Library filed under Legal
In these two court cases, parent company Invenergy, received cash outlays for two California projects, Bishop Hill and California Ridge. The funds were distributed, but the government later discoved that a portion of the grants were overpaid.A suit was filed by Invenergy to prohibit Treasury from taking any money back. In these final decisions, one for each project, the court ruled in favor of the Treasury. A protion of the decision(s) is provided below. The full decisions can be accessed by selecting the document icons on this page.
District judge Steven Hornbaker on Friday told wind farm opponents they had until Wednesday to file any further motions with the court and said he will issue a memorandum decision in about 10 days. The wind farm company, county commissioners, and the county clerk are defendants in the lawsuit.
This should be time to party at the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center. After all, the agency’s underused marine terminal in New Bedford is finally profitable, and a big tenant is on its way. The saga of the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal took an unfavorable turn against the state on Monday when a jury in Suffolk Superior Court ruled that contractors that built the port are owed at least $20 million for unpaid work.
The Department of Planning & Development recently issued a cease-and-desist order to an unauthorized solar installation off Carr’s Trail. The June 4 notice issued to 394 Carr’s Realty LLC and WED Coventry Seven LLC — a subsidiary of North Kingstown-based Green Development LLC, formerly Wind Energy Development LLC, founded by Mark DePasquale — claims a recent site inspection by two members of the Department of Planning & Development found “hundreds of piles had been driven into the ground commencing construction of a proposed solar generating facility that had been denied development plan approval by the Coventry Planning Commission” two years ago.
This was a very large project, covering some 23,000 acres with 76 wind turbines, and both the North Dakota Game & Fish Department and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were critical of it for its potential impacts on wildlife. Birds, in particular. The three-member, all-Republican commission rejected the permit for the project because they didn’t feel NextEra had demonstrated that they’d do enough to mitigate wildlife impacts.
Regulatory filings showed federal and state agencies charged with protecting wildlife have long been concerned with the proposed wind farm's location. A North Dakota Game and Fish Department official said upon first hearing about the project in 2016, agency staff indicated the developer "could not have picked a worse spot in the state."
Harold Youngblut filed an appeal Thursday challenging District Court Judge Kellyann Lekar’s April 29 ruling in favor of Washburn Wind Energy’s 35-turbine wind farm. The notice filed by Youngblut’s attorney, John Holmes, claims the district court erred when it failed to allow Youngblut and others to testify the turbine locations are currently used for agricultural purposes as defined in the county zoning ordinance.
A petition was iled Thursday in district court by Overland Park lawyers Robert Harken and Robert Titus on behalf of 15 wind farm opponents. The petition seeks a judge’s review, declaratory relief, and a temporary restraining order. It also claims the state open records act was violated.
County commissioners balked Monday at paying a bill from Wichita attorney Pat Hughes that includes consultations regarding a proposed wind farm in the south portion of the county.
A stalemate on a number of issues after the early wrap-up of this week’s “evidentiary hearing” for Invenergy’s Number 3 Wind Farm resulted in a closed-door “settlement conference” to try to search for middle ground.
The application for the Black Fork wind energy facility was initially submitted to the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) on March 10, 2011. The project, if constructed would have included up to 91 turbines (up to 200 MW) across 14,500 acres in Richland and Crawford counties, Ohio. There was significant opposition to the project but it was granted a permit by the state. In December 2018, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in a 5-2 decision that OPSB wrongfully granted the project an extension to the date on which construction was to begin from January 2017 to January 2019. The Court found that the change was an amendment to the permit and required a more extensive review process and would subject the project to more onerous state setback distances.
Commissioner Kristie Fiegen said the fact that Prevailing Wind violated one of many conditions in their permits so early in their construction was a major concern -- especially for a project of its size. ...in order to avoid a costly civil lawsuit. Prevailing Wind will pay the maximum fine of $10,000 per day of the violation, totaling $30,000. The money will go to the permanent school fund.
The Iowa Judicial Building.
Woman angrily walks out of county meeting Opponents of a proposed wind farm that would span from Florence to Aulne to north of Peabody have hired two lawyers in an effort to stop potential development.
WATERLOO — A local farmer has lost his legal challenge against a planned wind energy project in southern Black Hawk County.
The issue only came to light following investigations by local people over what they considered to be excessive noise pollution. So far, so straightforward. Last November, An Bord Pleanála ruled that it constitutes an unauthorised development. Now, the enforcement order has been issued and the developer has six months to comply with the planning permission. As might be expected, the developer has applied to retain the structures.
A wind farm which was not built according to planning permission has been issued with an enforcement notice to cease operations. Barnafaddock Wind Farm in Ballyduff Upper, Co Waterford, was built using turbine 103m-diameter blades. It had permission for 90m-diameter blades. Last November, An Bord Pleanála ruled that the wind farm constituted an unauthorised development because of the anomaly.
In a six-page filing obtained by The Blade and expected to be entered soon in the OPSB online docket, three lawyers for Utah-based sPower’s subsidiary, Seneca Wind LLC, notified the state siting board that the developer wants to “suspend the procedural schedule and stay discovery” until further notice.
“(Potential buyers) are unwilling to enter into an agreement … until the legal proceedings are resolved,” Law said. “In addition, it is unreasonable and unwise for Washburn to commence construction of the project unless or until it has a purchase agreement in place and the legal proceedings have been completed.”
Oldenburg ruled that both sides could face potential harm, for plaintiffs if the wind farm is built, and for the defendants, if the wind farm isn’t build. “Until the ultimate issues are decided by a trier of fact, the balance of equities does not fall in favor of one side or the other,” Oldenburg wrote in his decision.