 |
| 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.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.
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.'
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,
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.
