Showing posts with label Wysocki CAFO central Wisconsin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wysocki CAFO central Wisconsin. Show all posts

Nov 4, 2018

Campaign 2018: Year of Water Is Here

Clean water advocates from across Wisconsin gathered
at the state capitol in Madison to demand clean and
safe water. Image is from a video filmed in November 2015.
(Mal Contends)
Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — The toil of citizens working for clean water appears likely to pay off in the midterm elections statewide.

Massive water condemnation from factory farms enabled by corrupt Republican officeholders and resultant political activity have led to a reckoning — November 6, 2018, Election Day.

Republicans often sound like clean water warriors, adopting the language of the citizens fighting for water in political messaging.

Reports Jack Healy of the New York Times in a dispatch from Armenia in central Wisconsin this morning: "The groundwater that once ran cool and clean from taps in this Midwestern farming town is now laced with contaminants and fear. People refuse to drink it. They won’t brush their teeth with it. They dread taking showers. ... [F]ears and frustration over water quality and contamination have become a potent election-year issue."

Increasing opposition to proposed massive CAFO in central
Wisconsin signals statewide, clean water sentiment.
- Photo by Mary Captain-Braund (creative commons)
Potent is correct.

Wisconsin citizens around the state are working to protect Wisconsin's abundant fresh waters, (Saratoga Concerned, Kewaunee County, U.S. DHS, Mal Contends, In These Times, Water Watch Wisconsin, Kewaunee Cares, Tri-Lakes Management District, Protect Wood County and Its Neighbors, Citizens Concerned about Lake Superior CAFOs, Farms Not Factories).

Republicans are fighting for the polluters.

It's that simple.

Residents in central Wisconsin are fighting a proposed
massive factory farm owned by the infamous
Wysocki corporation, (Saratoga Concerned). State
Rep Scott Krug (R) runs political interference for
polluting industry, and appears poised to pay
the price at the ballot box in the gerrymandered
72nd state assembly district.
Writes the Times Healy

As [Gov Scott Walker (R)] runs for a third term, his Democratic challenger, Tony Evers, has turned polluted wetlands and unsafe water into campaign slogans. In Lodi, north of the state capital, Ann Groves Lloyd is campaigning for the State Assembly with a tongue-in-cheek ad in which she tries to water her cows with plastic bottles and irrigate her fields with a water cooler strapped to a John Deere tractor.

Some voters who say they cannot drink from the taps or water their livestock without worrying about nitrates or E. coli bacteria say the state’s deregulatory spree has gone too far.

'I blame the government,' Jose Rangel said one afternoon as he sat in the living room of his trailer home, reviewing a letter confirming that his 27-foot-deep well had tested at double the federal safety limits for nitrates. 'We can’t do nothing about it. I’ll vote. I want clean water.'
Election Day 2018 will remembered as the day Wisconsin citizens did something about it; they voted out the water polluters' lobby seated in the capitol.

Oct 10, 2018

Clean Water Group Endorses David Gorski in Central Wisconsin Assembly Race

Wisconsin State Rep. Scott Krug (R) is a factory farm champ
who runs political interference for the Wysocki corp. proposing
a massive factory farm in central Wisconsin. The clean
water citizen group, Saratoga Concerned, dumped on Krug
and endorsed David Gorski (D), a water warrior.

Saratoga Concerned Endorses David Gorski (D) over Rep. Scott Krug (R)


Candidate Synopsis
Saratoga Concerned
Tue 10/9/2018, 7:55 AM
                   
Saratoga Concerned

72nd Assembly District Race
Candidate Synopsis


Friends and neighbors,

The Saratoga Concerned group does not associate itself directly with any political party.  Our leadership team consists of individuals on various sides of the political spectrum and together we work every day to create a balance within our beliefs and messaging to our supporters.  We believe it is everyone's responsibility to VOTE and now more than ever we also believe it is extremely important to know where your candidate actually stands on the ISSUES and not depend on what you believe their political party once represented.

Over the past 2 months, our Saratoga Concerned team has connected with candidates for the 72nd Assembly District with one sole purpose, to dig deep with questions and make them prove their commitment to protecting and preserving Wisconsin waters.  We understand our supporters have multiple issues that are important to them personally and you need to weigh all the factors before voting. For Saratoga Concerned our one and only focus is the issue of Water.

Our Saratoga Concerned team has poured hours into the candidate questionnaire project, checked and rechecked candidate responses fact-checking information provided and made every attempt to provide a non-biased resource to our supporters regarding where each candidate stands in protecting Wisconsin Waters. Below, you will find our synopsis of each candidate, sharing both positive and negative aspects of their responses.

SCOTT KRUG
Scott Krug has been the 72nd Assembly District representative since 2010.   In his early years of holding this position, Representative Krug successfully acquired funds to study and address phosphorus levels within Petenwell Flowage to address the blue-green algae issue.  As Wisconsin citizens watched numerous bad water bills come through our state legislature Representative Krug on occasion made attempts to bring forth amendments to make these bills more palatable to his constituents.   In 2013 Representative Krug formed the Citizens’ Water Advisory group which consisted of local citizens, farming interests, and environmentalist to work together to design an acceptable legislative bill addressing high capacity well pumping in the Central Sands.  Although the intent of this group was positive and proactive the overall progress was not. According to participants, meetings were often disorganized lacking a specific agenda, minutes of the meetings were not published, and in the end citizens did not have input on, nor did they see, a copy of the bill prior to it being brought forth by Representative Krug, resulting in lack of support for the bill by actual members of the Citizens’ Advisory Committee and their associated groups.  In 2017 Representative Krug successfully proposed an amendment and acquired necessary funds, for a hydrological analysis of the Central Sands to study the overpumping currently being allowed.  Although the amendment was accepted into the bill, the actual area currently being studied by the WDNR is much smaller than originally promoted to local constituents.  The High Capacity Well bill itself is horrendous and was highly contested by conservation, environmental, and citizens groups as a whole.  The amendment proposed and passed by Representative Krug, although limited in scope, was a small positive step for the Central Sands and is currently underway.

Representative Krug has made documented efforts to support water initiatives over his time as our local Representative, however, he has also voted AGAINST water protections and in favor of loosening protections.  Just this last legislative session alone found Representative Krug voting to support the following bad water bills that are destructive to our Wisconsin waterways:

    AB105 High Capacity Well Bill - limits the ability of the DNR to address groundwater overpumping and grants ‘forever’ permits for high capacity wells

    Special Session (SS) SSAB1 Exempting Foxconn from State Clean Water Protections - Creating a special district/zone, the bill eliminates state environmental protections for isolated wetlands, navigable streams, and lake beds within this zone. 

    AB547 Removing State Protections for Identified Wetlands - Removal of protections of over one million acres of wetlands in Wisconsin, allowing them to be filled in for development, leading to potential increased flooding in our communities and decreased water quality

    AB499 Industrial Acid Mining Bill -  Eliminates Wisconsin’s “Prove It First” mining law that protects public health and natural resources by requiring mining companies to show a demonstrated track record on protecting water quality before being permitted.

Closer to home, Representative Krug has repeatedly shared that he supports a compromise between the township of Saratoga and the Wysocki organization regarding the proposed CAFO to our community, “With the project in Saratoga, I made my position clear in 2014 and have worked to make sure neither side loses or wins 100% of what they want”.  Representative Krug does not support a limited moratorium on CAFO’s and believes new technologies will solve the pollution problems associated with them.

In conclusion, of the 13 questions posed to Representative Krug he directly answered 7 and received a “non-answer” status on 5 questions for talking around the given subject matter. 

DAVID GORSKI
Candidate Dave Gorski is running as a challenger to Representative Krug for the second time.  As a legislative challenger, Candidate Gorski does not have a voting record as an elected official for us to share among our supporters. Therefore our synopsis consists solely on responses received from Candidate Gorski and on documented actions we could verify through public records and accounts.

Candidate Gorski solidly advocated for the protection of our water and the environment which is voiced clearly and openly in his response to numerous questions posed. He is a strong outspoken advocate of the Public Trust Doctrine believing in the State Constitution that the waters belong to all of us. Candidate Gorski states he would like to work with fellow legislators on the problem of high capacity well overpumping of groundwater and believes there is a need for legislation that balances the needs of the citizens and agricultural interest for water usage.  Most importantly Candidate Gorski believes that environmental polluters should pay for the damage done to our environment and compensate the citizens impacted. He is also an advocate of the Great Lakes compact and voices that Wisconsin should honor the Great Lakes Compact using the water withdrawal for residential use and not for business interests as the compact was designed.

Candidate Gorski states many of these issues can be addressed/accomplished by returning local control back to communities and creating the Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources as an elected position by the Natural Resource Board and removing it as an appointed position by the sitting Governor.

Saratoga Concerned was able to verify that Candidate Gorski works with numerous local and statewide environmental groups.  In 2016 he helped organize The New Peoples Environmental Summit in our local area, additionally, in 2016 he attended the Factory Farm Summit to learn about the impact of CAFO to communities across the country.  In 2017 Candidate Gorski attended the Citizens’ Water Lobby Day at the state capitol as well as attending numerous other water protection events such as Conservation Lobby Day and actively testified and spoke with legislators in Madison regarding water issues and proposed legislation. 

Closer to home Candidate Gorski has spoken out openly against the Wysocki Golden Sands CAFO proposal and supports a statewide CAFO Moratorium on new and expanding CAFOs until appropriate water and environmental protections are in place for Wisconsin citizens.  He actively attends and participates in our local meetings and has a clear understanding of what his potential constituents are vocalizing regarding water and environmental concerns.

In conclusion, of the 13 questions posed to Candidate Gorski he directly answered 11 and received a “non-answer” status on 2 questions for not answering the specific question completely.

FINAL THOUGHTS
It is imperative that we all exercise our right to vote.  It is also important that we step out of our former mindset of being either a Republican or Democrat voter and instead vote the issues.  Our area lakes and streams are in a state of decline and our control over our own environment is being taken away. That makes it all the more important to know what your candidate stands for on individual issues and vote based upon the issue.  Please remember you can access all our previous newsletters at the link provided www.saratogaconcerned.com/newsletter-subscribe.

After thoughtful conversation and reviewing answers provided by both candidates, Saratoga Concerned believes Candidate David Gorski will be the stronger water protector and support his candidacy for the 72nd Assembly District.

Sep 16, 2018

Water Warrior in Central Wisconsin Hails Women Voters in Assembly Campaign

Wisconsin water warriors seek office.
Pictured from left are Sarah Godlewski,
candidate for state Treasury,
Dave Gorski, candidate for the 72nd assem dist,
and Erin Stacy, candidate for the 42nd assem dist.
shown after participating in the Water Walk.
David Gorski, Democratic Party nominee for the 72nd state assembly dist, makes protecting water a central theme of his campaign.

Gorski faces State Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa, Wisconsin) in a repeat of the 2016 general election.

The 72nd Wisconsin assembly district is gerrymandered to protect the Republican incumbent.

Krug is a champion of factory farms and polluters who made local infamy when Krug told a longtime Wood County resident to "quit your bitching" after she protested the region being ambushed by the proposed Wysocki corporation's factory farm in central Wisconsin in July 2012.

Krug and Republicans have been conning the region for some time now. The gig appears to be up.

"I can't tell you the number of woman voters who say they will never vote Republican again," said Gorski, reached by phone this weekend.
 
From Dave Gorski, attending the Water Walk this weekend:

Jul 17, 2018

Central Wisconsin Voters Signal Hell to Pay for State Republicans

Madison, Wisconsin — Citizen groups continue to fight to protect their communities from industrial agriculture and state Republicans, following a bitterly disputed Wisconsin Supreme Court decision last Spring.

Saratoga Concerned, Protect Wood County and Its Neighbors, and other affinity groups have amped up work this Summer targeting the Fall general elections.

Saratoga Concerned revealed the first of its Candidate Questionnaires this morning.

After some five and one-half years of fighting the proposed Wysocki factory farm, the reach and power of Saratoga Concerned has grown.

The organization now is a practical political player.

Saratoga Concerned  has become sufficiently powerful that even incumbent State Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa, Wisconsin), who runs political interference for the Wysocki corporation and other Big Ag polluters, dares not skip the group's 13-question Candidate Questionnaire.

Krug is a no-show for several other citizen groups' forums and questionnaires, including traditional good-government non-profits such as the League of Women Voters.

Krug and the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party for the 72nd state assembly district, David Gorski's, answers are reproduced verbatim below.

From Saratoga Concerned:

Saratoga Concerned 72nd Assembly District Candidate Questionnaire

As explained in our most recent Newsletter, both candidates for the 72nd Assembly District, current Representative Scott Krug, and challenger David Gorski have completed our Candidate Questionnaire.  Over the next few months, we will be sharing their answers to the 13 questions asked in our Special Edition Newsetters.

We warned both candidates to directly answer the given question clearly and to avoid talking around the subject matter, as we believe the constituents of the 72nd deserve nothing less than straight, direct, honest, answers from both individuals.

At the close of each question, you will find our FactCheck and Scorecard section where we will briefly comment on our determination if the question was answered directly and fact check any information that was questionable, misleading, inaccurate, or warrants further explanation for clarity.  Enjoy!

Saratoga Concerned Question One

Nitrate poisoning of our groundwater is a major issue facing all of Wisconsin.

Given the background of the Public Trust Doctrine, what legislation would you propose to allow agriculture to continue while protecting the general public from increasing Nitrate levels?

SCOTT KRUG

The well compensation program needs more updating. We increased the compensation amounts and we have to keep working on the qualification method for families.

This session I worked with Senator Cowles and Rep Kitchens on Senate Bill 168 which will better provide for safe and clean drinking water to residents in areas where contaminated wells and failing septic systems lead to challenges. The bill will allow for an increased grant amount for well replacement from $9,000 maximum to $12,000 maximum. The bill also creates better options to municipalities and residents alike to replace failing septic systems that can also elevate nutrient levels in groundwater.

I also worked on an amendment to a democrat bill this session to allow owners with wells containing nitrates over 40ppm to be compensated under the program. My amendment would have made sure those with 20ppm instead of 40ppm would be eligible for this compensation. I think the combination of qualification and compensation amounts will lead to a program that will allow agriculture to continue and keep residents feeling more certain that they can access clean and safe drinking water no matter what happens.
 ---
DAVID GORSKI

Response: Agriculture is a leading industry in Wisconsin and very important to the overall health of our state economy.  It is in the best interests of all in our state to resolve the issue of rising Nitrate levels.

I would propose legislation that would better enable our county Land and Water Conservation offices and the DNR to improve nutrient management plans and help farmers with expertise and funding to implement better groundwater and watershed protections.

Additionally, we need to hold polluters accountable for damages done to private wells, streams and lakes.  Our state has recently passed a law that provides financial assistance for residents who need to redrill their wells due to high nitrate levels.  This is good, but it pushes the cost of pollution clean up onto the taxpayers. We also need polluters to pay for the cost of clean-up.

As the Wisconsin Public Trust Doctrine states, Wisconsin waters belong to all of us, and we only have a reasonable right to use these waters.  So, while we all have the right to use state waters, we also have the responsibility to protect them.
FactCheck - None necessary for this question

Scorecard

Krug - Non-Answer
Provided details on compensating residents with contaminated water.  Did not answer the direct question of what legislation he would propose to protect citizens from increasing nitrate levels

Gorski - Answered the question directly

Saratoga Concerned Question Two

In the 2017 legislative session, State Representatives considered legislation (AB544) that would legalize the purchase of water utilities by out-of-state corporations and change existing law to make public referendums on such purchases optional instead of mandatory. This was done against massive public outcry.  The proposal eventually failed.

What is your stance on the privatization of Wisconsin’s water as proposed last legislative session?

SCOTT KRUG
There was no bill passed in the 2017 session. I feel that if a referendum remains a requirement residents can make the choice on a local level if a private company should manage their local utility.
---
DAVID GORSKI 
I clearly remember when AB 544 was being debated.  I was shocked that AB 544 was even being considered. Obviously, many other Wisconsinites felt the same way, and the authors of this bill got the message.  My guess is the authors of this bill were hoping that the public was not paying attention.

The Wisconsin Public Trust Doctrine clearly states that water belongs to all Wisconsinites.  Allowing in-state, out-of-state, or foreign private parties to gain ownership of our water supply violates the spirit of the Public Trust Doctrine.

I understand that some cash-strapped communities with poor water quality may not have the resources to effectively treat their water.  These communities may need to contract with companies to effectively treat their water and make it potable. However, in these cases, it must remain mandatory that community members decide if they want to have a private party profit off their water. So, having a referendum on this issue needs to be mandatory.

Additionally, I see this as just one more attack on local control and democracy. The more public input we have, the more democracy we have.
FactCheck

Correction - Water Privatization bill was pushed during the 2016 Legislative session
Assembly passed the bill Jan. 12 and a Senate committee approved it on a Jan. 28.  It did not make the Senate floor for a full chamber vote.

Rep. Krug voted in favor of this bill which did include the option of a referendum as he stated in his stance above
Stipulation included - no referendum would occur unless opponents gathered signatures of 10 percent of voters

Scorecard

    Both candidates answered the question directly.

#

Jun 8, 2018

Central Wisconsin Vows to Continue Fight Against Proposed Factory Farm after Supreme Court Defeat

 An activist rightwing Wisconsin Supreme Court bends
law to arrive at a decision green-lighting a proposed
massive factory farm in central Wisconsin.

'No amount of compromise worth risking the health, safety, and welfare of our citizens,' says Saratoga Concerned, a Wisconsin citizens' group

Saratoga Concerned and allied clean water groups may be the most powerful citizen-action Wisconsin phenomenon since the peace movement.

These central Wisconsin residents appear injured and not surprised by the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 5-2 decision in favor of a proposed factory farm.

Looking for meaning in a corrupt court's decision appears a fool's game. But here goes.

The Court decision by Republican justices in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga implies a new legal doctrine, (not acknowledged by state jurists because it suggests corruption), that broadly stated elevates a general claim of corporate vested property rights through the inclusion of a vague reference to 'land' in a state building permit application, against community zoning power.

The corrupt decision is revealed in the dissenting opinion of Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson joined by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, though the implication is subtle:

Today, the majority expands the Building Permit Rule to create vested rights to  particular uses of land so long as the land is 'specifically identified' in the building permit application.

This ill-advised expansion of the Building Permit Rule sacrifices the important public policies that the Building Permit Rule was designed to encourage, namely, 'predictability for land owners, purchasers, developers, municipalities, and the courts.'
Golden Sands is not an expansion of the Building Permit Rule, it's a perversion and warping of the Building Permit Rule. Put simply, property owners must strictly conform to applicable zoning regulations except when they don't.

Abrahamson and Walsh Bradley suggest as much in footnote 7 of their dissent, (p. 3):

At  the  time  Golden  Sands  submitted  its  building  permit application, the land at issue was enrolled in the DNR's Managed Forest Land  program, which precluded agricultural uses, and Golden Sands was aware of the Town's efforts to rezone the land. 

One wonders how reasonable Golden Sands' expectations were given what it knew at the time it submitted its building permit application.

For central Wisconsin residents, Golden Sands means residents' right to peaceful, healthy living in homes and communities is outweighed in this case by factory farms' right to degrade such peace and health by the industrial operation of private corporations.

The predictable effect of operating a factory farm is toxifying the water supply causing communities to zone for protection, but this is no longer a powerful basis for argument in litigation of corporations' claim to vested property rights in many situations now.  

Golden Sands applies statewide. After Golden Sands as long as corrupt Republican justices remain in the majority, the Court will find for corporations over other competing interests case-by-case.

The majority opinion in Golden Sands is a convoluted argument five justices threw together to find for the corporation.
---
An eruption of dejection was palpable in central Wisconsin after the Wisconsin Supreme Court announced its decision the morning of June 5.

An objective reading of the devastation Big Agriculture inflicts onto other communities concludes vast harm is subjected to non-corporate interests, an acceptable outcome for the Republican Party.

After the sixth year of the grassroots fight against this proposed factory farm owned by the Wysocki corporation, some residents appear locked in an abusive relationship with the Republican Walker administration, the Republican-dominated Supreme Court and the Republican-dominated state legislature.

As each new injury through policy decision is inflicted onto this region, many politically active residents walk on eggshells fearful that publicly calling out Republicans for corrupt policy decisions will upset their Republican abusers.

In Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, the Republican Wisconsin Department of Justice filed an extraordinary amicus brief in November 2017 in favor of private corporate interest against Wisconsin communities after the Republican Wisconsin Supreme Court quickly agreed to hear the case in Sept 2017 with the clear intention of reversing the rare victory achieved in state appellate court in April 2017.

Many residents last year and in 2018 mistook their communties' presentation of a narrow legal issue in Golden Sands as mandating something other than what can be expected from the collective corrupt intent of five Court justices who arrived at in a predetermined result.
 ---
If central Wisconsin residents say nice things about legislative Republicans and Scott Walker, pretend Republicans on the Wisconsin Supreme Court are not corrupt and are not rightwing judicial activists, the policy outcomes will not change. Residents are not players or stakeholders, not even valid competing interests, in the minds of policymaker.

To this point, central Wisconsin clean water activists have not thrown all-in towards a concerted electoral effort to defeat the policymakers who are committed to the devastation of the activists' communities.

Unless this broad grassroots movement replaces Republican Party policymakers, residents' current status of not mattering with be replaced with in the way to predictable outcomes.

Stay tuned.

From Saratoga Concerned

Friends and neighbors,

Many of you have already heard from either radio, newspaper, or our Facebook page, the WI Supreme Court reversed the WI Appellate Court decision and ruled in favor of Wysocki. The decision was a 5-2 split with only Justice Abrahamson and Justice Walsh-Bradley ruling in our favor.  Although an extremely frustrating outcome, it was one to be expected when we look at the make-up of the current sitting Justices.  The full copy of the decision can be viewed here.

It is important to state loud and clear OUR FIGHT AGAINST WYSOCKI IS NOT OVER.  He may have won the battle but the war between our opposing sides rages on.  There are still roads untravelled that we can pursue in the fight to preserve our water, air, and soil.  The court decision has only reignited the fire in many of us, now more than ever, we need the rest of our citizens to re-engage and stand alongside us and fight.

Over the years many of you have donated your talents, sacrificed your time, and emptied your pocketbooks to assist in our battle.  We are again asking for your assistance in the coming weeks as we plan to be proactive in our battle and face the situation head-on.  No more waiting patiently for Wysocki to make a move and then react, it is time we start making our own moves as we continue forward.

Watch for an upcoming announcement and meeting date to learn how you can assist and get involved to protect our beautiful Saratoga.

Sincerely,
Saratoga Leadership Team

Criste Greening, Eric Peterson, Timm Rosenthal, Brian Hamm, Rob Borski, Bruce & Doreen Dimick, Bob and Mary Wright, Dan and Nancy Fara, Buzz and Helen Donahue
Concerned Rome Citizens (CRC) Representatives: Don Ystad, John and Jeanie Endrizzi

What happens next seems to be the million dollar question on everyone's mind. Please know, information provided below are possible ways of how this scenario could play out moving forward, there is no set path or predetermined avenue we (or our town board) may decide to take.  Only time will tell and determine future actions.

Contact with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Members of our group immediately rekindled relationships with our WDNR contacts to get an idea of what happens next with the CAFO permitting process.  The preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been on hold while the WI Supreme Court determined the outcome of our case.  Communication with WDNR personnel indicated the following.

    No immediate plans have been made to reopen the EIR review and complete the pending EIS (simply too soon to have scheduled a planning meeting with necessary individuals)

    The WDNR is still awaiting Wysocki's
    Administrative code NR150 has changed multiple times since our battle started in 2012 and again since the EIS completion was placed on hold, WDNR personnel could not answer definitively how this would impact our case until it is determined which version of NR150 they would be following moving forward
    WDNR personnel state NR150 changes MAY impact our opportunity to have the WDNR complete an EIS and hold a public hearing as was the original plan prior to the WI Supreme Court appeal.
    Constant communication will be maintained with the WDNR and we will keep citizens abreast of information as it is received. 

EIS Hearing (IF GRANTED)
If the WDNR completes the EIS statement and a public hearing is granted, we will need every able body possible to pack the house and speak against the dairy and its plans.  Prior to the appeal being filed to the Wi Supreme Court, the plan was to host the hearing at the Wisconsin Rapids Performing Arts Center (PAC).  As of now future plans are uncertain.

CAFO Permitting
The cold reality is there has never been a CAFO permit denied in the state of Wisconsin, we fully expect the Wysocki organization to receive their permits with little opposition from the WDNR but hopefully with some restrictions due to all the natural resource data we have supplied over the years.  In reality, the WDNR's hands are tied and must follow the rules for permitting.  However, once permitted the town of Saratoga (or other invested parties) can file for a Contested Case Hearing.

Contested Case Hearing
A contested hearing is a formal court hearing, held when the parties do not agree on one or more aspects of the permit.  In this situation, it would be a contested case against the WDNR's ruling to issue a permit noting numerous issued involved.  A Judge hears both parties tell their stories and then makes a decision. Depending on who brought forth the contested case, individuals can speak for themselves, bring witnesses, and present documents. Court rules of evidence and procedure are followed.

Additional Points to Consider

    If reaching the point of a Contested Case Hearing the CAFO will again be on hold while it is battled in the courts, this could take years

    Over the past few years, Saratoga has put in place numerous ordinances that would make operating a CAFO within our community a tangled mess of hurdles for Wysocki to overcome, making business operations difficult

    Local volunteers under the guidance of the WDNR have compiled 5 complete years of extensive water data of our creeks, residents have supplied 500+ residential water samples, and our town continues to collect monitoring data from the 10 test wells drilled around proposed fields creating one of the most concrete water baseline data profiles in history.  We will know if our water becomes contaminated and WE WILL KNOW WHO IS GUILTY OF CONTAMINATING IT and can pursue legal action if necessary

    Adams County township of Rome has also started stream monitoring efforts as well as installed monitoring wells.  The town and local volunteers are actively collecting data on current water conditions to proactively protect their citizens and assist Saratoga in their efforts.

    With the Supreme Court decision, be prepared to see changes in our landscape as it was announced in the newspaper by Wysocki "The dairy will begin working on some farmland aspects of the project this year by clearing more land and putting some of the land already cleared into production"

Continued Concerns

For years we have worried about the proposed CAFO and the massive amounts of manure it would bring to our area but also about the effects of clear-cutting and cropping the thousands of acres within Saratoga.  To be clear, we do not want either within our borders - period!  It has been considered that perhaps the CAFO piece of the plan would go away and just the cropping of our lands would remain, clear-cutting thousands of acres will still have a significant detrimental impact to our groundwater and due to the numerous high capacity wells needed for irrigation, would significantly impact our groundwater levels as well.

There is no amount of compromise that is worth risking the health, safety, and welfare of our citizens.

Saratoga Concerned will continue to fight.

Jun 5, 2018

Wisconsin Gov Candidate, Flynn, Hits State Court Decision on Factory Farm

Update: Gov Scott Walker and Wisconsin Republicans leave behind death. From the Minneapolis Star-Tribune and The Political Environment:

"Celina Stewart, a young mother in the tiny town of Nekoosa, lost an infant daughter to a fatal brain malformation that has been associated with high levels of nitrate, a fertilizer byproduct found in the community’s drinking water. Her tragedy led to a community well testing program this year, which found that 40 percent of the homes had nitrate concentrations that, like hers, were far above the legal limit."
 ---
Madison, Wisconsin — Matt Flynn, candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for governor, responded to the Golden Sands v. Saratoga decision and opinions released today by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Flynn has taken an aggressive stance towards factory farms and Republican Party work in favor of factory farms against local control and state anti-pollution statutes and regulations.

Reads Flynn's press release:

Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Matt Flynn today responded to the shortsighted decision by the State Supreme Court in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v Town of Saratoga, which will allow the concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) – also known as a factory farm – to proceed despite overwhelming community opposition.

"This decision ignores precedent and legalizes contamination and draining of our groundwater," said Flynn. "As governor, I will restore local control, enforce local ordinances, and support any county that rejects CAFOs which are poisoning our groundwater and must be stopped."

Golden Sands Dairy is owned by the Wysocki Family of Companies, which has been accused of violating state environmental laws, but has also contributed over $30,000 to Governor Scott Walker.

Flynn has been a strong opponent of unregulated CAFOs in Wisconsin, and has called for laws to limit their ability to use groundwater and contaminate wells.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules for Proposed Factory Farm over Communities

Madison, Wisconsin — The Wisconsin Supreme Court held for a proposed massive factory farm in a widely anticipated decision released this morning.

Updates and links follow this morning.

Here is the link to 2015AP1258 Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

The decision is five-to-two in favor of Wysocki Golden Sands factory farm.

This is a decision by Republican justices for Repulbican interests, against communities and families. The majority opinion was written by out-going Justice Michael J. Gableman who is retiring from the Court on July 31.

A naked act of results-aimed corruption in the judiciary, Gableman's decision upends the doctrine of vested property rights and towns' ability to protect families and the community.

After today's decision all a corporate interest has to do to manage destructive operations is conceal its aims in a Building Permit Rule application and include a vague reference to land.

Writes Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson joined by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley in dissent:

Today,  the majority  expands  the  Building  Permit  Rule  to  create  vested rights  to  particular  uses  of  land  so  long  as  the  land  is 'specifically identified' in the building permit application.

This ill-advised expansion of the Building Permit Rule sacrifices  the  important  public  policies  that  the  Building Permit  Rule  was  designed  to  encourage,  namely,  'predictability for land owners, purchasers, developers, municipalities, and the courts.'

The  majority's  expansion  of  the  Building  Permit  Rule transforms what was once an easy-to-apply, bright-line rule into a  rule  requiring  a  case-by-case  analysis  of  the  applicant's specificity  regarding  both the  description of the property included within the scope of the building permit application as well as the property's proposed use.

Tears, anxiety and a resolve to keep fighting describe the central Wisconsin communities' mood this morning.

One Saratoga resident reached by phone said she has slept only two hours in the last two days awaiting the Court decision and opinions.

Another resident, Criste Sullivan-Greening of Saratoga Concerned, writes in Facebook:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is a lawless institution and its Republican justices will find a way to rule in favor of Republican interests no matter the damage to Wisconsin communities, residents and the Court as a functioning branch of government.
 ---
Below is a column written in 2017 on what the Wisconsin Supreme Court has become after Republicans and Republican justices worked to transform the Court into a tool for Republican interests.

Pictured is Wisconsin Supreme Court at the state capitol. Inside
this iron door deliberation dies, and Republicans reign ascendant.
Madison, Wisconsin — The Wisconsin Supreme Court no longer functions as an independent judicial body.

A corrupt institution, Court justices, (five of the seven), elected to 10-year terms rely on $ millions from rightwing interests to keep the judges in their offices where Republican interests are jealously protected by the subsequent conduct of the justices.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is part of the Republican political machine, a turgid and pretentious cog spewing out reliably Republican case opinions for the benefit of Republican interests.

The justices' ethics are decided by Republican justices who rejected proposed rules that would mandate justices recuse from cases involving mega-donors to their campaigns, (Beck, Wisconsin State Journal). The law of the land in Wisconsin for the judiciary is: Fund my election, and I'll vote your way if you come before my court, (Mal Contends, The New Yorker).

So it was no surprise that the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to hear a case this month from central Wisconsin concerning the plans of a polluting, industrial agricultural outfit, the Wysocki Family of Companies, that proposes to build and operate a massive factory farm based in Saratoga, Wisconsin that would devastate parts of four counties. The case is Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

Residents in central Wisconsin are scared, so scared that nobody wants to go on the record and speak the truth about Wisconsin has become, specifically about what the Supreme Court has become. Who can blame these people?

Their communities, homes and small businesses are at stake in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga and bad-mouthing the Supreme Court is considered risky.

As noted in these pages, it's an indication how corrupt Wisconsin government is under Republican rule that residents contacted in Wood and Adams counties believe Republicans on the Wisconsin Supreme Court will vote to hear the Golden Sands Wysocki petition, overturn the appellate decision and radically expand the vested rights of property owners to commit virtually any environmentally and economically destructive act, altering the capacity of local communities to protect their economic and environmental well-being and the safety of families against corporate actors.

Since 2011 Republicans have implemented an unprecedented statutory framework according property rights supremacy over any other competing rights, including public interest concerns.

No one is surprised the Wisconsin Supreme Court is corrupt. Certainly not James Wysocki, chief financial officer of the Big Ag outfit that will devastate central Wisconsin.

Reports Karen Madden in the Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune, quoting Wysocki:

'Golden Sands is gratified, but not surprised, that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has taken this case. It will provide the court the opportunity to clarify the law of vested rights in Wisconsin for all businesses that create jobs in the state and to rectify the unfair process by which the town of Saratoga sought to deprive Golden Sands of its vested rights.'

Numerous agricultural and real estate groups filed motions with the Supreme Court that supported the court taking the case. Those groups were concerned that other communities could change the rules after property is purchased, Wysocki said. 

Under the new Republican theory of vested rights in Wisconsin, an owner of property becomes a extraordinary, super-interest for whom environmental, safety, zoning, and water-protection laws do not apply.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court will vote in Wysocki's favor 5-2 sometime in 2018 in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga. Don't be surprised.

Jun 2, 2018

Wisconsin Supreme Court to Release Decision on Proposed Factory Farm, Local Govs and Communties on June 5

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — The Wisconsin Supreme Court is not an impartial judicial body anymore.

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

Dec 28, 2017

Wisconsin Supreme Court Case on Vested Property Rights and Zoning Powers Set for Oral Argument, Jan. 11

Proposed Golden Sands factory farm in central
Wisconsin could turn rural paradise into an
industrial wasteland. Don Ystad of Adams County
Wisconsin
who has been promoting tourism
and recreation
for years writes:
"Take a step back from the politics of this
situation and ask yourself, 'what is best
for the state of Wisconsin? Another CAFO sited, or the
preservation and growth of an existing, vibrant area,
poised to be the 'golf mecca of the Midwest?'
Unfortunately, the Wysocki CAFO has the
political support of local State Rep. Scott Krug,
(R-Nekoosa, Wisconsin) and State Sen.
Patrick
Testin, (R-Stevens Point). These pols
have already chosen Big Ag over everything else,
including a new Sand Valley Golf Resort,
multi-generational families and entire communities.
The Wisconsin Republican Party's attempt to transform the legal scope of property rights on behalf of major financial donors is behind a case that could prevent the operation of a massive factory farm, sited in the town of Saratoga in central Wisconsin.

The case is Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga. The high court will hear oral arguments on Jan 11, 2018. [Note: For legal updates on the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, enter 15ap1258 in the Appeal Number field, leave the rest of fields blank and hit search at bottom-left of the linked Wisconsin Supreme Court page.]

The Wisconsin Supreme Court no longer functions as an independent judicial body as its members have become corrupted and beholden to the Republican-linked special interests that fund some of the Court members' campaigns. Judicial ethics are decided by Republican justices who rejected proposed rules that would mandate justices recuse from cases involving their mega-donors to their campaigns, (Beck, Wisconsin State Journal, Mal Contends, The New Yorker).

Communities and private citizens want an April 2017 state appellate decision to stand because the ruling restricts a massive factory farm from beginning operations, as Republicans and Big Ag work to impose onto Wisconsin a radical, new conception of corporate vested property rights.

The predictable consequences of operation of the proposed Golden Sands factory farm are the pollution and depletion of water and air, devastating parts of four counties in this region.

The April 2017 Golden Sands Dairy LLC appellate ruling effectively kills the operation of the massive factory farm by disallowing use of a 4,660-acre manure dumping field on which millions of gallons of liquid cow waste would be vectored every year. The unanimous appellate ruling recognizes the town of Saratoga used its zoning power in accordance with state law and decades of legal precedent.

Concludes an amicus brief in part filed on behalf of local businesses in December 2017:

Over 1.7 million Wisconsin citizens more than 30% of the state’s population reside in towns like the Town of Saratoga. In this case, the Town reasonably evaluated local conditions and zoned its land to prevent harm to property values and businesses, drinking water quality, and local character. By seeking a 6,000-acre exception to this rule, GSD [Golden Sands Dairy] cannot credibly state that expanding the vested rights doctrine does 'no violence' to the Town’s ability to regulate land use. (GSD Br. at 26.)

The Court should affirm the court of appeals’ decision upholding the Town’s lawful exercise of its zoning authority in this case, and reject GSD’s requested expansion of the vested rights doctrine. 

Bottom line: Will the Wisconsin Supreme Court issue yet another corrupt decision on behalf of Republican interests? There is hope.

Two citizen groups, Protect Wood County (Wisconsin) and Its Neighbors and Concerned Rome (Wisconsin) Citizens are urging central Wisconsin residents to await the decision from the Court expected sometime in the Spring 2018.

From Protect Wood County:

Friends and Neighbors,

The date is set, January 11th, 2018, at which time our case against Wysocki will be heard in front of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  Although this news broke quite a while back, there was the chance for extension requests and/or other delays, therefore, we kept silent on the news until we were positive the date would stick.  It officially appears that January 11th will be our day in court.

Cases in front of the Supreme Court follow a very formal and structured format.  Due to this, Saratoga’s legal team has asked that citizen supporters NOT attend the oral argument proceedings.  We ask all our followers please adhere to the legal teams request and continue to wait patiently for the outcome and judgment decision to be handed down later this spring.  Most likely we will not hear a deciding judgment until March or April of this year. Once again, we have more waiting ahead.

It is important to clarify the basis of the Supreme Court case as we continue to hear many residents misunderstanding what our current case is about.  The case before the Supreme Court is about vested rights to the thousands of acres of land Wysocki purchased in Saratoga.  In a very simplistic nutshell, the court will be deciding if Wysocki can clear-cut and crop the thousands of acres of land he purchased after Saratoga’s zoning was in place.  The court is not determining if Wysocki has the right to build the buildings and/or the CAFO, simply if he has the right to use the land for his identified purpose which is in conflict with Saratoga's zoning.  This battle has been a very complicated web of twist and turns, surely one for the record books.  

We will keep everyone informed as we continue through the next few months.

Nov 21, 2017

Wisconsin GOP-DoJ Gives Supreme Court Marching Orders on Factory Farm Case

Citizens are mobilized in central Wisconsin against Big Ag and
Republicans, led by Scott Walker and AG Brad Schimel.
Updated - Madison, Wisconsin—The Republican Wisconsin Department of Justice has given the putative non-partisan Supreme Court its marching orders in an important case involving a proposed, massive factory farm.

The case is Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, (Appeal Number 2015AP001258).

In April an unanimous state appellate court ruling effectively killed the proposed operation of the Golden Sands/Wysocki corporation CAFO by disallowing use of a 4,660-acre manure dumping field on which millions of gallons of liquid cow waste would be vectored every year.

The appellate ruling freezes construction plans of the Golden Sands CAFO, Confined Agricultural Feeding Operation, by honoring the current legal doctrine of the delineation of vested property rights on which the case centers.

But the Wisconsin Supreme Court quickly agreed to hear the case in September, (Madden, Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune), in an apparent effort to radically expand vested property rights under a new conception pushed by Republicans.

Central Wisconsin residents, local governments and the town of Saratoga want the April state appellate decision to stand because the ruling restricts the operations of the CAFO, and recognizes long-observed doctrine of vested rights.

Under the new Republican theory of vested rights in Wisconsin, an owner of property becomes a extraordinary, super-interest for whom many environmental, safety, zoning, and water-protection laws do not apply.

Don Ystad, a retired business consultant living in Adams county in central Wisconsin has been working with fellow citizens to stop the proposed Golden Sands/Wysocki CAFO which would devastate parts of four counties.

Writes Ystad today:

If it's not occurred to you just how uneven the playing field is against citizens in this CAFO fight, consider that the State of Wisconsin has just weighed in with an Amicus Brief supporting the Supreme Court appeal of the Wysockis and their proposed Golden Sands Dairy CAFO in Saratoga.

It seems overtly political in the face of a brief from the Wisconsin Towns Association, Wisconsin Counties Association and the League of Municipalities which supports Saratoga in their fight against this proposed CAFO, much like Attorney General Schimel's opinion ignoring cumulative effect of high cap wells when the legislature was unable to pass an ag-friendly groundwater bill early this year. I am fed up with being trivialized by this Walker administration in this fight to preserve the health and well being of this area.

Here is the state's DoJ brief.

Fellow concerned citizens, if the number of Amicus Briefs is any indication, this is a watershed moment for us. Nothing to be done for now, but if a 'call to action' comes, please be there for all of us.
The corrupt Wisconsin Supreme Court will rule in favor of Big Ag sometime in 2018 in this case, fulfilling its new function to carry out the wishes of Republicans.

Wisconsin Supreme Court justices

Justice Shirley Abrahamson - rule-of-law judge
Justice Ann Walsh Bradley - rule-of-law judge
Justice Patience Roggensack - rightwinger will do anything Wisconsin Republicans wish
Justice Annette Ziegler - rightwinger will do anything Wisconsin Republicans wish
Justice Michael Gableman - rightwinger will do anything Wisconsin Republicans wish
Justice Rebecca Bradley - rightwinger will do anything Wisconsin Republicans wish
Justice Daniel Kelly - rightwinger will do anything Wisconsin Republicans wish

Sep 22, 2017

Wisconsin Supreme Court Looks to Terminate Its Diminished Credibility

Pictured is Wisconsin Supreme Court at the state capitol. Inside
this iron door deliberation dies, and Republicans reign ascendant.
Madison, Wisconsin — The Wisconsin Supreme Court no longer functions as an independent judicial body.

A corrupt institution, Court justices, (five of the seven), elected to 10-year terms rely on $ millions from rightwing interests to keep the judges in their offices where Republican interests are jealously protected by the subsequent conduct of the justices.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is part of the Republican political machine, a turgid and pretentious cog spewing out reliably Republican case opinions for the benefit of Republican interests.

The justices' ethics are decided by Republican justices who rejected proposed rules that would mandate justices recuse from cases involving mega-donors to their campaigns, (Beck, Wisconsin State Journal). The law of the land in Wisconsin for the judiciary is: Fund my election, and I'll vote your way if you come before my court, (Mal Contends, The New Yorker).

So it was no surprise that the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to hear a case this month from central Wisconsin concerning the plans of a polluting, industrial agricultural outfit, the Wysocki Family of Companies, that proposes to build and operate a massive factory farm based in Saratoga, Wisconsin that would devastate parts of four counties. The case is Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

Residents in central Wisconsin are scared, so scared that nobody wants to go on the record and speak the truth about Wisconsin has become, specifically about what the Supreme Court has become. Who can blame these people?

Their communities, homes and small businesses are at stake in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga and bad-mouthing the Supreme Court is considered risky.

As noted in these pages, it's an indication how corrupt Wisconsin government is under Republican rule that residents contacted in Wood and Adams counties believe Republicans on the Wisconsin Supreme Court will vote to hear the Golden Sands Wysocki petition, overturn the appellate decision and radically expand the vested rights of property owners to commit virtually any environmentally and economically destructive act, altering the capacity of local communities to protect their economic and environmental well-being and the safety of families against corporate actors.

Since 2011 Republicans have implemented an unprecedented statutory framework according property rights supremacy over any other competing rights, including public interest concerns.

No one is surprised the Wisconsin Supreme Court is corrupt. Certainly not James Wysocki, chief financial officer of the Big Ag outfit that will devastate central Wisconsin.

Reports Karen Madden in the Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune, quoting Wysocki:

'Golden Sands is gratified, but not surprised, that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has taken this case. It will provide the court the opportunity to clarify the law of vested rights in Wisconsin for all businesses that create jobs in the state and to rectify the unfair process by which the town of Saratoga sought to deprive Golden Sands of its vested rights.'

Numerous agricultural and real estate groups filed motions with the Supreme Court that supported the court taking the case. Those groups were concerned that other communities could change the rules after property is purchased, Wysocki said. 

Under the new Republican theory of vested rights in Wisconsin, an owner of property becomes a extraordinary, super-interest for whom environmental, safety, zoning, and water-protection laws do not apply.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court will vote in Wysocki's favor 5-2 sometime in 2018 in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga. Don't be surprised.

Sep 19, 2017

Wisconsin Supreme Court to Hear Factory Farm Appeal for Inflated Property Rights

Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear factory farm appeal
Examination of the updated Wisconsin Supreme Court website (PDF) indicates the Court will hear Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

The Court website reads in part: "Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga - When a permit applicant secures vested rights by filing a valid building permit application for a project (Wisconsin's "Building Permit Rule"), does the law protect the applicant's right to both construct buildings and to use the project land in the lawful manner described in the building permit application?"
--
In central Wisconsin the fearful, hope-and-see mood describing families awaiting the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision to grant or deny review of a state appellate court April ruling, Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga has been replaced by expletives by residents, and muttered statements of determination not to be chased out of their own communities by Republicans and a polluting factory farm bellowing the right to use corporate property in violation of settled vested property rights.

Central Wisconsin Awaits Supreme Court on Factory Farm Appeal for Inflated Property Rights

Popular opposition to proposed massive factory farm
in central Wisconsin faces corrupt state Supreme Court.
Photo by Mary Captain-Braund

Appellate law and vested property rights concern families in central Wisconsin

Update: Examination of the updated Wisconsin Supreme Court website (PDF) indicates the court will hear Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

The Court website reads in part: "Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga - When a permit applicant secures vested rights by filing a valid building permit application for a project (Wisconsin's "Building Permit Rule"), does the law protect the applicant's right to both construct buildings and to use the project land in the lawful manner described in the building permit application?"
--
Madison, Wisconsin — In central Wisconsin a fearful, hope-and-see mood describes families awaiting the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision to grant or deny review of a state appellate court April ruling, Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga.

Residents want the April state appellate decision to stand because the ruling restricts a massive factory farm from beginning operations under a radical, new conception of corporate vested property rights

The communities' future depends on the high Court decision as the predictable consequences of operation of the proposed Golden Sands factory farm are the pollution and depletion of water and air, devastating parts of four counties in this region, if it began operation.

The Golden Sands Dairy LLC appellate ruling effectively kills the operation of the massive factory farm by disallowing use of a 4,660-acre manure dumping field on which millions of gallons of liquid cow waste would be vectored every year.

The Supreme Court decision on the Golden Sands-Wysocki corporation's petition for review, a legal request of a court to hear a case, is expected around October 12, some six months after the April appellate ruling's date.

The appellate ruling freezes construction plans of the dairy Golden Sands CAFO, Confined Agricultural Feeding Operation, by honoring the current legal delineation of vested property rights.

[Note: For updates the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court is 2015AP001258. Enter   15ap1258 in the Appeal Number field, leave the rest of fields blank and hit search at bottom-left of the linked Wisconsin Supreme Court page.]

Republican Altering of Health, Safety and Environmental Protection

It's an indication how corrupt Wisconsin government is under Republican rule that residents contacted in Wood and Adams counties believe Republicans on the Wisconsin Supreme Court will vote to hear the Golden Sands Wysocki petition, overturn the appellate decision and radically expand the vested rights of property owners to commit virtually any environmentally and economically destructive act, altering the capacity of local communities to protect their economic and environmental well-being and the safety of families against corporate actors.

Since 2011 Republicans have implemented an unprecedented statutory framework according 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, 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 state appellate decision.

Proposed Golden Sands factory farm in central Wisconsin
could turn rural paradise into industrial wasteland.
 Don Ystad of Adams County Wisconsin
who has been promoting tourism and recreation for writes:
"Take a step back from the politics of this
situation and ask yourself, 'what is best
for the state of Wisconsin?  Another CAFO sited, or the
preservation and growth of an existing, vibrant area,
poised to be the 'golf mecca of the Midwest?'
Unfortunately, the Wysocki CAFO has the
political support of local State Rep. Scott Krug,
(R-Nekoosa, Wisconsin) and State Sen. Patrick Testin,
(R-Stevens Point). These politocs have already chosen Big Ag
over everything else, including the Sand Valley Golf Resort.