HomeMy WebLinkAbout20010694 WELD CO!FITY
March 4, 2001
I. `'2 -6 rd 3: 54
To: The Weld Board of County Commissioners:
Subject: Effective implementation of the Right to Farm Advisement
RFCET: !)
Dear Commissioners:
As"city people" continue to move into agricultural areas of Weld County, friction
mounts, as these people become aware of the realities, rather than the idyllic
preconceptions they have, of living in the country. Many object to what have been
normal, accepted practices of the agricultural industry since Weld County was settled two
centuries ago. They find objectionable certain smells, sights, sounds, slow moving farm
equipment on the roads, hours of operation, housekeeping practices and the farm
atmosphere in general. At times their objections are expressed in personal confrontations,
proactive group organizations, media exposure, public hearings and forums and in the
courts.
A.Policy 7 of the Comprehensive Plan seeks to deal with this problem through the
Right to Farm Advisement [aka Right to Farm Covenant and Weld County's Right to
Farm]. This document is required to be placed on the recorded plat of any County
development.
There are a number of weaknesses, indeed failings, in this sole requirement for
accomplishing the ends for which it was designed:
1.Very few purchasers of property see or read a final plat on which the Right to Farm
Advisement appears.
2. The covenant is not on the final plat of lands in municipalities of the County, so that
purchasers in towns and cities have no opportunity to see or read the Advisement.
3. When developed residential land is resold there is no opportunity for the new
purchaser to see or read the covenant.*
As a result, in most cases, the Advisement is ineffective because those that should be
made aware of it are not.
If Weld government is serious about newcomers being made aware of the right of
farmers to continue their agricultural practices as permitted by applicable statutes,
regulations and ordinances, and the responsibilities of non agricultural residents to
respect those rights, perhaps the following steps and measures should be considered:
1. Require that the Advisement be read and signed by all residential land purchasers
in the County at the time of closing on the property.
2. Negotiate with County municipalities to adopt the Advisement and institute the
procedure suggested in [1] above.
3. In lieu of these two suggestions, to require that the County Clerk and Recorder to
send, with the recorded deed, a copy of the Advisement to the grantee of any deed
recorded by the Clerk for the sale of residential land in the County or in any of its
municipalities.
As rapid residential development continues in the County, friction between the -
agricultural and residential populations increases. The Advisement is a worthwhile idea,
but it is ineffective unless the appropriate parties are made aware of it.
03/AP-42001 2001-0694
There is a bill in the State Assembly addressing this problem. However, it would
seem fitting, given the stated goals of the County, to give "fair warning" to new urban
residents in what remains, to a great extent, an agricultural county.
This proposal was made previously to the Commissioners. At the time, there were
concerns as to its adding more paperwork at closings or work for the Clerk and
Recorder's office and authority for implementation. However, with three new
Commissioners serving on the Board, it is my hope that this Board will consider its
merits for the benefit of all County residents and for more effectively implementing a key
objective of the Comprehensive Plan.
John S. Folsom
*As an example, recently, in Casagrande Estates, where I live, almost the first remark of
a newcomer was objection to agricultural odors. Gregerson's Dairy, the Booth feed lot
and a Conagra turkey farm are within a couple of miles of our homes and subdivision
residents have a variety of animals on their premises. Having lived here for over 25 years,
I accept this as being part of the aura of the area.
Hello