HIGHFILL — The community of Highfill is facing several tough decisions as city council members struggle to decide how to integrate the town’s rural farming heritage with the realities of being an incorporated and planned city.

At the April 12 meeting, city council took up the issues of whether the city’s planning and zoning committee should have the authority to regulate where concentrated animal feeding operations, such as poultry farms, can be built and the question of how close to a home an animal shelter can be built.

While the issues in question are completely separate, they both affect former mayor Chris Holland’s efforts to build a $2 million poultry farm on his land. He appeared before the council, along with Don Wilson - who is both his attorney and uncle - and more than 17 community members in support of his position. The two issues also directly effect Larry Barnes, who recently completed building a poultry farm across the street from Chris Holland’s property and told the council he would be getting his first chickens at 8 a.m. the next morning.

By land area, Highfill is the largest city in Benton County, but the town has a population of just over 700 people. A largepercentage of the town’s residents are farmers who have lived on the land for generations. But with the development of the Northwest Arkansas Airport and the booming growth Benton County has experienced over the past 10 years, there are also manynewcomers living in the city’s newly-developed subdivisions.

Dallas Cross, a resident of the Holland Hills Estates subdivision, also came to themeeting to represent himself and his neighbors who do not want a poultry farm near their homes. Holland Hills Estates is located catty-corner to Chris Holland’s property on West Holland Avenue. The row of recently built upscale homes stands on land that was used for a hog farm 10 years ago.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

After a heated debate about whether the terms “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations” should be in the zoning code, five council members voted to recommend the planning and zoning commission omit the phrase from the code and set a date for a public hearing on April 26.

Councilwoman Sandy Evans abstaned from voting on the motion.

Both Barnes’ and Chris Holland’s property is zoned Rural Residential. Under current zoning regulations, permitted uses of the land include farms, ranches and stables, single family residences, in-home day-cares, manufactured homes and accessory buildings and uses.

There are a number of conditional uses for rural residential land - ranging from churches and parks to plant nurseries - including concentrated animal feeding operations.

In order to comply with the zoning code, Holland and Barnes, or anyone else who would like to use their land for one of the conditional uses, would have to pay a $200 application fee and present how they proposed to use the land to the planning and zoning committee, hold a public hearing and then go before the city council for final approval.

At Monday’s meeting, Chris Holland and his attorney asked the council to strike the CAFO terminology from the zoning code altogether and suspend any action against him until a decision is made.

CAFO is terminology used by the federal government’s Environmental Protection Agency and deals with issues regulating water pollution. TheEPA’s definition is dependent on the species and numbers of animals, and concentrates on whether animals are confined for more than 45 days and are producing pollution. The problem is that Highfill’s code does not define what qualifies as a CAFO.

CAFOs are already regulated very closely by the state and federal government. The city will only be adding unnecessary burden to farmers by adding its own regulations, Chris Holland and Wilson argued.

Barnes said delays in deciding the issue could cost Chris Holland thousands of dollars or even his contract.

Undefined, the term CAFO could cause anyone with a few cows or horses, or even a handful of chickens in theiryard, to be in violation, Chris Holland told the council. Because the council members are also farmers, they are probably in violation of the code as well, he said.

Chris Holland told the council that he was going to make a list of everyone else in Highfill who was in violation of the code and insist the city enforce the code in their instances as well. The more people the city goes after, the more people who will come back and pressure the city to change the code, he told the council.

The council asked code enforcement officer Rob Holland - also Chris Holland’s brother - what percentage of the city was in violation of the code.

“Probably half if I were a guessing man ... To be quite honest with you, I would have to put a pencil to it,” he said.

Barnes speculated that more than 75 percent of the town was in violation of the code and told the council he felt that both he and Chris Holland had been singled out by the city.

Mayor Stacy Digby said the city only recently became aware of the CAFO terminology in the zoning code after the residents of the Holland Hills Estates brought it to his attention. The zoning code is posted on the city website.

Evans jumped out of her seat, pointed her finger at Rob Holland and shouted out, using coarse language, that it is Rob Holland’s job to know the zoning codes.

Barnes said that as soon as the city became aware of the code, Rob Holland brought the proper paperwork to Barnes and Chris Holland to notify them they could be in violation.

Cross told the council that when he moved into the subdivision, he never imagined having chicken houses right across the street.

“I don’t think anyone wants to live next to a chicken house,” Cross said, expressing concerns that a poultry farm wouldbring down property values and could make it difficult to sell the 22 undeveloped lots in the subdivision.

Questions of why the code was originally written, who wouldbe ultimately responsible for enforcing it, when fines would be issued, how to go about changing the code and how Chris Holland should proceed were discussed at great length. The ensuing debate stirred up strong feelings from both sides of the issue.

Councilwoman Michelle Rieff, along with several community members, asked the council to waive the fines until the issue was decided.

If the code is enforced it could affect a number of farmers. Property owners whose farms were built before the code was written would be grandfathered in, city attorney Steve Miller said, but those who are in violation of the code would have to pay the $200 fee and go through the process of acquiring a conditionaluse permit.

“It’s possible there are situations where people have been in violation for years,” said alderman Toby Lester.

“What about us youngfarmers that want to keep this town going and want to keep farming going? Why do we have to jump through all these hoops that our parents didn’t? It’s ridiculous,” said Gary Holland, Jr. “I want to save the opportunities our parents always had. By gosh, if that gets taken away from us, that’s ridiculous. Have you ever eaten chicken?” he asked Cross. “I mean somebody’s got to do it.”

Digby said that Chris Holland and Barnes had only been advised that they could be in violation and no action had yet been taken against them.

Miller pointed out that the zoning code doesn’t rule out building CAFO’s; it just gives the planning and zoning committee some control over where and how they can be built.

“We need to either A define it (CAFO), or B take it out (of the code),” said Digby.

The issue will be discussed at the next planning and zoning committee meeting set for April 26. A public hearing will also be held on the matter, and the date will be advertised when the hearing is set, Digby said. In the meantime, the city is organizing a sub-committee to solicit public feedback on the matter, he said.

Four council members at the April 12 meeting voted to do away with an ordinance that does not allow structures intended for animal housing to be built within 600 feet of a home. Evans voted against the measure.

On Monday, Digby said it was the council’s intention to abolish the ordinance but it was not legally rescinded. Under state law, changing city code or ordinance must be done by ordinance, with three required readings. The matter is set to be revisited at next month’s council meeting, Digby said.

News, Pages 1 on 04/20/2011