2 barred from hog farm appeal

Green blocks water commissioners from role on Callaway CAFO project

Callaway Farrowing LLC proposes operating a Kingdom City hog farm with about 10,000 hogs in Callaway County.
Callaway Farrowing LLC proposes operating a Kingdom City hog farm with about 10,000 hogs in Callaway County.

When two members of Missouri's Clean Water Commission took an impromptu look at a proposed Callaway County combined animal feeding operation (CAFO) site last year, they became ineligible to decide the site's future, Cole County Circuit Judge Dan Green ruled this week.
State law "expressly confines the Clean Water Commission to only consider 'facts and evidence' that were introduced at the hearing conducted by the Administrative Hearing Commission," Green explained in an eight-page judgment Tuesday.
"By driving by and observing the location and topography of the site of the Callaway Farrowing CAFO while the permit appeal was pending before them, Chairman (Ben A. "Todd") Parnell and Commissioner (Ashley) McCarty obtained 'facts and evidence' directly regarding the Callaway Farrowing permit appeal outside the hearing record."
Green ordered Parnell and McCarty not to participate in the commission's discussion or vote on the permit appeal for the proposed CAFO.
Commissioners who did not attend the CAFO tours can take part in a decision on the Callaway Farrowing permit.
Eichelberger Farms Inc, based in Wayland, Iowa, had proposed operating the Callaway Farrowing CAFO with 9,520 swine over 55 pounds and another 800 swine under 55 pounds.
A non-profit group, Friends of Responsible Agriculture - formed to fight the proposed hog farm and its feared odors and polluted run-off - challenged the state's general operating permit granted to Callaway Farrowing in 2014.
The "Friends" group asked the Administrative Hearing Commission to block the permit.
After, the AHC conducted its hearing in February 2015, but before issuing its opinion, officials "arranged" for Clean Water Commission members to tour different CAFO facilities, Green noted.
The notice of the tours only named one of the three facilities to be visited, and the Callaway Farrowing site wasn't included in that notice.
"While the decision to schedule the CAFO tours," the Callaway Farrowing permit appeal still was pending "is certainly questionable," Green wrote, "the Court gives the Clean Water Commission the benefit of the doubt that the tours of (three) facilities were for educational purposes and were not directly related to the Callaway Farrowing permit appeal."
But a staff suggestion some commissioners "drive by" the proposed Callaway Farrowing site was inconsistent with state law requirements for commissioners to make decisions based only on evidence presented in a hearing.
Additionally, the judge said, opponents had no notice of the spur of the moment visit and were adversely affected by being denied proper public notice and the opportunity to attend the tours.
Although the remaining Clean Water Commission members still could uphold Callaway Farrowing's permit, Green wrote, "the facts and circumstances of this case show unequivocally there is an extreme necessity for preventative action" to the commission's consideration of the Callaway Farrowing permit appeal.