This bill amends the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program to set aside 10% of funding for eligible projects on farm-to-market roads in counties with high agricultural output.
David Valadao
Representative
CA-22
This bill amends the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program to create a new funding set-aside for specific counties with high agricultural output. It defines "covered counties" based on significant annual agricultural production value and density. Ten percent of the program's funds must then be reserved for projects located on "farm-to-market roads" within these designated counties.
This bill makes a targeted change to the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program, specifically carving out a dedicated funding stream for roads in the country’s biggest agricultural powerhouses. The core of the change is defining a “covered county” as one with massive agricultural output—at least $1,000,000,000 in annual gross agricultural production value, plus a high production density of at least $500,000 per square mile. Once a county hits those high thresholds, it qualifies, and every road within it officially becomes a “farm-to-market road.”
The real impact comes from the money. The bill mandates that 10 percent of the total funds available in the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program must be set aside exclusively for projects located on these newly defined farm-to-market roads. This is a direct investment mechanism: if you’re a farmer or a trucking company in one of these high-output counties, this means a reliable, dedicated pot of federal cash to fix the roads you use every day to move crops and livestock. The Secretary must update the list of qualifying counties annually, adjusting the billion-dollar thresholds for inflation so the criteria stay relevant over time.
This legislation is laser-focused on improving infrastructure where agricultural output is highest and most concentrated. Think of the massive agricultural regions that feed the country—this bill ensures that the roads supporting that output get priority funding. For the farmers and agricultural workers in these areas, better roads mean lower maintenance costs on equipment, faster transport times, and fewer delays getting perishable goods to market. It’s a direct economic boost to the efficiency of the agricultural supply chain in these specific regions.
While this is a clear win for the high-yield agricultural counties, it introduces a necessary trade-off for other rural areas. By reserving 10 percent of the grant money for a specific, high-bar subset of counties, the overall pool of funding available for every other rural county in the country shrinks. If your county is rural but doesn't hit that billion-dollar agricultural threshold—say, it relies more on tourism or small-scale industry—you’re now competing for 90 percent of the funds, rather than 100 percent. This means that while funding is more targeted, it also creates a clear distinction in priority, potentially leaving smaller, less agriculturally dominant rural areas with tougher competition for road funding.