Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes Agricultural Protection Act amendment after debate over 300-foot notice and takings concerns
Summary
The House adopted amendments and passed HB36, which requires notice when new subdivisions are within 300 feet of agricultural protection areas and places that notice on plats to inform buyers. Supporters said it protects farmers from repeated complaints; critics argued the language may be overbroad or ineffective and raised takings and property-value concerns.
The Utah House on Feb. 6 passed House Bill 36, an amendment to the Agricultural Protection Act that requires notice when proposed subdivisions are within 300 feet of an agricultural protection area and specifies how that notice will be recorded.
Sponsor David Lewis outlined the bill’s core: a requirement that owners of new subdivisions provide notice on plats filed with the county recorder alerting prospective buyers that normal agricultural activities (noise, dust, fertilizer, seasonal operations) may occur. Lewis said the measure is designed to reduce future complaints and preserve agricultural operations in the face of encroaching residential development.
The House adopted a floor amendment and engaged in sustained debate over the bill’s scope. One member contended the bill could create a regulatory ‘‘taking’’ by preventing landowners from building within certain setbacks; in floor debate the member said, “I say this is a takings, and I don't want any part of it,” and moved to delete the contested language. That amendment was withdrawn and the larger bill remained intact after members discussed alternatives such as limiting the wording or changing where the notice appears.
Opponents pressed whether the required notice would have unintended effects, including reducing neighboring property values or becoming a permanent encumbrance if an agricultural protection area were later withdrawn. Supporters replied the intent is ‘‘buyer beware’’ notice placed on county plats and that the measure is not meant to change applicable health or nuisance laws; it simply documents the agricultural context.
After debate, the bill was put to a vote and carried. The House recorded the passage and sent the bill to the Senate for consideration.
The immediate effect of HB36 is procedural: counties will have a new plat-notice mechanism and developers and buyers will receive a formal warning when lots lie within 300 feet of designated agricultural areas. Additional implementation details — including exact notice language, prioritization of grants or technical assistance for farmers, or whether local ordinances will adopt related measures — were discussed but not decided on the floor.
The body voted to pass HB36; the transcript records the floor discussion, adoption of amendments and a recorded vote in favor of the measure.
