Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy Farmland topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee amends preserved‑farmland energy rules to allow certain rooftop systems; conservation group seeks limits
Summary
A-4688 was amended and released to clarify that certain energy systems on existing structures in exception areas would not be subject to preserved‑land size caps; Farm Bureau asked removal of SADC approval for exception-area projects while the New Jersey Conservation Foundation requested an amendment to ensure no new buildings are allowed and that only existing facilities or equipment are exempt.
The Assembly Agriculture Committee amended and released Assembly Bill 4688, which would exclude energy generated on certain rooftops and other existing structures in exception areas from size limits that apply to preserved farmland. Sponsors said the amendment corrects an earlier drafting error and would allow farms more flexibility to site rooftop panels above the current 110% cap on energy generation tied to farm use.
Ashley Kerr, state policy director for the New Jersey Farm Bureau, testified that exception areas were mistakenly included in the original restriction and that the bill would "fix the law so that exception areas did not have that same prohibition." Kerr asked for an additional amendment to remove the State Agriculture Development Committee (SADC) approval requirement for projects sited in exception areas, saying that exception areas are not part of the land SADC oversees.
Amy Hansen of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation asked the committee to add language to make clear that the bill would exempt energy generated from 'existing facilities and structures' and not permit construction of new buildings to host solar or other systems on preserved farmland. "I just am looking for 1 amendment to make it clear that, no new buildings would be built," she said.
Members debated environmental oversight and long-term planning for panel decommissioning. One member said she had a "fundamental conflict" with expanding energy footprints on preserved land and abstained from the vote; another member highlighted agrivoltaics and livestock integration as compatible with farming operations. The committee adopted amendments and released the bill.
