I agree with Kay Syvrud's letter (Sunday, May 14) about the Clay County Board's zoning blunders, but would like to point out that the bungling may be worse than she or most other Clay County residents realize.
As testament that foresight continues to be their weak point, the board's July 2005, zoning code revision expresses what could mildly be described as a "tough luck" attitude toward those of us who have bought rural properties. It is riddled with language that chides us for our residential choice and is accompanied by a new requirement that applicants for building permits sign a statement that they will not complain to the county about noise, odor, or traffic "nuisances" posed by farm or aggregate operations.
By attempting to dismiss the problems posed by feedlots as mere annoyances, the board has abdicated responsibility for dealing with the real environmental, safety, and property value issues that go with them. Permitting and inspection of feedlots is the domain of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, not the county, but the zoning ordinance fails to address issues that are well within the county's control. It falls far short of what should be an obvious goal: establishing codes that preserve agricultural land while making the most of the tax revenue opportunity presented by an ever-increasing number of potential rural home owners.
The Clay County Board has indeed created an unfortunate division between rural residents and agricultural producers - unfortunate because we have so many interests in common. The current membership seems incapable of rising to the challenge of finding ways for farmers and rural residents to share the land as we did just a few years ago - like neighbors.
Kathleen Pettis-Smith
ADVERTISEMENT
Hawley, Minn.
