Advertisement
County officials say commissioners’ go-ahead for a Lewiston feedlot expansion last week could mark a constructive shift from a permitting process that’s been fraught with recent conflict.
Commissioner Dwayne Voegeli and three others voted 4-1 last Tuesday to approve a conditional-use permit for the expansion, with Jerry Heim opposed.
The approval capped a three-month process for Lewiston dairy farmer Bill Rowekamp, who plans to expand his dairy operation from 200 to about 350 cows.
In voting for the permit, Voegeli lifted his vow — made in May — not to approve any new conditional-use permits until his concerns with the process were addressed.
Voegeli has criticized the county’s existing policies on conditions for all permits — not just those governing feedlots. He says the conditions are often poorly developed and inconsistently enforced.
But the Second District commissioner now says he sees “significant progress” being made by the county’s planning department, planning staff and other board members.
“They’re going to have, I think, a real conversation,” Voegeli said.
Debate on the Rowekamp permit centered on neighbors’ complaints about odor problems at the site. A home next to Rowekamp’s operation was built before the enactment of current laws that now would require more distance between the two.
Rowekamp said at a July 3 county board meeting that he felt his request “was being held hostage” by the county’s ongoing debate over conditional-use permits.
Commissioner Marcia Ward noted that the Rowekamp permit was the only of four such requests that didn’t receive quick approval after they were submitted in April.
Still, Ward argues that environmental concerns — while valuable — must be weighed against the economic implications of stifling the growth of local agricultural operations.
“There’s a balance of how we protect what we’ve got, and how we allow operations without driving people out,” Ward said.
Voegeli and other officials have advocated for greater focus on environmental concerns when drawing up permit conditions. The area’s unique karst geology creates an unusually high potential for contact between surface-level pollutants and groundwater, Voegeli argues.
State environmental guidelines aren’t always enough to mitigate these concerns, he added.
“Even with those protections, our aquifers are staying as polluted and not getting better,” Voegeli said. “The problem persists.”
Under conditions of the approved permit, Rowekamp will be required to monitor specific chemicals in his manure basins and water wells. Voegeli supplied conditions that will require Rowekamp to mark his property for sinkholes, which could be “direct conduits” for groundwater pollution.
It’s the type of concern that Voegeli says should be more frequently considered when drawing up permits. Among other changes, Voegeli hopes the planning department can tighten its legal backing for permit enforcement by improving communication with the county attorney.
Voegeli praised Rowekamp last Tuesday for agreeing to the 16 permit conditions.
“They are agreeing to abide by standards that are higher than anywhere else in the state,” Voegeli said.
Ward hailed the “good discussions” that took place, but warned that prolonging the permitting process could have a chilling effect on business growth.
“(Business owners) are going to have to think long and hard about our process if they want to expand,” Ward said.
County planning director Brian Bender — whose department has absorbed commissioners’ criticism for its permit enforcement — also was heartened by last week’s turn of events.
“I think this is kind of turning the corner in establishing usability and enforceability of conditions,” Bender said.
The perception of lax enforcement, Bender said, was sometimes due to vaguely written permit conditions.
“Everyone is realizing that conditions can’t just be pulled out of the sky,” Bender said. “They have to be specific, and they have to have benchmarks in them that can be measured.”
