The Tragic Death of HB 1142

It sounds like the Agriculture and Small Business Committee in the Indiana Senate also put a stop to HB 1142, which, as discussed here, had at least a small potential for improving the local food economy in Indiana. Rep. Sandy Blanton, who proposed the bill, may be giving the bill another shot next round.

Hunger and local food in Indiana

Below is an excerpt from the Indiana Senate Democrats' blog. Note the $300,000 appropriation for local food for the hungry.

Tuesday [Feb. 16] was Food Bank Day at the Statehouse, providing legislators and other state officials with an important reminder of the nearly 600,000 Hoosiers who go to bed hungry each night. Advocates and many Senate Democrats hope the event will also help encourage the state to release $300,000 appropriated by the General Assembly to the state’s food banks last year in the state budget.

The appropriation was intended exclusively for Indiana grown and produced products to feed low-income children, adults, and seniors in need throughout the state. Releasing the $300,000 appropriation would mean that Indiana’s food banks could provide more than 1,250,000 additional meals to hungry Hoosiers across the state.

Read the rest here. It seems like it's a non-controversial, bi-partisan measure to appropriate these funds for food banks during this economic crisis. But why is any spending intended for infrastructure that will alleviate hunger and health problems in the long term regarded as a strain on the budget?

Indeed, SB 194, proposed in January in the Indiana Senate by Sen. Errington, contained no spending provisions. The bill was discarded by the Agriculture and Small Business Committee Chairman (Sen. Johnny Nugent), in part, because it could involve spending "down the road."

Where is the discussion of food deserts? Of urban farming? Of Indiana's health rankings?

Meat and Poultry Inspection Budget Cuts

Update on the cuts to the meat inspection program here.

State Senator Sue Errington of Muncie spoke in support of an amendment on Monday that reinstates the requirements of the Meat and Poultry Inspection Program under the Indiana Board of Animal Health. Recent budget cuts threatened locally owned state-inspected meat processing facilities as well as an estimated 1,600 jobs in those processing facilities.

The Indiana Senate Dems blog from which this information comes has not been updated to say that Sen. Errington's amendment failed later that same day!

SB 0035, the bill in which her amendment was introduced, contains a huge assortment of provisions, from elimination of "the requirement to submit fingerprints to the horse racing commission every five years" to granting permission to "the board for the deaf school and blind school to prescribe [...] a salary schedule for the school without having to make the daily rate of pay for a teacher equal to that of a teacher at the Indianapolis public schools."

This crazy bill is now heading to the House where perhaps there will be another chance for a legislator to propose an amendment to ameliorate the effects of the Meat and Poultry Inspection Program cuts.

Meanwhile, Gov. Daniels has responded to complaints by saying the cuts won't be as deep as first proposed. It remains to be seen what this vague pronouncement really means.

Health Regulations vs. the Small Producer

Earlier this month, the Chicago Health Department destroyed thousands of dollars worth of food at Kitchen Chicago, a licensed, shared use kitchen. This is a rather heartbreaking example of how unclear and too-strict health department regulations can somehow trump the better sense of the individual inspectors involved. It has been clear to small-time local food producers for a long time that regulatory rules meant to oversee large-scale processing operations are not one-size-fits-all.

Here is an update on that situation.

Local food advocates often cite health regulations as barriers to small-scale food processing and distribution. Unfortunately, reasonable regulations and licensing conceived as safety oversight for high-volume commercial kitchens often work against small-time food producers, even (especially?) those who operate as transparently as possible and follow the rules.

Read this excellent discussion of proposed revision of food safety regulations at the national level in the "Food Safety Modernization Act" and the more sensible, scale-appropriate "Growing Safe Food Act".

Farm to school in Indiana

Seth Slabaugh often writes about farm and food in The Star Press of Muncie. His recent article documents the range of attitudes toward the issue of getting local, fresh food into school lunchrooms. Here are two interesting excerpts:

According to the national Farm to School Network, 8,943 schools are involved in the Farm to School program, but only one in Indiana (Jennings County).
[. . .]
"Farm to School is on the Indiana State Department of Agriculture's radar, but it's just not a priority," said Christina Ferroli, a registered dietitian and a Purdue University extension educator in Marion County. "We have a lot of pieces in place, like Going Local Week and the Junior Master Gardener program. We just need to bring people together and get the ball rolling

Agribusiness and local food advocates in the same room

Check out this AgriNews Online article about Illinois local and organic food advocate Jim Slama's recent appearance at the Perspectives on the Future of Agriculture in the Midwest conference in Chicago. To an audience of ag bankers, officials, and consultants, he promoted investment in development of infrastructure for the local food economy. Jim's argument for developing a local food infrastructure is handled very seriously in the article, even as AgriNews is an outlet for news about conventional agriculture.

(Jim Slama is a member of the Illinois Food, Farms, and Jobs Council and founder of FamilyFarmed.org.)

Another Indiana ag-food bill: HB 1142

Here is an potentially intriguing bill that is making its way through the Indiana General Assembly: HB 1142. Introduced by Rep. Sandy Blanton (D-District 62), this bill establishes a "study committee on agriculture safety and production." One of the responsibilities of this committee is to "study ways of enhancing the purchase by state agencies of agricultural products grown, produced, or processed in Indiana." As AgriNews Online comments, "that could include just about anything." Another of the committee's responsibilities listed is to "administer state programs and laws promoting agricultural trade."

In addition, the bill allows governmental institutions to "give up to a ten percent (10%) price preference for agricultural products grown, produced, or processed in Indiana." Originally, this bill required that the government buy at least 20% of its food from within the state by the year 2015, but amendments removed that proposition.

HB 1142 has already passed a few legislative hurdles and appears to have some potential to create incentives that expand and improve the efficiency of the local food economy. Several questions quickly arise, however:
How will this study committee be organized?
Who will be chosen to participate in it?
Will there be an opportunity for public input (e.g. hearings, surveys)?
Is the working definition of "local farm and food products" too inclusive? (Perhaps we could amend it from "agricultural products grown, produced, or processed in Indiana" to "agricultural products grown, produced AND processed in Indiana.")
How will the priorities of the study committee be determined as it "administer[s] state programs and laws promoting agricultural trade"?