SYLVESTER - What was intended to be a routine Board of Adjustment public hearing became a contentious meeting when requests to make public comment were denied before the board voted to allow an incoming large-scale dairy a driveway permit variance on grounds that Sylvester Township officials said have no legal basis.
A variance was requested by Friedly Bader Farm LLC on behalf of Pinnacle Land Holdings LLC. The 127 acres on which Pinnacle plans to build a 5,800-cow dairy farm, referred to as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, is owned by Friedly Bader Farm.
Pinnacle Dairy was recently approved after a two-year application process with conditions to their plans that have not yet been met.
Despite being posted as a public hearing, discussion during the July 26 meeting was limited to Sylvester Township officials and Pinnacle representatives from Michael Best Law Firm.
Sylvester Town Chair Anna Anderson read a letter submitted by the township lawyer Mark Steichen of Boardman & Clark LLP objecting to the request for a variance. Steichen argued Pinnacle had not fulfilled the requirement to receive a township driveway permit and referred to county code that states a variance can only be granted in the event of a hardship, one which cannot be created by the property owner.
Steichen wrote that Pinnacle's failure to comply "is not a basis on which this board may excuse it from ... procedural requirements of the county's ordinance."
His letter asserted that the variance, which would allow a zoning permit to be issued to Pinnacle Dairy, is "a request that the board rewrite the procedural requirements of the ordinance."
Zoning Administrator Adam Weigel said the variance simply allows for permits to be issued with the understanding that Pinnacle Dairy still needs to adhere to current restrictions put in place by local law.
"The variance does not supersede local township ordinances," Weigel said.
New Glarus resident Harry Pulliam, a member of the southwest chapter of the Wisconsin Farmers Union, was present at the meeting to request the county not remove control from local government.
"They have chosen not to go through the Smart Growth Committee, which is a state mandate," Pulliam said. "The township is within its right to ask people to follow the laws. The fact of the matter is that this is one of the few things a town has in its tool kit."
He added that requesting a variance from the county was a way for Pinnacle to circumvent the town in an effort to begin the building process. Other critics of the incoming dairy who have said it is a major concern for groundwater contamination have echoed the same sentiment.
Anderson said she and the township board felt the Board of Adjustment, which voted unanimously in favor of the variance, was dismayed by the delays in the process, which have been attributed to Pinnacle Dairy's failure to meet the driveway permit requirements, including a submitted siting ordinance. She said she was not surprised by the results.
Board member Kenneth Clark moved to approve the variance request. When Anderson pointed out Clark has done business with Bader Farms and asked for recusal on the basis of conflict of interest, she was dismissed. All members proceeded with the vote.
A sticking point for a number of attendees at the Green County Courthouse was Board of Adjustment Chair Ted Fahey's refusal to allow public comment, including feedback from nearby residents and farmers invited to the proceedings. A public hearing is generally used to gather information from residents on a particular issue.
Pulliam said people were dismayed after an attendee asked about public comment and Fahey indicated the Green County Corporation Counsel had advised that public input was not required.
Corporation Counsel Brian Bucholtz said his office would never advise officials not to allow public comment, but would emphasize discussion remain on topic to avoid open meeting law violations.
"I think the members of the board were woefully unprepared," Pulliam said. "And if they weren't, they were biased. I don't think justice was served. It was not a public hearing because the public was not allowed to speak."
A variance was requested by Friedly Bader Farm LLC on behalf of Pinnacle Land Holdings LLC. The 127 acres on which Pinnacle plans to build a 5,800-cow dairy farm, referred to as a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, is owned by Friedly Bader Farm.
Pinnacle Dairy was recently approved after a two-year application process with conditions to their plans that have not yet been met.
Despite being posted as a public hearing, discussion during the July 26 meeting was limited to Sylvester Township officials and Pinnacle representatives from Michael Best Law Firm.
Sylvester Town Chair Anna Anderson read a letter submitted by the township lawyer Mark Steichen of Boardman & Clark LLP objecting to the request for a variance. Steichen argued Pinnacle had not fulfilled the requirement to receive a township driveway permit and referred to county code that states a variance can only be granted in the event of a hardship, one which cannot be created by the property owner.
Steichen wrote that Pinnacle's failure to comply "is not a basis on which this board may excuse it from ... procedural requirements of the county's ordinance."
His letter asserted that the variance, which would allow a zoning permit to be issued to Pinnacle Dairy, is "a request that the board rewrite the procedural requirements of the ordinance."
Zoning Administrator Adam Weigel said the variance simply allows for permits to be issued with the understanding that Pinnacle Dairy still needs to adhere to current restrictions put in place by local law.
"The variance does not supersede local township ordinances," Weigel said.
New Glarus resident Harry Pulliam, a member of the southwest chapter of the Wisconsin Farmers Union, was present at the meeting to request the county not remove control from local government.
"They have chosen not to go through the Smart Growth Committee, which is a state mandate," Pulliam said. "The township is within its right to ask people to follow the laws. The fact of the matter is that this is one of the few things a town has in its tool kit."
He added that requesting a variance from the county was a way for Pinnacle to circumvent the town in an effort to begin the building process. Other critics of the incoming dairy who have said it is a major concern for groundwater contamination have echoed the same sentiment.
Anderson said she and the township board felt the Board of Adjustment, which voted unanimously in favor of the variance, was dismayed by the delays in the process, which have been attributed to Pinnacle Dairy's failure to meet the driveway permit requirements, including a submitted siting ordinance. She said she was not surprised by the results.
Board member Kenneth Clark moved to approve the variance request. When Anderson pointed out Clark has done business with Bader Farms and asked for recusal on the basis of conflict of interest, she was dismissed. All members proceeded with the vote.
A sticking point for a number of attendees at the Green County Courthouse was Board of Adjustment Chair Ted Fahey's refusal to allow public comment, including feedback from nearby residents and farmers invited to the proceedings. A public hearing is generally used to gather information from residents on a particular issue.
Pulliam said people were dismayed after an attendee asked about public comment and Fahey indicated the Green County Corporation Counsel had advised that public input was not required.
Corporation Counsel Brian Bucholtz said his office would never advise officials not to allow public comment, but would emphasize discussion remain on topic to avoid open meeting law violations.
"I think the members of the board were woefully unprepared," Pulliam said. "And if they weren't, they were biased. I don't think justice was served. It was not a public hearing because the public was not allowed to speak."