Windsor Passes Farm Bylaw Despite ConcernsBy Noah Hoffenberg
iBerkshires Correspondent
04:04PM / Monday, June 29, 2009
WINDSOR, Mass. — Voters approved a right-to-farm bylaw last Monday, after it was pulled from the May town meeting ballot at the last minute.
Right-to-farm bylaws give farmers the legal footing to protect their livelihoods from neighbors who take issue with the daily doings of agriculture. The Windsor bylaw was dropped from the warrant after Agricultural Commission members were told April 13 by the Selectmen that the bylaw needed to be vetted jointly with the Planning Board, which it never was. Commission members apologized, expecting to have to reintroduce the bylaw to voters at a special town meeting in June at the earliest.
And that's exactly what happened Monday, the bylaw passing by voice vote with some nays noted for the public record, said commission member Kate Markowitz, who sits on the three-person panel with Andrew Schmidt and Hugh Ferry.
At the special town meeting, there were some very vocal people speaking against it, said Markowitz. One of these people even circulated a letter against the bylaw prior to the meeting. Markowitz felt the letter may have backfired, though, bringing out a substantial number of voters in favor of the bylaw.
Further, she said two major complaints from opponents — a decrease in property values from farming and legal favoritism of a farmer — just don't hold water.
"[The bylaw] doesn't stop anyone from seeking recourse. If there's a nuisance or a health issue or anything like that, the bylaw doesn't stop you from addressing those. It just says that if your complaint is that a rooster is crowing in the morning, well, that's what roosters do," said Markowitz. "If your rooster is perching on somebody's windowsill, obviously you have a right to take issue with that."
If such a situation did occur, residents would get a hearing before the Agricultural Commission, which would supply an advisory ruling. That ruling would be passed on the Selectmen, the governing body that would hear interested parties and issue a binding decision.
Regarding decreased property values, Markowitz checked with the assessor, who also works in Cheshire, and said there was no appreciable difference there between home values prior to and after the bylaw taking effect in that neighboring town. She also checked with the state, asking if there's any validity to the concern, and found none.
"[The state] said it's never even be suggested that that could be a possibility of decreasing values."
Markowitz, who recently sold her East Windsor Road home and moved next door, said the first question prospective buyers ask is if farming is permissible at the property. Markowitz has chickens, sheep and cows.
As to the other main concern, that rights were being taken away from nonfarming residents, Markowitz said, "The thing is, it doesn't change any of the laws, it's a statement from the town, saying that, 'We support agriculture.'"
The main point of the bylaw, said Markowitz, is the inclusion of a signed notification for potential buyers of real estate in town, that they know that it's a right-to-farm town. This real estate disclosure is the only portion of the bylaw that does not mirror the state's right-to-farm law.
Close to 100 towns have the bylaw in Massachusetts, said Markowitz, because there have been problems between neighbors. The bylaw exists to keep things equitable, she said.
"There was a perception that the Ag Commission would support the farmer no matter what. But it would be looking at best practices and accepted practices. The Ag Commission isn't going to support someone who doesn't maintain their fences and their cows are out in somebody's garden all the time. They're not going to say, 'We'll, he's a farmer, so he's OK.' It's really to promote harmony, to make sure that people interested in living here know what's going on."
Contact Noah Hoffenberg at hoff1013@gmail.com. |
