Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
The state's general statutes (NCGS) on Voluntary Ag Districts (VAD) and VAD boards are part <br /> of the complicating factor on the Ag Board, but I'll try to provide a short version of the situation. <br /> State law requires that if a county engages in the Voluntary Agricultural District program, it <br /> must have an Agricultural Districts Advisory Board. It also provides that each Voluntary <br /> Agricultural District in a County must have a seat on the board. (Many years ago, we expanded <br /> our board into an Agricultural Preservation Board that has the charges laid out in the statutes, <br /> but also an expanded role to provide advice on agricultural matters to the BOCC, for example.) <br /> When we first started our VAD program in the early-90's, each farm was its own VAD district. <br /> But by the early part of last decade, we began to see that farms enrolling in VAD could get <br /> numerous, and if each farm had a seat on the board we could have a board of 40-50 people or <br /> more. We saw a few other ordinances that set up a "Voluntary Agricultural District" as a <br /> geographic sub-region of the county rather than an individual farm, and we changed our <br /> ordinance to that model. Now we have seven geographic area "agricultural districts," within <br /> which we have participating farms in the VAD program. Owners of the participating farms are <br /> eligible to apply for the VAD seats on the Ag Board. The NCGS "promised" seats on the board <br /> in this manner come from one of the farm owners in the larger district. (I can provide a map of <br /> the seven VAD geographic "districts" if desired — it was part of what was approved back 10 <br /> years ago or so). <br /> Initially, these VAD seats were semi-permanent, as there was no provision in the NCGS <br /> regarding terms, but with the advisory board changes a few years ago, these now conform to <br /> our two three-year term rules. So there are no automatic or permanent seats any more. <br /> Some of our geographic VAD districts are filled by farm owners who have an enrolled farm in <br /> that geographic VAD area, but we still have some of the seven that are not filled, because we <br /> have only a few farms participating in the program within that particular VAD boundary, and/or <br /> that particular VAD area has members who served on the Ag Board for many years in that <br /> capacity and no longer wish to serve (Bob Nutter and Bob Strayhorn would be examples of <br /> this) and no other qualifying farm owner has stepped up to apply. <br /> So the Ag Board now has seven at-large members, and seven more (one slot for each of the <br /> seven "Voluntary Agricultural District " geographic regions) to be filled only by owners of <br /> participating farms in the VAD program from within that district boundary. When a new VAD <br /> farm is approved, we make the owners aware of that possibility (and if the seat for that VAD is <br /> vacant) and if they apply, they can be considered for appointment using the standard process <br /> (APB recommendation/BOCC approval). <br /> I should note that the pending APB appointments requests for this time have an unusual <br /> proposal for one of these VAD seats, as Howard McAdams term as an at-large member has <br /> expired but with no current qualifying applicant for his VAD district, the Ag Board has asked if <br /> he can "roll" into that VAD seat. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said he understood Dave Stancil's response, but felt the Board <br /> still needed more clarification. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs suggested that tonight the Board nominate for recommended <br /> positions only, and ask staff to come back with more clarification on this board. <br /> Chair McKee also suggested holding open the vacant positions. He asked the Clerk if <br /> there were applications specific to Sly/Eno or New Hope/Hillsborough. <br />