Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Neighbors press Gage County board over water, odor and prior burns at public hearing for 8‑barn Ash Road Poultry proposal
Loading...
Summary
An applicant seeking a special use permit for an 8‑barn poultry site in northern Gage County described operations, water tests and manure management, while multiple neighbors raised concerns about pond levels, air quality (alleged burning of construction waste), property values, road wear and the potential for further expansions; the board closed the hearing and deferred a vote for two weeks.
The Gage County Board of Supervisors opened a public hearing on Special Use Permit 2026-2 for an eight-barn poultry operation proposed by Roy Mulder of Ash Road Poultry. Planning staff presented the packet, including UNL livestock matrix scoring and setback maps, and the board voted to open the hearing.
Roy Mulder, the applicant, described the proposed site as roughly 25 acres with eight 43-by-510-foot barns to grow Smart Chicken broilers. "I submitted an application to build 8 chicken barns in Northern Gage County," Mulder said, and explained his day-to-day flock management: two barns equal one flock, about 48–50 days per flock, and approximately 5.5 flocks per year. He discussed manure handling, composting mortalities, DEQ oversight, and said a test hole showed a well capable of "300 gallon a minute," exceeding Smart Chicken’s 15 gallons-per-minute requirement for an eight-barn site.
Multiple neighbors objected during the hearing. Jennifer Oberg said residents remain "totally against this," and alleged a prior air-quality incident: "he was burning all his plastic stuff from his insulation from his barns," she said, and said the state air-quality authority inspected and required disposal receipts. Jeff Oberg testified: "We have air quality problems in our area from this chicken farm that's presently there," citing recurring odors and a pattern he said correlates with barn cleanouts and manure movement.
Several speakers raised water concerns and property impacts. Pat Bair said a nearby pond is drying and asked "What's that doing to our property value?" Brett Bernheidi, identifying himself as an agronomist, used applicant-provided numbers to illustrate seasonal water use and urged verification of water figures. Deb Keys, whose family has held their farm for more than 100 years, said she is "totally against this" unless the facility is sited away from residential areas.
Supporters and the applicant emphasized local investment and tax revenue. Mulder said his existing operations have contributed property taxes and that the operation supplies organic feed and manure that farmers value as fertilizer; he also offered to cost-share rock and grading on township roads to accommodate truck traffic. Planning staff reiterated that the application included required documentation — road-superintendent review, well review, and matrix scoring — and noted planning and zoning had recommended approval (5–0 with two absent).
The board accepted public testimony and recorded a protest petition presented by neighbors; counsel noted a petition with signatures meeting the county’s protest threshold would trigger a supermajority requirement if validated. After hearing all speakers, the board moved to close the public hearing and voted to come out of hearing; the chair said the permit will return to the board agenda in two weeks for further discussion and a vote. No final action was taken at the meeting.
The record contains contested technical claims (water use and well capacity), prior compliance actions (air-quality inspection and disposal receipts claimed by a neighbor and acknowledged by the applicant), and petitions from adjacent landowners. The board directed staff to include the application packet and submitted protest materials in the hearing record for the upcoming agenda.