Dillon’s Rule and Right-to-Farm
In addition to state right-to-farm statutes, many communities across the country have enacted local ordinances intended to protect farmers and their lands from urban encroachment. The methods municipalities may employ to grant this protection, however, are limited in Vermont and many other states by the amount of power to regulate granted to localities by the state. New Jersey, for example, is a “Home Rule” state. In a Home Rule state, the state constitution or a state statute grants essentially unlimited power to municipalities to legislate and regulate.14 As a result, New Jersey’s municipalities have broad authority to enact their own right-to-farm legislation. Many municipalities there have taken advantage of this to extend protection to farmers beyond that granted by the New Jersey state right-to-farm laws. Municipalities in “Dillon’s Rule” states such as Vermont, on the other hand, only have the powers that they are explicitly granted by the state.15 Thus, cities and towns in Vermont are restricted from creating ordinances that grant additional protection against nuisance suits to farmers. For more information on Dillon’s Rule view the box.
This has not stopped towns from using other means to protect farms and farmland that are similar in spirit, if not substance, to right-to-farm. Vermont towns are able to regulate land use through zoning, and Waitsfield is one town that has used this power to protect agricultural lands. Waitsfield’s zoning ordinance permits “agricultural uses” as of right.16 Further, the ordinance defines agricultural uses broadly, as “The growing or harvesting of crops; raising of livestock; operation of orchards, including maple sugar orchards; the sale of farm produce on the premises where raised; processing or storage of products raised on the property.”17Essentially, this means that any of these uses are immune from challenges based on zoning. Though this does not protect farmers from nuisance suits, it does protect them from a different course of legal action that unhappy neighbors may take.
14 See Daniel R. Mandelker, Land Use Law §§ 4.24-4.25 (5th edn. 2003).
15 See, for example, Valcour v. Village of Morrisville, 104 Vt. 119, 158 A.2d 83, 85-86 (1932).
16 Town of Waitsfield Zoning Ordinance, art. III, § 3 B.
17 Id. at art. II, § 4.