions. Then she
starts on the accommodations. Now she's
got the whole group riled about the food, the
itinerary, you name it. And we've got another
whole week of this trip."
"E-MY night its the carne thing. Loud, obnoxious,
indecent music. If he doesn't turn that thing
down, I'll throttle /Toil. the first chance I get!"
And then the outcome, Alienation. bad feelings.
Hostility. Sometimes even violence. but conflict
doesn't have to end this way. Indeed, there are
other ways to handle differences, disagree -
m.erits, and intense clashes that preserve rather
than destroy rela.tionsliips and strengthen rath-
er than divide communities.
"ti"re don't have to be enemies. Let's talk."
"There must be a solution we can all agree to..."
Information helps. Knowledge. Facts. Data.
Real stuff to grapple with. instead of raw emo-
tions. That's wl-ty there's so much information
in earlier chapters about fanning, the environ-
ment, and laws and regulations. Even so, ques-
tions, disagreements, and conflicts will occur
as farmers and neighbors go about their daily
lives.
When problems arise, there is a range of ways
to respond. All involve problein solving and the
search for win -win outcomes. 'The simplest is
direct communication between two neighbors.
'T'he most complex involves planning and par-
ticipating in a large -scale community problem -
solving process. The way to proceed generally
depends on the situation at hand. Whichever
approach you use, remember that productive
interactions and increased trust result from:
26
1 sbar.in.g information
1 building common knowledge
i strengthening relationships
"Sounds pretty vague to me. Help me under-
stand the benefit of a problem- solving pro-
cess."
Think back to the first two chapters, where we
briefly talked about building understanding and
reconciling differences in a search for mutu-
ally beneficial outcomes. The potential pay -offs
from doing this include:
0 savings of time.., money, aggravation
1 stronger interpersonal relationships and com-
munity ties
! agreement about ways to resolve problems
1 self - sufficiency in dealing with problems
1 more acceptance of, and satisfaction with,
outcomes
1 greater knowledge about controversial issues
and engagement. 1n civic life
e S
ust
What can you do when things next door are
not as you would like them to be?
"I see hurt out there on the tractor every day.
Just what is he spreading on those fields?"
"That new neighbor knows nothing about
farming. And now he's talking to the others
about the noise from otIr tractor."
"If they build a neu, barn, that means stilt more
cows and more stink."
"The town has no right to prevent me from
expanding my farm."
Begin by talking. This first step may be obvi-
ous, but is often ignored. Attempt to get an-
swers to your questions. Provide helpful infor-
mation directly. Make contact. person -to- person.
one reason talking; is so useful is that it builds
relationships. And relationships make it easier
to work through differences. Another reason
talking; helps is that it can prevent. misunder-
standings. All too often, people jump to nega-
tive cmiclusions without botlh.ering to checl.,-,
if those conclusions are correct. Soinetimes
talking call Clear tip the facts. Sometimes talk-
ing can help clarify wl:hy other people are doing
somethinh you don't like.
So when thin s are not as you would like them
to be, reach out.
"Thanks for callin &: I appreciate the informa-
tion and reassuring ansivers."
r � r`
J `.t
"I'll stop by Betty's house so we can exchange
information and explore the issues."
Sometimes talking, information sharing, respect
and reason don't resolve your concerns. Still
more obstacles block the way.
"How -wdl we preserve,
"How do I have a rather than darnage,
conversation with relationships ?"
someone who doesn't
seem to listen ?"
".Flow do 'we get agar cement
on the facts, rules, and
regulations ?"
"How will we handle
complex, scientific, or
technical information ?"
,wow can use explore the
available reMedies ?"
"How- do we agree
on next steps ?"
So consider oslier cooperative options. Often
this ineans turning to an "honest broker," some-
one trusted who can help you and your neigh-
bor have a more productive conversation, Many
times, the person who can offer the most effec-
tive help will have some training in mediation
skills. It can be useful to involve a trusted third
person even if you have some of these skills
yourself. When the issue is more complex and
involves many people and interests, try a. com-
niuni.ty -based problem - solving process. Both
two- pasty mediation and cornniunity- based
problem solving are described below.
28
G4 d
s ie'l�-
Mediation. Let's start with the simpler process,
mediation by an honest broker. Mediation is a
good second step when you and your neighbor
are unable or unwilling to talk directly,
Mediation is a voluntary process. It involves a
small number of people agreeing to meet and
trying to cooperatively resolve their differences.
The mediator facilitates the conversation with -
out taking sides, giVing advice, or pushing peo-
ple to agreement. Mediation allows each person
to gain clarity about options and resources. It
Also provides an opportunity for listening and
considering someone else's perspective. Once
people are helped to talk without shouting and
ja.bbi.ng and defending, tliey frequently come
up with an agreement that satisfies all those
involved. If the mediation fails, the parties can
pursue whatever other options exist for dealing
with their concerns.
In New York State, the Unified Court. System
funds a mediation center in every county; the
centers offer- mediation services at little or no
cost. Mediations conducted through these cen-
ters are confidential. Some Agricultural Farm-
land Protectiorr Boards (AFPB) recommend
.mediation to farmers and neighbors in conflict.
(See The Resources at the end of this guide for a
Web address that lists these centers and infor-
mation about contacting your local AFPB.)
Why mediate? Because mediation:
1 encourages communication and. cooperation.
1 fosters relationships
M allows people to shape their own solutions
1 can be scheduled. at dates and times conve-
nierit to the people involved
1 focuses part icipants' energies on looking for
solution s
! is cost effective.
Comintinity Problem Salving. Mediation is
a great way to deal. with issues between a few
people. but sometimes a lot of people want to
weigh in on an issue... Sometimes a dispute be-
tween two neighbors taps into deeper concerns.
L t A
Tlie whole community may start taking sides.
Cold timers. Newcomers. Fanners. Nonfarmers.
Citizens. Advocacy groups. Regulatory agencies.
Local government. This is when it may make
sense to think about a "collaborative community
problem- solving process,' also known as multi -
party mediation. Whichever name you prefer,
the process varies based on the complexity of
the issues and the rium.ber of people involved.
A community problem- solving process is usual-
ly organized in response to an existing problem
or situation. People realize they're stuck. Their
ability to act is blocked by others with oppos-
ing perspectives. I..ots of people have opinions.
No one can come up with an idea. that satisfies
enough people.
�U '' 1ha t vv � ,
t� e S - _ C,00 " St cxnntlt �. r,rxllV need is
S��t�oll on �� f irc tr tzCk.
r �?
ev en
d� a� `I thZnk
c e f c,$ Iter ' hozzs the �'l`� Are
s
e11okrv�� e �shDZ1ld be
renovated:
pa) -
for
t1l.i s ?
Elected officials or appointed boards are usually
the ones who l.-na.ke decisions about public issues.
But decisions that affect rnarfy in. the coinry .nity
are often controversial. Zoning. Property values.
Lifestyle. Local culture. All too often, leaders
and citizens alike participate in processes that
leave them feeling polarized, unsatisfied, and
alienated. When this happens, the wrong lesson
is learned: all you can do is hunker down, bear
throu ah it, and. see who gets their way.
But in many cases, public outcry can be more
constructively managed. and mitigated through
open. airing of comn:uu.nity interests and con-
cerns. In other words, carefully structured. a.p-
pr.oacl:les to obtaining broad public input in the
decision - making process can lead to the holy
grail of public policy: better decisions and wider
community support.
"How will we ever solicit all the input we need ?"
"The farmers are convinced all the neuVcorn.ers
uv.n.t to put th.errt. out of business."
"If we adopt Plan B, then everyone who sup-
ports plans A and C will be furious."
A collaborative community problem- solving
process can help officials and residents get to a
satisfactory resolution— especially when people
feel stuck.
30
.3' �..tp. starting evert before a crisis
arises is a whole lot more efficient.
So the next time your town or village wants to
change its comprehensive plan, invite public
discussion that is inclusive. When your farm-
land protection board begins planning an agri-
cultural district, make sure farm and nonfarm
community members have a say. Cur, when mul-
tiple factions have already staked out positions
on, say, the utility of extending sewer lines into
outlying areas, try a new strategy. Start by ton-
ing down the rhetoric. This sin:iple step may be
a necessary precondition for preserving com-
munity peace. And then consider a collaborative
community problem - solving process.
Let's now look at the key elements of this pro-
cess and some comments on how to move it
forward.
4 s e
"Tell me, who's going to lead this effort ?"
No matter what the motivating cause, collab-
orative community problem solving generally
begins when someone shirts to systematically
pull people together. This person is referred
to as the convener. The convener needs to be
someone (or some representative group) who is
respected by, and has access to, people on all
sides of the issue. The convener may be a local
person, perhaps an elected official, a commu-
nity elder, a well- kriown clergy or businessper-
son. Sometimes the convener is a mediator or
facilitator who will assist throughout the entire
problem- solving, process. Other times the con-
vener works closely with a neutral third party,
froin the start.
g �� 3:f � f; ! y s ;z 'yF`. g y T l t ;. y ; `� r �4 F£ Z ,3e j n
i s< y^ ! F, ✓.t ;. > i:. ;. T F .�:.:. it .i.,..n :. d i../ :.�L Y ../ .: 1' �.T'
"We Tteed sorneone who will ptiy attention to the
process but has no stake in the outcorn.e."
Tn most communities, there are people with fa-
cilitation skills. They run meetings. `They keep
the dialogue flowing. They enable a process.
Sometimes there are people with mediation
skills. 1'hey., too, keep the dialogue flowing.
But they do so in the context of a conflict. They
guide the sea.rcli. for mutually acceptable solu-
tions. Facilitators and mediators can play im-
portaxit roles in commurnty probl.ern solving.
A few words of caution. it may be difficult to get
such people involved in every issue. They have
jolts. They have families. They have lives. They
may be perceived as being close to one side or
the other. Even more important than time, fa-
cilitators and mediators must have credibility.
In addition, community problem solving, re-
quires a major commitment of time, energy, and
resources from all who participate, Assess the
situation carefully to deterriiine whether such
a. process makes sense at this moment in your
commu.n.ity. It t1ie issue is iniportan.t, firid.ing
an honest Broker is usually worthwhile; you
rnav need to search outside the coininunity for
a facilitator or mediator. This person is gener-
ally compensated for his or her tune. Sometimes
local governments cover the cost. Other times
everyone involved contributes. Local founda-
tions nia.y be williiig to support efforts to bring
people together to solve tough. probl.eins.
�1
"We'll be putting in a lot of hard work. We
want to be sure our efforts aren't ignored."
Good point. Solutions that result from collabora-
tive community problem solving are advisory.
'This is where the convener comes in: he or she
usually begins by talking with officials who
have the authority to make formal decisions.
"These decision makers must be willing to seri-
oiisly consider the input provided by residents
during a community problem- solving process.
To iricrease the chances this input will. be ac-
ceptable, they shorild set clear parameters for
any solution or plan. This assures folks who
participate that their time and hard work will
have the intended result.
il
Assuming the decision niakers support the idea,
the convener amid /or facilitator begin(s) by ask-
ino questions:
1 What is the history of the situation and those
involved?
i Flow do different members of the community
view the issue?
0 Who needs to be involved in whatever process
is designed (i.e., who are the stakeholders)?
M What information about tl:ie issue(s) is avail-
able?
As the convener and. facilitator gather answers
to these questions, the convei:ier explains the
problem- solving process and assesses people's
willingness and ability to participate.
'r
)• l t 5
des',-
Now it's time for the design phase.
"Help me understand what people who design these processes
are concerned about."
There is no one perfect design for a collaborative community
problem- solving process, SuccessfUl processes typically reflect
the individuals, institutions, and issues involved, as well as the
local culture. Successful processes also typically include these
elements:
i Feasibility. 'The process must be feasible. Participants need to
understand what they're agreeing to and for how long.
! InlLisiveness. The process needs to be inclusive, with the
diversity of perspectives represented.
! Participation. People must have different ways to participate.
Only one mode of participation, speaking at a public la.earing,
for example, is riot erlougla.
! information. Information must be readily available to the
wider public and technical information must be accessible to
nonexperts.
1 Agreements. Participants agree on rules for collecting infor-
mation, choosing options, and making recommendations.
Designs differ based on local needs. Most include a carefully
conceived, but flexible, sequence of large public meetings open
to everyone and smaller group or task force meetings that ac-
complisla specific tasks and report back at large meetings. A
core group workirig with the conveners /facilitators will design
the process.
32
J
! Level of interest.. It's hard to get a process go-
ing if there's little or no interest in ail issue.
M Degree of polarization. Too many people oil
different sides of the issue may be unwilling
to work together.
1 Need for regal clarification. If a decision sets
or challenges a legal precedent, people may
prefer to have a court decision.
1 Acceptable options. Community problem
solving works best when citizens can consid-
er a range of options. When legal, financial,
or technical realities limit creativity, starting
such a process may not be worthwhile and
might even increase frustration levels.
t
If you think collaborative community problem
solving makes sense, talk to others. Contact an
elected official, a town or planning board mem-
ber, someone in an influential local or state or-
gal:iization, and those working, with —or against
—you- on the issue. Think about the leaders in
your community who may be able to get oth-
ers to participate. Some local mediation centers
facilitate community problem solving or know
others who do. Cornell Cooperative Extension
educators may be another source of information
about how to get started.
An annotated list of resources begins on the
next page. Call one or two or three. Ask ques-
i:.. _ - /- .x'11___ :. C-.- - -&-: - f":.- .4. +rvr
The Resources
i The New York State Unified Court System
(UCS) helps to ma.intai.n. a network of cominu-
nity dispute resolution centers that serve all. 62
counties in the state. The UCS Web site provides
information about the court system's alterna-
tive dispute resolution programs and contact
information for local dispute resolution centers.
The centers provide trained mediators who can
help community members resolve many types
of conflicts.
Go to http : / /www.courts.state.ny.u.s /adr/ or
cheek your local telephone directory under "me-
diation" or "dispute resolution" for the center
neatest you.
■ The New York State Agricultural Mediation
Program (NYSAMP) offers mediation assis-
tance to agricultural producers, them- creditors,
and other persons who are directly affected by
the actions of the United States Department. of
Aaricult[Ire (I1SDA). NYSAMP mediators are
provided by the statewide system of dispute
resolution centers (see above).
For more information go to http: / /www.nysdra.
org /a.dr /adr.__nysamp.litmI or call (518)687 -2240,
(866)661) -7267 (toll free).
Importarit Tiote: NYSAMP also acts as a clear -
inohouse for people connected to agriculture
who are involved in disputes. In situations
where you need. other conflict- related services,
N'YSAMP can held) you find them.
0 New York FarmNet is an information and re-
ferral service for fanners. FarrnNet consultants
work confidentially Witli farmers wlto are expe-
35
riericing financial or family problems. FarmNet
also inai.ntains a resource library; offers work-
shops on topics sucli as reducing and managing
stress, farm transitions, and rebuilding after a
disaster; and helps to match potential farmers
with existing farms.
Go to http: / /www.nyfarmnet.org or call 1-800 -
54, FARM or 607- 255 -1603 to speak with a
FarmNet representative. The Web site is a great
resource, providing useful information and
links to publications, agriculture and social ser_
vice agencies, trade associations, and the like.
0 Cornell Cooperative Extension (CCE) is a
multi- pronged educational system that links ex-
perience and research, builds partnerships and
coalitions, promotes youth and local leadership
development, and. provides resources to loci l
community residents. CCE maintains offices
throughout New York State and sponsors a wide
variety of programs. Many CCE educators are
committed to the practice of conflict resolution
and community engagement in public issues.
Go to http: / /www.cce.cornell.edu/ or check the
telephone directory for the nearest office.
M New York. Farm Bureau represents the inter-
ests of its members (mostly farm families) on
econoinic and public: policy matters. Farm bu-
reau runs promotions and educational prograni.s
and sponsors contests and awards.
Go to http: / /www.nyfb.org/ or contact Farm
bureau at (518) 436 - 8495.
continued Ort n.eyt page
The Resources corttirZ11,61 froni previous page
■ New York State Department of Agriculture
and. Markets' mission is to prornote a competi-
tive and financially sound agricultural industry,
foster environmental stewardship by agricul-
tural producers, and safeguard the food supply
of Neer Fork residents.
Search the 'Web site at http: / /www.agmkt.
state .ny.us /TheDepartment.html or contact the
department at 518 -457 -3880 or 1- 500 - 554 -4501.
0 Natural Resources Conservation Service, a.
division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
provides technical assistance and information,
and sometimes financial incentives, to help
farmers, ranchers, and other private landown-
ers conserve their soil, water, and other natural
resources. N'RCS works with local conservation
districts and. local. governments.
Check the Web site at http: / /www.nres.usda.gov/
for more information acrd links to other programs.
■ Each county in the state (:but for New York
City) has a Soil and IVater Conservation Dis-
trict, which is overseen by the New York State
Soil and Water Conservation Committee. The
districts implement soil and water conservation
measures and agricultural nonpoint source wa-
ter quality programs.
(moo to the coinmittee's Web site at littp: //
www.agm kt. state .ny.us /soilwater /home.html,
check the telephone directory for your county
district, or call the state office at (518) 457 -3738.
36
■ Th.e Agricultural and Farmland Protection
Program authorizes counties to create agricul-
ture and farmland protection boards. These
boards are responsible for planning and imple-
menting policies that protect local farmland and
encourage agricultural expansion. One key part
of the program enables local governments to
purchase development rights on farms, which
permanently protects agricultural acreage from
development pressures.
For more information, call your county clerk
and ask if there is an AFPB, Also check out
http:// www. cals .cornell.edii /agfoodcommunity/
afs_temp3.cfm ?topicID =368, w1iich is loaded
with relevant information, resources, and links.
■ For additional reference material, see Culti-
uatingr Farm, Neighbor; and Contrrur.rt.ity Rela-
tions, by Durlcan Hilchey, Community .Food
and Agriculture Program, Cornell University,
and Nathan Leonard, Area Extension Specialist
PRO- DAlR1' Program, Cornell Cooperative Ex-
tension.
Go to http://www.cardi.cornell.edu/cd_tool-
box_2 /tools /farmers_community.cfm for ex-
cerpts and an order form.
Let"s
turn over
a new
leaf.
ears
Michigan Legislature
Home
Register
Legislature
Bills
Calendars
Committee Bill Records
Committee Meetings
Concurrent Resolutions
Joint Resolutions
Journals
Legislators
Public Acts
Resolutions
Session Schedules
Search Wizard
Basic Search
Advanced Search
Laws
Freq Requests (by topic)
Freq Requests (alpha)
Search Wizard
Basic MCL Search
Advanced MCL Search
Constitution Search
Chapter Index
Executive Orders
Historical Documents
MCL Tables
Publications
Publications
Publications (text only)
Related Sites
Related Sites
Legislative PDA Pages
rchived Sessions
Page 1 of 2
www.liegislature.mi.gov
Michigan Compiled Laws Complete Through PA 175
of 2005
Why Register? Login Hell
Michigan Legislature: Search Results
5 Document(s) found
Search within these documents for Search
Document Type
Description
Act 93 of 1981 Statute
MICHIGAN RIGHT TO FARM ACT
(286.471 - 286.474)
Section 286.471 Section
Short title.
Section 286.472 Section
Definitions.
Section 286.473 Section
Farm or farm operation as public or
private nuisance; review and
revision of practices; finding;
conditions.
Section 286.474 Section
Investigation of complaints
involving farm or farm operation;
memorandum of understanding;
generally accepted agricultural and
management practices; unverified
complaints; applicability of other
statutes; preemption of local
ordinance, regulation, or resolution;
ordinance proposed by local unit of
government; generally accepted
agricultural and management
practices for site selection and odor
controls at new or expanding
animal livestock facilities; advisory
committee; manure management
plan; duties of department;
definitions.
The Michigan Legislature Website is a free service of the Legislative Internet
Technology Team in cooperation with the Michigan Legislative Council, the
Michigan House of Representatives, and the Michigan Senate.
The information obtained from this site is not intended to replace official versions
of that information and is subject to revision. The Legislature presents this
information, without warranties, express or implied, regarding the information's
accuracy, timeliness, or completeness. If you believe the information is inaccurate,
out -of -date, or incomplete or if you have problems accessing or reading the
information, please send your concerns to the appropriate agency using the online
Comment Form.
http: / /www. legislature. mi. gov /mileg.asp ?page= executesearch 10/25/2005
Michigan Legislature
Page 2 of 2
Please call the Michigan Law Library at (517) 373 -0630 for legal reference
questions.
Privacy Policy I Copyright Infringement Policy I Acceptable Use Policy
http: / /www. legislature. mi. gov /mileg.asp ?page = executesearch 10/25/2005
M
NOVEMBER 21, 2005
County,
public get
to plan for
growth.
Hearing tonight
slated to focus on
housing density
BY EMILY COAKLEY
ecoakley@heraldsun.com; 732 -6397
HILLSBOROUGH — Orange
County will hold a public hearing
at 7:30 tonight to hear comment
on a plan to reduce the amount of
houses which could be built in
rural, unincorporated areas. The
joint hearing is with the Board of
Commissioners and the Planning
Board.
The county is updating its land
use plan, or a map which tells
officials and the public how dif-
ferent pieces of land are to be
used. The plan was originally.
adopted in 1981, and while there
have been some changes, the plan
as a whole hasn't been updated
until now.
At tonight's hearing, the coun-
ty will seek comments on density.
Under current zoning, up to
145,000 new homes could be built
in the county's unincorporated
areas, bringing more than 345,000
new people. The county's current
population is about 120,000, and
approximately 180,000 acres
within the county's jurisdiction
remain undeveloped, said Tbri-
Altieri, comprehensive planning
supervisor for the county. '
Such a scenario, known as
"build- out," could take a century
to play out, Altieri said. But the
county Planning Department
doesn't think it is sustainable.
Planning staff members won-
der what impact an additional
345,000 people; even a century
from now, could have on schools,
traffic, air quality, groundwater
and surface water.
The Planning Department has
offered four proposals. Those
proposals have a range of densi-
ties, which could bring an esti-
mated 90,000 to 1751000 more peo-
ple to the rural areas once the
county is built out. Additional
people could move into what the
county calls "urbanizing transi-
IF YOU GO
What: Public hearing on
Orange County's Com-
prehensive Land Use Ele-
ment Update
When: 7:30 tonight
Where: F. Gordon: Battle
Courtroom, 106 Margaret
Lane, Hillsborough
HEARING
FROM PAGE
tiori areas" outside Mebane and
Hillsborough, and the Planning
Department staff has a recom-
mendation about where devel-
opment should be focused.
"We are shifting develop-
ment potential from the coun-
ty's rural areas to the county's
urbanizing areas," Altieri said.
Those urbanizing areas are
places in unincorporated
'Orange County just outside
Mebane and Hillsborough.
Under this current effort, the
county is focusing on central
and northern Orange County.
And refocusing development
doesn't mean that nothing can
be built in the rural areas,
Altieri said. It means increas-
ing the amount of land required
to build one house, from two
acres .under current rules to a
proposed three acres, for
example.
"We're kind of erasing future
units from the landscape and
shifting them to urbanizing
areas," Altieri said.
But the Planning Depart-
ment would like to hear what
the public thinks about that
idea, too, Alfieri said.
The county is holding a total
of three public hearings over
the coming months addressing
its land -use plan. No decisions
will be made until after the
final public hearing, Altieri
said.
The hearing will be in the F.
Gordon Battle Courtroom. Any
county resident can attend,
whether they live in an unin-
corporated area or not.
Comments can also be sent
to taltieri @co.orange.nc.us.
On the Web: Maps of the
options the Planning Depart-
ment proposed are on the
county's Web site, .
www.co.orange.nc.us. Click on
"meeting agendas'" then the
link for the 7:30 p.m. hearing.
The abstract is the second item
under "Public Hearing Items."
10