A legislative committee debated details of a proposal to create an “Agriculture, Food Resiliency & Forestry” board and fund to support farmers, loggers and related businesses after disasters and severe weather, including whether to include a placeholder appropriation and how to staff and administer the program.

Speaker 1, Committee member, said the agency would have a role in administering the fund and recommended considering an appropriation to ensure the board and agency have capacity to carry out duties. Committee members discussed whether to put a specific dollar amount in statute now or to create the fund vehicle and wait for appropriations.

Members referenced an earlier draft that included $7.5 million for the program; Speaker 2, Committee member, and others said they would prefer the fund be able to receive money if appropriations or federal disaster funds become available. “I’d love to see it funded at 7.5,” said Speaker 2, Committee member, while others urged a more flexible approach that would allow the statute to create the account and await funding decisions.

The committee discussed administrative needs. Several members suggested the statute could authorize up to a half‑time equivalent position or allow the fund to pay for administrative support when money is available. Speaker 1 proposed asking the agency whether it could allocate existing staff versus creating a new position and recommended consulting the appropriations committee for funding options.

Panelists debated program design details: whether enrollment should be by prior registration so contact information and farm data are prepopulated; whether registration should be required for eligibility or merely listed as something the board could consider; and how to structure outreach to reach small producers, loggers and specialty producers (for example, egg producers or sugar bush owners). The committee discussed lessons from prior state application portals and urged consultation with agency staff who built similar COVID and BGAP applications to avoid time‑out and module issues.

Members also considered whether the board should be empowered to treat a declared disaster — by the federal government, the governor, the secretary or the board itself — as the trigger for focused awards to avoid an overwhelming number of small claims after widespread events. Speaker 1 said current draft language allows the secretary to verify events based on NOAA or site visits and that the board could be explicitly given authority to declare a disaster for program purposes.

Next steps: committee members agreed to consult agency staff about staffing, application design and registration options and to bring more specific draft language back to the committee, with some members favoring an explicit appropriation placeholder and others preferring statutory authorization with funding to follow.