Putnam Legislature Ends Agriculture Drought

On Tuesday night July 1st, the Putnam County Legislature voted 7-0 to approve eight farms for inclusion in the County’s Agricultural District. While I applaud this step forward, it’s important to recognize the broader context—and the years of advocacy that helped get us to this moment.

As someone who has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with local farmers through courtroom battles, policy fights, and public hearings, I know this win didn’t come easy. I’ve been vocal about the unfair treatment of farmers in our county—whether it was the repeated denial of qualified applications, the weaponization of local zoning laws, or the abrupt shutdown of the Agricultural and Farmland Protection Board itself. Let’s not forget: that board didn’t even meet for more than a year, and was only recently revived after mounting public pressure and exposure.

So yes, this vote matters. It means Artemis Farm in Brewster, Barn Dog Farm in Southeast, Big Red Barn Farm and Cucumber Hill Farm in Putnam Valley, Bowen Farm in Kent, Lobster Hill Farm in Brewster, Rush Family Farm in Putnam Valley, and White Oak Apiary in Southeast will now receive the protections they deserve under the Agricultural District Program. These protections aren’t loopholes—they are guardrails that prevent towns from using local ordinances to push farmers out under the weight of bureaucracy or political favoritism.

Just as important, three farms—Clara Patunga in Putnam Valley, Mother and Daughter Farm in Patterson, and Reinmaker Farm East in Southeast—were not approved in bi-partisan split votes, and rightfully so in my opinion. These farms were not recommended for inclusion by the Agricultural and Farmland Protection Board, and for the first time in years, the Legislature respected that board’s expertise. This is how the process is supposed to work.

At the July 1 legislative meeting, I spoke publicly and urged the Legislature to follow the board’s recommendations across the board—approving those that met the criteria, and denying those that did not. Too often in recent years, the Legislature has overridden or ignored the board's recommendations, injecting politics into what should be a straightforward review of agricultural eligibility. This time, they listened—and for that, I give them credit.

But let’s be clear: the fight is far from over.

This recent progress does not erase the fact that dozens of legitimate farms were denied in past years, often without clear justification. I was in the courtroom when Dr. Dan and Arielle Honovich of Ridge Ranch had to file an Article 78 just to have their application taken seriously. I’ve also continued to investigate the disappearance of public records and the troubling use of Resolution 139 as a pretext to disqualify farms using vague or last-minute code violations.

The Agricultural District Program doesn’t give anyone a free pass. It ensures that those working the land—those preserving our open space, protecting our water quality, and feeding our communities—aren’t penalized by politics or punished by arbitrary enforcement.

To the eight farms approved this week: congratulations. To the volunteers on the Ag Board: thank you for your integrity and diligence. And to the Legislature: let this be a turning point.

Agriculture is not a relic of the past—it’s a vital part of Putnam County’s future. And any government that fails to protect its farmers is failing its people.