Legislative Update 4/28/22

Take Action! Senate Took Testimony on H. 501 - Regulating Depackaging Technology Bill

Last week, the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy (SNRE) began to take testimony on H.501 - the bill that would create a process for regulating depackaging technology. Depack technology is used by Casella to offer generators of food residuals another form of their “zero sort” services - mechanically separating food residuals from their packaging. This is in stark contrast to the “source separation requirement of the Universal Recycling law that mandates generators of food waste to separate the organics from recyclable materials and trash at the point of generation.

 Rural Vermont is part of the Protect Our Soils Coalition that advocates to uphold the source separation requirement by creating a process for regulating depackaging technology and researching the related contamination issues in a holistic manner. We do not believe that source separation is a “lofty goal,” as Casella characterizes the Universal Recycling law. 

In countries like Germany, contamination thresholds and collection bins for organics are everyday standards. Vermont can lead the way but is currently greenwashing the law that was supposed to resolve a resource concern (trash) by creating maybe even a larger one: the contamination of the soils we eat from with microplastics (including PFAS). Any management of food residuals comes with the risk of contaminants like microplastics entering soil, microorganisms, plants and eventually human bodies. The most effective way to mitigate this risk is to be very stringent about not including any packaging or utensils in organic waste - also not the compostable kinds which often still contain plastic film liners. While the scientific findings are still insufficient to suggest a contamination threshold for Vermont (due to the lack of an effective large-scale testing methodology), best practices, guidelines, strategic planning and also clear rules are tools that are also needed and that should be required now.

This is the gap H.501 seeks to close and it’s important to act now, while Casella’s permit is under review. Please revisit our call to action and reach out to SNRE now in support of passing H.501 and to consider the amendment proposals from the Protect Our Soils Coalition. Take Action Now: Support the Protect Our Soil Coalition, here!

More info: View Black Dirt Farm, ANR and UVM testimonials here; view Rural Vermont and Casella testimonials here. You can also read Rural Vermont's written testimony here. 

Latest status: SNRE is considering moving the bill through merging H.501 with the miscellaneous ANR bill, H.446, but was not presented with a new version of the bill yet.

Take Action! S. 148 - Environmental Justice Bill

In the past several weeks, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife continued to take testimony on S.148, An act relating to environmental justice in Vermont.  Much of the testimony came from representatives from the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR), the main state agency that will be tasked with implementing many of the provisions in the bill.  Maggie Gendron, Deputy Secretary of ANR, provided testimony on logistical concerns with the bill’s timeline—S.148 originally tasked ANR with making several council and committee appointments by December of this year and issuing guidance to other agencies by January 2023.  On Wednesday, April 27, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife approved an amended version of the bill, which amended the timeline to give the agency until September 15, 2023 to issue guidance. Other agencies now have until February 15, 2024 to review their past three years of spending and generate a report on it.

The bill appropriates $500,000 from the General Fund for the development of the mapping tool (including public input on said tool), as well as $200,000 for the conversion of one part-time position at ANR to full-time as well as the funding of two positions that will aid the implementation of S.148. As recommended by House Natural Resources, the bill sets up a Special Environmental Justice Fund so that council members that are not government employees can be paid up to an additional $150 on top of the $50 per diem that is allocated by state statute. But the fund has not been covered with sufficient appropriations so that lead advocates call for action, see below, to secure the financing and functioning of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council. 

Take Action Now! Support the Environmental Justice Bill (S.148) and email your Representative and/or the House Appropriations Committee to secure funding for the Environmental Justice Advisory Council at $200 per diem. Here’s a draft message:

“Dear members of the House Appropriations Committee,

I am writing to you today to ask you to include funds to secure a $200 per diem compensation for the work of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council. It is imperative that environmental justice communities have voice in the state level decisions that will impact them. This is the role of the Environmental Justice Advisory Council and it is only fair that their work be funded.

Regards,

Your Name”

Email the House Appropriations Committee members at:

More info: Read our previous write-up on S.148 here!

Latest status: On Wednesday, April 27, the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, & Wildlife approved an amended version of the bill, which can be read here.

"Right to Farm" Now Included in S. 258

The House Committee on Agriculture and Forestry amended the miscellaneous agriculture bill of the Senate, S. 258, to include an amended version of the Right to Farm bill (S.268). This amended version leaves the conditions farmers have to meet to be protected from nuisance lawsuits unchanged by keeping the rebuttable presumption in place. In contrast to that, the Senate's original version of the bill was changing the conditions to make it easier for farmers to be protected from nuisance lawsuits. What remains is a new definition of “agricultural activities” that will be covered under the Right To Farm laws protection in addition to what is already defined as “farming.”

Rural Vermont had been reaching out through our national network of family farms (via NFFC) to learn more about the role of Right to Farm laws and heard many times that their significance is often related to protecting concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO’s) by discouraging nuisance lawsuits. In Vermont, the legislation was inspired by an agricultural runoff case into Lake Champlain that was subject to litigation. The case was ruled in favor of the neighboring plaintiffs (who had a background in farming themselves) - VTDigger reported, read the latest on that here.

Rural Vermont monitored this bill without taking a stand one way or the other. Instead, we questioned in testimony how far improvements to “Right to Farm” would be able to create incentives for the establishment of more farms, reflect a right to food, protect homesteaders (from municipal zoning for example) and how the law would shake out when neighboring farms have conflicts (for example if there’s a pesticide drift). It appears that the Right to Farm law does not provide the most effective policy mechanism to address any of these concerns well and we’re looking forward to the summer to brainstorm better ways to set new policy priorities to advance some of these issues. Please reach out if any of these subjects are important to you or if you have other ideas for future work that we should consider - info@ruralvermont.org.

More info: We had shared the new list of agricultural activities that are now included in Right To Farm in our last update - read more here. Learn more about what else is part of this miscellaneous ag bill, by browsing through the bill or revisit our brief summary here.

Latest status: The House Appropriations Committee approved of the per diem compensation for members of the continued Task Force to Revitalize the Vermont Dairy Industry that is also part of the bill. The bill is now on the way to the House floor. 

Senate Agriculture Amends H. 466 - Surface Water Bill

After many weeks of repeated testimony and amendments, and many farmers and others contacting their representatives (awesome work everyone!) - an agreement seems to have been reached. The Senate Agriculture Committee took H.466 into its hands after the Senate Natural Resource Committee, and subsequently took testimony from farmers and farm organizations (including Rural VT) on multiple occasions over the past two weeks, creating multiple drafts, before arriving at a final amended version which we expect to be voted out of Senate Agriculture this week.

Features of the amended bill:

  • An “exception” from the future permitting process for: “surface water withdrawals for irrigation for farming, livestock watering, or other uses for farming, as the term “farming” is defined in 6 20 V.S.A. § 4802”

  • Farmers meeting the registration and reporting threshold will report their use to the Agency of Agriculture, not the Agency of Natural Resources.

  • “[Any] person who withdrew 10,000 gallons or more of surface water within a 24-hour period in the preceding calendar year or 150,000 gallons or more of surface water over any 30-day period in the preceding calendar year shall file a report with the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets. The report shall be made on a form provided by the Secretary and shall include all of the following information:
    (1) an estimate of the total amount of water withdrawn in the preceding calendar year;
    (2) the location of the withdrawals;
    (3) the daily maximum withdrawal for each month;
    (4) the date of each daily maximum withdrawal
    (5) any other information related to surface water withdrawal required by the Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets.”

Once the bill is through the Sen. Agriculture Committee it will continue to need support to make it through the rest of the legislative body. The VT Veg and Berry Growers Association, NOFA VT, Rural VT, the VT Farm Bureau, the VT Agency of Ag, and the Chair of the Surface Water Study Committee - Jeff Crocker, DEC Streamflow Coordinator - all support what has been discussed as the most recent version of the bill as an equitable compromise. Now’s the time to contact your reps to express your support and / or ongoing concerns!

More info: Read the most recent Draft No. 4.3 of the bill here and find our previous input on this bill here.

Latest status: The Senate Committee on Agriculture voted the bill unanimously as amended (Draft No. 4.3) out of committee this morning and the bill is on the way to the Senate floor now.

Rural Vermont and Others Express Opposition to Provisions of H. 715 - Clean Heat Standard Bill

Rural Vermont raised concerns about the Clean Heat Standard Bill, H.715, by signing on to a letter that Abbie Corse, organizers from 350VT, the White River Natural Resources Conservation District and others initiated. Areas of concern include a lack of meaningful community engagement in drafting this initiative, not realizing the Climate Action Plans Guiding Principles for a Just Transition, as well as the inclusion of biofuels and Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) in the eligible clean heat measures. Earlier, 350VT had put together a position paper on the bill to raise awareness about Vermont’s heating sector that could rely in the future primarily on biofuels, calling them out as a false solution to Climate Change. Biofuels have similar carbon emissions to fossil fuels (and thus don’t reduce emissions) and agricultural impacts include a continued reliance on fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, as well as the competing land use to sustainable food production. Similarly, RNG is mostly being produced on CAFOs and its potential for being produced within Vermont to achieve emission reduction goals is limited. 

The Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy proposes two amendments to the bill, one of which calls out “Vermont needs to transition away from its current carbon-intensive building heating practices to lower carbon alternatives” and another one that would direct the Public Utilities Commission to “hold at least four meetings using deliberative polling or another method” to “receive focused feedback from specific constituents.”

More info: read the sign-on letter here; more detail in the 350-VT position paper here.

Latest status: This morning, the bill was up for second reading on the Senate floor. Subject of the hour long debate was how the included taxes in the bill will impact low income Vermonters and seniors. In roll call, the Senate voted for the bill as amended 23-7. Tomorrow, during third reading another amendment will be presented by Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale that would address the questioned inclusion of biofuels and its global impacts in driving food prices (Sen. Hinsdale did vote yes today). Check the latest bill status here.

H. 709 - Miscellaneous Ag Bill - Heads to Senate Finance

In the past several weeks, the Senate Committee on Agriculture has taken testimony on several of the provisions listed in H.709, which is a miscellaneous agriculture bill that touches on a number of subjects. The Agriculture Committee’s only amendment to this bill was to add one section that pertains to agriculture soil mitigation fees for state airports. Previous discussions around not requiring state airports from paying agricultural soil mitigation fees had encompassed all state airports, but the amendment as recommended by the Senate Agriculture Committee applies this exception only to the Franklin County State Airport in Highgate.  

More info: read the bill as passed by the House here and Senate Ag’s amendment here. Learn more about other provisions of the bill in our previous updates here and here. 

Latest status: On April 22, 2022, the bill was voted out of Senate Agriculture and referred to the Senate Committee on Finance. 

Senate Ag Amending H. 626 - Pesticides: Treated Seeds and Neonicotinoids

Pesticides: Treated Seeds and Neonicotinoids - H.626 (as passed by the House).

Little action was taken on this bill over the past 2 weeks until this morning (April 28th) when there was some substantive conversation leading to an amendment being drafted and discussed in the near future.  This morning Sen. Pearson suggested that the bill be narrowed to focus on neonicotinoid treated seeds (as opposed to treated seeds and articles for all pesticides) based on testimony from the Agency of Agriculture (VAAFM) that it has a substantial amount of the Best Management Practices for them already in development.  Sen. Pearson’s idea was then supported by Cary Giguerre, Vermont Agency of Agriculture.  

The option currently being presented is for the committee to either send the Agency of Ag and Agriculture Innovation Board (AIB) a letter encouraging them to enact these BMPs and IPM protocols, or to require them to develop them in statute and in a particular timeframe and manner.  Cary Giguerre suggested the legislative path is feasible and agreeable, and would be better than the letter as it provides support that the VAAFM and the AIB needs to do the remaining work.  This is certainly our preference - and we are glad to see a renewed focus on neonicotinoid applications in particular; as was the original intention of the bill.

More info:  See our past updates on this issue and bill here.

Latest status:  Sen. Pearson and the Sen. Starr will be working on an amendment which will be brought to the committee as early as tomorrow, April 29th.  It is important that we take this opportunity to address neonicotinoid treated seeds in statute - and we will keep you up to date as the bill develops and need for action emerges.

Cannabis Market Rollout and Legislation

S.188, on cannabis cultivation and farming, has now passed the House Agriculture Committee and moved on to the House Ways and Means Committee.  Despite more consistent testimony from farmers, Rural VT, the VT Growers Association and the rest of the VT Cannabis Equity Coalition - the bill has not incorporated important structural changes:

  • All tiers of outdoor production be given the status of agriculture being provided to the smallest tier of cultivation in this bill

  • Direct market access for producers, product manufacturers, and consumers

  • Increased home grow allowances that bring VT closer in line to other States and reasonable horticultural practice

  • Including a Nursery License and allowing Cultivators and Nurseries to sell plants directly to consumers. 

There have however been substantial changes to the current bill based on testimony from Cary Giguerre and the VT Agency of Agriculture (VAAFM) which begins a process of moving substantive parts of the VT Hemp Program from VAAFM to the CCB (Cannabis Control Board).

The current bill includes gains sadly restricted only to the smallest tier of outdoor cultivators, and minimal gains for live plant sales for cultivators; these include:

  • Smallest tier of outdoor cultivation license will enjoy the same benefits of agriculture as relates to a number of things: access to current use status (if already enrolled), exemption from municipal bylaw, exemption from Act 250 and similar development laws, exemption from tax retail sales.

  • Cultivators given allowance to sell seeds and live plants to other cultivators (but not directly to consumers)

  • Wholesalers are also given allowance sell seeds and live plants to cultivators

Unfortunately, we do not expect action on our core agricultural and social equity advocacy this session (see past posts for more information).  It is disappointing; in particular as the primary concern expressed by legislators to our proposals (and those of the CCB’s Social Equity Sub-Committee) have been based on concerns about the lack of support from other legislators - particular members of the House.  We will continue to advocate and connect with cultivators, community members, and other cannabis licensees throughout the year - and plan on coming back for the next biennium to address action on these fundamental issues of equity and repair.

More info: As of April 25, 2022 the application window for all available tiers and types of cultivator licenses is open.  Our coalition partner VT Growers’ Association has been tracking the CCB meetings and provides links to information, forms, and more on its website.  The Cannabis Control Board also offers information, links, and support through its website.  See more information about our Social Equity and Agricultural Access advocacy in our past posts on this issue here.

Latest status: S.188 was voted out of the House Agriculture Committee and is now in House Ways and Means.

Rural Vermont