Last farm in Township dealing with township ordinance preventing tillage, any ideas?

[Turbys_1700]

I agree with Roy...
Start with your local reps...
That would be my first step...
I sure am glad that I don't live in that type of township...
We have laws for erosion control, development procedures, ect... here in the county I live in...
Nothing this extreme that I am aware of...

 

[meburdick]

I live in Pennsylvania...same as the OP. I know exactly what I'm writing about...believe me. That's why I am suggesting what I'm suggesting. The local reps and senator are his first line of defense.

I expect he may ultimately need a lawyer, but before entailing that expense he should contact the people he votes for.

I don't disagree that politicians can and will help the taxpayers / voters. I do disagree, however, that the landscape (no pun intended) is appropriate at this point for them to jump in.

Politicians are interested in helping people, but almost all of them are narcissistic by nature (that's why they're in politics in the first place). As a result, the first person they always try to help is themselves. If there is an injustice here, there's fodder to get them engaged. If this is completely on the up-and-up and the OP is in the wrong, they won't touch it (ESPECIALLY in an election year for BOTH sides).

That's why I say the OP needs to talk with the Farm Bureau and then an attorney. Only then will they know if they are being wronged. And, only if they are will the political folks jump in with both feet to help.

EDIT: The one possible complete exception to all of this that I can see is if you have a politician that has a farming background in their family and they know the laws much better than most would.

 

[meburdick]

I agree with Roy...
Start with your local reps...
That would be my first step...
I sure am glad that I don't live in that type of township...
We have laws for erosion control, development procedures, ect... here in the county I live in...
Nothing this extreme that I am aware of...

Laws for erosion control have as their basis the disturbance of the land. Mowing your grass does not fit in this category, and most towns actually mandate that it gets cut. Win-Win for the property owner to be able to mow.

Removing even so much as a SINGLE STONE from a waterway is against EPA laws in almost all scenarios because it has the potential to impact water flows which impact erosion.

Until and unless the OP knows what it is that the town is citing as the cause of the disturbance of soil, and knows whether or not that is actually a valid cause, there's nothing to discuss with the flesh-pressers.

 

[RoyJackson]

I don't disagree that politicians can and will help the taxpayers / voters. I do disagree, however, that the landscape (no pun intended) is appropriate at this point for them to jump in.

Politicians are interested in helping people, but almost all of them are narcissistic by nature (that's why they're in politics in the first place). As a result, the first person they always try to help is themselves. If there is an injustice here, there's fodder to get them engaged. If this is completely on the up-and-up and the OP is in the wrong, they won't touch it (ESPECIALLY in an election year for BOTH sides).

That's why I say the OP needs to talk with the Farm Bureau and then an attorney. Only then will they know if they are being wronged. And, only if they are will the political folks jump in with both feet to help.

EDIT: The one possible complete exception to all of this that I can see is if you have a politician that has a farming background in their family and they know the laws much better than most would.

The problem is, you don't know the local politicians and you're not in PA. What works in CT (your state) may not apply here.
I have used both my local state rep (very good guy) and senator...more then one occasion and, for the most part, successfully. Now, these were firearms rights matters.
I cannot say the OP's reps will be as accomodating since I don't know them. But I can attest that most local representatives are quite accomodating to their constiuents. The OP may find out the PA Right to Farm laws don't apply in his case...which would be a bummer. But better to find out ASAP before dumping a lot of money into this whole project. He has nothing to lose and much to gain.

 

[meburdick]

The problem is, you don't know the local politicians and you're not in PA. What works in CT (your state) may not apply here.
I have used both my local state rep (very good guy) and senator...more then one occasion and, for the most part, successfully. Now, these were firearms rights matters.
I cannot say the OP's reps will be as accomodating since I don't know them. But I can attest that most local representatives are quite accomodating to their constiuents. The OP may find out the PA Right to Farm laws don't apply in his case...which would be a bummer. But better to find out ASAP before dumping a lot of money into this whole project. He has nothing to lose and much to gain.

I understand your position, thoughts, and proximity. I also agree that reps are accommodating, but I apply a "when it's in their best interest" rule. Glad you were able to resolve your issue through your local political camps. I suspect that the issues came down to egregious disregard for the law, strong interest on the part of your politicians, or both.

My opinion, which is different than yours, is that the Farm Bureau (concerned with few laws in ALL geographies) will know the laws better than the local politicians (concerned with ALL laws in the constituent's geography) for a first pass. If the Bureau gets their hackles up over the issue, then engaging the politicians will be much easier because now the OP can tell them that without their help, the Farm Bureau and lawyers will be involved. THEN it's in their best interest to get involved quickly.

 

[sixdogs]

The the OP....again I say call Farm Bureau. You are flying blind without input from the only people who actually understand the situation and whose stated objective it is to help you. If you take any action on your own or meet with or say anything to the other side of this issue, you will compromise your ability to resolve this in your favor.

 

[Rock knocker]

they could still be compelled to product evidence of anything that they've said / done, and any settlement they reach may require non-disclosure of any related information.

If you're a lawyer, I will defer to you, but in this case it seems unlikely that anything would be sealed for non-disclosure. Damages probably don't exist, and the findings would be "go ahead". Even if there was a financial award, that is public records

 

[Deerherd]

My first call would be to the attorneys who handled the purchase and ask if they performed due dilligence. You did hire an attorney didn't you? My attorney's Fester, Carbuncle and Boil whom I have a love/hate relationship with would have had that straightened out PRIOR to any money changing hands. NOBODY hates paying attorneys more than I do (You're charging me HOW MUCH for a phone call?) but if you are a bonafide farmer buying additional land for farming they would have caught that.

I just purchased 77 acres that had 35 acres leased out for row crops and 42 acres of woods. On the disclosure form the seller and realtor signed, there was a question as to the amount of wetlands. As far as they were concerned, there was none. Heck it sits on one of the highest points in the county.

My attorneys found out that since the previous owners had purchased it, it had been reassessed by the state to contain 68 ACRES of state regulated wetlands and wetland checkzones. Literally everything but the driveway and the area immediately around the house now had some additional state control on what I could or could not do. This became a huge bargaining chip for me and I saved twenty times the attorney's fees in purchasing the house and land.

For me this is perfect because I will be farming it myself and since all the property around it has the same state regulations and nobody else will be building any where close. Get an attorney to sort through it.

 

[dmccarty]

Lawyer. NOW.

We have talked to many lawyers of the years asking for advice. NOT ONCE did they charge a penny.

TALK TO A LAWYER.

NOW NOW NOW

Are you stressed by this situation? Yes, yes you are. How much is it worth to make the stress go away?

I get Roy's point, but if this was in my area, getting the local politicians to step into this is problematic. It might work. It might not. In any case it would raise a political stink if t it got out. This is a very local issue and I would be shocked if your state representative would/could do a thing.

At this point you have been threatened with legal action. YOU need a lawyer. That lawyer might look at the letter and tell you what to do for no cost.

Later,
Dan

 

[RoyJackson]

I get Roy's point, but if this was in my area, getting the local politicians to step into this is problematic. It might work. It might not. In any case it would raise a political stink if t it got out. This is a very local issue and I would be shocked if your state representative would/could do a thing.

Later,
Dan

The local reps in PA (especially the more rural areas) are very good with constiuent service...which is why I suggested talking to his ASAP. He can find out if the PA Right to Farm act would apply in his case before consulting a lawyer.
It wouldn't cause a political stink in this area...not for the information he needs.