House Bill 130 establishes a new 2024 Agricultural Disaster Crop Loss Program within the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to provide financial assistance to farmers who suffered verified crop and commodity losses from USDA-declared agricultural disasters in 2024. The bill makes legislative findings that North Carolina agriculture had a large economic impact in 2024 and that every county experienced disaster-related agricultural losses from events such as drought, excessive rainfall, and tropical storms.
To fund the program, the bill directs the State Controller to transfer $475 million into the State Emergency Response and Disaster Relief Fund from three reserve accounts: the Stabilization and Inflation Reserve, the Information Technology Reserve, and the Economic Development Project Reserve. Those funds, along with certain remaining funds from prior disaster relief appropriations, are then appropriated to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for payments to affected farmers in counties designated by USDA disaster declarations.
The bill sets detailed eligibility and documentation rules. Applicants must show verifiable losses, generally through USDA Form 578 or a department form, and must submit claims within 45 days of the program becoming effective, with a possible 45-day extension for nursery, fruit tree, bush, and specialty crop losses that are not immediately known. The department is authorized to use up to 1% of the program funds for administration, to audit recipients, to require supporting records and affidavits, and to recover improperly paid funds with interest. Awarded funds must be used for agricultural production expenses and recovery from disaster losses, and the bill requires periodic reporting to the Fiscal Research Division.
The bill’s impact on state law is primarily fiscal and administrative: it creates a temporary disaster-relief grant program, reallocates money among state reserve funds, and gives the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services new authority to determine payment formulas, verify losses, audit recipients, and enforce repayment. It also defines covered commodities broadly, including crops, aquaculture species, specialty crops, trees, sod, and ornamental plants, while excluding stored grain. The program expires 30 months after becoming effective, with unused funds reverting to the State Emergency Response and Disaster Relief Fund.
No committee debate or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded public sentiment in the materials beyond the bill’s structure and findings. Based on the text, the bill appears designed as a broad relief measure for farmers and likely to be viewed favorably by agricultural interests, but it could raise questions about the size of the appropriation, the use of reserve funds, the short filing deadlines, and the documentation burden placed on applicants.
H130 would create a temporary agricultural disaster assistance program and appropriate $475 million for crop-loss relief, while shifting money from the Stabilization and Inflation Reserve, Information Technology Reserve, and Economic Development Project Reserve into the State Emergency Response and Disaster Relief Fund. It would expand the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ role in administering disaster aid, including eligibility determinations, payment calculations, audits, reporting, and recovery of improper payments. The bill would affect farmers, aquaculture producers, nursery and specialty crop growers, and other agricultural entities with verified 2024 disaster losses in USDA-designated counties.
The bill’s text reflects strong support for agricultural disaster relief, emphasizing the statewide economic importance of agriculture and the widespread nature of 2024 losses. Because no committee transcript or vote record was provided, there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from legislators in the materials. On its face, the measure appears intended as a responsive aid package for farmers affected by natural disasters, and the detailed eligibility and oversight provisions suggest an effort to balance relief with accountability.
The main potential points of contention are the funding source and the size of the appropriation, since the bill draws from multiple state reserve accounts, including the Information Technology Reserve and Economic Development Project Reserve. Another possible issue is the administrative and evidentiary burden on applicants, who must file quickly, provide detailed documentation, and certify losses under penalty of perjury. Some may also question the department’s discretion in setting payment formulas, reserving funds for uncertain specialty-crop losses, and using recipient audits and repayment enforcement.