NOFA Vermont, farmers press committee for $20 million Farm Security Fund and $500,000 for market programs

NOFA Vermont policy director Maddie Kempner and four farmers told the Agriculture Committee that recent extreme weather has left many farms financially vulnerable and asked the committee to establish a Farm Security Fund and restore state support for market-access programs.

The request was framed as a budget and program ask: Maddie Kempner said the FY2026 request is a one-time appropriation of $20,000,000 to seed a Farm Security Fund, and Joanna Doran of NOFA Vermont asked for $500,000 to reinstate Crop Cash Plus and FarmShare supports that direct state funds to low-income customers and farmers.

The proposal aims to provide rapid, equitable recovery aid after disasters. “The proposed Farm Security Fund isn't just about emergency response. It's an investment in Vermont's future,” said Jacob Pausner, a fourth‑generation farmer who also serves on the board of the Vermont Sugarmakers Association. Presenters said federal programs and private fundraising have not met the need: speakers described long waits for FSA and other aid and uneven coverage from charity drives.

Farmers described recent losses and how current programs fell short. Justin Rich, president of the Vermont Vegetable Growers Association and operator of Burghock Farm in Huntington, said his operation lost most value in specialty crops in the July 10, 2024 storm and that crop insurance payouts have been small relative to documented losses: “we received a $9,800 payout on over $200,000 in documented crop loss,” he said, and added that premiums and administrative work made the program a poor hedge for specialty growers.

Bill Chitzy, who said his Hardwick farm was severely eroded in the 2023–24 floods and is relocating to Greensboro, described infrastructure loss and called for boots‑on‑the‑ground help to assess damage. Jacob Pausner said NOFA and community fundraisers provided emergency relief—“NOFA raised about $1,700,000 in 2023 and about $350,000 in 2024,” he said—but warned that relying on private donations and nonprofit drives produces uneven and untimely recovery.

Program details and budget context were discussed. Kempner told the committee that the bill language ties future appropriations to the average of losses over the previous three years, and that the FY2026 request is a one‑time $20,000,000. Committee members noted the governor’s recommendation includes $5,000,000 for BGAP (a business grant program) and $2,000,000 in revolving loans, which presenters said would be insufficient for the needs described.

Joanna Doran asked the committee to restore and expand two market and food‑access programs. She said Crop Cash doubles SNAP (3SquaresVT) purchasing power at farmers markets, and that the 2023 expansion, Crop Cash Plus, allowed SNAP recipients to use matching benefits on a wider set of SNAP‑eligible products. Crop Cash Plus and FarmShare were paused in 2024 for lack of funding; NOFA received a one‑time $300,000 in FY2025 that helped shorten FarmShare wait lists, she said. Doran told the committee a $500,000 appropriation would allow NOFA to run Crop Cash Plus again and draw down federal funds to benefit low‑income Vermonters and farmers.

Committee members asked follow‑up questions about the proposed calculation, the form the fund would take, and next steps. Kempner said the FY2026 money would likely initially live inside an existing program such as BGAP until a special fund is formally established. Senator Major was mentioned as someone who will take lead conversations with appropriations on the measure.

The presentations did not produce a committee vote. Speakers asked the committee to advance the proposal to appropriations and to consider a permanent, state‑budgeted mechanism for rapid farm disaster recovery and market supports.

The committee heard multiple on‑the‑ground examples of how the gaps affected small, specialty and maple producers and requested additional materials and follow‑up from NOFA and agency staff.

Next steps: presenters asked the committee to discuss the proposal with appropriations; committee members indicated they would follow up with appropriations staff and legislators to consider funding levels and statutory design.