Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Good morning. We're on to our second group today. We're running up two minutes behind, but I apologize for that. We're going have some conversations with NOFA Vermont. We have some folks in the room, and we're going to start out with Maddie Kippmann. How are you?

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: I'm great. It's nice to see you all. Thanks so much for having us. Yes. Just as a reminder for the record, my name is Maddie Kippmann. Policy and Organizing Director at Nootkoe, Vermont Northeast Organic Farming Association. I really want to thank you, Chair Ingalls, and all the committee members for having us in today. I'll just say at the top, I'm joined by my colleagues Joanna Doran and Jessica Lucas, who are right here. We are excited to share some of Genova's priorities with you, and I do have some slides to share, so I'd love to just take a second to get those out of my mind. Great. I also just want to start out by reminding and speaking a little bit about this vision that I believe we all share where thriving farms are at the heart of all of our communities here in Vermont. I love to always include this graphic in every presentation that I do because it shows that we know that when we get food and farming right, we get so much else right. And we know that viable farms and secure farmers are generate so many other good things for our communities. And the great thing is also that Vermonters really understand this. NOFA Vermont currently has just under 2,500 members who share our vision for thriving farms and agricultural communities that support the long term well-being of the earth and all its people. I also wanted to just take a quick minute to briefly remind you about all of the work we do that you don't regularly get to see, and that's not as visible to you on a daily basis that supports this vision. Just to remind you, we have a strong team of folks providing direct services to farmers, including farm business planning, farm to farmer education programs and mentorship, and technical assistance. Our food access team, which Joanna helps to lead, is focused on making sure that every Vermonter has access to healthy, locally grown food, both directly from farmers and institutions like schools and hospitals. As you know, we also work with our members, our partner organizations, and all of you to advocate for policy and advance policy change and other system change that supports our communities' needs. We also host lots of educational and community building events through the year, including our forty fourth annual winter conference, which is coming up next month. And then finally, our certification program Vermont Organic Farmers, which was founded by farmers in 1985 and currently certifies over 700 farmers and producers around the state, and over 155,000 acres of farmland. And on that note, I'm happy to share hot off the presses our end of year statistics from 2025 that give you a picture of the current state and economic impact of organic farms and producers in the state. So, like I said, over 155,000 acres of land is certified organic by BOF, and total gross sales from our farms and processors are over $458,000,000 last year. I always like to point out on this stats list, as you can see, we have really grown in terms of the number of maple operations in particular that we certify, and they're now by far the highest number of certified producers in the state, which means that in addition to Farmland, a lot of our forests are being managed in a way that is supporting wildlife habitat and viable farms and lots of other great benefits. I also really want to take a moment to formally invite all of you to our Winter Conference this year. Do offer free registration for legislators, so I want to say that because we know that it's asking another day of you away from your homes and your families during the busy legislative session, and we think and hope that it's worth your while. It's the largest agricultural gathering in the state every year, and it's a great option to meet farmers and talk with other people who are as enthusiastic about Vermont Farming as you all. So we'd love to see you there. And then next, on to the business part. We have an overview of our legislative priorities for this year. Joanna is going to say a little bit more about this first one in just a minute, but we are once again asking for $500,000 in ongoing funding for our local food security programs, Crop Cash, Crop Cash Plus, and Farm Share. And as you know, we are asking the legislators to pass and fund S60, the Farm and Forestry Operations Security Special Fund, and mostly we want to thank you all for your support of that bill so far this year and last session. As you probably remember, Noco Vermont is a long standing partner in the Farm to School network, and Farm to School work is a long standing and important part of our mission as an organization. And we're asking in that vein for level based funding for the local foods incentive grants and Farm to School Childhood grants again this year. And I want to just let you know you'll be hearing a lot more from Kayla Strong, who leads our Farm to School work, and lots of others next Tuesday during Farm to School Awareness Day. So, I'm looking forward to coming on that.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Yeah, coming in on Tuesday morning, think we're going to start a little bit earlier K. At fifteen, I think, on Tuesday.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: What? Is this nine? It is

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Nine till 09:25.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Oh, nine to nine. Okay.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I think that is nine. Yeah. She's a regular night.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Depress. Yeah. Yeah. I believe there's also a press conference that day that spoke with some universal meals, so hopefully, I'll be able to. And then the fourth thing on our list is that we really want to encourage you to learn about and support Bridges Health, which provides direct health care support to over 1,000 farm workers on farms across all 14 counties of Vermont, as well as supporting families in access to food and other basic needs. Bridges to Health is an essential resource to ensure that those working on Vermont's farms can access the care that they need and other critical resources. That program is facing serious funding challenges and uncertainty largely as a result of some federal changes, which threatens the health and future of the agricultural workforce that sustains our farms. So we really want to encourage you to invite people from McAusland, who runs the migrant health programs currently based out of UVM Extension, including Bridges, to come in and share more about

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: the work that they do.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Next, No for Vermont, as you know, I think, is a core partner on the Food Security Roadmap Coalition, and we continue to be so excited about the work to move to a future where all Vermonters have the food that they need and want, and we hope that you'll spend some time in the coming weeks hearing more about our policy priorities from the whole coalition. And then lastly, North Vermont is part of a relatively newly formed and also broad coalition of farmers and farming organizations who hope to see the long standing exemption for agriculture from municipal regulation restored following Vermont Supreme Court decision back in May. We are really concerned about the implications of that decision for farmers and farming in the state, and we encourage you to spend time hearing more from us and our partners and the farmers directly impacted by that decision. So that's sort of a little preview for you, and if it's okay with you Mr. Chair, I'd love to have Joanna come in and share more about that.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Just a little bit more before we do that. Sure. Well, and you and I had the opportunity to talk the other day, which was nice and helpful, just to bring the committee up. It's just kind of what we kind of went through a little bit of it. Where are you where where have your discussions been with the LCP as far as and that? Have you been have been have they been partners with you as far as consulting, and you guys are getting your voices heard about what your feelings are about the Supreme Court decision?

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Yeah. We have met with a lot of partner organizations. Rural Vermont, I'll try to remember them all, just so you know, how broad this coalition is working together and that's in alignment. Rural Vermont Caroline's in the room today, the Connecticut River Farmers Watershed Alliance, the Vermont Dairy Producers Alliance, AgriMark the Land Access and Opportunity Board, the Vermont Association of Conservation Districts, and there are many more, but we've all been meeting collectively with both the Agency of Agriculture and the League of Cities and Towns. As a group, we've only met as the advocacy organizations once with VLCT, and that was a really productive and great initial conversation to sort of understand where they are and where we are, and it seems like there is some distance between what they want to see and what we want to see, but not maybe as much as we would have anticipated, and it seems like we were set up to have a good working relationship with them. But like I said, we really want to come back in and spend some time getting into those details with you all, and especially want to make sure that you hear directly from farmers who are going be impacted. More to come, certainly.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I think that decision came as a shock to everyone. I mean, don't want to be more obvious and state that, but I just did. I think it's, of all things, it's very, very important that we all understand that we're all in this together and that we can differ on what we believe farming is or not, but after a decision like that, it comes right in and strips away a lot of what we thought our rights were. It's concerning and it's very, very important that we all support one another and we appreciate that you guys are firmly behind that. The committee has talked about S-sixty a lot. We're firmly behind all that. We're going to have a real tough time, And we worked from the beginning. I I think we we went we went hard on that. We pushed the dollars hard as far as where it is. I think we started out at 7,000,000, and then it was 5,000,000, 3,000,000, 2,000,000, 1,000,000, and nothing, which is discouraging. And I think that this summer will show you anything, is that we're gonna have wide swings in weather. Who would have thought that we would have had the drought conditions that we found out yesterday were about $15,900,000 worth of damage or, yeah, harm card to promote farmers. So we will we will grab all that bill when it comes back across and do all that we can do to put some funding to that. I think it's gonna be a a very, very big challenge. But again, I appreciate your guys' support on all what you've done as far as with that. We and, yeah, we have Carolyn coming next, which will be nice. We have as I said, Tuesday, have Farm to School coming in. All of it is important to you, it's important to us. Let's keep chatting. Sounds great.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: You said that was powerful. We don't have a

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: I'm gonna send it to you.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I'm so sorry.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: I can actually probably do it while while I probably do it while I

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: I'm speaking but with I'll send it to you. Thank you. Yes.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Thank you. You're welcome.

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: Thank you, Chair Ingalls and community members for having us. As a refresher, I'm Joanna Doran, the Director of Markets and NOFA Food Access Director at NOFA Vermont, and I'm Winooski, be here asking for ongoing funding of $500,000 for these food security programs that you are familiar with, Prop Pash, Prop Pash Plus, and Farm Share. So, I'm going to just give a quick overview of these programs and then a little bit of an update on what the funding has done so far this past year and share, you know, how impactful it's been. So, as a refresher, PropCash doubles Three Squares Vermont or SNAP benefits for fruits and vegetables purchased at Vermont Farmer's Ricketts. This program is federally funded, but requires a local match, and so state funding will allow us, has allowed us, and will continue to allow us to to meet increased demand and to maximize the amount of federal funding that we could draw down. Crop Cash Plus expands the Crop Cash program to meat, dairy, eggs, bread, and more, extending this program's impact to all agricultural producers at farmers markets. State funding is necessary to continue this program. It's not possible without state funding, and hundreds more farmers benefit through it, and thousands of low income Vermonters can purchase more local fresh food with this program as well. And then, finally, the Farm Share program has subsidized its CSA shares for low income Vermonters for over thirty years and pays for 25 to 75% of the cost of a community supported agriculture share. State funding will allow us to support up to 700 families in purchasing a consistent supply of locally grown food throughout the year.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: So,

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: with significant support from this committee, thank you so much for your support in FY '26, we've been able to maintain increased food security through these programs with the FY '26 appropriation of $450,000 We have been able to grow program levels of these programs to help meet the demand, shorten wait lists, and bring more funds to local farms and ensure more households can afford a consistent supply of local fresh food. More specifically, here's what the impact has done so far this year in 2025. So through the Farm Share program in 2025, we have supported over five thirty households, which is more than 14 fourteen fifty individuals to purchase a CSA share that they wouldn't be able to otherwise. In the 2025 season, Crop Cash has been on track to invest $200,000 in over 40 summer and 20 winter farmers markets and farm stands and to draw over 10,500 snap transactions at farmers markets. Crop Cache Plus has also provided a significant economic boost to farmers. By expanding the Crop Cache program beyond produce, we've doubled the number of farmers that could benefit from this program and receive income. It's looking like around $77,000 have been spent between July and December on the Crop Cash Plus program at farmers' organs. And that's money going directly into the pockets of local producers and money that has supported folks in buying nutritious food that they wouldn't have been able to otherwise. How

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: do you track the families that are using the funds? As you said, five seventy families or 42 families? Five thirty. So,

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: with the Farm Share program, it's an application based program, and we keep track of, we ask folks how many people are in their household, so we know how many people are served through the program, and we know how many households we support through that program. With Crop Cash and Crop Cash Plus, it's a little bit trickier because we don't track the unique individuals. So, that's one reason I shared the number of snap transactions over 10,000, because we know how many times people have gone to the farmers market and used the program, but we don't necessarily know if it's the same person going every week, or one person going five times in a year, one person going once. So, that's a little bit harder to track the individuals, hope that answers the question. Okay, so a little bit more about the economic impact. I think this is really, This is stark to me. So, the blue this graph over the last several years is showing how much money NOFA has brought in, including state funding and federal funding, to support these programs. And then, the green is additional revenue that farmers are getting leveraged through these programs. So, the green includes things like the SNAP dollars that are being spent because of the Crop Cash program bringing folks into farmers markets. It's also the additional money that beyond what NOFA is contributing to the farm share discount, it's what the participants are also contributing. And so when NOFA and the state invest in NOFA's programs, this is the impact that it can leverage. It can bring so much more economic impact to our local farmers that wouldn't necessarily be possible without that support from from these programs. And over the last two years of receiving the state funding program, these programs have leveraged over $1,600,000 in local food purchases via additional community and participant contributions like I was sharing and SNAP dollars spent at Farmers Market. This even alone, collectively, we're on track to direct over $850,000 in revenue to Vermont farms through the Crop Cash and Crop Cash Flots and Farm Trip programs. These programs are supports that people count on every week to buy food. Crop Cash, Crop Cash Plus, and Farm Share are critical baseline programs that we must continue. And the state of Vermont has shown that it can be a leader in investing in these vital food security programs, which have been pivotal during critical moments and meet the needs of our community members. The state can count on this investment being used for the best possible outcome for Vermonters, and I think we've seen that already. I'm just gonna I'm not gonna read these books, but these are some examples of both customers and a farmer of how impactful these programs have been for them. Food security can and should be achieved for everyone who lives in Vermont, and at the same time, we can support our farmers and ensure that they get the profit that they need for food, for growing the food that we all need and want. Crop cash, crop cash plus and Farm Share help us achieve both of these goals. The City of Vermont can make policy choices that can ensure food security for everyone who lives here, while ensuring that our farmers can profit from the food from growing the food that we need. We support NOFA Vermont's request for $500,000 in ongoing funding to support Vermont farm viability and food security by sustaining these proven programs, Crop Cash, Crop Cash Refunds, and Farm Share. Thank you for your time, and I can take questions before passing it back.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Is there one to one match as far as what you're getting for federal dollars with the farm with the both of those two programs?

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: With crop cash there is that matching amount it's about one to one. Farm Share does not receive any federal funding and again the crop cash plus program is only possible via state funding because it's beyond the scope of federal funding.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Yep. And how much of that, out of the 500 goes into capital grant?

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: Sort of depends on demand and use of, use between the programs, but around $100,000 And then

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: the feds cover another, so it's $200,000 actually gets For the direct incentives.

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: So there's also some administrative costs that we put in for.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Just as a handout specifically on these programs, you want to take on the path of patients.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: You. We're glad to we were glad last year to be able to fund those. Think we're back through that. We're a little bit of a battle. But Yeah. We'll you We're gonna try to honor your request. I think it's a good program. I think it does a lot of good. Not just putting words out there because they're easy to say, but I truly believe that it does support the local economy. It does support you know, we know we know this, that buying local isn't always the cheapest, but it does so many other things for the communities as far as people putting their hands in the soil and raising our product, and if we can do our part as far as to help these farmers be successful, then we're all about that.

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: I appreciate that, sir.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Thanks. Thank you. Anything else? Anything else that you guys

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: I have a little more to say.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Absolutely. Yes. Come on in.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Some of it won't be entirely new to you, but as I mentioned earlier, really, really want to formally thank you for your fun support of S60. I also have a handout on that, which I know you're very familiar, but it's fresh and it's on nice, crisp paper. I just got you from there. Just a little bit more on S60 because we have some new numbers to share with you and a couple of other updates that you all should know. You know, Nobat is a part of a broad Polish pet farmer organization working to pass S60. The list of organizations who are understanding and supporting the need for S60 has only continued to grow, and now includes all those that you see here on the screen. Oh, sorry. I'm walking through slides over here, like, like, you can see them. Okay. Just a second. Alright. So I'm trying to get back into this.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: There we go.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: This is the formal thank

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: you that I was reading to show up

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: to you over here. This is a list of organizations who have now signed on and are actively supporting S-sixty, which is really great to see that community growing. More both agricultural organizations and also food security organizations are really understanding and stepping up to support S60, has been wonderful to see. And as you know, the farming community has now been through three consecutive years of catastrophic weather from untime across to flooding, and this past year, the drought that was so devastating to farmers all across the state, including in many of your districts. Farmers cannot continue to bear the cost of these disasters without substantial support from the state. As you know, federal programs like crop insurance really don't serve the needs of the vast majority of Vermont farms, and the federal relief that we have been promised is incredibly outrageously slow to arrive, unfortunately. In total, the losses reported by farmers and forestry operations over the past three years now add up to just over $94,000,000, and these are these are really substantial losses. It's easy to look at a number like that and think of it as a hypothetical, but these are real losses that farmers are facing and that their businesses just really can't continue to sustain, and that threatened viability of all types of sales agriculture in our state. Within this number is that the agency of our acres throughout DAPT 4 shows a total of just over 18,000,000 of estimated losses as of this morning. So, am a little bit curious, I won't highlight that number because if you go to the live dashboard on their website, which is excellent by the way, there is a discrepancy between what they've presented and what's there now, and I wonder if that's just since the deadline of when the survey closed. That does show a total of just over 18,000,000 And again, I don't like to just talk about the numbers because that number represents millions in lost crops or severely reduced yields, animals, and in some cases, whole herds sold, millions of gallons of water hauled, hours and hours of farmers' time spent hauling it. It represents yet another season of farmers pivoting, adapting, and figuring it out, and another season of economic, physical, and emotional strength for the people producing our food, providing jobs, and contributing so much to our safety economy and our communities. We encourage and trust that you'll take the time to also hear directly from farmers who can share their personal experience and what support they need from the state to continue farming as extreme weather conditions persist. And in the meantime, we have some quotes, which are also on the right side of that handout that I have surround, from farmers here on the screen about what the Farm Security Fund would mean for their future. So this is a quote from Owen in Derby. He said, Extreme weather events can have devastating effects on my business. The Farm Security Fund would help give me a better sense security as a farm business owner and fill major gaps in the safety net for us farmers. It also would mean that we farmers would feel better supported by the folks we elect to represent just in government. Jesse Orwell Lazy Dog Farm said Vermont's farms need the Farm Security Fund for extremely challenging seasons like this one. Farmers plan to prepare for yearly fluctuations, but can't control the weather, nor a year in which we produce only half our usual crops. Passing and funding this bill will provide crucial support for farmers having to purchase feed we normally wouldn't have to. Senator Effernan, thank you again for taking the time to visit Jesse's farm back in the fall, and hearing directly from him and Stephanie about some of the effects they've been facing. And then finally, Meg Emmons, who's a maple producer down at Woodstock, said farms are the backbone of Vermont's culture, heritage, and economy. They contribute in so many ways to food security, land stewardship, tourism, jobs, the list is endless. We need to support farmers through the Farm Security Fund to ensure farms can weather this changing climate and thrive as they protect their working needs. I know I'm not telling you anything that you all don't know and have already supported, I just want to lift up some of the things that farmers have been saying to us.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I think it's very important that of all people that you have on the list that we're looking at, and it's broad, and it's good to see some added people on there, that they let their voices be heard to the appropriations committee. That's where it's going to happen. That's where it's all going to happen. You've already sold us.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Yeah, absolutely. I do understand And we will do that work to make sure that they can be heard by the appropriations committees for sure.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Thank you.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Thank you. And then lastly, I already mentioned this, so I don't really think I need to reiterate, but just want to let you know that we're in alignment with lots of other organizations on this issue of the municipal exemption, and we'd love to come back and speak with you more about that in the future and bring some farmers in to speak about it too.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Yeah. We're talking that on a certain different front and and with some other partners. So yeah. So, hopefully, we can yeah. We we we've got some we got meetings, upon meetings. So, yeah, hopefully hopefully, we can get that back to where we think it ought to be.

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: Thank you so much.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Oh, and then lastly, here are the folks from note that you can expect to see in the State House from time to time. So you have three of us here in the room, and then you might also see Grace Odell, our Executive Director, and Kayla Schrum, who's our, that's an old title, she's now our Farm to School Program Director, who'll be in the building here and there too. That's all, thank you so much again, and if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Pretty, Well said, thanks. Thank so much. Thank very much. You.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Linda, I'll make sure you have all of this shortly.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I think we should just, if everybody's good, just move right on? Yeah, okay. Next we have Earl Vermont, familiar faces that have

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: been in here Caroline, for

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: sorry. If everybody's gonna line a name, maybe so. I'm forgetting for that. So

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Senator, can I come up with Caroline?

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Yeah. Absolutely. Come on.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: What's that? Yeah. We can try my last name.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Oh, I've got it down.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: The first one's using pornography.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Usually, crackers is the last one. You're getting that since they're great.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: It's gotten more funny to tell. Yeah.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah. Welcome. Good morning, dear committee. Thank you so much for inviting us in. For the record, Caroline Sherman Gordon, legislative director of World War One. I wish you all a happy New Year. And I will admit I was a little confused yesterday. I had reached out to Linda, applauding the committee that you so early had Steven Heuer in to to get get briefed on the municipal exemption issue and had shared with her the list of the contact information of all our coalition members with the goal to have us all in and ideally present as a coalition on the municipal exemption. Then then you invited me in to speak today, but I was first assuming you wanted maybe here, like, setting the stage on that issue from our side, but I see on the agenda it's more about general overview of our priorities for the year, so I asked Graham to come as well. So

[Unidentified Committee Member]: if that's The the

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: time is yours, so whatever you folks want to, let us be aware of. It's your time.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: All right, maybe I will just say very briefly about municipal exemption. Maddie already mentioned, but it was really made an effort to address the Supreme Court ruling. As it came out May 30, we immediately started working with the Farm Bureau and the Vermont Agency of Agriculture to address this. There was this short period where the legislation came back after they already had a jury and we were actually thinking, Would it be possible to just fix this on the fly? That attempt obviously had failed. But then over the last six months, as Fred mentioned, we really have grown to include and grow this diverse group of the most significant agricultural food system stakeholders in Vermont, including Will Vermont, the Farm Bureau, Alger MarCabot, the Monterrey Producers Alliance, NOVA Vermont, Vermont Association of Conservation District, the Connecticut River Watershed Farmers Alliance, Farm to Plate, and the Land Access Opportunity Board and a couple others as well that have been a little less active but engaged. Over this time, we have come to an alignment on a legislative proposal, and we definitely would like to present and discuss that with you as a coalition. I also want to share that we have been meeting with the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Market several times over that same period of time. And while we found a lot of alignment in our talking points, we left disappointed in our ability to come forward with a shared legislative proposal with them. But out of sheer respect for their effort to mitigate the differences between the different stakeholders, Maybe it would make sense for your committee to hear from their proposal first and then invite us in as a whole coalition. Maybe it would even make sense to do a joint joint hearing. I I know the house committee already started getting briefed on the issue as well by legislative council on Tuesday. So I think that's what a coalition would prefer, to show up as a group and really demonstrate our strength as a group. So I think that's what we want. I can already say that also considering the guidance the Supreme Court has offered that what we want to come forward with is, a, to reinstate premenstrual exemption as it was under Stutzent in 1987, and b) to also establish a right to grow food free from municipal exemption so that growing food cannot be prohibited through zoning. And I will add, this is a talking point of move among so far, but we know from experience that there's all these private homeowner associations as well that actually already prohibit growing food at times, and so that potentially the right to

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: grow food would have to extend to that as well.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: You've heard me say it as an audience member in the room, but this is your time with rural Vermont, and I think it's very, very important to say that it's very important that we all stay together as farmers. We're going to have difference of opinions about what we believe farming is on all sides, but when you have a decision like this, it just comes right in and cuts through the heart of everything. If we thought what we knew and and believed. It's very, very important that all voices are on the same place and doing everything they can do to protect all of us. And so I we I'm very appreciative of to hear not only Milton's, but Robert Mont's position in the fight that you're putting forward. Think it's very, very important that we stay together. Thank you for that.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah. And thanks for recognizing that. I think all of us in the coalition are recognizing that. That is has not happened since I'm in my position since 2019, that there has been an issue where we have come together with all the ever relevant agricultural stakeholder member led stakeholder groups so that this is quite unique and shows how relevant this is to our communities. Yeah. And with that, we shared with you our course of action, and I'm appreciating also Graham being flexible to jump in with me today and certainly want to run you through what our priorities are for the year. I will just, before I pass it on to Graham, I also really want to appreciate especially this committee and working with us and our members last year on the Accessory on Farm business issue where we tried to clarify statutorily that the farming exemption in Act 50 applies also to multi use of farming structures, and I will say we dropped that as a legislative priority for this year simply because we've, as you remember, last year we said let's hold off from advancing this legislatively now because of the tremendous pushback and opposition from environmental communities and so on on that issue. And given the power imbalance we felt on that issue last year, we feel like it would be a little ludicrous to advance both of those issues when we open up the municipal exemption at the same time. And also considering that the members affected, Paper Farm specifically and the PCP Collective, are still on the legal path to challenge the legal opinion that was presented to them. And we believe, given the legal analysis at hand, that they might even have better chances that way.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I can tell you that we haven't dropped that. I think I went to Senator Major for us to put some attention to that. We have a lot of, we laid out a very heavy schedule for us and that I don't think that we're going to get to all of that, but as things get presented to us and across our committee, we have a lot of ranging issues that we want and that is probably in our top 10. I think it's very, very important for us to allow farmers to diversify and to use common sense. And so I don't know

[Unidentified Committee Member]: if And I I know it's not on the front burner, but if okay, we may use you still as a resource.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: You know what? Our thinking on this, and I will explain more, is that, you know, we've actually consulted a stakeholder group over the summer on this as well, and why we did that is because of if we're gonna half this out and try to come to a proposal and discussion here, we fear we rather risk losing ground rather than gaining ground on that issue. That's why it is really important for us before we open that discussion here that we actually have a member carried proposal. So, that's why we organized with members to come to a proposal. We were unable to come to a shared proposal in the short amount of time that we had between sessions. We told some of our members that we know there was another Supreme Court decision just of that, where there is I know that you guys are requested by the Vermont Supreme Courts to work on this as well. We certainly said to some of our members, if if you're gonna approach the legislature independently with your ideas, obviously, that's your choice. But at this time, we don't have a member carried proposal for

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: this issue.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: And with that, it's also not my ability as legislative director to make specific recommendations on decisions for you.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Well, I think you kind of said it in there a little bit, that we certainly It even gets even deeper for us, impacting some other areas of government that I think that we owe it to the State of Vermont to keep our lead on that. I think as that subject comes to us in a lot of different venues that we're going to keep on pursuing it, just to let you know. It's because you hear about it, if you hear about it, then you understand.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Certainly we'll do our best to engage our members as you progress, that you certainly respond to what you lead on.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I think if look in our court, I'm sorry, Graham Yunkett, Policy director Rutland. If you look in this court section, you'll see it come down since she was still there under organizing. And that sort of reiterates kind point to me. We just didn't have a clear policy proposal. So it wasn't something we we thought we had come with that too, but something you're still very much involved in the community with. It's not an issue we don't care about. I think that's what I just really wanna underline. It's just an issue we didn't have consensus from the community around how to deal with it. And for us, as a small organization, five part time staff, we really need to figure out what our capacity was to carry, which issue is at this time. And like Jani said, we'd be happy to bring people in to speak to this issue. That that that's more and I apologize for not being that's more Yeah. Of a resource I want is people to testify and and be able to do that, and and I apologize for not being speaking up now. You're you're you're right on.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: That issue certainly is is much more complex than just the clarification around Maltese.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Well, I'll I'll go a little bit.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Sorry. Deep south.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Maddie, you know, spoke to farmers to relief funding. I don't think I needed so much time as senator Ingalls said. You all know where that is. You've been extremely supportive of this, and I appreciate that. We all appreciate that. All the farmers really appreciate that. We understand that the issue on speed is still difficult. We are, we can make this very hard choice this year, I think, in future years as well. You just heard from James Pepper. So we still are members of Vermont Finance Equity Coalition. Our priorities have largely not changed. We have been in I I briefly spoke with you, senator Ingalls, the other day when I was here. We've spoken with senator Rahm and others and certainly consistently with the members of the CCB. James Pepper has visited the Cultivator Working Group, Rockbrokers Association hosts a number of times. I wanted something that he said both of those times to get very interesting to note. The CCB is a 100% behind direct sales. He says they always have been. And I told him that was little hard to stomach, and so, yes last year, he came up and said it was unfeasible for him to do it. But I just wanna say, like, there's that was what the CCB told these cultivators and has been telling us. They're going surveys of small cultivators. The number one concern of them is not a lot of direct sales. Every sale they make, one of those direct sales, is a 100% more profits per sale. We I'll have to come back with the figures, but we'll be in touch with the mocking and executive coalition. But the figures we have seen is that more than a 160 small producers dropped out of the market this year and or other licensees. So we have sort of a different understanding of the health of the market and who returns and succeeding. And we agree with much of what you said and senator Ingalls that we just like to see some fairness for producers as we can within federal law to ensure that people can succeed at these businesses, that they're supported in doing.

[Joanna Doran (Director of Markets & Food Access, NOFA Vermont)]: And I and I

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: think that's very important. I don't know, Graham, you and I might have talked in the hallway or about it, but I've said it before, it is discouraging to see people drop out of the business, but I think that there's a lot of people that have gotten into the business knowing what the rules were and expecting just because they were a grower that they were gonna be successful and not understanding that it took a good business plan. And as James just said, a very tough business. A very, very tough business. So it is discouraging to see people get out of it, but I think our role is going to be exactly kind of what you touched upon and what I'm really trying to be clear about is giving farmers in Vermont opportunity. Again, I just had a hallway talk with the Lieutenant Governor about it, and I said, I just really think it's very important that these farmers have the same opportunity as people growing carrots or cannabis. And just being able to have that clear plan with that. I'm going to be very careful about getting into the cannabis control board's regulatory structure. I really don't think that that is our business, but we need to know what that structure is so that we can advise farmers as we go forward about, Hey, you gotta be careful about this, careful about that, because once it comes out of the field, it is another entity that's gonna be looking at looking at you and if not us.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yes. Yes. And then it it was interesting to listen to some of your conversation around, and I'm sure Jeff, if we could fill up and speak this more, but the rural Vermont has been involved in it happened since thousand nine, working with both hemp and others to bring that program, which Kyle referenced, to Vermont with the state based program, and then the different federal law changes. Now it's a USDA program, right, like you said. And it is a challenging position for farmers. I had a young farmer come to me, let's say, a year ago. He said, you know, I I've traveled around the country. I've been a farmer in different places. I'm not I have a I was able to get land trust. I cannot I cannot produce cannabis legally in this land. I also agree with the USDA, so I can't produce cannabis. But I've been offered a deal by an Oregon manufacturer to grow a particular one pound. It's such a pretty decent rate. And I think that's a tough position for Vermont farmers to be in, in that they might not want to support the market, especially if it's going towards some of these synthetic products we know have not been tested on human health if otherwise, and send them to this commodity market where see, what he really wants to do is just to be able to produce a high value product here for this market. So there's a really tough dynamic that the farms are putting, right, between the federal laws and the state laws and what they can or can't produce. I was trying to figure out what crops can I grow that I know how to grow well to make make a living? So I appreciate you just understanding the complicated nature of all.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: So if you if I may, and I don't wanna get you off topic, but we got a little bit of time. Sure. How and maybe you know, maybe you don't know, and I think you might have been in the room when I when I said it, how realistic am I being as far as to when we have hemp coming from out of state into the market and basically they're transporting THC. How realistic am I to say, listen. We're gonna give you a three year ramp up, but from this point forward, we want the hemp that's gonna be produced here to be grown in a state.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Have an interstate market as opposed to inter Right. And that's all dependent on this federal what happens federally. Right. You know, I'd I'd say that I I'm not sure I'm in the best to speak to that. I'd be curious to hear from legislative legislative council about legal issues moving up or from Steven Collier at the agency because well, to some extent, has to do with the setting between agency of agriculture and their federal funding, what they can or can't put their hands on for the farmer's oil products. And I was hearing you and James talk about, like, the is it aguins in the fields that becomes a regulated product once it's in the market? I do not. I'm not a legal background. I'm not a player.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: No. I'm not neither. I'm just trying to prove I'm just trying to create more of a market for Vermont farmers. And the harm that was caused last time were, you know, every field was hemp, and then we even just had just thousands and thousands and thousands of pounds of hemp and people believing they had contracts. Right. The harm that they the people that got hurt, and I don't want that to happen again. No. And but and I think it put a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Fair enough. And and and harmed and harmed the industry some because of the people that just didn't get paid. But if we could create that market here within the state on a safe and secure way with real contract with Vermont people, I think that would open up opportunity. So kinda where I'm going at with that a little bit. That that'd be really

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I think it'd be helpful for me to speak with Jeffrey. You know, he's in touch with more of these producers. They are, like they are sort of the the association is in touch with most of the cannabis producers in state and hemp producers. We have this relationship with many, but I haven't had a conversation with him to understand more how he understands that positionality to be like. I will say that there are some practices such as you you mentioned some of those contracts those days, and I was we talked to many farms who lost a lot. Right. They had contracts that were smart, honored. People thought it was lost, savings, investments, a year or or of work.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: And that's yeah. And that's dangerous. And I and, again, I yeah. I'm not gonna hijack your time. Yep. I appreciate you taking the time. I think that the future of Vermont farming, and again, some of the positions that you guys have taken earlier about the size and the scope of work farming has become in Vermont, I think that if regard to be successful, it needs to be the small farmers that create the growth. I think that as these other bigger farmers expand, we're actually not gaining farmers, we're probably gaining product, but we're actually losing that number of farmers. I think that whatever we can do to protect the small farmers and to let them I've been struck over and over and over again about how somebody can open up their kitchen and have a farm kitchen and make a living producing 12 loaves of bread a day, or whatever that number was, or on and on and on. We're very sympathetic to find ways to create new markets in the state of Vermont, because I think that's what grows agriculture. It isn't the large scale people that are coming in, it's the small farmer trying to figure out how they can make a living here that is that's gonna that's gonna carry the day.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: The shape of sentiments. Along those lines, what I was supposed to get is that there are some practices that are emerging which are hurting most small producers in cannabis, such as exclusivity contracts that retailers are trying to work with producers to sign be it if I take your product, you can't sell it to anyone within x mile radius of my store. We've heard a lot recently about the vertical integration of retail. So retailers getting manufacturing and their cultivation licenses, and then they're only selling their

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: own product or working with

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: stores who are also vertically integrated. There's more and more really challenging issues from those power players who have merged those models, especially because there is no producers can't sell their product. No. They need to sell through a retailer or all set. So maybe I'll leave the canvas there. I will say that beyond my initial critique of some of what was said, I think he's the right in a lot of ways. You know, that when services are offered on the underground market that are not offered in the aboveground market, we're gonna see what the scubbies have shown. So that's 30 per the states have captured about 30% in the cannabis market in every state. It's percent still there. It's not it's not

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I'm sorry. Yeah. I'm trying to that's that's important. Yeah.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I don't again, I don't have the the study with me, but Jeffrey Pizzatello from Montgomery says she will come we studied Polish and we'll bring more of the numbers ourselves. But some of studies we've been looking at have shown that across the country, these the people who have commissioned to do these studies have shown that about, on average, 30% of the cannabis market in every state is the legal market. But 70% of the market is still underground. In our part of our point, in what we've heard from people is that consumers want to go to producers. They don't necessarily want to go to this is a consumer driven, a lot of stuff. It's also, you know, underground producers who still don't see a market for themselves to be above ground. But just to say that there is reform that we think can be done, which can bring that bring the money to the state, bring those economic opportunity. We're talking about for small producers to capture that. We can see more of that study, you when we all come in, but those are some of the numbers that really ring in our heads as, like, really critical because it feels to us that part of the issue is that the regulations that are in place are creating some of the problems we're trying to prevent. And we can speak more to this.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I think I I just saw him just fully clear. So you're you're saying that that still 70% is is still a week?

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: The sales. The sales. So happen isn't happening or in these states, and Vermont was one the ones that's Yeah. Vermont.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: So what's drive I mean, I you may not know that because I'm just talking data in particular. Do we know what's driving that? Because it would seem that more people want to go the legal route rather than the illegal route. I I I just you know, I'm a bit think this would be a

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: better I think it'd be great for our coalition. If I'm in a Jeffrey, you can speak more to some of this stuff because he's more involved in that world than we are at twelve month. But some of things I've heard, you know

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Would you facilitate that?

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yes. I can't decide. Can send, like, an email about things and, you

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: know, hopefully, that's Yeah. These guys would

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: be important for us. Yes. There's a number of of of factors that we can discuss. And I will say that, you know, CCB is issuing a report, and we're actually in alignment with a lot of what they put in the report. So when they do have a chance to present that to you, think we will see a lot more alignment there that that we sometimes have disagreements over. I think how we see the whole picture and what we see as the immediate some of the immediate solutions that could be most helpful. And what you know, how feasible something is with the the resources people. We spoke last year. I think, you know, we're I spoke in the beginning here about us just being a time a time for for finances for the state. We know there's gonna be a lot of programs that might be cut. That's a choice to have to be made. Society placed a disagreement. I know we we had some seriousness last year, but we also see opportunities for revenue generation. And we're working with the oh, I can't think of the name. There's the folks with the Fair Share Coalition and Economic Justice Coalition talk about what some of those progressive revenue solutions can look like, which would not be regressive in terms of taxing the working class, growing more revenue for the state. We're not gonna necessarily be making up $400,000,000. We're we're not trying to get the impression we're saying tax the rich out of this. But we are saying even equitable taxation system. You know, a lot of people benefiting from the tax cuts in the in the big vehicle bill are gonna average average persons get $56,000 back. Also, those income brackets at a time when all of our state offers are gonna be extremely low. So we've we are gonna be part of that coalition supporting these more progressives on rep regeneration opportunities for the state. And we can we'd happy to bring people into moving to be all good about that. Genomic committees are preventing as well. Maybe Karen, you want speak to PFAS?

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yes. On PFAS, the legislature has done a lot of progress over the last couple of years, phase out PFAS products from consumer products. For Vermont, it's been, over the years, always a priority to also stress that we need to set a policy to ban the land application of sewage sludge, which is still happening on some legacy sites in the state. And Vermont was leading on introducing a house bill last year, H303, that was considered in the House Environment Committee, and we progressed there. To our knowledge, DE SEED testified that they are testing, I think, five chemicals out of 1,500 or so prepost chemicals for residue in the soil and that what they find was not concerning to them so that they wouldn't jump on setting a policy. But we are like, well, you know, if you have ubiquitous pollution problem and you only look at five out of 1,500 chemicals, then maybe there's more to discover there and maybe there's a compromise where we grandfather in the legacy sites but set a policy that we won't ever expand that practice, especially since there's also new research that The Guardian had just reported on how in drinking water you find these chemicals now which is resulting in Alzheimer's and fetus death and such issues. So it's tremendous. Just because we're addressing the consumer products, have not reached the end of the road on that issue. This is also an agricultural issue, and we would be greatly in support of addressing that. Obviously, Maine has had their experience with their farmers really being devastated going out of business because of the soil contaminants that were found there for a environment that we have been visiting Maine a couple years back and met those farms. We still have a relationship with those farmers. They would also want to be open to sharing their story here if that's of interest. Likewise, if there were, for us at Roval Model, it would be a priority if we were to address that, that we also set in place a policy that ever were there contentment levels found on farmers, that we need to have a safety net in place before that's happening so that if those farmers need to pull all their product up the market, need to cease operation, that they're being made whole from the start and that we're not sitting here after they've gone through hell to then address this as a little more proactive as this is obviously a big issue already. So so that's that. We we we don't know how high the chances are to maybe launch that in the senate. We were trying to talk to senators in next door in the environment about this, educate them about the issue, maybe them taking the lead, and then, you know, seeing after maybe the set if the senate would have interest in this, if it if if the house then would, you know, progress it as well. Maybe this is an issue we'd have to come back next year more prepared, but this is an issue we would not let go. Obviously, there's also complicated issues on where the sewage flush would have to go and all that, so there's a lot to unpack there as well, but still, putting it in the soil and contributing to these chemicals ending up in our drinking water doesn't seem to be the path that anyone is recommending. Yeah, that's PFAS issue. We would be happy to come into

[Unidentified Committee Member]: this committee. I'm sorry for you to follow-up with PFAS. My understanding is the federal government is rolling back some of the guidelines for Ukraine. Can you talk to them and what you know about that and how it would affect Vermont?

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: I would have to prepare for that.

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: Okay.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: I would be happy to do that. But, yeah, if the committee would be interested in diving into that issue, we'd love to prepare testing.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: More because, you know, I would wanna know if we do anything, will it be superseded by the federal government and are we spinning our wheels to to do anything when we we don't necessarily have jurisdiction?

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: And I think the agency of agriculture is taking a position on that. I think maybe you saw the same news Yes. Program that I did, and Steve was speaking about it as well. And I I think I think, Carolina, again, I don't know that it's on our plate as far as to get it in, but I think that's gonna be one of the issues that ends up crossing our plate this year. You know, that we're willing to, you know, at least talk with the agency of agriculture and, you their position on it. It sounds like it's well, I don't wanna speak for them because I've only gone off the one the news source that I saw, but probably some of the rangers saw the same one. Anyways, I think at some point in time, that discussion will cross our tables. And as you've said, we're not probably prepared to really make too much statement on it because we haven't had any testimony on it. Right. Bet I bet that we will.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Right. And I and maybe even your question, senator Major, would be a DC specific question that would get really the official rundown of the jurisdictional opportunity here or implications there, so that you get the official and correct answer. That might be the best recommendation to really get from them everything on the issue, maybe even how that went off the house or should that be Yeah.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I think it may work with Commissioning Healthcare. Know, there's not there's not an active bill that I'm aware of, but this is one of the biggest issues other than the municipal extension. It's not as we've been talking about over the last time. I mean, there's really a lot of issues, but as you all know, I'm sure you've heard that people are facing extreme premium rate increases in the farming community in in Vermont and otherwise disproportionate effect of farmers who depend on these programs and subsidies more than most demographics of workers. So you can be happy to get you information about that.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I think, it is concerning. I mean, when you hear, that the, Vermonters pocketbooks are affected by 19.8%, I think, is the number one as far as what they have for health care. Hampshire's 4%, and the national average is 7.9%. I think it I I think it is all concerning. And I don't know if that's something that we're gonna be able to tackle in here, but I think as legislators, we're gonna have a say on that eventually. I think it's concerning.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Well, maybe then, given that it sounds like you all are very much aware of the issue and empathetic to it, Part of it was if that does come up and we need people there, the farming community Yep. Can come in and speak We to worked with NOFA and Vermont Legal Aid over the last in December and November to offer three different webinars for the farming community. One on enrolling, enrollment, one on Medicare, and then one on just taxes. But we've been doing our best to support the community as we can, supporting a conversation with our federal delegation, and we can bring that to you as well. We feel like it's really helpful to push you into these directions. We're still waiting to see what comes up from a legislative perspective and from folks who are more health care experts than us, and what we can do to support the the vehicles that emerge. So we we may very well we may become a focus of ours because it is such a huge overwhelming issue for folks.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah. You may regional planning at all?

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Can I bring up one thing? Yeah. Especially while we saw Maddie in the room. As I said, we have a very wide, large subject matter that as it crosses our table this year that we're willing to take on. One of the things that is a concern of ours is the protection of farmland. We've got the solar folks coming in, and we have the windmill folks coming in. We have the housing advocates coming in, which is you know, they're all important. But they like to they seem to like to go and come up with schemes as far as to take in our great farmland. And I don't believe that there's any less acreage of farmland that's not in production today than there was when there was a lot more farms because there's a need for that. These farm fields have been around for two hundred years or whatever they have been because of their ability to grow. We're going be looking at legislation at some point in time to figure out how we protect farmlands. We have, and the thought process on that, is that as farmers, as farming has evolved in The States, especially the dairy aspect of it, used to pasture land, pasture land, pasture land. Well, there's a reason why they pastured it, they didn't crop it, it's because the land wasn't good enough to be farm fields. There's plenty of those lands available now just across the fence from a great farm field that are really not being used anymore because they don't pasture cows anymore. We would like to see legislation to where these developers, no matter what name that they are, go for that type of land versus taking up our great ag land. That is a fight that we're willing to have and find partners for as we move forward. I understand that it costs more money to build a home on a rugged piece of land versus a nice flat one, but those fields need to be protected at all costs is our thought process on that. That's a battle that we would join with you with that sometime.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: I'm actually also going to meet with Representative Byrd for lunch today who is introducing similar legislation in the House.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I've been working on some of that as well as far as on a committee bill with some of that, so undecided. Anyways, yes, that is a battle that Lee would join with you.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah, and I think that ties into one of our policy implementation priorities where we're engaging in the regional planning effort. Obviously, Exelon 81 is well underway. It was passed 2024. That land use law overhauled Act two fifty, setting new policies and a planning framework for housing development while also aiming to protect natural resources but kind of outside of the village and urban centers. And so what we've been doing, we're trying over the last legislative session, put an emphasis on that there's actually a mandate for the regional planning commissions to also issue future land use maps for agriculture. And we've been trying to emphasize that those land use maps should really be progressing into really indicating where do we actually need agricultural land given that we have significant data from the Inland feeding the Inland, how many more additional acres we need in production to even just produce 30% of the food that population of Vermont is consuming. And so it's in the hundreds of thousands. Could go east wide, but the the projection also shows that because of the heavy investment Vermont and also Maine has made in their local food systems, that those two states are projected to carry the lion's share of this, actually, regional food production, not just our in state production. So, we have no set policy and, legal tools to actually get to that and any, protect farmland from development and also farmers onto the land, make that land affordable to farming. So at the at the at this stage, as act one eighty one is being implemented, what we did is and I'm a I'm a commissioner of the Two Rivers Albuquerque Regional Planning Commission is to share and educate our folks that they should engage with their regional planning commissions. And as these future land use maps are drafted and asked for specific maps that indicate exactly where do you want agriculture to take place because that's actually not even happening at all even though that's the mandate. What's happening is

[Maddie Kippmann (Policy & Organizing Director, NOFA Vermont)]: that they say this is

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: all rural and this is all forest and agriculture, but they are not looking at where are all the agricultural soils, where are we losing agricultural soils, where should we protect them? Obviously, regional plants are not legally enforceable. That is the guidelines after which US legislature and the towns as municipalities craft their ordinances to make these more legally binding protections, but there's not this visioning process. The the data we have is not being used to make those recommendations from a planning level, and that's that's not in the public interest.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Well, think they raised a very good point with that, Caroline, in that the land use, all of that is It going just seems to me that it is being used to find ways to restrict more than to do the planes. I know we had talked last year about exactly what you're talking about, identifying these maps and trying to come up with something. I wasn't a supporter of that legislation that passed, but now that it's passed, would seem to be that other than just finding ways to restrict development or whatever. I don't want to make a political point here that's not allowed in this room, but it would be helpful if they used what what path to be helpful in identifying exactly what you just said.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: If I may, I think this issue, like, access to farmland, amongst nationally, in Vermont, it's it's the number one issue for young farmers, beginner farmers, and marginalized farmers, being able to access land. Mhmm. And as you said, one big speaker talking with NOFA and Land Access Opportunity Board, all these organizations, American Farmland Trust has some really amazing data about where what type of development is actually eating up Vermont's farmland and across the country. New England the New England data is amazing, but what we've been seeing is that there are plans that plan for increasing housing. There are plans that call for increasing conservation of wild lands, etcetera. We do not have a plan for food security, for affordable farmland, for our farming future. And very land, as you said, the very land that's most appropriate for housing is the very land that's most appropriate for agriculture. And Ryan Hatch has come in and pointed out. Well, only because it's only because It's the most easy to develop.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Exact and it's and it's cheaper for them. Absolutely. And so yeah. And those same just but do you wanna

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: say that thing Ryan said?

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Or No. No. You don't.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Oh, is it so I think this is a place I would say, like, where there could be a lot of commonality between agricultural organizations and the agency. Ryan Patch has given a really good presentation with a slide which brings us new thing on New New England thing, New England data with how many thousands of acres we are losing per year and per month, and what predictions are going to be. Pairing it with some of these climate models saying that, you know, these critical resource areas that are identified in acts one eighty one, where housing cannot be shallow to bedrock, river corridors. Wetlands. Wetlands. Those are the same areas that farming can also not be easily if it's Exactly. Yeah. So we're there's many places where the farmland is being it's just being cut away. All these other plants, the farmland's just disappearing between them all. So we need a structure. We need some really deliberate legislative intent to protect and grow farmland farmland.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Because eventually, the regional planning commissions and the towns, all they're doing is implementing what they see as your intent. As right now, that intent is set on housing development, not protecting parliament. And neither Act 50 nor current use nor easements are the mechanism to protect parliament. They're all voluntary. And an Act two fifty doesn't grab for those residential low density residential developments. And that's where the future land use maps create an illusion. You have this picture of the town center and green space around it, where the data that American Farmland Trust can present I I deeply recommend inviting Jamie Potter and the American Farmland Trust to testify on it because they did the research, but their statistics says that 83% of development of farmland occurs as low density residential development in the outlying area. So, when we look at the future land use maps, that's an image, and you see, oh, we have all this green space. We don't have all this green space. That's already rules wrong. It's all incorporated through residential housing already. So, it's creating a false picture that we could push agriculture into that green space when we cannot. So, that's the point I wanted to make there. Another thing where we were looking at policy implementation is one of our policy priorities that we successfully passed into law in 2021 that was Act 41. It's about on farm composting of food residuals. The defined on farm composting of food residuals as farming to date when you go onto the Agency of Agriculture's website and open up the RAP rule that's still on there in the 2018 version. Obviously, anyone who wants to farm and look at what other rules apply to them, and I will add the IP rule of, like, farm, not the only rule applying to farmers and farming and farming practices. But in that rule, you cannot find the definitions that are statutorily added to that rule. So it's a kind of misinformation on that head. And so we've been criticizing the agency year after year for not doing the rulemaking process to incorporate the rules for those practices into that rule as it was mandated by law. And we had a meeting with a handful of agency representatives that were all very sorry that that didn't happen. The excuse is that it's because of wetland rulemaking and that they wanna open up the rule only once. And now we already have a meeting in the calendar for April with the promise that the rulemaking will come, but, frankly, I've heard that many years. So and that's why I'm mentioning it here. So we'll not just trust that. So that's for your info. Because also there, we're talking about sewage sludge and such for a more sustainable communal system, having those food residuals be composters, obviously, that's in the intent of the universal recycling law, that's the higher and best use, that's another market stream for farmers. I'm not sure if you're aware of that, but waste management is about the top three most earning industries in the country, while farming is not at the bottom of that list. So merging those two industries into one business plan is a great idea for a farming enterprise and could actually make farming viable so if we're not creating these opportunities by not implementing our laws, well, then that's our fault.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: And there's an issue with guidance around that as well. Obviously.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah. I'm myself, I'm a beginning farmer. I just this year, we'll start a micro chicken hatchery. My whole business plan is also based on this for transparency. I wanna raise roosters on those scraps and sell them as meat birds. And before I don't know what the rules are, can bet I will not invest the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it will take me to build that facility.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I'm I'm sorry. Sell them as Meat birds. Okay. That's what I thought you said.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Meat birds. But, basically, we're in a situation where these there are a number of entities that exist who are benefiting from this, but new producers there's no guidance offered by the agency. You can't see it reflected in rules. So it's it's a situation where you sort of protected the legacy producers, but there's no guidance or RIPs don't show the ability for newer producers to come into that market. And so we're seeing this consolidation of the waste streams to lead time. It's the packaging.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: Right. And there's some positive movement on the depackaging side. A and R is in the rulemaking process there. The process there, they actually wanna rule out that depackaging facilities can take source separated food residuals, which is mandated for the management of all food residuals so that the depackaging market should really be the market for the bad actors, in a way, or the the problems that you can otherwise not solve. So so we really still need to create, as as Graham said, the the the actual market for the upper end of the universal recycling organics management hierarchy tiers of composting and on farm attributes. Yeah, what else do we have to share? In terms of land access, I think Graham just touched on that. We are in the process with the Land Access of Opportunity Board. They've been generous in facilitating a diverse group of stakeholders around the land access issue, part of that is the affordability of farmland. And it's great to have just a sort of independent format where we can have just more discourse on that issue because it's very complex and also that is any policy that would address that would be sort of radical, and therefore we need big coalitions to push that and well vetted proposals. And so that's something we've been stressing over the last couple of years. We need those substantive discourses, how to tackle that. It's also a priority of the Food Security Roadmap Coalition, and we're waiting for that coalition to take action on on those discourses, and we're very ready to participate in that. So so that's also in the organizing realm where we're we're brooding on that.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: This isn't directly in your

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: realm, but the federal legislation we've been working on around on farm slaughter, and this is, like, a continuation of the work we've done locally as well. And just to let you know, that is ongoing, and we now have bicameral support in both chambers of federal, I think.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: That's right.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: So we have Republican and Democratic sponsors, maybe progressive sponsors as well? We have

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: parallel bills that are identical in

[Unidentified Committee Member]: both chambers. So that's that's very positive, and that would protect if

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: that bill succeed, it would protect for months as slaughterers and and our farm slaughter laws and the laws similar to this all around the country and more than 30 states, I believe.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: That's right. That's right. So so the good news is, in a way for us, that there wasn't a farm bill because it gives us more time to build momentum around this issue. So we're still hopeful that that will pass through the View Farm Bill. Every year we participate in the National Family Farmer Coalition's fly in and other member organizations of our national coalition are doing their own fly ins where we bring really farmers from across the whole country to testify on the relevance of unarmed slaughter for them, to educate the makers they receive about unarmed slaughter, and really bring home the fact that it's already a legal practice nationwide, that it depends really on the state whether they do or don't allow for it. You only do defer to the US three that does allow for it, and that what also their producers need is the the clarity around it. So, also, they don't make a business plan on something where you feel it's a legal gray zone and and more direct meat access. The pandemic has shown that that's what people want, and that's also very critical to our food resilience and food security. And and so we wanna see more small livestock growers like me or small ruminants. That that that's what we need, basically, those priorities for those business plans. So the second year, we've

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: worked with the agency of agriculture to survey custom processes, try to get more data on it. The agency, again, is the place where we're in alignment with the agency. Another issue, I think, is this is in alignment more or less across the board. A lot of agricultural organizations, you know, in Kentucky. We're doing halal slaughter who support this. We have other farmers in Texas, in other types of slaughter that support this. This is really across the board in a lot of ways.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: Yeah. Well, cool.

[Caroline Gordon (Legislative Director, Rural Vermont)]: That's our program for now. Okay.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Bennington is enough.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: I think you guys got a lot going on than we are. We've got a large back half out there, so I think a lot of what you talked about is, we might have touched upon it some as well. We appreciate smarter kids. Let's keep working together on what we can work on and let's communicate well. And we have a of same interests. We only get it done if we work together. So you'll take care of what Linda

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: I will. You know, Linda, I'll get in touch with the caller. She won't know anything.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: It's gotta be anything to get smaller.

[Graham Unangst-Rufenacht (Policy Director, Rural Vermont)]: Yeah. Appreciate your time. We don't I didn't mention anybody to see it. We are we are also supporters of Food Security Coalition. I'm not sure we mentioned that, but that's why I already shared.