Sprawling Farm Bill sails through Senate without dissent

After hitting a mild bump in Committee, the Agriculture Department’s priority legislation passed the Senate on Thursday with a unanimous vote.

The nearly 40-page measure, sponsored by Sen. Keith Truenow, touches everything from land use and biosolids regulation to veterinary workforce development and local government preemption.

The Eustis Republican, a farmer by trade, pitched SB 290 as delivering practical relief to hard-working Floridians in an unforgiving industry, saying it would make the grind “just a little bit easier” for farmers.

As with most agency bills, this one is sprawling — public-private food bank partnerships, veterinary education loan repayments, and preemption of government restrictions on gas-powered farm equipment all get a turn in the spotlight.

The bill would also make meaningful changes to the state’s conservation land policies by requiring the Department of Environmental Protection to determine if parcels of state-owned land are suitable for agriculture; if found suitable, DEP would be able to “surplus” the land after attaching a conservation easement — a mechanism that allows agricultural operations to continue unimpeded but locks out further development.

Additional provisions phase out the land application of lower-grade biosolids — treated sewage byproduct used as fertilizer — and eventually limit land application to Class AA only. Class AA is the highest treatment standard under Florida’s system, requiring elimination of detectable pathogens and compliance with strict contaminant limits.

The change means only the most heavily treated material could be spread on land, lowering the risk of harmful bacteria and regulated pollutants reaching groundwater and surface waterways, which is a persistent flashpoint in Florida’s water quality debates.

Also noteworthy is what the bill doesn’t contain: an edit to the state’s implementation of federal agriculture disparagement law. Sometimes referred to as “veggie libel” or “ag-gag,” the long-standing statute governs civil claims related to false statements about agricultural products.

At one point, SB 290 sought to expand the cause of action to include “real” agricultural food products, as opposed to simply “perishable.” The intent was to provide the same protections enjoyed by fresh produce to goods that are technically a step away from fresh but which few would consider “processed” à la junk food — such as drying of citrus peel.

Though seemingly innocuous on its face, some viewed the change as a welcome mat for a flood of litigation in what’s already a famously litigious state. After pushback in Committee, lawmakers stripped the language — the version that cleared the Senate today contained no reference to the underlying statute.

SB 290 now heads to the House, where Rep. Danny Alvarez is carrying the companion measure (HB 433). If ultimately signed into law, the bulk of the bill would kick in on July 1.