2021 NASDA Winter Policy Meeting Policy Materials

• Committee Agendas- pg. 2 • Policy Amendments & Action Items- pg. 9

1 2021 Winter Policy Meeting Committee Agendas

2 Animal Agriculture Committee Chair: Secretary Blayne Arthur, Oklahoma Vice-Chair: Commissioner Charles Hatcher, Tennessee NASDA Contact: Rebecca Barnett Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 23 | 4:30 – 5:30 PM ET | 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Virtual

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (4:30) • Secretary Arthur

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Animal Biotechnology (4:35) • Secretary Arthur

Policy Update and Member Discussion: One Health (4:45) • Secretary Arthur • Speaker; Dr. Burke Healey, Deputy Administrator Veterinary Services and Chief Veterinary Officer, USDA – APHIS

Consideration of Policy Amendments, Action Items (5:10) • Policy Amendments & Action Items: o Policy Action Item A: Expansion of USDA Meat Plant Modernization Grant Eligibility (Secretary Romanski, WI) o Policy Action Item B: One Health, Emergency Response in Non-Traditional Situations (Secretary Romanski, WI)

Member Dialogue (5:20)

Adjourn (5:30)

3 Natural Resources & Environment Committee Chair: Secretary Wes Ward, Arkansas Vice-Chair: Secretary Michael Scuse, Delaware NASDA Contact: Zachary Gihorski Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 23 | 4:30PM - 5:30PM | 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (4:30) • Secretary Ward (4:30) • Secretary Scuse (4:35)

Speaker: Professor of Law Jonathan Coppess, University of Illinois (4:40) • Questions

Food and Agricultural Climate Alliance (FACA) Update (5:05) • Zachary Gihorski, NASDA Associate Director of Policy

Consideration of Policy Amendments and Action Items (5:10) • Action Item C: Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) Expansion & Farmland Protection

Climate Resilience Panel Preview – Commissioner Amanda Beal (5:20)

Member Dialogue (5:25) • Questions • Open Discussion

Adjourn (5:30)

4 Marketing and International Trade Committee Chair: Director Derek Sandison, Washington Vice-Chair: Secretary Mike Naig, Iowa NASDA Contact: RJ Karney Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 24 | 1:00 – 2:00 PM ET | 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Virtual

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (1:00) • Director Sandison and Secretary Naig

Committee Business (1:05) • Consideration of Policy Amendments and Action Items

Trade in the New Administration & Mexico Investigations (1:15) • Jason Hafemeister, Acting Deputy Under Secretary, FAS

U.S Grocery Shopping Trends Report (1:35) • Steve Markenson, Director, Research, The Food Industry Association

Member Dialogue (1:55) • Open Discussion

Adjourn (2:00)

5 Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation Committee Chair: Commissioner Bryan Hurlburt, Connecticut Vice-Chair: Director Chris Chinn, Missouri NASDA Staff Contact: Zachary Gihorski Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 24th|1:00pm – 2:00pm| NASDA Winter Policy Conference

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (1:00) • Commissioner Hurlburt (1:00) • Director Chinn (1:05)

Speaker – Bill Richmond, Chief of Domestic Hemp Production Program, USDA-AMS (1:05) • Questions

Consideration of Policy Amendments and Action Items (1:25) • Policy Amendment II: Section 11 – Domestic Marketing and Promotion (Hemp) • Action Item D: Section 18

Member Dialogue (1:40) • Questions • Open Discussion

Adjourn (2:00)

6 Food Systems and Nutrition Committee Chair: Secretary Karen Ross, California Vice-Chair: Commissioner Amanda Beal, Maine NASDA Staff Contact: Zachary Gihorski Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 24th | 2:30PM-3:30PM | 2020 NASDA Winter Policy Conference

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (2:30) • Secretary Ross (2:30) • Commissioner Beal (2:35)

Speaker: Stacy Dean, Deputy Undersecretary, USDA- FNCS (2:40) • Questions

Update and Member Discussion: FDA Cooperative Agreements (3:00) • NASDA Staff: Bob Ehart

Consideration of Policy Amendments (3:05) • Policy Amendment I: Section 10 – Agriculture Infrastructure o In response to COVID-19 the policy amendment looks to expand and emphasize the need for local and regional processing. • Policy Amendment III: Section 5 – Nutrition and Food Assistance o The policy amendment looks to elevate NASDA member’s emphasis on tackling nationwide hunger. Consideration of Action Items (3:15) • Action Item A: Increasing Processing Capacity o The action item calls for support of the Local Processing Act. • Action Item H:– Reducing Food Waste o The action item calls for the extension of the federal inter-agency agreement to reduce food waste.

NEASDA Hunger Roundtable Report, Commissioner Amanda Beal, Maine (3:20) • Questions • Open Discussion

Adjourn (3:30)

7 Rural Development & Financial Security Committee Chair: Commissioner Jewel Bronaugh, Virginia Vice-Chair: Commissioner Thom Petersen, Minnesota NASDA Contact: RJ Karney Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 24 | 2:30 – 3:30 PM ET | 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Virtual

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (2:30) • Commissioner Bronaugh and Commissioner Petersen

Rural Broadband Update (2:35) • Director Chinn, MO

Committee Business (2:45) • Commissioner Bronaugh and Commissioner Petersen • Consideration of Policy Amendments and Action Items o Action Item E: Furthering NASDA’s Commitment to Diversity, Inclusion, and Racial Equity Through Community Partnerships; Commissioner Fried, FL o Action Item F: Agricultural Emergency Response Workforce Safety; Commissioner Petersen, MN

Member Dialogue (2:55) • Open Discussion

Rural Mental Health – NIFA Presentation & Dialogue (3:00) – *closed session • Esther Lin, Outreach Program Manager, USDA FSA • R. Brent Elrod, National Program Leader – Community & Rural Development Division of Family & Consumer Sciences, USDA NIFA

Adjourn (3:30)

*Closed session – This presentation is only for NASDA Members and state departments of agriculture staff.

8 2021 Winter Policy Meeting Policy Amendments & Action Items For consideration and action during Committee Meetings

9 Proposed Policy Amendments Policy Policy Book Passed with Amendment Title Submitted By Committee Passed Failed Page Number Amendment Number Commissioner Greenberg (CO) Secretary Ross (CA) Section 10- Director Taylor (OR) Food Systems & I. Agriculture 12 Director Killian (AZ) Nutrition Infrastructure Secretary Witte (NM) Director Ott (NV) Director Gould (ID) Section 11- Plant Agriculture Domestic II. Secretary Tebbetts (VT) & Pesticide 14 Marketing and Regulation Promotion Section 5 - Commissioner Beal (ME) Food Systems & III. Nutrition and Food 15 Secretary Ross (CA) Nutrition Assistance

Proposed Action Items

Action Item Policy Book Passed with Title Submitted By Committee Passed Failed Number Page Number Amendment Expand USDA Meat Plant Secertary- designee Animal A. 16 Mondernization Romanski (WI) Agriculture Grants One Health Secertary- designee Animal B. Emergency 18 Romanski (WI) Agriculture Response Director Taylor (OR) Secretary Ross (CA) Agricultural Commissioner Greenberg Conservation (CO) Natural Easement Program C. Secretary Beam (KS) Resources & 19 (ACEP) Expansion Commissioner Beal (MA) Environment & Farmland Director McDowell (MI) Protection Chief Ayars (RI) Secretary Tebbetts (VT)

Plant Agriculture D. Section 18 Commissioner Fried (FL) & Pesticide 22 Regulation

Rural Diversity, Development & E. Inclusion, and Commissioner Fried (FL) 23 Financial Racial Equity Security Agricultural Rural Emergency Commissioner Petersen Development & F. 25 Response (MN) Financial Workforce Safety Security

Increase Processing Commissioner Beal (ME) Food Systems & G. 26 Capacity Secretary Ross (CA) Nutrition Reducing Food Commissioner Beal (ME) Food Systems & H. 27 Waste Secretary Ross (CA) Nutrition 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference I Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 01/27/2021 Committee: Food Systems & Nutrition [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Policy Amendments (PA) either create a new section or amend an existing section of NASDA’s Policy Statements. PAs establish general policy principles of the association and guide NASDA’s policy prioritization process and engagement.

Section Number and Title to be Amended: 10 Agriculture Infrastructure

Subject of Policy Amendment: Add a local and regional processing section to the Agricultural Infrastructure policy

Submitted By: Commissioner Kate Greenberg (CO), Secretary Karen Ross (CA), Director Alexis Taylor (OR), Director Mark Killian (AZ), Secretary Jeff Witte (NM), Director Jennifer Ott (NV), Director Gould (ID)

Text of Policy Amendment:

10 Agriculture Infrastructure Farmers and ranchers depend on reliable infrastructure to deliver their products and expand their operations. Out-of-date, underfunded transportation systems, inadequate local and regional processing, and a lack of available labor hinder agriculture production, while advancing technology encourages growth. NASDA believes in maintaining fairness and equity within the agriculture community through the development of a strong agriculture infrastructure.

10.5 Local and Regional Processing Demand for locally-produced food is creating jobs and opportunities for farms, ranches, and businesses that produce, store, process, market and distribute food locally and regionally. To meet consumer demand and realize the potential economic gains from locally-produced foods, policies must support new and expanded local and regional processing facilities. ● NASDA believes local and regional processing is essential to a resilient and vibrant agricultural sector. ● NASDA supports policies and practices that put processors of all sizes on equal footing by ensuring equitable access to inspections, technical support, and financial resources. ● NASDA supports the timely investigation and enforcement of laws and regulations targeting anti- competitive practices to ensure equitable market access for producers and fair prices for consumers.

Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Policy Amendment or appear in the NASDA Policy Handbook):

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated and brought further attention to the lack of local and regional processing capacity across the country. Closures of large processing plants left producers across multi-state regions with no options for taking their products to market. The local and regional processors were quickly overwhelmed with demand and unable to meet producer and customer demands. Creating a resilient food system requires investment and support for processors of all sizes. The addition of the Local and Regional

12 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference I Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 01/27/2021 Committee: Food Systems & Nutrition [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Processing section brings attention to the role local and regional processors play in a strong and resilient food system and the need for policies that support them.

13 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference II Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/21 Committee: Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Section Number and Title to be Amended: Section 11.8 New Uses of Agricultural Products

Subject of Policy Amendment: Change the federal definition of “Hemp”

Submitted By: Secretary, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets Anson B. Tebbetts

1 Text of Policy Amendment:

2 • NASDA supports an amendment to the definition of hemp in the 7 U.S.C. chapter 38, Hemp Production, 3 Section 1639o (1) to say 4 o The term “hemp” means the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including 5 the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of 6 isomers, whether growing or not, with a total tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 7 one (1) percent on a dry weight basis.

8 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Policy Amendment 9 or appear in the NASDA Policy Handbook): 10 11 In the US, with currently available genetics, up to 40% of test results show that samples exceed the 0.3% total THC 12 concentration. With wider cannabis legalization looming nationwide, the current framework puts hemp farmers at 13 the distinct disadvantage of stricter regulation than establishments growing high THC cannabis. Hemp farmers 14 deserve reasonable policy and support that enables them to bring their crops to market. This 0.3% delta-9 THC level 15 is an arbitrary standard that was never meant to be used as a legal measure for THC concentration in hemp, and is 16 not consistent with the level of concern placed on the potential for diversion of crops with a THC concentration of 17 1% into an illicit market. This is evidenced by many countries launching hemp programs at a 1% THC level, including 18 Mexico, Ecuador, Switzerland and Thailand. 19 20 This proposed policy item suggests amending the federal definition of hemp to increase the total THC concentration 21 to 1% or less. Increasing the total THC concentration to 1% would allow for use of available seed varieties, provide 22 greater assurance to the producers that they have a viable crop and still places limits on THC concentration. 23 24

14 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference III Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 01/27/2021 Committee: Food Systems & Nutrition [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Section Number and Title to be Amended:

Section 5 – Nutrition and Food Assistance

Adds Section 5.3 – Hunger and Food Insecurity

Subject of Policy Amendment: Hunger and Food Insecurity

Submitted By: Commissioner Amanda Beal (ME) Secretary Karen Ross (CA)

1 Text of Policy Amendment: 2 Section 5.3 – Hunger and Food Insecurity 3 4 NASDA is committed to addressing hunger and food insecurity with the goal of ending hunger in our nation. As 5 homes to many feeding and nutrition assistance programs and as representatives of the producer community, State 6 departments of agriculture are uniquely positioned, formally and informally, to connect farmers and ranchers with 7 entities (public and private) providing support to food insecure communities. 8 9 Further, state departments of agriculture have the ability to leverage and/or implement federal programs at the 10 state level, that can best meet local objectives and strategies focusing on food insecurity. 11 12 By creating and fostering a nexus between those who raise and produce our food, those who address food 13 insecurity, and those in need, the agriculture sector can play an integral part in meeting urgent needs as we work as 14 a nation to end hunger. 15 16 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Policy Amendment 17 or appear in the NASDA Policy Handbook): 18 19 On average more than 11 percent of the population (32.5 million people) is considered food insecure by the USDA. 20 21 NASDA members have a significant history in addressing food insecurity through USDA national feeding and 22 nutrition assistance programs. According to a 2017 NASDA survey - 58% of the members conduct farm to school 23 programs, 26% facilitate a Farmers Market Nutrition Program and 22% conduct the Senior Farmers Market 24 Program. 25 26 COVID-19 demonstrated proactive steps by NASDA members to address the high-level of food insecurity being 27 experience throughout the nation.

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference A Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 01/27/2021 Committee: Animal Agriculture [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Action Items (AI) highlight a specific current issue Members feel NASDA should act on or other priority issues. AIs do not establish NASDA policy and must comply with existing policy or be accompanied by a corresponding Policy Amendment.

Subject of Action Item: Encourage Expansion of USDA Meat Plant Modernization Grant Eligibility to include all Small Meat Plants Operating under State or Federal Inspection

Submitted By: Secretary-designee Randy Romanski (WI)

1 Text of Action Item: 2 3 NASDA encourages the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to expand opportunities for meat plant 4 modernization grants to all small meat establishments operating under state or federal inspection. 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 8 Background 9 10 The Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1967 and the Poultry Products Inspection Act of 1968 authorize states to 11 establish their own Meat and Poultry Inspection (MPI) programs. In states operating MPI programs, meat 12 establishments may either participate in the state program or be inspected by USDA. Twenty-seven states 13 operate MPI programs and collectively inspect nearly 1900 establishments. State MPI programs are rigorously 14 audited by USDA and must be “at least equal to” the federal program. Wisconsin has approximately 250 15 establishments, placing it in the top three for most state-inspected establishments (alongside Ohio and Texas). 16 Although state MPI programs are at least equal to federal inspection, state-inspected meat and poultry products 17 may only be sold intrastate unless the state program and participating establishments have been approved for 18 USDA’s Cooperative Interstate Shipping program (CIS). To date, seven states, including Wisconsin, have been 19 approved for CIS. An additional USDA oversight program evaluates state CIS programs and their participating 20 establishments. The participating establishments are limited in size to 25 or fewer employees. Meat 21 establishments of this size, whether they are inspected by USDA, the regular state MPI program, or a state CIS 22 program, face common challenges related to aging or cramped facilities, shortages of trained employees, and 23 the resources to efficiently implement mandated food safety systems. These challenges have been heightened 24 during the COVID-19 pandemic as small plants have endeavored to increase throughput. 25 26 COVID-19 Impacts Meat Processing 27 28 The COVID-19 public health emergency has underscored the essential work performed by meat and poultry 29 processing plants of all sizes. Many of small processing plants saw an increase in demand for services due to 30 pandemic-related supply chain disruptions. These processing plants did not receive the same federal support as 31 their larger counterparts, though they were seen in many ways as the unsung heroes of the pandemic response. 32 Limited in regards to facility size and processing capacity, these small plants need equipment upgrades and

33 workforce enhancements in order to keep pace with increased demand. Recently passed federal legislation 34 creates a program of modernization grants for already-operating meat establishments seeking to enter the CIS 35 program or to operate under federal inspection. 36 37 The modernization grants should also be offered to small state-inspected meat establishments that are not 38 seeking to join the CIS program or switch to federal inspection. Regardless of the destination of the meat and 39 poultry products made by an establishment, i.e. intra-or interstate, modernization of an establishment will add 40 resiliency to the food supply chain, thereby protecting consumers from price shocks, avoiding or reducing 41 distress to producers caused by unexpected herd culling, and increasing local economic activity. 42 43 Wisconsin urges the expansion of meat establishment modernization grants to any small meat establishment 44 operating under state or federal inspection. 45

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference B Action Item Form

To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Animal Agriculture [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Emergency Response in Non-Traditional Situations

Submitted By: Secretary-designee Randy Romanski (WI)

1 Text of Action Item: 2 NASDA supports coordination between intergovernmental agencies and industry for a One Health approach for the 3 preparation and response to disease outbreaks. NASDA encourages the strong relationship between USDA and CDC 4 to collaborate on a One Health approach, in addition to supporting outbreaks associated with new or emerging 5 diseases, or diseases affecting non-traditional livestock animals. 6 7 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 8 9 The One Health approach recognizes the interconnection between people, animals, plants and their shared 10 environment, and requires collaborative, multi-sectoral, and transdisciplinary work at the local, regional, national and 11 global levels. NASDA recognizes the importance of ongoing collaboration between agricultural experts in plant and 12 animal health and human health experts to ensure that there is sufficient monitoring, assessment, preparedness and 13 response to emerging diseases, pathogens, or other threats. These collaborative efforts not only ensure that impacts 14 to health and wellness are minimized during an outbreak, but the economic consequences as well. The avian influenza 15 situation in 2015 and the current COVID pandemic have heightened the awareness to respond quickly and effectively 16 to a disease outbreak from a national security and economic security perspective. The National Animal Health 17 Laboratory Networks (NAHLN) have highlighted the importance of the linkage between animal and human diseases 18 and supporting infrastructure and research to have flexible capacities to address any disease outbreaks. NAHLN 19 Laboratories, for example, have stepped in to help with COVID-19 testing. NASDA supported this One Health approach 20 to mitigate disease outbreak. 21 22 Current training and disease response preparations often focus on the major livestock species in the nation such as 23 cattle, swine, and poultry. This work needs to continue, especially given the potentially devastating impacts of 24 outbreaks of known threats, as well emerging diseases such as African Swine Fever. However, recent outbreaks have 25 also highlighted the need for training and preparation to deal with other animal species. SARS-CoV-2 has brought to 26 the forefront the need for training and preparation in addressing mink, and rabbit hemorrhagic fever highlights the 27 need to better prepare for work with captive and wild rabbits. We wish to underscore the importance of collaboration 28 in accomplishing the goals of One Health, as well as recognizing the need to broaden the scope of our activities to 29 prepare for new diseases in other animal species. 30 31

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference C Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Natural Resources and Environment [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Expansion of the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) and support for other farmland protection measures

Submitted By: Director Alexis Taylor (OR), Secretary Karen Ross (CA) Commissioner Kate Greenberg (CO), Secretary Mike Beam (KS), Commissioner Amanda Beal (MA), Director Gary McDowell (MI) Chief Ken Ayers (RI), Secretary Anson Tebbetts (VT),

1 Text of Action Item: 2 1. NASDA supports programs established for the voluntary preservation of agricultural lands in exchange for 3 financial and/or tax incentives; such programs include conservation easements, transfer of development rights, 4 enhanced property tax relief for rolling conservation contracts and other similar programs. The use of local, regional 5 and state comprehensive land use tools should also be considered where appropriate. 6 7 2. NASDA supports enhanced funding and continued implementation of the Agricultural Conservation Easement 8 Program (ACEP). 9 10 3. NASDA supports increasing the ACEP-Agricultural Land Easement (ACEP-ALE) federal match contribution to 11 80% in all cases. 12 13 4. NASDA supports allowing transaction costs to be eligible for ACEP-ALE funds, in addition to the purchase price 14 of the easement. 15 16 5. NASDA encourages the USDA to provide incentives that encourage agricultural producers and succession 17 planners to create and implement comprehensive plans for business and estate succession. 18 19 6. NASDA supports the development of ongoing resources for farmer/rancher matchmaking programs serving 20 local to national geographies, including technical assistance support to Beginning Farmers and Ranchers (BFRs) and 21 landowners in negotiating deals, maintaining successful partnerships, and intergenerational transfer (where desired). 22 23 7. NASDA supports changes to Federal tax law that provide income tax credits as incentives for landowners to 24 sell or lease assets and land to beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, and the USDA should assist 25 them in affording the farmland tenure by rent or purchase. 26 27 28 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 29 According to the American Farmland Trust, between 2001 and 2016, 11 million acres of farmland in the United 30 States were “paved over, fragmented, or converted to uses that jeopardize agriculture.” Conversion of 31 agricultural land also places burdens on the ability of surrounding farmers and ranchers to conduct viable

32 operations due to issues such as vandalism, traffic, trespass, litter, encroachment of non-compatible land uses, 33 and speculative land values. Loss of a critical mass of land and operations can also adversely affect agriculture’s 34 infrastructure needs. 35 36 Exacerbating the pressures that development has placed on conversion of agricultural lands are the pressures 37 being put on landowners relating to succession. More than four times as many farmers and ranchers in the 38 United States are age 65 and older as are those under age 35, and in most states, seniors comprise at least one- 39 third of the farming population. Including non-operator landlords, seniors aged 65 and older own more than 40 40 percent of the agricultural land in the United States, pointing to an imminent transfer of more than 370 million 41 acres of farmland. Challenges that farmers and ranchers face in developing and implementing a succession plan 42 are many, such as not having an identified successor, not knowing how to establish all of the components of a 43 plan, and finding and affording qualified service providers. 44 45 As agricultural land changes hands, it is becoming increasingly cost-prohibitive for many farmers and ranchers to 46 afford such land on slim and uncertain margins. A 2018 USDA report found that “current farmland values are 47 not supported by returns to farming.” Exacerbating the aging farmer demographics, the report found that 48 “[y]oung and beginning farmers often state that their most significant challenge is access to farmland.” 49 50 Potential Remedies 51 52 Working land conservation easements provide a voluntary mechanism that allows landowners to protect 53 agricultural lands from conversion to nonfarm development, maintain and enhance the ability to conduct viable 54 farm and ranch operations, help facilitate succession planning, and maintain land values at the market price for 55 agricultural land. Such conservation easements allow farmers and ranchers to access much needed capital 56 associated with the value of their land without selling the farm or ranch or parts thereof. 57 58 The federal government, through the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service provides funding for the 59 protection of agricultural lands through the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP). Current Farm 60 Bill funding for the program is $450 million per year for the entire nation. Funding from the federal government 61 historically has been inconsistent and inadequate to support a strong, long-term program. The NRCS has 62 indicated that current funding levels allow it to meet one-third of the existing demand for the program. 63 64 In the implementation of the ACEP program at the local level, several issues have been proven to be 65 problematic. The USDA requires a 50% match from the local entity involved in the proposed acquisition of a 66 conservation easement. This has proven to be a major obstacle in the completion of many proposed easements. 67 Transaction costs, the administration of creating an easement, has also been difficult for smaller local 68 governments, NGOs and land trusts to fund. Current USDA rules do not allow ACEP to fund transaction costs. 69 70 To assist with intergenerational transfer of agricultural land, numerous states and localities offer matchmaking 71 programs and farm succession counselors. These programs can be highly successful at introducing farmers and

72 ranchers to non-familial successors and ensuring that a plan is comprehensive and is actually implemented. 73 Since these services would be difficult for farmers and ranchers to afford at full cost, they are often subsidized 74 by various state and private funders. The opportunity exists to examine and fund these important support 75 services. 76 77 Many other solutions to the intertwined issues of the preservation of working lands and succession are being 78 explored by various government bodies, NGOs and the private sector. The recommendations discussed here are 79 just some of the most impactful tools that are currently being used to address this complex and urgent challenge 80 confronting agriculture. 81 82 Existing NASDA policy under which this action items complies with: 83 7.2 Conservation Programs 84 85 USDA conservation programs are effective tools in helping farmers and ranchers implement and 86 maintain conservation practices. NASDA supports Farm Bill conservation programs for addressing 87 environmental concerns. 88 • NASDA encourages Congress to adequately fund Farm Bill conservation programs. In particular, 89 NASDA supports funding for EQIP, CSP, RCP and ACEP. 90 • NASDA supports increased funding for technical assistance (TA) and availability of TA for all 91 producers seeking to implement improved management practices. 92 • NASDA supports increased flexibility of farmland preservation programs. NASDA emphasizes the 93 need to focus on farm viability, deference to local and state conservation entities. 94 95 96 Sources: 97 1. USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2017 Census of Agriculture 98 2. American Farmland Trust, Farms Under Threat: The State of the States, 2020 99 3. USDA Economic Research Service. 2014 Tenure, Ownership and Transition of Agricultural Land 100 Survey. Washington D.C.: USDA-ERS, November 2015 101 4. Burns, Christopher, Nigel Key, Sarah Tulman, Alison Borchers and Jeremy Weber, Farmland Values, 102 land Ownership and Returns to Farmland, 2000-2016, ERR-245, USDA-ERS, February 2018. 103 5. Land Tenure, Access and Farm Business Transactions for Beginning Farmers and Ranchers, 104 Recommendations from the USDA Advisory Committee on Beginning Farmers and Ranchers, August 105 31, 2015 106 6. Policy Platform of the Partnership of Rangeland Trust (PORT)

21 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference D Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: NASDA encourages the U.S. EPA to work with the states to address Section 18 requests for extended protection claims on disinfectants for use against SARS-CoV-2 in a manner that upholds the integrity of the State Section 18 process.

Submitted By: Commissioner Nikki Fried, Florida

1 Text of Action Item: NASDA recognizes the importance of the well-established process for State Section 18 2 exemptions, and its integrity must be maintained. Therefore, NASDA requests the U.S. Environmental Protection 3 Agency works with State Agriculture Departments and other relevant state agencies to determine whether a Federal 4 Section 18 or Section 3 may be more appropriate verses State Section 18 exemptions for extended protection claims 5 on disinfectants for use against SARS-CoV-2 where the intended application sites are not specific to an individual state. 6 7 8 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 9 10 Section 18 emergency exemptions may only be requested by State or Federal agencies when an emergency 11 condition (e.g., serious pest problem) jeopardizes production of agricultural goods, the environment, or public 12 health, but there are inadequate tools (including pesticide registrations) to address the situation. Following the 13 August 24th announcement of EPA’s approval of the Texas Section 18 for an extended protection claim on a 14 disinfectant for use against SARS-CoV-2, other states began receiving an uptick in similar requests. Many of 15 these Section 18 requests are coming to the states from the disinfectant companies, and not coming from state 16 or federal health agencies who can attest to the significant risk and urgency of the situation. Furthermore, the 17 sites where these products are intended to be applied (i.e. airplanes, stadiums) are not specific to an individual 18 state. 19 20 Whether the request for extended protection claims on disinfectants is appropriate for a State Section 18 has 21 come into question as well as whether it meets the definition of an emergency condition given alternative 22 products are available (there are over 600 products on EPA’s List N that are registered as effective to combat 23 SARS-CoV-2). 24 25 State Section 18 exemption is an important and well-established process that should be used judiciously. 26 Assuring that the science is solid to support such claims and a Section 18 emergency exemption is only 27 requested if it meets the emergency condition definition ensures, the wrong precedent is not set.

22 2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference E Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Furthering NASDA’s Commitment to Diversity, Inclusion, and Racial Equity Through Community Partnerships

Submitted By: Commissioner Nikki Fried, Florida

1 Text of Action Item: NASDA supports and encourages State Departments of Agriculture to foster community 2 partnerships to expand outreach to social minority farmers, enhance nutrition education, and promote urban 3 agriculture as part of its commitment to promoting diversity, inclusion, and racial equity in agriculture. 4 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture adopted new diversity and inclusion policy during 8 the 2020 NASDA Annual Meeting. The new policy formally incorporates NASDA’s commitment to racial 9 justice into its policymaking framework. Building off of this policy amendment, this action item encourages State 10 Departments of Agriculture to foster community partnerships to expand outreach to young Black farmers, 11 enhance nutrition education, and promote urban agriculture. These are important areas to focus on as NASDA 12 puts its new policy into action, supporting programs that will help promote diversity, inclusion, and racial equity. 13 14 Nutrition Research: 15 Per CDC’s latest research brief, Nutrition education is a vital part of a comprehensive health education program and 16 empowers children with knowledge and skills to make healthy food and beverage choices. 17 18 USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service released a study in 2013 that found that children participating in certain nutrition 19 education programs increased their daily fruit and vegetable consumption at home by a quarter- to a third-cup and were 20 more likely to choose low-fat or fat-free milk. Participating seniors consumed about a half-cup more fruits and vegetables 21 daily. 22 23 The American Heart Association and Aramark launched a join initiative called Healthy for Life 20 by 20. The Healthy for Life 24 community engagement program was launched in 2016 in Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia. The target population was 25 low-income single mothers or single heads of households responsible for their families’ food and meal decisions. They 26 followed a 12-week interactive educational program designed to change behaviors regarding food and nutrition. 27 Specifically, it focuses on teaching simple strategies to change food and health attitudes and behaviors, equipping 28 participants with new skills for healthy living. Culturally-relevant and family-centric activities focused on overall wellbeing, 29 cooking skills and food, grocery shopping and gardening. The results were impressive. Seventy-five percent of participants 30 say they are working to improve their health. And 69 percent have improved their overall fruit and vegetable consumption. 31 These findings prove that the program, designed for underserved communities, can be effective in modifying behavior. 32 Community-targeted initiatives can inspire local collaborations, help sustain health and wellness programs, and directly 33 impact community members. 34 35 Black Farmers Research:

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference E Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

36 According to the latest Census of Agriculture, 1.4% of the U.S.'s 3.4 million farmers identify as Black, either alone or in 37 combination with another race. In Minnesota, Black farmers account for 0.03% of the total producers, compared to 0.07% 38 across the border in Wisconsin. Now, two projects piloted by Black women aim to get more Black producers on farmland 39 and stay there for generations ahead. Community members in both Minnesota & Wisconsin have used a crowd-sharing 40 fundraising method to raise thousands of dollars to purchase farmland for Black producers and help it stay there for 41 generations to come. 42 43 Urban Farming Research: 44 Urban farms play a vital role in our cities, providing access to healthy, local food, green space that benefits both body and 45 mind, and more. Often led by and rooted in communities of color and immigrant and New American communities, urban 46 gardens and farms bolster the well-being and resilience of our cities. Here’s a look at the many benefits they provide: 47 48 Nutrition: Urban agriculture offers increased access to healthy, locally grown, and culturally appropriate food sources. 49 Having space to grow and share food is especially important in disinvested and underserved neighborhoods, where finding 50 affordable fruits and vegetables can be challenging. Plus, growing and eating food locally reduces the distance food travels 51 to our plates – which is good for our climate and our health, as food loses nutritional value in transport. 52 53 Health: While eating fresh food is beneficial in and of itself, the act of growing that food also boosts physical and mental 54 health. Research shows that working with plants—and putting our hands in the dirt—provides outdoor physical activity, 55 induces relaxation, and reduces stress, anxiety, blood pressure, and muscle tension. 56 57 Economy: Urban agriculture can provide a flexible source of income for gardeners and cut family food costs. Also, urban 58 gardening and farming projects, like Mill City Grows, can often provide job training and jumpstart food entrepreneurship. 59 60 Community: Urban farming adds and preserves green space in cities, providing places for neighbors to come together, 61 strengthen bonds, and build community cohesion. Urban agriculture connects people with the earth and the source of their 62 food as well as with each other. What’s more, urban farms offer critical opportunities for youth leadership, 63 intergenerational collaboration, and cross-cultural learning. 64 65 Environment: Urban agriculture improves environmental health and climate resilience in the face of increasing storms and 66 heat. Cultivated land absorbs rainfall, preventing stormwater from overloading sewer systems and polluting waterways. 67 Also, by increasing vegetation and tree cover, farms and gardens attract pollinators like bees and keep city neighborhoods 68 cooler, minimizing the health impacts of heat island effect. 69

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference F Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Agricultural Emergency Response Workforce Safety

Submitted By: Thom Petersen, Commissioner, MN Dept. of Agriculture

1 Text of Action Item: 2 NASDA supports efforts to secure resources and tools (ie., PPE, access to vaccinations, utilize rural health clinics to 3 administer vaccinations, etc.) needed for farmers, workers, and rural communities to maintain a continual food supply 4 in the face of a global pandemic. NASDA encourages interagency cooperation to provide federal resources and 5 support to help states manage food and agricultural worker protection. 6 7 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 8 The health and safety of our nation’s front-line farm and food workers is necessary for a resilient food supply system. 9 Interagency cooperation between state agencies and the federal government will help ensure essential agricultural 10 workforce gets the proper vaccinations and PPE need to stay healthy while alleviating some of the financial stress 11 farmers continue to experience from COVID -19. As new COVID-19 vaccines are approved and ready for distribution, 12 we would like to encourage the new administration and Congress to support granting priority vaccine access to 13 essential agricultural workers. 14 15 The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has designated 16 the food and agriculture sector as part of the nation’s critical infrastructure. This ensures that planting, harvesting, 17 processing, and distribution of human and animal food can continue to meet the needs of consumers. First 18 responders, medical professionals, elderly and caretakers, along with other vulnerable individuals, clearly have the 19 highest priority for vaccination. However, as we move beyond these highest priority groups, NASDA asks that front 20 line food and agriculture employees be included in the next highest priority for the vaccine within any federal COVID- 21 19 Vaccination Plans. This request is consistent with the recommendations of both the National Academies of 22 Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s (NASEM) Framework for Equitable Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine and the 23 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) COVID-19 Vaccination Program Interim Playbook for Jurisdiction 24 Operations. We concur with these recommendations from our nation’s top scientists and experts on infectious 25 diseases. NASDA signed a letter in support of these actions in 2020.

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference G Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted :01/27/2021 Committee: Food Systems & Nutrition [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Action Items (AI) highlight a specific current issue Members feel NASDA should act on or other priority issues. Also do not establish NASDA policy and must comply with existing policy or be accompanied by a corresponding Policy Amendment.

Subject of Action Item: Increasing Processing Capacity

Submitted By: Secretary Karen Ross (CA) and Commissioner Amanda Beal (ME)

1 Text of Action Item: 2 3 Support the reintroduction of the Strengthen Local Processing Act, or substantially similar legislation in the 4 117th Congress. 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 8 Supporting this legislation will create more robust access to local protein sources and support small growers which 9 will increase food access as a critical means of reducing hunger. 10 11

2021 NASDA Winter Policy Conference H Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted:01/27/2021 Committee: Food Systems & Nutrition [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Reducing Food Waste

Submitted By: Secretary Karen Ross (CA) and Commissioner Amanda Beal (ME)

1 Text of Action Item: 2 3 Support the extension of the inter-agency agreement to reduce food waste by the USDA, FDA, and EPA to 4 2030. 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 8 This is a policy recommendation outlined in the Food and Agriculture Climate Alliance (FACA) in which NASDA 9 is already apart of. Passing this action item will give NASDA policy staff clear instruction on an area NASDA 10 members can lead regarding certain FACA policy recommendations. 11 12