Charity Begins at Home with American Citizens

Photo: Martha Boneta 2014

While we are fighting in Virginia and around the country for small farmer’s rights to maintain their freedom to farm, unencumbered by local government permits and environmental NGOs that are determined to force all farmers under conservation easements and regulatory control, war refugees are given land and grants to farm in our country.

A recent report by the Associated Press from Des Moines, Iowa, stated, “The rapidly rising demand for locally grown fruits and vegetables has created a robust new market for refugees who fled violence in their home countries and found peace in farming small plots of land in several U.S. cities.”

The Global Greens program offered through the Lutheran Services of Iowa enabled 26 refugee families from Bhutan, Burundi, Burma, and Rwanda to grow tomatoes, potatoes, carrots, kale, lettuce and eggplants for their own consumption on small plots of 50 feet by 50 feet. Eight families are growing food on quarter-acre plots for local commercial consumption.

The 2003 federal Refugee Agricultural Partnership Program awards a maximum $85,000 to each organization ($1 million per year). In addition to previous organizations, plots are currently funded in New York City, Buffalo, Cleveland, Honolulu, Nashville, Providence, Sioux Falls, and Tampa. http://www.federalgrants.com/Refugee-Agricultural-Partnership-Program-41339.html

Simon, a refugee from Burundi said, "We were in a refugee camp and life was not good there but the United States gave us the opportunity to come here. This means a lot to me because we get to sell stuff and make a little bit of money so we can help our family and we can grow food so our family can feed other people and feed ourselves too." He expressed his hope to return to Africa one day and “to teach them new techniques to grow food and fight hunger.”

The goal of the Global Greens program is “to help families make money, but it’s also about being able to grow some of their own cultural crops. It’s being able to involve their families, being able to just have their own land.” http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dc77e20b44534de5b9b029f968cb21c4/refugees-settle-thanks-small-farm-plots

Should these government grants and charity not be given to our own unemployed and destitute American population who would welcome the opportunity to have their own piece of land on which to farm commercially and grow their own food? Charity begins at home but lately it seems that our own population does not count; illegal aliens and refugees from war and poverty-torn areas are given priority over the wellbeing, financial security, and health security of our own citizens.

Additionally, has any American citizen tried recently to get a "Farmers Home Loan?”  What about two years of free living like the State Department gives to refugees? 

Environmentalists in the historic York County, Virginia having collected 130 signatures, have asked the Board of Supervisors to ban commercial farming. Anthony Bavuso, a local oysterman, did not believe that York County should require him to purchase a special use permit for his oyster-farming operation at York Point because the Commonwealth of Virginia passed a low in 2014, the Boneta Bill, to protect small farming.

This law is strongly opposed by conservationist activists and environmental NGOs and they are determined to obstruct it by “asserting that the county of 66,000 could cite lot sizes and other considerations to quash farming activities.” www.watchdog.org/170548/county-farming-ban/

Martha Boneta, the small farmer who owns Liberty Farm in Paris, Virginia, has been battling for eight years the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC), a 501(c) non-profit land trust that co-holds an easement on her family farm with the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF). Her easement contract permits agricultural, industrial, commercial, and residential uses of her property. Yet PEC regularly inspects, to the point of harassment, her barn, tools, kitchen, bathroom, and closets to make sure that nobody resides in her barn. According to Boneta, based on the secretive “confidential agreement” between the NGO and realtors, there is no doubt about the intent of the constant harassment and unending court battles.

While American farmers who have farmed for generation on small plots are being squeezed out by the NGO environmentalist assault on property rights, refugees and illegal aliens are given land and money to achieve the American dream. It is nice to be charitable and altruistic but our American citizens and their children’s dreams should have priority.

The Environmentalists Are Not Giving Up

Liberty Farm, Paris, Virginia
Photo: Martha Boneta, March 2014

The small farmers in Virginia rejoiced when Senate Bill 51 and House Bill 268, dubbed the “Boneta Bill,” passed both houses and the Democrat Governor Terry McAuliffe signed it. The bill gave farmers legal protection from overreaching and overzealous county bureaucrats who impose unreasonable requirements and unnecessary fees on small farmers.

The bills, sponsored by state Senator Richard Stuart (R-Montross) and state Delegate Bobby Orrock (R-Thornburg), protect “agricultural operations from local regulation” and limit the government’s ability to require “special-use permits” for farm activities. Among many things, “Martha’s bill prevents counties from imposing a $100 fee to grow tomatoes.”

Martha Boneta, the farmer at the center of this protracted battle in Virginia said, “No Virginian should be forced to lose everything when they fight city hall.” Her farm is embroiled in a costly legal battle with Fauquier County supervisors over the use of her own farmland.

Boneta explained, “Corn mazes and pumpkin carvings were considered ‘events’ that required site plans and a mile-long list of red tape that can be suffocating.”

“There is an illusion that farmers are allowed to sell all their products because there are farmers markets and one-day bake sales. ... These are exemptions granted at the whim of government. I have 33 acres with cows. If I had the ability to sell all my farm products (including raw milk) directly to the public, I could make $56,000 a year. But not under existing regulations.” (Bernadette Barber, founder of Virginia Food Freedom)

Martha Boneta found herself at the center of the battle for farm freedom and property rights when she held a birthday party for eight 10-year-old girls at her Liberty Farm. Fauquier County deemed this party illegal because it lacked a permit. “Why would I need a permit for pumpkin carving?” Boneta said.

Boneta was issued a special license in 2011 which allowed her to run a “retail farm shop” in which she sold handspun yarns, fresh vegetables, eggs, herbs, honey, and craft items such as birdhouses. Fauquier County Board of Supervisors changed in 2011 the “farm sales classification” to require a special permit for activities that were previously included in the permit that Boneta had already been issued. Faced with fines of $5,000 per violation under charges that she held a birthday party for eight 10-year-old girls without a permit and a “site plan,” advertised one wine tasting, sold postcards with pictures of her rescued farm animals, sold wool fiber products from her sheep and alpacas, and sold organic tea from herbs grown in her garden, even though she had a business license, Martha paid $500 to appeal these unjust administrative charges. “The county zoning administrator told her at the hearing that “Martha was out of line,” for appealing these charges.”

Mark Fitzgibbons wrote that “Fauquier County also passed a winery ordinance that blatantly violates property rights and civil liberties.  It gives Fauquier zoning administrator Kimberley Johnson discretion to create penalties and to prohibit private personal gatherings.”http://washingtonexaminer.com/virginia-vintners-taste-the-police-state/article/2504381

Fitzgibbons said that “A local but powerful group called the Piedmont Environment Council (http://www.pecva.org/index.php/our-region/fauquier/711-fauquier-farm-winery-ordinance)

wholeheartedly backed that illegal, anti-liberty winery ordinance.  The PEC seems to have an unusual if not disturbing amount of influence over Fauquier County officials. http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/the_environmentalists_police_and_welfare_states.html

Barber described the Boneta Bill victory as “opening the barn door for the blossoming farm-to-table movement.” However, bureaucrats and NGOs do not give up easily. Undaunted, no sooner had the ink dried on the signatures on the bill, the environmentalists came calling for a farm inspection of Martha’s Liberty Farm.

Property owners and farmers are fined, bullied, threatened based not just on zoning ordinances, but also via environmental conservation easements with onerous requirements, and farm inspections.

Martha Boneta’s farm is the only farm in the state of Virginia that has four required inspections per year. Inspectors used to come several times a month until Boneta complained. She gets a seven day notice.

The inspections are intended to “measure” the size of an apartment that Boneta is permitted to have. However, nobody lives on the farm; they have not built an apartment yet. Instead, PEC inspectors (at times as few as 2 and other times as many as 11) come into the converted barn that holds tools, tables, furniture with drawers, wool bundles, closets, and rummage through drawers, open closets, inspect the contents, an obvious violation of the farmer’s privacy.

According to Martha Boneta, the inspectors came on March 25, were rude, angry, aggressive, and disrespectful, pushing their way into her cottage although she told them they were fine outside. They took pictures even though Martha did not give them permission to do so and it is not stipulated in her conservation easement. “They are running roughshod over people because there is no oversight over these people.”

During this recent visit, an observer commented that seeing the two inspectors rummaging through Martha’s personal belongings, opening closets, drawers, touching and going through personal items reminded her of what “must have been like during Nazi Germany. I feel invaded, I feel violated, and I feel like I need to go take a shower.” When questions were asked of the inspectors, they responded, “we don’t have to answer you.”

Martha Boneta had a conservation easement with Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC), an NGO, when she bought her farm from the previous owners. Donna Holt explained that “PEC holds the easement and that makes them a stakeholder in the property although they don’t own the land or pay taxes on it.  They have the right, under the terms of the contract, to inspect it for compliance of the terms of the easement. The language is vague, they make rules as they see fit, and the courts usually uphold them.”

Martha used tires on her property to “help hollow fields for plowing, train animals to move in a certain direction, and assist in planting. PEC sued Boneta, saying that the tires violated her agricultural conservation easement, and she was forced to store them in an enclosure.” Tires were the least of her numerous and constant problems with PEC. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/60623

A “conservation easement” imposes certain restrictions on the homeowners’ use of their property in exchange for tax breaks. These easements have a specific length or can be permanent.

A private citizen described PEC on Facebook, “This group has even sued about a $25 hose attachment because it interfered with the "view-shed." They claim to want to protect us but they really want to take away our property rights.” He explained that the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF), “the parent organization of PEC only inspects farms maybe once every three years and are not subjected to inspections of drawers and personal belongings, don’t have pictures taken of their families or drive-bys by the PEC or their agents.” They are empowered by the federal government and the state and act as agents of the local county of Fauquier.”

The Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) protects more than 725,000 acres of open space in Virginia, mostly through conservation easements.http://www.virginiaoutdoorsfoundation.org/

Joel Sallatin warns American farmers and land owners about those “sincere conservation easements” because “Ultimately, these easements reduce farm viability and gradually turn Virginia’s pastoral landscape into a wilderness area.” This type of green environmental movement is probably not what the average American envisions. “Giving over farm decisions to people who neither farm nor adapt their approaches jeopardizes farmers’ livelihoods. Ultimately, preserving farmers is the only sustainable way to preserve farms.” http://flavormagazinevirginia.com/conservation-easements/

The tax breaks are a welcome relief for farmers who struggle to make a living on their land but they are presented through rose-colored glasses. But, at a time when food is expensive, we are using more crops for biofuels, and we have to import food from other nations, the obvious and most important question is - why would a landowner place good farmland under perpetual conservation easement in order to preserve it? Preserve working farmland for what? Land owners and farmers should seek and request opt-out policies before they sign onto conservation easements.

Boneta Bill Part Deux

Farming comprises less than three percent of American labor force that feeds 307 million Americans and many other millions around the world yet government regulations are making it harder and harder for small farms to operate and bring wholesome foods to the market.

Why should farmers be subjected to “annual property monitoring visits and inspections” by environmental groups, environmental councils, and local supervisors beholden to international agencies, groups that have no idea how their food gets to the table nor do they care?

Virginians have fought back the NGO environmentalist assaults on their land, private property rights, and the right to farm by introducing HB 1430, The Right to Farm Act, better known as the Boneta Bill, which passed the House of Delegates 77-22 in February 2013 but was blocked by the Senate Agricultural Committee by a vote of 11-4. The sponsor of the bill, Delegate Scott Lingamfelter, promised to reintroduce the bill in 2014.

Chairman Mike Thomas and his committee of 12 proposed a resolution on May 4, 2013, the Virginia Small Farm and Food Freedom Resolution in support of HB 1839, the Virginia Food Freedom Act. (www.vafarmandfoodfreedom.com)

The Resolution called on the Republican Party of Virginia “to support state legislation and local ordinances consistent with each farmer’s right to determine what best constitutes farming, farm life, the best uses of his/her own farm land, respect for their neighbors,” market pay for their labor, and to repeal state laws and ordinances inconsistent with the Resolution.

Martha Boneta found herself at the center of the battle for farm freedom and property rights when she held a birthday party for eight 10-year old girls at her Paris Barns. Fauquier County deemed this party illegal because it lacked permit. “Why would I need a permit for pumpkin carving?” Boneta said.

Boneta was issued a special license in 2011 which allowed her to run a “retail farm shop” in which she sold handspun yarns, fresh vegetables, eggs, herbs, honey, and craft items such as birdhouses.

Fauquier County Board of Supervisors changed in 2011 the “farm sales classification” to require a special permit for activities that were previously included in the permit that Boneta had already been issued.

Faced with fines of $5,000 per violation under charges that she held a birthday party for eight 10-year old girls without a permit and a “site plan,” advertised one wine tasting, sold postcards with pictures of her rescued farm animals, sold wool fiber products from her sheep and alpacas, and sold organic tea from herbs grown in her garden, even though she had a business license, Martha paid $500 to appeal these unjust administrative charges. “The county zoning administrator told her at the hearing that ‘Martha was out of line,’ for appealing these charges.”

When farm property owners can no longer hold a child’s birthday party without a permit, we are no longer free. In a letter dated January 8, 2012, Delegate L. Scott Lingamfelter said, “What’s next? A citation from the food police for serving cake and ice cream to the children? A user fee for every helium balloon inflated? It’s not outside the realm of possibility. Not anymore.”

Farmers engage primarily in agriculture; additionally, they have the right to commerce, the right of enjoyment of their land, assembly on their own property, the right to exercise religious freedom on their lands, the right to grow, eat, sell their locally produced foods without burdensome local and state government regulations or dictates from environmental groups sponsored by international groups and entities with taxpayer dollars.

Government should not use laws, regulations, zoning ordinances, or cumbersome and expensive permits to violate or trespass on farmers’ rights and freedom to farm under the guise that they know what is best for farming in general or one farmer in particular.

Such government agencies that violate farmers’ rights and trespass on their property should be made accountable for their deeds. Americans should not be treated as guilty until proven innocent while giving environmental groups unlimited power without much redress for small farmers who do not have the means to fight back and must shut down their farming operations and farm stores as was the case of Martha Boneta in Virginia and many others across the country.

The new Governor of Virginia and the General Assembly have a duty to advance legislation in 2014 that respects the rights of citizens to pursue their self-interests as protected by the Constitution of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

It appears that a compromise was reached and, on January 8, 2014, Delegate Bobby Orrock introduced HB 268. This bill is the labor of a state-appointed task force which assembled farmers from both sides of the aisle, reviewed public testimony, and reached a compromise. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?141+sum+HB268

HB 268 summarizes agricultural operations and local regulation of certain activities, “protecting customary agritourism activities from local bans in the absence of substantial impacts on the public welfare and requires certain localities to take certain factors into account when regulating agritourism activities.” There has to be a basis in health, safety, or public welfare for a local ordinance to restrict activities such as agritourism, sale of agricultural or silvicultural products, related items, preparation or sale of foods that already comply with state laws, and other customary activities. Local boards are “prohibited from subjecting these activities to a special-use permit requirement.”

Senator Richard Stuart filed a companion bill, SB51. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?141+sum+SB51

The Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services task force members included:

-         Joel Salatin of Polyface Farm

-         Lois Smith of Virginia Independent Consumers and Farmers Association Katie Frazer of Virginia Agribusiness

-         Trey Davis of Virginia Farm Bureau

-         Martha Boneta of Liberty Farm

Virginia Farm Bureau and Virginia Agribusiness Council support the new bill that will strengthen the rights of small family-owned farms, allowing them “to sell their products from nearby farms and host events without additional local permits.”

Martha Boneta, a member of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, http://farmtoconsumer.org/ explains, “This is a win-win for farmers, consumers, and the state. Farmers get the income they need, while consumers have a one-stop shop option and the state gains additional sales revenue. We are all so happy we’ve found a winning compromise.”

http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2014/01/14/602451/10064259/en/Virginia-Task-Force-Results-in-New-On-Farm-Activities-Bill.html

Bills can be tracked at:

www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2014/hb268/
www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2014/sb51/

The Boneta Bill in Virginia to Protect the Right to Farm

Martha Boneta never dreamed that she would be at the center of a battle in Virginia that will have implications for every small farmer in America. I have met her last year and wrote two articles (http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52188) about her battle with the board of supervisors in Fauquier County. I have featured Martha in my book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy.” (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=un+agenda+21+environmental+piracy+kindle)

Delegate Scott Lingamfelter (R-Woodbridge) introduced HB 1430, the Boneta Bill, an amendment to the Right to Farm Act of July 1, 1981. HB 1430 will expand the definition of agricultural operations to include commerce of farm-to-business and farm-to-consumer sales, including art, literature, artifacts, furniture, food, beverage, and other items incidental to agricultural operations. Items which “constitute less than a majority amount of production or sales, or less than a majority of annual revenues from such sales, are defined as part of the agricultural operation.

“The bill gives persons engaged in agricultural operations a cause of action against the county or any official or employee of the county for violations of the Right to Farm Act.” Two provisions of HB 1430 are retroactive to the Right to Farm Act of 1981:

-          expansion of the definition of agricultural operation

-          any ordinance directed at persons, property, or activity on land that is zoned agricultural or silvicultural that seeks to restrict free speech or the right to assembly, among other rights, is null and void

The Boneta Bill will be heard on Monday, January 28, 2013 at 5 p.m. by the Virginia House Agricultural Committee at the Virginia State Capitol – “The Pitchfork Protest Comes to Richmond.” (http://fauquierfreecitizen.com/)

The original pitchfork protest took place in August 2012 in Warrenton in response to a Fauquier County supervisor threatening Martha Boneta, the owner of Liberty Farms in the village of Paris in northern Virginia, with $5,000 fines for selling produce and crafts and hosting unlicensed events such as a pumpkin carving and a birthday party for her best friend’s daughter and eight ten-year old girls.

Boneta was told that “she did not have the proper event permits for the party and other events, including wine tastings, craft workshops, and pumpkin carving.” Fines were also threatened for produce and products not grown or made on her 70-acre farm although she had a special “retail farm shop” license issued to her in 2011. Martha planned to sell handspun yarns, birdhouses, fresh vegetables, eggs, and herbs. But Fauquier County Board of Supervisors changed “farm sales” classification in 2011 to require a special permit for activities that were previously included under her license.

Martha paid $500 to appeal the unjust administrative charges and threats. The country zoning administrator told Martha at the hearing that she was “out of line” for appealing these charges.

Martha’s farm store that was opened just seven hours a week is now closed. She fears the “uncertain, unlawful, and unscrupulous actions of the county.”

When citizens fear their local governments, there is no freedom. The ruling attitude of the elected boards is that the “King can do no wrong.” When elected officials claim “sovereign immunity” and no longer serve the citizens’ interests but their own, there is tyranny and oppression.

According to Delegate Scott Lingamfelter, in November 2012, 74 percent of Virginians voted to amend the Constitution of Virginia in order to strengthen property rights. “Let’s make sure that Fauquier County officials and all government employees remember that they work for us. Virginians will not tolerate overreaching and overregulating by any layer of government.”

The Virginia Association of Counties opposes the Boneta Bill, developing talking points against HB 1430. Some of the counties support the mandates of U.N. Agenda 21 and prefer “penny-loafer farming,” preserving thousands of acres of green grass with a few riding horses, no real agriculture to spoil the well-manicured “wilderness.”

The Virginia Association of Counties’ talking points are: (http://www.rightsidenews.com/)

-          HB 1430 weakens the authority of counties to plan and regulate land use (this is false; the bill protects traditional, centuries-old forms of farming commerce and constitutional rights on farm lands)

-          HB 1430 creates a more permissive zoning scheme in agricultural areas that may lead to land use conflicts with neighboring properties (false; protecting rights does not obstruct agricultural zoning; counties are still free to prohibit trespasses by farmers on their neighbors’ rights of enjoyment)

-          HB 1430 threatens “sovereign immunity” of county officials; they won’t be able to perform their duties for fear of penalties (false; HB 1430 is only limited to violations of the Virginia Right to Farm Act; counties carry litigation insurance against frivolous lawsuits when their officials make mistakes in good faith; if officials are fearful of losing their “sovereign immunity,” they should ask Martha what their overreaching ordinance did to her family’s life and livelihood)

Counties and officials who support the Boneta Bill respect and follow the law and do not overreach in their duties as elected representatives of the people. The HB 1430 “will ensure that government at all levels respects the heritage and traditions of farming – and the rights of property owners to enjoy their land in the way that they see fit.” (Del. Scott Lingamfelter’s letter to constituents, January 8, 2013)

Unfortunately, there are those who developed and passed onerous regulations by “consensus,” without the knowledge or approval of a local majority. These are “visioning committee” officials who were hand-picked to promote and pass U.N. Agenda 21 goals without the people’s knowledge that the boards’ green growth, smart growth, sustainable, and save the planet plans were limiting the use and ownership of private property, and, in some cases, leading to confiscation of property and return to wilderness.

Sevil Kalayci wrote an impassionate letter to her representative. “Sunday morning the local news was talking about local farms in Maryland and how much [urbanites] enjoyed getting produce from their local farms. I guess they have no idea small farms will be disappearing because of the goals of U.N. Agenda 21. The ultimate goal is to completely eliminate all small farms around the country. A few huge companies like Monsanto will direct all the farms in the country. Eventually all backyard gardens will be illegal.”

Alice Butler Short was listening to John Kerry deliver a speech on the Hill and heard him make the analogy that “foreign policy is economic policy.” He said, “A fruit vendor in Tunisia who ignited the Arab Awakening wanted dignity and respect. He wanted to sell his fruit without corruption and abuse. That is what led him to self-immolate.”

Doesn’t Martha and millions of small farmers like her deserve the same right to sell the fruits of her agricultural labor without corruption and abuse in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave?