Two CAFO lawsuits set to be heard in court on the same day
By Brendan Crowley, Boonville Daily News (MO)
Jan 3, 2019
Judge Robert Koffman dismissed counts against several Cooper County Health Board members, but opponents of the board’s CAFO regulation will get another day in court to argue their claims against it.
Opponents of a regulation passed by the Cooper County Public Health Center Board will have another chance to be heard in circuit court Jan. 14 after a judge rejected several motions to dismiss a lawsuit against it, while a separate suit against the Cooper County Commission relating to the proposed Tipton East CAFO will also be heard that afternoon.
Nathan Alpers of Prairie Home, along with dozens of other area landowners, sued the board and its members after it passed a regulation Aug. 24, which would require landowners who apply manure from Class I confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to formulate a nutrient management plan. Landowners would also be required to inject manure into the soil, rather than spraying it over the top. A hearing in the case is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Jan. 14, with Koffman presiding.
The state defines a Class I operation as one that holds more than 1,000 animal units, which is equal to 2,500 hogs more than 55 pounds. There are currently six permitted Class I operations in Cooper County, including Tipton East, the proposed southern Cooper County operation that is facing a challenge to its operating permit, according to an online database kept by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
The lawsuit claims the board doesn’t have the authority to impose the regulation, and that it didn’t provide adequate notice of meetings in which it discussed the regulation. A court injunction has kept the ordinance from going into effect.
Cooper County Circuit Court Judge Robert L. Koffman rejected the board’s motion to dismiss each count laid against it by the dozens of people named as plaintiffs in the case.
The board claimed several counts should be dismissed, because it is not an agency and is not subject to state regulations for administrative review, as laid out in statutes. The board is not a state agency, Koffman wrote. But it is an agency, defined as any administrative body authorized to make rules by law or constitution, and is subject to the law, he wrote.
“If (the statutory procedure) is not the proper procedure to challenge a violation of the rights and liberties of citizens in the context of rules that may affect their lives, then the Court questions what is,” Koffman wrote in his order.
Koffman also rejected the board’s motion to dismiss several counts because the court injunction has kept the county from enforcing the rule. Since nobody has been charged over the rule, there is no controversy subject to the court, the board argued. Koffman wrote that each plaintiff could face criminal prosecution if they “exercise their right to enjoy the use of their property.”
“There is a stated justiciable controversy and the plaintiffs should not have to wait to be arrested before they can raise it,” Koffman wrote.
Koffman did dismiss allegations of Sunshine Law violations against five named defendants, all members of the public health board. The plaintiffs didn’t allege the board members were records custodians, so they wouldn’t be subject to the law, Koffman wrote in his order.
Koffman did not dismiss Cooper County Public Health Administrator Melanie J. Hutton from liability, as the plaintiffs claim she is the custodian of records.
Sunshine lawsuit ...
more, including links