Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPB minutes 011812-draftJanuary 18, 2012 Draft Meeting Summary 1 DRAFT, MEETING SUMMARY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION BOARD January 18, 2012 MEMBERS PRESENT: Roland Walters, Howard McAdams, Allan Green, Kim Woods, Lynnette Batts and Patrick McGarry MEMBERS ABSENT/EXCUSED: Elizabeth Walters, Spence Dickinson, Louise Tate and Joe Thompson. GUESTS: Matthew Roybal, Renee and Mike McPherson STAFF: Tina Moon, Natural and Cultural Division Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER Chair Roland Walters called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. ITEM #2: CHAIR COMMENTS (none) ITEM #3: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA (none) Roybal provided an overview of the safety and sign-in requirements to using the Piedmont Food and Agricultural Processing Center meeting room. Staff revealed that Roybal had another evening commitment, so the APB agreed to rearrange the order of the meeting agenda to allow Roybal to provide the tour of the facility first, and then leave. The Special Presentation/Tour of the facility was shifted from Item #7 to Item #4 and all other agenda items were moved back one position, i.e. the Minutes became Item #5, the Items for Decision became Item #6, etc. ITEM #4: Special Presentation/Tour a. Piedmont Food and Agriculture Processing Center Roybal provided a thorough tour of the new Processing Center facility and provided APB members with an opportunity to ask questions throughout. Roybal explained how the existing equipment was selected and how new equipment was considered. Roybal also shared information about his own areas of expertise and explained that part of his role as the manager (of the Processing Center) was to help clients recognize which equipment would most benefit their operation and to provide training on how to use it. ITEM #5: APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 21, 2011 McAdams motioned approval of the minutes; Woods seconded the motion. The APB voted unanimous approval of the December 21, 2011 minutes. ITEM #6: ITEMS FOR DECISION a. McPherson EVAD Application Staff provided a brief explanation of the Voluntary Agricultural District program and the application process, including a little information about the Enhanced Districts (EVADS) which are a relatively new addition to the program at the state and county level. The McPhersons are the first farmers to apply for enhanced district status. Staff also reported on a question from the last APB meeting regarding the McPherson’s conservation easement. Staff contacted Brandon King, NCSU Cooperative Extension staff, regarding any potential programs for a farm under conservation easement to enroll in the EVAD program, which essentially works like a term easement. King indicated that unless the terms of the easement prevented the land from being under cultivation or otherwise used for farming purposes he saw no conflict with having land under easement enrolled as an EVAD. Staff explained that if the APB recommends the McPherson farm for enrollment in the VAD program, staff will forward the application materials along with the APB endorsement to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC will review the application and make the final decision. Woods asked the McPhersons for more information about their farm and what they raise. Mr. McPherson reported that they grow corn, soybeans, wheat and hay. McAdams made a motion to recommend the January 18, 2012 Draft Meeting Summary 2 McPherson Farm for inclusion in the County’s Voluntary Agricultural District program and the first Enhanced VAD. Green seconded the motion. The APB voted unanimously to recommend the McPherson Farm to the Board of County Commissioners for inclusion as the first Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District in the Orange County Voluntary Agricultural District program. b. Potential Topics for Legislative Agenda APB members have discussed a number of different topics over the last several months, including a couple that seemed appropriate for consideration for the BOCC’s annual legislative agenda. At the December meeting, David Stancil, the DEAPR Department Director, offered a brief explanation of the legislative agenda process and offered suggestions for the APB to assemble a memo in support of its concerns. Green offered to prepare a draft memo regarding two areas of “missed opportunities’ for local farmers: the on-farm sale of raw milk and the production of renewal energy. Green worked with staff to prepare a memo in time for inclusion in the agenda packets. Staff revealed that it appeared that a few of Green’s edits did not make it into the memo included in the packets and asked Green to summarize his comments for the APB’s consideration. Green reviewed the memo outlining a request for the BOCC to support two bills (HB495/SB473 and SB694) to increase the demand for renewable credits—credits could be used by farmers to supplement their income. The memo also requested that the BOCC support the sale of unpasteurized milk and dairy products for human consumption. Woods expressed concern that the risks associated with unpasteurized milk are still too great to support on-farm sales and recommended that the request for the sale of raw milk be omitted from the memo at this time. Green reported that 35 states currently allow the sale of raw milk and related dairy products and questioned the source of Woods’ data. Wood reported that 70% of all milk-borne illness is related to unpasteurized milk, explaining the nature of milk and its potential as a host for bacteria particularly if allowed to get warmer than 40 degrees. Wood also reported that the majority of food-borne illnesses were linked to the 35 states where unpasteurized milk was allowed. Batts asked if there are standards for raw milk, if the 35 states which allow the sale of unpasteurized milk have standards. Woods reported that some do, but that even the states with standards have problems with illness. Green noted that farms are currently allowed to sell raw milk for animal consumption. Since there isn’t any way to enforce the human consumption of the milk, once off farm, it would be safer to allow human consumption and then regulate the milk and the herd to certain standards through inspections. Staff indicated that if there enough controversy over the sale of raw milk, the BOCC might pull the topic. In that case, the APB may wish to remove the topic from this year’s legislative agenda, and spend a year researching the topic, perhaps even preparing a white paper addressing concern, and submit the topic to the BOCC for next year’s legislative agenda. McAdams made a motion that the APB forwards the memo with the recommendations for renewable energy opportunities, (only), to the BOCC for inclusion in its 2012 Legislative Agenda. Woods seconded the motion. The APB voted 5-1 in support of the motion. (Ayes: McAdams, Woods, Walters, McGarry, Batts. Nays: Green) Green asked Woods to email him some of her information about the potential problems associated with raw milk. Staff asked Green for information on the state, closest to North Carolina that allows the sale of raw milk? South Carolina. Staff reported that a few years ago, the APB brought in an expert from Duke University to discuss the pros and cons of genetic modification in agriculture. It turned out to be a very good discussion. Perhaps the APB could find another expert or couple of experts who could speak to the pros and cons of unpasteurized dairy products? McAdams suggested maybe the Farm Bureau would have a representative. Woods offered to research and report back. ITEM #7: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION a. Updates & Information Sharing 1. 2012 Agricultural Summit Members were encouraged to take advantage of the off meeting month and attend the Agricultural Summit if at all possible. Staff noted that the Ag Summit will be held at the “Big Barn” in the Daniel Boone complex in Hillsborough. This is the first time the Ag Summit will be held at this venue. Staff also noted that there January 18, 2012 Draft Meeting Summary 3 will likely be a short presentation on the status of a local agritourism project that is being spearheaded by the Orange County/Chapel Hill Visitors Bureau. 2. Officer Elections in March This item was included as a friendly reminder. Some APB members have traditionally been hesitant to nominate a slate of officer candidates from the floor during a meeting without having a prior conversation with the candidate outside of the meeting. 3. Other ITEM# 8: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a. “Beginning Farmer Bill Introduced in Congress to Include in Farm Bill” b. “More Young People See Opportunities in Farming” ITEM #9: ADJOURNMENT McAdams made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:30; Woods seconded the motion. The January 18, 2012 Agricultural Preservation Board meeting was adjourned at 9:33 p.m. Next meeting scheduled for March 21, 2012, in the small Conference Room in the Environment and Agriculture Center.