I WISH IT WEREN'T TRUE...

 I post this entry because there were a total of six people, three on Zoom and three in person, at the Town Board Special Meeting "Workshop" on Agritourism on June 27. Not a lot of oversight. Things troubling at least to me were said at that meeting. Perhaps citizens should be alerted to some of what happened.

Without naming anyone, Mr. Novacek alluded to others in the Township as being "SOCIALIST" and "ELITIST." Yes, he did indeed! Having served on the Board at the same time as Mr. Novacek, I believe I know some to whom he was referring, but he was (purposefully?) vague. But ask yourselves, this is how "our" elected official feels about his fellow citizens? Is this how he feels about his former colleagues in public office, one wonders?  Calling your neighbors "socialist" and "elitist" because they don't agree with your extreme ideas (my opinion) is bit much.

                                                         

In the days before the "Deep Freeze" (see earlier post) such comments would not go unchallenged. 

On a personal level, I have had experience with what Mr. Novacek is capable of. Since Mr. Novacek made an extremely crude direct comment to me as a fellow Board Supervisor, IN FRONT OF THE THEN-TOWNSHIP ATTORNEY, he left no doubt in my mind how he feels about me. His comment had to do with "the place where the sun doesn't shine" and my head. No lie. My jaw dropped, not so much at the utter crassness of his comment, but at the rashness of saying such an ill-advised thing out loud and in front of the attorney, no less. No filter? I let several others know of his comment as I don't think anyone should say such nasty things and just get away with it. He couldn't out-and-out deny it. He has no idea how off-base he is. His thinking seems to go that if this fact is true about a person (such as a former occupation), then that person must think these things. I think they call it pigeonholing. Again, he really doesn't know me and he jumps to all these unwarranted conclusions. That's offensive.

He also questioned the Township Attorney in front of me at the time of his outburst if "it was even legal" for a Board Supervisor to assist in enforcing a search warrant under court order. How ignorant is THAT? Did he really think the attorney would expose himself and a supervisor to performing an illegal act? I will say that at the time, there were several total falsehoods put forth on social media about that whole incident. To the point of slander, in my opinion.

Back to the meeting.

When the Board was discussing how they favored an IUP vs. a CUP for agritourism, Al objected. One comment was made that it may be less involved and less costly for the Township to enforce compliance with conditions with an IUP. Mr. Novacek asked why would the Township want "more control?" Ask yourself: If the Township is issuing these permits, don't you want it to have the ability to make sure the permit holders are doing what they said they would? The conditions are placed to protect you, the neighbors, from the negative effects of these uses, such as increased traffic, noise, etc. But Mr. Novacek sees this as unnecessarily "controlling." 

Chair Pete Storlie tried several times to keep Novacek on track with discussing only what was on the special meeting agenda, as is required by law.  Novacek kept pushing to disagree with what was included in "livestock" on a farm under agritourism, evidently.  He mentioned "deer farms." Livestock does not include exotic animals. It says so expressly in the definition. See 240-64 {51}. Deer are included in the prohibition of possession of exotic animals. Storlie pointed out a handful of times that the Exotic Animals Ordinance (240-42) was not on the agenda. But Novacek supported "deer farms" since deer "are native" to Minnesota, he said. Well, yes, they are native, but that does not make them ag animals, does it? Think of the various animals that are native to Minnesota that are not part of agriculture. Where is the logic? Does he misunderstand the term "exotic" to mean such animals must come from some other country?  A raccoon is an exotic animal. Google "exotic vs. domestic animals" and see for yourselves. What is Supervisor Novacek attempting to do? Does he want to repeal some or all of the exotic animals ordinance? Chair Storlie even raised chronic wasting disease as a reason deer farms might not be the best idea ever. Storlie advised Novacek that if he wants to revisit exotic animals, he should put it on the agenda for another meeting. We'll have to see what Mr. Novacek proposes...

I remind you that at more than one occasion in the past, Mr. Novacek has asserted that the Township would be "better off" with NO ordinances. And he was a Planning Commissioner at the time! In my opinion, he doesn't understand the whole concept of zoning and why it was started in the 1920's, as I learned at a training session. He has publicly stated that anyone should get to do "whatever he wants on his own property." This doesn't even take into account that that means that one's neighbor, as well as you, can then do whatever he wants. Can you think of any activities you would not want next door to you? Even if your neighbor owns his property and pays taxes? But you own your property and pay your taxes, too, right? Where does this leave you? Could this be taking things too far? Clear thinking?

Comments were also made that "some" (again, unspecified) have tried to "make things hard" for citizens. Does confirming that the ordinance setbacks are indeed met on someone's site plan, a simple example, qualify for "trying to make things hard," or is that just doing your "due diligence," one of Storlie's favorite phrases, to assure that the ordinances are complied with? No official body has any business approving something if they haven't examined if the Ordinances are met. This isn't making things hard for people. It's making things right for people. All the people.

The amended agritourism language that the Board (at least a majority) agreed with will be brought out at their continued meeting on July 3 at 4:00 p.m. I would like to say that it was a good thing that the Board asked for attorney input regarding this matter. That is the prudent thing to do so as to avoid unintended consequences.

STAY TUNED.