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.

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.

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

Wisconsin Clean Water Advocates Are in Fighting Mood

'Why do we, as a democratic society, allow the rich and powerful to trample over the rights and health of the average rural citizen!'

Updated - Commenting on children drinking manure-laden water caused by factory farms, Janet McConaughey of Ixonia, Wisconsin, (Jefferson County), said:

"What I'm concerned about is (5-year-old grandson) Jordan's world. So, I want to know that when he's grown up, he'll have a decent place to live. He'll have clean air, clean water," (Bowden, Wisconsin Public Radio).

Ms. McConaughey is not alone as Gov. Scott Walker has ceded rural Wisconsin as a colony to Big Ag, without regard to the consequences to families and communities.

Walker's brazen give-away of private homes and public communities is a major political fight that is bearing electoral fruit.

But a major battle is the Wisconsin courts.

In central Wisconsin, 10,000s of residents are waiting to hear what the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide to do with their communities and homes in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga case, awaiting opinion and decision.

Golden Sands is a name of a proposed factory farm of the infamous Wysocki corporation.

The stakes are high.

1. The Court can eliminate the democratic capacity of families to protect local conditions, property values, drinking water, health, and local character.

2. The Court can decide to impose onto Wisconsin a radical, new conception of corporate vested property rights.
---
Clean water advocates have built a movement in Wisconsin.
---
On April 3, Big Ag's candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Michael Screnock, Scott Walker's candidate, was decisively defeated by Rebecca Dallet who campaigned in part on protecting clean water as a value.

Consider the unofficial results from four central-Wisconsin counties, much of which would be devastated by an adverse Court decision in Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga case.

Next to each county below is the Trump victory margin in 2016, and the Democratic swing.

Adams County: (Won by Trump 58 to 36 percent)

Rebecca Dallet       - 1892 votes (49 percent)
Michael Screnock  - 1912 votes (50 percent)
—Democratic swing of 21 points

Wood County (Won by Trump 56 to 37)

Rebecca Dallet       - 6471 votes (52 percent)
Michael Screnock  - 5933 votes (47 percent)
—Democratic swing of 24 points

Juneau County (Won by Trump 60 to 34)

Rebecca Dallet       -  2157 votes (45 percent)
Michael Screnock  -  2600 votes (54 percent)
—Democratic swing of 17 points

Portage County (Lost by Trump 44 to 49)

Rebecca Dallet       - 7455 votes (62 percent)
Michael Screnock  - 4435 votes (37 percent)
—Democratic swing of 20 points

[Trump figures are rounded. Dallet-Screnock figures omit scattering votes.]

Conclusion: The Blue Wave is building in Wisconsin, and clean and safe water advocates are energizing the momentum.
--
The Wysocki corporation has a factory farm in Juneau county, and it is polluting families unfortunate to live near the shit-emitting monstrosity, the Central Sands Dairy, LLC.

Central Sands is applying for a Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permit.

An update from central Wisconsin residents, Bruce Dimick and Doreen Dimick follows:

Hello all,

On March 22, 2018 there was a WPDES public renewal hearing for the Wysocki CAFO, Central Sands Dairy, in Armenia, Juneau County. This public hearing was conducted by the DNR as are all these public hearings. Wysocki has been in frequent violation of his current WPDES permit, but that appears to be of no great concern to the DNR.

I did not have any great expectations about how this hearing would go, but I was greatly encouraged by the outcome.  First of all at least 9 citizens from Saratoga showed up and 5 of those citizens spoke in opposition to renewal of Wysocki's WPDES permit. But what was the biggest surprise was that at least 50 people showed up for the hearing and an additional 13 people, all from Armenia and the surrounding area spoke up against.  No one spoke in favor of granting Wysocki a renewal.  The people from Armenia spoke from the heart. They had had their wells contaminated, their property devalued, and their way of life degraded.

Sheri Red Fox, who can't use her water for much of anything, spoke of having to distill enough water just to brush her teeth and have enough to drink and cook with.  She lives quite close to the CAFO.  A former employee of Wysocki spoke of how he had been ordered to spread manure on frozen ground and on snow covered fields, all of which is illegal.  When he complained he was fired by Wysocki's managers and threatened if he ever told anyone about what was going on.  One member of the Armenia Town Board spoke up on how the contaminated water was adversely affecting his constituents.

Many people from Armenia thanked those of us from Saratoga for standing with them.

I could not identify anyone from the Wysocki organization being at the hearing, but I am sure they had at least one plant to report back to "Jimmy".

No one is under any illusion that the DNR will not renew the WPDES permit, but the testimony given is now a matter of public record and could be used in court proceedings in the future.
--
WPDES PERMIT HEARING FOR CENTRAL SANDS DAIRY – MARCH 22, 2018

Geologically speaking, the Central Sands area was a large lake called Glacial Lake Wisconsin formed after the last ice age.  There was a large ice dam in the Wisconsin Dells area that allowed the lake to persist for 5 or 10,000 years. During those years, the lake filled up with sand from the Wisconsin River and its tributaries. Once the ice dam gave way, the lake drained and our current environment was slowly established. We might envision that we are living over a huge washtub of sand filled with water. The sand is quite porous, so this washtub is continually replenished with rainwater and snowmelt. There is no real distinction between surface water and ground water in this porous environment.

 Most of us who live in the Central Sands in rural areas have our own private wells, whether they be drilled wells or sandpoints.  For the most part we are all drinking from the same aquifer.  This aquifer is both plentiful and vulnerable to pollution due to the porosity of the sandy soil. It is incumbent on all of us that live here and use this aquifer to protect it for the good of all. 

Excessive nitrates are a particular pollutant that easily are dissolved in rainwater and flow down into the aquifer. The EPA limit for dissolved nitrates in drinking water is 10 ppm for municipal water supplies for health reasons. Colorectal cancer, blue baby syndrome, and other deadly ailments are among the diseases linked to nitrates in drinking water.

The Central Sands Dairy has a total of 9 monitoring wells strategically placed around the CAFO.  Many of these monitoring wells have consistently exceeded the EPA limit of 10 ppm by wide margins.  The worst reading that I have seen recorded was 88 ppm for CSD 7S in October 2017.  Think of that – almost 9 times the EPA limit!

So all this contaminated water flows in a predominately southeasterly direction on its way to the now highly contaminated Lake Petenwell. Along the way it contaminates the water supplies of the rural residents in its path.

All of us siting here today know that the DNR will renew the WPDES permit for the Central Sands Dairy. The question is why do we, as a democratic society, allow the rich and powerful to trample over the rights and health of the average rural citizen!
---
WPDES PERMIT HEARING FOR CENTRAL SANDS DAIRY,
Mar. 22, 2018

The hearing today centers on the DNR’s decision whether or not to give the Central Sands Dairy a permit to continue operations for the next five years and under what conditions it may operate. One would think that this permit would be based on what effect the dairy has and has had on the groundwater in the area of and around the dairy. 

The EPA standard for maximum nitrogen in the groundwater is 10 ppm, yet almost all the monitoring wells in and around Central Sands Dairy show levels well above that standard. So it is very concerning that it seems that there have been  no real efforts to enforce that standard. There is no way that the houses around the CSD have drinkable well water and must choose expensive bottled water and/or a reverse osmosis system.  Indeed one would wonder where the dairy is accessing the water that is given to the cows that produce the milk. 

Municipal water supplies must stay within the 10 ppm limit. Restaurants or other service businesses that rely on water must stay within that limit. Central Sands Dairy is not even close. I would urge the DNR to deny the permit under present business practices and enforce some meaningful limits.

Doreen Dimick
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

Central Wisconsin Clean Water Group Endorses Rebecca Dallet for Supreme Court

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.

Rebecca Dallet is our Supreme Court candidate, says Saratoga Concerned in Republican-dominated central Wisconsin

"Rural America once had strong communities. It would have been very difficult for anyone who built a CAFO facotry farm in a rural area in earlier times. It wasn’t socially or morally acceptable for one person in the community to benefit at the expense of others."
 —John Ikerd, Rural Communities of Necessity
 --
The communities of Saratoga and Rome, in central Wisconsin say the Wisconsin Supreme Court race is personal.

The April 3 race featuring candidates Rebecca Dallet, (a mainstream rule-of-law Milwaukee County judge), and Michael Screnock, (extremist rightwing Sauk County judge) will determine if rightwingers control the Wisconsin Supreme Court for the next nine years.

The stakes are high, but even more so for central Wisconsin where Republican interests and Big Ag are trying to use a local case awaiting decision from the Supreme Court to obliterate local control and codify corporate property rights in a radical and novel interpretation that is dreaded by families.

In Golden Sands Dairy, (Wysocki corporation),  LLC v. Town of Saratoga case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide whether some 1.7 million Wisconsin citizen, 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.  [For legal updates on the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, enter 15ap1258 in the Appeal Number field.]

The case was argued Jan 11, 2018.

It's personal because 1,000s of families in Wood, Adams and Juneau counties who have spent generations building lives, security and opportunity for future generations will see dreams shattered and security gone if the Wysocki corporation's badly polluting factory farm begins operations.

The proposed massive factory farm, a CAFO or Confined Animal Feeding Operation, would leave the region an economic moonscape.

That's fine with Wisconsin Republicans, and Supreme Court candidate Michael Screnock whose campaign runs for and is funded by Republican special interests. Screnock in fact is a former attorney for Big Ag against virtually everyone else in Wisconsin.

A major group fighting for entire communities and central Wisconsin families just came out for Supreme Court candidate Rebecca Dallet, and against Screnock.

The group, Saratoga Concerned, is awaiting word from the Supreme Court on Golden Sands Dairy. They are nervous and frightened. Who came blame them?

Today, according to an email, Saratoga Concerned endorsed Rebecca Dallet over Michael Screnock.

From Saratoga Concerned:

As we are all aware, politics are dirty. It doesn't matter the party or the platform, each side spins false innuendos and statements at the other in the hopes of having you simply dislike the other candidate more. The race for Supreme Court is no different even though it is supposed to be a nonpartisan position.

We encourage everyone to vote on Tuesday, April 3rd but instead of voting by your political party leaning, we encourage you to vote the issues. Let's face it, the Wisconsin Republican and the Democratic party are not what they used to be years ago. Voting the issues is the only way to get folks in office who are going to truly represent your interests. We all need to be willing to put our political partisanship aside and vote on the things that are important to our fight.

Saratoga Concerned leadership team has identified our issues  1) Clean water  2) Protection of our Natural Resources and 3) Protecting local control. When looking solely at these three topics we feel strongly Rebecca Dallet is our candidate. Her challenger, Michael Screnock, has repeatedly represented CAFO owners in court against the average citizen and denies their civil right to clean and plentiful water. Not to mention his work with the Michael Best and Friedrich law office that is retained by Wysocki. We cringe just thinking about what may happen if he earns a seat on the bench.

We encourage you to vote the issues on April 3rd.

Our Saratoga fights need a Justice like Rebecca Dallet on the bench.

Former Big Ag Atty Is Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate

Sauk County Directory, p. 37

Scott Walker, Big Ag and Judicial Corruption

Updated — When Michael P. Screnock filed a petition for judicial review on October 17, 2014, Screnock represented a massive industrialized factory farm and heavily polluting corporation, MS Real Estate Holdings LLC (formerly MilkSource Holdings LLC and Tidy View Dairy) headquartered in Kaukauna, Wisconsin in Outagamie County.

Screnock was awarded by Gov. Scott Walker with a judicial appointment some seven months later on April 10, 2015, approximately a month before Screnock withdrew from the case.

Now, Screnock is a candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court which is deciding a case that could rewrite property rights law and local control in Wisconsin, Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga. [Note: For legal updates on the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, enter 15ap1258 in the Appeal Number.] Oral argument was heard in Golden Sands in January 2018.

The Golden Sands case hangs over Wisconsin communities like a Sword of Damocles which will could eviscerate local control in favor of Big Ag operations and real estate developers.

The Republicans' Wisconsin DoJ filed a Friend of the Court brief on Nov. 17, 2017, effectively giving the justices marching orders. The Wisconsin Realtors Association and Wisconsin Builders Association, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce also filed briefs in Nov. 2017.

The Screnock appointment demonstrates again the massive work accomplished by the Scott Walker administration on behalf of polluters known in politics and the public culture as graft and corruption.

Screnock is also one of the attorneys who represented Scott Walker during the 2011-12 Recall campaign, (WisPolitics, PDF, p.4).

Screnock is a former attorney of Michael Best and Friedrich LLP, aka in-house counsel for Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin), (Elbow, The Capital Times)).

In New Chester Dairy LLC and MS Real Estate Holdings LLC v. Wisconsin Dept of Natural Resources, Outagamie Circuit Court Judge Mark McGinnis ruled the state Department of Natural Resources doesn't have the authority to monitor high-capacity wells at this factory farm in central Wisconsin, (Wisconsin Public Radio).

This ruling, for the time being, insulates New Chester Dairy LLC and MS Real Estate Holdings LLC and other factory farms from state efforts to protect the region from the toxins and pathogens vectored from the New Chester Dairy LLC CAFO sited in Adams County in central Wisconsin.

Protecting polluters remains a high priority of the Walker administration, (Isikoff, Yahoo News), (Pierce, Esquire).

Screnock filed the petition for judicial review on behalf of MS Real Estate Holdings LLC on October 17, 2014, according to court records.

Screnock officially withdrew from the New Chester case on May 18, 2015 a month after Scott Walker appointed Screnock to a circuit court judgeship in Sauk County on April 10, 2015.

Walker and the Republican Party special interest groups fund judges who will rule in their favor, and Walker appoints judges who do him political favors such as helping polluters in Screnock's case.

Michael P. Screnock awarded with judgeship by Scott Walker for representing Big Ag polluter

Republicans Push 'Wetlands Destruction Act' in Wisconsin

Wisconsin wetlands are targeted for destruction by
Republicans - "Small Wisconsin wetlands are crucial to the
health of our land, water, wildlife, and communities," notes
the Wisconsin Wetlands Association.

Wisconsin Republicans continue assault against water and land

Madison, Wisconsin — Rightwing Republicans, and only Republicans, who control the gerrymandered Wisconsin legislature are poised to terminate existing state and local protection for wetlands through more environmentally destructive legislation.

"This is the worst conservation bill that I’ve seen in a generation," said Wisconsin Wildlife Federation executive director George Meyer, a former state Department of Natural Resources secretary, (Verburg, Wisconsin State Journal).

The legislation is Assembly Bill 547, (2017-18), and Senate Bill 600, (2017-18).

Republicans control the legislature so passage of the two bills appears a forgone conclusion, after which Gov. Scott Walker, enemy of protections for surface and ground waters, will rubber-stamp the legislation into law.

As reported by the Wisconsin State Journal this morning:

Republican lawmakers are optimistic they will pass a bill opening 100,000 acres of Wisconsin wetland to development. Conservation and hunting groups want builders to continue following state law requiring them to minimize or avoid filling wetlands and to pay for replacement acreage to prevent flooding and purify water and maintain wildlife habitat. 

The legislation is supported by rightwing and Big Ag groups.

Clean water and citizen action groups have registered with the Wisconsin Ethics Commission in opposition.

The legislation also eliminates the power of local communities to protect wetlands by zoning, notes the Wisconsin Wetlands Association.

Assembly Bill 547, (substitute amendment 1) "creates an express preemption on local regulation," notes the Wisconsin Legislative Council, a non-partisan research arm of the Wisconsin Legislature.

In practical terms, this removes the capacity of local governments to protect their communities by preserving isolated wetlands from destruction.

Several of the same Big Ag and other rightwing groups supporting AB 547 have filed amicus, friend-of-the-court briefs in a related Wisconsin Supreme Court case now under deliberation, awaiting opinion.

The case is Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, (Appeal Number 2015AP001258). These groups include: Wisconsin Realtors Association, Wisconsin Builders Association, and the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce.

In the Golden Sands case, private Big Ag interests seek judicial codification of a new Republican theory of vested rights in Wisconsin, where an owner of private property becomes an extraordinary, super-interest for whom many environmental, safety, local zoning, and water-protection laws do not apply.

Wetlands Protection Act of circa 1990

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, major water-protection legislation considered included the Wetlands Protection Act, which would have enhanced existing conservation for water. The Wetlands Protection Act was defeated by Big Ag, especially the cranberry growers in Wisconsin, a major lobbying force.

Today, after the Republican transformation of state government in the Lost Decade, (2011-2019), Wisconsin Republicans no longer consider the public interest, but rather work on ways to enhance their relationship with rightwing special interests who fund Republican campaigns.

Wetlands Destruction Act of 2017-18

So the co-author of SB 600, Sen. Roger Roth, (R-Appleton), takes $10,000s from development and other industry interests whose agenda do not include consideration of the people of Wisconsin, (Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and PAC contributions, and individual contributors).


In the state assembly, assembly majority leader State Rep. Jim Steineke, (R-Kaukauna), similarly hauls in cash from virtually anybody, (Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and PAC contributions, and individual contributors).

From the Wisconsin Wetlands Association

The Assembly Committee on Regulatory Licensing Reform voted today to amend Assembly Bill 547 on a party‐line vote. AB 547, as amended, will clear the way for the destruction of hundreds of thousands of acres of wetlands important for providing fish and wildlife habitat, reducing floods, recharging groundwater, and protecting water quality.

The amended bill also promotes sprawl by removing protection of state jurisdictional wetlands in every city and village in Wisconsin, including areas within a one‐mile radius of those municipalities, all sewerage service areas, and in nearly 300 town sanitary districts spread all across Wisconsin. As communities grow, those wetland permit exemptions areas will grow.

Though the authors maintained that no net loss of wetland acreage would result, this amendment removes nearly all wetland replacement provisions included in the original bill. It also removes local authority to protect isolated wetlands through zoning. These provisions will result in a net loss of untold amounts of wetlands across Wisconsin’s urban and rural settings, undermining community‐based efforts to address flooding and poor water quality challenges.

"Wisconsin Wetlands Association is strongly supportive of policies that reduce red tape, promote well‐planned economic development, and protect our wetland resources. This bill achieves none of those goals. It’s incredibly disappointing to see this bill move forward, especially in light of the fact that almost none of the recommendations given by the conservation and sportsmens’ communities were adopted in the amended bill," said Tracy Hames, Executive Director of Wisconsin Wetlands Association. "For these reasons, we remain firmly opposed to the original bill and this amendment."
#

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.

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

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.