The State of Illinois is infinancial collapse. There isn'ta day that goes by that you

don't read about someone not gettingpaid or some constituent service or

program being cut or eliminated. Local school districts, units of local

government, and private business are innear bankruptcy because of the insta-bility of state funds. Our elected offi-cials continue to attempt to patch themess together with no long-term fix.

Potential answers to how the messwill be fixed havebeen few and farbetween. Many ideashave been floated,but none gainsenough politicalmomentum to beconsidered.

If the fiscaldemise is notaddressed, howmuch worse will itget?

That leads rightinto how bad it isnow. If this were afamily farm or busi-ness, the bank andour suppliers wouldhave cut us off a longtime ago and sent thesheriff to put a bigred "Foreclosed" signon the front door.Let's look at some quick facts.

The state has close to $7 billion inunpaid bills. That is equal to almost 27percent of the state’s yearly tax collec-tions. If we put it in other items thatare not included in the state budget,such as the annual state pensions pay-ments for this year of $3.7 billion, thedeficit percentage jumps to 41 percentof the state tax collections.

Then add to that all the new interestpayments for all the borrowing thestate has been doing to stay afloat,health care payment increases, otherprogram cost increases, and decliningtax revenue collections of an additional$4 billion and the total comes to a $13billion deficit. That is is equal to 50percent of the state's total tax collec-tions.

How did the state get to this point?Well, let's look at some telling statistics.Medicaid (medical assistance to thosenot able to pay) spending has increased72.6 percent, from $8.4 billion to $14.5billion, from fiscal year 2001 to FY2009. State employee health insurancespending has increased 92.9 percent,from $1.1 billion to $2.1 billion, in thepast 10 years.

The state has issued long-term

bonds for construction and pensionpayments that will cost taxpayers $22.7billion in interest alone. In fiscal 2003and fiscal 2010, the state borrowed acombined $13.5 billion to make thepension payments in those respectiveyears.

To top off the spending increases,

the state has seen drastic declines in taxcollections. The state income tax, oneof the largest revenue sources for thestate, has seen a decrease in revenue of5.1 percent over the past 10 years. Ifyou are thinking this is a "perfectstorm," you are correct — increasedspending and decreasing revenue.

So what are the answers? There are

many "options" being publicly dis-cussed. Some say the state should con-tinue to cut spending. But what pro-grams should be cut?

In agriculture alone, there arenumerous programs that rely on statefunding. Programs that provide basicservices, such as meat and poultry

inspectors so ourlivestock can beprocessed, thegrain warehouseprograms thatperform inspec-tions to makesure grain issecure, weightsand measuresstandards thatensure scales arecorrect, fertilizerand pesticideapplicator testingprograms so wecan get ourlicenses to applyour inputs, andmany more.

Then there areother programssuch as Soil andWater Conserva-

tion Districts, University of IlinoisExtension, county fairs, ag education,and AgrAbility Unlimited. Whereshould the cuts be made?

Others state that taxes need to beincreased to address the fiscal crisis.Which taxes could be increased?

See Intersection, page V4

Page V-1 Monday, August 2, 2010 FarmWeek

RICH GUEBERT JR.Chairman,Illinois Farm BureauResolutions Committee

With funding forresearch and edu-cation ever dwin-dling, an explodingglobal population,a greater need foraffordable, safe,and abundant pro-duction, and an

increasing emphasis on environ-mental stewardship, perhaps at notime in history has agriculturebeen at a more critical cross-roads.

For that reason, it has neverbeen more important that organi-zational policy is current in reflect-ing your views on the range ofissues surrounding agriculture.

Our passion — which happensto double as our business — mustfind a way to exist in a still-evolv-ing new paradigm. We must notonly respond to current issues, butwe must anticipate trends thatoften originate outside the bordersof our control.

We can build into our businessplans contingencies for weather,price fluctuations, and production—but one variable for which wecannot plan is public opinion.

And so it is this crossroads atwhich we stand—our current pro-duction and business modelsworking at peak efficiency facing apublic that might force us to alterthose models.

This annual FarmWeek supple-ment will hopefully arm you withsome of the information you willneed to make so many importantdecisions at such a critical junc-ture.

Readingthe signs

®

Illinois’ dangerous intersection:How can the state pull out of its fiscal skid with the least injury?

MAPPING IT OUTShould the Illinois Farm Bureau support increased cuts in state pro-

gram funding? If so, what programs should be cut and to what levels?

Should policy support changes in the way state pension systems pro-vide retirement benefits to state employees and teachers? Should the Illi-nois Constitution be amended to remove the current guarantees for bene-fits currently earned by state employees and teachers?

Are there acceptable tax increases or tax expansions? If so, whichones and to what levels?

Should policy be open to a "graduated state income tax?"

Is there a need for increasing the state motor fuel tax or should the cur-rent gallon tax be changed to a mileage tax?

Should users of specific programs or individuals seeking state permitssee fee increases?

FarmWeek Page V-2 Monday, August 2, 2010

There are many cases in Illi-nois in which livestock farm-ers have indicated their intent

to construct a new livestock facility,have received the “green light” fromthe Illinois Department of Agricultureand have started construction, only tobe sued by neighbors prior to comple-tion of construction.

The basis of these citizen lawsuits isthe premise that these livestock facili-ties, even though they are not yet popu-lated with livestock, will be a nuisance.

Just because someone may believe anevent which may result in a nuisancemay occur doesn’t mean that this eventwill occur. It can be compared to giv-ing one a speeding ticket just becauseyou “may” drive over the speed limitsome day.

Yet, Illinois courts have enjoinedthe operation of such facilitiesbecause of the anticipatory nuisancetheory. When a court enjoins opera-tion of a livestock facility which hasnot been completed, it essentiallyforces livestock farmers to halt con-struction of the facility until the entirelegal proceeding — which includes the

appeals process — is resolved. Thus, farmers lose income because

they cannot operate their business, theymay incur increased construction costs,and they have to pay attorneys’ fees andcourt costs to defend themselves in thelawsuit.

Bills which limit a person’s ability tofile lawsuits against proposed facilitiesthat have complied with applicable per-mitting laws yet, have been submittedin the Illinois legislature but have had adifficult time moving forward. The pri-mary reason is that lawyers’ interestgroups and anti-livestock groups donot want to see legislation that limits aperson’s right to sue.

Most recently, HB 6142 was intro-duced and sought to pre-empt anticipa-tory nuisance suits against owners ofproposed livestock facilities or expan-sions to existing facilities that are incompliance with the Livestock Manage-ment Facilities Act and other applicablelaws. This bill also seeks to allow a suc-cessful defendant to receive paymentfrom the plaintiff(s) for costs and rea-sonable attorney fees in the case of anynuisance action against a farm.

Unfortunately, this bill is being heldin committee and will not moveforward this year due tostrong opposition.

Historically, lawsuitsfiled against farmers aregenerally few and infre-quent, but several law-suits have been filedagainst livestockfarmers in thelast few years.Many of thefarmers whowere suedeventuallyprevailed insuch law-suits but atgreat expense,including lost prof-its, attorney fees, andcourt costs.

Each farmer whoprevails sends astrong message to citizengroups that this is a losingbattle. It is a weak legal argument,it reinforces Illinois livestock farmers’excellent track record in stewardship,and it continues to build strong caselaw for agriculture — helping to pavethe way for others.

We should be proud of the produc-ers who have had the tenacity to fightand prevail in these cases. It also sendsa strong message to persons interestedin growing agriculture that the system“works.”

There is concern that any litigationsends a negative message to thoseinterested in expanding or starting anew facility. Has this had an impact onIllinois and stymied our growth?

That is a difficult question to answerand is predicated on many other issues

too numerous to mention in this article.One thing that is certain: Illinois is

not alone in dealing with persons whowish to live in the country but not neara livestock operation. Other states,including Michigan and Indiana, havereported numerous citizen lawsuitssimilar to what we have experiencedhere in Illinois.

The Resolutions Committee is inter-ested in finding innovative solutions tothis vexing problem. The answers cer-tainly will not come easy. Priorattempts to seek legislative solutionshave been turned back. Lawsuits areexpensive for livestock farmers todefend and some cannot afford thelegal battle.

Light at the end of the tunnel?Nuisance suits add uncertainty to Illinois livestock development

MAPPING IT OUTIFB policy supports legislation that prohibits the filing of lawsuits

against farmers who have complied with all applicable laws. Are thereother means to pursue that would help us achieve a similar goal?

What are some creative ways we can employ to allow for the expansionof the livestock industry in our state and yet reduce the threat of lawsuitsfor a new or expanding facility?

Would an “early intervention team,” which would inform neighbors earlyon of plans to construct livestock facilities, help a producer or hurt?

The production of electricityin Illinois comes primarilyfrom coal and nuclear power.

Renewable energy accounts for nearly1 percent of electricity generation inIllinois.

Illinois ranks 16th in the list of U.S.states with wind energy potential but iscurrently in the top 10 states forinstalled wind energy. As of July 2010,Illinois had 21 wind projects activelyproducing energy, which account for1,847 megawatts (MW) of electricity.

According to wind industry experts,Illinois has the potential to eventuallyinstall up to 15,000 MW of wind gener-ation. At an average capacity of 1.8MW per wind turbine, that would beapproximately 7,300 additional turbinesstatewide.

Full development of that potentialwill depend on a number of key factorssuch as public policy and the price ofelectricity.

The largest wind operation in Illinoisis Twin Groves Wind Farm I and II,located in McLean County, with a com-bined capacity of 396 MW. The devel-oper, Horizon Energy, plans to expand

this wind farm with an additional 500MW, which would make it the largestwind farm in the United States.

In 2007, the Illinois General Assem-bly passed legislation mandating that 25percent of electricity be produced fromrenewable energy by 2025. This means7,500 to 8,000 MW of renewable ener-gy must be generated and 75 percent ofit must come from wind energy.

Therefore, in order to meet that goalin 16 years, the state must install at least4,453 additional MW of wind energy.Today, there are approximately 6,500MW of wind development under somestage of development in Illinois.

The process of developing a windfarm may span several years. Countysiting and permitting requirementsmust be met. A special use permit isrequired in most counties with zoning.

Wind ordinances developed bycounty governments vary in length andcomplexity. They address such thingsas design and installation, setbackrequirements, use of public roads,operation, noise levels, etc.

Some require environmental studiesand agency approvals prior to granting

a permit to construct. The development process is com-

prised of several steps: The wind energy developer finds a

location with sufficient wind resourcesusing meteorological test towers. If thesite looks promising, the developermakes contact with landowners as wellas local government officials.

During this period, a check of exist-ing transmission lines is necessary toconfirm that there is adequate capacityto move the electricity generated by thewind farm onto the transmission grid.If the interest in the location is main-tained, the developer engages in negoti-ations with landowners to lease theirland for siting wind turbines, access

roads, power lines, and substations. Thedeveloper can then draft the site plan.

Negotiations with landowners forthe payment of the lease are finalizedwhile studies such as road constructionand environmental impacts are con-ducted. If the project overcomes all ofthese hurdles and is approved by thecounty board, construction begins.

Many people view wind energy asgood for the environment, job creation,energy independence, and rural eco-nomic development. Once they areconstructed, wind turbines generateelectricity without emitting greenhousegases and requiring little water.

See Wind, page V4

MAPPING IT OUTWhat are the most important issues regarding wind energy in your

county?

Where should county Farm Bureau education efforts be focused?

If you have existing commercial wind energy systems in your county,what are the positive and negative aspects regarding those systems?

Crosscurrents: Wind power generates diverse views

Page V-3 Monday, August 2, 2010 FarmWeek

In recent years, farming has been under attackfrom several quarters. Negative portrayals offarming have appeared in magazines, negative

documentaries have been released, and best-sellingbooks have been written that are very critical of ourentire food production system.

Activist groups have been fueling these attacks byreleasing undercover videos, protesting against farm-ing practices, and offering up legislation or ballot ini-tiatives that severely restrict farm practices.

The result has been an erosion of consumer confi-dence in farming and damage to thevital interests of farmers.

Programs are being conducted inseveral states to combat these attacks.New coalitions have formed amongmajor commodity groups and farmorganizations to communicate thebenefits of modern agriculture toconsumers.

Specialized firms such as the Cen-ter for Food Integrity are working tobring ag and food groups together topresent a unified and accurate mes-sage.

In Illinois, efforts are under way tocommunicate with consumers viasocial media, train farmers to speak tocommunity groups about livestock pro-duction, and communicate with thefood industry regarding the value andpurpose of farm practices.

The Illinois Beef Association, Illi-nois Corn Growers Association, Illi-nois Farm Bureau, Illinois SoybeanAssociation, and Illinois Pork Pro-ducers Association have joined forcesto launch a Farmer Image Campaign.

This campaign is designed to determine consumers'attitudes about farming and develop messages that willupdate the image of the farmer.

The Farmer Image Campaign will soon be releasingideas on how farmers and farm organizations can usethese messages to better connect with consumers.

While these efforts are under way, numerous ideasto improve the image of agriculture continue to sur-

face. One idea is to create a national, wide-reachingnon-profit organization led by farm organizations,industry representatives, members of academia, andinterested consumers. This organization would be dif-ferent from Farm Bureau or other ag organizationsbecause if wouldn’t represent the interests of main-stream consumers, as well as farmers and the foodindustry.

The group's goal would be to become a respectedsource of mainstream, accurate information onnumerous food and agricultural issues. The organiza-

tion would work to combat the negative attacks thatcome from activists and uniformed critics.

Having a non-profit organization that includes con-sumers among its membership could provide uniquebenefits. Tapping even a small percentage of the con-suming public could mean millions of members. Italso would mean a significant pool of resources thatcould be used to combat activist groups. A non-profit

organization such as this also would have the advan-tage of representing members along the entire foodvalue chain.

This diverse representation would add credibili-ty to the organization, improving its impact on themedia and with food companies.

There also would be significant challenges to start-ing a national non-profit organization. A large numberof resources would be needed to start the coalitionand develop new relationships with industry partnersand consumers.

The recruitment of consumermembers would be need to be anaggressive and ongoing endeavor.The leadership of the organizationwould be representative of its mem-bership and not completely driven byfarmers, leading to potential situa-tions where this organization's poli-cies don't match with our own.

These challenges require carefulconsideration and planning for theorganization to be successful atimproving the image of agriculture.

State and national efforts areimportant to help improve the imageof agriculture. Developing messagesthat help consumers connect withagriculture can help erode the credi-bility of activist groups.

Having national and state effortsallow groups to reach consumers withgeneral messages or those specificallytargeted to consumers in a certainregion. Having a national non-profitorganization representing farmers andconsumers could provide the mem-bership size and resources needed to

directly combat national activist groups.However, these efforts take a significant investment

of time and money. Starting a national non-profitorganization would require a large number of finan-cial resources as the initial coalition is built. Reachingconsumers with well-crafted messages means purchas-ing advertising.

Providing opportunities for farmers to interactdirectly with consumers could be implemented, butfarmers would need to be committed to participate.Using social media as an avenue to reach consumerscan be cost effective but requires technical skill andsubstantial time to deliver information effectively.

The image of farmers has been attacked more vig-orously during the last few years. Many state andnational ag organizations have stepped up and devel-oped programs to respond to these criticisms.

With these activities taking place and more ideassurfacing, what are the most effective ways for IFB toimprove the image of agriculture?

Directional indicatorsHow can producers steer their image and industry?

MAPPING IT OUTShould IFB be a part of an effort to start a national non-profit organization that would represent

the interests of consumers and the agricultural industry?

In what ways could current state and national efforts be coordinated to connect with consumers?

Are there other innovative methods of reaching consumers that IFB should employ?

This FarmWeek supplement aims to spark local dis-cussion of integral issues.

Members are encouraged to contact their countyFarm Bureau to provide input into policy develop-ment (to view Farm Bureau policy, visit{www.ilfb.org} and click on ‘‘Inside IFB/IFB Policyand Development’’).

Each county Farm Bureau will review memberinput and send policy proposals to the Illinois FarmBureau Resolutions Committee for consideration byvoting delegates at the December IFB annual meet-ing.

Here are this year’s Resolutions Committee members:District 1: Paul Rasmussen (DeKalb County)District 2: Brian Duncan (Ogle)District 3: Phil Fuhr (Rock Island)District 4: Robert Sharkey (Bureau)District 5: Steve Kodat (Grundy) District 6: Randy Poskin (Ford-Iroquois)District 7: Wayne Blunier (Woodford)District 8: Milton Smith (Peoria)District 9: Terry Rush (Pike)District 10: Robert Pharis (Logan)District 11: Gary Towler (Christian)District 12: David Sadler (Vermilion)District 13: Joe Bierman (Jasper)District 14: Ken Cripe (Fayette)District 15: Edward Marburger (Macoupin)

District 16: Ray Krausz (Clinton)District 17: Kent Darnell (Hamilton)District 18: Lewis Hollis (Johnson)

ACTION Team: Greg Leigh (Fulton)

Young Leader: Alan Chesnut (Vermilion)

Board of DirectorsMike KenyonRichard OchsTroy Uphoff

ChairmanRichard Guebert Jr.

THE CROSSING PATROL The 2010 IFB Resolutions Committee

FarmWeek Page V-4 Monday, August 2, 2010

ARTICLES FOR THIS SUPPLEMENT WERE PREPARED BY ILLINOIS FARM BUREAU STAFF MEMBERS KEVIN SEMLOW, JIM FRALEY, RAE PAYNE, BILL BODINE, AND KEVIN RUND

Cross purposes?Transportation, maintenance priorities sometimes collideRoad access and maintenance

interests often conflict whereweight limits are involved.

Illinois' farm families rely daily onpersonal and business access to andfrom their farms and homes via a serv-iceable rural road system. The vastmajority of local road officials sharethat interest as they maintain the87,000-plus miles of road district roadsand the 17,000-plus miles of countyroads in Illinois.

Within that mix, somewhat counter-intuitively, weight limits are employedto maintain access by restricting it.

The law of supply and demand cre-ates the need. Farming requires majormovements of inputs and commodi-ties. In fact, in 2007, agricultureaccounted for 31 percent of thenation's freight ton-miles hauled.

For Illinois farmers, that means lotsof trucks; and in recent years, relianceon larger trucks.

Livestock farmers often are depen-dant on year-round truck access fordelivery of animal feed, heating fuel,and feeder stock and for the routineshipment of manure, market animals,and animal products. Grain farmerssometimes need frequent truck access,too, but often have more available tim-ing options.

The laws of nature created theproblem. Most road district roads —and some at the county level — simplyevolved from a wide dirt lane.

Some were covered with an oil-and-chip surface. Others were graveled.But in neither case were they "engi-neered" to withstand dramatic changesin the soils that make up their sub-base.

The underlying soils can turn to softmud each spring when the winter frostthaws from the ground. That can leavethe overlying pavement (or graveledsurface) vulnerable and soft enough tobe damaged because of another natural

law: gravity.The laws of man create the pow-

er. Illinois road officials have authority— when warranted — to limit vehicle

weights on their roads. Weight limitpostings may be permanent (year-round) if the road would be undulydamaged by repeated heavy loadings.

Roads may also be posted on a tem-porary basis for up to 90 days each cal-endar year for any weather-related rea-son. Typically, that's the spring thawperiod.

Often, these spring postings imposethe most dramatic limitations, but theycan differ widely. Some are as low asfive tons of gross weight.

Thankfully, most are more reason-able, often ranging from 10 tons to25 tons of gross weight. A few are

set using what some consider to be amore sound engineering approach forpavement protection, a tons-per-axlebasis (or a gross weight basis thatvaries by the number of axles on thevehicle.)

The laws of survival create theconflict. Where road weight limitshave been a long-term, annual routine,farmers often have adjusted by limitingtheir operations in terms of sizeand/or timing.

Operating in that situation is oftenchallenging but manageable. Butwhere farm operations have been builtaround the experience and expectationof year-round heavy truck access, anabrupt restriction imposed by a newweight limit posting can be potentiallydevastating. Significant investment inthe farm and its operational integritycan be rendered virtually useless bysuch a change.

The law of averages creates win-ners and some losers. Many times,road officials and local trucking inter-ests—including farmers—can worktogether to find windows of opportu-nity to ship loads in or out during thespring thaw.

It requires good will between theparties and a cooperative weather pat-

tern. Even then, lowered volumes andinopportune timing remain as issues.

Since a truck's empty weight can't beappreciably reduced, weight limit post-ings force drastic reductions in cargo.In extreme cases, even empty (large)trucks cannot be moved.

Such onerous weight limits can cre-ate an intolerable situation for a farmer,especially a livestock farmer faced withfeed input needs or animals ready tomarket. It would very likely increaseproduction costs, limit market options,and negatively impact profits.

Ultimately, it could force the shut-down of the farming operation in thatlocation.

But, without weight limit postingsduring the spring thaw, most of Illinois'rural local roads would be vulnerable toserious damage from heavy trucks. Asingle trip by a heavy vehicle can beenough to destroy a thin oil and chippavement without an "engineered" base.

Repeated loadings could cut ruts andpulverize established pavements leavingreduced capacity and unsafe conditions.Local taxpayers would then either bestuck with the tab for repairs or wouldhave to live with the damaged pave-ment as a part of their everyday experi-ence.

Continued from page 1Should the income tax be increased and if so by how much? For every 1 per-

cent of personal income, the state would generate approximately $2.8 billion.Should the state sales tax rate be increased or should it be expanded to the serviceindustry? Economic indicators show that the largest growing sector in Illinois isthe service industry. Or what about bringing streamlined sales tax practices toIllinois and taxing internet sales? Should other taxes be increased such as utilitytaxes, cigarette taxes, or others?

Then there are the roads -- those terrible pot holes and lack of market roadsfor agricultural crops. But to fix these, road jurisdictions need more funds.Should the motor fuel tax rate be increased or should the state switch to a vehicleuse tax based on the number of miles a person drives?

There is no easy answer to the state's fiscal crisis. It is going to take great forti-tude and a lot of hard choices.

Intersection

WindContinued from page 2

The turbines provide significantproperty tax revenue and are a sourceof revenue for the landowners whohave turbines on their property. Theconstruction and maintenance of theturbines can produce local jobs which

contribute to the local economy. As with any major new project of

such scope, there are issues to con-sider. Are units of local governmentprepared to properly address andenforce complex and sometimes con-troversial issues that need to be

spelled out in a wind ordinance? For landowners, will the compensa-

tion from the wind farm be sufficient tooffset the disruption to their farmingoperation, both now and long term?

The wind energy contract thatlandowners sign for a turbine on theirproperty are typically 30 years or longerand are quite complex and lengthy.

This often follows a short-termoption agreement which may be asomewhat simple document followedby the more long-term easement orlease. These easement agreementsinclude granting the wind energy com-pany access to your land both duringand after construction.

The massive size of the wind turbinemakes it a long-term commitment toyour land because turbines are not easilyremoved. With much of Illinois beingcomprised of agricultural land, turbinesare typically placed within crop produc-tion areas, thus having the potential todisrupt some agricultural practices.

Roads often are constructed acrossfarm fields to access turbine sites. Soilcompaction and damage to drainagesystems must be properly addressed.Long-term issues, such as turbinedeconstruction, must be carefully andfully spelled out in easement contracts.

Pesticide application (both groundand aerial) will require more pre-plan-ning to avoid the application of cropprotection products when turbine main-tenance workers are present. Pesticideexposure to workers is an importantfactor to consider because it may createadditional liability for the landowner.

The ability to secure aerial applicationservices may be limited. The presence ofwind turbines on one farm has the poten-tial to limit aerial services on a neighbor-ing farm that does not have a turbine.

Given all these factors that canimpact your farm, Farm Bureau isworking to provide information andeducation about wind energy. We wel-come your ideas and input.

MAPPING IT OUTWhat options should farmers have regarding road weight limit postings?

How much do road postings affect farm operations financially? Providean instance in which a road posting financially affected your own farm —include estimated dollars and time lost.

What opportunities should there be to provide input regarding a roadcommissioner's authority on weight limits?

How might arbitration work as a means for affected farmers to getaccess to transportation, and under what conditions (i.e., degree of limita-tion, make-up of arbitration board, etc.)?