Noem's proposal to streamline county zoning clears committee

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) — Gov. Kristi Noem's proposal to overhaul the decision-making process for county zoning permits, including getting rid of a two-thirds majority vote requirement in some counties and making it more difficult to appeal permits once they are granted, cleared a Senate committee on Wednesday.

The proposal would pave the way for an increase in feedlots, an issue that has led to disputes and lawsuits in county zoning board decisions across the state. Opponents say Noem's proposal strips locals of their ability to influence zoning decisions and check the growth of feedlots and other projects that harm the environment. The Republican governor argues that it would spur investment in rural communities.

Noem made the unusual move of appearing before the committee on behalf of the bill.

“All of us have seen how broken this process is and how important it is that we fix it,” she told legislators.

Noem said the bill would create a more predictable environment for investors and would help the next generation of farmers stay in the state. The bill would also apply to mining, wind farms and other agriculture infrastructure projects.

Jerry Schmidt, the president of the South Dakota Soybean Grower's Association, called the proposal, “a first step in breathing life back to our shrinking communities.”

Several agriculture groups, chambers of commerce, banker associations and the South Dakota Association of County Commissioners supported the bill.

Travis Mockler, a farmer and Clay County commissioner, said the Sierra Club sued him over a permit he requested a year ago. He wanted to build a feedlot to provide a way for his children to take over his farm, but said he does not have the money for a prolonged legal battle with the environmental organization.

A growing number of feedlots, or concentrated animal feeding operations that can hold thousands of animals in a small area, have sparked controversy in the state.

Opponents point to problems in neighboring Iowa, where corporate farms pollute the air, contaminate water, and have been linked to ailments such as asthma.

The South Dakota Stock Growers Association, conservation groups, the Yankton Sioux tribe and several individual farmers spoke in opposition to the bill.

Both sides claimed they were on the side of “local control" — a popular phrase in the halls of the conservative-dominated Capitol.

Noem has argued that the bill ensures local boards have control over decisions that she says could otherwise be “hijacked by a vocal few.” The bill would take away the two-thirds majority vote requirement that some counties have for permits and replace it with a simple majority of the board members present at a meeting.

Opponents argued that some projects should have that high bar to receive a permit because of the lasting affects they have on the local environment.

Nick Nemec, a rancher and former legislator, said the proposed law would “steamroll” locals who want to make their voice heard in the zoning process.

The process is already open, fair and allows for people who know the local conditions best to make decisions, said Rebecca Terk, a lobbyist with Dakota Rural Action, a farmer-led conservation group. She argued that the permitting processes should vary from county to county because each community is unique and has different concerns.

Noem's proposal would give county officials the option to grant one type of permit based on a checklist of requirements without holding public meetings. Some counties already have that process in place.

It would also make it more difficult for people to appeal permits once they’re granted. The bill would give people three weeks to appeal the approval of a permit and require counties to make a decision on appeals within 60 days. It would only allow people who are “legitimately aggrieved” to file an appeal, require a two-thirds vote from county boards to reverse a permit decision, and make people who sue counties over the decision liable for attorney’s fees and damages.

It will next be considered by the full Senate.