Residents press DeKalb County for moratorium and tighter rules after chicken‑barn concerns

A group of residents asked DeKalb County commissioners on Aug. 12 to halt approvals of large off‑grid poultry operations until the county updates zoning and permitting rules.

Scott Syer, who said he lives at 5038 County Road 52, told the board he and other neighbors are worried the proposed chicken barn would set a precedent for ‘high‑intensity’ agricultural buildings without setbacks, air‑quality mitigation or adequate erosion controls. “This project is a precedent,” Syer said, urging the county to consider setbacks of 700 to 800 feet and other model ordinance provisions he cited from an Indiana land‑use guide.

Syer and other speakers pointed to an independent review by Indiana’s inspection contractor (IDM) that flagged the site’s lack of adequate silt fencing, graded swales directing sediment to a field drainage channel, and other construction‑phase erosion concerns. “IDM has concerns about the swale,” a commenter summarized, saying the firm marked the current sediment controls as inadequate and noted sediment‑laden runoff flows through the field.

County staff told the commissioners the developer has obtained an IDEM construction general permit. Planning staff (Cameron) said the site is operating under that permit, that check dams and a sediment trap have been installed and that additional seeding and best‑management practices (BMPs) are in progress. Cameron said he planned to visit the site and that the applicant provided documentation and photographs showing BMP installation.

But residents pressed for stronger long‑term controls, not just construction‑phase fixes. They raised concerns about manure handling, the fate of mortalities, on‑site stockpiling and the potential use of older generators that may not meet EPA Tier‑4 emissions standards. Speakers asked the board to invite the property owner and a State Fire Bureau representative for a dedicated briefing so commissioners could hear directly about animal‑handling protocols, dead‑bird disposal and emergency response plans.

Commissioners discussed process options. County legal staff said a moratorium modeled on the 2019 solar moratorium would most appropriately begin at the plan commission level because current zoning allows these uses; a county‑level moratorium would likely be limited to future permits and could be legally vulnerable if applied retroactively. Commissioners asked staff to research the legal route to pause future permits and to coordinate a hearing where the property owner and relevant state officials could present information in a focused session rather than a public back‑and‑forth.

What happens next: staff said they will coordinate with planning staff and with Jesse (the property contact) to schedule a presentation and to provide the IDM/IDEM paperwork and photographs the commissioners requested. The board did not adopt a moratorium at the Aug. 12 meeting.