Both sides appear to be wrong in farm bill fight

Two weeks ago both candidates for the 15th Congressional District argued over whether one candidate voted to strip municipalities of their abilities to regulate agriculture. The ability to regulate farms has become part of a hot-button issue in Union County, some of whose residents oppose the construction of a 6-million chicken farm for eggs. They argue it will create air and water pollution from chicken manure.

On Monday, the campaign of Franklin Co. Commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Columbus) reiterated its attack on state Sen. Steve Stivers (R-Columbus) for voting on H.B. 152 while in the Senate. Kilroy’s campaign said the bill “stripped local governments of their ability to issue permits for large factory farms.”

Stivers has said that this 2003 bill that he voted for did not remove local control, but that a 2000 bill was to blame for the absence of local control – adding that he wasn’t a member of the legislature at the time.

However, it appears that neither side was correct.

Stivers’ Senate office told PolitickerOH.com that townships and counties have not been able to regulate agriculture since the 1950s, as stated in sections 303.21 and 519.21 of the Ohio Revised Code. These statutes forbid counties and townships, respectively, from regulating agriculture. Stivers’ office said before 2000, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency was in charge of regulating agriculture but the 2000 legislation transferred regulatory control to the Ohio Department of Agriculture. Stivers himself was incorrect in saying that the 2000 legislation actually stripped localities of control.

Regarding the 2003 legislation Stivers voted on, and which Kilroy accuses of stripping local control, Stivers’ office said this bill clarified existing language about municipalities’ inability to regulate, so that it was clear to them in statute instead of the ODA having to constantly explain to municipalities what the law meant.

Moreover, Stivers’ office points to a court case this year Meerland Dairy v Ross Township (read the opinion here) that upheld revised code section 519.21 for “confer[ring] no power on any” township to prohibit the use of “any land for agricultural purposes or the construction...or use of buildings” for agriculture.

ALSO on PolitickerOH.com:

• Kilroy, Stivers scrap over chicken farm controversy