Feed for /2003/related/acts/235 PDF
Date of enactment: April 13, 2004
2003 Assembly Bill 868 Date of publication*: April 27, 2004
* Section 991.11, Wisconsin Statutes 2001-02 : Effective date of acts. "Every act and every portion of an act enacted by the legislature over the governor's partial veto which does not expressly prescribe the time when it takes effect shall take effect on the day after its date of publication as designated" by the secretary of state [the date of publication may not be more than 10 working days after the date of enactment].
2003 WISCONSIN ACT 235
An Act to create 15.135 (1), 93.90 and 165.25 (4) (as) of the statutes; relating to: the siting and expansion of certain livestock facilities, local zoning ordinances relating to livestock facilities, creating a Livestock Facility Siting Review Board, and granting rule-making authority.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:
235,1 Section 1. 15.135 (1) of the statutes is created to read:
15.135 (1) Livestock facility siting review board. (a) There is created a livestock facility siting review board which is attached to the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection under s. 15.03. The board consists of the following members:
1. A member representing the interests of towns, selected from a list of names submitted by the Wisconsin Towns Association.
2. A member representing the interests of counties, selected from a list of names submitted by the Wisconsin Counties Association.
3. A member representing environmental interests, selected from a list of names submitted by environmental organizations.
4. A member representing livestock farming interests, selected from a list of names submitted by statewide agricultural organizations.
5. Three other members.
(b) The members under par. (a) shall be nominated by the secretary of agriculture, trade and consumer protection, and with the advice and consent of the senate appointed, for 5-year terms.
235,2 Section 2. 93.90 of the statutes is created to read:
93.90 Livestock facility siting and expansion. (1) This section is an enactment of statewide concern for the purpose of providing uniform regulation of livestock facilities.
(1m) Definitions. In this section:
(a) "Animal unit" has the meaning given in s. NR 243.03 (3), Wis. Adm. Code.
(b) "Application for approval" means an application for approval of a livestock facility siting or expansion.
(c) "Board" means the livestock facility siting review board.
(d) "Expansion" means an increase in the number of animals fed, confined, maintained, or stabled.
(e) "Livestock facility" means a feedlot or facility, other than a pasture, where animals used in the production of food, fiber, or other animal products are or will be fed, confined, maintained, or stabled for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period. "Livestock facility" does not include an aquaculture facility.
(f) "Political subdivision" means a city, village, town, or county.
(2) Department duties. (a) For the purposes of this section, the department shall promulgate rules specifying standards for siting and expanding livestock facilities. In promulgating the rules, the department may incorporate by cross-reference provisions contained in rules promulgated under ss. 92.05 (3) (c) and (k), 92.14 (8), 92.16, and 281.16 (3) and ch. 283. The department may not promulgate rules under this paragraph that conflict with rules promulgated under s. 92.05 (3) (c) or (k), 92.14 (8), 92.16, or 281.16 (3) or ch. 283.
(b) In promulgating rules under par. (a), the department shall consider whether the proposed standards, other than those incorporated by cross-reference, are all of the following:
1. Protective of public health or safety.
1m. Practical and workable.
2. Cost-effective.
3. Objective.
4. Based on available scientific information that has been subjected to peer review.
5. Designed to promote the growth and viability of animal agriculture in this state.
6. Designed to balance the economic viability of farm operations with protecting natural resources and other community interests.
7. Usable by officials of political subdivisions.
(c) The department shall review rules promulgated under par. (a) at least once every 4 years.
(d) The secretary shall appoint a committee of experts to advise the department on the promulgation of the rules under par. (a) and on the review of rules under par. (c).
(e) In addition to the rules under par. (a), the department shall promulgate rules that do all of the following:
1. Specify the information and documentation that must be provided in an application for approval in order to demonstrate that a livestock facility siting or expansion complies with applicable state standards under sub. (2) (a).
2. Specify the information and documentation that must be included in a record of decision making under sub. (4) (b).
(3) Political subdivision authority. (a) Notwithstanding ss. 33.455, 59.03 (2) (a), 59.69, 60.10 (2) (i), 60.61, 60.62, 61.34 (1), 61.35, 62.11 (5), 62.23, 66.0415, 92.07 (2), 92.11, and 92.15 (3) (a), a political subdivision may not disapprove or prohibit a livestock facility siting or expansion unless at least one of the following applies:
1. The site is located in a zoning district that is not an agricultural zoning district.
2. The site is located in an agricultural zoning district in which the proposed new or expanded livestock facility is prohibited, subject to pars. (b) and (c).
3. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility violates an ordinance adopted under s. 59.692, 59.693, 60.627, 61.351, 61.354, 62.231, 62.234, or 87.30.
4. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility violates a building, electrical, or plumbing code that is consistent with the state building, electrical, or plumbing code for that type of facility.
5. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility will have 500 or more animal units and violates a state standard under sub. (2) (a).
6. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility will have 500 or more animal units and violates a requirement that is more stringent than the state standards under sub. (2) (a) if the political subdivision does all of the following:
a. Adopts the requirement by ordinance before the applicant files the application for approval.
b. Bases the requirement on reasonable and scientifically defensible findings of fact, adopted by the political subdivision, that clearly show that the requirement is necessary to protect public health or safety.
8. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility will have fewer than 500 animal units but will exceed a size threshold for requiring a special exception or conditional use permit that was incorporated into the political subdivision's ordinances before July 19, 2003, and the proposed new or expanded livestock facility violates a state standard under sub. (2) (a).
9. The proposed new or expanded livestock facility will have fewer than 500 animal units but will exceed a size threshold for requiring a special exception or conditional use permit that was incorporated into the political subdivision's ordinances before July 19, 2003, and the proposed new or expanded livestock facility violates a requirement that is more stringent than the state standards under sub. (2) (a) if the political subdivision does all of the following:
a. Adopts the requirement by ordinance before the applicant files the application for approval.
b. Bases the requirement on reasonable and scientifically defensible findings of fact, adopted by the political subdivision, that clearly show that the requirement is necessary to protect public health or safety.
(ae) A political subdivision that requires a special exception or conditional use permit for the siting or expansion of any of the following livestock facilities shall require compliance with the applicable state standards under sub. (2) (a) as a condition of issuing the special exception or conditional use permit:
1. A new or expanded livestock facility that will have 500 or more animal units.
2. A new or expanded livestock facility that will have fewer than 500 animal units but that will exceed a size threshold for requiring a special exception or conditional use permit that was incorporated into the political subdivision's ordinances before July 19, 2003.
(am) Notwithstanding par. (ae), a political subdivision may apply to a new or expanded livestock facility described in par. (ae) 1. or 2., as a condition of issuing a special exception or conditional use permit, a setback requirement that is less stringent than a setback requirement under sub. (2) (a) if the setback requirement is incorporated in the political subdivision's ordinances as a numerical standard.
(ar) Notwithstanding par. (ae) a political subdivision may apply to a new or expanded livestock facility described in par. (ae) 1. or 2., as a condition of issuing a special exception or conditional use permit, a requirement that is more stringent than the state standards under sub. (2) (a) if the political subdivision does all of the following:
1. Adopts the requirement by ordinance before the applicant files the application for approval.
2. Bases the requirement on reasonable and scientifically defensible findings of fact, adopted by the political subdivision, that clearly show that the requirement is necessary to protect public health or safety.
(b) Notwithstanding ss. 59.69, 60.61, 60.62, 61.35, and 62.23, a political subdivision may not prohibit a type of livestock facility in an agricultural zoning district based on number of animal units if livestock facilities of that type with fewer animal units are allowed in that zoning district, unless the political subdivision also has an agricultural zoning district in which livestock facilities of that type are permitted or conditional uses without respect to number of animal units.
(c) Notwithstanding ss. 59.69, 60.61, 60.62, 61.35, and 62.23, a political subdivision may not enact or enforce a zoning ordinance with a category of agricultural district in which livestock facilities are prohibited unless the political subdivision bases that prohibition on reasonable and scientifically defensible findings of fact, adopted by the political subdivision, that clearly show that the prohibition is necessary to protect public health or safety.
Loading...
Loading...