It has been nearly a year since heavy rainfall left Kaitlyn Kimball’s 3-acre field in Naugatuck under a foot of water for almost a week, killing all of the tomatoes.
But Kimball, who co-owns Sunset Farm, said she can “still feel the impact” of the flooding from August 2024. Kimball said she lost years of compost and materials to improve the soil, and she had to buy extra fertilizer.
That same rain also hit David Buck’s Guardians Farm in Southbury. He had just gotten his license from the state agriculture agency, and the flooding coincided with the day he was finally getting to sell milk. And he recalled the consistent rain in 2023 adding an extra layer of challenges as he built up dairy operations.
As farmers like Kimball and Buck await relief for weather-related losses, Connecticut officials and its federal counterparts have been working for months on a $220 million block grant for small and midsize farming states. Over the past couple of weeks, negotiations hit a new juncture, prompting some disagreements over the rollout of disaster aid passed by Congress in December.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture presented two options. States could run their own crop loss program by using the block grant tailored for them, but they wouldn’t get access to a larger pot of supplemental disaster aid — the option that Connecticut ultimately chose. Or they could go with the latter, run by the federal agency, but face limits on what gets covered by the block grant.
Connecticut decided it would develop a state-run program using the federal block grant to help farmers recoup losses from extreme weather in 2023 and 2024. Under the current structure, that means the state won’t get access to the $21 billion Supplemental Disaster Relief Program, or SDRP.
After learning of the USDA’s proposals in late May, eligible states scrambled to make an assessment and meet the initial deadline of June 4, though Connecticut got an extension until this past Wednesday. States weighed which option made more sense for their farmers while they wait to learn how much of the $220 million grant they will receive.
Connecticut’s Department of Agriculture believes the block grant option gives the state more flexibility for specialty crop operations, especially since the supplemental disaster funds might not cover many of the farmers and producers in Connecticut.
It’s a decision some farmers in Connecticut think is the best approach and one they are cautiously optimistic about since they have been waiting for relief for months. “It really seems like the only option you can do. It feels like a no-brainer,” Buck said.
But the state agency and Connecticut’s congressional delegation pushed back against the USDA’s parameters that states cannot participate in both programs.
“While we respectfully disagree with USDA’s interpretation that states must choose exclusively between the two options, we have proceeded with Option 1 to avoid leaving producers without critical recovery assistance,” the state Department of Agriculture wrote in its newsletter last Friday. “We also reserve the right to challenge USDA’s statutory interpretation that precludes dual participation in both the SDRP and Farm Recovery and Support Block Grant and have requested clarification on this point.”
The Farm Recovery and Support Block Grant Program was set up to go to farmers and producers in New England plus Hawaii and Alaska — smaller farming states that don’t typically benefit from federal programs as much as commodity farmers in the Midwest and elsewhere. The grant included crop, timber and livestock losses caused by extreme weather in 2023 and 2024 and didn’t require crop insurance to qualify.
Connecticut’s Agriculture Commissioner Bryan Hurlburt and his office have been talking with USDA staff on a weekly basis to finalize the contract and formally set up the block grant agreement. Both parties remain in contact about the path forward.
As things stand, Connecticut is waiting to hear back on its allocation of the $220 million. It’s also waiting for USDA’s approval of the state’s design of the program.
The USDA is trying to stay on track with its timeline to roll out various disaster funding streams. Under this plan, agreements for the small states block grant could be executed by June 30 if finalized by Friday.
From there, it’s expected states will manage the program and determine the schedule for applications and disbursements. But the timing of that is still up in the air until the contract is squared. Some farmers in the state don’t expect payments until months from now.
USDA, CT lawmakers clash over disaster aid
The USDA’s proposals set off a back-and-forth between the federal agency and Democratic lawmakers over the deployment of disaster aid. The farm assistance passed on Dec. 20 as part of a broader supplemental package to help those suffering from recent natural disasters and extreme weather.
Questions emerged over the potential of double dipping and farmers getting money to cover the same thing. (Lawmakers said there is an audit in place to prevent that and ensure farmers aren’t exceeding their losses.)
Lawmakers argued that the options as designed could prevent some farmers in New England and smaller Pacific states from getting the relief they need. The USDA pushed back that Democrats are politicizing the issue and slow-walking aid for their own states.
U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District, who championed the creation of the small state block grants, argued the federal agency is going against the intentions of Congress in how it wrote and passed the law. She said lawmakers interpreted the $220 million as a supplement for smaller farmers who don’t always qualify for traditional disaster relief.
A group of 29 Democratic lawmakers who represent the eligible block-grant states framed it as an “bait and switch” that pits two federal disaster aid programs against each other. They argued it could hurt small and midsize farmers, many of whom do not have crop insurance.
“USDA is demanding States either accept traditional disaster relief, which has failed most of our small farmers for years, or gamble on an unknown amount of repayment with little to no guidance from USDA. Once again, this choice would leave so many small farms to fend for themselves after a disaster,” the group of lawmakers said in a statement that included Connecticut’s House delegation and its two U.S. senators.
Critics wished farmers were part of the equation to solicit their feedback on USDA’s proposals instead of only asking state commissioners to decide quickly on the way to distribute disaster aid.
In her own statement, DeLauro called it an “unacceptable and a clear violation of the law as written.”
For its part, USDA is placing the blame on Democratic lawmakers, contending that they are delaying aid. The federal agency argued members are looking “to manufacture controversy and blame the Trump Administration” and accused them of trying to “misuse” taxpayer money.
“Secretary Rollins is working in good faith to deliver relief quickly and responsibly. USDA has met weekly with eligible states, offering flexible options and clear guidance to avoid duplicating existing federal programs,” USDA spokesman Seth W. Christensen said in a recent statement.
“Some states, led by partisan officials, have refused to engage,” he added. “They’re not just denying aid to their own farmers — they’re now delaying relief for producers nationwide.”
Disaster aid for farmers was a major topic of discussion when Rollins testified before two congressional committees last month. She vowed to get the money out but cautioned that the need from all eligible states will likely exceed what Congress appropriated for the small state block grants.
And the topic came up again a couple of times Wednesday while Rollins testified before the House Agriculture Committee.
During her questioning about the block grant and the Connecticut farms in need, U.S. Rep. Jahana Hayes, D-5th District, specifically highlighted Buck’s Guardians Farm, which is the only veteran-owned dairy farm in the state. Rollins wrote down the name of the farm, saying she wanted to get more information about it.
Hayes asked the agriculture secretary for the reasoning behind asking states to essentially choose between two disaster programs.
Rollins highlighted the active conversations that continue among state agriculture commissioners on the issue, including a call later with DeLauro.
“We are continuing to assess what this means, understanding that this $220 million block grant to New England that you all put in the relief act at the end of this year is different,” Rollins testified Wednesday. “We are continuing to look at this. The decision has not been released yet, but will be soon.”
While officials had until the end of Wednesday to make its final decision, Connecticut confirmed it will proceed with the block grant option.
In ongoing discussions over the matter, Rollins and DeLauro spoke on Wednesday.
Long-awaited aid
2024 wasn’t the only challenging year for farmers in Connecticut when it came to bad weather.
Buck of Guardians Farm recalled feeling like there was “constant rain all summer long for us” in 2023. And earlier that year, farmers also contended with a late-spring frost that affected some crops, like peaches.
Farmers who experienced weather-related losses in 2023 and 2024, including Kimball and Buck, filled out the survey to help Connecticut figure out how much to report to USDA to help determine state allocations. Kimball said she reported upwards of $30,000 in losses.
Connecticut’s Department of Agriculture submitted a request of $83 million to USDA in January. That included $72 million in reported losses, a 2% administration fee and $10 million for resiliency projects.
Kimball said she got an email from the commissioner about choosing the block grant the other day because she was working with a group to advocate for it. In addition to running Sunset Farm and overseeing farmers markets in New Haven, she is the director of agriculture for the nonprofit CitySeed, where she works on policy.
Since Connecticut is going with the block grant, it will be fully in charge of administering the program and eventual compensation. Some farmers feel like that will be more beneficial than going through USDA’s Farm Service Agency since the state agency has “more intimate knowledge” of farmers’ struggles from the past two years.
“I’m really excited about these block grants. This would be huge for our farm. I’m a little nervous about it actually going through,” Kimball said. “I’m glad to see that the state is moving forward in wanting to support farmers.”
Farmers have “experienced so much disruption to federal money in the last six months,” Kimball said. “I know the commissioner and other people at the Department of Ag pretty well, and I’d like to think that I trust their judgment in advocating for us.”
Buck was also active in trying to figure out what aid was available for farmers in Connecticut that got hit badly by flooding and other weather events. He was part of a number of meetings with nonprofits and at the state level. And he had encouraged other farmers and producers to respond to the survey of reported losses.
Given the quick turnaround, Buck said Connecticut needed to take a bit of a gamble on which option to choose. But he ultimately felt it “went the safer route.”
Buck said he isn’t too worried about the state not getting access to the supplemental disaster aid passed by Congress. From his perspective, Connecticut farmers could have been left out even more from the larger pot of money and then the state wouldn’t be able to use the block grant to its fullest capacity.
Because diversified farms in Connecticut get left out of federal agriculture assistance often, farmers in the area believe there needs to be more disaster relief at the state level, pointing to places like Massachusetts that got checks out the door within weeks after flooding hit the state.
“But I guess I’m very jaded when it comes to grants, just because, one, I don’t like relying on the government for things, but obviously we all need help at times,” said Buck, who noted he hasn’t gotten most of the grants he’s applied for over the years. At Wednesday’s hearing, Hayes noted that the farm has not received any disaster assistance, including a request for $50,000 to help recover some of the lost revenue.
Kimball gave credit to William “Willie” Dellacamera, a farmer from Northford, who had also been pushing for the rollout of farm disaster aid and the special block grant for New England.
He lost hundreds of thousands of dollars last August when a 13-minute hail storm destroyed his farm. That prompted him to travel to D.C. by tractor to push for help, for smaller farms that typically don’t get as much federal aid as larger commodity farms.
Since then, Dellacamera has made repeat trips to D.C. this year to get more answers on the block grant that was in part inspired by his story.
He came for several days in May to watch the hearings with Rollins in person. That trip got him face time with the agriculture secretary on two occasions as he made his plea for the quick rollout of the money for small and midsize farmers.
Dellacamera made a return trip this week to Congress amid the negotiations on the block grant. He again sat in the audience listening to Rollins testify before the House Agriculture Committee.
The next steps and the timing are a bit uncertain. And some farmers don’t anticipate getting anything until fall at the earliest.
“Whenever this goes through, obviously it’s taken too long. I was hoping again, in all these meetings I was going to last year, that something would have happened sooner to help farmers really get ready for the next year. We’re already in June now and we probably won’t see anything until the fall I’m assuming,” Buck said. “Nothing is going to happen quickly when you have the federal and the state government working together.”
The Connecticut Mirror/Connecticut Public Radio federal policy reporter position is made possible, in part, by funding from the Robert and Margaret Patricelli Family Foundation.
This story was originally published by the Connecticut Mirror.
