« Law - Federal law says creditors can't take Social Security and Veteran's benefits to pay debts, but the practice is widespread | Main | Law - Courts in three other states have found traffic restrictions bearing similarities to Louisville's Broadway cruising plan to be unconstitutional »

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Ind. Law - Status of fireworks, serial meeting, and CAFO bills

Fireworks. Angela Mapes of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette writes today in a story that begins:

Local governments can regulate the use of fireworks 352 days a year under a bill that passed Saturday after weeks of tweaking by state lawmakers.

While giving municipalities authority the majority of the year, Senate Bill 9 creates 13 “holy days” centered on major holidays with protected hours. * * *

But some lawmakers worried that the bill would just create confusion if the fireworks regulations varied greatly from one municipality to another. * * *

Under the new bill, local governments can’t limit the use of fireworks between 5 p.m. and two hours after sunset from June 29 through July 9, except on July 4. On July 4, fireworks usage is protected from 10 a.m. to midnight.

From 10 a.m. Dec. 31 to 1 a.m. Jan. 1, fireworks use also is protected, according to the approved bill.

If local governments don’t place their own regulations on fireworks displays, they will remain under the broader state law.

See also the ILB entry from April 26th headed "An improvement to the current fireworks law?"

Serial meetings. From the Evansville C&P:

Lawmakers have passed the so-called "Bob Knight rule" to close the serial-meetings loophole in the Indiana Open Door law and prohibit elected officials from breaking into small groups, behind closed doors, to conduct official business in private that should be conducted in public.

The House on Friday voted 89-6 for the legislation, Senate Bill 103, before the Senate approved it 43-2, sending it to Gov. Mitch Daniels for his consideration. * * *

Although the Knight case was the best-known example, bill author Sen. Beverly Gard said other serial meetings have occurred on elected councils, commissions and boards elsewhere in the state. She recalled one example in her district where council members held a series of impromptu nonpublic gatherings to correct an oversight in a budget they had previously passed.

"That's not the way you do things," Gard said. "I don't think it was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the public process; I think it was expeditious on their part, because they were down to the wire. I think they just didn't think it through."

Rep. Russ Stilwell, D-Boonville, said the Senate bill now incorporates provisions from a similar serial-meetings bill he got passed in the House.

Under the bill, Indiana's Open Door Law would be violated if the following criteria were met:

- One of the gatherings is attended by at least three members of a governing body but less than a quorum, and the other gatherings include at least two members.

- The total number of members attending the gatherings equals a quorum.

- All the gatherings concern the same subject matter and are held within seven days.

- The gatherings are for the purpose of taking official action, which includes receiving information, deliberating, making decisions or taking final action.

Serial meetings would include in-person gatherings or telephone conversations but not e-mail. They would not include such things as social gatherings, a political caucus to discuss strategy, or gatherings to discuss an industrial or commercial prospect that did not result in recommendations or decisions.

Senate Bill 103 would allow anyone who alleges that serial meetings had occurred to file a lawsuit in court seeking to invalidate any policy or decision that was made based in whole or in part on such behind-closed-door gatherings.

Confined Feeding. Angela Mapes writes in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette:
A bill that would increase inspections required for confined animal feeding operations has come under threat because lawmakers can’t agree on a key point.

A House version of a bill brought by Rep. Phil Pflum, D-Milton, included a prohibition against new confined operations locating within 1 mile of a city or school.

Pflum wants that provision included in Senate Bill 431, the one confined feeding bill still alive before the legislature, but Senate leadership is balking at the idea.

Confined and concentrated feeding operations raise hundreds to thousands of cows, pigs and chickens in a small area and store treated waste in lagoons or apply it to acreage.

Sen. Beverly Gard, R-Greenfield, chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Environmental Affairs Committee, believes applying a 1-mile setback to all confined feeding operations would be a mistake.

Local governments should regulate where confined feeding operations locate, Gard said Friday.

A one-size-fits-all approach would be impractical at best and dangerous to the environment at worst, said Gard, a former biochemist. Geography specific to application locations, such as aquifers, can affect whether an application site is suitable for a confined feeding operation.

City and counties can pass zoning regulations on confined feeding operations, including where the operations can locate, although many communities have not done so.

If Pflum won’t sign off on the bill because of the setback issue, he will keep the other beneficial parts of the bill from passing, Gard said.

By increasing fees, the proposal gives the Indiana Department of Environmental Management resources to inspect confined feeding operations more often.

The approximately 2,300 operations in Indiana now are inspected about once every seven years, or in response to specific complaints.

The bill also would require applicants to disclose past environmental violations. Pending applications would be included in the requirement, Gard said. * * *

But to Pflum, the entire point is the setback and what he believes it would do to protect homeowners – protection many local governments don’t currently offer.

“Our home is our sanctuary,” he said. “It’s all about location.”

Rep. Thomas Saunders, R-Lewisville, agreed, saying the state already regulates how close sex offenders can locate near schools – and regulates setbacks related to landfills and liquor stores –and that a setback for confined feeding operations is no different.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 29, 2007 09:39 AM
Posted to Indiana Government | Indiana Law