Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPB Minutes 011520 Attachment 1 Orange County Agricultural Preservation Board Approved Meeting Summary: January 15, 2020 Environmental &Agricultural Center—Food Lab 306 Revere Rd., Hillsborough, NC 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Anderson, Compton, Dawson, McAdams, McKnight, Myers, Parker, Redding, Saiers, Shambley, Sykes, Woods Members Absent: Finley, McPherson,Vanhook Guests: None Staff: Peter Sandbeck, Cultural Resources Coordinator; Mike Ortosky,Ag Economic Development; Tyrone Fisher, County Extension Director 1. Call to order: Chair Redding called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Chair Comments/Introductions: None 3. Considerations of Additions to Agenda: Hughes noted that she needs to discuss the process for removal of farms from the VAD program. 4. Meeting Summary/Minutes: November 20th, 2019:Shambley moved to accept the minutes/summary; seconded by Saiers; motion carried. 5. Items for Decision: a) New VAD/EVAD Applications(Attachment 2): Sandbeck presented the current applications listed below.All of these farms meet the requirements/criteria for VAD/EVAD enrollment. • James W. Rogers: 45.9 acres for VAD, White Cross Ag District. Corn,wheat, soybeans and hayland. • Gaston Pierce, Edwin Pierce and Betsy Pierce: 51 acres for VAD, White Cross Ag District. Wheat, corn and soybeans. Woods moved to approve the Rogers application, seconded by Shambley; motion carried. Woods moved to approve the Pierce application, seconded by Sykes; motion carried. b) Changing from mailing paper copies of VAD applications to using digital versions to be shown on the projector at future meetings: Chair Redding asked the board to consider showing the VAD application materials on a projection screen rather than having staff print and mail multiple copies. Staff is happy to continue to send paper to any member who prefers the paper version. Members would like paper agendas at the meetings. Dawson moved to go digital for all materials, provided there can be paper agendas at the meeting; seconded by McAdams; motion passed. 6. Discussion Items: a) Follow upon milk processing feasibility study: McKnight provided an overview of her current thinking about how to approach the USDA grant application for this study,to be prepared by consultant Ann Wilkinson who has worked before with the USDA on this type of project; she worked z with NCSU folks to get a similar grant for diary processing hub facility in Wake County,to be supported by a number of dairy operations in the surrounding region. Dairy farms will be gone if we don't do something. Reasons include: land preservation of existing/former dairy farms;job retention for dairy farm families; potential job creation in the processing activities; plus some synergistic activities that will generate additional spin off jobs; and finally, agritourism.This could be regarded as a prototype to provide a vision for other future regional facilities. Discussion followed about possible funding entities to sponsor this.The Center for Environmental Farming Systems (CEFS) at NCSU or the Carolina Farm Stewardship Association would be good fits and probably simpler than trying to have the County accept and administer this sort of small grant. A component of this project will include interviewing former dairy operators to determine why they left and if they had an appetite for getting back into dairy again. We will have an opportunity to present this overall issue to the County Commissioners when we meet with them at their annual work session in early April. After discussion, members agreed that this will be a stronger project if another entity agrees to support the application, say CFSA or CEFS. Discussion followed about other possible partnerships, like the Dairy Herd Improvement Association, a local group covering Orange, Caswell and Person counties. Getting buy-in from this group could lend credibility. McKnight will initiate some email correspondence with the key players. CFSA and CEFS could assist with drafting the application. b) Next steps for organizing a meeting of ag-related boards and groups: Staff reviewed past discussions about this topic to that effect. Members thought this sounded useful, as a way to learn about the current issues facing the ag community. Staff will work on preparing a list of the various organizations to share at the March meeting. Maybe we should consider inviting more than one or two members of each organization, and broaden it to include farmers who sell at local farmers markets,for example. Once Hughes returns, staff will develop a list of possible groups to include. c) Priorities for issues to present in annual report to the County Commissioners:Staff asked members to select the topics that they think are most important to cover when we appear before the BOCC as there is not time to cover everything. Staff reminded members that this is our best chance to get our main issues in front of them. Members felt that the top issues are the Ag Trust Fund proposal and the collapse of dairy farming.The other important items are ongoing concerns, like the aging out of farmers and the need to continue to promote agritourism. The growing numbers of very small farmers points to a need for creating processing facilities and cooperative marketing opportunities. 7. Informational Items/Future Agenda Items: a. Ag Summit 2020 date and details: Fisher reviewed the agenda and encouraged members to attend. b. Update on Gail's position:Staff reported that there are plans to post her position soon. We believe she will be interested in coming back to work part-time in March. 8. Time for Information Sharing: Fisher explained that Mike Lanier and Sheila Beasley were planning to retire soon. Ortosky and Fisher reported on the excellent presentation they recently heard from the tax administration staff members.We might consider inviting Roger Gund to make a presentation to the APB. 9. Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 7:50 pm.