Environmental Commons Expands 2007 Agriculture-Based State Legislation Tracker

by Britt Bailey

Environmental Commons continues to track agriculture-based legislation that impacts local government and community decision-making. Unlike previous years of tracking, which focused solely on identifying "seed preemption" bills aimed at removing a community's ability to make decisions about seeds and plants, the 2007 Tracker is additionally identifying where state lawmakers recognize the importance of community decision-making and are introducing bills that protect small farming systems and local decision-making.

So far in 2007, two dissimilar types of agriculture bills are appearing. We are seeing ever-expanded preemption bills, such as Missouri's SB364, juxtaposed with bills that recognize the value and importance of local food systems and community decision-making, such as New Jersey's A385, New Mexico's SB90 and Vermont's H0133.

Missouri, SB364

Missouri's SB364 is a particularly alarming bill. Its language, if passed, would provide that "state law and regulations adopted by state agencies shall preempt the entire field of and constitute a complete and integrated regulatory plan for agricultural operations in Missouri." Whereas the 2006-defeated bill centered solely on seeds, the 2007 SB364 would preempt local governments from making any decisions related to agriculture. Not only would local jurisdictions be hamstrung from passing laws related to seeds and plants, but also regulations related to industrial concentrated animal feeding operations would be preempted by the State.

According to Dick Burke of the Missouri Association of Counties, "local officials are willing to cede some control. But a total pre-emption is just something we cannot accept." In addition, Tom Beamer, the mayor of Arrow Rock, who is fighting a proposed hog farm expansion near his town, stated, "Without any county planning and zoning, then there's nothing you can do to stop it. A farmer could put a nuclear reactor in his field and you couldn't stop him. You might as well not have a county commission because everything is being decided by the state." A large animal-feeding operation nearby would devastate the town's tourism-based economy, which demonstrates the need for local decision-making.

Vermont, H0135

Unlike Missouri's bill which favors big agribusiness farming with little to no constraint, Vermont's bill would direct state agencies and institutions to procure Vermont farm and food products whenever available at a cost of no more than eight percent above like products produced outside the state. The bill supports local farming systems and recognizes the uniqueness of agricultural markets and Vermont's rural farm economy. The bill in no way seeks to remove local decision-making, but instead lauds the values of local farm products. Fundamentally, the bill celebrates the rights of small-scale farmers and food producers to supply food to their community without unnecessary financial or physical burdens.

Why Local?

Providing local governments and communities with oversight of their food supply ensures that food production, distribution, and marketing are carried out in ways that are healthy for the local economy and the environment. The local control of our food supply helps secure the health and welfare of communities. Local authority strengthens democracy and gives citizens a more direct stake in a healthy future. Local control of our food improves food security, local economies, environment, and community cohesion and civic engagement.

From a public policy standpoint, local governments have historically provided oversight of issues of health, safety, and welfare. Certainly farming operations fall within this arena. Moreover, when a series of local jurisdictions begin introducing laws to better protect health, safety, and welfare, the state's response should not be to simply remove the local governments ability to protect its constituents.

The basis for such local laws should be thoroughly explored and studied. Perhaps concentrated animal feeding operations significantly affect air quality. Perhaps the cultivation of genetically modified seeds presents a real threat to local native species or organic farming economies. The State needs to support the concerns of its local jurisdictions not simply run roughshod over them. In 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to James Madison in which he stated,

"I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people, and if we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take the power from them."

Brief Summary of Seed Preemption Legislation

Since November 2004, fifteen "seed preemption" bills have been passed into law - with very little public input - in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia. However, unlike the 2004 and 2005 legislative sessions, 2006 saw the defeat of four bills aimed at stripping local decision-making concerning our foods while only a single bill (Michigan) passed.

For More Information