Farmers urge lawmakers to reject right-to-farm changes; seek clarification on Act 250 and farm events

Kate Seer, a farmer in Randolph Center, told the House Committee on Agriculture that she opposes proposed changes to Vermont’s right-to-farm laws and asked members to "vote down the proposed changes to Vermont's right to farm." Seer described living near an industrial confined animal feeding operation and said runoff from a nearby genetically modified cornfield contaminated a spring-fed pond that she used for livestock. "We tested the water ... it is contaminated with herbicides due to runoff from this cornfield," she said, and warned that the proposed language could leave neighbors "powerless to do anything about it."

A Barnard farmer and cooperative member (testifying as a cooperative representative) said a law that took effect last summer created ambiguity that allowed the Natural Resources Board to assert jurisdiction over on-farm structures used for events, escalating to Act 250 review. The speaker described receiving a letter from the Natural Resources Board claiming that a pole barn used primarily for music and community meals could fall under Act 250 jurisdiction and said the resulting legal interaction has cost the cooperative "thousands of dollars collectively for legal fees." He asked lawmakers to clarify that multiuse structures primarily used for farming should remain covered by the agricultural exemption.

Committee staff and members acknowledged the concern and said they are drafting clarifying language. A committee representative said the clarification will be part of a miscellaneous bill under consideration and that committee staff hope to have language available prior to a markup: "We should have that bill hopefully passed out on this committee on Wednesday. That should give us enough time to get through the building, and we'll see where it goes."

Why it matters: Farmers and cooperative operators told the committee that ambiguity in the right-to-farm and Act 250 interaction risks exposing small and diversified farms to permit requirements and legal costs that could threaten their operations. Testimony combined pollution and nuisance concerns with worries about land-use jurisdiction and event-related activities on family farms.

Details and context: Seer quantified her operation as about 100 acres of certified organic pasture and said she and her husband operate two Airbnbs to make mortgage and tax payments. The Barnard cooperative speaker said their operation has about 70 head of grass-fed beef and that the board’s letter has required legal responses. Committee staff indicated they are working with stakeholders and plan to circulate draft language for comment. No formal committee vote or amendment was taken during the session.