I generally leave the coverage of new Indiana Appellate decisions in the capable hands of Marcia Oddi over at the Indiana Law Blog, but I wanted to highlight an appeal dealing with a CAFO issue that Marcia covered last Friday. I think you can see some of the challenges facing both the farmers and the surrounding property owners through a case like this.
Robert & Melinda Sexton, Stephanie & Craig Flinn, David & Gail Helt, et.al. v. Jackson County Board of Zoning Appeals and members, et.al. is an Indiana Court of Appeals decision that reversed a decision by Judge William Vance in the Jackson County Circuit Court.
Judge Vance found that the petitioners did not have proper legal standing to challenge the BZA’s granting of a permit for construction of a CAFO in the county - an important issue - because they were able to show that the granting of the permit would cause them a loss of property value. The court said:
Here, the issue is the operation of an 8,000 hog CAFO—the odors associated with such an operation alone presents a much different set of acts than the setback variance.
The petitioners had called a former township assessor at the hearing before the BZA, and he said:
The first thing that has to happen if this hog operation goes in, is the neighborhood value will have to be lowered from a good to a fair or a poor. . . . [T]here’s some houses like Flynns [sic], Bowmans and Jerry Marsh’s, David Helt’s there’s some of them that the Sexton’s house, there’s two of them there that are pretty new houses, Steve Bowman’s sister just built a new house up there. I wouldn’t be surprised if they wouldn’t drop 30 percent, I don’t think it would be out of the question. So the property values will decrease in this area.
The appeals court found this sufficient to establish standing to sue. The second issue asserted a peculiar violation of Indiana’s open door law (IC 5-14-1.5-1, et cetera): The petitioners claimed that members of the BZA started mumbling during the hearing - keeping the public and the recording devices from picking up on what was said. The trial court did not consider this 20 minutes of blank tape (sound familiar) issue, and the appeals court held that they should have.
At this point, the decision of the appeals court will not become final until May 18, 2008, and before that time either party might ask the court to reconsider the decision or seek to send it to the Indiana Supreme Court. If the decision does become final, the case goes back to Judge Vance for reconsideration.
One lesson from this case is that these things can grind on for a very long time: The original BZA hearing occurred on October 11, 2005, so 2 and a half years later, folks are still waiting to see what will happen with this CAFO.