Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPB meeting summary 01152025 Orange County Agricultural Preservation Board Approved Meeting Summary: January 15', 2025 ***Bonnie Davis Center, 1020 US 70 West, Hillsborough *** 6:30 pm Members Present: Compton, Hughes, McPherson, Miller, Myers, Ranells, Saiers, Totten, Wagger, Members Absent: Hooten, Palmer, Sykes, Taylor, Weitzel, Woods Guests: None Staff: Jessica Perrin, Soil and Water Conservation Manager, Peter Sandbeck, Cultural Resource Coordinator; Mike Ortosky, Community & Rural Development Agent 1. Call to order: Chair Hughes called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. 2. Chair Comments/Introductions: None 3. Considerations of Additions to Agenda: None 4. Meeting Summary/Minutes: McPherson moved to approve the meeting summary for Nov. 121", 2024, seconded by Compton; motion passed. S. Items for Decision: a) VAD update and new farm applications: Perrin presented a summary of activities. The VAD breakfast at Camp Chestnut Ridge was successful with 68 attendees; this venue was less expensive, at a cost of$1,259 versus $1,900 last year. The two farms the APB reviewed in November were approved by the BOCC in December. The two farms being proposed for review meet the requirements and criteria for VAD/EVAD enrollment. a. Peter Gundlach and Elizabeth Kage: 82.78 acres for EVAD, in the Caldwell Ag District. Four parcels with one in grass and the others are managed forest land; the forestry management plan and conservation plan are completed and provided. b. Ashley Cummings: 9.3 acres for VAD, in the Schley-Eno Ag District. The farm operations include produce, cut flowers, honey, eggs and livestock. This application is complete, pending getting a signature on the conservation plan. McPherson moved to approve both applications, with approval of the Cummings application contingent on obtaining a signature on the conservation plan; seconded by Saiers; motion carried. Perrin reported on the status of the two applications in progress, for Cooper and Butler. The Farm Succession Program hosted by the Cedar Grove Law Firm on Dec. 3 was well attended, with 46 attendees (not including staff) and no expenses. The z county recorded the video which is available through a link. Members agreed it was a valuable presentation. 6. Discussion Items: a) Review and discussion of draft Ag Preservation Plan: Saiers asked for general feedback about primary content issues. Members can write her directly with any specific minor corrections or spelling/grammar errors. Staff pointed out some of the big challenges we might face in making big asks from the county commissioners, like a new staff member and the PUV recapture funding. A lot of the success of this will depend on how we approach the commissioners with our recommendations. The APB will be on the agenda for the BOCC's work session on April 81h to talk about our recommendations and goals; they don't receive public input or comment at work sessions. Discussion followed. It's clear that we're going to be facing conflicting interests and needs, with farmland preservation vying with other needs like affordable housing and social services. The whole topic of the cost of community services will become relevant. The current land use planning process will provide additional opportunities. Ortosky provided an overview of the upcoming Jan. 171h BOCC work session when county staffers will be giving the BOCC members a thorough overview of the current state of the Ag and food systems economy in the county, so this is timely. The subcommittee tried to be mindful of target audiences: commissioners and public. Members were asked to provide any feedback or thoughts by email to Saiers in the next couple of weeks. In the end, the BOCC will look to the membership of the APB to represent the broad viewpoints of the farm community through this draft plan. When this goes to a full public meeting later this year, it might be helpful to have some real farmers (not APB members) make brief presentations about the importance of farms and farming, so that they hear that from folks who can tell personal stories about their experience on the land. We have a wide range of perspectives on the APB, but it's safe to say that all can agree about the importance of preserving our farmland. And the high cost/value of the land is absolutely driving all of these decisions, making it critical that we try to figure out how to have mechanisms for compensating farm owners who wish to preserve their farmland. Ortosky has spoken with the new farmland preservation staffers in Chatham and Wake, who have agreed to meet with us in the future to share information about their experiences in those counties. And there is a political side to this on the statewide level, where we need the different counties who are active in this topic reach out to their state representatives to help build larger coalitions that could eventually move legislation. The goal is to have a final in-house draft plan done in February; Saiers will then merge all comments into a new draft, for the April BOCC work session. There was general agreement that we should develop a "condensed version" that can be shared with the BOCC, and maybe even a set of simple bullet points that we can share with members for them to use in explaining what we're trying to do. We'll need to figure out what our actual "asks" will be when we approach the BOCC, starting on April 8, because ultimately, a big piece of the recommendations will involve asking for funds, especially through the PUV recapture funding and for the staff 3 position. All of this will require building connections with the commissioners. Members thanked the subcommittee and especially Saiers for all of the hard work on this. b) Annual Report and Work Plan: Staff referred members to the draft plan that was sent out, with the new updates and changes highlighted in yellow. Our final plan will be coming due on January 17t". Members should look over the current draft and email any changes to staff by then. c) Feasibility of future APB educational initiatives: Hughes spoke about his interest in having the APB look into ways that we could be educating the general public about the work of the APB and the goals of our new plan. Maybe we can create a subcommittee to start talking about this idea. This could take the form of good videos as well as talks/programs, at different venues like the Chapel Hill library, the Grange etc. Discussion followed. Members generally agreed that this should become a focus of our activities going forward. Ortosky mentioned the video that they produced a few years ago, that might be applicable or edited down. We may need to develop a core script for what we're trying to do, maybe hold community listening sessions, or work with local radio and media outlets, like WHUP in Hillsborough, WCHL, or even Spectrum local news to have interviews and they could have a link on their websites. Part of our mission is to reach out to the public about our work and about the farmland preservation challenges, maybe have Ashely Parker or Jeff Sykes tell their stories. That might get the general public interested in speaking up to their county commissioners. Another approach might be to have commissioners visit farms so they can hear the stories and concerns from members of the farm community. 7. Informational Items/Future Agenda Items: a. 2025 Ag Summit is coming up on Feb. 10th: Staff will share the link and information so that members can register online. About 100 have registered to date. b. Farm Succession Program follow-up: Staff covered this earlier in this meeting. c. VAD breakfast follow up: Covered earlier in this meeting. d. Extension and Ag Economic Development activities: Ortosky discussed current developments. The grant program has made 129 grant awards to date, with more will be coming. They expect to get a large grant to help fund the agrovoltaic demonstration project. e. Membership: Staff reviewed the roster briefly, noting that four members will be retiring off the APB on June 30, 2025, after serving two full terms: McPherson, Myers, Saiers and Sykes. Members should start looking around for prospective new members and share with staff. f. County Land Use Plan update: No new updates at this stage. The consultants collected and posted all the results from the various public information meetings. There seems to be more emphasis on the protection of farms and natural resources. 8. Time for Information Sharing: None 9. Adjournment: McPherson moved to adjourn, seconded by Totten; meeting adjourned at 8:34 pm.