Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture Right To Farm topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee backs fines and fee protections for farmers in Right to Farm bill
Summary
Senate Bill 1033 would let agricultural operators recover attorney fees in nuisance suits they win and create escalating penalties for repeated meritless complaints to state agencies or sheriffs; the committee voted to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation.
BOISE, Idaho — Senate Bill 1033, proposed changes to Idaho’s Right to Farm Act, drew widespread industry support at a Senate Agricultural Committee hearing Thursday and was advanced to the Senate floor with a do-pass recommendation.
The bill, presented by state Sen. Todd Lakey, would add two enforcement features to the Right to Farm Act (Idaho Code, Title 22, Chapter 45): (1) allow an agricultural operator who prevails in a nuisance lawsuit to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; and (2) impose graduated penalties for repeat “meritless complaints” filed with state agencies or local law enforcement when the agricultural operation is operating lawfully under the statute.
“An Ag operator may recover their reasonable attorney's fees and costs in a nuisance lawsuit if they prevail because they were operating lawfully and in accordance with the Right to Farm Act,” Sen. Lakey told the committee. The bill defines a “meritless complaint” as one alleging a public or private nuisance when the operation complies with the Right to Farm Act. Under the proposed penalties, a second meritless complaint within two years would be an infraction carrying a $150 fine; a third within two years would be an infraction with a $300 fine; and a fourth within two years would be a misdemeanor.
Why it matters: Sponsors said the measures are designed to deter frivolous complaints and lawsuits that distract producers, burden state and local agencies, and impose legal costs on lawful operations. Lakey said the law already protects lawfully conducted agricultural operations from nuisance suits, but the bill adds “teeth” to discourage meritless filings and to educate complainants.
Industry witnesses testified in support. Samantha Parrott, executive director of the Snake River Sugar Beet Growers Association, said Idaho’s agriculture relies on protections in the Right to Farm Act and that the bill would add necessary protections for farmers and ranchers. Roger Batt of the Idaho Mint Growers Association and the Idaho Eastern Oregon Seed Association noted that growers in rapidly developing areas are receiving more confrontational complaints. Cassidy Plumb of the Idaho Honey Industry Association and David Lehman of the Idaho Agricultural Aviation Association also supported the bill; Lehman said nuisance complaints also create safety concerns for aerial applicators and described prior, related legislation aimed at false claims and aviation safety.
Several witnesses described ongoing outreach plans. Representatives said they have formed an “Ag Communicators” group that works with local media and chambers of commerce to inform new rural residents about typical agricultural operations, timing of activities and the Right to Farm protections. Tests of prior related laws, witnesses said, have reduced the number of formal claims even as public contacts rise.
Committee action: A motion to send Senate Bill 1033 to the Senate floor with a do-pass recommendation passed by voice vote; the committee did not record a roll-call tally in the transcript.
