Details from the Howard County Zoning Meeting on July 16, 2013

Susan Gray's Recap of the Howard County Zoning Meeting:

It was pretty amazing. Despite an article on the front page of the Sunday
Sun with the inaccurate headline "County officials back off controversial
new livestock, farm rules," almost 70 folks showed up for the rally and/or
to testify. That is quite a number, particularly given the newspaper
article and the short time frame for getting the word out. We had great
representation from backyard horse and pony owners and all kinds of groups:
4H, Pony Club, Spur & Stirrup, TROT, PVDA, Saddlepals, League of Maryland
Horseman, Central Maryland Saddle Club, to name a few. Howie Feaga,
President of the Howard County Farm Bureau and owner of a lovely boarding
facility on an agricultural preservation property in the County was there to
support us, as was the Patuxent Riverkeeper, Fred Tutman. [We counted 68
people at the rally, and then 30 people testified to the Council on the
problematic proposals concerning small farms (the vast majority of the
people testifying); about 10 more had signed up to testify but had to go
home before being called on -- a great showing.]

I think everyone made it very clear that the small farm community was upset
that they were not considered in the drafting of these proposals that came
to light last week; that they were not deterred by the Department of
Planning and Zoning's reassurances that they were actually trying to
"liberalize" things for the small farm community; and that these proposed
regulations would pose real problems to the small farm community if adopted.
Numerous, super speakers addressed these issues and also how environmental
concerns were best addressed through collaboration with Soil Conservation
Service and implementing best management practices, instead of through
animal to acreage ratios. Speakers gave the Council concrete examples of
how small farming practices are conducted and how the proposed regulations
would negatively affect them. 

As of several hours before the hearing, the Department of Planning and
Zoning had made several language changes in the proposed regulations. As of
the last draft published, there were still very significant issues
outstanding. The primarily issue to my mind is ensuring that small
farmers retain their ability to keep livestock as a matter of right, instead
of as an accessory use as the County proposes. Also, very importantly, the
latest iteration of the proposed regulations still contains setback
requirements and very significant limitations on the total sq. footage that
accessory structures can cover. Finally, as to the issue of number of
animals allowed per acre, the draft proposed increasing the number of
animals allowed somewhat--from the 1 horse per 1.5 acres as initially
proposed to 1 horse per acre. But the draft still contains no requirement
that this animal limitation would be lifted if the livestock owner worked
with the Soil Conservation Service to develop a conservation plan. The
latest draft language specifies that the limitation "may" be lifted, but
does not make lifting the limitation mandatory.

We've made progress but there is still quite a ways to go in a very short
time frame. We'll see what happens. I think it was obvious at the hearing
that the Council heard our concerns. The question is now, what are they
going to do about it and how are they going to vote? Thanks again
everybody for getting involved Tuesday night. It really does take a village
to make things work. 

Susan G.