Cerro Gordo supervisors hold public hearing on proposed health-nuisance ordinance after farmers raise right-to-farm concerns

Cerro Gordo County supervisors opened a public hearing Sept. 8 on proposed Ordinance 11C, a county health-nuisance ordinance that includes expanded definitions and civil penalties. Several rural residents raised concerns that the language is vague and could conflict with Iowa’s right-to-farm protections.

The ordinance draft, presented by county public-health staff, updates definitions of nuisances and changes enforcement from a simple misdemeanor to civil penalties. A public-health representative told the board, “This has been brought forth to our board of health and signed and approved.”

The matter drew multiple public speakers from unincorporated parts of the county. Matthew Doan of Thornton told the board, “I have some serious concerns concerning this ordinance, mainly due to the fact of the legality of it and how it affects farmers. The state of Iowa has a right to farm law. As such, farmers have nuisance immunity.” Other residents raised similar points about specific draft provisions—dense vegetation, vermin lists, and timelines for removal of dead animals and waste pickup.

County public-health staff said some definitions in the draft were taken from Iowa Code and that the intent is to focus enforcement on closer-living proximities—neighborhoods such as Mason City or Clear Lake—rather than routine agricultural operations. Staff described the department’s usual process as complaint-driven: inspectors contact the property owner, confirm whether a plan is in place, and work with residents to close complaints. “We don’t go on people’s property looking for abandoned cars, or trying to find, nuisances. It's not a gotcha type of thing,” a public-health representative said.

Speakers cited specific operational concerns: the ash-borer problem that has led some farmers to burn debris, the frequency of private haulers collecting carcasses, and the practical presence of rodents and wild animals on working farms. One resident noted a previous road-side carcass incident that persisted for more than a week and asked whether the proposed time frames in the ordinance would allow for routine collection routes.

Supervisors discussed the process and public input during the meeting. Several supervisors said they were not comfortable waiving later readings and wanted more time for public comment. One supervisor summarized the board’s approach: approving the ordinance’s first reading would keep the process moving while allowing county health to refine language and publish notice for further comment. The county health representative said staff could provide revised language “by the end of the week” and would take changes back to the Board of Health for approval before returning to the supervisors.

The board moved to adopt the ordinance for the initial reading to allow more public comment and staff revisions; the roll-call vote and tally were not specified in the meeting transcript. Supervisors clarified that a first-reading approval would not make the ordinance immediately enforceable and that the board would not waive subsequent readings without further notice.

The county health department and the Board of Health are expected to revise the draft and publish a new notice of public comment and hearing dates; the department said it will work to include clearer definitions and timing tied to services such as carcass collection.

If enacted as changed after additional readings, the ordinance would apply to unincorporated areas of Cerro Gordo County and to incorporated areas only if those municipalities choose to partner with the county’s program.

Next steps: county health staff will draft revisions and return the ordinance to the Board of Health, then publish notice of subsequent readings and hearings for additional public comment.