Henry County Supervisors revive rezoning conversation

MT. PLEASANT — Henry County Board of Supervisors voted to rescind their latest decision denying the rezoning of a rural plot of land from Agricultural I to Industrial I at Thursday’s regularly scheduled meeting.

Tuesday, July 25, the Henry County Board of Supervisors heard objections from attorney Mitch Taylor representing “an undisclosed resident” to the proposed ordinance to rezone the land for the development of a concrete plant.

In consideration of these objections, the board voted to proceed through the third reading of the proposed ordinance and reject it.

Following this rejection, Chad Ebling, the party interested in establishing the concrete business on this parcel of land, returned to the board with his own lawyer Thursday, Aug. 3 requesting that the board rescind their decision and return to the first reading.

Ebling’s lawyer, William Jahn, sent the request to the board in writing prior to the scheduled meeting.

“I won't reiterate the entire letter, but the primary point of that correspondence was after hearing that Mr. Ebling's application had been denied, I contacted Darin Stater to kind of see what had happened,” Jahn began.

Jahn stated that he learned from Stater that Taylor’s objects came from Henry County Planning and Zoning Code 6-2-17-2 and focused on an argument that Ebling did not properly apply for a zoning permit.

“In talking to Mr. Stater and reviewing his information, it appeared to me that, that really wasn't a grounds to object to an application for a zoning change,” Jahn explained. “That zoning change is under a different section, which is 6-2-19-1 and again, talking to Mr. Stater, my understanding is that code section in your ordinance was not discussed at the meeting. …I don't believe it's in the minutes that, that section was discussed.”

With that information, Jahn asked the board to allow for all three readings of the proposed change to allow for the opportunity to hear and respond to objections in the process.

Jahn stated he believed that the meeting on July 25 caught many off-guard as he was unaware of any written objection or previous objections on this basis before that meeting began.

“I think Mr. Ebling was caught a little bit cold,” Jahn stated. “I think the County Attorney’s Office was caught a little cold, and perhaps you folks were, perhaps you weren’t.”

Jahn and Ebling did not ask the board to decide to approve the proposed rezoning amendment, Thursday, but asked that they schedule another time for Ebling to respond to the merits of the objection and for the board to again consider their decision.

“From what I understand of the situation, I think [Jahn’s] arguments for why that should be done are appropriate arguments,” Assistant County Attorney Steven Giebelhausen said.

With that, Supervisor Greg Moeller motioned to rescind their decision of July 25 and schedule another public hearing and Supervisors Marc Lindeen seconded.

Upon Zoning Administrator Joe Buffington’s suggestion, the board will hold a public meeting pertaining to the rezoning August 15, but will schedule the first reading for a separate meeting to “slow that down and get everybody the chance to digest.”

Comments: AnnaMarie.Ward@southeastiowaunion.com