Intrusive government and thank goodness for Farm Bureau

[hardnox604008]

The case law is pretty clear, if you move to the nuisance you have diminished rights to dictate change.

Spur Industries vs. Del Webb, Arizona Supreme Court.

[dagwud]

Aren't you the least bit curious what they are doing and the reason that motivates them. Why do you automatically conclude that they are just a bunch of treehuggers trying to make unnecessary restrictions on you.

With your kind of thinking there would be no pollution laws. No environmental laws. Nbo protection for air and water. For certain, I might object but first it wouldn't hurt to inform yourself. Believe it or not the city fathers are not sitting around in their cozy chairs trying to figure out how to "eff" things up just to make farmers miserable.

But then I do believe you are perfectly willing to convict without hear all of the evidence.

We can always count on a heavy dose of hypocrisy from you Don.  You are the one that has "automatically concluded" that I believe the Johnson County supervisors to be "treehuggers."  All I said was that Johnson County is known as Iowa's most liberal county which is typical for midwest counties with larger cities, housing larger colleges and having a younger overall population.  I mentioned this for people not familiar with the state and believe it is relevant in this story as most people  naturally assume a more liberal urban county would be more apt to promote such an ordinance then a more rural conservative county. 

Not sure just how you jumped to your embellished conclusion that because I or others are critical of such a haphazardly written ordinances that lacks clarity along with common sense that we would somehow be in favor of or promote pollution and "no protection for our air and water."  Once again it seems like you are the one "perfectly willing" to convict without all the evidence or concern for the facts.

Maybe a new years resolution to be a little more open minded before you judge would be in order and the realization that your team can make mistakes at times and is not perfect just like all other teams.  A little less with the quick judgment that everything is always so black and white or politically motivated.

[kraft-t]

Liberal Johnson county says it all. As if everyone in Ia city is a liberal wacko. You've been so indoctrinated by Limbaugh and co that if an ordinance comes out of Johnson county it has to be unreasonable. Do you think they are just being unreasonable to make farmers miserable?

You have some reason for making a snap judgement. Might it be political bias or might it be that you don't care about nonfarmers and their environment?

 Ps I didn't make a judgement. I just want to hear both sides of the story which you didn't offer in your zeal to cut down those damned liberals.

[dagwud]

Don, if you posted about some rural southern county or town that passed an ordinance that all its house owners must maintain a gun in their house and you accurately pointed out that the town or county was known for being very conservative it would not get my panties all ruffled up as it would be a legitimate and important part of the conversation.  Trouble is you take offense to the term liberal which is a very commonly used term by most folks including members of the press (yes even MSNBC) and people inside the Democrat party. 

I don't think the Johnson County supervisors are setting out to try "to make farmers miserable" but do definitely think they were being unreasonable.  When a person sees something that is both unreasonable and poorly thought out it does not take a long time to recognize that fact.

If you want to learn more about this story I would suggest you do a Google search.  I did and found a couple more stories written on the matter.  Seems there were two Farm Bureau representatives working with the committee that drafted the ordinance and were led to believe that farms and farm buildings would be exempt in accordance with current state law but were surprised to see that the in the final draft farms were not exempt.

[dagwud]

"Why don't you go to the hearings and then you can make an educated decision."  This coming from the man that will criticize any Repub at the drop of the hat without caring about facts or particulars?  A least you are consistent with your unending hypocrisy.

I haven't had anyone trouble me with dust blowing. Have you. I know the counties do not like ditches filled with top soil but as yet I don't believe they have passed a law against dust nor have they enforced osuch a law.

In case you missed it Don.   For decades, farmers have enjoyed an exemption to the dust regulations in the Clean Air Act.  However new EPA guidelines, adopted in late September, now fail to exempt agriculture.  The EPA claims the focus of the new guidelines is on "urban and industrial" sources of dust not agricultural ones.  However even after repeated request by Senator Grassley and others to exempt farmers the EPA has continued to refuse to do so.  "Don't worry just take our word for it."  I'll bet you eagerly bought that one when the Bush administration claimed they would not abuse the Patriot Act.

[tomtoolbag]

  What's really interesting is that the FB was involved in the first place, as it seems they were trying to legislate through the back door to "help" address a problem with a run down trailer court. They have a pattern of "helping" people or groups of people, so much that they have eroded their own base of supporters, and ticked off the rest, forcing them to replace that base of support and membership list with mandatory insurance policy holders.

  I found your initial post odd in that I didn't think that you even lived in Johnson county, and that it resembled an e-mail notification from the FB, which is more than misleading. Against state law pertaining to building codes?? I perused the Johnson county website and they have breakdowns for the various permits and applicable inspections, which by the way most if not all banks would require for a mortgage to build a house in the unincorporated area to ensure that the house was built to industry standards, and for safety purposes along with properly valued collateral. They even give the level of contractor licensing and such too. 

  So, did the cat get let out of the bag pertaining to the FB's participation in that whole mess and now they're trying to do the CYA routine??? It seems like a lot of BS and hoopla just to write a simple ordinance pertaining to rental properties and the upkeep/maintenance of such. I especially like the double standards within the same governmental body pertaining to code adherence.

  We don't have a rental property ordinance where we own our rentals, but the mayor owns a few rentals also, and the problems are more often than not homeowners and junk cars/trucks and lack of repair or upkeep of the house, not the rental properties. It's not uncommon though for rental property ordinances, especially in towns with a high percentage of college rentals.

  I gotta ask, because usually the people that complain the loudest are the ones that the ordinance is directed at. Could you be affected by renting out some drafty farmhouses, or mobile homes???? Or, are you on an e-mail notification list from the FB???

[kraft-t]

Yet you largely ignore conservative Farm Bureau's interest in the matter. That is why I quit being a farm bureau member. Farm Bureau an insurance company posing as an advocate for farmers.

I don't mind being a liberal but the suggestion that they are mindless dolts is a bit tough to swallow. Conservative fascists like to diminish liberal all they can. Their own ideas are pitiful but they don't want to listen to anyone else.

[kraft-t]

What the heck tom. I ought to be able to buy that $69K lot in nottingham and move my 18 X 60 mobile home in amongst those $500k homes. Without standards you would have junk cars and crap sitting all over. To say nothing about boats and winnebagos.

There are people that think only about ther own interests and they don't much care if they create an eyesore for everyone else. That is why they need ordinances and regulations.

[tomtoolbag]

  LOL, Mr. Kraft, if you notice the near-sighted selfishness overrides their own long term gain. Those standards would maintain their property value, and increase it's value in the future because of people actually wanting to build and/or live there.

  You obviously get it and so do I, but I think dagwud is blinded by his loyalty(or active participation in) in regards to the FB. I have yet to figure out how the FB gets by with not having to comply with the various laws pertaining to lobbyists, because they are always actively participating in legislation at every level throughout the country.

[dagwud]

"I gotta ask, because usually the people that complain the loudest are the ones that the ordinance is directed at. Could you be affected by renting out some drafty farmhouses, or mobile homes????  Or, are you on an e-mail notification list from the FB???"

No Tom I'm do not own nor have ever owned any rental property.  In fact the wife and I just recently bought our first house as we had rented an acreage for the last 20 years from a land lord that we rent farm ground from.  Nor have I ever owned or lived in a trailer house.  Nor am I a big fan of Farm Bureau because as I have stated before I think they tend to ignore the smaller family farmer and instead carry the water for big time operators and the industrial livestock sector.  

When I got my first car I purchased F.B. insurnace as that is what my parents used.  When I started farming I also purchased all my hail and farm liability insurance from F.B.  When I started farming full time and quit my full time job we purchased our health insurance and life insurance from F.B.  However over the years as I have become more dissatisfied with F.B.'s stand on various issues I have taken nearly all my insurance business to Sate Farm and a couple of local independent agents.  For the last 15 years the only insurance I now carry with F.B. is my farm liability.  I have even turned F.B. down on a couple of occasions to serve as a board member and representative since we don't seem to share the same goals and philosophy. 

I do not receive any emails or talking points from F.B.  The only thing I get is the F.B. Spokesman which is a small newspaper with articles in it pertaining to farming, marketing information and lots of for sale ads.  I believe there are around five different Spokesman editions in Iowa.  Each covers a different section of Iowa and all are identical except for the personal ads which are free and are listed by the individual counties.   The Spokesman is free but I do pay an extra $6 a year so I can also

get the Spokesman issue that covers another group of counties near me as I read their ads religiously.  The Spokesman is the main reason I still retain a little of my insurance business with F.B. as I have very good luck selling items or locating farm equipment in the Spokesman and prefer their free ads over the expensive ones that news papers charge that seem to get little response.

Not sure about your back door help comment as I thought that it was common practice for many industries to have a seat at the table to offer their input when legislation pertaining to them is being discussed or drafted.

Do you and Don really believe that farms and farm buildings should be required to meet the same window requirements or sanitary standards as rental property?  Still waiting to hear Don say with a straight face that he would have embraced such a vaguely written ordinance while he was still farming and raising livestock.

Tom, you are right in that I don't live near Johnson County or have any connection to it.  I simply don't want to see any county start down that slippery slope with such vaguely worded ordinances. 

"Against state law pertaining to building codes??"   Yes Tom according to Iowa Code chapter 331.304 farm buildings are exempt from county regulations.

2.  A county shall not adopt or enforce county legislation regulating a condition or activity occurring on land used for the production, care, feeding, or housing of animals unless the regulation of the production, care, feeding, or housing of animals is expressly authorized by state law. County legislation adopted in violation of this section is void and unenforceable and any enforcement activity conducted in violation of this section is void. A condition or activity occurring on land used for the production, care, feeding, or housing of animals includes but is not limited to the construction, operation, or management of an animal feeding operation, an animal feeding operation structure, or aerobic structure, and to the storage, handling, or application of manure or egg washwater.

"While county officials may say the code is not intended to create inspections of barns, sheds and shops on farmsteads, there is nothing in the proposed ordinance that specifically exempts them."

I'll try you Tom as Don shys away from the tougher questions.  Would you welcome an ordinance that officials say is not intended to create inspections and additional costs for your line of work yet the proposed ordinance does not specifically exempt you?  Or would you prefer to see a more precise and clearly written ordinance that specifically shows your business is exempt from the new more expensive requirements?