Hamilton's Agriculture and Rural Affairs Advisory Subcommittee Reviews Agricultural Community Improvement Plan

Hamilton's Agriculture and Rural Affairs Advisory Subcommittee reviewed a feasibility study for a proposed agricultural Community Improvement Plan (CIP). The plan could provide grants, fee rebates, tax-related incentives and application support for rural businesses, farms, agritourism and farmworker housing. No funding was approved. Staff said recommendations could return to council by the end of the year or early next year.

Topics Discussed

AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN

The proposed CIP would create a municipal framework for supporting agricultural and rural investment. "Existing programs are directed primarily towards urban priorities whereas farms and rural businesses operate within a very different investment environment and there is currently no dedicated framework focused on agricultural economic development. A CIP for agriculture in rural Hamilton would address a distinct geographic and economic context with different development patterns, investment needs, project timelines, and regulatory considerations."

The study identified possible assistance including:

• Matching grants
• Planning and technical-service grants
• Permit or application fee relief
• Tax-increment grants
• Support for physical improvements

Potentially eligible projects could include farmworker housing, on-farm processing and retail, agritourism, signage, parking, stormwater management, building retrofits, renewable energy and environmental improvements.

Rebecca said "The intention is not to create a grant for every possible expense but rather focus on investments that advance an identified public objective where municipal assistance could really materially influence the project's timing or its scope or its feasibility." She also said "The CIP has to strike that balance. It should support investment and diversification but without weakening the protection of the agricultural land base or impacting on the escarpment's ecological and landscape values."

REGULATORY BARRIERS AND CITY APPROVALS

The feasibility study identified municipal approvals as a barrier for agricultural businesses. "Third, the municipal development process is viewed as a barrier. Participants described complex requirements, lengthy approval processes, uncertainty, and difficulty identifying a clear path forward. Fourth, some sector stakeholders believed that policies and regulations haven't kept pace with the realities of modern agriculture in particular in relation to processing, packaging, farm retail, agritourism, technology, renewable energy and farm worker housing."

The study identified potential support through a rural liaison or "concierge" who could help applicants determine which activities are permitted, what approvals are required and which city departments are involved. Other options included specialized planning assistance, site visits and an expedited review process.

Staff noted that "We heard quite a bit about the complexity of municipal approvals and how that can introduce a lot of uncertainty for businesses. And then with that comes relationships in need of some repair and some trust building there. Whether real or perceived, there's an opportunity to strengthen those. Policies are also perceived to not be keeping up with agriculture and how modern agriculture operates."

One proposed CIP would not replace existing approvals. The study noted that applicants would still need to meet planning, building, environmental and other regulatory requirements.

RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORTATION

The discussion identified electrical capacity, natural gas, broadband, stormwater management and distribution infrastructure as potential barriers to rural investment. Staff also discussed seeking outside funding and preparing delegations for the Rural Ontario Municipal Association conference.

Transportation was another concern. Farm and rural workers may have limited access to private vehicles and transit, creating a need for safe active-transportation connections and other transportation improvements.

AGRITOURISM, LOCAL FOOD AND FARM DIVERSIFICATION

The study considered support for farm-gate sales, local food, farm experiences, processing, renewable energy and the reuse of agricultural buildings.

Stakeholders also identified rising land costs, an aging workforce, labour shortages, competition and climate-related pressures as challenges for farm businesses. Rebecca said a CIP could help support investment and diversification while maintaining protections for agricultural land.

FUNDING AND NEXT STEPS

No municipal funding has been committed while the proposal remains a feasibility study. Councillor Ted McMeekin asked: "Different figures are quoted for different types of programs in different areas. How much money are we talking about and where is it coming from? And are there limits to the kind of fiscal support that could be had? Where is the money coming from and how much is it?"

The study noted that provincial Rural Economic Development funding could potentially provide up to about $50,000 through a 50 per cent cost match for developing the framework. Any future program would also need rules to prevent grant stacking and coordinate with provincial and federal programs.

Staff said funding levels and sources would be proposed only if council directs staff to develop the CIP. Recommendations are expected to return to council by "the end of this year, early next year at the very latest."

Motions

• Receive presentation under Agenda Item 7.1, "Agriculture community improvement plan feasibility study, the project update and feedback" — carried.
• Adjournment — meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.

Attendees

The provided record identifies the following participants:

• Councillor Ted McMeekin
• Councillor Mark Tadeson
• Councillor Tatterson
• Daniel Vanderhout

The full attendance list was not included in the provided record.