Local Efforts to Handle CAFO’s Continue
Randolph County’s meeting on local CAFO limits yesterday reported turned into a theoretical discussion about which arm of county government should be making the decision on approval of a new CAFO. Either that, of a turf war:
But the discussion turned into a confusing back-and-forth conversation between county attorney John Tanner and APC attorney Bob Oliver about exactly how the county can impose those restrictions, who has the jurisdiction to establish or enforce them and which group should have the final say when a farmer wants to build a CAFO in Randolph County.
Link (Star Press). The committee studying a CAFO ordinance just wanted a little guidance on the issue, but an hour passed without any guidance being given:
County Commissioner Ron Chalfant asked APC board President Mike Wickersham which option the board preferred. And that’s one question the APC board hasn’t taken to a vote.
Chalfant asked, "What’s your recommendation? Is your recommendation that CAFOs live and die with area planning?"
Wickersham said personally, he thought the 13 members of the APC board better represented the broad population of the county, as opposed to the three members of the county commission.
Randolph County is not the only County considering local regulation of CAFO’s. I mentioned St. Joseph County and Grant County yesterday, and now Jay County is stepping into the issue as well. Its approach was to hire an outside firm to make recommendations for $19,000.00:
The commission recently approved an agreement with Ball State University’s Office of Building Better Communities. Richard Heupel — ex-director of the Jay County Economic Development Commission who is now employed by the Ball State office — said his group will look at the county’s comprehensive plan and zoning regulations, and submit a report summarizing the county’s options and obligations by the end of the year.
Link (Star Press). The move by the planning commission still requires approval from the county commissioners.
