Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: All right, we're back. Took a little recess, a little break, can hear what you've got in sight.
[Joseph "Joe" Major (Vice Chair)]: Oh, thanks. The great minds we got together in the other room over there, along with counsel. In reference to two and three, I guess at this point in time, we have some additional language we'd like to just leave it as it is, but we have some additional language we'd like to add to it. Counsel O'Grady can go over the concept at this point in time, and then we can look at a potential addition or amendment to the
[Counsel O'Grady]: So I don't have the specific language yet, but the concern was raised that just someone with a subjective complaint could go before a court, provide testimony, and then somehow convince a judge that there was a noxious and significant interference or that there was a substantial adverse effect on health, safety, or welfare. One of the things that you could do is you could provide that in order to show a substantial adverse effect, they have to provide objective medical documentation of the adverse effect being caused by or related to the agricultural activity. So it's not just your witness's testimony. It's not just the judge interviewing neighbors and saying, oh, when they land applied manure, I got a runny nose or my eyes watered or it was really, really smelly. You would have to show an actual adverse health effect based on objective medical documentation.
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: Something real. Yeah.
[Joseph "Joe" Major (Vice Chair)]: And then
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: That's really what we are that's really where the sticking point with us is. It's just not somebody Mhmm. You know, making a claim. We've gotta back it.
[Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: And then for safety, there'd be something comparable.
[Counsel O'Grady]: There'd be something comparable. Was
[Joseph "Joe" Major (Vice Chair)]: that was that it?
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: That's it. We do that.
[Joseph "Joe" Major (Vice Chair)]: Can we see the language? Let's let's see the language first that you come up with before we do anything. I'd like to say it also. Yeah, why don't you guys see it first and decide if you want to make that intergrational proposal.
[Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: We'll ping up if if you guys wanna try and
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: We'll let
[Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: before then or
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: We'll let your I mean, we'll let counsel O'Grady ping us and ping Bob or whatever you'd like and I have What do you think, counsel?
[Counsel O'Grady]: I I I'm not gonna be done by six. Let's be real.
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: No. No. No. We know that.
[Joseph "Joe" Major (Vice Chair)]: No. How about seven? Let's let's say seven. Seven sounds good.
[Brian Collamore (Member)]: What are we fine with that, counsel?
[Counsel O'Grady]: I'll get you the senate company's language before that. Oh, yeah.
[Russ Ingalls (Chair)]: That's correct. If that doesn't