Committee reviews draft amendment to H941 limiting municipal regulation of farming, adds stakeholder study

Legislative Council staff walked the Agriculture, Food Resiliency, & Forestry committee through draft 3.1 of an amendment to H941, which narrows the circumstances under which municipalities may regulate farming and adds a stakeholder study on livestock conflicts.

The draft retains findings in section one and uses section two to restate that towns may not regulate farming that meets the minimum thresholds and required agricultural practices (RAPs). It also clarifies that towns may not prohibit the cultivation or use of land for growing plants for food for personal use, donation, or sale — language that specifically lists orchards and maple sap as examples.

Section three focuses on the limited regulatory powers a town would retain. For new farms on parcels smaller than 0.75 acres, not operating as of July 1, 2026, and not on conserved land, the draft allows towns to impose regulations tied to traffic safety and site design such as egress/ingress controls, parking, signage, pavement markings, functional livestock enclosures, and siting and setback requirements. The provision also clarifies that towns cannot prohibit farming that otherwise qualifies under RAPs.

Committee members debated whether the bill should protect ornamental plant cultivation. The Environment Committee requested adding ornamental plants; committee members asked whether that protection could unintentionally shield invasive ornamentals. Staff suggested adding a statutory cross-reference to the definition of “ornamental plant” (6 V.S.A. § 1101) to clarify scope rather than attempting a narrower definition in the amendment.

Another recurring issue was whether the draft's language should say 'poultry' or 'chickens.' The committee agreed to revise the draft to use the title-six definition of poultry (domesticated birds) to capture more than just chickens, and to include a cross-reference to the relevant definition. Members also discussed the interaction between municipal limits on bird counts and eligibility for RAPs: RAP coverage for animals typically requires both an animal-count threshold (examples discussed included 100 birds) and acreage thresholds (examples discussed included four continuous acres), and Schedule F filing and sales thresholds (noted in discussion as $2,000 of sales) can affect whether a property is governed by RAPs.

Section four establishes a stakeholder group convened by the Secretary of Agriculture to examine conflicts between landowners involving agricultural livestock in densely populated villages, towns, or cities. Required members include agricultural organizations, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, Vermont Farm to Plate, and experts in local and regional planning and zoning administration. The Secretary must submit a report of findings and recommendations, including any suggested statutory changes or rulemaking, to relevant legislative committees by Jan. 31, 2027.

Committee members asked the stakeholder group to develop a working definition of 'densely populated' for the study’s purposes. Staff repeatedly noted the draft is designed primarily to make recommendations; the draft does not itself change existing law beyond clarifying municipal regulatory limits and study requirements. Staff committed to three edits requested by the committee: replace 'chickens' with 'poultry' (using the statutory definition), add a cross-reference for the ornamental-plant definition, and include a forestry definition; staff will circulate the revised draft back to the committee.

The committee did not take a formal floor vote on the amendment during this meeting; members indicated broad support for the edits and planned to move the draft forward after the changes are made. The committee adjourned to head to the floor and discussed scheduling a brief lunchtime check-in with the Forest Products Association.