Senate Bill 59 revises North Carolina’s voluntary agricultural district laws to add more procedural protections before farmland in a voluntary agricultural district or enhanced voluntary agricultural district can be condemned by a state or local public agency. The bill requires the condemning agency to first request a public hearing before the local agricultural advisory board, and it directs the board to hold that hearing, make written findings, and provide a recommendation to the agency before any condemnation action is formally initiated.
The bill also changes the timing rules for that process. It extends the advisory board’s deadline to hold the hearing and submit its findings from 30 days to 45 days after receiving the request, and it bars the agency from formally initiating condemnation until 120 days after the board submits its findings and recommendations. The act becomes effective October 1, 2025, and applies to condemnation actions initiated on or after that date.
Impact
The bill amends G.S. 106-740, which governs public hearings on condemnation of farmland in voluntary agricultural districts and enhanced voluntary agricultural districts. Its practical effect is to slow and formalize the condemnation process for qualifying farmland by adding a mandatory public hearing step, extending advisory board review time, and imposing a waiting period before condemnation may begin. This affects state and local agencies seeking to acquire farmland interests in protected districts, as well as landowners and agricultural advisory boards involved in land-use decisions.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was noncontroversial in the Senate, passing second reading unanimously by a 44-0 vote. No committee transcript is provided, but the bill’s purpose and the vote indicate broad support for strengthening procedural safeguards around farmland preservation and public participation in land-use decisions.
Contention
The main policy issue is the balance between farmland preservation and government acquisition authority. Supporters are likely to favor the added notice, hearing, and delay requirements as protections for farmers and local agricultural interests, while potential opponents could view the bill as creating additional procedural hurdles and delaying public projects or infrastructure acquisitions that require condemnation. The bill does not appear to have generated recorded opposition in the available vote history.