Tulsa Federal Judge Gregory Frizzell’s rejection of proposed settlements between poultry companies and the state of Oklahoma has left state leaders, Attorney General Gentner Drummond among them, wondering what happens next.
The Attorney General announced earlier this week he had asked Judge Frizzell for approval of some of the settlements reached over the poultry litter pollution of the Illinois River Watershed. Drummond said a delay “risks unraveling agreements that took months of good-faith negotiations to reach.”
A day later, the judge gave his answer—-denied. Judge Frizzell said the companies “presented no evidence that runoff from land-applied poultry waste has ceased to be a source of phosphorous” in the watershed to achieve “the objectives of the judgment – abatement of the nuisance and compliance with federal law.” He offered other reasons for his decision.
- They don’t “limit the application of poultry waste to reduce phosphorus runoff” into the watershed to a soil test phosphorus level of 120 lb./acre or lower, as the judgment requires.
-
They don’t guarantee that the amount of poultry waste land-applied in the watershed will decrease.
-
They “are insufficient in duration.”
-
They don’t “adequately fund the duties of the special master.”
-
The payments into the monetary relief fund are insufficient to remediate the pollution, and up to half “could be expended on attorney’s fees and costs rather than remediation.”
-
No penalties would be paid to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality for violations of the Environmental Quality Code.
-
Their “proposed structure is unworkable” because Cal-Maine and Simmons have not reached settlement agreements yet.
-
They release potential claims against non-party contract growers of the companies, which is outside the scope of this litigation and the court’s jurisdiction.
-
“The asserted economic harm to the poultry industry and Oklahoma poultry farmers is too speculative to justify a finding of exceptional circumstances.”
The Judge, who ruled last December that the companies in question were jointly liable for the pollution, further declared the firms and the state could have reached an agreement any time in the three years of negotiations.
“No resolution was reached as to any party until after entry of the judgment,” he said. “The parties’ failure to do so suggests they ‘roll[ed] the dice’ and now seek to erase the result of that gamble through vacatur.”
His December judgment was against Tyson Foods, Cargill, Cal-Maine, Cobb-Vantress, George’s, Peterson Farms and Simmons – jointly liable for the pollution. The judgment included30-year watershed remediation, restrictions on land application of poultry waste and civil penalties, all overseen by a special master appointed by the court.
The judgment stemmed from the lawsuit filed by Oklahoma in 2005 in which the state said the firms polluted the Illinois River Watershed in Oklahoma and Arkansas with phosphorus runoff from poultry litter that had been spread on farmland.
The lawsuit and proposed settlements even sparked more political differences between Gov. Kevin Stitt and Drummond. At one point, the governor accused the attorney general of “prioritizing the interests of out-of-state trial lawyers” and called Drummond’s plan to ban the spreading of poultry litter to be “unworkable” for farmers.
Drummond responded by claiming the Governor had been “bought and paid for” by large poultry corporations. The Attorney General said at the time he was “willing to work toward a fair resolution” and still insisted on holding the poultry companies accountable for the IRW pollution.
What legislators are saying
Two legislators who were involved in the pollution fight were disappointed in the Judge’s denial.
Rep David Hardin, R-Stilwell was one of them.
“The Attorney General and his team worked to bring forward settlement agreements that would have provided a clearer path forward in this case. Those agreements reflected months of negotiation and an effort to bring stability to a situation that has remained unresolved for far too long.”
He said the families who rely on the industry for their livelihoods are impacted by the Judge’s action.
“In eastern Oklahoma, poultry growers are family operations that have made significant investments and taken on real financial risk. Without long-term certainty, many of them are now facing difficult decisions about whether they can continue operating.”
Hardin said it’s time to reevaluate the direction of the case.
“I am urging the Attorney General to consider withdrawing the lawsuit so we can prevent further economic strain on rural communities and avoid pushing more families to the brink.”
Sen. Tom Woods, R-Westville called the decision “incredibly disheartening” and said it puts the future of Oklahoma’s poultry industry and the livelihoods of many Northeast Oklahoma families at risk.
“Without resolution, many poultry growers will again be forced to make difficult decisions about the future of their farms, which will ultimately result in ceased operations in the state and detriment to our local economies.”
Wood said it’s time to put the matter to bed once and for all.