Wednesday, March 9, 2005

Limiting debate is not the American way

Guest opinion by Sen. Clint Stennett


Guest opinion by CLINT STENNETT
Clint Stennet, D—District 25, is the Minority Leader of the Idaho Senate.

As citizens of the United States, we have the right to defend our unalienable rights of life, liberty and property. One of the greatest weapons in our defense is the freedom of speech. This right is currently limited to some Idahoans by Idaho Code with regards to Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO). As Idaho Code reads now, only members of the public with their primary residence within a one-mile radius of a proposed CAFO (also known as a large dairy) site may provide comment at a public hearing. This week in the Senate, I introduced a bill on the floor that would provide all residents the opportunity to exercise their freedom of speech and speak to their public officials on this issue.

The one-mile restriction is the only place in Idaho Code that carves out a provision to limit the Constitutional right of people to appear and speak before an elected body; I believe that provision is unconstitutional. Two weeks ago, the Legislature held a statewide public forum at Boise State University to discuss the Nez Perce Water Agreement. This forum was attended by Idahoans from all over the state and lasted for two days. At no point did we ask those who spoke their concerns if they lived or owned property within a mile of the reservation or other affected areas, if they owned a water right, or any other qualifier. For over 13 hours, the Legislature listened to each person who wanted to speak, regardless of where they came from. Such forums are the American Town Hall tradition, and should be encouraged with regards to CAFO siting hearings as well.

The construction of motels, hotels, a thousand-unit housing development or even a coal-fired power plant requires a public hearing; it is an American tradition to not limit who can attend and speak their mind. Yet, we have created a special exception for CAFOs. During the debate on this bill, defenders of the current law explained that dairies need this special exception because they are a large industry that is threatened by our state's growing population. The dairy industry is a large industry, especially in Idaho, but Idaho is home to many industries. The dairy industry should not receive any special treatment not offered to the other industries in Idaho.

The truth is that CAFOs effects go beyond this artificial one-mile limit. Odor, flies, dust or lights are all characteristics of CAFOs and can travel for miles. Manure is transported for many miles surrounding the CAFO. Any resident who lives near a CAFO will tell you that the effects of CAFOs in their communities do not cease at an imaginary one-mile boundary. The language in Idaho Code is arbitrary, and capricious to residents and landowners, as well as to our democracy.

Idaho Code does allow that the board of commissioners can increase the distance. Since there is not another such provision in the Idaho Code, this is indeed a rare discretion for county commissioners. This bill requires us to weigh our Constitutional right of the freedom of speech against the discretion of three county commissioners. I believe a person's right to speak up on any issue, which they believe they have a compelling interest in, should trump this rare discretion of county commissioners.

Also, this bill did nothing to force the commissioners' discretion when it comes to decision-making. This bill had the support from the Idaho Association of Counties. As Daniel Chadwick, Executive Director of the Association wrote, "The existence of the one-mile limitation does nothing to instill confidence in the public that they have an opportunity to be heard. It does nothing to add to the commissioners' ability to conduct public hearings or make good decisions. Therefore, the repeal of the limitation is very appropriate."

It was my goal with this bill to clean up the Idaho Code-- to make a CAFO siting decision no different, no better, no worse than any other land use decision. This bill failed the Senate this week with a 17-17 vote. Although the final vote in itself was disappointing, last year we introduced a similar bill that did not even make it out of committee, so this is still encouraging. Since the citizens of Idaho deserve the opportunity to speak out on this issue, I will introduce similar legislation next year.




 Local Weather 
Search archives:


Copyright © 2024 Express Publishing Inc.   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy
All Rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Express Publishing Inc. is prohibited. 

The Idaho Mountain Express is distributed free to residents and guests throughout the Sun Valley, Idaho resort area community. Subscribers to the Idaho Mountain Express will read these stories and others in this week's issue.