July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
CFO action can wait, but not forever (07/21/06)
Editorial
Should the Jay County Commissioners defer action on new local regulations of confined animal feeding operations?
Yes, but with two strict conditions.
The county has been mulling over changes in rules on set-backs, notification of neighbors, and permitting for a couple of years now.
A study committee spent endless hours on the topic in 2004 and presented a set of recommendations to the commissioners in March of 2005.
At that time, the commissioners held off after signals from the state level that Indiana-wide regulations changes were on the way.
Roughly 13 months later, with no action coming from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management or the Indiana Department of Agriculture, the issue came back before the county commissioners.
And once again, it's gone through months of study and numerous public hearings.
Now a new set of recommendations is expected to come before the commissioners for action.
But local members of the Indiana Farm Bureau this week asked the commissioners to defer action once again.
It seems that a statewide review of confined feeding regulations is finally under way, and - local farmers argue - it would be a mistake to implement local rules when states rules are in the process of revision.
They have a point.
If, indeed, IDEM, the Farm Bureau, and others are in the process of drafting new rules, it makes sense to wait.
But not forever.
That's one of the conditions we'd suggest if the commissioners decide to defer action on the recommendations being sent to them by the Jay County Planning Commission.
Deferring action makes sense as long as there's a reasonable deadline set.
Is that 60 days? Ninety days? One hundred and twenty days?
That's up to the commissioners, but it can't be open-ended.
That's what happened in March 2005, sparking anger in April 2006.
The second condition we'd recommend is to keep the possibility of new local regulations alive depending upon what the new state rules look like.
In other words, wait to see what the state comes up with but don't automatically abdicate authority on the topic.
It's worth noting that the agriculture community has shown a tremendous willingness to compromise on this issue in the past two years.
As one Farm Bureau member put it the other day, "We're not saying, 'Do nothing.'"
Instead, they want something all parties can agree upon.
It's worth waiting a reasonable, well-defined period of time to see if that common ground can be found this fall. - J.R.[[In-content Ad]]
Yes, but with two strict conditions.
The county has been mulling over changes in rules on set-backs, notification of neighbors, and permitting for a couple of years now.
A study committee spent endless hours on the topic in 2004 and presented a set of recommendations to the commissioners in March of 2005.
At that time, the commissioners held off after signals from the state level that Indiana-wide regulations changes were on the way.
Roughly 13 months later, with no action coming from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management or the Indiana Department of Agriculture, the issue came back before the county commissioners.
And once again, it's gone through months of study and numerous public hearings.
Now a new set of recommendations is expected to come before the commissioners for action.
But local members of the Indiana Farm Bureau this week asked the commissioners to defer action once again.
It seems that a statewide review of confined feeding regulations is finally under way, and - local farmers argue - it would be a mistake to implement local rules when states rules are in the process of revision.
They have a point.
If, indeed, IDEM, the Farm Bureau, and others are in the process of drafting new rules, it makes sense to wait.
But not forever.
That's one of the conditions we'd suggest if the commissioners decide to defer action on the recommendations being sent to them by the Jay County Planning Commission.
Deferring action makes sense as long as there's a reasonable deadline set.
Is that 60 days? Ninety days? One hundred and twenty days?
That's up to the commissioners, but it can't be open-ended.
That's what happened in March 2005, sparking anger in April 2006.
The second condition we'd recommend is to keep the possibility of new local regulations alive depending upon what the new state rules look like.
In other words, wait to see what the state comes up with but don't automatically abdicate authority on the topic.
It's worth noting that the agriculture community has shown a tremendous willingness to compromise on this issue in the past two years.
As one Farm Bureau member put it the other day, "We're not saying, 'Do nothing.'"
Instead, they want something all parties can agree upon.
It's worth waiting a reasonable, well-defined period of time to see if that common ground can be found this fall. - J.R.[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD