Saline County Study
Committee
Monday, July 10, 2000
Saline County Extension Office, Marshall
Minutes
Saline County Study Members Present: Mark Belwood, Kathy
Borgman, Wayne McReynolds, LeAnn Haling, Vince Buck, Richard Clemens, Becky Plattner
Saline County Study Members Absent: Ruthie Cramer, Roy Hunter, Marc Harris
Saline County Commissioners Present: Richard Pemberton
Saline County Commissioners Absent: John Stouffer, Mike Dillon
Saline County Extension Staff Present: Darin
Starr
Saline County Extension Staff Absent: Rachel
Miles, Cynthia Crawford
University Partners Present: Wendy
Pettersen
University Partners Absent: John Lory, Tom Johnson, Chris Barnett, Kathy Miller,
Mubarak Hamed, Chris Fulcher, Dr. Ron Powers, Anna Cox, Jim Meyer, Jerry Organ
Marshall Democrat News: Bob Stewart
Chairman Mark Belwood called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The June 19 minutes were approved as corrected,
taking care of a spelling error and noting that the figures for the preference ranking
were preliminary and not final figures.
The June 26 minutes were approved as printed and distributed.
Mark Belwood noted the health study that was to be conducted in
northern Missouri has been postponed. The
study is to determine if there are health problems related to CAFOs and since the normal
spreading of nutrients from lagoons is not taking place due to the drought, the study has
been postponed.
Anna Cox has provided the final preference ranking information. They are:
Private Property Rights
19.6%
Neighborhood Property Values 18.2%
Local Ownership
14.8%
Environmental Considerations
20.2%
Cultural and Historical
11.5%
Economic Considerations
15.6%
At this point Wendy Petterson made notes of the discussion so
recorder Kathy Borgman could participate in the discussion.
The following is a free flowing discussion summarized from Wendy’s
notes. Kathy Borgman recorded all motions.
The discussion began with the observation that the health
ordinances we had copies of seemed too complicated and created a negative impact. It would be better to take a more proactive
approach that planning and zoning provides. The
people of the county need to vote on it and that is possible with P & Z but not with
an ordinance. Carroll County planning and
zoning is a good model. It would be a good
idea to discuss with the Farm Bureau what will happen in the state legislature as they
deal with the CAFO regulations that will expire next year.
The Farm Bureau will be a major player in this legislative decision. A suggestion is that the larger CAFOs be
classified as industrial and regulated and taxed as industry. It would be highly unlikely that the legislature
would remove the agriculture exemption for P & Z.
What happens if nothing changes in the legislature; don’t
we need a Plan B? A good way to go might be
with a Good Neighbor Plan involving an arbitration board.
There is a lot of fear associated with P & Z. It would be nice if we could call it something
else, but that’s not possible. Local
solutions are better than county or larger legislative bodies. Each township would need its own Good Neighbor
Board.
Can we get support for P & Z? What’s more palatable for farmers? Could a Good Neighbor Plan work until state laws
are changed?
The creation of a good zoning document must allow for change
over time. A board of zoning adjustment
attends to issues on a case-by-case basis. They
try to make it work. It may not be perfect,
but guidelines make things better for everyone.
It was noted members of the planning commission would be rural
residents. However, everyone in the county
would vote on it. Public hearings would be
required during the creation process. It
would also be a lengthy process. Yes, there
are companies who draft such documents. We
would like ours to be simple and straightforward.
Turning from the P & Z discussion, the question was asked,
“What about a health ordinance? Is there
an advantage to having a health ordinance?” This
was followed by the question, “Is there a health problem?” Opposition to a health ordinance was voiced
because it only deals with CAFOs and not larger issues that could be addressed through P
& Z. It is another layer of regulations
and it would be hard to enforce. On the other
hand, is there a fear that creating a health ordinance would really find health problems
of other natures too, such as chemicals, and we are reluctant to deal with that?
Planning and Zoning is preferred, but it will take a long time
to implement. A health ordinance gives more
protection and it gives it more immediately. Is
a health ordinance a good temporary way to address the CAFO issue? It was noted there are vast improvements in
overall water quality, disposal of dead animals, and use of nutrients for crop advantage
in the past 20 years. However, there are
still more animals concentrated in one area and there is still odor that neighbors find
offensive.
Richard Clemens moved, Becky Plattner seconded, that we do not
recommend the implementation of a health ordinance by the county commission at this time.
Kathy Borgman chaired the meeting. Mark Belwood moved we table the discussion of
health ordinance until people have the opportunity to read the Minnesota literature review
on health factors associated with CAFOs. The
motion died for lack of a second.
Mark Belwood chaired the meeting again. Vote was called.
Four voted yes, Three voted no. Motion
carried.
Richard Clemens moved, Becky Plattner seconded, that we proceed
with a recommendation for county Planning and Zoning implementing a Good Neighbor Plan for
agriculture because agriculture is exempt from Planning and Zoning. Carried unanimously.
Richard Clemens moved, LeAnn
Haling seconded that we invite members of the Farm Bureau legislative representatives to
our next meeting for the purpose of discussing options that might come before the
legislature during the next session such as the reclassification of larger agricultural
operations as industrial. Carried
unanimously.
The next meeting will be July 24, 6:30 p.m, meeting first with
Farm Bureau representatives if possible. August
14 is the only other scheduled meeting at this time.
Meeting adjourned 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathy Borgman, recorder
This web site is hosted by CARES- University
of Missouri - Columbia
This web site is maintained jointly by the Saline County Study Steering
Committee and CARES
For problems or questions regarding this web contact the Saline
County Steering Committee or Chris
Fulcher (CARES).
Last updated: October 13, 2000
