A bill for an act providing that an animal feeding operation constitutes a per se interference with the com...
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HF 2281 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HF 2281.
You're tracking HF 2281
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HF 2281 — A bill for an act providing that an animal feeding operation constitutes a per se interference with the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property of a person residing in proximity to the animal feeding operation.
Last action — Introduced, referred to Agriculture.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed House
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Bill Text
- Introduced View text Current pdf
AI-generated reading aid from the bill's amendatory text — verify against the official bill.
The bill establishes that an animal feeding operation can be considered a per se nuisance based on specific odor conditions, altering the existing legal framework for nuisance claims related to such operations.
-
Section 657.11, subsection 2
An animal feeding operation, as defined in section 459.102, shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance under this chapter or under principles of common law, and the animal feeding operation shall not be found to interfere with another person’s comfortable use and enjoyment of the person’s life or property under any other cause of action brought by a person.→ An animal feeding operation constitutes a per se interference with the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property of the person bringing the cause of action as provided in section 657.12.This change makes it easier for individuals to claim nuisance against animal feeding operations based on odor.
-
Section 657.11A, subsection 5
This section shall not apply if the under any of the following circumstances: a. The person bringing the action proves that the public or private nuisance or interference with another the person’s comfortable use and enjoyment of the person’s life or property under any other cause of action is proximately caused by any of the following:→ The animal feeding operation constitutes a per se interference with the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property of the person bringing the cause of action as provided in section 657.12.This amendment aligns the nuisance claim standards for odors from animal feeding operations with the new provisions in section 657.12.
-
NEW SECTION 657.12
An animal feeding operation constitutes a per se interference with the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property of a person residing within one mile of an animal feeding operation as defined in section 459.102, if all of the following apply:... (continues with specific conditions).
Creates a legal standard for determining when an animal feeding operation is considered a nuisance based on odor measurements, outlining specific criteria for proof.
Action History
-
Introduced, referred to Agriculture.
Sponsors
- David Jacoby · Primary
- ABDUL-SAMAD · Primary
- Ruth Ann Gaines · Primary
- Timi M. Brown-Powers · Primary
- Bob Kressig · Primary
- Mary Lee Madison · Primary
- STECKMAN · Primary
- Monica Kurth · Primary
- Elinor A. Levin · Primary
- Jerome Amos Jr. · Primary
- Ken Croken · Primary
- Art Staed · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →12 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 138 not signed on
Sponsors (12)
- David Jacoby Democrat
- ABDUL-SAMAD
- Ruth Ann Gaines Democrat
- Timi M. Brown-Powers Democrat
- Bob Kressig Democrat
- Mary Lee Madison Democrat
- STECKMAN
- Monica Kurth Democrat
- Elinor A. Levin Democrat
- Jerome Amos Jr. Democrat
- Ken Croken Democrat
- Art Staed Democrat
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (138)
138 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 138 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HF 2281?
- HF 2281 is sponsored by David Jacoby (Democrat), ABDUL-SAMAD, Ruth Ann Gaines (Democrat), Timi M. Brown-Powers (Democrat), Bob Kressig (Democrat), Mary Lee Madison (Democrat), STECKMAN, Monica Kurth (Democrat), Elinor A. Levin (Democrat), Jerome Amos Jr. (Democrat), Ken Croken (Democrat), and Art Staed (Democrat).
- What is the current status of HF 2281?
- This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track HF 2281?
- Track HF 2281 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HF 2281
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HF 2281
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →