Factory Farms and Preserving the Right to Vote

South Dakota became the first state to have referendum and initiative in 1898. An initiative allows people to propose a new law or amend an existing law. A referendum allows th1e people to vote on legislation that has been passed by the state Legislature or by county government. These both provide a valuable check on the power of elected officials.

Massive hog feedlots were proposed in Bon Homme County in 2001 and in Hutchinson County in 2002. Large numbers of local residents came to the zoning meetings opposing the projects. The Zoning Board granted conditional use permits anyway. Residents then collected the signatures necessary to put the issue on the ballot. The feedlot proposers sued and the Circuit Court ruled in favor of the hog farms. The case was appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the right to vote, ordering a vote in both counties in separate cases. Local residents overwhelming voted down the feedlots by two to one and three to one margins.

After pressure from agribusiness in 2003 the Governor and Legislature passed a law rescinding the right to vote on zoning permits. Over 25,000 South Dakotans then signed petitions to overturn the law (HB 1281) and put it on the November 2004 ballot. Knowing they’d lose at the ballot box, the Legislature then repealed HB 1281 on its own.

Moody County adopted a new zoning ordinance designed specifically to bypass the citizens' right to vote. When citizens in Moody County found out, they collected the necessary signatures to put two large dairy feedlot permits on the ballot. A local judge ruled they had lost their right to vote saying they should have objected when the new zoning law was passed. However, the people didn’t know at the time the ordinance was designed to take away their right to vote.

The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled this August that only county board whose decisions are referable to a vote is the county commission. Moody County had found a loophole. Commissioners appoint themselves to be the Board of Adjustment (the zoning board). Decisions of county commissioners are referable to a vote. Decisions of the Board of Adjustment are not. So at some point of the night, the county commission reconvenes as a Board of Adjustment and their actions become infallible and not answerable to the people.

This all adds a great deal of confusion. In counties such as Brookings and Deuel (Clear Lake), a board of adjustment (which has not been elected by anyone) makes the final decision on permits. In counties such as Minnehaha (Sioux Falls) and Lincoln (Canton), the county commission must approve decisions of the board of adjustment. So in theory, people in Minnehaha and Lincoln counties should retain their right to vote. However, no doubt this would have to be argued in court. Feedlot proponents threaten to sue if counties don’t approve any permit. The SAVE OUR VOTE initiative will protect counties from such frivolous lawsuits that harass citizens trying to exercise their right to vote.

County Commissioners are being told that if a permit meets the guidelines, they have no choice but to pass it. That is not true. In 2004, the state legislature tried to pass a law (SB 163) that would have made that true. It said, "A permit applicant, who has met or exceeded all conditions in the plan and any applicable laws and zoning ordinances, shall be granted a permit...” In other words, commissioners would be turned into rubber stamps automatically granting any permit that met guidelines. They would have no longer been able to use their best judgment in making decisions to accept or reject a particular permit.

That proposed law was defeated. It lost. However, feedlot proponents went right ahead again pretending that they’d won. They tell commissioners they must pass any permit that meets guidelines and cannot exercise their own best judgment. States attorneys are being misled by the same administration in Pierre that tried to pass this law in the first place.

Not all feedlots are created equal. Commissioners should have the right to separate the good from the bad. And county governing boards are also not infallible. Voters should retain their right to veto a bad decision.

A decision September 21 in Deuel County (Clear Lake) shows what can happen when citizens lose the right to refer a bad decision to a vote. By one vote, the appointed board of adjustment approved a feedlot 1/2 mile directly uphill from the wells from which the county gets its water supply. State maps also show this operation is on top of an aquifer. East Dakota Water District testified the feedlot posed an unacceptable risk to public health. Rural water officials testified if it were approved, they would have to move the wellheads at a cost of millions which would substantially raise rural water rates for customers. Commissioners ignored all this and approved it by one vote.

Citizens will now have to hire a lawyer to sue in court rather than getting to decide at the ballot box. This is just the way feedlot proponents want it. They want to take decisions out of the hands of voters. The SAVE OUR VOTE initiative protects the right of the people to have a say over what happens to their rural neighborhoods.

It is fair to both sides. Producers need to know what to expect before breaking ground. The people need to retain their right to have a say on controversial permits. Giving voters 20 days to collect signatures to put an issue on the ballot after a permit is approved is fair. Our democracy is too precious to lose for the sake of any special interest.