Bill seeks to limit local regulation of agritourism
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20140214/NEWS/140219430/general-assembly-notes&template=fairfaxTimes
An bill that would restrict local regulation of customary agricultural and farm activities has passed the Senate.
Senate Bill 51 would prohibit Virginia counties from regulating the management of agritourism for-profit events; the sale of agricultural or silvicultural (forest) products or related items; the preparation or sale of foods that are not otherwise in violation of state law and other customary activities without a “substantial impact on the health, safety or general welfare of the public.”
Localities would not have the authority to require a special-use permit for any of the activities listed above.
No local ordinance regulating sound produced by the activities listed above could be more restrictive than the general local noise ordinance, except if an ordinance regulates the sound of outdoor amplified music.
Sen. William Stanley (R-Dist. 20) says SB51 would empower farmers.
“We want to make sure that we’re encouraging agritourism,” Stanley said, “that we’re encouraging the product of the small farmer to be brought to market on the farmer’s terms, rather than being the captive of a vendor.”
Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D-Dist. 34) said the bill would allow the wine industry in Virginia to grow by combating local overregulation for winery owners.
“A lot of counties have tried to restrict, regulate and frankly put these wineries out of business,” Petersen said.
Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Dist. 30) voted against SB51. Sam Bosch, Ebbin’s legislative aide, stated the senator opposed the bill based on issues of “clarity in the language” because the meaning of both “substantial” impact and “regulate” are not clearly defined in the bill.
Stanley says residents — including farmers — in Fauquier County and members of the local government are responsible for much of the lobbying against SB51.
“There seems to be a desire at the local level there [Fauquier County] to overregulate and minimize farm production,” Stanley said. “And the ability to make a living.”
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20140214/NEWS/140219430/general-assembly-notes&template=fairfaxTimes
An bill that would restrict local regulation of customary agricultural and farm activities has passed the Senate.
Senate Bill 51 would prohibit Virginia counties from regulating the management of agritourism for-profit events; the sale of agricultural or silvicultural (forest) products or related items; the preparation or sale of foods that are not otherwise in violation of state law and other customary activities without a “substantial impact on the health, safety or general welfare of the public.”
Localities would not have the authority to require a special-use permit for any of the activities listed above.
No local ordinance regulating sound produced by the activities listed above could be more restrictive than the general local noise ordinance, except if an ordinance regulates the sound of outdoor amplified music.
Sen. William Stanley (R-Dist. 20) says SB51 would empower farmers.
“We want to make sure that we’re encouraging agritourism,” Stanley said, “that we’re encouraging the product of the small farmer to be brought to market on the farmer’s terms, rather than being the captive of a vendor.”
Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D-Dist. 34) said the bill would allow the wine industry in Virginia to grow by combating local overregulation for winery owners.
“A lot of counties have tried to restrict, regulate and frankly put these wineries out of business,” Petersen said.
Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Dist. 30) voted against SB51. Sam Bosch, Ebbin’s legislative aide, stated the senator opposed the bill based on issues of “clarity in the language” because the meaning of both “substantial” impact and “regulate” are not clearly defined in the bill.
Stanley says residents — including farmers — in Fauquier County and members of the local government are responsible for much of the lobbying against SB51.
“There seems to be a desire at the local level there [Fauquier County] to overregulate and minimize farm production,” Stanley said. “And the ability to make a living.”