—Lancaster Farming, Saturday, December 30,1978 20 Shapp HARRISBURG - Outgoing Pennsylvania Governor Milton Shapp says he sees a need for the preservation of farmland, but adds he cannot agree “to place this land into special parcel for rich agricultural land owners without check of normal government processes and normal economic development.” Those are the words the governor used in a letter dated Nov. 26,1978 in which he failed to approve House Bill 2145, which was designed to create agricultural districts in the Keystone State. The measure was generally regarded as good legislation and' had the recommendation of State Agriculture Secretary Kent Shelhamer, as well as a number of farmers, con servationists, and farm organizations. State representative Samuel Morris of Chester County, who was the initial sponsor of H.B. 2145, gives the following account of the bill and the Governor’s veto: “At the end of this Legislative Session, Governor Shapp has unjustifiably vetoed House Bill 2145 which for the first time in Pennsylvania would have provided a means whereby farmers, with the approval of their local town ships, could have voluntarily formed Agricultural Districts to preserve their land for agricultural produc tion. The reasons given in his veto message are pure ‘cock and bull’. “This legislation, winch had the support of both the Pennsylvania Farmers Association and the Grange, would have assured the farmers that their land could remain in active production for at least eight years without being forced out by unreasonable governmental restrictions respecting farm structures or practices, unless for the protection of the public health and safety, and from any governmental exercise of eminent domain which would have an unreasonably adverse effect upon agriculture m the district, when there was a reasonable or prudent alternative available. There have been incidents in the last few years which illustrate the very real dangers to agriculture by both these kinds of governmental ac tions. “The bill also made it a policy for the Commonwealth to encourage the maintenance of viable farming in these' Agricultural Districts and to conform the regulations of Commonwealth agencies to this end. It would have been a positive step in our state toward presemng agricultural land and to give our farmers the confidence they need to make long term investments to modernize their operations and remain economically competitive. “The bill was firmly based on the solid foundation of a similar law in New York state which has been-highly successful and satisfactory to all segments of society,” Morris said. He added, “The new federally sponsored highways have taken a serious toll of agricultural land and while farmers do not complain that these highways are not needed, they would like to see them located where they could be less damaging to agriculture. “More recently, proposed landfills have been a serious threat to agriculture in Chester, York and Lancaster Counties. H.B. 2143 would have obviated much of this threat in cases where the landfill would have been operated by a government authority. “The last statement in the Governor’s veto message is so far from reality”, Morris stated, “as to be ridiculous and is an insult to our farmers. The reason given by the Governor for the veto is T cannot agree to place this land into special parcel for nch agricultural landowners without check of normal government processes...” To the agricultural community, this statement concerning ‘rich fanners’ would be laughable if it did not indicate total insensitivity to the real problems of Pennsylvania’s second largest industry, and the precarious economic situation of most farmers. “I can only add that Governor Sbapp has been a great disappointment to me for a good many years. I broke with him long agowhen he failed to fulfill a promise to save Cbesterbrook for Valley Forge Park. Coming on top of my own defeat, this is the last straw particularly when my opposition gained some votes by associating me with Shapp, which was an absolutely untrue implication.” Representative Morris also noted that a number of legislators, both House members and Senators, who represent agricultural areas, voted against H.B. 2145. “It would be well for the farmers to check more carefully on the votes of their legislators to find out whether they really are voting for their farming constituents or not.” The Governor’s Reply Governor Shapp, in his written reply and denial to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, commented: “This bill has the desirable aim of preserving good agricultural land for agricultural purposes. That was the purpose of the Clean and Green Amendment to the State Constitution which was supported by my Administration. “However, this bill creates agricultural districts of 500 acres or more in which there is a drastic reduction in and limitation on activity by local government, the Com monwealth and certain condemnors. “It is these limitations on legitimate governmental concerns which compel me to disapprove this bill. These limitations have the effect of making agricultural districts “extra special” for government purposes and which by implication and treatment create independent agricultural sovereignties which are intolerable in our democratic form of government.” “By the terms of the bill, no municipality or political subdivision shall exercise any of its powers to enact local laws or ordinances within an agricultural district in a manner which could unreasonably restrict or regulate farm structures or farming practices in contravention of the purposes of the act unless such restrictions or vetoed agricultural districting bill regulations bear a direi-t relationship to the public health or safety.” “By die terms of this bill it shall be the policy of all Commonwealth agencies to encourage the maintenance of viable farming in agricultural districts and their ad ministrative regulations and procedures shall be modified to this end insofar as is consistent with the promotion of public health and safety, and with the provisions of any Federal statutes, standards, et cetera.”' “By the terms of this bill no agency of the Com monwealth, political subdivision authority, public utility or other body having or exercising powers of eminent MR. FARMER - HERE IS SOME STRAIGHT TALK ABOUT 4-WHEEL DRIVE TRACTORS - BEFORE YOU INVEST IN A 4-WHEELER. THERE ARE CERTAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ARTICULATED (BEND-IN-THE-MIDDLE) AND css, 4 WAY SELECT STEERING PERFORMANCE YOU SHOULD KNOW. FRONT WHEEL STEER. 4-way steering makes _ BE .„ c _,__ u the big difference. When you select front wheel STEER. Hooking up to an implement steer only, the 2870 handles much like your IMI ou s * ear the rear wheels only so the present 2-wheeler You don't have to learn all drawbar or 3-point hitch goes where you want it over again. Great for the majority of your field * 0 8? *-* se as we " to overcome implement side work including row crops draft CRAB STEER. Working on hillsides or levees 7 Switch to crab steer on-the-go to counteract side drift Fronts and rears steer in the same direc tion. Also useful in muddy fields since it creates four separate wheel tracks Thus providing opti mum traction for all four driving wheels IF YOU'RE THINKING OF A NEW TRACTOR FOR SPRING, YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF TO VISIT BINKLEY & HURST BROS. FOR A TEST DRIVE. ALL THESE MODELS IN STOCK. YOU CAN CHOOSE ONE TO FIT YOUR FARM OPERATION. A BINKLEY & HURST BROS. 133 ROTHSVILLE STATION ROAD 717-626-4705 (Turn to Page 21) Ih, B 4. Governor __ Milton Shapp doesn't think “rich agricultural land owners” need speciaP treatment theirlarms. protect COORDINATED. Want to make short full power turns at the headlands? Flip the selective steering lever to coordinated steermg for a tight 17Vi foot turning radius Some articulated 4WD require up to 26 ft LITITZ, PA 17543 j * < "" -- > mi > > .S' * % ARTIC DESIGN MANUf F CONSTI ROAD! OUARI THE VI THE 4-WI IS DK F FA U Case 1845 HP JD 111/ 2 ft. Fiel bar tine hai Brillion 12 ft. R Case 10 ft. trar NH #6 crop car JD KBA disc ha Case 3 bot. slat Little Giant 301 head & dow Case 12 HP mo w/attach... Case 6 bottom Case 4 bottom. 1816 Case umfc clutch, new ll ft. t w/scrapers, footcultipac domain district I obtained “As or of this t ferently different the impl complice ment of otherwis that ther land, I a for rich a
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers