Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Meeting participants agree to revise nuisance-protection language for agricultural activity
Summary
Participants in a meeting agreed to change wording in a nuisance-protection provision so a plaintiff must prove one or more specified elements and that “sole” causation will be replaced with a proximate-cause standard for agricultural activities; staff was directed to prepare the revised text for signatures.
Meeting participants agreed to revised wording clarifying when a plaintiff may overcome nuisance protection for an agricultural activity and to replace a "sole" causation standard with a proximate-cause standard, speakers said.
The change discussed would require the plaintiff to demonstrate one or more of the listed elements to pierce nuisance protection. Under the revised language described during the discussion, subsection 3 would require the plaintiff to show that a reasonable person would find the agricultural activity was the proximate cause of a "noxious and significant interference" with the use and enjoyment of neighboring property.
"We agree. Yep. We agree. We're good. I reluctantly agree," said Speaker 1, meeting participant, in apparent concurrence with the wording as summarized by another participant.
Speaker 2, meeting participant, summarized the drafting changes and proposed next steps: "I go make the change and I can either give it to one of you to get the signatures or I can track it down." That participant indicated they would prepare the revised text and circulate it for signature.
The discussion focused on wording and standards of proof; no formal motion or recorded vote was taken during the excerpt provided. Participants explicitly framed the revisions as edits to the existing nuisance-protection provision rather than as a final adopted ordinance or regulation.
The language points discussed included (1) placing the burden on the plaintiff to demonstrate one or more enumerated grounds to overcome nuisance protection, (2) replacing a "sole" causation term with a proximate-cause standard, and (3) applying a reasonable-person test to determine whether the agricultural activity caused a noxious and significant interference with neighboring property use and enjoyment.
The meeting excerpt did not specify the governing code, ordinance number, or when the revised language would be formally considered or adopted. Speaker 2 indicated only that they would update the draft and obtain signatures, and participants did not state a formal timeline for further consideration.
