Oconee County agricultural advisory board forms preservation subcommittee and votes to seek budget for outreach and a county agricultural liaison

The Oconee County Agricultural Advisory Board on Tuesday voted to form a subcommittee to produce public education materials about farmland preservation and zoning, directed staff to request money for printing and outreach, and asked staff to request that the county include a full-time agricultural communications liaison in the upcoming budget.

The actions grew out of an extended discussion about using zoning tools, county policy and public outreach to protect working farms as development increases across the county. Board members highlighted the county comprehensive plan language that recommends supporting the South Carolina Right to Farm Act and creating county-level policies and staff to coordinate agricultural outreach.

Why it matters: Board members said development pressure and rising land prices are reducing the county’s agricultural base and making it harder for the next generation of farmers to acquire land. The board framed the short-term goal as public education — “rebranding” zoning and producing brochures, signs and other materials — and the longer-term goal as securing county support through a budgeted staff position and county policy.

What the board did - The board approved a motion to create a subcommittee (named in discussion as the “Preservation and Promotion of Agricultural Land in Oconee County” subcommittee) to draft educational materials about land-use options, zoning categories and farmland protection. Board members Kim and David McMahan volunteered to serve on the subcommittee; the group also invited other board members to join. - The board directed county staff (via a motion) to request additional funds in the advisory board’s operational budget to print and distribute outreach materials (brochures/pamphlets/signage) to inform landowners, realtors and residents about zoning options and farmland preservation tools. - The board voted to direct staff to request that the county pursue the comprehensive-plan recommendation (Strategy 8.1.1.0.10) by asking that an agricultural communications/coordination staff position be included in the budget request. Board members described the position as a liaison to farmers, Soil and Water, the Farm Service Agency and economic-development partners to coordinate outreach, education and programs. - The board voted to pursue agricultural-disclosure language in real-estate transactions — i.e., to investigate adding an agricultural-disclosure statement or checkbox in real-estate forms that would notify prospective buyers that they are purchasing property near active agricultural operations.

Discussion highlights and context Board members repeatedly emphasized public education as the first step. James (chair) summarized the board’s role in public outreach and asked staff to bring budget requests forward; James also outlined existing comp-plan strategy language recommending an agricultural liaison. David McMahan (resident, board member) and other farmers described the local economic role of agriculture and urged clearer public messaging so people moving into the county understand farming activity and related impacts.

On zoning and development tools, the board discussed the differences among zoning districts and how density standards affect development economics. Participants cited the county’s current small-area rezoning threshold (recently changed to 50 contiguous acres for small-area rezoning) and said agricultural-district density is generally 1 dwelling per acre, ag-residential typically allows half-acre lots, and the “control-free” district allows higher densities (discussants used these numbers in explaining how rezoning affects the viability of development projects).

Board members also discussed county conservation tools and the Conservation Bank, noting that the bank’s donations are limited and that the largest recurring contribution historically has come through utility relicensing donations (Duke Energy was cited as a past major donor). The board signaled interest in seeking more regular local support for the conservation bank to enable more conservation easements and land-protection transactions.

Other items the board raised for future follow-up included: working with the Oconee County Farm Center to gather event and attendance statistics for promotion; supporting FFA/student contests for county agriculture signage design; and finishing previously discussed 240-day summer contracts for ag teachers (board members asked staff to continue pursuing that with the school district).

Votes at a glance - Motion: Amend minutes (clarify event venue as Tri-County Tech/Oconee Food Council and accept minutes as amended). Outcome: approved. - Motion: Form a subcommittee to create educational materials on land preservation and promotion of agricultural land in Oconee County. Outcome: approved. Subcommittee volunteers included Kim and David McMahan. - Motion: Direct staff to request additional budget funds for printing and outreach to support the subcommittee’s materials. Outcome: approved. Specific dollar amount: not specified; board directed staff to develop an appropriate request. - Motion: Request staff to propose inclusion of an agricultural communications/coordination staff position in the county budget per comp plan Strategy 8.1.1.0.10. Outcome: approved. (Board instructed staff to draft job description/justification for budget submission.) - Motion: Pursue agricultural-disclosure language for real-estate contracts (investigate adding disclosure wording). Outcome: approved. Implementation path: board will research state examples and coordinate with Farm Bureau and local real-estate stakeholders.

What’s next Staff was directed to prepare the budget request language and bring back materials and draft job descriptions as part of the board’s budget recommendations. The subcommittee will draft outreach materials for printing and distribution at farmers markets, the farm center, libraries and community centers; the board also scheduled follow-up agenda items on forestry and food-security topics for the next meeting. A representative from the county arts, recreation and tourism office (identified in discussion as Kilcherley, director) was invited to the next meeting to discuss signage collaboration.

Attribution of roles First references use the names and roles recorded during the meeting: James (chair), David McMahan (resident, board member), Kim (board member), Tessa (board member / food council participant), Chris (county extension staff), Mark Fisher (Soil and Water, referenced), Mr. Coley (county staff), Nate (secretary). Direct quotes are not used in this summary unless a speaker and role were clearly established in the meeting record. All paraphrases reflect points raised on the record during the advisory-board discussion and motions presented at the meeting.

Ending Board members framed the approved steps as an immediate shift toward practical outreach and a longer campaign to secure county resources and policy support for working farms. Staff will return with draft budget language, and the newly formed subcommittee will begin work on printed and online outreach materials.