Articles filed under Legal
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.
Judge Rollex held off ruling on the validity of leases for now, but said he was denying sPower’s request for the preliminary injunction — in other words, denying the company’s request to go on private property to do its work whether landowners agreed or not.
Mr and Mrs Milne did not object to the development, as they were never given notice of them during the planning process. But the couple – who had considered building their own turbine on the land by their home – became so fed up with the noise that they complained to the council, and after being unsatisfied with the impact the noise notice issued, decided to go to Aberdeen Sheriff Court to get their own order.
According to court documents, Kohmetscher lives on an 11-acre plot that is surrounded on three sides by wind turbines from NextEra's Cottonwood Wind Energy Center, a 40-turbine, 89-megawatt farm that began operation in the fall of 2017. Kohmetscher says in the lawsuit that the closest turbine is 1,300 feet from his property line.
In the appeal, Debra A. Shulski and Edward J. Greene, attorneys for Atlantic Wind, call the zoning board’s denial of its second application “arbitrary and capricious,” saying that the zoning hearing board “improperly discriminated against Atlantic Wind and held Atlantic Wind to a stricter standard than mandated or permitted by the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, the Zoning Ordinance or Pennsylvania case law.”
Filed on Friday in West Palm Beach federal court, the lawsuit is seeking damages to be determined at trial for hundreds of residents nationwide who live within three miles of a NextEra wind turbine.
Basically, EDP is challenging the validity of Murdock Township's zoning, arguing that the Douglas County wind regulations that have been in place for some time should supersede those of the township. Murdock Township responded to the lawsuit with motions asking the court to dismiss the EDP complaints, and Thursday, Judge Gary A. Webber denied some of the motions, but not all of them.
"This is huge. This is a tremendous victory for national parks and public lands," said Pamela Goddard, senior regional director for the NPCA's Mid-Atlantic region. "The court has found that if anyone wants to build a major infrastructure project, they must follow the law. So it's a victory for our parks and public lands."
The complaint filed in Seneca County Common Pleas Court states that each defendant refused to allow Seneca Wind access to their properties and that Seneca Wind needs to access the properties to analyze, plan and construct the project and to provide key information to Ohio Power Siting Board as it considers the application.
Retired Wood County Common Pleas Judge Robert Pollex, assigned by the Ohio Supreme Court to preside over the case, told attorneys after the final witness testified that he would give them until 4:30 p.m. Wednesday to submit their final briefs. The judge is being asked by sPower to issue an order granting immediate access to 31 tracts of land in which a different would-be developer negotiated leases from the 30 property owners more than a decade ago.
Freedom United is trying to force the Town Board to rescind its new wind law and resubmit it to the Cattaraugus County Planning Board along with a complete Environmental Assessment Form. The law was passed on a 3-2 vote.
According to the decision filed Jan. 30, the board found that overall, Atlantic Wind failed to produce sufficient evidence and did not show that the project would comply with the Penn Forest Zoning Ordinance. The application sought to construct 28 nearly 600-foot-tall industrial wind turbines in the township.
Pure New Energy USA, the company proposing to develop the controversial Burleigh-Emmons Wind Farm, filed an appeal to the South Central Judicial District Court on Friday, challenging the Burleigh County Commission’s recent decision to deny 30 special use permits for the project. According to the notice of appeal, PNE argues it “met any and all requirements for issuance of the subject permits and the board should not have denied its applications.”
Seneca Wind LLC, a subsidiary of Utah-based sPower, whiffed Monday on its first attempt for a court order that would have let it proceed with preconstruction work on 31 tracts of private land that are part of the massive wind farm it wants to build. Visiting Judge Robert Pollex denied a request from Seneca Wind attorneys for a temporary restraining order against 30 property owners holding the combined 31 leases.
In its bankruptcy filing, PG&E claims some of the credit for helping renewable energy come of age, saying its contracts “contributed to significant price reductions for renewable energy resources currently available in the market.” But PG&E is still paying out those contracts, which can last 15 to 20 years. The bankruptcy judge could potentially seek to change their terms or prices.
There’s a new judge and a new hearing date for the legal complaint Utah-based wind turbine developer sPower has filed against 30 property owners whom the company claims are in breach of contract by resisting sPower’s attempts to come onto their property
PG&E wants the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Francisco to rule whether the company must honor $42 billion worth of contracts with about 350 different energy suppliers, mostly solar and wind plants. The court’s decision could have a major impact on California’s renewable energy industry and power makeup.
Iberdrola Ingeniera Y Construction S.A.U claims that Kinangop Wind Park Limited, which is under receivership, in 2013 contracted it to procure and install the wind turbines but following alleged hostility by the local community the agreement was terminated in 2015.
"...PG&E is involved in a number of contracts with power purchase agreement suppliers. Some of these agreements have above market terms and are pretty expensive for the company. ...PG&E may seek to reject or renegotiate some of its more expensive PPAs. The rub there is, who has jurisdiction? Can the court allow PG&E to cancel these, or do they have to go to FERC?" said Foss, noting there is case law supporting both sides.
The latest action came Thursday, when the nearby ranches filed a lawsuit against Sweet Grass County, alleging a proposed road use agreement ceded too much control over county roads to Crazy Mountain Wind, LLC, the company behind the project. Hours later, the Sweet Grass County Commission declined to make a decision on the agreement, saying at the advice of their lawyer, they were taking more time to consider the agreement.