Around 40 people attended the last Big.Small.All workshop in Urbana Tuesday evening.
Let me start with positives about the Big.Small.All visioning project. Citizens from diverse backgrounds were able to dialogue civilly about the future of Champaign County. It was pretty clear that each person cared deeply about where we're going as a community and wanted to affect the type of changes each thought was important.
Most people came with an agenda and a vested interest (I consider this a generally good thing). Farmers discussed land use with idealistic college student/urban planners. Business owners and laborers, lay people and bureaucratic experts were represented. However, minorities were definitely underrepresented, even with attempts by Frank DiNovo and staff to include every group.
Lots of talk at our table about the goal of zero waste, greenspace, and government accountability.
Two agricultural goals that will be contentious:
- “By 2030, the number of farms will be at least as large as today.”ÂÂ
- “By 2030, no more than 10,000 additional acres of farmland in Champaign Co. will be converted to non-agricultural uses.” (This goal has the dubious distinction of being on the list of both favorite and least favorite goals)
Chamber leaders continue to be concerned with the anti-business restrictions throughout many key objectives.
Discussion lead to the inevitable cities “merger” proposal (including Savoy”¦yikes, leave us out of it).
- “Duplicative services will be substantially eliminated and all appropriate opportunities for sharing or consolidating govt. responsibilities will be implemented.” (This is a whole thread unto itself.)
The final product is due out in January and at a price tag of $ 300,000+, it will be interesting to see what comes of this document.
For example, I talked with one prominent farmer last night about the land use restrictions promoted in the plan. Weren't farmers upset, I asked? “Not really,” he replied. “They don't think the document has the teeth to make a difference anyway.”ÂÂ
Thanks for the post, Joan. My Champaign County farmer friend believes that the goal of “By 2030, the number of farms will be at least as large as today.” is totally unrealistic even if there is zero development of farmland.
He backs up that opinion with his experience of growing the number of acres he farms just to keep up the income necessary to make it as a farmer. In the last twenty years he has increased from 685 to 970 just to stay in business.
It's will be impossible to maintain the "number of farms" in Champaign County, especially if any additional land is converted from agriculture to non-agriculture. The trend for at least a century has been larger and larger farms, as agricultural technology has improved. As farms get larger and the amount of farm land shrinks, there will be fewer farms.
"It's will be impossible to maintain the “number of farms” in Champaign County"
And besides, it is just a stupid goal. Did they also propose that Champaign County maintain the same number of car dealerships, or grocery stores? How about we bulldoze the airport and plant corn there - we could add 1 new farm :-)
Every year, every industry generates more product with fewer people. Large-scale operations will always be the most economic way to farm. I suspect that the number-of-farms goal is either coming from a romantic-nostalgic "save the family farm" response, or the misguided notion that all of Champaign County could be agrarian free-range organic cruelty-free garden plots. Neither are realistic or even desirable, and I think it's unfortunate that such a goal has been conflated with the issue of protecting productive farm ground, which I consider a local economic issue and a national strategic issue (ensuring energy and food supplies).
"I suspect that the number-of-farms goal is either coming from a romantic-nostalgic “save the family farm” response, or the misguided notion that all of Champaign County could be agrarian free-range organic cruelty-free garden plots."
Well said :-)
You know, one way to "protect" farmland, without restricting property owner rights, would be to lower the taxation/assessed value on farmland. The more money that can be made on farmground, the less attractive the sale of it is. $3 corn won't hurt either.
We need less farmland and more clinics that could be sited in already-developed areas.
Hey RSW--We have $3.00 corn now and the ..."notion that all of Champaign County could be agrarian free-range organic cruelty-free garden plots.” is not allowed by Big Small All because “By 2030, the number of farms will be at least as large as today.”ÂÂ
You did hit partly on what we really need----namely a shift from property tax to income tax.
This issue of preserving prime farmland by relinqueshing the owners property rights is a huge issue. How would you like to be a landowner and have your county board dictate new zoning regulations that restrict your ability to sell off home sights. Ten years ago a one acre home sight was legal by right. Today the new zoning text amendments are proposing to retrict the landowner to one lot per forty acres with a maximum of four additionl lots per tax parcel. Heres an example, if you owned sixty acres you could have a minimum six, posssibly more home sights, if the new regs went through you would be limited to one home sight. Do the math and one can see the loss of value to the landowner.
How can the county board even consider doing this to the citizens of this county. Especially when you see that the loss of farm land is not a big issue outside the urban spawl of CU. This is the culprit, CU not the rural landowners.
THERE IS A PROTEST AT 6:30 THIS TUESDAY THE 21ST AT THE BROOKENS CENTER IN URBANA AT THE COUNTY BOARD MEETING. SPREAD THE WORD! AS A CONSERVATIVE LOOKING TO STOP A LIBERAL ATTACK IN OUR COMMUNITY. YOU SHOULD TAKE PART AND SUPPORT YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS.