Fiscal Court Votes To Remove Lot Size Requirement From Ag Noise Exemption
File Photo: Kentucky State Seal in the courtroom at Mercer County Fiscal Courthouse.
Robert Moore
Herald Staff
[email protected]
The Mercer County Fiscal Court gave first reading to an amendment to an existing county ordinance dealing with the abatement of nuisances, including noise from farms.
At their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 8, the magistrates gave first reading to an amendment that leaves most of the original 2005 ordinance intact, but removes language concerning the lot size requirement for exemptions for noise from agricultural production. The current ordinance exempts noise from lots of five acres or more in an agricultural area. The amendment exempts noise on all property zoned agriculture—A-1, A-2 and A-3—regardless of lot size. The amendment passed unanimously.
There has been a lot of noise about the topic lately, especially on Facebook after the Harrodsburg Herald reported that county officials were receiving complaints from home buyers about noise from livestock such as chickens and cows and farm machinery such as tractors and combines.
At the beginning of Tuesday’s fiscal court meeting, people were given the opportunity to speak. All of the speakers identified as farmers.
“The county was based on agriculture, our livelihood depends on it,” said Bob Clark. “I cannot control an animal that brays or a calf that bawls.”
Many home buyers are happy to purchase lots next to farms, hoping for peace and quiet. But peace and quiet can be hard to find during the harvest season, when teams of contractors arrive with combines and work through the night to meet their contractual obligations.
“Why did they move here in the first place?” Clark asked. He asked the fiscal court to use good, sound judgment.
“I agree with everything this man says,” said Steve Goodlett. “There’s no way we can farm without making noise, cows smelling, one way or another.”
“Agriculture was here first,” said Zack Ison. “Mercer County was built on agriculture and we need it in a bad way.”
“I’m here to support the farmers,” said Bruce Wade.
“Some things are unpleasant when you live beside a farm,” Wade told the magistrates. “It’s part of what you have to deal with.”
He said he was worried about “opening up a whole can of worms,” including complaints about mud on the road and weeds in the fence row.
“We’ve just got to live with what nature’s got there,” Wade said. “I urge you all to take our side on this.”
Later in the meeting, the fiscal court gave first reading to the amendment.
“I farmed all my dang life,” said Magistrate Tim Darland after the vote. “We ain’t against no farmer.”
“We ain’t against nobody,” Darland said.
“I don’t know how it got out there the fiscal court’s against the farmers,” Darland said.
Darland and Magistrate Stephen “Pete” Elliott served on the committee that met with planning and zoning commissioners to discuss the issue.
“There were no one on the committee against farmers,” Magistrate Elliott said.
“It kind of hurts your feelings a little bit,” said Elliott, who said his son was a farmer and who farmed himself.
“I know it’s a tough business,” he said. Elliott called farming the toughest business in the country.
“I’ll stand for you 100 percent,” Elliott said.
Mercer Sheriff Ernie Kelty called everyone in the room a “friend.”
“They’ve always bent over backwards to help us out,” Kelty said.
“I think it was kind of misleading what people read,” said Beth Kelly of the Mercer County Farm Bureau.
“Everybody gets riled up,” Kelly said. “People don’t come to meetings like this until something happens.”
“We’ve got to keep what makes our county special,” Kelly said. She said she appreciated Judge-Executive Sarah Steele for reaching out.
“She really understands,” Kelly said. “Sorry you have to hear all the complaints.”
