Bill to connect local farmers, ranchers with food banks moves to House floor
Freshman Rep. Shelly Fyant, D-Arlee, was nervous waiting for the House Agriculture Committee to decide the fate of one of her first bills, about food security.
House Bill 649 would create a $3 million grant program connecting local food producers with food banks. Committee discussion zeroed in on the bill's financial impact and any overhead costs, as well as how many food pantries and food hubs would qualify.
The grants would help food banks purchase food from local farmers and ranchers and open up a new market for them.
Following about 45 minutes of discussion and a strong defense of her bill, Fyant left and waited outside in the hallway. One of the members of the committee, Rep. Jennifer Lynch, D-Butte, even walked over at one point to tell Fyant they were about to go into final discussions on her bill.
But Fyant didn't go in and watch, and later found out it passed on to the House floor with an 11-6 vote when an aide gave her a thumbs up. In an interview with the Daily Montanan, Fyant said she fought to work on these problems for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes during her eight years on Tribal Council, and
now in the Legislature, Fyant has an opportunity to talk about the issue to an even broader audience.
'Food sovereignty has been my passion since 2016,' Fyant said. 'I started a food sovereignty committee because I could and pushed my agenda, because it was a healthy one, right? A long term vision. If we can't feed ourselves, we're not truly sovereign.'
One of the things Fyant did was study work by the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians. Essentially the tribe bought a farm and started producing food over a period of about three years, Fyant said.
Fyant wanted to bring the idea back to the Flathead Valley. Then, COVID-19 got in the way.
'I developed this team, a specialist in water, a hydrologist, one of the local tribal producers, a guy from legal who was like-minded,' Fyant said. 'I put together this team, sent them down there, (and) then the pandemic hit.'
The tribe has since developed some space to have a commercial kitchen, Fyant said, and there are other ongoing and upcoming projects related to the issue of food insecurity in the Flathead.
She's also trying to reach youth.
'When I do food security talks with young people, I tell them, 'There were no obese hunters, there were no diabetic warriors,'' Fyant said. 'You know, there's a lot of physical activity related to getting food, and so not just getting your food, but processing it. You know, after the buffalo hunt, you gotta process. I remember the first time I tanned a hide. I thought, 'That's some upper body workout.''
The Farm to Food Bank proposal is similar to some work already being done in Montana, including the University of Montana's PEAS Farm. Student interns work the farm over the summer, which is run in coordination with Garden City Harvest. They do two things — provide Community Supported Agriculture boxes for sale and produce about 15,000 to 20,000 pounds for the Missoula Food Bank and other places, including a farmers market for low-income seniors.
The PEAS Farm program is over 25 years old and Garden City Harvest was started by Missoula County Commissioner Josh Slotnick.
Nearly one in nine Montanans face hunger and about 58,000 Montanans live in areas with limited access to grocery stores or supermarkets, according to the Montana Food Bank Network.
In 2023, the organization served 13,896,595 meals to food pantries and program partners.
Kiera Condon, an advocacy specialist with Montana Food Bank Network, spoke in favor of the bill.
'The investment provided through this legislation will build both food security and economic security by connecting Montana's food banks and pantries to growers and ranchers in their area,' Condon said. 'Strengthening local food systems and ensuring access to fresh, nutritious foods creates healthier families and stable communities.'
The Montana Farmers Union also supported the bill.
'It's a priority for our membership to promote regional, resilient Food Systems and diverse markets in order to achieve these goals The Farm to Food Bank program builds both resilient food systems and diversifies the market opportunity for farmers and ranchers,' Rachel Prevost, with the Farmers Union, told the committee. 'It's a win-win across the board for our food systems and our producers.'
The bill moved forward with one amendment, which lowered the amount of funding that can be used for administrative costs from 20% to 5%.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
20 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Trump administration cuts impact NWI food organizations
More cuts from President Donald Trump's administration have affected Northwest Indiana, shifting and canceling funds for those who provide food. The Food Bank of Northwest Indiana announced a nationwide funding pause for the Senior Community Service Employment Program, which the organization called an 'unexpected pause' that has disrupted daily operations and impacted team members who work to maintain food access. 'As the food bank becomes more efficient in serving more friends and neighbors in Lake and Porter counties, we are already finding ourselves in challenging situations given some of the constraints with new policy at the federal and state level,' Victor Garcia, president and CEO of the food bank, said in a news release. 'This is not the time to be taking even more resources from sister nonprofits like the food bank and others in the community that benefit from this program that's offered with federal dollars through the American Association of Retired Persons.' The food bank supports about 2,000 seniors each month, according to the news release, providing them with a stable income and keeping them engaged with the community. Funding changes have made everyday operations more demanding for staff. The Northwest Indiana Food Council is among national organizations affected by the termination of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's $400 million Regional Food Business Centers program. A representative for the Northwest Indiana Food Council was unavailable for comment. The program was created by Congress during former President Joe Biden's administration, using one-time, temporary funding. According to the USDA website, the department terminated the program because it 'should not have been established in this manner in the first place.' 'The Biden Administration created multiple, massive programs without any long-term way to finance them. This is not sustainable for farmers who rely on these programs, and it flies in the face of Congressional intent,' said Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins in a release. 'USDA will honor existing communities for over 450 grants to farmers and food businesses to ensure planning decisions on the farm can continue as normal, however stakeholders should not plan on this program continuing. Any remaining funds will be repurposed to better support American agriculture.' Eight Regional Food Business Centers have selected or issued Business Builder grants, according to the USDA, but the Great Lakes Midwest portion has not. The Great Lakes Midwest center is run by the Michigan State University Center for Regional Food Systems, and it provides coordination, technical assistance and capacity-building opportunities through financial assistance for farmers, producers and other food business owners. Jahi Johnson-Chappell, director of Michigan State's Center for Regional Food Systems, said it's 'incredibly disappointing and angering' to see the food business center program terminated, especially because it provides millions of dollars to food programs in Midwestern states, including Illinois and Indiana. 'We really targeted how this could give back to communities, not just making sure that businesses were financially sustainable, but they were contributing to food access, equity, nutrition and diversity in their local food systems,' Johnson-Chappell said. 'These resources are very much needed. … We know small and mid-sized food and farm businesses are the backbone of resilience.' Cutting the program hurts the credibility of the USDA, Johnson-Chappell said, and he worries how farmers and food businesses will continue without the assistance the program provided. Effects from the program cuts are seen immediately, Johnson-Chappell said. Farmers in the Midwest are losing about $2 million almost immediately, he said, because they've had to cut grant applications and programs. Michigan State's Center for Regional Food Systems will look for ways to close gaps and help provide funding to those in the Midwest who need it. 'It's infuriating because we know these programs were effective,' Johnson-Chappell said. 'We know they're needed. … I don't know what (the USDA) will do with the money now.'
E&E News
20 hours ago
- E&E News
USDA bends to pressure, opens public comment on reorg plan
The Agriculture Department gave way to pressure and announced it will take public comment on its abruptly announced plan to relocate most of its national capital region staff and close some facilities. Although a public comment period wasn't initially part of the changes announced July 24, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said Friday that the agency wants feedback from the public, farm groups and lawmakers. The comment period will close Aug. 26. 'We value your perspective as we work to ensure that USDA is best positioned to serve America's farmers, ranchers, producers, and rural communities,' Rollins said in a news release. Advertisement The plan includes relocating about 2,600 of USDA's 4,600 Washington area staff to five hub locations across the country, cities selected without consultation with Congress or farm organizations — although Deputy Agriculture Secretary Stephen Vaden said locations were picked for lower costs of living and proximity to other USDA offices, among other objectives.
E&E News
a day ago
- E&E News
USDA defends secretive rollout of reorganization plan
The Department of Agriculture deliberately kept lawmakers in the dark about its plan to reorganize the agency for fear the information would leak out if shared with their offices, Deputy Agriculture Secretary Stephen Vaden told a Senate committee Wednesday. Vaden, the USDA's No. 2 official behind Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, said at a Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee hearing that officials took the secretive approach out of 'common courtesy and respect' to the department's nearly 100,000 employees whom officials wanted to inform first about the sweeping plan. 'There was a thought to that,' Vaden said, responding to complaints from Democrats and Republicans alike about the lack of prior consultation with Congress. Advertisement 'The employees are the ones who are most directly affected by the secretary's decision,' Vaden said. 'They should hear that decision from the secretary first, and not from a leak that originated from somewhere else.' The surprise nature of the reorganization announced last Thursday was a flash point at the hearing, where a few Republicans joined Democrats in expressing displeasure that the Trump administration didn't involve them in the decision. Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry ranking member Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) said the committee learned of the plan just minutes before it was announced. Vaden's assertion that concern for employees was the top priority fell flat with the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents USDA workers. The department didn't consult in advance with labor representatives either, although consultation is required by federal law when an agency seeks to reorganize and relocate workers, said an AFGE spokesperson, Tim Kauffman. The USDA plan includes relocating about 2,600 of the agency's 4,600 Washington-area employees to five regional hubs to be created from North Carolina to Utah. 'The heart of USDA is in the field,' Vaden said, noting that 90 percent of agency workers are already located away from the nation's capital. Big plans, big questions The department's South Office Building in Washington would be closed, but the Jamie L. Whitten headquarters building with top-level management would be retained. The USDA research station at Beltsville, Maryland, would close over the course of a yet-to-be-determined number of years, and the Forest Service would dismantle its nine regional offices and shift a yet-to-be-determined number of employees to other locations. In all, the plan would save the department around $4 billion, Vaden said, although he didn't offer an estimate of upfront costs. A reduction in force isn't planned, the USDA has said, although Rollins projected as many as half of Washington-area employees may elect not to relocate. Few new details about the plan emerged at the hearing, where Vaden fended off vigorous complaints from Democrats and tried to reassure a few skeptical Republicans that officials will collaborate with them from now on. 'The consultation process has just begun,' Vaden said after taking a verbal lashing from Klobuchar, who'd asked whether the agency had run its ideas past the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Farmers Union, or White House Office of Management and Budget. Vaden didn't directly answer whether the Farm Bureau — the nation's biggest lobbying group for farmers — had any input. He said the agency hadn't consulted with the NFU. Senate Agriculture ranking member Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) had sharp words for the Agriculture Department's reorganization plan. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Officials did submit a plan to OMB, Vaden said, although it wasn't clear if the submission to OMB is the same one the department announced in a news release. 'A plan was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, and they're aware of our current plan,' Vaden said. Klobuchar called the announcement a 'half-baked plan with no notice' that would exacerbate the strain caused by the administration's push to reduce the USDA workforce — an effort that's yielded some 15,000 departures so far, mostly through deferred resignations. Klobuchar, who like other Democrats opposed Vaden's nomination a matter of weeks ago, reminded him that he'd struck a tone of coordination with the committee at his confirmation hearing earlier this year. 'I did not vote for you,' Klobuchar said, 'but I did think that you would go in based on your experience and be able to do things that would actually help rural America.' She added, 'I actually took you at your word when you had pledged to work with us on things that would help. That's not what happened here when we had absolutely no notice about what you were going to do.' 'Washington is cost-prohibitive' Some Republicans took issue with not being consulted as well. Sens. John Hoeven of North Dakota and Deb Fischer of Nebraska said they wished the agency had shared the news ahead of time, if for no other reason than to let their states make a case for becoming a hub location. Hoeven, chair of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, added that the reorganization will have upfront costs that could be addressed in spending bills for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. Those bills have already moved through congressional committees. 'It's going to change your funding needs,' Hoeven said. Hoeven, too, pointed to the contrast between the USDA's unilateral strategy now and its approach during the first Trump administration to relocate the Economic Research Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture from the nation's capital to Kansas City, Missouri. In that move — which Vaden helped craft as the USDA's chief counsel at the time — the department hired an outside consultant to conduct a competition that communities could enter. A total of 136 parties in 35 states, and some of their elected leaders in Washington, made the case for hosting ERS or NIFA. The USDA picked Kansas City based on lower costs of living and other factors after a nearly yearlong review. Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) pointed out that the reorganization would have an impact on annual appropriations. | Angelina Katsanis/POLITICO 'That's kind of what we're looking for this time,' Hoeven said at Wednesday's hearing, adding that the USDA would have no hub offices within 600 miles of North Dakota. 'And we're in the heart of ag country.' Vaden said the five hub locations — Fort Collins, Colorado; Salt Lake City; Indianapolis, Raleigh, North Carolina; and Kansas City — make sense because of lower costs of living, already-in-place USDA workforces and proximity to rural areas, measures the department also cited in selecting Kansas City for the ERS and NIFA moves. 'The cost of living here in Washington is cost-prohibitive,' Vaden said, adding that officials want to encourage employees to spend their careers with the USDA and make their salaries go further. On the merits of the plan, Vaden faced a more mixed, and often friendly, reception. Klobuchar was the most critical, questioning why the USDA would seek to shutter and consolidate research facilities, and potentially lose researchers in the process, on the heels of deep cuts already in place or proposed. But Vaden pushed back, saying the plan would close only four research facilities out of 94 across the country. Work now done at the Beltsville facility would continue in other locations, he said. The reorganization and closing of buildings has solid legal grounds as well, Vaden said. Buildings need to be at least 60 percent occupied — a requirement the targeted Washington buildings don't meet — and agencies offices are supposed to be as close as possible to constituents, he said. The 60-percent threshold, Vaden added, is in the 'Use It Act,' which was part of the Water Resources Development Act, and signed by then-President Joe Biden in January. 'That is exactly what USDA is choosing to do, follow the law this body passed,' Vaden said. 'A political calculation' Vacating four buildings in Washington will save the USDA around $2.2 billion in deferred maintenance costs, Vaden said. He said officials don't yet know how much will be saved through less expensive rent on leased buildings in the hub areas. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said they endorse the idea of having USDA employees closer to constituents and support more efficient operations. Vaden didn't offer much detail on how specific USDA agencies will be affected. The plan is still being ironed out, he said. But he said the Salt Lake City location will be important for the Forest Service as that agency's nine-region office structure is abandoned. The Forest Service plans won't interrupt wildfire operations, Vaden said. Officials picked the USDA hubs in part to support the Forest Service 'and especially its aviation needs,' Vaden said. He said the department wants to build on the Forest Service's presence in locations such as Colorado and Utah, although the plan doesn't put Forest Service leadership in California or the Pacific Northwest. California Sen. Adam Schiff, a Democrat, lamented what he said looks like an extended political swipe at his state. Vaden denied that was the case. California faces the possible closure of a USDA research facility, has seen conservation grants for farmers canceled and was deemed ineligible for the latest round of farm disaster aid, Schiff said. 'It's hard not to perceive this as a political calculation rather than one that's in the best interest of farmers, given our dominance in agriculture,' Schiff said. Vaden said the latest round of disaster aid was targeted at farmers with crop insurance, and that a later round will address specialty crop growers like those in California — and that politics didn't play a role. 'That's not the case at all,' Vaden said. Contact this reporter on Signal at hellmarcman.49.
