HomeMy WebLinkAboutAAC 2025-09-10AGRICULTURE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
September 10, 2025
In-PersonPresent:Evan Carpenter (chair), Doug Antczak, Austin Beck, Kim LaMotte, Absentees:Steve Foote, Brian MageeLiaisons:Craig Schutt (Conservation Board)Staff:Allison Kjellander-Cantu
(Deputy Town Clerk)
The meeting was called to order at 7:37 p.m.
Review and Approval of Minutes from August 13, 2025
On motion made by E Carpenter,the motion to approve the minutes of August 13, 2025, wereapproved as written. Vote: Ayes- Carpenter, Antczak, LaMotte, andAbstained- Beck.
Local Law No._______ Of the Year 2025 A Local Law Adopting a New Article II of Chapter 105 of The Town Code, To Be Entitled “Confinement of Livestock”
Each member received a copy of these proposed laws. They reviewed the sections on setting standards for livestock, confinement, and welfare. Most members found them straightforward andwould
like to suggest adding provisions for warnings for repeat offenders (owners). They also noted that negligence was not explicitly listed as a condition for maintaining fixtures and protocols
for animal control and seizure.
Section 1. Purpose and Intent. They would like to see the wording “and requiring sufficient setback for fencing” removed, as this wording is not revisited or relevant to agriculture.
Farm fences are typically located on the property line, with no setbacks, which is why farmers use them to identify their property line. E Carpenter stated, “There’s a different philosophy
of a purpose of a fence when you're in the suburban or in the county.”
Section §105-53 Presumption. A. Beck would like to highlight the last sentence, “The burden of proving proper confinement or restraint shall be upon the owner of such livestock”.He feels
the wording may require clarification to ensure the understanding of this sentence. Theexpectation is clear on how to keep an animal confined. Thewording needs to be clarified to prevent
some people from taking advantage of it. K. LaMotte would like to see some initial warnings issued and tickets issued for reacquiring offenders.
Section §105-54 Enforcement. A. “Any livestock found running at large within the Town of Dryden violates this article and may be seized by any animal control officer, as well as any
peace or police officer of the Town, Tompkins County, or the State of New York.” Members would like to change the wording to read:
“The animal control officer or police officer has the authority to investigate the cause/s of the incident/s, issue warnings to owners, and, if necessary, issue appearance tickets and/or
seize unsupervised livestock off the premises or facilitate the return to the owner, humanely and reasonably.”
A. Beck questioned, “Can we do that without defining the word seizure?”
Section §105-55 Seizure of Unconfined Livestock. A.The wording “impoundment agency,” the Town does not have a third party to handle (transport) any impoundment of livestock. Several
felt that law enforcement does not have the means to transport animals back to their owner. There needs to be a deal with an outside source to help handle these cases. Empire Livestock
was mentioned as a source for a handler, but members felt they are not staffedadequatelyto handle such matters.
Section §105-56 Penalties of Offenses.“Any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a violation punishable by fine not to exceed $250 or by imprisonment
for a term not to exceed 15 days, or both such fine and imprisonment.”Members felt the wording was excessive and would recommendremoving the wording “or by imprisonment for a term not
to exceed 15 days, or both such fine and imprisonment.” They also proposed that fines start with a minimum of $250 or more.”If observed violations of this article by repeated offenders
are the reason why the wording needs to be clarified, or do we add imprisonment for these repeat offenders?”
Section§105-57 Disclaimer of Liability. A. Beck, “This is something I don’t see happening. Again, this falls onto the third party who would handle the livestock.”
Question For Legal Counsel (Jason
Members' biggest concern is “How to enforce this?” and they would like the supervisor’s help with the wording. A. Beck would like to add wording of such “ animal enforcement will seize
the animals by an authorized handler and/or deliveryagency; both need a place to go.”“If livestock is off the owner's premises, this is typically not incriminating, but negligence of
the owner.” Livestock is the owner's liability.
Zoning Advisory Board Update
D. Antczak attended the most recent meeting held on September 4. The topic of data centers was a key point of discussion. There is significant local opposition to the establishment of
these centers, particularly concerning their potential for cryptocurrency operations and broader environmental impacts. In response to this, the board is proposing a policy that would
permit standalone data centers, specifically those dedicated to general data production for artificial intelligence or other purposes, and it restricts their location to light industrial
zones. The committee asserts that this would avoid any impact on agricultural areas or residential neighborhoods, and they are actively developing regulations designed to deter widespread
development of these facilities by ensuring they are not financially attractive to opportunistic ventures.
Dryden Lake Dam UpdateMembers asked if they had heard any updates. C. Schutt informed the group that he has spoken with the supervisor, and there are no updates.DEC will not be physically
present;the next meetingon September 17th will be via Zoom. He is hoping to attend this meeting.
There being no further business, on motion made byK.LaMotteand secondedby A. Beck, the meeting was adjourned at 8:38p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Allison Kjellander-Cantu
Deputy Town Clerk