Legislative Update - Crossover Report 03.27.23

What is Crossover? Crossover literally describes a deadline, this year it was March 17th, by which a bill needs to pass through one chamber of the legislature to “cross over” to the other to have a chance to make it through the entire legislative process in the same year. That means two things: 1. That bill will have gone through three readings! 2. There’s an effort made and likelihood to pass these bills the same year. 

Three readings start with the bill introduction and referral to the committee of jurisdiction - first reading. In committee the bill subject is being discussed in hearings with various stakeholders. After editing the bill, often in multiple drafts with the help of legislative council, the committee will vote on the bill. If the bill is moved in favor it may be referred to another committee. Especially when there’s money involved, the appropriations committee will make recommendations on appropriating money from the State Treasury and the Ways and Means committee will make recommendations on measures to secure the revenue of the State. During the “second reading“ it's often those committees who present their recommendations through amendments to the version of the committee of origin to the “floor,” meaning all members of a chamber. After another day to digest the possibly amended version of the bill, a third reading gives the final yay or nay by the respective chamber. A bill is called “dead” when it didn’t move in favor, didn’t make crossover or didn’t pass in a session. A bill is not really “dead” oftentimes, for example: since the legislature meets in biennial sessions, technically bills can pass within two years when they are introduced in the first year. Also, often bills are part of national campaigns and are being reintroduced session after session. As such, the ag committees have been working (again) this year on the right-to-farm bill and the right-to-repair bill. In our “crossover” legislative update we focus on those bills that have been moving and relate to agriculture. We’ve included a couple updates on stranded efforts as well which are not comprehensive. 

We celebrate the good chance for the passage of H.205, which would establish a new Small Farmer Diversification and Transition Program. While this new funding will be important, it will ultimately only benefit about 25 farms - more systemic change in the programmatic landscape is needed to service thousands of farms that are bleeding in this economy.

Cannabis

Summary: Rural Vermont continues to work with other member based organizations of the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition (NOFA VT, VT Racial Justice Alliance, Vermont Growers’ Association, and the Green Mtn. Patients’ Alliance) to advance our goals related to a racially just, economically equitable, and agriculturally accessible cannabis economy in Vermont. There are multiple bills related to the regulated adult-use and medical cannabis market in VT this legislative session, we are currently most focused on 3 bills: H.270, H.426, S.127.  

Latest Change: H.270, miscellaneous cannabis bill, was voted out of the House on 3/28 with minor revisions.  On March 15th (beginning minute 38) a farmer / cultivator and members of our coalition were provided a short window in House Government Operations to speak to things currently in the bill - in particular the medical components and the propagation license.  It will be taken up by the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs on Thursday the 30th, this week. This bill is largely informed and led by the Cannabis Control Board (CCB), and is likely seen as “must pass” by the Board and some members of the legislature.  It is also a potential vehicle for our coalition’s proposals - our coalition and members have been told so by members of the CCB - despite pressure we face to limit our testimony which we reference here.  The most recent significant changes to the bill include:

  • Replacing the $10k gross income cap on the Tier 1 manufacturing license with a $50k cap.  This is not as high a cap as we advocated for - but is an improvement and one of our priorities.

  • A “Cannabis Propagation Cultivator” license ($550) of 3500 sq feet of canopy with sales of live plants limited to licensed cultivators.  A license which addresses the sale and growing of seed and live plants is one of our priorities - but this license does not allow sales to the general public which is of significant importance to the people we have talked to with interest in being a nursery.

  • Particular regulations related to accessibility and confidentiality in disciplinary measures

Status: H.270 passed the House 3/28; H. 426 and S.127 did not make crossover.

TAKE ACTION!  Policymakers in the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs in particular will need to hear from community members and stakeholders pressing them to take action this session on our priorities by including them in H.270 and by inviting impacted community members and advocacy organizations into the committee to represent themselves.  Your voice makes a difference to policymakers!  Actively harming farms’ and small businesses’ viability and accessibility right now is the lack of inclusion in H.270 of an improvement and extension of the exemptions provided to Tier 1 Outdoor Cultivators in Act 158 to all Tiers and types of Outdoor Cultivation license. These exemptions allow this scale of cultivation to be treated in the same manner as farming when it comes to development, municipal regulation, taxation and current use status.  Contact Graham@ruralvermont.org for more information.

More Info: see the 2/28/23 Legislative Update for a more comprehensive list of what’s in H.270

H.205 - An Act Relating to Establishing the Small Farmer Diversification and Transition Program

Summary:  This bill would create the new “Small Farm Diversification and Transition Program” within the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets. Grants would be used for (1) farm diversification, (2) transitioning farm type, (3) on-farm processing, or (4) add on-farm accessory businesses. Grants would be capped at 15K. In early discussions in the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency and Forestry, when former dairy farmer Rodney Graham first mentioned this idea, he named closing dairy farms as the motivation behind the bill that aims for easy access to grants that would help small farms specifically. Evaluation for grant applications will consider the potential to increase revenue for farmers. 

RV comment: This new funding will be important. Unfortunately, its scope will ultimately only benefit about 25 farms and more systemic change in the programmatic landscape is needed to service thousands of farms that are bleeding in this economy.

Latest Change: The House Committee on Appropriations is suggesting to increase the funding amount from $250K to $350K and for the Working Lands Enterprise Board to administer the program.

Status: House is coming back for third reading 3/29 at 1pm

More Info: on the bill website here; see also bill as considered by the House here (p. 27)

H.126 - An Act Relating to Community Resilience and Biodiversity Protection

Summary: This bill aims to mandate conservation goals for Vermont in alignment with federal and international “30 by 30” initiatives: to conserve 30% of Vermont by 2030, and 50% by 2050. Get more background info about this bill in our Legislative Update from 2.28.23 here.

Latest Change: Passed the House with an amendment from the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry that seeks to pair land access and keeping the working lands open with conservation goals by:

  1. Inclusion of the Vermont Forest Future Strategic Roadmap in the findings.

  2. Inclusion of a review of the conservation categories in the conservation plan that will be mandated to be developed by the Secretary of Natural Resources by December 31, 2024; and 

  3. for the conservation plan to inform a comprehensive strategy towards conserving agricultural land that would include recommendations to increase equitable access to protected and conserved lands and land-based enterprises as well as recommendations to increase funding in the working lands more broadly.

Status: Passed House 3/24 

More Info: on the bill website here. See the amendment of the House Committee on Agriculture, Food, and Markets in House Journal 03/23/23 p. 607 

H.472 - House Miscellaneous Agricultural Subjects

Summary: This bill makes many small technical changes to statutes related to agricultural fairs, meat processing, bees and apiaries, and agency regulation of nurseries and pests. Most of these changes are semantic or insignificant, but changes to apiary registration rules and the creation of a grant program for county fairs will be impactful. Below is a summary of the changes related to bees and apiaries – for a full summary of the bill, see the 3/13 Legislative Update.

Latest Change: No substantial changes have been made to the sections on bees and apiary regulations in the House miscellaneous ag bill since our 3/13 legislative update. Here’s a brief overview of those changes that stand out as being more impactful to beekeepers in the state: 

  • The annual report required by VAAFM will no longer need to include prospective changes to whether the location of an apiary will change in two weeks of report submission. It will now require reporting for bees, colonies and equipment that are just passing through the state.

  • Change to inspection of bees for sale: instead of requiring one summertime inspection, it would require inspection within 45 days prior to any sale. This will likely shift the inspection to a time just before the spring sales of bees, instead of in the annual cycle before the distribution of many hives. It also might require more inspections for those selling bees throughout the season.

  • Beekeepers near borders will likely need more import permits for moving apiaries in and out of state, see Section 14. Shall the bill pass the Senate as well, bees that are transported out of Vermont for less than 75 miles away for 30 days or less would require an import permit. Currently, those conditions are exempt from needing a permit. There is still no import permit required for bees just traveling through Vermont to another destination (though that information is now required on the annual report).

Status: Passed the House 3/28

More Info: Bill draft as passed by the House 3/28; track bill info

S.115 - Senate Miscellaneous Agricultural Subjects

Summary: It is still a new occurrence that the Senate launches their own “miscellaneous” agricultural bill, parallel to the House. S. 115 would clarify that VAAFM has the authority to quarantine dairy cows that are suspected of producing unsafe milk or other product; modernize requirements for labeling, sale and marketing of eggs; significantly increase the amount of penalties VAAFM may charge in enforcement actions and deals with the authority of municipalities for a farm’s stormwater management. Below is an update of the changes related to stormwater management – for a full summary of the bill, see the 3/13 Legislative Update.

Latest Change: The changes regarding stormwater regulation and water quality related to a municipalities authority to penalize stormwater management infractions. The  Senate’s draft bill version as recommended the Committee on Agriculture suggested that towns can manage stormwater, but only if “the municipality does not exceed [ANR’s] authority, maintains the exemptions in 10 V.S.A. § 1264(d)(1), and does not charge an operating fee related to exempt practices.” Goal was to ensure that towns cannot regulate or penalize farms in particular, which are exempt from storm water regulation. 

Many towns currently penalize farms for their stormwater management (which is based on impervious surfaces, which can be large for farms) and this change would protect those farms, leading to a decrease in revenue for some towns. For this reason, this change is contentious and still being debated. The Senate Committee on Finance is recommending an amendment to mandate a report on stormwater regulation and the potential impact of prohibiting municipalities from collecting fees from farms in accordance with RAPs. The suggested report would leave more discretion to the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture. The Senate Finance amendment suggests that municipalities would no longer be able to assess a fee, rate, or other assessment to farms for stormwater runoff until the mandated report was submitted and the legislature had a chance to review the subject again during the 2024 legislative session. 

Status: Voted out of Senate Committee on Finance, Second reading ordered 3/29 at 1pm 

More Info: 

H.81 - Right to Repair

Summary: Reintroduced and granted a couple hearings was the right-to-repair bill, presented by a nationwide coalition as a recurring effort across 27 states. This bill raises the issue of a dealership of agricultural equipment having the right to computer parts and service materials needed to repair equipment. While Memorandums of Understandings in place with Dealerships have made improvements to farmers' right to repair according to the Farm Bureau, the bill aimed to advance the ability to buy parts and service materials (diagnostic tools etc.) to fix equipment DIY or through independent neighborhood mechanics. Opponents raised safety concerns and the fear of losing more dealerships for agricultural equipment. 

Status: this bill did not make crossover 

More Info: Proponents hearing 3/15, 10.45am HAG; Opponents hearing 3/16, 10am HAG

Summary: Right to Farm describes a farms’ protection from nuisance lawsuits when in compliance with existing regulations. 

Latest Change: See draft 4.1 here

Status: This bill had not been introduced yet, so the Committee on Agriculture considered this subject as a potential committee bill. A straw poll indicated opposition from Senator Campion; the committee did not take a vote on this bill in time for the crossover deadline. 

More Info: For a full summary of the bill, see the 3/13 Legislative Update.

H.368 - An Act Relating to Supporting New Farmers, Veteran Farmers, and Farmers who are Disadvantaged

Summary: The House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry members Heather Suprenant, Esme Cole and Josie Leavitt have been co-sponsoring this bill which charges the Vermont House and Conservation Board (VHCB) with supporting new, veteran, and disadvantaged farmers. The bill would expand VHCB’s formal duties to include “increasing financial and technical assistance” for those groups. There is no associated allocation or fund defined in the bill itself. The draft defines a disadvantaged farmer as someone “engaged in farming or proposing to engage in farming who is annually earning not more than the State median income level for the relevant household size.”

Latest Change: None

Status: The draft as introduced has not received updates or much discussion - this bill did not make the crossover deadline.

More Info: https://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/status/2024/H.368 

H. 165 - Universal School Meals

Summary: This bill extends the current COVID-reactive universal school meal policies by requiring all public schools in Vermont to make available school breakfast and lunch to all students at no charge in perpetuity. It also extends some support to public-tution students at some independent schools. The bill asks for $29M from the Education Fund to the Agency of Education for fiscal year 2024.

Latest Change:  After approval from Committees on Way and Means and Appropriations, a strike all amendment from the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency and Forests included definitions of universal meal supplements for breakfast and lunch, now ordering funds for the program through the Education fund - without spelling out the exact appropriation in the bill itself. The new version also includes small language tweaks to the existing local foods incentive grant.

Status: Passed by House

More Info: https://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/status/2024/H.165 

AG Relevant Budget Items

LAOB Funding Request

Summary: The Land Access and Opportunity Board is proposing in its sunrise report a funding request for the FY2024 of 1.2M to continue its work, and it is also advocating for the use of one-time funding to appropriate 3.8M to fund their work in a more sustainable way over the next three years (for a total of $4.8 million).

Latest Change: Members of the Land Access and Opportunity Board and allies continue to provide additional testimonials in support of the appropriations request. Last week, LAOB members spoke to both agricultural committees during Small Farm Action Day 

Status: as of 3/27 the 1.2M funding request was included in the FY24 budget as a one-time appropriation from the General Fund

More Info: Watch Jess Laporte (LAOB, Rights and Democracy) testify to HAG here & Kirsten Murphy (LAOB) testify to SAG during Small Farm Action Day here

Organic Dairy Relief - New Draft

Summary: Organic dairy farms are in a crisis -  to help carry Vermont’s organic dairies through the year, NOFA-VT has asked the state to provide funding to farmers who were shipping organic milk in 2022 to compensate for nightmarish economic circumstances. Asking that farmers be paid $5 for every hundred pounds of milk they shipped, NOFA-VT originally estimated this would cost about $9.2 million dollars. This request was met with enthusiasm but the House Ag Committee, and now the Senate Ag Committee is working to move quickly but thoroughly with it. 

Latest Change: After working with the Agency of Ag and NOFA-VT, better data on quantities of organic milk shipped in 2022 (the basis for the payments) determined that paying $5 per hundredweight shipped in 2022 would actually cost about $6.9M dollars. 

Status: A new bill draft was released last week by the Senate Committee on Agriculture, that would make those funds available to farms that were shipping organic milk in 2022 (and that are still dairy farms). 

This bill is likely to move quickly!

More Info: new bill draft here; follow the bill in SAG here

Working Lands Enterprise Fund

Summary: Earlier this year, the Working Lands Enterprise Fund (WLEF) celebrated 10 years of supporting Vermont’s Farm and Forestry Businesses. In the past decade, over $13.6 million in funding have been awarded in grants through WLEF and leveraged $22.5 million in matching funds. Money invested in a total of 418 projects that generated over $55M in sales one year after completing their grant project. While forestry projects make up a third of all projects, dairy and meat processing projects were most prominent among agricultural ones, followed by grant awards in produce farms and value-added products. 

Latest Change: The FY24 budget suggests an annual base funding from $594,000 to $1,000,000. Notably, this increase is still a display of an underfunded program given that Governor Scott, who is conservative in spending, proposed an increase to $4 million in funding for the program in fiscal year 2024 (see press release here). 

Status: As of 3/24, budget FY24 includes 1M in one-time funds from the General Fund (see here)

More Info: Check out the full Impact Report or two-page summary report detailing the past 10 years of WLEF!

Conservation Districts

Summary: The Conservation District desired to increase their baseline funding to 3M this year and the past year and testified early on to both agricultural committees. Conservation Districts function as an important local liaison between local stakeholders and government programs available to them. They are historically underfunded and last year the legislature increased their baseline funding from over an additional $250,000 for a total base appropriation of to total $362,000. This year's funding request would support the 14 District Managers and their Boards of Supervisors, training, community outreach and education, equipment and facility upgrades and additional capacity development. 

Status: The FY24 Budget includes a one-time appropriation from the general fund over 1M for the Conservation Districts

More Info: 3M Baseline funding request here

Rural Vermontcannabis, healthcare, Dairy, URL
Legislative Update 03.13.23

Note that this update is not a comprehensive list of all of the bills or work we are tracking.  This reflects movement on issues and bills since our last legislative update (02.28.23) which you can see here.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LAOB Sunrise Report & Legislative Asks

S.56 - Childcare

H.368 - An act relating to supporting new farmers, veteran farmers, and farmers who are disadvantaged

23-0138 - “Right to Farm” Update

Cannabis Update

Universal School Meals Update

23-0761 - House Miscellaneous Ag Bill

S.115 Senate Miscellaneous Ag Bill

LAOB Sunrise Report & Legislative Asks

In the last couple weeks of February, the Land Access and Opportunity Board (LAOB) released its Sunrise Report.  You can see a presentation about the report and board to the House Committee on General and Housing from February 28th, here.  As summarized on its website, “the Land Access and Opportunity Board was created under Section 22 of Act 182 of 2022 to engage with Vermont organizations working on housing equity and land access "to recommend new opportunities and improve access to woodlands, farmland, and land and home ownership for Vermonters from historically marginalized or disadvantaged communities who continue to face barriers to land and home ownership."”  It is an independent Board made up of BIPOC community leaders and is currently housed within the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (VHCB).  

Rural Vermont supports the recommendations of the report - as well as the organizing effort led by Seeding Power Vermont (the organization leading the original effort which led to the creation of the Board) to increase the requested appropriation of $1.2 million to fund the Board to continue its work for one year, to $4.8 million to fund the work of the Board for 4 years.

S.56 - Childcare

S.56 - Childcare: We recently co-facilitated a workshop / listening session about childcare in the agricultural community at the NOFA VT winter conference.  We did this alongside national childcare and ag researcher Florence Becot, and Suzanne Graham of Let’s Grow Kids (LGK) - and heard from approximately 20 people in the room about their experiences, challenges, and what they’d like to see change related to childcare in Vermont..

At the moment there is a piece of legislation, S.56, which proposes investing significantly more money into VT’s childcare sector.  We rely on local and national advocates and researchers, as well as our community members, to help inform us on the needs of our communities - Let’s Grow Kids! is one of those local resources.  Here’s a link to more information about the bill from Let’s Grow Kids - as well as a recent update from VT Digger.  This is also a list of improvements that Let’s Grow Kids is advocating for in relationship to the bill.  LGK anticipates S.56 will pass out of Senate Health & Welfare by the end of this week, and will go next to Senate Finance & Appropriations Committees for further deliberation; then to the Senate floor and on to the House by the end of March.

Please be in touch with Graham@ruralvermont.org if you would like to share your thoughts on this legislation, your interest in providing testimony on childcare, or simply to talk about your experiences with childcare in VT as a member of the agricultural community.

H.368 - An act relating to supporting new farmers, veteran farmers, and farmers who are disadvantaged

H.368: House Ag Committee members Heather Suprenaut, Esme Cole and Josie Leavitt are co-sponsoring this bill which charges the Vermont House and Conservation Board (VHCB) with supporting new, veteran, and disadvantaged farmers. The bill would expand VHCB’s formal duties to include “increasing financial and technical assistance” for those groups. There is no associated allocation or fund defined in the bill itself. 

The draft defines a disadvantaged farmer as someone “engaged in farming or proposing to engage in farming who is annually earning not more than the State median income level for the relevant household size.”

The draft was just introduced to committee on 2/24, so check back for updates or follow along on the statehouse website as conversation and testimony begin.

23-0138 - “Right to Farm” Update

23 - 0138: Each state’s “right to farm” law is a protection for farms against nuisance lawsuits. The idea is that farming can be smelly and loud, but that doesn’t mean anyone who moves near a town should be able to sue a farm that’s not harming anybody. Different state’s right to farm laws have different amounts of strictness, or protection for farmers.  Last year, Vermont’s right to farm  law had been worked on as well, which resulted in the successful expansion of the lists of activities that are now encompassed under the nuisance protection. This year, the Farm Bureau, the Vermont Dairy Producers Alliance and supporting farms have requested changes that expand protection for farms, including new, expanding, and transitioning farms.

It is indeed important to protect farms from unreasonable nuisance complaints and Rural Vermont believes the existing law is adequate, and that the suggested changes are potentially harmful.  Rural Vermont has received clear feedback from our national allies in the National Family Farm Coalition that many expanded “Right to Farm” laws have been used to effectively displace and disadvantage small farms, and to prevent communities from defending themselves and their lands and waters in states such as Missouri, North Carolina, and more.  

Importantly, the bill would remove an exemption which states that farms are not protected from lawsuit if “the activity has a substantial adverse effect on health, safety, or welfare, or has a noxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring property.” (12 V.S.A. § 5753). The draft also removes language stating that the legal protection shall not “be construed to limit the authority of State or local boards of health to abate nuisances affecting the public health” (12 V.S.A. § 5753). This change also removes a requirement that the practice has been in place for at least a year, and potentially expands protections to practices like biogas digestion. By removing these clauses the new Right to Farm bill would make pressing charges against a farm much harder. 

This change requires an attempt at mediation between plaintiffs and farms before a legal action can be pursued, though this mediation would not extend the 1 year deadline for the plaintiff to file suit. And farms are, importantly, still required to be compliant with the state’s Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs) and Rule of Control of Pesticides, but the latest changes place the burden of proof of non compliance on the plaintiff themselves.

There are even more changes and details in this bill. For more info and up-to-date drafts and testimonies of the bill, you can follow it here.

Cannabis Update

S.71 and H.270:  An act relating to miscellaneous amendments to the adult-use and medical cannabis programs.

H.426:  An act relating to the creation of new types of cannabis establishment licenses and the provision of cannabis excise tax revenue to the Cannabis Business Development Fund, communities that have been disproportionately impacted by cannabis prohibition, and substance misuse treatment

One of the bills we worked to inform prior to the session - H.426 - is now numbered and on the wall in House Government Operations; and we anticipate its companion bill to emerge in Senate Government Operations soon.  We do not support all provisions of H.426 (such as the “social equity delivery license”), some ideas we have brought to the table are not reflected in the bill as we suggested they be authored (such as the direct sales allowances), and some ideas and language we brought were simply not included in the bill (such as scaled direct sales allowances for sales of immature plants and seeds by cultivators to the general public).

Our coalition colleague Geoffrey Pizzutillo of the Vermont Growers’ Association testified to the House Gov. Operations committee on H.270 on February 28th - during which he brought the committee through our coalition’s top 10 priorities and presenced H.426 on the committee’s wall (meaning it is waiting to be addressed by the committee). We have since been told by the Chair of the committee that he does not want to include new subjects in H.270 at this point so close to crossover - but he has also told us that he is committed to having more and broader testimony after crossover when other cannabis related bills come to this committee. For this reason, on Wednesday March 15th, our coalition will also have 2 medical advocates and stakeholders representing the Green Mtn Patients’ Alliance as well as two licensed cultivators providing testimony to the committee on H.270 focusing on the medical provisions as well as the “propagation license” (which currently only allows a propagator to sell immature plants to cultivators - and not to the general public or other licensees).

At this time and going forward, we will need support from the broader community in contacting your representatives, and members of the House and Senate Government Operations Committees, voicing your support for our coalition and its policy priorities.  We may be able to improve H.270 to some extent this week (in particular the medical and propagation aspects), and then in the Senate - but we are hoping that the other bill we worked on prior to the session will be numbered and taken up for discussion soon, such that we can have the opportunity to address more fundamental barriers and inequities in this newly regulated economy.

Universal School Meals Update

H.165 - An act relating to school food programs and universal school meals

Referred to Ways and Means

Rep. Erin Brady w/ Rep. Jana Brown, Rep. Esme Cole & Rep. Josie Leavitt

This bill extends the current COVID-reactive universal school meal policies by requiring all public schools in Vermont to make available school breakfast and lunch to all students at no charge in perpetuity. It also extends some support to public-tution students at some independent schools. The bill asks for $29M from the Education Fund to the Agency of Education for fiscal year 2024.

23-0761 - House Miscellaneous Ag Bill

23-0761

Fair and Field Days Support

The first part of the House’s miscellaneous ag bill states support for Vermont’s various fairs and field days events, and seeks to support them with grant funding. It establishes a new grant program in the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets (VAAFM) to fund the associations that host fairs and field days. The size of this fund is as yet unknown.

Meat Processing License Fees

There is a semantic change from “meat cutting operations” to “meat processing operations” in existing statutes that determine things like vendor fees collected by VAAFM.

Livestock Brands

There is a set of laws in the current statute that determines the rules and regulations around branding livestock - it determines the rules for registering unique brands, etc. This change repeals and removes that chapter of the law because the practice is extinct.

Bees & Apiaries 

There are many existing laws that require the registration, reporting and potential inspection of beehives in the state in order to decrease harm done by pests and diseases. There are many proposed changes to that statute (6 V.S.A. § 3023), most of which are small and semantical, but some of which will impact anyone in the state with bees, be they a small backyard colony or a large honey business.

The annual report required by VAAFM will no longer need to include whether the location of an apiary will change into two weeks of report submission. But it now requires reporting for bees that are just passing through the state as well (colonies and equipment that started outside of Vermont and are designed for another place outside of Vermont).

There is also a change in the cadence of inspections for those selling bees: instead of requiring one summertime inspection, it would require inspection within 45 days prior to any sale. This likely shifts the inspection time to just before the springtime sale of bees, instead of in the annual cycle before the distribution of many hives. It also might require more inspections for those selling bees throughout the season.

There are currently rules requiring a permit to import bees. Three of the exceptions to this rule are proposed to be removed, which would require more import permits. Those exceptions which would no longer be considered exceptions to having to file an import permit are for bees that are  transported out of Vermont for less than 75 miles away for 30 days or less. With this bill, an import permit would be required even if those conditions are met. There is still no import permit required for bees just traveling through Vermont to another destination (though that information is now required on the annual report).

Soil Amendments

The definition of “soil amendments” is being expanded to include additives to hydroponic (soil-less) systems, which will expand VAAFM authority for that type of growing.

Nurseries & Pest Survey and Detection 

The state and VAAFM’s definition of “nursery dealer” is proposed to be expanded to those who install (plant) nursery stock for commercial gain (in addition to those who sell or distribute for commercial gain). This supposedly would expand authority of nursery regulations (6 V.S.A. § Chapter 206) to folks like gardeners and landscapers who are paid to plant trees, shrubs or almost anything plant-y other than seeds.

This also tweaks the procedure for when VAAFM orders for plants to be destroyed in a way that will apparently have little impact.

Lastly, there is a proposed chance to remove a clause about compensation for destruction, removing the agency's responsibility to reimburse for trees or plants that are ordered to be destroyed due to infestation.

S.115 Senate Miscellaneous Ag Bill

S.115

Dairy Quarantine

The change expands the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets’ (VAAFM) ability to quarantine livestock  to include dairy cows suspected of producing contaminated or unsafe milk. This was written with potential contamination from drugs and antibiotics in mind.

Eggs Law Update

Most of the the state’s egg laws haven’t been updated since 1973, and these changes would “modernize” them, bringing egg laws on par with many other food regulation statutes. This includes disallowing the sale or donation of adulterated eggs. “Modernization” also includes updating language about how penalties are handled by VAAFM with farmers, but that language change should have little impact on farmers or hen raisers. 

The proposed changes also raise the maximum penalties that VAAFM might assess for violations. It has been over 30 years since the original maximums were changed, and these changes largely restate the maximums given the decades of inflation since.

VAAFM Enforcement

This bill would increase the maximum penalty that VAAFM can assess for a violation from $1k to $5k, and increases the total maximum fees for recurring and multiple violations from $25k to $50k.

Water Quality

These changes slightly curtail municipal authority to penalize stormwater management infractions. It adds that towns can manage stormwater, but only if “the municipality does not exceed [ANR’s] authority, maintains the exemptions in 10 V.S.A. § 1264(d)(1), and does not charge an operating fee related to exempt practices.” This makes sure that towns cannot regulate or penalize farms in particular, which are exempt from storm water regulation. Many towns currently penalize farms for their stormwater management (which is based on impervious surfaces, which can be large for farms) and this change would protect those farms, leading to a decrease in revenue for some towns.

Rural Vermontcannabis, healthcare, Dairy
Legislative Update 2.28.23

Action Alert! Champion the Federal Amendment for On-Farm Slaughter 

Early February, the wonderful Mary Lake, Rural Vermont staff and farmers from across the country had a chance to fly to D.C. to present our Petition To Clarify The Personal Use Exemption in the FMIA to lawmakers - looking for champions for the initiative (more info)! We need Sen. Welch to take leadership in his Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry - reach out to your Senator Welch, Subject Line: Clarify On-Farm Slaughter is legal! And share with his staff why clarifying that on-farm slaughter is legal matters to you.

Take Action!

  1. Keep the petition growing! Continue to sign-on & share our petition with your networks, especially with out of state supporters (individual and organizational): Sign-on here

  2. Need more info? Policy Guide On-Farm Slaughter here

  3. Find supporters, stats and testimonials in the appendix to our petition here

  4. Reach out to Senator Welch’s office and urge them to champion this campaign. Contact Jeff_VanOot@welch.senate.gov & customize this template message:
    “Dear Jeff, thank you for meeting with a group from NFFC to learn about our Petition to Clarify the Personal-Use Exemption. I am reaching out as a ____________(farmer, on-farm slaughter customer, meat processor, supporter) to urge the Senator to take leadership on clarifying that on-farm slaughter has a place in federal law. A resilient food system depends on small, direct-to-consumer farms outside of commodity agriculture, and those farms need a level playing field that can only be served by the protection and preservation of exempt market niches like the personal use exemption for on farm slaughter. Respectfully, _____________”

NFFC’s Milk from Family Dairies Act

Rural Vermont board member, Stephen Leslie, joined the NFFC fly-in to D.C. in February to promote NFFC’s Milk from Family Dairies Act. Here’s some of what Stephen had to say about the bill and his experience of the trip: “Leading up to the trip I was feeling some angst about supporting a proposal that might extend the life of a consolidating (& polluting) conventional dairy industry in VT. Even though I had studied the NFFC proposal, it wasn't until I heard Siena explain it, that I understood how it could radically reform the dairy sector through a non-monetized national quota system---incentivizing small & mid-size farms and de-consolidating the CAFO-style operations. 

For my part, I spoke to the trend of massive consolidation in our state: 2500 dairies in 1975 to less than 500 in 2023---all the while producing approximately the same volume of milk. I spoke up for the migrant workers often forced to live and work in sub-par conditions on the large farms. I talked about my own small diversified & value-added dairy farm, and how in partnership with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) we have seen huge improvements in soil health and yields through stacking soil health practices, such as: intensive management grazing, silvopasture, riparian buffers, pollinator hedgerow, compost application, & cover cropping. I emphasized the need for USDA to funnel more conservation dollars to fully fund the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and to ensure that Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQUIP) dollars are not spent to prop up large farm operations.”

Learn more about the Milk from Family Dairies Act here
& about other priorities of the NFFC farm bill platform here

Cannabis

Rural Vermont continues to work with other member based organizations of the Cannabis Equity Coalition (NOFA VT, VT Racial Justice Alliance, Vermont Growers’ Association, and the Green Mtn. Patients’ Alliance) to advance our goals related to a racially just, economically equitable, and agriculturally accessible cannabis economy in Vermont.  We anticipate 2 bills - 1 in the House Gov. Operations Committee, and 1 in the Senate Gov. Operations Committee - coming forth soon which hope will include some of our recommendations, at least in some form.  

At this time, there are 4 bills related to VT’s cannabis policy: 

S.71 and H.270:  An act relating to miscellaneous amendments to the adult-use and medical cannabis programs.

These are bills which are largely informed by the Cannabis Control Board (CCB), these bills are likely seen as “must pass” by the Board and some members of the legislature - they are potential vehicles for our Coalitions’ goals as well.  Some of what these bills currently include:

  • Repeals the sunset of the CCB

  • New “propagation license”

  • Eliminates fingerprinting for caregivers

  • Eliminates the requirement for active therapy (for example related to particular medical conditions like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) to qualify for the medical registry.

  • Allows for cultivators to possess cannabis products.  This is also a goal of our coalition - currently cultivators can not make and sell “value added” products (other than “pre-rolls”) because they are not allowed to take back into their possession for resale any product made from the plant they grew made by a licensed manufacturer.

  • Establish a State Testing lab and 3 positions, an appropriation for $850,000.  This is a critical need for producers, consumers, and the regulatory community.  However it alone will not meet all of the challenges at the CCB which affect producers - such as positions devoted to product registration where there is a significant backlog.

S.72:  An act relating to lifting the potency limits on concentrated cannabis products

This is a standalone bill coming from the Cannabis Control Board and Sen. Sears geared at shifting the “THC” cap of value added products. 

H.300:  An act relating to establishing the afterschool and summer care grant program

There is currently 30% of the VT cannabis excise tax committed to “youth prevention”, and Act 164 (the original Act enabling recreational sales) also includes dedicated funding for the expansion of afterschool and summer learning programs from the retail sales tax.  It is not immediately clear how this proposal interacts with these existing funds and directives in law or if it is creating an entirely new program and asking for a new source of funding.

Now is a good time to contact your representatives, the Speaker of the House and the Senate Pro-Tem, and members of the House and Senate Government Operations Committees who will be hearing these bills.  You can let them know about your experiences, concerns and needs, and your support for Rural VT and the VT Cannabis Equity Coalitions’ legislative goals.  You can advocate that these goals be integrated into S.71 or H.270, and express your support for bills coming to the Government Operations Committee which will already include aspects of some of these recommendations.  S.71 and H.270 are potential vehicles for addressing our goals as they are seen as bills including “miscellaneous” (or unrelated) aspects of legislative change, and are likely perceived as “must pass” bills by the Cannabis Control Board and some members of the legislature.

Streamlining “Ecosystem Service” Incentive Programs 

Small Farm Action Day is a collaboration of NOFA-VT and Rural Vermont. This years first event on February 21st focussed on: Vermont and “Payments for Ecosystem Services” - What Structural Reforms are Needed to Advance Functional Ecosystems and Farm Viability? Farmers, service providers, activists, and researchers, were sharing their desires and recommendations for programmatic solutions with lawmakers to better support and incentivize farm and forestry practices to address the climate challenges of our time.

The Small Farmer Cohort around Cat Buxton (that RV is part of) got the opportunity to speak to the past three years working alongside the PES and Soil Health Working Group. Two major successes for the Small Farmer Cohort are a) the final consensus decision towards a pilot program to enhance the Conservation Stewardship Program - similar to what the group recommended in 2021; and b) the final report making clear statements against any efforts to monetize nature. 

The Vermont Agency for Agriculture, Food, and Markets announced that a legislative proposal to codify the Vermont enhancement to CSP is currently being developed as a pilot program with an existing appropriation (Act 185, Sec. B.1100(a)(7)(A)) and will not be proposed to the legislature for codification until 2025. 

In consequence, Small Farm Action Day stressed to legislators not to wait until 2025 but to act on WHAT CAN BE DONE NOW to:

  1. Hear from the PES & Soil Health WG directly, especially from the farmers on the group, about their experiences and takeaways from the WG process.

  2. Address the complex issue of how to improve agricultural programs. Hear more from farmers about their policy recommendations!

  3. Endorse the Conservation Districts request to increase their baseline funding to 3M. 

Each of the presentations was tremendously rich and meaningful, reaching from how current programs already aim to incentivise Ecosystem Services, to revealing “PES” as false solutions that benefit first and foremost Natural Asset Companies (NAC’s), to sharing efforts on farmer led decision making, to sharing farmer perspectives on pre-existing shortfalls and recommendations for improvements, and more! Beyond that, the national and international narrative of what “PES” means was eloquently dismantled by Julie Davenson, Board President NOFA-NH:

“Natural Asset Companies (“NACs”) claim that by valuating these ecosystem services we are able to protect them from further degradation. In reality, they are justifying their attempts to create new markets by commodifying nature in pursuit of endless growth. For over a millennia, indigenous peoples have valued, honored and respected nature without assigning a monetary value to it. Today’s financial systems are built on an endless growth continuum and PES, NACs and Carbon Credits are designed to extract as much wealth as possible from nature.”

Rural Vermont and the Small Farmer Cohort are working towards legislation that would make the various existing “Payment for Ecosystem Programs” work better, especially for small farmers. That includes further exploring the idea to develop a web portal to aggregate various programs, making discovery and application easier for farmers. Improved interface interoperability would also eliminate pre-existing redundancies. 

We hope you feel encouraged to learn more & watch one of the recordings of the event. 

Please do reach out to us & share your thoughts on shortfalls of existing programs; your ideas for addressing them & any thoughts on what you’ve learned about PES, Nature Asset Companies and how farmers would be disadvantaged through market solutions that aim to monetize nature. Share your testimonial with Rural Vermont here. 

Watch the recordings:

  • Testimonials to the Senate Committee on Agriculture: Full Recording here, including Dan Brooks from Wayward Goose Farm about how Beavers are forgotten in Conservation Planning. 

  • Testimonials to the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry: Full Recording here

  • Panel Food and Climate: Carbon Market Pitfalls & Better Strategies for Regenerative Organic Practices: Full Recording available here

Written testimonials & handouts: 

  • Mario Machado, Postdoctoral Researcher, Gund Institute, UVM (handout, report)

  • Julie Davenson, President, Board of Directors NOFA-NH (handout)

  • Jennifer Bryne, District Manager, White River Natural Resources Conservation District (report Vermont Farmer Perspectives on Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) Programs: A Summary Report)

  • Cat Buxton, Soil Health Working Group representative, Vermont Healthy Soils Coalition (handout)

  • Stephen Leslie, Owner, Cedar Mountain Farm (handout)

  • Daniel Brooks, Wayward Goose Farm (handout)

  • Abe Collins, Co-Founder, Land Care Cooperative (presentation)

Food Residuals - Call to Regulate Depackaging Technology

The Protect Our Soils Coalition (POS) is working to protect the Universal Recycling Law (URL), the law that banned food scraps from the landfill, with a goal to close-the-nutrient loop by diverting organics to their best and highest use in accordance with a management hierarchy. POS argues that depackaging technology is currently illegal, because it does not require “source separation” - generators to separate their food scraps from non compostable trash and recycling at the point of generation. Instead, it allows service providers like Casella, to offer “zero sort” type systems where they pick up mixed loads and separate them mechanically through depackaging technology at their facility in Williston, Vermont. POS argues: “This practice creates new resource concerns that the Universal Recycling Law was intended to solve and hinders market development for small scale composters.” Resource concerns include a presumed greater likelihood for contamination of organics and water with microplastics (including PFAS) through depackaging technology (zero sort) vs. separation of the different resources at the point of generation (source separation). Last year, POS advocated successfully for the creation of a stakeholder group that recommended policy changes. That stakeholder group expressed a shared desire for more clarity through better public outreach and education from the Agency of Natural Resources and clear definitions and parameters for the use of depackaging technology. 

Next steps:

  1. ANR has presented their draft to rewrite their 2019 policy - read more here. Share your written comments on the draft policy with Ben Gauthier by email on or before March 16, 2023 (Benjamin.Gauthier@vermont.gov)

  2. The POS coalition is advocating to a) set parameters for the continued use of depackaging technology as a niche in law, e.g. for managing homogenous loads of food manufacturing businesses and b) to prohibit the application of end products from depack on agricultural lands. Stay tuned for action alerts & join POS here.

  3. Call your legislator today (find your legislator here) & say that you want:

    1. food scraps to be diverted to their highest and best use

    2. that “zero sort” management systems disadvantage small farmers and composters in the marketplace

    3. depackaging technology needs to be regulated as a niche, en large for homogeneous loads from food manufacturing businesses &

    4. A ban on the land application of end products from depackaging technology to mitigate PFAS & microplastic contamination now!

Right to Farm

This request from the Farm Bureau, the Vermont Dairy Producers Alliance and supporting farms is being considered by the Senate Committee on Agriculture as a committee bill, Draft 2.3. Last year, the “Right to Farm” law had been worked on as well, which resulted in the successful expansion of the lists of activities that are now encompassed under the nuisance protection. Important to note is that this expansion included the change or expansion of farming practices so that transitioning farms are better protected. Read more about the most recent changes in Section 10 of Act 162, 2022.  

It is indeed important to protect farms from unreasonable nuisance complaints and Rural Vermont believes the existing law is adequate, and the suggested changes are potentially harmful.  These laws are ideally guided by the need to protect small farms from nuisance lawsuits having to do with the inherent nature of farms as non-farm development has increased, yet these laws have spread and been adapted by organizations such as ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) to protect ever larger farms, confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and agribusiness. Different states have different Right to Farm laws of various strengths: some provide iron clad protection to farms, while others provide less, allowing neighbors to pursue civil action against disruptive farms in certain cases.  Rural Vermont has received clear feedback from our national allies in the National Family Farm Coalition that many expanded “Right to Farm” laws have been used to effectively displace and disadvantage small farms, and to prevent communities from defending themselves and their lands and waters in States such as Missouri, North Carolina, and more.  

This year, the most current bill draft would suggest that an agricultural activity:

  1. shall not be a nuisance or trespass when the activity has been in operation for more than one year and the activity was not a nuisance at the time the activity was initiated, or 

  2. complies with generally accepted agricultural practices. 

  3. is not protected whenever a nuisance or trespass violation results from the negligent operation of an agricultural activity or from a violation of the State agricultural water quality requirements. 

  4. shall not lose nuisance or trespass protection due to a change of ownership or a cessation of operation of not more than five years; a change of crops produced; or 

  5. a change of a farming method or conversion of a farming practice or agricultural activity to another farming method, practice, or agricultural activity on a farm. 

  6. The act would also provide that the conflicting parties, at least once, attempt to resolve through mediation (though this mediation would not extend the 1 year deadline for the plaintiff to file suit).

Furthermore, the bill would remove an exemption which states that farms are not protected from lawsuit if “the activity has a substantial adverse effect on health, safety, or welfare, or has a noxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring property.” (12 V.S.A. § 5753). The draft also removes language stating that the legal protection shall not “be construed to limit the authority of State or local boards of health to abate nuisances affecting the public health” (12 V.S.A. § 5753). By removing these clauses the new Right to Farm bill would make pressing charges against a farm much harder. The draft conserves some important aspects of the current Right to Farm bill, including that farms are only protected if they comply with the state’s Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs) and Rule of Control of Pesticides.  One Large Farm Operation providing testimony stated that this bill was written to extend the definition of farming to include biogas digesters on farms, limiting neighbors’ and towns’ abilities to have oversight of, and influence on, such a form of development.  

Opposition to the bill was well articulated by by Scott Sanderson from the Conservation Law 

Foundation, watch testimonials from 2/23 here. Scott wrote to the committee (emphasis added): “CLF opposes Draft 2.3 because the bill does not solve a problem: nuisance and trespass lawsuits against farms are rare and do not threaten Vermont’s farm economy. Moreover, Draft 2.3, [...], curtails property rights; limits Vermonters’ recourse to the courts when they have no other option to protect their property, health, and welfare; and upsets the careful balance established by Vermont’s existing right-to-farm law. Last, Draft 2.3 introduces new concerns: it applies a “generally accepted agricultural practices” standard that further erodes property rights; it establishes a mediation requirement that is unlikely to resolve disputes between farmers and neighboring landowners; and it creates factual issues that are likely to complicate court proceedings. For these reasons, CLF opposes Draft 2.3. We urge the Committee to preserve Vermont’s existing right-to-farm law.”

For more info and up-to-date drafts and testimonies of the bill, you can follow it here.

H.145 - Organic Dairy Relief

We are in support of NOFA-VT’s ACTION ALERT: Call your rep to save organic dairies click here. 

Update:The request is for $9.2 million in relief funding to help keep Organic dairies from going out of business, which the House passed on 2/2/23 in H.145, the FY 2023 Budget Adjustment Act. The Senate took the provision out of their version of the BAA, being technical about it and suggesting to place it in the FY24 budget or in a stand-alone legislation.

Earlier, organic dairy farmers testified in a joint hearing organized by NOFA-VT on 1/26/23 to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry (or, “House Ag”). Legislators heard firsthand the extent to which the free-falling Organic milk prices are impacting farmers. NOFA-VT released a concise, powerful edit of testimony highlights here.

This one time request is not the structural change we need but can help prevent many of Vermont’s Organic dairies from disappearing. With many of these farms on the brink of bankruptcy, their loss would be a tragedy for Vermont’s grasslands, climate strategy, dairy industry, milk drinkers, and more. For more info see NOFA-VT’s action alert and infographics.

H.165 - An act relating to school food programs and universal school meals

The Vermont Legislature is seeking to extend the school meal coverage plan it implemented initially as a COVID relief strategy. H.165 would fund breakfast and lunch for Vermont students at public schools, and publicly-tuitioned private school students by appropriating $29M from the Education Fund to the Agency of Education for fiscal year 2024. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Erin Brady of Chittenden and the House Education Committee but is currently on the way to the House floor after a 9-2-0 favorable vote in the new House Agriculture, Food Resilience and Forestry committee. The new language includes students attending an approved independent school on public tuition, including prekindergarten children, if their school offers a school lunch program.

H.205 - An act relating to establishing the Small Farm Diversification and Transition Program

Lead by former dairy farmer Rep. Rodney Graham and diversified small farmer Rep. Heather Suprenant, H.205 is sponsored by the entire House Ag Committee and more, and introduces the “Small Farm Diversification and Transition Program” within VAAFM, a new grant program with $250K appropriated from the general fund. Grants are to be used for small farms for (1) diversifying commodities, (2) transitioning farm type, (3) on-farm processing, or (4) add on-farm accessory businesses. 

This bill seems to be in the early stages as the House Ag Committee is still exploring expected uses for the funds and grant limits and processes. 

H.126 - An act relating to community resilience and biodiversity protection (conservation mandate)

H.126, which is still in committee in the House Committee on Environment and Energy, mandates conservation goals for Vermont in alignment with federal and global “30 by 30” initiatives: to conserve 30% of Vermont by 2030, and 50% by 2050. This includes private, municipal, state, and federal land, and “conservation” just means more than half of the parcel is protected from development or in a wildlife production initiative. Without making additional funding available, the bill encourages research and reporting and generally charges the Agency of Natural Resources with the task of meeting those conservation deadlines!

Did you know? During Small Farm Action Day, Farmer and Rural Vermont Board Member Stephen Leslie testified, that: 

“Beginning in 2010, and for the first time in over one-hundred years, Vermont is again losing forest to the tune of 1150 acres a year. Unchecked development, clear cutting and fragmentation all threaten the health and connectivity of woodlands.

50% of the carbon stored in a forest is held by the top 1% of the biggest trees. New findings show that, young trees are net emitters of carbon until they reach about twenty years and that although it is not as rapid as in young trees, sequestration is greatest from the growth period of 50 years to 150 years of age and is continuous after that. In terms of immediate impact in the midst of the climate crisis & loss of biodiversity, the most consequential action we can can take in the northeast is to protect our mature forests.

In the last biennium law makers passed a far-reaching conservation measure---now known as the “Biodiversity Bill”. The original bill was vetoed by the governor but it is being reintroduced as H.126 in this biennium. The bill is on a par with President Joe Biden's “30 x30 & 50 x50” executive order, which sets a goal to conserve 30% of all land and waters nationwide by 2030 and 50% by 2050. A 30x30---50x50 initiative was also adopted this past December 2022 by international delegates at the COP 15 gathering on Biodiversity held in Montreal. Vermont already has 24% of it’s land protected under three tiers of conservation. We can easily meet

the 30 x30 goal by permanently protecting all forests on public land (including state and national forests which comprise about 10% of all VT woodlands).”

Current Use: Land Use Change Tax Streamline

The Vermont Department of Taxes, with support from the department of Forest Parks and Recreation and the Vermont Agency of Agriculture Food and Markets, is requesting to reshape how the “Land Use Change Tax” is calculated. The “Land Use Change Tax” is the fee or penalty that landowners pay when they withdraw land from the Current Use program, so its calculation has big implications for how much land gets enrolled and stays enrolled. The current schema makes it impossible to know how big the penalty will be when land is withdrawn from Current Use, and results in surprising and hugely ranging fees. This makes enrolling in Current Use less attractive. And, according to testimony from the Dept of Taxes, the way the penalty is currently calculated is “difficult if not impossible to administer” because it puts a huge burden on town administrators, as well as state tax people.

According to the Dept. of Taxes, the changes will not increases fees on average, but will redistribute the cost of the penalty to be more equitable, and easy to calculate and administer. 

Good idea! Dan Brooks from Wayward Goose farm was advocating during Small Farm Action Day on 2/21 for a policy recommendation of Sarah Flack that suggests a New Wetlands Current Use Category with No Tax to incentivize farmers and foresters to allow for more beaver habitat and wetlands. “Given the growing likelihood of year round hot/dry weather due to climate change, I am alarmed by the lack of any mention of beavers and the critical roles they play in mitigating drought as well as flooding and all of the other ecosystem services they provide…” Read more from Dan about this here.

Take action in support and email these officials together Subject Line: Beavers: New Wetlands Current Use Category with no tax

Jill.remick@vermont.gov - Director of Property Valuation and Review, Department of Taxes 

laura.lapierre@vermont.gov - Wetlands Program Manager, Agency of Natural Resources

hannah.smith@vermont.gov - Associate General Counsel, Agency of Natural Resources

Take Action on Healthcare!

59 House members have introduced H156! It creates a clear roadmap for publicly financed health care for all Vermonters! (A companion bill S74 has also been introduced in the Senate). Legislators need pressure to take up these bills. Contact the House Health Care Committee and the Senate Health and Welfare Committee. Tell these committees we need these bills considered and passed. These bills deserve a hearing! They would phase in a universal health care system, starting with Universal Primary Care, including outpatient mental health and substance use disorder treatment. They also propose adding preventive dental and vision care in the second year, and incorporating additional health care services in later years until we have universal access for all sectors of care. (More information on the bills here).

Rural Vermont
On-Farm Slaughter Petition Landed in D.C.

Rural Vermont is a member organization of the National Family Farm Coalition (NFFC), an alliance of grassroots farmer- and advocate-led groups from across the country representing the rights and interests of independent family farmers, ranchers, and fishermen in Washington, DC. NFFC organized a two day fly-in event to DC earlier this week, where farmers and fishermen from across the nation came together to speak to over 20+ legislative offices in four groups - land access, dairy, capital and on-farm slaughter. Our Vermont delegation included board member Stephen Leslie from Cedar Mountain Farm who supported the dairy group, RV staffer Caroline and the wonderful shepherd, shearer and itinerant slaughterer, Mary Lake. This was the first time we presented our Petition to Clarify the Personal Use Exemption and it was tremendously valuable to pair leadership from Vermont for on-farm slaughter with experiences from other states. Much appreciation to Kenya Abraham, who farms in Kentucky and shared how difficult it is to practice halal slaughter in a state where OFS is not supported; to Betsy Garrold who farms in Maine, where they were also facing threats from the USDA to revoke Maine’s equal-to status when they passed a food sovereignty law that included on-farm slaughter; and to our friends from Dakota Rural Action for their support in stepping up for this issue. It was fascinating to have Leonardo Wassilie in our team, a fisherman from Alaska, who explained how difficult it is to get into regenerative farming without any infrastructure - now that permafrost melting reveals fertile soils - it is a matter of food security. “

“ ‘What is not being taken care of will break over time…’ that was what really sat with me when I listened to two strong women, Mary and Kenya, during our meetings. The structural barriers for learning and engaging in meat processing are a huge part of their shared experience. I find their passion to re-cultivate the skill to ethically care for our livestock by slaughtering them where they were raised inspiring.”

RV Legislative Director, Caroline Gordon 

While these were initial conversations in DC, and many staffers were entirely new to the issue of on-farm slaughter, we hope to deepen and broaden conversations and to see leadership from Senator Welch’s office on this issue. 

Stay tuned for action alerts and for now, continue to share and sign-on the petition! Big shout out to the wonderful NFFC staff who made this advocacy effort possible!


Rural VermontOFS
Universal Primary Care Bill Introduced

A new House Bill was introduced by Brian Cina, the act relating to incremental implementation of Green Mountain Care: This bill proposes to:

  • implement Green Mountain Care, a publicly financed health care program for all Vermont residents, over time, starting with primary care in the first year, adding preventive dental and vision care in the second year, and incorporating additional health care services in later years,

  • establish the Universal Health Care Advisory Group at the Green Mountain Care Board to provide recommendations to the General Assembly regarding the sequencing of and financing for the health care services to be added in the third through tenth years of Green Mountain Care’s implementation,

  • express legislative intent regarding funding sources for Green Mountain Care,

  • prohibit health insurance plans and rates from reflecting duplication of the coverage provided by Green Mountain Care.

Rural Vermont supports this bill, and the full implementation of Act 48. Stay tuned for a bill number, and link to the language when it's available. For more info contact mollie@ruralvermont.org

Rural Vermonthealthcare
Vermont Cannabis Equity Coalition Priorities

This biennium the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition (Rural VT, NOFA VT, VT Racial Justice Alliance, Vermont Growers’ Association, and recently joined Green Mtn Patients’ Alliance) is looking forward to seeing legislation emerge in both the Senate and the House which we anticipate will directly address many of our coalition's priorities:

1.  20% of Tax Revenue to Reinvestment in Communities Disproportionately harmed in a Community reinvestment fund administered by members of these communities

2.  10% Revenue to the Cannabis Business Development Fund 

3.  Direct Markets and value added for smaller tiers of cultivators and manufacturers

  • On-farm and off-farm direct sales allowances for Cultivation Tiers 1,2 Indoor; 1,2,3 Mixed; 1,2,3 Outdoor

  • Includes allowances for all cultivators to sell products manufactured from their plants wholesale; and the “direct market” tiers to also directly market particular manufactured products 

4.  Agricultural Use and Exemptions

  • All outdoor cannabis cultivation shall be treated as agriculture at the municipal level, including the outdoor cultivation aspects of “mixed tier” licenses.

  • Extend Tier 1 current use and other ag related privileges to all tiers of outdoor cultivation

5.  Increasing Homegrow Allowances to 10 plants or to the new medical allowances

6.  Complete Expungement of any and all Cannabis Related Charges and Not Re-criminalizing 

  • Public consumption anywhere tobacco is allowed

  • Burden on the renter to get permission currently - model this after NY where one is allowed to consume unless specifically prohibited, and can’t limit all forms of consumption (ie edibles, etc.)

7.  The Tier 1 manufacturing license is not economically feasible - increase the income limit

  • Currently costs too much to afford with the limit of income allowed to qualify for it.

8. Breeding License

  • Separate license

  • Some precedent in other States; in some cases can’t sell flower at all from this license type

  • Both breeding and cultivators licenses can sell live immature plants

9. Licensure / regulation of live Plant Sales:  

  • Allow cultivators to sell seeds and living plants they grow directly to customers.

10.  Support for Green Mountain Patients’ Alliance’s proposed medical cannabis policies


Rural Vermontcannabis
Rural Vermont's 2023 Legislative Session Guide

A new biennium has begun! To help our constituents understand what has changed in the State House and support them in engaging with agricultural issues and the legislative process, we've created a simple reference guide. Read on!

Biennium. Since 2023 marks an odd-numbered year, the legislative procedure prescribes the beginning of a new biennium. Any bill introduced has the next two years to be passed into law by the General Assembly. Since the COVID shut down in March 2020, it’s been three years that lawmakers have been meeting remotely (mostly). Vaccination and testing policies were dropped by the Joint Rules Committee in fall 2022 for the State House (VT Digger article) and lawmakers of the House are expected to be back in-person “unless sick or otherwise necessarily detained” (House Rules). In contrast, Senators will continue to abide by the 2021 rule that “A Senator participating remotely shall be considered present and in attendance at the meeting of the Senate, including for purposes of determining if a quorum is present” (Senate Rules). Both chambers will continue to use the ability to livestream committee hearings and floor sessions on YouTube. 

Find out what’s important to you within:


Legislators. There has been remarkable and record turnover in lawmakers; about one third of the elected body are new to the legislature. Democrats and Progressives won 10 seats and now hold the two-thirds majority needed to override vetoes from Governor Scott. The new spirit brings hope for transformative change as young legislators organize in the new Vermont Future Caucus. Aside from the partisan caucuses, there are many others that meet independently to discuss strategy like the Social Equity Caucus, Climate Solutions Caucus and the Rural Caucus for example.

Committees. The House Ag committee got renamed to House Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry (H.R. 4) overseeing matters related to: “Agriculture, food resiliency, climate change mitigation and adaptation, forestry and forest products, and State parks and lands, and other similar policies.” While food resiliency is not defined in the House Rules, we understand that it’s inclusive of food security. 

You can find bios and contact info of committee members on the committee’s website: Reach out to any of these legislators to express your needs and concerns regarding agriculture, food and climate policy and regulation (House Ag; Senate Ag).


Leadership. Long time chairperson of the former House Agriculture and Forestry Committee, Carolyn Partridge, retired after the 2022 session and over 24 years in service. The new leadership of HAG includes young farmer Rep. Heather Suprenant from Barnard as Vice Chair and we are excited to see the farmer leadership - congratulations Heather! Re-elected farmer Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman has been a long time supporter of the Rural Vermont membership and will welcome us back to in-person Small Farm Action Days at the State House with NOFA-VT (Stay tuned - dates TBD)!

Bills. Follow along as legislation is starting to be introduced here or tune in to House and Senate Floor Sessions. Did you know? Rural Vermont and the Cannabis Equity Coalition are working with legislators to introduce a bill that enables direct sales of cannabis for growers (recent VTDigger article).


Testimonials. If you want to testify in committee because you are affected by pending legislation - reach out about that to the committee assistant, not the chair or another committee member. Great soul and long time committee assistant Linda Leehman ((802) 828-2258 lleehman@leg.state.vt.us) is still with the Senate but there’s a new point person to assist the new respective House committee (Alaura Rich (802) 828-2267, arich@leg.state.vt.us); see also witness information. Additionally, reach out to Legislative Director Caroline Gordon for support and guidance.

Reports and Rules. Many legislative reports - including those on revitalizing the Dairy Industry, the rollout of on-farm composting of food residuals; and from the depack stakeholder group, and the Payment for Ecosystem Services and Soil Health Working group - are being released in January. You can find reports here. The legislative committee appointed to adopt new rules, LCAR, decided last week to postpone their vote on a new pesticides rule after the Department of Health announced concerns. The new rule is mostly concerned about how commercial applicators notify about when and how pesticides are being used as well as requiring some new municipal permits for their application in public spaces (recent VTDigger article).  


Reach out and Connect! Let us know what your interest in any of the upcoming new legislation is and help to inform our shared work and goals:

Rural Vermont
Rural Vermont 2023 Course of Action 11/15/22

Our 2023 priorities for organizing, education, advocacy and action are shaped at the intersection of many influences: our relationships with our membership, our Board, our Staff, our allied organizations, coalitions, and allied movements locally and globally. During the legislative session, we actively track legislation throughout the Statehouse and keep our members updated on a diversity of bills and conversations, providing opportunities to engage. This is an overview of some of the many issue areas we work on and support. For more info and to keep up with Rural Vermont, follow us on Facebook and/or Instagram, sign up for our mailing list or e-newsletter, or become a member and attend our Quarterly Member Forums.

Launch of the La Via Campesina supported Agroecology and Movement Building School: After co-hosting the 2022 Agroecology Encounter in Marshfield, we have been working as part of a collective effort to build an agroecology and movement building school in Vermont in a collaboration with local, regional and national partners. The school will highlight farmer to farmer training models and popular and political education, and seeks to increase access to and uplift those already doing this work.

Federal On-Farm Slaughter Amendment: With partner organizations, including the National Family Farm Coalition, Food and Ranch Freedom Alliance, and the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, we aim to amend the Federal Meat Inspection Act to clarify  outdated language from the personal-use exemption to more closely align with standing Food Safety & Inspection Service (FSIS) guidance and state laws which explicitly allow livestock owners to slaughter their animals on the farm where they were raised or to hire an itinerant slaughterer. The Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets is in support of amending the federal law to provide more clarity on this issue.

Payments for Ecosystem Services: The three-year working group process to assess whether new financial incentives are needed to promote a number of ecosystem services ends with a consensus to enhance the federal Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) with additional rewards for farms in Vermont. The Small Farmer Group coordinated by Cat Buxton, that Rural Vermont is part of, has advocated since 2020 for the so-called CSP+ proposal. We continue to inform the working group and the legislature with our farmer-led recommendations.

Cannabis:  Rural Vermont will continue to work with other members of the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition (VT Racial Justice Alliance, NOFA VT, Vermont Growers’ Association, Justice for All) to achieve a market which is economically equitable, racially just, and agriculturally accessible. Some of our goals include: reducing the significant barriers to accessing licensure and agricultural services for cultivators and farmers, to create ongoing funding for the Cannabis Development Fund and for reinvestment in communities disproportionately harmed by criminalization, to ensure direct market access for producers and the public, and to create scale appropriate licensing for breeding, manufacturing of products, and live plant sales.

Healthcare: In collaboration with grassroots and other healthcare advocates, we continue to offer farm(work)er specific training opportunities around healthcare access, amplify agrarian voices in healthcare, and work in coalition with experienced healthcare advocates towards our goal of publicly funded universal access to healthcare for all.

Market development and rules for composting food residuals on farms: With the Protect Our Soils Coalition, we work to secure markets for on-farm and community scale composting of food residuals by advocating for regulating depackaging technology, strengthening the source separation requirement and the hierarchy for organics management. Next year, the rules for farms that compost food scraps will be released and we aim to offer new on-farm workshops, with a focus on utilizing poultry forage.

Land, Capital, and Housing:  Long term secure access to land, capital, and appropriate housing are some of the most pressing issues faced in the agricultural community, locally and globally. There are a number of efforts ongoing to collaboratively listen to stakeholders and address these issues: the Milk with Dignity Program and Migrant Justice, Just Construction, the Farmworker Housing Repair Program, Every Town, the Land Access and Opportunity Board, the Farm to Plate Network, the Land Grab Working Group at the National Family Farm Coalition, and many more coalitions, organizations, and efforts. We will continue to participate and monitor different programs and conversations, consider particular leverage points we may be best suited to work on, and bring the experiences and concerns of our members to the conversation.

Workshop Series: Our popular series of food sovereignty workshops continue, partnering with farmers and other members of the agricultural community to teach participants how to process raw dairy at home, slaughter and process poultry and livestock, and we’ll offer a new community food scrap composting workshops for farms.

Farm To Plate:  We continue to have a seat on the Farm to Plate Steering Committee and to participate as we are able in a number of groups within its new organizational structure, including: the Policy Priority Strategy Team (working towards and influencing a “policy roadmap”), the Agroforestry Priority Strategy Team, the Meat Slaughter and Processing Priority Strategy Team, the Food Cycle Coalition, Food Security Priority Strategy Team (co-creating a food security plan for the State), and more. These relationships allow us to be in conversation with diverse groups of organizational stakeholders working towards particular goals and outcomes.

Quarterly Member Forums and Ongoing Grassroots Engagement:  We are now hosting quarterly member forums. These are opportunities for our members to join our Director of Grassroots Organizing, our Legislative Director, and our Policy Director in a virtual forum to discuss particular issues which may be affecting your farm and / or community, and/ or that we are currently working on. We seek additional feedback from members and allies on an ongoing basis through 1:1 meetings, kitchen table conversations, and other community organizing initiatives.

Small Farm Action Days & Statehouse to Farmhouse 2023: In partnership with NOFA-VT and other organizations, we will continue to host Small Farm Action Days at the Statehouse at least 3 times throughout the legislative session. These are opportunities for you to become familiar with the Statehouse itself, with the policy making process and some active issues, and to meet with your representative or provide testimony on a particular issue you’re affected by. Statehouse to Farmhouse is an annual event in which we work together with a number of organizations to bring farmers and policy makers together on farms across VT.

Accessory On-Farm Business and Act 250:We look forward to participating in a larger collaborative effort to amend the law governing Accessory On-Farm Businesses (AOFBs) in order to ensure consistent definitions across laws which define agriculture, to address how Act 250 intersects with accessory on-farm businesses, and ideally to ensure that there is adequate outreach and education done to municipal governance and the agricultural community so that the law is more adequately understood and enforced across Vermont. We are also supporting farmers with AOFBs in court by expressing the significant need to uphold existing carve outs from Act 250 for farms.

Rural Vermont
Sign-on Letter Urging Congress to Clarify the Personal Use Exemption of the Federal Meat Inspection Act

Join Rural Vermont and partner organizations National Family Farm Coalition (NFFC), Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (FARFA), and Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF) in urging Congress to support clarifying language to the Federal Meat Inspection Act’s (FMIA) personal-use-exemption that will affirm state laws - like Vermont’s! - that allow for on-farm slaughter without state or federal meat inspection.

Currently, there are many people whose businesses rely on the personal use exemption, including farmers selling livestock for on-farm slaughter, itinerant slaughterers, and custom processors. In order for their operations to be in compliance, they are relying on 2018 guidance put forth by the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). This puts them in a vulnerable position because an Agency can change their guidance at any moment.

It is time to update outdated language in the FMIA to ensure that standing FSIS guidance is more clearly visible in the written law so that on the ground practitioners have planning security, instead of them continuing to be vulnerable and subject to Agency discretion. 

Rural VermontOFS
Take Action! Public Hearings on Wetlands Regulation

The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is undergoing rulemaking to change their inventory of Class 2 wetlands of significance. Part of the proposed change would be to give the Secretary of Natural Resources the authority to make a general determination of what polygons (parcels of land) qualify as Class 2 - effectively uprooting the current requirement to base such determination on a case-by-case functions and values analysis. Rural Vermont cautions farmers, foresters and other landowners that this change is a DEC money maker as landowners will have to bear the cost to take false determinations off the map and/or to get permits to continue ongoing activities, including agricultural use, in affected sugarbush or fields.

Speak up against this change at the upcoming hearings:


More background of the proposed wetland rule changes:

Effectively, DEC is proposing to turn Class 3 wetlands, which are currently not regulated, into Class 2 wetlands by incorporating them into the VSWI (Vermont Significant Wetland Inventory). To our understanding, this seems to be getting rid of a map known as the “advisory layer” - where Class 3 wetlands are marketed for further investigation to become determined as significant, and thus regulated, as Class 2 wetlands.  While the proposed change, for now, focuses on Franklin County, DEC already made a motion earlier this year to apply this methodology to the entire state. After conflicts arose, DEC is presenting a more narrow focus, but is also making clear that this change would be bound to affect the entire State soon. DEC is suggesting a change to the requirement to craft case-by-case functions and values analysis by also allowing the Secretary to make a general determination based on assumptions. In the newly proposed map, polygons that would be incorporated as Class 2 wetlands already appear to be incorporated based on false assumptions. For example, while the general assumption requires polygons to be at least half an acre - the map includes about 2,700 polygons that are obviously smaller than that size. Quality assurance also shows other obvious lacks as many manure pits in Franklin County have falsely been mapped as being incorporated as Class 2 wetlands. While it would seem ridiculous that such obvious mistakes result in regulatory consequences, many of these mini class 2 wetlands would be in the middle of fields and thus require farmers and landowners to apply a 50ft buffer and permitting for any infrastructure within that radius. To us, this is DEC trying to shift their regulatory burden of making adequate determinations of Class 2 wetlands through functions and values analysis onto landowners who now will have to hire a consultant to make a proper analysis and then undertake the bureaucratic efforts to amend the blanket determination by changing it back to Class 3. Should land owners fail to receive an analysis on their behalf they would then also carry the burden of acquiring the permits they will need for activities in association with their, now confirmed, Class 2 wetland. This could be a manure stack that’s within the 50ft radius of a mini wetland that would be Class 3 but now had been incorporated as Class 2 through the Secretaries general determination. This could also be a sugarbush and related infrastructure (forest road, tank) that’s within such radius. 

Rural Vermont encourages farmers, foresters, and landowners to engage in the current public comment process and to express their distress about this proposed change. We suggest to amplify the following message:

“Keep checks and balances - Keep Class 3 wetlands on the advisory layer map! We say NO to a general determination by the Secretary of Natural Resources that would adopt Class 3 wetlands as Class 2 without case-by-case functions and values analysis attesting their significance in advance.”

More info here: Wetlands Rulemaking | Department of Environmental Conservation

Shelby Girard
Rural Vermont GMO Litigation Win! Labeling with QR Codes Alone is NOT Enough

We celebrate with all of you who have been following and supporting GMO labeling for years and our attorneys at the Center for Food Safety on this huge win for the people’s right-to-know! Rural Vermont was, as a plaintiff, part of a coalition of nonprofits and retailers in a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of San Francisco (California) to successfully challenge the Trump Administration’s rulemaking in 2018 that would have discriminated against tens of millions of Americans by permitting the use of QR codes on packaging. The court has agreed that QR codes alone are not enough !! Unfortunately, the court did not agree to all claims, e.g. the USDA will still define highly refined products that don't need to be labeled because of undetectable GMO traces.

Read the full press release here.

Rural VermontGMO
Depack Stakeholder Group Launched: Ben and Jerry’s Reluctant to Apply Precautionary Principle

The first stakeholder group meeting launched with discussions around composition, decision making, planning meeting schedules and core principles. The group agreed to make decisions by consent with majority rules when an objection can’t be resolved. Stakeholder group member Tom Gilbert (of Black Dirt Farm, also representing the Poultry Farmers for Compost Foraging as well as the Protect Our Soils Coalition), made a motion to add at least one scientific perspective to the group's slate of industry reps, without success. Noticeably, there was agreement to take testimony from a series of scientists across the board. In another motion, Tom Gilbert suggested agreeing to core values including the precautionary principle, an ethical/legal principle often used to guide states in protecting the natural bases of existence. Further, this principle establishes a responsibility to future generations - a pursuit which can entail measures for precaution and danger prevention. When applied, the precautionary principle often leads to conservative approaches to a risk, and its application calls for the development of solutions (e.g. to health problems).

We were disappointed to hear the Ben & Jerry’s representative caution against adopting the precautionary principle as a guiding value: “In environmental health, there’s so many things that can hurt us out there, the air we breathe, the water bottles from which we’re drinking. The precautionary principle can be applied very broadly. I'm hesitant to agree that because someone could get harmed later, we won’t do it. If it comes to environmental health, it could be almost anything.” This prompted initial support from Michael Casella who would like to get more information about what such an approach could mean on the ground. 

Watch Ben and Jerry’s statement and the full recording here.

Rural VermontURL
VAAFM Explains On- Farm Slaughter - Recording Available Online

The Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food, & Market’s (VAAFM) 9/15/22 virtual training on On-Farm Slaughter aimed to explain on-farm slaughter in a practical and meaningful way. VAAFM reiterated the requirements announced on 1/6/22 that owners must be present during the act of slaughter, as well as their obligation to hire itinerant slaughterers directly and transport their carcasses to custom processors themselves - though neither requirement appear feasible for many. While VAAFM staff allowed plenty of time for discussion, equity issues arose like “What if a person can’t attend because they have a disability?”  According to VAAFM staff, each household should be able to send an agent (without allowing the use of agents from outside of the household). Discussion also arose around the question of why the farmer wouldn’t be allowed to function as an agent - especially when some whole, half, or quarter of the livestock is for the farm’s own personal use. This discussion continues to lead Rural Vermont to raise legal concerns about the legitimacy of these interpretations offered by the Agency. An Agency's discretion ends where the law at hand (here 6 V.S.A. § 3311a) is rendered impractical - or absurd - through the administration of the law. 

Rather than offering viable pathways to on-farm slaughter, VAAFM prioritized exploring other slaughter strategies at the virtual meeting, especially utilizing or starting custom slaughterhouses while also gauging pathways to fund NEW “Rigs” - trailers used for on-farm slaughter that would include infrastructure and transport capacity, and when used, would not require owners to be present for the outdoor on-farm slaughter by an itinerant slaughterer. Farmers were confused about how this idea could be cost effective and meaningfully different from the current practice. After the event, we heard the following from attendees: 

“There is so little connection to [VAAFM interpretation to] reality in that picture that it borders on the ridiculous. [… What does their] idea for how the OFS system should work, actually do to improve the quality and care involved in getting the meat to the ultimate user? The slaughter is still done by the same professional, the offal is still disposed of by the farmer, now the user has to transport his lamb carcass to a butcher. How - in the trunk of his prius? It's just a cumbersome stack of unnecessary, ineffective requirements that accomplish nothing and doom the small farmer's chances of sustainability.” - Anonymous

“I have worked/spoken with 4 itinerant slaughters and all agree that they do not have time or energy to speak with and schedule every individual owner for a harvest of multiple animals- it is difficult enough to connect with one agent that acts on their behalf to schedule. They are on farms and on the road, or at a job they work, not sitting at a desk with a calendar in front of them. I typically schedule the next harvest during the present harvest because it is so difficult to connect otherwise.” - Rev. Moretti, Murmuration Farm, Fairfax Vermont

On the positive side - VAAFM did express preliminary support for an approach to amend the federal personal use exemption to alleviate this interpretation dispute.

Please do raise your questions and express your areas of concern to Julie Boisvert (Meat Inspection Chief at VAAFM, julie.boisvert@vermont.gov) and CC or contact caroline@ruralvermont.org.

Watch Full Recording Here

Rural VermontOFS
VT Agency of Ag Hosts Virtual On-Farm Slaughter Info and Q&A Session on Thursday, September 15th from 7-8:30pm

The VT Agency of Agriculture’s new interpretation of Vermont’s on-farm slaughter law has created a lot of confusion and concern this year. Bring your questions and comments to this virtual info session with the VT Agency of Ag. Rural Vermont will be there - we hope to see you too.

On-Farm Slaughter Informational and Question/Answer Session

 

The Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets is holding an informational and Q&A virtual forum for those interested in On-Farm slaughter, or who have questions about it. Join the Meat Inspection Chief, Julie Boisvert, as she goes through an overview of information, addresses misconceptions, and answers questions you may have in an open and welcoming setting.

 

September 15, 2022

7:00PM – 8:30PM

 

Join by clicking the link below or using the call-in number provided.

 

________________________________________________________________________________

Microsoft Teams meeting

Join on your computer, mobile app or room device

Click here to join the meeting

Meeting ID: 256 895 167 824
Passcode: 8CFfoh

Download Teams | Join on the web

Or call in (audio only)

+1 802-552-8456,,100265603#   United States, Montpelier

Phone Conference ID: 100 265 603#

Find a local number | Reset PIN

Learn More | Meeting options

Rural VermontOFS
Coming Up! Public “Managing Food Waste Stakeholder Group” on addressing contamination issues and the role of depackagers

Have you heard of the recent catastrophe of fish dying in a river on the German Polish border? 

Or that rainwater is not safe to drink due to PFAS?  

Or that PFAS is leaching into groundwater around the Coventry VT landfill?

Microplastics should not get into the environment, but do. 

The Universal Recycling Law was meant to "close the nutrient loop" by separating food residuals from trash and recycling, and allowing for the best and highest use of this valuable resource - including their agricultural use. But currently, waste streams are being consolidated through Casella’s zero-sort type services and sent to their depackaging facility in Williston VT. There, the commingled materials get crushed and grinded in a machine, mixed with water to become a pumpable “slurry” and afterwards get sent to digesters, after which they are land-applied. 

Even though science is behind on risk and harm assessments, this practice likely creates environmental harm through soil and water contamination as well as risks for human health. We call on Vermont to apply a precautionary approach. We call on Vermont to avoid these environmental and human health risks as much as possible through whatever means necessary, including regulation, while maintaining the Universal Recycling Law’s mandates.

Rural Vermont is a proud member of the Protect Our Soils Coalition, which successfully advocated for the passage of Act 170, that includes a stakeholder process to develop recommendations by January 2023 on how to regulate depackaging technology.

Now is time to protect the integrity of the URL in Vermont!

HERE’S WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Put this date on your calendar! The first "Food Waste Stakeholder Group" public meeting will be on Wednesday August 31st from 1-2:30pm.

Tom Gilbert (Black Dirt Farm, also representing the Poultry Farmers for Compost Foraging) will be part of the Managing Food Waste Stakeholder Group launching on August 31st 1pm - 2.30pm to find recommendations for the management of food waste and to address contamination issues with microplastics (including PFAS) as well as the role of depackaging technology. See the full list of those involved here.

TAKE ACTION:

(1) Show up in person, virtually or calling in to demonstrate that this matters to you! *

(2) Prepare and provide a one minute public comment on why this concerns you!

(3) Submit your talking points or written comment if you can't make the meeting or choose not to speak at it. Email comments to Ben Gauthier.

Express your concerns regarding the consolidation of waste streams of food residuals and the associated contamination risks for agricultural soils, human health and the environment more broadly. Hold the Agency of Natural Resources accountable for a more strict implementation of the source separation requirement and voice your support for community-scale solutions for the management of food scraps-- such as the innovative agriculture practice called compost foraging, where chickens graze on the compost piles, generate valuable soil amendments, and farmers save the #1 expense in poultry farming: the feed.

* How to Register and/or Join the Stakeholder Meeting:

  • In person at the National Life campus, Davis Building, Catamount Room (1 National Life Dr, Montpelier, VT 05604). Please register via email and contact Mia Roethlein at mia.roethlein@vermont.gov

  • The online Microsoft Teams meeting here | Meeting ID: 243 876 622 951 and Passcode: 5iiCWU

  • Or call in (audio only) | +1 802-828-7667,,656507214#   United States, Montpelier and Phone Conference ID: 656 507 214#

BACKGROUND:

The Agency of Natural Resources allowed for the utilization of depackaging technology in Vermont for the management of food residuals without requiring their separation from their packaging at the point of generation. Over the last couple of years, this has led to a consolidation of food waste streams, making it harder for small farms to engage in community-scale composting of food residuals that have been separated from trash and recycling by generators for the diversion within their local communities.

For more information: 

Mollie Wills
Press Release: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Strengthen Food Supply Chains, Level the Playing Field for Growers, and Lower Prices for American Consumers

Today, USDA announced a suite of new actions delivering on key commitments from President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy, including issuing a new Packers & Stockyards Act rulemaking, making available $200 Million to expand competition in meat processing, and investing $25 million in workforce training

WASHINGTON, May 26, 2022 – U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced more support, resources, and new rules that will strengthen the American food supply chain, promote fair and competitive agricultural markets, prevent abuse of farmers by poultry processors and make prices fairer for farmers and American consumers. These actions build on President Biden’s historic whole-of-government effort to promote competition in the American economy and fulfill key pillars of the Meat and Poultry Supply Chain Action Plan launched in January by President Biden, Secretary Vilsack, and Attorney General Garland. These actions combat market dominance by a small number of major meat and poultry processors in key markets, where excessive concentration and control has led to lower prices paid to producers and higher prices paid by consumers.

“For too long, farmers and ranchers have seen the value and the opportunities they work so hard to create move away from the rural communities where they live and operate,” Vilsack said. “Under the leadership of President Biden and Vice President Harris, USDA is committed to making investments that promote competition—helping support economic systems where the wealth created in rural areas stays in rural areas—and strengthening rules and enforcement against anticompetitive practices. The funding and new rule we’re announcing today ultimately will help us give farmers and ranchers a fair shake, strengthen supply chains, and make food prices fairer.”

Fighting for Fairness for Poultry Farmers

USDA today announced a proposed rule under the Packers and Stockyards Act to protect poultry growers from abuse. Today’s action is the first of three rulemakings that USDA will issue under the Packers and Stockyards Act under the President’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy in order to stop unfair, deceptive, discriminatory, and anticompetitive practices in the meat and poultry industry.

Currently, poultry processors exert control over much of the process of raising chickens through take-it-or-leave-it contracts with growers. Under these contracts, processors provide inputs like chickens and feed to poultry growers. Poultry growers, who often take on debt to build poultry growhouses, have limited visibility into the real range of outcomes and risks they face under these contracts. Moreover, once in the contracts, the processors then determine the payments that poultry growers receive for their services by weighing the chickens and ranking farmers based on how much the chickens grew. Pay is generally determined based on how a farmer compares to other farmers, but farmers currently have little insight into this comparison. For far too long, growers have complained that the “tournament” system is ripe for abuse.

The new rulemaking will require poultry processors to provide key information to poultry growers at several critical steps—increasing transparency and accountability in the poultry growing system. For example, processors would be required to disclose details of the inputs they provided to each farmer and information about the input differences among farmers being ranked. Furthermore, disclosures would cover the level of control and discretion exercised by the poultry processor and what financial returns the farmer can expect from the relationship based on the range of real experiences of other growers. Contracts would also be required to contain guaranteed annual flock placements and density. Poultry processor CEOs would be required to sign off on the compliance process for disclosure accuracy.

Simultaneously with issuing the proposed transparency rule, USDA is opening an inquiry into whether some practices of processors in the tournament system are so unfair that they should be banned or otherwise regulated. USDA seeks input from stakeholders to determine whether the current tournament-style system in poultry growing could be restricted or modernized to create a fairer, more inclusive marketplace.

Investing in Expanded Capacity

Vilsack also announced that USDA is making available $200 million under the new Meat and Poultry Intermediary Lending Program (MPILP) to strengthen the food supply chain and create opportunities for small businesses and entrepreneurs in rural communities. These funds will provide much-needed financing to independent meat and poultry processors to start up and expand operations. By introducing competition at this key bottleneck point in the supply chain, these investments will help raise earnings for farmers and lower prices for consumers.

The MPILP will provide grants of up to $15 million to nonprofit lenders, including private nonprofits, cooperatives, public agencies and tribal entities. These intermediaries will use this funding to establish a revolving loan fund to finance a variety of activities related to meat and poultry processing. For example, businesses may use the loans to acquire land, build or expand facilities and modernize equipment.

For more information, please visit www.rd.usda.gov/mpilp and read USDA Rural Development’s program announcement.

Building a Well-Paid, Well-Trained Meat and Poultry Processing Workforce

Vilsack also announced $25 million in investments for workforce training programs for meat and poultry processing workers with American Rescue Plan Act Section 1001 funding. The targeted funding through new and existing National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) programs is designed to create and expand upon good paying jobs that can strengthen the meatpacking industry by attracting and retaining employees.

NIFA is leading two funding opportunities:

  • Extension Risk Management Education and Sustainable Agriculture Research Education Programs: An investment of $5 million will be split equally between Extension Risk Management Education and Sustainable Agriculture Research Education programs. Work in these programs will support development of meat and poultry processing training and educational materials for place-based needs, particularly relevant to small- or medium-sized farmers and ranchers. Additionally, training local and/or regional meat and poultry workers presents a unique opportunity to address the demand from niche markets, like mobile processing units fulfilling market demand from fresh markets, on-site processing, farm-to-fork (restauranteurs), boutique grocers and others.

  • Community/Technical College Ag Workforce Training and Expanded Learning Opportunities: This Agricultural Workforce Training (AWT) investment makes available $20 million to qualified community colleges to support meat and poultry processing workforce development programs. The AWT program helps develop a workforce ready for the field as well as industry jobs in the food and agricultural sectors. By creating new workforce training programs, or expanding, improving, or renewing existing workforce training programs at community, junior, and technical colleges/institutes, this program will expand job-based, experiential learning opportunities, acquisition of industry-accepted credentials and occupational competencies for students to enable a workforce for the 21st century.

  • For more information, please visit NIFA’s Webpage and read NIFA’s agency announcement.

Charting a Comprehensive Strategy for Promoting Competition in Agricultural Markets

Today, USDA also released a new report on Promoting Competition in Agricultural Markets, as required by President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. The report details USDA’s strategy for promoting competition in agricultural markets—including not only actions and initiatives to promote competition in meat and poultry markets, but also other key agricultural sectors like fertilizer and seeds. The report also discusses the negative impacts concentration in shipping has on our food supply chain and describes USDA’s efforts to work across the Administration to use all available tools to promote competition.

The report includes the announcement of two new pro-competition initiatives—initiatives that go above and beyond those required by the Executive Order. First, USDA is announcing plans to complete a top-to-bottom review of its programs to ensure they promote competition. Second, USDA announced it will update guidance to strengthen the verification requirements for the most widely used “animal-raising claims” to ensure consumers are getting what they are paying for.

Biden-Harris Administration Commitment to Supporting American Farmers and Ranchers

These steps are pursuant to President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy and his Executive Order on America’s Supply Chains. As Co-Chair of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force and as a member of the White House Competition Council, Secretary Vilsack and USDA have brought together industry, labor and federal partners to address the short-term supply chain disruptions arising from the Administration’s strong economic recovery and to address longstanding problems with the lack of competition in our economy. Today’s announcements are among many key steps that USDA is taking to build a more resilient supply chain and better food system and to increase competition in agricultural markets. This initiative will support key supply chain infrastructure investments to expand and scale existing capacity, as well as support long-term investments in new operations. See all recent actions taken to support the American food supply chain on www.usda.gov/meat.

USDA touches the lives of all Americans each day in so many positive ways. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, USDA is transforming America’s food system with a greater focus on more resilient local and regional food production, promoting competition and fairer markets for all producers, ensuring access to safe, healthy and nutritious food in all communities, building new markets and streams of income for farmers and producers using climate-smart food and forestry practices, making historic investments in infrastructure and clean energy capabilities in rural America, and committing to equity across the Department by removing systemic barriers and building a workforce more representative of America. To learn more, visit www.usda.gov.

#

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Rural Vermont
Economic & Workforce Development Bill - RV Highlights

The Joint Fiscal Office issued the Committee of Conference Report on S. 11 - An act relating to economic and workforce development on May 11, 2022. The report nicely summarizes the bill that is still waiting for the Governors signature. Highlights are:

  • $250,000 in General Fund dollars to the Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation to establish a two-year contract for the development of the Vermont Forest Future Strategic Roadmap. The roadmap is meant to strengthen, modernize, promote, and protect the forest products sector in the State. (Section 45)

  • $387,000 in General Fund dollars to Vermont Technical College to develop a skilled meat cutter training and apprenticeship facility.

  • $1.3 million in General Fund dollars to Everyone Eats (Restaurants and Farmers Feeding the Hungry Program, Section 53e). The State funds will match Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds available for the program.

  • $2.5 million in General Fund dollars to administer a statewide forgivable loan program of $5,000 per graduate who commits to work in Vermont for two years after graduation - with additional loan forgiveness for nurses, physician assistants, nurse faculty members, and mental health professionals

  • $500,000 in ARPA SFR funds to the State Refugee Office to administer grants to refugee or New-American focused programs to support increased in-migration or retention of recent arrivals.

  • $250,000 in ARPA SFR dollars to the Vermont Professionals of Color Network for business coaching and other training for BIPOC business owners; networking; and career fairs, workshops and paid internships.

Call the Office of Governor Phil Scott if you want to leave a message for the Governor on open bill signing actions at 802 828-3333. Read more about bills that Rural Vermont covered and that also have not been signed yet here.

Rural Vermont
2022 Legislative Recap - In Brief

In the 2022 session we covered 19+ bills related to agriculture and forestry (of which the majority passed) that were either directly related to our policy priorities, that we supported, provided testimony for, or monitored for you, our constituents, members and supporters. More details, including additional issues and policy positions can be found here.

Rural Vermont Legislative Policy Priorities

These are issues we actively advocated for because they are most relevant to current Rural Vermont policy priorities.

★Addressing contamination issues with food residuals management

With an interest in securing markets for clean streams of food residuals, our farmer stakeholder group initiated the Protect Our Soils Coalition that successfully advocated for a bill (H.446) addressing increased consolidation and contamination of soil by launching a process for regulating depackaging technology as well as a study on microplastics and PFAS in food packaging and food waste.

★Just and Equitable Cannabis Cultivation

Rural VT and the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition focused on integrating our primary goals related to social and economic equity, and agricultural access into the many bills related to cannabis introduced this session.  Our primary social equity goals were not integrated into legislation, leaving the marketplace without an ongoing source of funding for the Cannabis Development Fund and no reinvestment from tax revenue in communities disproportionately harmed by the criminalization of cannabis.  We sought to shape and improve S.188 - related to outdoor cultivation and agricultural use -which in its final version offers very few gains and some losses, including: a) Agricultural status for the smallest tier of outdoor cultivation license (we advocated to include all tiers of outdoor production) - access to current use status (if already enrolled), exemptions from municipal bylaw, Act 250 and similar development laws, and from tax retail sales. b) Cultivators are given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to other cultivators (but not directly to consumers); c) Wholesalers are also given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to cultivators (which we oppose); d) no direct sales license for producers or product manufactures.

★On-Farm Slaughter Reporting Form Requirement Repeal

Rural Vermont's ask to repeal the form requirements gained 155+ supporters but did not find specific consideration by legislators.  New state restrictions released via email in January now require livestock owners to be “present” during on-farm slaughter and to organize hiring itinerant slaughterers and transport of the carcasses for further processing. Farmers testified that these restrictions impair how they engaged with and built business models around the practice during the past decade, causing some to stop managing livestock. Rural Vermont is a member of the Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, where we continue to partner to protect small farms and on-farm slaughter practices.

Bills Rural Vermont Informed

These are bills we testified on and organized for because they are relevant for the agricultural sector.

★H.466, An act relating to surface water withdrawals and interbasin transfers

The regulation, reporting, and future permitting process for surface water withdrawals and interbasin transfers in VT (H.466) was an emergent issue in 2022. Currently, those who own or have access to land directly adjacent to a surface water are allowed to withdraw “de minimis” amounts from those waters (so-called “riparian laws”). H.466 aims to develop a fairly comprehensive database to better understand how, where, and for what purposes surface water is currently being used in order to address climate change, water resource supply, and equity concerns, and to inform a future rulemaking & permitting process - similar to regulations in most other States.  The final bill was substantially influenced by farmers and farming organizations in testimony and in outreach to their representatives, and arrived at a compromise agreeable to the agricultural & environmental parties present.

★H.626, neonicotinoid pesticides and treated seeds

This bill changed substantially from its initial proposal resulting in the Agricultural Innovation Board submitting a draft rule with recommended Best Management Practices  and other protocols related to treated articles (seeds & other items treated with pesticides) to the Ag Committees by 2/15/23.  During the implementation phase of the rules, the Agency of Ag is held to “work with farmers, seed companies, and other relevant parties to ensure that farmers have access to appropriate varieties and amounts of untreated seed or treated seed that are not neonicotinoid treated article seeds.” The bill also includes a program monitoring managed pollinator health and proposing benchmarks to the General Assembly by 2024, and provides the Agency with 2 new positions.

★S.258 Senate Miscellaneous Ag Bill, including Right To Farm

S.258 expands what will be covered under the right to farm law by including a new definition of “agricultural activities” in addition to what is already protected as “farming”. The misc. agricultural amendments in S.258 also include an across the board good standing requirement for recipients of VAAFM grants; the Secretary's approval prior to transporting non-sewage waste to farms; the extension of the task force to revitalize the dairy industry into 2023;  and minor tweaks to existing programs.

Bills Rural Vermont Supported

These are bills Rural Vermont supported by amplifying existing advocacy efforts of leading organizations through our network.

★Environmental Justice Bill

S.148 initiates a series of mechanisms and working groups so that the state government facilitates meaningful participation with its constituents on issues of environmental burdens & benefits to fulfill Title XI of the Civil Rights Act.  The bill tasks certain agencies with reassessing past investments and to identify where there has not been an equitable allocation of resources at the municipal or census-block level, with the help of an environmental justice mapping tool that is now being developed. This assessment would determine which communities do not receive a proportionate amount of environmental benefits, and inform the agencies’ subsequent investments.

★BIPOC Land Access and Opportunity Bill

The creation of a diverse Land Access & Opportunity Board to promote racial and social equity in land access and property ownership passed through an amendment to S.226, the VT housing bill. The amendment aims to develop related programming in collaboration with VT Housing & Conservation Board (VHCB) and included $200K in funds and administrative support from VHCB. 

★Liability for poor workmanship at utility construction worksites

An effort to set stringent measures to prevent instances of poor workmanship at utility construction worksites where ingestion of debris can cause hardware disease or poisoning (such as at two farms in Tunbridge last year) ended up in Sec. 23a of H.515 requiring the Public Utility Commission to issue educational risk management guidance to broadband service providers. Unfortunately the bill directly states that: “It is not the intent [...] to establish new or expand existing rights, obligations, or remedies.” Guidance documents are not legally binding and are subject to change at the discretion of the issuing agency. The lack of accountability is disappointing  given the ongoing efforts to expand broadband and the associated risks that surfaced for livestock specifically.

Rural VermontCannabis, OFS, pesticides, Pesticides
2022 End of Session Legislative Recap

Bill statuses updated 6/9/22.

Rarely have we seen as many bills related to agriculture and forestry as in the 2022 session - we covered 19+ bills that were either directly related to our policy priorities, that we supported, provided testimony for, or monitored for you, our constituents, members and supporters. More importantly, these bills have not just been introduced, but the majority of them have made it through passage by the general assembly. Now they are on their way to the Governor's desk as we’re writing this end-of-session recap.

HIGHLIGHTS: 

With an interest in securing markets for clean streams of food residuals that have been separated from their packaging, our farmer stakeholder group initiated the Protect Our Soils Coalition that successfully advocated for a bill (Now H.446) that addresses the increasing consolidation and contamination of this valuable resource by launching a process for regulating depackaging technology. Regrettably, establishing meaningful agricultural access, racial justice, and economic equity in the emerging cannabis market, could not be achieved in the political landscape this biennium but our Vermont Cannabis Equity Coalition succeeded  in having farmers and other community voices heard in testimony on a number of occasions while educating legislators of their challenges and needs.  Emerging issues such as surface water regulations (H.466) were substantially affected by farmers and farming organizations in testimony and in outreach to their representatives, and arrived at a compromise agreeable to all of the agricultural and environmental parties present.

As this is also an election year, this was the last session with some of Vermont’s legislative icons. We say thank you and farewell to progressive leader Senator Anthony Pollina - who co-founded Rural Vermont and served as our very first Executive Director. With fellow Progressive Senator Chris Pearson also leaving the Senate, two of 5 seats of the Senate Agriculture Committee will be available.    Representative Carolyn Partridge is  retiring from her long term Chair position in the House Agriculture and Forestry Committee  - she was a significant supporter of raw milk and on-farm slaughter legislative improvements over the years. The House Agriculture and Forestry Committee will also likely be substantially different next year.

Bill updates:

On-Farm Slaughter Reporting Form Requirement Repeal

Why is this a Rural Vermont policy priority? We center our work on food sovereignty and have advanced the right to slaughter livestock and poultry in Vermont through legislation and grassroots organizing for over a decade. 

Advocacy priority: The goal to repeal the registration and report form requirements for farmers would have mirrored the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets (VAAFM) policy shift to more responsibly engage livestock owners in on-farm slaughter while alleviating bureaucratic burdens for farmers. New VAAFM restrictions released via email in January to registered practitioners now require livestock owners to be “present” during on-farm slaughter and to organize hiring itinerant slaughterers and transporting the carcasses for further processing themselves. Farmers testified to the fact that these restrictions impair their status quo of how they engaged and built business models around the practice during the past decade, causing some of them to stop managing livestock.

Status update: Both agriculture committees had a hard time making sense of the new requirements, hearing testimonials from farmers, itinerant slaughterers, and advocacy organizations during our Small Farm Action Day, as well as the federal delegation and Vermont agency staff. Rural Vermont's ask to repeal the form requirements gained over 155 supporters but did not find specific consideration by legislators and was not included in a miscellaneous agriculture bill.

Addressing Contamination Issues with Food Residuals Management

Bill info & status update: H.446, relating to miscellaneous natural resources and development subjects now includes language on regulating depackaging technology from the original H.501. The bill includes a moratorium on further permitting of food depackaging facilities until rules have been adopted. This will not impair the existing facility in Williston Vermont but the expansion of capacity for this new industry. Rules will need to be informed by a collaborative stakeholder process that will recommend a role for depackagers in managing food waste as well as a study on microplastics and PFAS in food packaging and food waste. H.446 was signed into law by the Governor on June 2, 2022, and is now Act 170.

Why is this a Rural Vermont policy priority? We support compost foraging as an innovative agricultural practice where farmers import clean streams of food residuals onto their farms and allow their chickens access to compost piles to forage on while producing valuable soil amendments. The “zero sort” consolidation of waste streams of food residuals creates new resource concerns that the Universal Recycling Law was intended to solve while hindering market development for small scale composters.

Advocacy priorities: The introduction and passage of a pathway for regulating depackaging technology is a success of the Protect Our Soils Coalition that Rural Vermont is a founding member of. We will continue to advocate for regulating the industry with a goal to strictly implement the source separation requirement with a strategic plan, a ban of all non-packaged, easily unpackaged and post-consumer materials from being mixed with packaged materials at depackaging facilities as well as a land application ban from slurries from depackaging facilities.

Just and Equitable Cannabis Cultivation

Why is this a Rural Vermont policy priority? As part of the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition, Rural Vermont is advocating for a cannabis economy in Vermont which is racially just, economically equitable, agriculturally accessible, and environmentally sound. This includes core principles such as:  ongoing funding for the Cannabis Development Fund (which funds the State’s social equity programming related to cannabis), a percentage of the tax revenue from cannabis be allotted to reinvestment in communities disproportionately harmed by the criminalization of cannabis, scale appropriate regulations, all outdoor production be given agricultural status, market equity and direct market access for producers, nurseries and manufacturers for the very products and crops they produce, realistic home cultivation allowances.

Bills & status update: About six bills on cannabis have been introduced this session and our coalition has  largely been focused on one remaining bill the last few weeks, S.188 - related to the outdoor cultivation of cannabis.  After a few back and forths between the House and Senate at the tail end, we are left with a bill which still offers very little agricultural or economic equity that our coalition and members directly advocated for. The current bill includes minimal gains and some losses:

  • Smallest tier of outdoor cultivation license will enjoy the same benefits of agriculture as relates to a number of things: access to current use status (if already enrolled), exemption from municipal bylaw, exemption from Act 250 and similar development laws, exemption from tax retail sales.

  • Cultivators given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to other cultivators (but not directly to consumers)

  • Wholesalers are also given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to cultivators (which we are not in support of)

The final bill also included last minute controversial language leveraged by Rep. Gannon to avoid a committee of conference on particular issues in the miscellaneous cannabis bill , H.548, including THC caps on extracts which our organizational ally the Vermont Growers Association, as well as the Cannabis Control Board, have been in opposition to.  S.188 was signed into law by the Governor on May 31, 2022, and is now Act 158.

Advocacy priorities: Ultimately, we support the agricultural status gains for small cultivators - but feel they cannot be limited to only the smallest tier - and oppose a number of aspects of this bill from the allowances for Wholesalers to the inclusion of these agricultural status gains only for land already in current use (which may disproportionately impact particular farmers, and those without current access to land currently in agriculture).  The most important Social Equity goals of our coalition - and a recommendation of the CCB (Jan. 15th Report, Slide 25) - were disappointingly not addressed by legislators:  

  • bring 20% of excise tax revenue from this market to a “reinvestment fund” to invest in the needs of communities impacted, and disproportionately impacted, by the criminalization of cannabis

  • bring 5% of the excise tax to the Cannabis Development Fund (a fund established by the legislature to fund social equity initiatives largely within the industry, but which has no source of ongoing funding).  

Overall, The primary racial justice, agricultural access, and economic equity goals and proposals we were advocating for remain absent as we see this legislative session end, and the market roll-out begin.  The Vermont Cannabis Equity Coalition will continue to advocate, organize, and educate about the importance of these priorities.  Please be in touch throughout this first year of the regulated market to share your experiences.!

H.626 - Neonicotinoid Pesticides

What is this bill about? This bill has changed substantially from its initial proposal (which included a moratorium on the use of neonicotinoid treated seeds until rules and integrated pest management practices were developed) to its current form as passed by the House and Senate.  At this point, the bill allows the Agency of Agriculture to adopt by rule Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other protocols related to treated articles (seeds and other items treated with pesticides) as recommended by the Agricultural Innovation Board (AIB) - an authority which the Agency already has.  It also requires the Agency of Agriculture, in consultation with the AIB, to adopt by rule BMPs for the use of neonicotinoid treated seeds.  It requires the Sec. of Agriculture to, “work with farmers, seed companies, and other relevant parties to ensure that farmers have access to appropriate varieties and amounts of untreated seed or treated seed that are not neonicotinoid treated article seeds”.  It also now includes a program of monitoring managed pollinator health and developing benchmarks associated with it.  It requires the Agency and AIB submit their proposed rules to the Agriculture Committees and General Assembly in 2024; and in the case of BMPs for all treated article seed (as opposed to neonics alone) to the Ag Committees by February 15, 2023.  Lastly, it provides the Agency with 2 new positions split between different functions germaine and not germane to pesticides.

Rural Vermont position: We are conflicted in relationship to this bill.  Though we did not draft or know of this bill until after the legislative session began, our goal - and those whom we’ve been working most closely with (including NOFA VT) - has been to shape it towards ending the unregulated prophylactic use of neonicotinoid treated seeds (as has been done in many parts of the world based on significant scientific evidence of their detrimental impacts on pollinator and insect health) while providing the support farmers need to implement integrated pest management protocols, and source adequate varieties and amounts of seed not treated with neonicotinoid pesticides.  It is unclear to us if this bill will get us to this point - and based on the language of the bill it largely depends on the work of the Agency of Agriculture, the Agricultural Innovation Board, and the legislature.  A number of VT beekeepers provided compelling and devastating testimony throughout this process which the legislature has not responded to with the kind of support it has with other agricultural industries in crisis; as beekeepers noted to the committees.  It is unclear if the monitoring program in this bill is supported by VT’s apiaries, and particular beekeepers we’ve been in contact with have expressed their significant disappointment and frustrations with this bill.  

Status: H.626 has been signed into law by the Governor on May 27, 2022, and is now Act 145.

H. 466 - Surface Water

What is this bill about? This bill addresses regulation, reporting, and a future permitting process for surface water withdrawals and interbasin transfers in VT.  Currently, surface water withdrawals are governed by “riparian laws” (which allow those who own or have access to land directly adjacent to a surface water to withdraw from those waters) and “de minimis” withdrawal allowances in VT (a particular amount of water allowed to be withdrawn each day based on particular data related to streamflow - but which does not account for cumulative use); yet most States have implemented regulations similar to what H.466 now proposes.  The goal of this reporting is to develop a fairly comprehensive database and understanding of how, where, and for what purposes surface water is currently being used in the State in order to  address climate change, water resource supply, and equity concerns, and to inform a future rulemaking and permitting process.  This bill may affect you if you are a farm, business, or other entity using surface water.  Important features of the final bill for the farming community:

  • “[Beginning in 2023, any] person who withdrew 10,000 gallons or more of surface water within a 24-hour period in the preceding calendar year or 150,000 gallons or more of surface water over any 30-day period in the preceding calendar year shall file a report with the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets. The report shall be made on a form provided by the Secretary and shall include all of the following information: 

(1) an estimate of the total amount of water withdrawn in the preceding calendar year; 

(2) the location of the withdrawals;

(3) the daily maximum withdrawal for each month; 

(4) the date of each daily maximum withdrawal

(5) any other information related to surface water withdrawal required by the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets.

  • An “exception” from the future permitting process for: “surface water withdrawals for irrigation for farming, livestock watering, or other uses for farming, as the term “farming” is defined in 6 20 V.S.A. § 4802”

  • Springs are no longer included in the definition of surface water in this bill.

Rural Vermont position: This bill will affect many farms and agricultural businesses in the State.  lt benefited substantially from the organizing, testimony, and expertise of the VT Vegetable and Berry Growers’ Association and the farmers and farming organizations who testified.  In particular farmers such as Justin Rich and Joseph Dutton (among others) who came out to testify many times, organized on farming listservs, and made the time needed to substantially affect this bill.  The Senate Agriculture Committee also took important steps to work with farming and environmental groups to arrive at a compromise which all parties could agree to - including Rural VT.  

Status: H.466 was signed into law by the Governor on May 24, 2022, and is now Act 135.

S.258 - Senate Miscellaneous Ag Bill, including Right To Farm

What is this bill about? S.258 expands what will be covered under the right to farm law by including a new definition of “agricultural activities” in addition to what already has been protected as “farming”. The miscellaneous agricultural amendments in S.258 also include an across the board good standing requirement for recipients of VAAFM grants; the Secretary's approval prior to transporting non-sewage waste to farms; the extension of the task force to revitalize the dairy industry into 2023;  and some minor tweaks to existing programs. 

Status: S.258 was signed into law by the Governor on June 1, 2022, and is now Act 162.

S.148 - Environmental Justice Bill

What is this bill about? Introduced by Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (D-Chittenden), S.148 will set into motion a series of mechanisms and new working groups so that the state government facilitates meaningful participation with its constituents on issues of environmental burdens and benefits in fulfillment of Title XI of the Civil Rights Act.  The goal of this piece of legislation is to ensure that no segment of the population “bear a disproportionate share of environmental burdens or be denied an equitable share of environmental benefits,” and “to provide the opportunity for the meaningful participation of all individuals, with particular attention to environmental justice focus populations, in the development, implementation, or enforcement of any law, regulation, or policy” (S.148, pgs. 8-9).  The bill tasks certain government agencies with reassessing their past investments and to identify where there has not been an equitable allocation of resources at the municipal or census-block level. This assessment would determine where there are communities that do not receive a proportionate amount of environmental benefits and would serve to inform the agencies’ subsequent investments.  Furthermore, S.148 establishes an Interagency Environmental Justice Committee as well as an Environmental Justice Advisory Council — the Interagency Committee would be composed of representatives from the agencies, including ANR and VAAFM, and the Advisory Council would include members of environmental justice populations to represent their community’s interests.  Finally, S.148 sets forth the creation of an environmental justice mapping tool which would assist in the implementation of the environmental justice policy by overlaying different criteria to help identify and depict populations that bear disproportionate environmental burdens.

Status: S. 148 was signed into law by the Governor on May 31, 2022, and is now Act 154.

More info: Much of the bill was informed through work by the R.E.J.O.I.C.E. Project—read more about that initiative here. Environmental Justice in the news on VTDigger here and here AND on VPR here.

BIPOC Land Access and Opportunity Bill

What is this bill about? H.273, An act relating to promoting racial and social equity in land access and property ownership, sought to address systemic barriers to property ownership by creating a fund and board that would, per the the bill’s language, “promote racial and social equity in land access and property ownership by creating grant programs, financial education, and other investments targeted to Vermonters who have historically suffered from discrimination and who have not had equal access to public or private economic benefits due to race, ethnicity, sex, geography, language preference, immigrant or citizen status, sexual orientation, gender identity, socioeconomic status, or disability status” (H.273 as introduced, pg. 1). While H.273 died in committee, the creation of the Land Access & Opportunity Board was included in an amendment to S.226, the VT housing bill, that passed the House last week. The Board would be composed of a diverse set of community members and representatives from racial equity organizations. The amendment included $200K in funds and administrative support by the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (Sec. 22a, p. 36 et al.). It appears that the idea of establishing a fund was tabled for the newly created board to develop related programming in collaboration with VHCB instead.

Status: S. 226 was signed into law by the Governor on June 7, 2022.

More info: Lead organizers for H.273 were Seeding Power, a collective of multi-racial organizers working on systemic changes that center BIPOC self-determination and healing relationships with land and between people. Sign-up for updates from Seeding Power here.

Liability for Poor Workmanship at Utility Construction Worksites

What is this bill about? S.166 started as an effort to set stringent measures to prevent instances of poor workmanship at utility construction worksites where ingestion of debris can cause hardware disease or poisoning like it has occured at two farms in Tunbridge Vermont last year. Instead of setting an obligatory liability of contractors for their subcontractors into statute or requiring the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to issue an order to specify requirements, what remains is Sec. 23a in H.515 (p.98) that now requires the Department of Financial Regulation in consultation with the PUC: “to provide educational risk management guidance to broadband service providers engaged in broadband construction projects to reduce the risk  of harm or injury to Vermonters, generally. It is not the intent [...] to establish new or expand existing rights, obligations, or remedies.” Guidance documents are not legally binding and subject to change at the discretion of the issuing agency. The lack of accountability measures that would establish rights, obligations and remedies is disappointing - given the ongoing efforts to expand broadband in Vermont and the associated risks that surfaced for livestock specifically. 

Status: H. 515 was signed into law by the Governor on May 27, 2022, and is now Act 139.

More info: contact the Vermont Farm Bureau who took the lead on advancing this issue here.

Universal School Meals

What is this bill about? Campaign goal was to secure funding to provide free breakfast and lunch to every student in Vermont for another year. S.100 estimated the cost at $29 million that will be secured out of the state’s close to $100 million education surplus. The passage of S. 100 secures the continuation of the program that would otherwise have ended on June 30 due to limited federal funding. Equity is the core piece of this legislation - providing all kids with free meals to reduce stigmas. 

Status: S.100 was signed into law by the Governor on May 31, 2022, and is now Act 151.

More info: Learn more about this initiative from Hunger Free Vermont here. 

H. 709 - House Miscellaneous Ag Bill

What is this bill about? H.709, An act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects, is a miscellaneous bill that includes a number of provisions related to agriculture, with major discussions surrounding the provision about accessory on-farm businesses that resulted in  striking the word “principally” from the phrase “principally produced on the farm” in 24 V.S.A. § 4412’s description of what products are allowed to be sold at an AOFB.  Other provisions in H.709 include no longer requiring that owners or lessees of small farms notify the Agency of Agriculture about changes of ownership; changes to how high-THC hemp products are dealt with; incentives for prioritizing larvicide treatments in mosquito control districts; and granting the Agency of Agriculture the ability to consider of past permit or license violations or allegation when issuing a new permit of license. Furthermore, Section 11 includes a clarification to the Act 250 definition of farming after which “small farms” do not have to certify or meet the minimal numbers of animals like “certified small farms” - an important distinction for farmers that want to diversify into compost foraging and the commercial sales of composts derived from food residuals. A tier of the new emerging VAAFM rules privileges small farms that manage poultry to commercially sell all of their composts derived from food residuals without needing to land-apply the majority of those composts. Without the clarification in law, VAAFM interpreted farmers would need to keep at least 6,250 laying hens instead of only 100 laying hens in this on-farm composting category for poultry farmers.  

Status: H.709 was signed into law by the Governor on June 2, 2022, and is now Act 174.

Clean Heat Standard Bill

What is this bill about? The Clean Heat Standard bill aimed to realize emission reduction goals of the Climate Action Plan in the thermal sector.  We reported on H.715, with concerns regarding the bill's inclusion of biofuels and natural gas as clean heat measures (revisit our blog here). In third reading, Sen. Ram Hinsdale and Pollina offered an amendment (p.54) that would have included sustainability measures to cap and sunset the eligibility of biofuels and renewable gas for clean heat credits. The Senate did not agree to these amendments but the bill still failed due to the Governor's veto and subsequent failure of the House to override the same by one vote (read VTDigger report here). 

Status: Vetoed by Governor - override failed in roll call that needed 100 of 150 (Yeas = 99, Nays = 51).

Forestry & Working Lands Bills

  • S. 234 - An act relating to changes to Act 250

    What is this bill about? This bill functionally acts as a miscellaneous bill that contains a number of updates to Act 250.  The stated purpose of S.234 is to “encourage a municipality to plan for new and infill development in the area including and immediately encircling its designated downtown center [...] in order to provide needed housing and to further support the commercial establishments in the designated center.” (S.234, pg. 1) One of Vermont’s most consequential pieces of land use and development legislation, Act 250’s permitting process, can sometimes impede necessary development — S.234 tries to remedy that by making incentives available to municipalities seeking permits for infill development in their town centers. The bill was controversial because of allowing infill development in “flood hazard areas” provided that the developer institutes a comprehensive series of flood resilience measures.  Many Vemronters remember the consequences of tropical storm Irene well and question how this approach mitigates long term flood projections that are expected to occur with Climate Change. Critics of S.234 also feel the bill does not do enough to ensure that necessary housing projects come to fruition, or even that the bill would further complicate development efforts. 

    Commentary: Initiatives like this may also be seen as a soft version of what’s in geography known as the “central places theory” - a principle that originated in Germany where it is part of the federal building code that resulted in keeping the landscape free from development by prohibiting urban sprawl. Germany’s building code instead only allows for a development project in undesignated outlying areas when it serves agricultural or forestry activities; is for the public supply of electricity, gas, telecommunications services, heat and water or for sewerage, and a very few other permissible uses (see Sec. 35 German Building Code).

    Status:  Vetoed by the Governor on June 1, 2022, because “this bill makes Act 250 even more cumbersome than it is today and it will make it harder to build the housing we desperately need.” Read the Governor’s letter to the General Assembly here. VTDigger reported here.

  • H. 566 - Vermont Forest Future

    What is this bill about? H.566 was about a new initiative through the Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund that would have served to “strengthen, promote, and protect the forest products industry of Vermont.” (H.566 as introduced, pg. 1) H.566 would have prompted the development of a Vermont Forest Future Action Plan, which would have identified funding opportunities, recommended measures to support and further develop the state’s forest enterprise workforce, and recommend ways to “maintain access by Vermont forest enterprises to forestland while maintaining the stewardship and conservation of Vermont’s forests as a whole.” (H.566, pg. 5)

    Status (updated 5.24.22): The Forest Future Strategic Roadmap passed the Senate and House through S.11, the workforce development bill (Sec 42-45 of the act, starting on pg 31: https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2022/Docs/BILLS/S-0011/S-0011%20House%20proposal%20of%20amendment%20Official.pdf). S. 11 was signed into law by the Governor on June 8.

  • H. 606 - An act relating to community resilience and biodiversity protection

    What is this bill about? This bill acknowledges the intrinsic value of biodiversity and the continuous rapid threats of extinction of one million species of plants and animals globally and locally. In consequence of the Climate Action Plan, this bill sets conservation targets of 30% of Vermont’s total land area being conserved by 2030 and 50% by 2050 through the development of a mix of ecological reserve, biodiversity conservation and natural resource management areas according to a conservation plan issued by the Secretary of Natural Resources by December 2023. 

    Status: H.606 was vetoed by the Governor on June 2, 2022, backing up the Agency of Natural Resources position stating: “the conservation goals established in H.606 are unnecessarily tied to - and unreasonably limited to - permanent protection. The Agency has repeatedly said that permanent preservation has not been, and cannot be, the state's exclusive conservation tool and this bill, intentional or not, would diminish the existing and successful conservation tools we have.” Read the Governor’s letter to the General Assembly here. VTDigger reported here.

  • H. 697 - An act relating to eligibility of reserve forestland for enrollment in the Use Value Appraisal

    What is this bill about? H.697 paves the way for landowners to enroll their reserve forestland into the Current Use program which assigns a property tax based on the forestry or agricultural production value rather than the market value.  Currently, privately-owned forestland accounts for 80% of Vermont’s total forests.  “Reserve forestland,” as defined in the bill, refers to “land that is managed for the purpose of attaining old forest values and functions in accordance with minimum acceptable standards for forest management.”  (H.697 as passed by the House, pg. 8) Landowners would need to submit a conservation management plan to the Department of Forests, Parks, & Recreation in order to apply for the Current Use Enrollment. 

    Status: H.697 was signed into law by the Governor on May 27, 2022, and is now Act 146.

  • S. 281 - An act relating to hunting coyotes with dogs

    What is this bill about? This bill intends to reduce conflicts between landowners and persons pursuing coyotes with the aid of dogs by reducing the frequency that hunters and their dogs enter onto land that is posted against hunting or where such hunting has not been authorized.

    Status: S. 281 was signed into law by the Governor on June 1, 2022, and is now Act 165.

Other Bills

  • FY23 Budget includes $1 M for development of Payment for Ecosystem Services program

    “$1,000,000 for the development of an agricultural Payment for Ecosystems Services Program to support the work of the Payment for Ecosystem Services and Soil Health Working Group (PES WG) – as authorized by 2019 Acts and Resolves No. 83, amended by 2020 Acts and Resolves No. 129 and 2021 Acts and Resolves No. 47 – to enable Payment for Ecosystem Services Program development to retain facilitation services, contract identified research needs, fund pilot program development, and deliver payments to farmers for quantified ecosystem services.”
    The PES WG continues to meet and is yet undecided about the cornerstones of a pilot program - register here and provide public comment during the May 17th mtg.

  • FY23 Budget includes $4.76 M to AAFM from ARPA funds for climate mitigation

    “$4,760,000 to the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets to provide farms in Vermont with financial assistance for the implementation of soil-based practices that improve soil quality and nutrient retention, increase crop production, minimize erosion potential, and reduce agricultural waste discharges. Assistance may take the form of programs that provide education, training, or instruction to farmers.”

  • H. 730 - An act relating to alcoholic beverages and the Department of Liquor and Lottery

    What is the bill about? A bipartisan effort to clarify the regulatory landscape for Ciders and other alcoholic beverages, H.730 includes a wide range of technical corrections. Among those, Cider will now have its own legal definition and will be taxed like beer when lower 7% ABV at 26 ½ cents per gallon and like wine when alcohol contents exceed 7% ABV.

    Status: H. 730 was signed into law by the Governor on June 7, 2022.

  • S. 285 - An act relating to health care reform initiatives, data collection, and access to home- and community-based services

    What is the bill about? This bill gives the Green Mountain Care Board $4 million+ to come up with a “patient-focused, community-inclusive plan” for setting hospital budgets. The bill falls drastically short of the reforms needed around overall healthcare costs, and provides an incremental step towards hospital budget reform.
    Status: Signed into law by the Governor on June 1, 2022. Read the signing letter here.

  • FY 23 budget includes $8.26M for VAAFM Ag Clean Water Fund Work (Both ARPA and CWF funding sources)

Rural VermontPES, OFS, cannabis, pesticides, healthcare, Healthcare, Cannabis
Legislative Update 4/28/22

Take Action! Senate Took Testimony on H. 501 - Regulating Depackaging Technology Bill

Last week, the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy (SNRE) began to take testimony on H.501 - the bill that would create a process for regulating depackaging technology. Depack technology is used by Casella to offer generators of food residuals another form of their “zero sort” services - mechanically separating food residuals from their packaging. This is in stark contrast to the “source separation requirement of the Universal Recycling law that mandates generators of food waste to separate the organics from recyclable materials and trash at the point of generation.

 Rural Vermont is part of the Protect Our Soils Coalition that advocates to uphold the source separation requirement by creating a process for regulating depackaging technology and researching the related contamination issues in a holistic manner. We do not believe that source separation is a “lofty goal,” as Casella characterizes the Universal Recycling law. 

In countries like Germany, contamination thresholds and collection bins for organics are everyday standards. Vermont can lead the way but is currently greenwashing the law that was supposed to resolve a resource concern (trash) by creating maybe even a larger one: the contamination of the soils we eat from with microplastics (including PFAS). Any management of food residuals comes with the risk of contaminants like microplastics entering soil, microorganisms, plants and eventually human bodies. The most effective way to mitigate this risk is to be very stringent about not including any packaging or utensils in organic waste - also not the compostable kinds which often still contain plastic film liners. While the scientific findings are still insufficient to suggest a contamination threshold for Vermont (due to the lack of an effective large-scale testing methodology), best practices, guidelines, strategic planning and also clear rules are tools that are also needed and that should be required now.

This is the gap H.501 seeks to close and it’s important to act now, while Casella’s permit is under review. Please revisit our call to action and reach out to SNRE now in support of passing H.501 and to consider the amendment proposals from the Protect Our Soils Coalition. Take Action Now: Support the Protect Our Soil Coalition, here!

More info: View Black Dirt Farm, ANR and UVM testimonials here; view Rural Vermont and Casella testimonials here. You can also read Rural Vermont's written testimony here. 

Latest status: SNRE is considering moving the bill through merging H.501 with the miscellaneous ANR bill, H.446, but was not presented with a new version of the bill yet.

Take Action! S. 148 - Environmental Justice Bill

In the past several weeks, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife continued to take testimony on S.148, An act relating to environmental justice in Vermont.  Much of the testimony came from representatives from the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR), the main state agency that will be tasked with implementing many of the provisions in the bill.  Maggie Gendron, Deputy Secretary of ANR, provided testimony on logistical concerns with the bill’s timeline—S.148 originally tasked ANR with making several council and committee appointments by December of this year and issuing guidance to other agencies by January 2023.  On Wednesday, April 27, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife approved an amended version of the bill, which amended the timeline to give the agency until September 15, 2023 to issue guidance. Other agencies now have until February 15, 2024 to review their past three years of spending and generate a report on it.

The bill appropriates $500,000 from the General Fund for the development of the mapping tool (including public input on said tool), as well as $200,000 for the conversion of one part-time position at ANR to full-time as well as the funding of two positions that will aid the implementation of S.148. As recommended by House Natural Resources, the bill sets up a Special Environmental Justice Fund so that council members that are not government employees can be paid up to an additional $150 on top of the $50 per diem that is allocated by state statute. But the fund has not been covered with sufficient appropriations so that lead advocates call for action, see below, to secure the financing and functioning of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council. 

Take Action Now! Support the Environmental Justice Bill (S.148) and email your Representative and/or the House Appropriations Committee to secure funding for the Environmental Justice Advisory Council at $200 per diem. Here’s a draft message:

“Dear members of the House Appropriations Committee,

I am writing to you today to ask you to include funds to secure a $200 per diem compensation for the work of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council. It is imperative that environmental justice communities have voice in the state level decisions that will impact them. This is the role of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council and it is only fair that their work be funded.

Regards,

Your Name”

Email the House Appropriations Committee members at:

More info: Read our previous write-up on S.148 here!

Latest status: On Wednesday, April 27, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife approved an amended version of the bill, which can be read here.

"Right to Farm" Now Included in S. 258

The House Committee on Agriculture and Forestry amended the miscellaneous agriculture bill of the Senate, S. 258, to include an amended version of the Right to Farm bill (S.268). This amended version leaves the conditions farmers have to meet to be protected from nuisance lawsuits unchanged by keeping the rebuttable presumption in place. In contrast to that, the Senate's original version of the bill was changing the conditions to make it easier for farmers to be protected from nuisance lawsuits. What remains is a new definition of “agricultural activities” that will be covered under the Right To Farm laws protection in addition to what is already defined as “farming.”

Rural Vermont had been reaching out through our national network of family farms (via NFFC) to learn more about the role of Right to Farm laws and heard many times that their significance is often related to protecting concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO’s) by discouraging nuisance lawsuits. In Vermont, the legislation was inspired by an agricultural runoff case into Lake Champlain that was subject to litigation. The case was ruled in favor of the neighboring plaintiffs (who had a background in farming themselves) - VTDigger reported, read the latest on that here.

Rural Vermont monitored this bill without taking a stand one way or the other. Instead, we questioned in testimony how far improvements to “Right to Farm” would be able to create incentives for the establishment of more farms, reflect a right to food, protect homesteaders (from municipal zoning for example) and how the law would shake out when neighboring farms have conflicts (for example if there’s a pesticide drift). It appears that the Right to Farm law does not provide the most effective policy mechanism to address any of these concerns well and we’re looking forward to the summer to brainstorm better ways to set new policy priorities to advance some of these issues. Please reach out if any of these subjects are important to you or if you have other ideas for future work that we should consider - info@ruralvermont.org.

More info: We had shared the new list of agricultural activities that are now included in Right To Farm in our last update - read more here. Learn more about what else is part of this miscellaneous ag bill, by browsing through the bill or revisit our brief summary here.

Latest status: The House Appropriations Committee approved of the per diem compensation for members of the continued Task Force to Revitalize the Vermont Dairy Industry that is also part of the bill. The bill is now on the way to the House floor. 

Senate Agriculture Amends H. 466 - Surface Water Bill

After many weeks of repeated testimony and amendments, and many farmers and others contacting their representatives (awesome work everyone!) - an agreement seems to have been reached. The Senate Agriculture Committee took H.466 into its hands after the Senate Natural Resource Committee, and subsequently took testimony from farmers and farm organizations (including Rural VT) on multiple occasions over the past two weeks, creating multiple drafts, before arriving at a final amended version which we expect to be voted out of Senate Agriculture this week.

Features of the amended bill:

  • An “exception” from the future permitting process for: “surface water withdrawals for irrigation for farming, livestock watering, or other uses for farming, as the term “farming” is defined in 6 20 V.S.A. § 4802”

  • Farmers meeting the registration and reporting threshold will report their use to the Agency of Agriculture, not the Agency of Natural Resources.

  • “[Any] person who withdrew 10,000 gallons or more of surface water within a 24-hour period in the preceding calendar year or 150,000 gallons or more of surface water over any 30-day period in the preceding calendar year shall file a report with the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets. The report shall be made on a form provided by the Secretary and shall include all of the following information:
    (1) an estimate of the total amount of water withdrawn in the preceding calendar year;
    (2) the location of the withdrawals;
    (3) the daily maximum withdrawal for each month;
    (4) the date of each daily maximum withdrawal
    (5) any other information related to surface water withdrawal required by the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets.”

Once the bill is through the Sen. Agriculture Committee it will continue to need support to make it through the rest of the legislative body. The VT Veg and Berry Growers Association, NOFA VT, Rural VT, the VT Farm Bureau, the VT Agency of Ag, and the Chair of the Surface Water Study Committee - Jeff Crocker, DEC Streamflow Coordinator - all support what has been discussed as the most recent version of the bill as an equitable compromise. Now’s the time to contact your reps to express your support and / or ongoing concerns!

More info: Read the most recent Draft No. 4.3 of the bill here and find our previous input on this bill here.

Latest status: The Senate Committee on Agriculture voted the bill unanimously as amended (Draft No. 4.3) out of committee this morning and the bill is on the way to the Senate floor now.

Rural Vermont and Others Express Opposition to Provisions of H. 715 - Clean Heat Standard Bill

Rural Vermont raised concerns about the Clean Heat Standard Bill, H.715, by signing on to a letter that Abbie Corse, organizers from 350VT, the White River Natural Resources Conservation District and others initiated. Areas of concern include a lack of meaningful community engagement in drafting this initiative, not realizing the Climate Action Plans Guiding Principles for a Just Transition, as well as the inclusion of biofuels and Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) in the eligible clean heat measures. Earlier, 350VT had put together a position paper on the bill to raise awareness about Vermont’s heating sector that could rely in the future primarily on biofuels, calling them out as a false solution to Climate Change. Biofuels have similar carbon emissions to fossil fuels (and thus don’t reduce emissions) and agricultural impacts include a continued reliance on fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, as well as the competing land use to sustainable food production. Similarly, RNG is mostly being produced on CAFOs and its potential for being produced within Vermont to achieve emission reduction goals is limited. 

The Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy proposes two amendments to the bill, one of which calls out “Vermont needs to transition away from its current carbon-intensive building heating practices to lower carbon alternatives” and another one that would direct the Public Utilities Commission to “hold at least four meetings using deliberative polling or another method” to “receive focused feedback from specific constituents.”

More info: read the sign-on letter here; more detail in the 350-VT position paper here.

Latest status: This morning, the bill was up for second reading on the Senate floor. Subject of the hour long debate was how the included taxes in the bill will impact low income Vermonters and seniors. In roll call, the Senate voted for the bill as amended 23-7. Tomorrow, during third reading another amendment will be presented by Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale that would address the questioned inclusion of biofuels and its global impacts in driving food prices (Sen. Hinsdale did vote yes today). Check the latest bill status here.

H. 709 - Miscellaneous Ag Bill - Heads to Senate Finance

In the past several weeks, the Senate Committee on Agriculture has taken testimony on several of the provisions listed in H.709, which is a miscellaneous agriculture bill that touches on a number of subjects. The Agriculture Committee’s only amendment to this bill was to add one section that pertains to agriculture soil mitigation fees for state airports. Previous discussions around not requiring state airports from paying agricultural soil mitigation fees had encompassed all state airports, but the amendment as recommended by the Senate Agriculture Committee applies this exception only to the Franklin County State Airport in Highgate.  

More info: read the bill as passed by the House here and Senate Ag’s amendment here. Learn more about other provisions of the bill in our previous updates here and here. 

Latest status: On April 22, 2022, the bill was voted out of Senate Agriculture and referred to the Senate Committee on Finance. 

Senate Ag Amending H. 626 - Pesticides: Treated Seeds and Neonicotinoids

Pesticides: Treated Seeds and Neonicotinoids - H.626 (as passed by the House).

Little action was taken on this bill over the past 2 weeks until this morning (April 28th) when there was some substantive conversation leading to an amendment being drafted and discussed in the near future.  This morning Sen. Pearson suggested that the bill be narrowed to focus on neonicotinoid treated seeds (as opposed to treated seeds and articles for all pesticides) based on testimony from the Agency of Agriculture (VAAFM) that it has a substantial amount of the Best Management Practices for them already in development.  Sen. Pearson’s idea was then supported by Cary Giguerre, Vermont Agency of Agriculture.  

The option currently being presented is for the committee to either send the Agency of Ag and Agriculture Innovation Board (AIB) a letter encouraging them to enact these BMPs and IPM protocols, or to require them to develop them in statute and in a particular timeframe and manner.  Cary Giguerre suggested the legislative path is feasible and agreeable, and would be better than the letter as it provides support that the VAAFM and the AIB needs to do the remaining work.  This is certainly our preference - and we are glad to see a renewed focus on neonicotinoid applications in particular; as was the original intention of the bill.

More info:  See our past updates on this issue and bill here.

Latest status:  Sen. Pearson and the Sen. Starr will be working on an amendment which will be brought to the committee as early as tomorrow, April 29th.  It is important that we take this opportunity to address neonicotinoid treated seeds in statute - and we will keep you up to date as the bill develops and need for action emerges.

Cannabis Market Rollout and Legislation

S.188, on cannabis cultivation and farming, has now passed the House Agriculture Committee and moved on to the House Ways and Means Committee.  Despite more consistent testimony from farmers, Rural VT, the VT Growers Association and the rest of the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition - the bill has not incorporated important structural changes:

  • All tiers of outdoor production be given the status of agriculture being provided to the smallest tier of cultivation in this bill

  • Direct market access for producers, product manufacturers, and consumers

  • Increased home grow allowances that bring VT closer in line to other States and reasonable horticultural practice

  • Including a Nursery License and allowing Cultivators and Nurseries to sell plants directly to consumers. 

There have however been substantial changes to the current bill based on testimony from Cary Giguerre and the VT Agency of Agriculture (VAAFM) which begins a process of moving substantive parts of the VT Hemp Program from VAAFM to the CCB (Cannabis Control Board).

The current bill includes gains sadly restricted only to the smallest tier of outdoor cultivators, and minimal gains for live plant sales for cultivators; these include:

  • Smallest tier of outdoor cultivation license will enjoy the same benefits of agriculture as relates to a number of things: access to current use status (if already enrolled), exemption from municipal bylaw, exemption from Act 250 and similar development laws, exemption from tax retail sales.

  • Cultivators given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to other cultivators (but not directly to consumers)

  • Wholesalers are also given allowance sell seeds and live plants to cultivators

Unfortunately, we do not expect action on our core agricultural and social equity advocacy this session (see past posts for more information).  It is disappointing; in particular as the primary concern expressed by legislators to our proposals (and those of the CCB’s Social Equity Sub-Committee) have been based on concerns about the lack of support from other legislators - particular members of the House.  We will continue to advocate and connect with cultivators, community members, and other cannabis licensees throughout the year - and plan on coming back for the next biennium to address action on these fundamental issues of equity and repair.

More info: As of April 25, 2022 the application window for all available tiers and types of cultivator licenses is open.  Our coalition partner VT Growers’ Association has been tracking the CCB meetings and provides links to information, forms, and more on its website.  The Cannabis Control Board also offers information, links, and support through its website.  See more information about our Social Equity and Agricultural Access advocacy in our past posts on this issue here.

Latest status: S.188 was voted out of the House Agriculture Committee and is now in House Ways and Means.

Rural Vermont