Proposed policy resolutions approved by delegates at the county annual meeting

View the resolutions below that were approved at the county annual and submitted to the state policy development committee to be considered at the Michigan Farm Bureau annual meeting. 

Contact the county office for information about the Policy Development process

Data pager
Data pager
 Item 1 to 20 of 500
of 25 
Show all 500
TitlePolicy
Data pager
Data pager
 Item 1 to 20 of 500
of 25 
Show all 500
015-Industrial HempWe support having hemp as a legal crop and the approval of hemp as a crop having Federal and State oversite to assure the crop production is useful for Industrial purposes. (N&I 204)
097-HighwaysWe support the adequate funding of the entire Highway system (local, urban, state and Federal roads) within the state to assure a reasonable usage by the traveling public inclusive of the farm community. In addition, we support the fact that the road system includes both the traveled portion of the road and bridges, culverts, cross tubes, signage, ditches and brush and trees cleared back to allow for the unobstructed passage of farm equipment. We also support a separate culvert fund modeled after the current bridge fund that funds replacement of culverts that have collapsed. We support the design and engineering of bridge and culvert structures to handle a 100 year rain event. When other state agencies (DEQ, DNR etc.) require additional requirements they shall be responsible for funding that portions of bridge and culvert replacement that their agency cause that exceeding a 100 year rain event. We support that any additional road funding developed will be distributed thru the existing Act 51 process and no additional funding will be set aside for special projects, roads or bridges (with the exception of creating a culvert fund) that has the result of helping an individual jurisdiction or class of road. We support the concept that roads should be paid for by usage fees and as such support a operational fee put on electric vehicles. Lastly, with the increased use of off road vehicle in farming and the fact that farms are getting larger and many times are on multiple fields we support the use of non-road legal vehicles for farming purposes.
074-Environmental Protection and AuthorityWe support the current wording in regard to application of manure on frozen or snow covered ground.
Local ResolutionThe election of Federal, state and local candidates for office that support the objectives of the Farm Bureau is important to our ongoing mission. We encourage Cass County Farm Bureau to be more active in local elections both with candidates and issues.
097-HighwaysNo local taxes should be used for funding road repairs. We also believe that the prevailing wage provisions should be removed from both state and federal road construction and repairs. We further believe that any taxes collected from the legalization of marijuana should be used for road repairs and construction. (TAX 92)
033-Right To Farm We do not support “Right to Farm” protection being extended to marijuana growing facilities until growing marijuana becomes legal at the federal level. (C&M MISC)
092-TaxationWe support the elimination of sales tax on transportation fuels and an increase in the road taxes on gas and diesel fuels. We further support… - Distributing at least 100 million from the Michigan general fund directly to townships in counties that have a population density of less than 125 people per square mile for the expressed purpose of matching Act 51 funds for local roads. The funds shall be allocated in a fair justifiable manner. A gradual increase in any fuel tax enacted. We oppose…. - The funding of roads based solely on property taxes - The funding of roads based solely on registration fees. - The distribution of Act 51 road funds being determined by the population density of a county. (TRANS 97)
 We do not support “Right to Farm” protection being extended to marijuana growing facilities until growing marijuana becomes legal at the federal level. (SA 33)
092-TaxationNo local taxes should be used for funding road repairs. We also believe that the prevailing wage provisions should be removed from both state and federal road construction and repairs. We further believe that any taxes collected from the legalization of marijuana should be used for road repairs and construction. (TRANS 97)
092-TaxationHaving our roads in bad repair is not only frustrating, it is also a traffic hazard and a safety issue. In addition, - We believe local roads are inadequately funded and support a variety of ideas to increase funding. - We support the elimination of sales tax on transportation fuels and an increase in the road taxes on gas and diesel fuels. - We support a raise in fuel taxes to be designated to local roads only. - We support a gradual increase in any fuel tax enacted. - We oppose the funding of roads based solely on property taxes. - We oppose the funding of roads based solely on registration fees. (TRANS 97)
092-TaxationWe encourage the State of Michigan to provide tax incentives for the production, distribution and sale of renewable fuels and energies including, but not limited to, ethanol, biodiesel, wind power, methane digesters, hydropower and solar energy. (ENERGY 42)
087-Waters of the United StatesThe success of the Clean Water Act (CWA) over the past 35 years is attributable in large measure to the act's partnership between the federal and state governments. This structure of shared responsibility allows states to protect truly ecologically important and environmentally sensitive areas within their borders while, at the same time, preserving the authorities of states and local communities over their own land and water use planning. Congress chose its legislative terms carefully to protect the statutory distinction between federal and state waters and the constitutional distinction between federal jurisdiction and state authority. American Federal Legislation opposes proposals that would fundamentally alter the CWA that expands the federal government's jurisdiction to all intrastate waters including groundwater, ditches, culverts, pipes, desert washes, sheet flow, erosional features, farm and stock ponds and prior converted cropland. Legislation introduced in the 110th Congress would have deleted the term "navigable" from the CWA. If the legislation were enacted, it would fundamentally change the law by completely severing the CWA from the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. Such a step would significantly change the intent of Congress when it enacted the CWA and result in an unprecedented expansion of the CWA. Because the CWA already regulates truly navigable waters and streams with both permanent and seasonal flow, the enactment of the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA) would lead to the broadest possible interpretation of the CWA. Proponents have asserted that CWRA "restores" the original intent of the CWA and "clarifies" CWA jurisdiction. However it does neither. We oppose the EPA's ability to write rules that change the intent of the Clean Water Act. The rule changes would take away landowner rights by controlling streams, drainage ditches, and water run-off. We believe the people of Michigan should have a say in where our water goes. (N&I 547)
336-Agricultural ChemicalsAdd new language to AFBF Policy #336 (Agricultural Chemicals) that states, “There has been proposed legislation (in southern states currently) to outlaw pesticides based on human mishandling of pesticides (i.e. DICAMBA), therefore, we oppose government revocation of EPA-approved pesticides based on applicator errors, as long as the pesticides is used and is working, according to label instructions.
547-Water QualityThe success of the Clean Water Act (CWA) over the past 35 years is attributable in large measure to the act's partnership between the federal and state governments. This structure of shared responsibility allows states to protect truly ecologically important and environmentally sensitive areas within their borders while, at the same time, preserving the authorities of states and local communities over their own land and water use planning. Congress chose its legislative terms carefully to protect the statutory distinction between federal and state waters and the constitutional distinction between federal jurisdiction and state authority. American Federal Legislation opposes proposals that would fundamentally alter the CWA that expands the federal government's jurisdiction to all intrastate waters including groundwater, ditches, culverts, pipes, desert washes, sheet flow, erosional features, farm and stock ponds and prior converted cropland. Legislation introduced in the 110th Congress would have deleted the term "navigable" from the CWA. If the legislation were enacted, it would fundamentally change the law by completely severing the CWA from the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. Such a step would significantly change the intent of Congress when it enacted the CWA and result in an unprecedented expansion of the CWA. Because the CWA already regulates truly navigable waters and streams with both permanent and seasonal flow, the enactment of the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA) would lead to the broadest possible interpretation of the CWA. Proponents have asserted that CWRA "restores" the original intent of the CWA and "clarifies" CWA jurisdiction. However it does neither. We oppose the EPA's ability to write rules that change the intent of the Clean Water Act. The rule changes would take away landowner rights by controlling streams, drainage ditches, and water run-off. We believe the people of Michigan should have a say in where our water goes. (ENV 86)
536-Proprietary DataThe committee recommends Farm Bureau support the position that all farm level data derived from the farmer’s use of technology is owned by the farmer. Access to data requires the farmer’s written permission and data cannot be sold or distributed to 3rd parties.
502-Clean AirA balanced and science-based implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) is of the utmost concern to farmers and ranchers. Particulate matter from agricultural sources should be excluded from the National Ambient Air quality Standards (NAAQS) because there is no conclusive scientific evidence indicating that particulate matter from farm and ranch operations adversely affects public health. We support the following principles: (1)Sound Science-To protect public health, all CAA rules and incentive-based programs must be based on peer-reviewed, science based, reliable and accurate information. We support funding for agriculture air quality research to establish accurate agricultural emission baselines. (2)Transparency-The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should establish and maintain a deliberate, consistent and transparent decision-making process to inform the public, including farmers, of any criteria used to regulate air emissions. (3)Workability-The CAA must be administered in a practical and realistic way to establish workable and reasonable rules and incentive-based programs. EPA should always consider incentive-based programs, before regulation, to achieve emission reduction. Compliance costs associated with meeting any imposed standards should be the responsibility of the federal government. (4)Practicability-We will work with industry groups and the appropriate agencies to ensure common sense implementation and economic achievability of any new rule and incentive-based programs. (5)Cost Benefit Analysis-Benefits should exceed the cost of any regulation or program. (6)Congressional Oversight-Congress should review the effects of CAA on agricultural operations and ensure workable and reasonable CAA rules and programs. (7)Landowners and/or farmers should not be held responsible for pollution that crosses international borders. We support: (1)Seeking the direction and guidance of the USDA Task Force on Agricultural Air Quality and its role in reviewing and making recommendations to the secretary of agriculture on issues and proposed policies targeting agricultural air quality. (2)Providing incentives to industries seeking to become more energy efficient or to reduce emissions of identifiable atmospheric pollution and the means of preventing it. (3)Providing incentives to individuals seeking to reforest fragile lands that are currently in agricultural production. (4)Exempting air conditioned farm equipment from the 1990 amendments to the CAA which mandate refrigerant recycling;(5)Continuing the use of prescribed or controlled burn programs. (6)Agriculture’s exemption regarding particulate size in EPA’s ambient air quality standards. We oppose: (1)Mandatory air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter on farmers and agricultural businesses. (2)Air permits for agricultural operations that are not science based. (3)Any efforts by the EPA to implement permitting fees and/or protocol or take regulatory action regarding greenhouse gas emissions for production agriculture.
438-Tax ReformWe support simplification of the current federal income tax code. The current tax code contains the following flaws: Excessive bookkeeping is required in effort to comply. There is a greater opportunity for honest mistakes and audit challenges by the IRS due to the many computations and schedules currently required. The number of schedules necessary for completion usually requires hiring of a tax preparation expert to keep current with code revisions and to stand up to the IRS if audit questions occur. The current tax code contains loopholes that can be exploited by those who discover and decide to challenge these gray areas.
204-Industrial HempWe support having hemp as a legal crop and the approval of hemp as a crop having Federal and State oversite to assure the crop production is useful for Industrial purposes. (C&M 15)
033-Right To Farm Townships continue to propose and pass local ordinances that have intended and unintended negative impacts on agriculture. Most recent noise ordinances have been proposed limiting activity creating noise after a certain hour. The limiting of a farmer’s ability to use a grain dryer, or ability to operate equipment after a certain hour has the potential to disrupt normal and accepted farming practices, negatively impacting a farm or operation. Cass County Farm Bureau opposes the patch work of local ordinances affecting generally accepted and agricultural management practices.
067-Redress for Unsubstantiated ClaimsWe support legislation making individuals, news organization, consumer and environmental groups responsible for damages caused by their unsubstantiated claims against approved products and practices that result in market losses for producers and the filing of frivolous lawsuits against producers. Upon finding a complaint unsubstantiated, the individual or organization who filed the complaint shall be responsible for all court and legal fees. A person should be prohibited from filing a liability claim if the person was trespassing, breaking a law or serving a prison sentence at the time of an injury.