Future wind energy projects killed in Floyd County?

A divided Board of Supervisors at a meeting on Tuesday evening may have ended the prospect of future commercial wind energy development in Floyd County.

There are still steps that need to be taken before a now heavily amended wind energy ordinance proposal becomes law, but representatives of both energy companies currently trying to develop projects in the county said the amendments passed at the meeting were "poison," and would prevent their projects from being possible.

Comments at the continuation of the public hearing Tuesday, Aug. 6, leaned more in favor of wind energy projects than during the first part of the hearing on Monday, July 26.

But taken together, the comments given live at the two meetings and the emails and other messages read at the meetings came out almost even, with a total of 52 in favor of wind energy projects, 51 against and 11 either noncommittal or suggesting a few modifications of the proposed ordinance.

A first reading of the ordinance was held Monday after all the amendments had been dealt with. That reading passed 2-1 with Supervisor Chair Mark Kuhn voting no.

Two more readings will be held at separate meetings, with the next scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Monday, Aug. 19. If the ordinance is passed at the third reading that version will become law in the county.

After the public hearing was closed Tuesday evening, Supervisor Jim Jorgensen offered 11 amendments to the proposed ordinance, including seven that passed, and Supervisor Dennis Keifer offered three amendments, two of which were referred to the county attorney for legal opinions, and one that died for lack of a second.

Most of the amendments that passed did so by a 2-1 vote, with Kuhn opposed.

Perhaps the most limiting of the amendments approved by a 2-1 vote Monday evening was proposed by Jorgensen to set the number of wind turbines allowed in the county to no more than 70, including the existing Charles City Wind Farm, which has 50 turbines.

That means only 20 more would be allowed in Floyd County. The two projects that are currently being developed for Floyd County have a total of 130 to 150 turbines proposed.

That same amendment set the maximum height for turbines at 450 feet, while most modern wind turbines are 500 to 600 feet tall at the highest point of the rotating blades.

Both Jorgensen and Keifer proposed amendments that would increase the required setback distance from things like occupied structures, non-participating property lines, public lands and eagle nests, commercial feed operations and others, sometimes dramatically.

Wind project developers have said that some of the setbacks that have been proposed would not leave enough suitable areas in the county to build a project.

Neither of those amendments was passed on Tuesday, however, with Keifer's motion not receiving a second and Jorgensen's failing 1-1 when he did not vote. Both of the amendments were sent to the county attorney regarding legal questions.

Jorgensen said his goal was safety, and he wanted to protect people not only where they lived but where they worked, including on farms, because "things fall off" of wind turbines.

Isaac Lamppa, project director for Invenergy, asked if anyone could give him an example of any person who had ever been hurt by an operating wind turbine out of the 6,000 across Iowa.

Lamppa said Invenergy had already signed up 79 property owners in the county for wind turbine easements, and he wasn't giving up hope because the ordinance needs to pass two more readings and "there could be a change of heart."

But if the ordinance is approved as currently amended, wind energy projects will not be possible, he said.

He said the ordinance that had been passed and proposed to the supervisors by Floyd County Planning and Zoning had already been "one of the most restrictive ordinances in the state," but that it would still be possible to build commercial wind energy projects following its rules.

"If you get these changes – 450 feet (tall), 70 (turbine) limit – those are poisonous," Lamppa said.

After the meeting had ended, Jorgensen replied "No," when asked by the Press if his intent had been to ban all future wind projects, and when he was asked if he thinks a wind energy project is possible under the amendments that were approved, he said, "I think there's room."

Jorgensen said during the meeting, "I had a lot of people in my yard. An overwhelming majority that have reached out to me, called me, texted me. I'm representing these people. I can't tell you how many people are against this."

Tom Treharne, senior project manager for NextEra Energy, which is also trying to develop a commercial wind project in Floyd County, said, "These limitations make it really impossible to do the project."

He said, "We've been very supportive of this process. We want to go where the project is wanted. If this ordinance goes through we'll move on to someplace where people want this. I feel there is just not a desire for us to be here from the board. It's discouraging, but it's not something we can develop to."

County Auditor Gloria Carr, who attends all supervisor meetings to take the minutes, said she had been with the county for almost 20 years and she was "shocked" by the actions of Jorgensen and Keifer and had expected that there would be some compromise.

"You have taken one side. You have not taken the side of numerous people, especially today there's been lots of comment in support of turbines, and you've taken one position only. You do work for everybody in the county, not just those that are opposed to this. I'm just shocked at the direction this is going today. I've never seen a board of supervisors act in this fashion," Carr said.

"You are sending a message that you do not want new business in this county. You are not supporting a huge venture that brings so much to this county," she said.

The proposed ordinance had been approved by the Floyd County Planning and Zoning Commission with the help of North Iowa Area Council of Governments (NIACOG) Senior Planner John Robbins, and had been recommended to the Board of Supervisors after months of joint meetings between the supervisors and P&Z, public input sessions, hearings and workshops.

At one point in the meeting someone in the audience called out asking why the two supervisors hadn't just passed an ordinance saying "no wind projects," instead of going through all the time and trouble of developing the proposed ordinance and holding hearings.

The public hearing last Monday, July 29, had lasted four hours. The meeting Tuesday evening started at 6:30 and ended at 11:59 p.m.

The proposal that had been developed and recommended by Planning and Zoning was a much more detailed version of a wind energy ordinance that had been on the county books for years, but it kept the same process for approving a commercial wind project – seeking a conditional use permit through the Floyd County Board of Adjustment.

Supervisor Keifer was the first to offer an amendment Tuesday, saying he believes that the Board of Supervisors should retain final say on whether wind energy projects are approved, and his amendment would replace the Board of Adjustment with the Board of Supervisors.

Both NIACOG's Robbins and Floyd County Zoning Administrator Jessy Willadsen said it would require a significant rewrite of the proposed ordinance to change the process from the Board of Adjustment to the supervisors, and from a conditional use permit – which the supervisors cannot grant – to something else.

"It's not just a minor tweak. It's a major change," Willadsen said.

Several questions were raised during the amendment process regarding whether certain proposals were legal, how words should be defined and other legal issues.

County Attorney Todd Prichard had been in the audience at the meeting to begin with, but left after a couple of hours, before the amendment discussion began.

The supervisors agreed to seek Prichard's advice before proceeding with Keifer's amendment.

Keifer later offered another amendment, that would not allow commercial wind energy projects on "highly productive soil where the parcel is rated at an average of 79.5 CSR2 or above."

CSR refers to corn suitability rating, a system developed in Iowa to rate soil for its potential to grow row crops. It can be used to help calculate the value of farmland for sale or lease, and is also used to help determine assessed valuation for property tax purposes.

One landowner at the meeting said he didn't see the difference between putting up a wind turbine or deciding to build a livestock building or a house or other building on farmland.

One person noted that the government is paying people to take acres out of production through CRP.

Dean Tjaden, the chair of the Floyd County Planning and Zoning Commission, said, "What you're doing is eminent domain in reverse. You're controlling what he can do with his land."

Cindy Trettin said, "This gives government control over a farmer's land. It's one step closer to a government land grab. I think this should scare everyone in here."

Zoning Administrator Willadsen said the language sounded close to the legal definition of a government "taking" of property by limiting its use.

The supervisors agreed to get County Attorney Prichard's opinion on that amendment before adding it to the ordinance, along with their other legal questions.

Some of Jorgensen's amendments mirrored language that had been on a petition circulated in the county.

Cala McGregor, one of the leaders of the petition effort, said more than 530 people had signed it, and it represented their concerns.

Near the end of the meeting, Merlin Bartz, a farmer and former state legislator who is county outreach manager for Invenergy in Iowa, said the board's action would send a message that the county was "closed for business."

"You have basically said to Charles City Economic Development Corp. you're going to turn down $170 million in economic development for this county. Can you imagine what would be reported if Mitas wanted to do $170 million expansion in this county, or Zoetis?" he asked.

Bartz also said that with some counties closing down to wind energy the state Legislature is likely to do what it did in the 1990s with the livestock industry and take away from counties the ability to regulate the wind industry.

"The state Legislature will step in and they will set a statewide standard, and you won't have the authority to determine what specifically would be best to apply to your county," he predicted.

Kuhn said at the end of the meeting that the process to amend the wind energy ordinance started with a goal of working with Planning and Zoning "to develop an ordinance that met the needs of the wind turbine industry so they could grow and be placed in this county, and at the same time meet the needs of nearby neighbors and have concerns about our precious natural resources, our water, our air, our land."

"Tonight I think we diverted far from that. I think we have diverted to a position that is indeed not going to allow any wind turbine companies to locate in Floyd County," Kuhn said. "That's not what the goal of this process was. We all have our opinions on how it turned out."