That's not what the state's high appellate court is in business for. The Court serves special interests.
But the Court announced that on June 5 the decision and opinions in 2015AP1258 Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga will be released. See Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Release of Supreme Court Opinions. Find the case on June 5 at Wisconsin Courts.
In the Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide whether some 1.7 million Wisconsin citizens, some 30 percent of the state living in towns, can act locally to protect local conditions, property values, families, drinking water quality, and local character through zoning, (p. 14. Brief of Amicus Curiae - Local Business Amici. Filed by Christa Westerberg).
The Golden Sands factory farm is seeking a new and novel interpretation of the state's vested property rights doctrine to render a town's capacity to protect itself virtually non-existent. [For legal updates on the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, enter 15ap1258 in the Appeal Number field.]
In April 2017, "the 4th District Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Town of Saratoga, holding that the vested rights that the Wysocki Family of Companies have in a building permit for seven dairy buildings on 98 acres do not authorize them to use more than 4,660 acres throughout the Town for the application of manure ... ," (Apr 13, 2017; 015AP001258; Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga; District 4; Wood County,).
Stopping this massive application of manure could be a mortal blow to the business operation of this proposed factory farm, Golden Sands Dairy LLC.
The case was argued before the Supreme Court Jan 11, 2018.
No central Wisconsin resident contacted this weekend expressed confidence the Wisconsin Supreme Court would follow existing doctrine on corporate property rights and municipal authority. Anything is possible as powerful interests are parties to both sides of the case. Facts, law, long-observed doctrine and arguments are irrelevant in the Court's proceedings.
In action related to this case, since 2011 Republicans have implemented an unprecedented statutory framework according corporate property rights supremacy over any other competing rights, including public interest concerns.
Notes David Strifling at the Marquette University Law School:
In 2016, the Wisconsin Legislature [enacted] Wis. Stat. § 227.57(11). The statute provides that a 'court shall accord no deference to the agency’s interpretation of law if the agency action or decision restricts the property owner’s free use of the property owner’s property.'Though to this point Republicans have worked to change the nature of corporations' property rights vis a vis the public interest function of state agencies and local governments, the Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga case accords the Republican-dominated Supreme Court a way to expand corporate property rights over the health and safety claims of neighbors and communities.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Corporate interests, the Wisconsin Farm Bureau and Wisconsin Realtors Association, have filed Amicus, (Friend of the Court), briefs in support of the Court hearing the Golden Sands-Wysocki petition.
Republican Supreme Court members protect corporate interests, and for years have refused to recuse themselves in cases in which the justices' political campaigns have benefited from heavy spending by litigants, (Wisconsin Democracy Campaign), (Wisconsin Democracy Campaign).
Some central Wisconsin residents contacted believe that because the remaining credibility of the Wisconsin Supreme Court as an independent judicial body is at stake, the Court may not overturn the well-grounded April 2017 state appellate decision in Golden Sands.
---
From Saratoga (Wisconsin) Concerned Update
6/1/2018
Special Announcement:
Supreme Court - Golden Sands Dairy -vs- Town of Saratoga
Decision coming on Tuesday, June 5th, 2018
Earlier this morning the WI Supreme Court posted the list of cases whose decisions will be announced next week. Saratoga's case is on the list for release on Tuesday, June 5th.
It is important to remind our followers the decision in front of the WI Supreme Court is NOT about whether Wysocki can build his CAFO in Saratoga, but specifically what he legally can do with the land he eventually purchased in 2015. The decision ahead will either allow Wysocki to clear-cut the parcels for cropland or uphold Saratoga's current zoning ordinance which was in place before the land was purchased.
Although a win at the WI Supreme Court level would be cause for a huge celebration, it does not necessarily end completely our battle with the Wysocki's. It would, however, be a significant roadblock for him moving forward with his proposed CAFO.
The minute the decision is made public on Tuesday we will immediately break down the information and blast it out via our Newsletter and Facebook pages. Please be thinking positive thoughts and keep your fingers crossed for a verdict in our favor.
Sincerely,
Saratoga Concerned Leadership Team
We are all holding our breathe...those living by these farms will be holding their breathe a lot longer...this decision is VERY IMPORTANT for us mouth breathers...! Are citizens now saying NO to the manure spreaders...is LAND the issue...if so...we the landowners now CONTROL THIS ISSUE...what would they do without your land for spreading...?
ReplyDeleteThere can be no functional democracy without local citizens voicing what is best for their locale and being respected and their concerns reckoned with. Our present governor and legislature clearly only follow the money of politically powerful & financially deep pocketed special interests such as represented in this case by big agriculture. The irony is that large CAFOs like Wysocki benefit from taxpayer dollars converted to subsidies & given to big Ag by various governmental agencies. This is truly a many sided insult to the taxpayer who is then deprived of their representation. This is what happened in the Revolutionary War: Taxation without Representation! Another example of history being repeated via a failed government which ignores past examples of what to avoid. Let us all wait with bated breath & hope that this Court wakes up to its purpose, we will know by tomorrow!
ReplyDelete