Putnam County committee pre-files resolutions to add 10 parcels to agricultural district

The Putnam County Physical Services Committee on June 15 voted to pre-file resolutions to include 10 parcels in the county Agricultural District, following recommendations from the Putnam County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board (AFPB).

Nicole Scott, chairwoman of the AFPB, told the committee the board reviewed each application for agricultural viability and recommended inclusion for parcels ranging from a 1.19-acre nursery to a 104.53-acre livestock operation. "The AFPB has reviewed the parcels to see if they are viable for agriculture," Scott said, summarizing the board's evaluations.

Why it matters: inclusion in an Agricultural District is an overlay that does not change local zoning but provides procedural protections for farms, including a defense in nuisance actions and the option to request an opinion or assistance from New York State Agriculture and Markets, officials said. Legislative Counsel Heather Abissi cited Ag & Markets Law section 303‑D (AFPB role) and section 305‑B (notification and local land‑use considerations) as governing authorities.

Key parcels and debate: notable recommendations included: - The Ferguson's Farm, Town of Kent (401 Dixon Rd), 7 acres: principal operations listed as apiary and breeding livestock. Legislator Sayegh, who visited the farm, said she was impressed and noted the farm is certified to ship poultry interstate. - Crooked Fence Farm, parcels in the Towns of Kent (104.53 acres) and Carmel (7.66 acres): focused on pork production and converting woodland to pasture; the AFPB recommended inclusion for both parcels. - Teakettle Farm, Mahopac (4.37 acres): a diversified operation producing vegetables, fruit, eggs, poultry, dairy and meat livestock. - High Point Equestrian, Patterson (75 acres): an equine boarding facility; a wetlands violation discussed earlier in the meeting was clarified as relating to this parcel and described as resolved with the town. - Clara Patunga Farm, Putnam Valley (1.7 acres): a startup orchard that generated the most discussion. Some legislators, including Legislator Sayegh, said they saw limited active production on site and noted the parcel has applied before. Legislative Counsel Abissi said a startup orchard is considered within the first five years of establishment and therefore may meet inclusion criteria.

Officials and AFPB members repeatedly urged the Legislature to base decisions on the AFPB's viability review. Cassandra Roth, chair of the Soil & Water Conservation District Board and an AFPB member, said the board spent considerable time on applications and encouraged legislators to rely on that expertise.

Committee action and next steps: for each recommended parcel, Chairman Gouldman moved to pre-file the necessary resolution; motions were seconded (by Legislator Regan or Legislator Sayegh) and recorded as "all in favor." Those pre-filed resolutions will be considered by the full Legislature at a later meeting.

The committee's discussion made two practical points clear: inclusion in the Ag District does not alter a parcel’s underlying zoning and towns retain permitting authority for activities such as farm stands or structural changes; however, inclusion adds a layer of procedural protection and the ability to seek state-level review.

The committee adjourned after completing the agenda; the resolution filings and any final votes will occur at the full Legislature meeting.