Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Control Amicus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mitchell County votes to contribute $500 toward ISAC amicus brief defending local zoning authority
Summary
The Mitchell County Board of Supervisors voted to contribute $500 to an Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC) amicus curiae brief in Kucera v. Shelby County, a case argued as raising questions about whether pipeline safety claims preempt local zoning. The decision followed debate over budget source and prior notice.
At its Nov. 3 meeting, the Mitchell County Board of Supervisors voted to provide a $500 contribution to an Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC) amicus curiae brief in Kucera v. Shelby County, a legal dispute the board described as having potential to affect counties' local zoning authority.
The request was introduced by a supervisor who said the brief "is being filed on behalf of ISAC's membership, and it makes the argument that highlights the importance of local control," and asked counties to consider a minimum contribution of $500 toward ISAC's $25,000 fundraising goal to underwrite the filing at the U.S. Supreme Court. The presenter said ISAC had hosted a webinar about the issue on Oct. 29 and distributed supporting materials and a draft of the brief to member counties.
Several supervisors questioned whether the solicitation should be paid from the current year's budget or included in next year's budget planning. One supervisor said they had not received ISAC's mailing or emails and asked why ISAC had not presented directly to the board before requesting funds. The presenter replied that ISAC had sent letters and electronic notices to county chairs and that funding needed to be secured by Nov. 21.
Board members also discussed prior legal work related to the dispute, noting invoices from attorney Tim Whipple on pipeline and zoning issues. The presenter clarified that the Shelby and Story County litigation has progressed through federal courts and that ISAC's requested contribution would support taking related questions about preemption and local zoning to the Supreme Court.
During the roll call vote the board recorded: Jim — No; Tom — No; Mark — Yes; Pam — Yes; Sydney — No. The clerk announced the motion as passed.
Public commenters and a resident named Lisa urged support for ISAC and pointed the board to the ISAC webinar (iocounties.org/meetings) and argued the issue could affect water use, mining and other county planning decisions. One supervisor said they planned to make a personal contribution to the ISAC effort.
The board did not attach additional conditions or a follow-up report to the vote; funding was authorized at the $500 level as announced at the meeting.
