Browse
Search
APB agenda 092700
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Agricultural Preservation Board
>
Agendas
>
2000
>
APB agenda 092700
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/10/2018 12:16:12 PM
Creation date
5/10/2018 11:54:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/27/2000
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
o <br />Page 2 <br />2. Find a way to allow farms with less than 80 qualifying acres to participate in <br />the program. Staff will review the state statutory language regarding <br />minimum acreage requirements, compare other county programs such as <br />Durham County, and report back. <br />3. Examine NCDOT provisions regarding moving farm equipment along roads <br />(speed limit). Staff will contact representatives at NCDOT regarding the <br />procedure to change speed limits in farming communities. <br />4. Pursue a farmer -to- farmer land transfer program that would be exempt from <br />the tax rollback. This may be a difficult accomplishment since it would likely <br />require special legislation. The APB can continue to promote it as an <br />incentive and see if it could be pushed forward by the legislative delegation. <br />5. Look at old ideas: <br />0 Property tax exemption for farm buildings, machinery and equipment; <br />0 Fifty- percent deferral of use -value assessed property taxes; <br />0 Abatement of property taxes on land donated as conservation easements; <br />0 Consideration of agricultural conservation easement eligibility for local, <br />state, or federal farmland preservation programs. <br />The first 3 items require special legislation and were not pursued in the past due to <br />the anticipated negative support, statewide. <br />Stancil asked for other ideas to be included in the report preparation. Strayhorn asked if other <br />states have incentives that could be investigated. Given the statutory restraints in NC, the County <br />may be limited in its ability to use programs from other states. Staff will reexamine the <br />information from Phillip Gottwals, regarding Virginia and Maryland. The idea of incentives for <br />farmland preservation and "keeping farmers farming" has been a hot topic for several years. A <br />lot of this same information has been communicated between Farmland Preservation efforts and <br />Farmland Conservation Trusts. <br />The APB asked Stancil if Agricultural Districts qualify under Governor Hunt's million acre <br />preserve program. Whitt suggested encouraging the governor's office to initiate ways to enhance <br />VAD incentives. Stancil explained that the specifics of the program are still uncertain, however, <br />the program is designed to include state preserves, wildlife refuges, natural parks and state parks, <br />which covers a lot of acreage. The APB agreed that by including active and critical farms in the <br />governor's program, VAD incentives might be improved and local VAD programs enlarged. <br />Staff to explore possibilities. Stancil encouraged the APB to focus on two or three of the more <br />accomplishable goals rather than pursuing several goals and risk not particularly accomplishing <br />any. <br />The APB discussed the idea of a two- tiered approach to VAD incentives. One tier could address <br />local issues that the BOCC could achieve in Orange County, such as simplifying the agreement <br />and working with DOT to reduce speed limits. The other tier could consist of more complicated <br />DRAFT MINUTES 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.