A Bill Called ‘Good Food’ Should Be Good for Farmers, Too
You might think a bill called the “Good Food” bill (S.7638-B/A.8091-B) is good for everyone. Not so fast.
New York’s farmers know what it means to produce good food. Every day, they invest their time, money and hard work to grow crops, raise livestock and provide the products that feed our communities. They do so while navigating unpredictable markets, rising operating costs, labor challenges and an increasingly complicated regulatory environment.
That’s why farmers MUST be part of the solution, and why the “Good Food” bill must not impose vague standards or add complication to an already complex food procurement process.
In a nutshell, the legislation would allow public entities (including schools, hospitals, senior centers and correctional facilities) to award certain food procurement contracts to bidders whose bids are as much as 10% higher than the lowest responsible bid, provided they meet certain standards. The catch: the procuring public entity gets to decide which standard a farm must meet to get the preference.
To be clear, New York Farm Bureau supports efforts to expand markets for locally produced agricultural products. We believe public institutions should have opportunities to purchase New York-grown and New York-produced food whenever possible. But a procurement policy must be practical, transparent and fair to the farmers expected to participate.
Farmers need clear and fair rules.
Agriculture is not a one-size-fits-all industry, and farmers should not have to navigate subjective or unclear standards to compete for public food contracts. When legislation introduces broad criteria without clarity, as is the case in the “Good Food” bill, it creates uncertainty for producers and purchasing agencies alike.
Supporters present this legislation as a way to strengthen local agriculture and improve the food served in public institutions. Those are worthy goals. But good intentions do not automatically produce good policy, and New York’s farmers have legitimate concerns about how this legislation would work in practice.
Supporting New York agriculture means listening to New York farmers.
There are better, more direct approaches than the “Good Food” bill to strengthen farm-to-institution purchasing, including improving connections between farms and public buyers, addressing distribution challenges, and helping institutions identify products that New York farms can reliably supply. These efforts can expand markets for local agriculture from the ground up, rather than introducing confusing and often contradictory “standards.”
Most importantly, if the objective of the “Good Food” bill is to strengthen New York agriculture, farmers should have a seat at the table. The people who understand the realities of producing food should not be an afterthought.
Let’s join counties in raising our voices.
Concerns about this legislation are not limited to farmers. At least three county governments have introduced resolutions calling on Governor Hochul to veto the bill (Wayne, Madison, and Cattaraugus), and Cattaraugus has already passed its resolution.
These actions matter. County governments understand the practical challenges of delivering services, managing budgets and making purchasing decisions that serve their residents. Their concerns deserve consideration.
Governor Hochul has an opportunity to stand with New York’s agricultural community by once again rejecting a bill that raises significant questions about fairness, implementation and the future of public food procurement. But a veto would not mean abandoning local food purchasing. Instead, it would signal that this policy needs a different approach — one developed with farmers and grounded in clear, workable standards.
New York’s farmers want to be part of the solution. They want to supply their communities, build viable businesses and ensure that future generations can continue producing food. They need policies that open doors to opportunity, not rules that introduce yet more uncertainty to an already challenging business.
This decision is not about whether healthy food matters, or whether local agriculture deserves support. Of course they do. The question is whether this legislation is the right way to achieve those goals.
We believe it is not.
David Fisher, President, New York Farm Bureau
