Washington County wind ordinance passes

WASHINGTON — Washington County Supervisors have completed the process to put a new ordinance on the books that heavily regulates wind power in the area, effectively preventing any large-scale development for the renewable energy source in the foreseeable future.

The board of supervisors voted 5-0 to complete the code’s second reading on Tuesday, Sept. 17. A subsequent motion to waive the third reading passed 4-1, with a no from Bob Yoder, who typically votes against any motion to waive third readings because he thinks they come off as unnecessarily hasty.

Supervisor Jack Seward Jr. made both motions. He said he was ready to have the code on the books after years of discussion.

“There has not been a lot of community involvement since the first reading, and there hasn’t been a lot of community involvement or communications with us one way or the other,” he said. “For the last several months, there have been some advocates that have sent us some information one way or the other, but … I think most everybody’s satisfied with what we’re doing.”

The new local law has a number of clauses prospective wind developers took issue with, chief among them a section that requires turbines to stay at least half a mile away from any occupied structures, unless those buildings’ owners sign a waiver.

Also contentious is a rule requiring turbine owners to pay for supposed drops in property value on nearby land, if a qualified professional attributes the price change to generators on the skyline around the time of sale.

Deriva Energy, which once scouted Washington County for a 200 MW wind farm that would’ve spanned much of the land between Kalona and Washington, has all but backed out of that plan this year. Representatives said they sensed local decision-makers opposed the project.

  Buy Photo

“We know that there are going to be challenges getting everybody to participate no matter what we propose, and no matter how responsibly we develop and work with the neighbors,” said Deriva Energy Director of Renewable Business Development Jeff Neves at a supervisor meeting in March. “So if we know that this type of setback is the requirement, we’re just not going to be able to develop the project. And no other group would be able to do that either.”

Proponents of wind power bashed the now-effective ordinance, saying turbines would lower local energy prices, improve the environment and generate millions of dollars in tax revenue and local job markets.

Another frequent critique of the policy is that it restricts the property rights of farmers who could otherwise lease their land out to energy developers for steady revenue with minimal disruptions to their crop production.

“I do not see how it is fair if a non-participant does not accept being paid for participating, and the developer proposes a safe setback, but the county requires a much larger setback with no solution,” Neves said in an email to supervisors last year.

While the angle was ultimately ineffective, it seemed among the most persuasive pro-wind arguments in the largely conservative county.

“Some of the farmers I’ve talked to have said, ‘What gives you the right to tell me what I can do with my property?’” Board Chair Richard Young said at one meeting in August. “I’ve always been a property rights person. I agree with them.”

But most locals who’ve weighed in on the matter in the historically Republican county have shunned renewable energy, accusing developers of overreliance on state subsidies and potentially sparking countless disputes among neighbors. Critics have also raised concerns about turbines’ environmental impacts, citing reports of the structures leaking lubricant oil and damaging bat populations in other areas.

“We need to stay with conventional power, not go to wind,” Washington County Resident David Bruns said during one public comment period at a supervisor meeting Sept. 3. “If wind turbines and solar was such a good deal, why is Bill Gates building a nuclear power plant out west in (Wyoming)?”

The new ordinance passed after a handful of last-minute amendments at its first reading earlier in the month, including clarifications about financial responsibilities in dispute settlement procedures, rewording a requirement for an “acceptable third party” to a “mutually agreed-upon third party” when dealing with property value disagreements, heightened requirements for developers’ insurance before building turbines, and minor grammatical fixes.

Its final passage ends a long-running conversation in Washington County.

An earlier code proposal governing wind energy stalled out with a 2-2 vote in 2021, but was scrapped after a prospective developer at the time pulled the plug on its plans at the last moment, before a vote was possible with a newly sworn-in, vacancy-filling fifth supervisor.

The matter came up again in 2022, but wasn’t pushed in earnest until last year, when Deriva publicly announced details of its proposal in Washington County. It then faced myriad delays as elected officials ironed out attachments like a road use agreement and disposal requirements for the turbines, and passed a separate ordinance establishing authority to tax the generators in October of last year. The ordinance’s first public reading was also pushed back one week, thanks to a typo in the board’s meeting materials that left them without an accurate copy of the proposed new code.

Little of that finality was apparent on Tuesday, Sept. 17. Supervisors passed both the code amendment’s second reading and waived its third reading with little discussion or fanfare.

“I have not sensed there’s a lot of interest in arguing the controversy one way or the other,” Seward said after the meeting.

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com