Latest news with #JimmyDixon
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Senate Agriculture Committee reviews zoning, excavation, wasterwater bills
(Photo: NC Department of Agriculture 2018 Pesticide Report) The Senate Agriculture, Energy, and Environment Committee approved one bill and discussed two others during its hearing on Tuesday. Lawmakers voted to pass House Bill 126, titled 'Revise Voluntary Ag. District Laws,' without any discussion or testimony. This measure would require government agencies considering condemning or rezoning property within a voluntary agricultural district to hold a public hearing. There would be 45 days to set up the hearing and 120 days for the local agricultural advisory board to submit its findings and recommendations to the agency. 'At this point, I've heard no opposition to this bill,' primary sponsor Rep. Jimmy Dixon (R-Duplin, Wayne) said. The bill now heads to the Senate Rules Committee. Legislators also reviewed two bills for discussion only: House Bill 247 ('8-1-1 Amendments') and House Bill 694 ('Study Water/Wastewater Regionalization'). Sen. Michael Lazzara (R-Onslow) presented HB 247 to the panel, explaining the language would be replaced with text from Senate Bill 328, which updates the Underground Utility Safety and Damage Prevention Act. 'We just made the corrections to some of the language, but essentially, it's a consensus,' he said. Sen. Tom McInnis (R-Cumberland, Moore) said he appreciated the bill, seeing as he's had a lot of complaints about 8-1-1. That's the number individuals should call prior to excavating to ensure they don't encounter any buried utilities. 'We can't move forward in our state unless we have a cohesive unit of construction,' McInnis said. If this bill passes the panel, it will proceed to the Senate Rules Committee. It's the same case for HB 694, which would direct the Environmental Finance Center at the University of North Carolina to study wastewater and water regionalization efforts. Sen. David Craven (R-Anson, Montgomery, Randolph, Richmond, Union) presented the legislation. Sen. Lisa Grafstein (D-Wake) asked about the Department of Environmental Quality's role in the process of transferring water between basins. 'This starts with a notice, then DEQ works with the water applicant to develop a draft environmental statement that looks at environmental impacts, it looks at alternatives to the water withdrawal, as well as several other things of that nature,' legislative analysis Kyle Evans said.
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Utility-scale solar projects in North Carolina could see 500% property tax increase
A bill that would raise taxes on utility-scale solar facilities in North Carolina by 500% is moving through the Statehouse. House Bill 729, known as the Farmland Protection Act, passed the Agriculture and Environment Committee Wednesday morning. Rep. Jimmy Dixon (R-Duplin) introduced the bill in early April as a way to address concerns about North Carolina losing productive farmland. The latest version of the bill repeals an 80% tax abatement on utility scale solar projects over four years, ultimately eliminating the abatement entirely. PAST COVERAGE: Is solar threatening North Carolina farms, or is there room for cooperation? Stakeholders with the sustainable energy industry and farmers who have chosen to lease to solar companies expressed their concerns that the bill would unfairly penalize a single industry for farmland loss, which occurs primarily through housing development, while interfering with agreements property owners and solar companies entered in good faith. Before the debate and public discussion in the comittee, Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler voiced his support of the bill. 'We know that solar development has exceeded the amount of farmland we could protect with the Farmland Preservation Trust fund that we have,' he said. 'So, it is time to take a look at this.' A 2020 report from the American Farmland Trust ranks North Carolina second in states with the most-threatened agricultural land, but the report claims the biggest threats are from urbanization and sprawl from low-density residential land use. It does not mention solar development. The North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association released a report in 2022, claiming solar occupies 0.28% of agricultural land in North Carolina. Dixon also emphasized the potential financial boon this bill could provide local governments as they start to collect additional tax revenue, particularly in Tier 1, or the most economically distressed counties in the state, which host a disproportionate number of large-scale solar facilities. According to a note from the Fiscal Research Division, this could add an additional $60.4 million in local revenue annually by 2030, one of the primary reasons the County Commissioners Association expressed their support for the bill. Rep. Keith Kidwell (R-Beaufort), who voted to move the bill through the committee called the tax abatements on these projects 'corporate welfare,' arguing solar developers need to pay their fair share if they want to continue doing business in the state. 'We are subsidizing the solar and wind industry through these tax cuts,' he said. 'Now I'll hear the argument that we subsidize other businesses. Okay, let's stop that, too. Let's make everybody pay an equal amount of taxes, because that's what we're supposed to do under the Constitution.' Joel Olsen, who runs an agrivoltaics facility in Montgomery County that Channel 9 visited earlier this month, spoke at the committee hearing, taking issue with the idea that he is not paying his fair share in taxes. 'When I bought the land, we paid $972 a year in property taxes,' he said. 'Once we completed the solar farm, we paid three years of back taxes. We paid 100% of the real property taxes, and we paid over $100,000 in personal property taxes.' He said he built his solar project with agriculture in mind, with sheep grazing alongside the panels. Olsen said this bill and rhetoric pitting solar against farming doesn't take farms like his into account. The bill was reported favorably with a clear voice vote majority and will move to the Energy Committee for further consideration. This is a revised version of HB 729, original language in the bill would have also increased regulatory constraints by requiring the North Carolina Utilities Commission to refuse to issue a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a utility-scale solar project if the project is to be sited on land currently being used for agricultural production and also required all solar facilities to submit a decommissioning plan to the state. VIDEO: Agriculture Committee weighs N.C. bill to disincentivize solar on farmland
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Agriculture Committee weighs N.C. bill to disincentivize solar on farmland
A bill moving through the North Carolina Statehouse would greatly reduce tax incentives and make it harder to build utility-scale solar projects on farmland. 'Weather Whiplash' is making our dry days drier and wet seasons worse HB 729 or the Farmland Protection Act reduces tax abatements on solar projects from 80% to 40% and requires the North Carolina Utilities Commission to not issue a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a utility-scale solar project unless it's on land not currently being used for agricultural or horticultural production. The bill would also require all new and existing solar projects to register a decommissioning plan and put money aside to enact that plan. The bill's primary sponsor, Rep. Jimmy Dixon (R-Duplin), described the bill as a way to keep productive farmland in its current land use and ensure solar development pays its fair share, particularly to 'tier one counties' or the 40 most economically distressed counties in the state, which host a disproportionate number of these utility-scale solar projects. 'You travel across the state of North Carolina, and it's occupying the best farmland in the state,' he said. 'I am a firm believer in property taxes, property rights … but when you do something on your property that cost every citizen in North Carolina every month a subsidy to pay for what you do on your property. Then I have an interest in what you do on your property.' Six stakeholders spoke before the committee during public comment. Those in favor of the bill included the executive director of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, who spoke to the fact that this bill would bring in millions in additional property tax revenue. A representative from the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services spoke about how quickly the state is losing farmland and how solar development is outpacing their efforts to preserve farmland. According to a report from the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association from 2022, solar occupies 0.28% of agricultural land in North Carolina. Opponents of the bill included a solar industry lobbyist, the Carolinas Clean Energy Business Association and an Anson County farmer who is currently leasing his land for solar development. The advocates for clean energy say this bill threatens to stop future development in its tracks, severely limiting North Carolina's options for a quick and cost-effective transition to carbon-free energy. They also say that this bill would have a dramatic impact on the state business environment in general, as it would significantly increase tax and operational costs for projects that were developed in good faith under previous conditions. The advocates also point out that the idea that solar developments don't pay their fair share isn't accurate as the tax abatement only applies to the solar developments themselves, not the land those developments are on. That land also pays significantly more taxes to the counties than it would have, had it remained farmland. The Anson County farmer, George Draper, brought up the impact to his own property rights. He said he was previously leasing his farmland to family, but when the lessee opted for land closer to his property and better suited for his needs, Draper chose to lease to solar so he and his wife could retire on the land they owned while collecting a stable income. 'We make considerably more money now than we did leasing it to my brother-in-law and Anson County makes considerably more money from tax revenues,' he said. 'Solar is a perfect fit for farmers who have unimproved or unused land for providing alternative sources of income.' The bill was not up for a committee vote and the committee opted to cut discussion short. Rep. Dixon said the bill was still a work in progress and said he would change the language around the tax abatement. 'I originally had it going from 80 to 40% and now it goes to zero. There will be no exclusion going forward,' he said. 'We hope that that will be last, some of the very unfair treatment related to other businesses that have come and built in North Carolina, we feel like that will be a good adjustment.' The change in language has not yet been filed in online versions of the bill but his statements imply the abatement change would not apply to existing projects, though it removes the abatement for future projects entirely. The bill remains in the Agriculture and Environment Committee and will be up for another discussion before a vote. If it's reported favorable, the bill has two more committees before it makes it to the house floor. VIDEO: National Pediatric Health Group joins debate over schools being built near Silfab Solar in Fort Mill
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
North Carolina bill would make it harder to build solar in the name of protecting farmland
A new bill was introduced in the North Carolina state house that would make it more difficult and more expensive to build big, utility-scale solar projects on agricultural land. The bill, titled the Farmland Protection Act or HB 729, would reduce the tax abatement for certain solar projects to 40% of the appraised value, half of the current 80% tax abatement. It was introduced by Republican Rep. Jimmy Dixon of Duplin. The bill would also prioritize solar development on clear-cut timberland or former industrial property (EPA-designated brownfields) rather than farmland. It would require the North Carolina Utilities Commission to refrain from submitting a certificate of public convenience and necessity for utility-scale solar for land currently being used for agricultural or horticultural production. SPECIAL SECTION >> Channel 9 Climate Stories The bill comes as solar projects across the state face some backlash and counties consider moratoriums on the industry to protect their farmland. Davidson County passed a two-year moratorium late last year. A 2020 report from the American Farmland Trust ranks North Carolina second in states with the most-threatened agricultural land. The report claims the biggest threats are from urbanization and sprawl from low-density residential land use, the report does not mention solar development. According to a report from the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association from 2022, solar occupies 0.28% of agricultural land in North Carolina. As of Wednesday, the bill has not been referred to committee, but already has several sponsors including Rep. Kelly Hastings (R-Cleveland) and Rep. Ben Moss (R-Richmond). (VIDEO: First solar-powered Domino's opens in Clover)
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NC House advances bill to mandate labeling of meat alternatives
The North Carolina House is advancing a bill that would mandate specific labeling for meat substitute products. (Photo: The North Carolina House Agriculture and Environment Committee approved on Wednesday a bill to regulate labels for meat alternatives, moving it to the House Rules Committee. HB 134, 'Prohibit Misbranding of Certain Food Products,' requires manufacturers to mark alternative protein products differently from meat. Specifically, a label for a 'manufactured-protein food product' with an 'identifying meat term' would be required to have an 'appropriate qualifying term' such as 'cell-cultured,' 'fake,' 'lab-grown,' or 'grown in a lab' in 20-point or greater font. Meat products refer to foods made wholly or partially from meat — for example, cattle, sheep, swine, goats, bison, or deer — and excludes products that contain very small amounts of meat or have not traditionally been considered meat. Poultry products would be marketed separately. 'What we want is the consumer informed, and to the best of our ability, that's what this bill does,' Rep. Jimmy Dixon (R-Duplin, Wayne), the primary sponsor and committee chair, said. 'Properly label it.' Rep. Sarah Crawford (D-Wake) asked about the 20-point font requirement. Chris Saunders, a legislative analyst, clarified the label would need to be in either 20-point font or the size of the surrounding text, whichever is greater. 'Twenty-point font is about half an inch tall,' he said. 'Most product labels are probably going to default to the surrounding text.' Rep. Deb Butler (D-New Hanover) mentioned how moving towards self-cultured meat is likely inevitable in the future. She noted that it has the potential to reduce greenhouse emissions, cure hunger, and increase the humane treatment of animals and other creatures. But with it being new, Butler described it as a 'disruption' in the same way Uber served as a disruption to the transportation industry. Butler said she isn't opposed to accurately labeling food products, but she's concerned about the bill's implications. 'It feels like we are trying to stifle competition. It feels like we are trying to crush an industry before it gets started,' she said. 'I'm concerned that we are creating a regulatory barrier here, trying to stifle innovation rather than accurately labeling.'
