As we detailed in yesterdays post, for months Putnam County officials have insisted that their hands are tied when it comes to approving farms for Agricultural District inclusion, blaming New York State law for their repeated denials of viable farmland.
They’ve claimed that state-mandated criteria prevent them from adding farms—asserting that their actions are simply a matter of following Albany’s rules. But thanks to new documentation provided directly by New York State Agriculture & Markets (NYSDAM), these claims have been directly refuted.
What Did The State Say?
The official responses from the legal office of NYSDAM, provided below, directly contradict the county’s excuses. For example, according to the state's own legal experts, there are no state-imposed minimum soil quality requirements, no mandated acreage thresholds, and no arbitrary barriers to Agricultural District inclusion.
The law only requires that land be “predominantly viable agricultural land” and serve the public interest by contributing to a sustainable agricultural industry. Putnam County has been misleading the farmers its been denying—this is a local political decision, not a state directive.
So why is Putnam County working so hard to shut out farmers? The question isn’t whether the county can approve farms for Agricultural District inclusion—it’s why they won’t. With this new evidence in hand, the public deserves to know:
Is the county deliberately blocking agricultural development in favor of commercial interests?
Are local officials using misinformation to push farmers out?
And most importantly—who benefits from keeping viable farmland out of state-protected districts?
Recapping What We Know:
Here is what we know, as told to me from multiple sources with direct involvement in the on going issue, and documents reviewed:
Putnam County denied Ridge Ranch’s inclusion in the agricultural district, citing “under 50% prime farmland or statewide important soils.”
However, per the state as seen below, New York State Agriculture & Markets laws do not require specific soil classifications for district inclusion—soil maps are only relevant for real property tax assessments, not agricultural viability.
The county’s reasoning is flawed, misleading, and contradicts state law.
1. Misrepresentation of Soil Requirements
State law does not require a specific percentage of prime or important soils for farmland district inclusion.
The county’s reliance on soil maps and soil types is grossly misplaced—they are used only for tax assessments, not agricultural suitability.
Farmer expertise is a recognized factor in land selection, yet the county dismissed Dr. Dan and Arielle’s overwhelming qualifications as “not germane,” despite their expertise being directly relevant.
Neal Tomann, who has been cited by the county in its decision making, seemingly has no legal authority in this decision. He is not the currently the Soil and Water Conservation District Director (as they all cite his title in all correspondence) but merely an acting/interim manager.
Tomann also has had no statutory authority to be a voting member of the Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board the entire time he’s been in the role.
The Soil and Water board lacks proper leadership—no chairperson has been appointed in years, raising separate serious concerns about the validity of all its decisions.
3. The County’s Decision is Potentially Invalid
The county’s reliance on soil maps is baseless and contradicts official NYS Agriculture & Markets guidance.
The Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board is potentially improperly constituted, calling into question the legitimacy of Ridge Ranch’s denial and other farmland district decisions.
So Where Does The State Fall On This?
Here are the official State responses to direct questions posed to them relating to this matter, published in its entirety, and highlighted for relevance, due to Putnam County’s insistence the State laws are what’s at issue:
Additionally, here is a copy from the State’s 2016 decision on the criterion for the inclusion of viable agricultural land, a direct issue in this case. This is also published in its entirety, and highlighted for relevance.
So now what? County Executive Kevin Byrne will be redelivering his State of the County Address, because although he gave it Monday Night at Ace-Endico, he is legally required by County Charter to deliver it directly to the county legislature.
That will happen tonight, Thursday 3/6/2025 any the Historic Courthouse in Putnam County, located in Carmel Hamlet. That will happen at 7:00 PM est.
I have been told that the Farmers have mobilized and intend to show a presence at this address. In fact, the Honovich’s have rallied support to show up by giving away four free eggs to anyone sho who’s up in support.
In his address Monday night, Byrne seemingly acknowledged something is going on and announced he would be holding a round table for farmers and towns, voicing direct support for farmers.
As this information comes to light, and the role the 5-person (Ellner, Jonke, Sayegh, Adonizzio, Birmingham) majority legislature has played in this, this is worth keeping an eye on in the name of transparency, something this legislature has been particularly burdened by, which I will have more on later this week. So stay tuned.