Agenda - 02-09-2006-9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT MEETING SUMMARY 14 AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION BOARD January 12, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT: Tony Kleese, Louise Tate, Mari Trosclair, Elizabeth Walters, Whit Morrow, Marty Mandell, James and Patricia Wynn. MEMBERS ABSENT: Vickie Brown, Don Johnson STAFF: Environment & Resource Conservation Director David Stancil, Preservation Planner Tina Moon; Noah Ranells Agricultural Economic Specialist and Carol Melton, ERCD staff ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER Chair Kleese called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA Wynn requested the addition on one item regarding ways to solicit input from younger farmers. ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 30, 2005 Kleese entertained a motion for approval of the November meeting minutes. MOTION: Wynn motioned approval of November 30, 2005 meeting minutes, Seconded by Walters. VOTE: Unanimous approval. ITEM #4: ITEMS FOR DECISION a. Recommendation -Fickle Creek Farm Voluntary Agricultural District Application Stancil reviewed the application materials and explained the remaining steps in the approval process. Members noted that the application was complete and that it satisfied all the criteria required by the Voluntary Farmland Protection Ordinance (VFPO). Kleese entertained a motion for a recommendation. MOTION: Walters motioned approval to recommend to the County Commissioners that Fickle Creek Farm be designated part of the Voluntary Agricultural District program. Seconded by Tate.. VOTE: Unanimously approved. Members thanked Ranells for his interest in the VAD program. ITEM #5: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION a, Potential Letter re: Enhanced VADs (EVADs) Stancil reviewed that at a previous meeting APB members had discussed a list of the most desirable incentives for a farm family.. The two key items that came up were tax reductions and relief from the legal fees associated with frivolous nuisance suits.. The board asked to see the original language for Nouse Bill 607, the new legislation regarding voluntary agricultural district programs, because the bill changed somewhat with regards to the way that farmers handled liability issues. The APB discussed the idea of contacting Representative Faison, who apparently was involved in the language changes. The APB voiced concern over this issue and felt that if a farmer was sued, particularly on nuisance charges, and the courts ruled that the suit was frivolous the farmer's attorney fees should be paid by the plaintiff. (The language that was removed spoke to this topic.) Staff was instructed to get the original bill language and to draft a letter of concerns for the board to look at in February. Walters and Mandell agreed to work with staff on this task. b, Issue Paper- Farm Liability Threats from Genetically-Modified and Genetically-Engineered SeedslCrops At a previous meeting the APB discussed The Future of Food video and the possible impact of this topic on local farmers. A small group, including some members of the APB, previewed the video before the holidays before the video was formally released,° the film is now available for purchase. The film discusses issues associated with the use of genetically engineered/modified crops. Mandell proposed that the APB provide information about the OPAFT Ianoary l2.ZWB AO~m+llumi Pmsenallon BOaN Mecll,q Summary Page 1 of3