Some residents of western Vernon County are reeling after they were presented with paperwork last week that said Dairyland Power Cooperative would like their land to develop a 600-acre landfill to dispose of ash from its coal-fired power plant in Genoa.

Four residents were approached by Dairyland last week with papers asking them to allow Dairyland to do soil testing.

The residents have instead have banded together with their neighbors to see what can be done to stop the proposed plan, which would put a landfill with poisonous material next to a number of conventional and organic farms.

Dairyland spokeswoman Deb Mirasola said Dairyland is offering property owners compensation for permission to do the testing. If owners don’t agree, the utility has the option of using condemnation under state law.

“Dairyland has a policy of historically avoiding condemnation wherever possible, and it is our sincere hope we can reach voluntary agreements,” Mirasola said. “When the testing is complete, we will ask the (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources) to approve the site, and then seek voluntary purchases from landowners if DNR approval is given.”

Dairyland estimates it could take up to four years to complete the landfill siting and permitting process, with actual construction taking up to one year, she said.

Currently, 80 percent of ash from Genoa is recycled in concrete and roads, with the rest being taken to an ash landfill near Dairyland’s coal plant in Alma. Mirasola said new pollution control equipment at Genoa, including a filter baghouse, will improve air emissions from the plant, but also will create more ash waste. Because lime is used to remove sulfur dioxide and mercury, the resulting ash can’t be recycled in concrete anymore. The landfill will store coal ash and lime waste with captured sulfur dioxide and heavy metals that have been collected in the baghouse, Mirasola said.

A group of about 50 residents, who live near the two proposed sites, met at the home of Scott Leum, Saturday. Leum lives next to one of the property owners served with papers.

Leum and many others at the meeting were upset at the way in which they found out about Dairyland’s plans.

"They have been researching this for months if not years and they sort of did a sneak attack," Leum said. "…Somebody said, 'Like a stealth bomber.'"

Craig Peterson is one of the property owners given papers from Dairyland requesting to do soil and water testing on his property. He said he was shocked when he was informed they wanted all of his property.

"I was very upset," Peterson said. "I was literally shaking. He (a Dairyland representative) said they wanted to put in a landfill and I asked him how many acres. He said the whole thing. I couldn't believe it. I said, 'What are you talking about?'"

Peterson said the representative did not inform him that they were approaching any other property owners or let him know the whole scope of the project.

"He didn't give any other information and I think he just thought he was going to come in and this guy is going to sign the paper and then he was going to sneak over to the (other property owners) and they were going to get signatures there. No, I told the guy, 'You are not going to get my signature.'"

On Tuesday, the Broadcaster contacted Mirasola, who said the property owner contacts went as Dairyland had planned them.

“We realize that landowners are often under significant stress when they are initially approached about a project that could impact their property,” according to Mirasola. “This can make it difficult to explain a project, even generally, to a landowner during an initial visit. It is our goal to work with them to make sure they have the information they need.

“Dairyland's first contact with landowners was to generally describe the project and specifically to request a license agreement for test wells and soil borings on a number of properties (eight total),” Mirasola continued. “While a number of parties were willing to talk with our representatives, several others were not. Our representatives hope to meet again soon to share more information at the convenience of each individual landowner.”

Peterson urged the group to stick together to stop the project.

"What we have to look out for is we can't let them bully us because big corporations like to push," said Peterson "So, if we stick on task and all stick together I think we can beat 'em."

Peterson, a teacher, said the land he owns was his grandfather's farm and will soon be a "Century Farm." Peterson said his son had intended to start a goat operation on the property with a planned 63-foot expansion of a shed next week.

"That's on hold right now because of what's happening here," Peterson said. "Which as a parent makes me upset because my son has his livelihood taken away if this goes through."

What also upset the landowners was that when they were approached they were not informed about the overall scope of the project.

Following the notification to four landowners last week, Dairyland said it needs an off-site landfill for about 225,000 cubic yards of ash per year, as the result of new pollution control equipment being installed at the Genoa Power Plant this year. Its part of $250 million in new environmental controls the company plans at its Genoa and Alma plants.

While the landfill itself would be 55 to 75 acres, Dairyland wants to acquire about 600 acres to provide a buffer, said Wendy Berndt, Dairyland's project manager. Eleven landowners could be affected at each site.

The two sites being considered are on the north side of Hwy. 56 in the town of Harmony, Berndt said. Two other finalist sites southeast of Genoa near Red Mound are "not under consideration at this time," she said.

Some at the meeting said they will never voluntarily move from their property. Jim Dewey said he moved to rural Vernon County from a large city after an extensive property search and decided on his location because it was "quiet."

"I told my new wife when I moved here that I am going to die on this land," Dewey said. "Because I am not moving again because I must have moved 25 times in my lifetime, from one place to another to another. I am not moving. I like my neighbors. Everyone is friendly here and it you have a problem you can discuss it with your neighbor. When somebody new comes in you go down and say hi and tell them who we are. This is a great community. I think you all are a bunch of great people."

Dewey said he is not stopping any work on his property.

"I am not stopping nothing," Dewey said. "I am putting in a new patio door and adding on to my deck and when the old barn goes down I am putting up a new one. I don't care."

Leum was realistic about what may happen if Dairyland is able to get some landowners to sell their property.

"Somebody here may want to cash out," Leum said. "That's very possible that somebody says I hate this township and the taxes and says I am out of here. But if all the residents of this township say they don't want it they will go pick on someone else."

Local resident Jackie Doran said she would be one landowner that may consider selling, but only to protect the property of the other residents.

"I am liable to be the one to sell out and my reasoning is these guys need to keep their land and I don't," Doran said. "They are going to get the land somewhere and if it comes down to this site or that site I am going to say take mine."

Doran encouraged the group to talk to Dairyland to avoid a long psychologically stressful process.

The rest of the group encouraged Doran to wait until the other alternatives to the landfill were checked. Many residents speculated that Dairyland could chose other more expensive alternatives like trucking the waste to the La Crosse or Vernon County landfills.

"This is Dairyland's quick and easy solution," said Dewey. "There has to be other technology out there that you can use."

After about an hour of discussion 96th State Assemblyman Lee Nerison (R-Westby) and State Sen. Dane Kapanke (R-La Crosse) addressed the crowd and listened to concerns. Kapanke and Nerison said they had already met with Dairyland officials about the project.

Kapanke said he was informed that it was Dairyland's plan to inform the elected officials of the plan first, then town officials and then the landowners. Kapanke said he was shown specific maps of various sites. Kapanke said the brochure that was handed out about condemnation was handed out because it is required by law.

"It is used rarely by any government entity," Kapanke said. "It is just not a nice situation."

"But they are a corporation," said local resident Mark Taylor.

"But they are a utility," said Kapanke. "I said the condemnation law is out there. Do I like that they use it? No. It is rare and this is the beginning of the processes. If I had my choice I don't want them here as much as you, but we may not have that choice."

On Tuesday, Mirasola commented on the brochure.

“Since a license agreement that authorizes testing and soil borings is such a land right, Dairyland was required to deliver a pamphlet published by the state of Wisconsin Department of Commerce titled "The Rights of Landowners Under Wisconsin Eminent Domain Law" (pursuant to chapter 32.26 (6), Wisconsin Statutes),” according to Mirasola. “This is required for any project Dairyland does including power lines, substations and other facilities.

“It is possible the testing could eliminate the current proposed sites from further consideration,” Mirasola continued. “They were chosen using the most scientific, accurate measurements possible based on data available in the public domain, but there is certainly a possibility the testing would prove the sites to be unacceptable.”

Nerison said Dairyland informed him that they had researched 70 sites within a 30-mile radius of Genoa, some of the sites were in Iowa. Nerison said in his discussions with Dairyland it is apparent they do not want to go through a condemnation process.

"They are a company that very rarely uses that (condemnation)," Nerison said. "They would rather sit down and negotiate."

Nerison said the papers given landowners, so far, were to do testing to see "if they can even put it there.”

"But we don't want to do it," said landowner DuWayne Stafslien.

"They can't condemn your land for that," said Nerison.

Leum said he was informed by his attorney that they would need to start the condemnation process to get a court order to do the testing of landowners do not voluntarily allow them on their land.

When asked if he would be in favor of taking the stance that Dairyland use a current landfill versus the rural site Nerison said all options are being considered.

"I have been in contact with them three times since Monday and I have an open dialogue with them and they are going to be looking at every option because they know what it will be affecting out here and they don't want that either," Nerison said.

Nerison said the disposal site will be needed to get rid of waste produced from compliance with stricter EPA regulations on air emissions. Nerison said the projection is for between 4-20 semi loads per day depending on the coal quality.

Area resident Eric Lockington said since Dairyland is a cooperative, other alternatives should be looked at, even if they are more expensive and spread the cost over all members of the cooperative.

"Personally I am willing to pay more on my electric bill then build a landfill," Lockington said.

"Would you support us and say that makes sense, why would we dislodge 20 people when can use and existing landfill and dislodge no people?" asked neighbor Pete Strachen. -

"I think you can count us to make sure Dairyland explores all options," said Kapanke.

"That just makes sense to me to look at that and what a waste of time and effort to kick people off their land that three generations have been on," Strachen said.

Much of the acreage in the area is certified organic and neighbor Carl Volden estimated that there are seven or eight organic farms within a mile radius of the proposed site.

Volden asked the two officials to consider legislation that would not allow the kind of negotiations that Dairyland has already employed. Volden said there needs to be regulation that requires any potential condemnation process to inform land owners upfront of the entire scope of the project and not be asked to sign papers before that is known.

"Everyone was being told a different story," said Volden. "There needs be some kind of public information 30-60 days ahead of an event like this so people have a chance for public discussions so landowners are not blindsided. There is no way to base and informed decision."

“To bring the soil test agreement with you and say you have a week to sign it before there is even a public hearing…," said Leum.

Many landowners were unsure what to do if someone shows up on their property next week and demands to do soil testing. Some, like Taylor, suggested calling other neighbors to lie down on the roadway and even get arrested if they have a court order.

Kapanke and Nerison pledged to get a meeting set up between landowners and Dairyland officials before the Oct. 17 public hearing. The two also pledged to make sure the reasons for the project are fully thought out.

"They are on the hot seat to justify making the move out here," Kapanke said. "We will hold their feet to the fire and make sure they do that."