How would a health ordinance addressing concentrated animal feeding operations, if enacted by the Grundy County Commission, benefit the citizens of the county?
That was the central question posed to the commission this morning and the answer appeared to be elusive. Approximately 35 local producers showed up to question the commission about an ordinance that is being considered and speak their minds about how such an ordinance would affect their operations and the county as a whole.
Presiding Commissioner Rick Hull, First District Commissioner Gene Wyant and Second District Commissioner Joe Brinser were each questioned about whether or not they are in favor of such an ordinance. Hull stood by what he has said several times prior to today, that he is not in favor of anything that is going to hurt someone’s business or restrict their expansion. He said, however, that the commission had to “start the conversation” somewhere and drawing up an ordinance was a start.
Brinser said the commission is still in a “fact-finding” mode, seeking information after another group, Hickory Neighbors United, asked them to consider a health ordinance in an effort to stop a large hog operation from being located west of Trenton. That operation, Trenton Farms RE LLC, has sought a permit to operate a farm, but the Missouri Clean Water Commission has overruled the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and a permit has not been issued. It was stated at the meeting, and had been stated numerous times before, that even if the commission enacts a health ordinance, the proposed hog farm would not have been affected since the permit had already been sought. Brinser, addressing a comment that the commission is elected to represent all citizens of the county, said he felt that it made sense to draw up an ordinance that had the one-half mile setback and make it public to see how everyone feels about it.
Wyant said he felt that since a group had come to the commission and asked for a health ordinance that there should not be a “yes” or “no” answer until all the facts had been gathered.
The commissioners said that when a group of supporters of the ordinance and a group of opponents had met, it was their understanding that the opponents “could live with” a change in the 1,000-foot setback, moving that distance to one-half mile. Those who had been involved in that meeting said that was not exactly accurate and it was pointed out that you would be hard-pressed to find a place in the county that would not be within one-half mile of an “occupied dwelling,” a term which applies to houses, churches, cemeteries, conservation areas and public use areas.
One of the main objections to a health ordinance is the restrictive language and the burden that language would place on a producer who wants to expand. Several of those in attendance said they would not be able to support the next generation on their current operation, meaning those who would like to see their children or grandchildren be able to make a living on the family farm would not likely see that happen. While current operations would be “grandfathered in,” any change in the operation would mean the producer would be required to seek a permit and meet the requirements of the ordinance. Even changing the name of the farm would remove the “grandfathered” status from the farm.
There were several comments about the economic effects the ordinance would have on the county, noting that some producers would move their operations to land they own in other counties, taking the tax revenue with them.
Several of those in attendance indicated by raising their hand that their family farms would be considered CAFOs and nearly all said their farms are incorporated, technically making them “corporate farms,” a term that is most often used to describe a large farm controlled not by a family, but by a large firm, often from out of the area. There are currently regulations in place through the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and the United States Department of Agriculture to regulate CAFOs. Those regulations, it was said, should be enough without having the county commission stepping in to add more regulation. Hull told the group that the commission does not have the resources to police a health ordinance.
Cathie Rice, the lone self-declared member of Hickory Neighbors United at the meeting, told those in attendance that her group was trying to stop what they considered to be a shell corporation from putting in a farm in their neighborhood. She said that local farmers know the land is vital to their operation and take care of it. She alleged that landowners such as Pipestone, the would-be operator of Trenton Farms RE LLC, does not care about the land. Those in attendance let her know that, in their opinion, their operations will be stopped instead of just companies like Pipestone.
Overall, the group let commissioners know that passing a health ordinance as presented would stifle agriculture in the county and that producers would likely give up farming, move their operations or perhaps even take legal action against the county to stop the implementation of the ordinance.
When asked when a decision would be made, the commissioners noted they have not even formally proposed the ordinance, a step that would be followed by public hearings prior to any decision made. Producers noted that they are at a standstill in some respects, not knowing if they will be able to expand or not. Bankers are reluctant to provide funding for expansions in case the ordinance is passed. No timetable was provided by the commission.
A copy of the ordinance being considered may be obtained in the Grundy County Clerk’s office.
This website brought to you in part by the following sponsor:
