Wind farm setback fight re-emerges at state capitol

The wind farm setback dispute at the state capitol in Oklahoma is not ended. Still dealing with criticism from legislative leaders over his anti-renewable energy efforts last year and this year, Rep. Jim Shaw is urging supporters to contact the legislature to encourage a vote on a bill requiring wind farm setbacks.

Writing in a social media post, the Republican from Chandler explained SB2, the only active wind turbine setback bill, is currently stalled in the Senate. Shaw supported the measure last year but Senate Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, in a 2025 press release claimed, “politics, misinformation and petty personal agendas have co-opted the debate” on the bill.

Shaw claimed this week, ” This issue is not about a “petty personal agenda” – the People’s agenda is what we’re demanding.” He said that given Paxton’s press release last year about the bill, the Senate leader will “need a lot of encouragement to advance this bill in the Senate now.”

“While the bill in its current form is nowhere near sufficient to protect non-participating landowners, the local control component is critical and was the main non-negotiating piece of this legislation for me last year – unfortunately, it was the main component senate leadership attacked. We must have this bill in motion to have a chance to strengthen the language and finally put into place common sense regulations on an out of control industry,” wrote Rep. Shaw.

SB2 won approval in the House of Representatives last year on a 54-39 vote and in the Senate, it received support on a vote of 28-19. But Paxton said the petty politics resulted in senators being harassed and interfered with a serious, rational policy discussion on the bill.

“I think the best path forward for this legislation is to hit pause and find a better path forward where everyone can come to a reasonable agreement,” he stated in his press release in May 2025.

The bill included, “After June 1, 2025, no wind energy facility may be constructed if the base of any tower is located at a distance of
less than:
1. One-quarter (1/4) nautical mile from the nearest point on the outside wall of any residential dwelling; and
2. One-quarter (1/4) nautical mile from the nearest point of any nonparticipating property.”

Sen. Paxton’s decision last year led to Shaw’s public criticism in which he charged, “Pro Tem Paxton sided with wind lobbyists and corporate interests instead of the Oklahoma families asking for basic protections. SB2 passed the House with strong support, yet Paxton shut down to appease donors and industry insiders.”

In Paxton’s decision last year to delay the bill, he explained, “I made the decision to hit pause on this bill because it violates the Senate’s final action rule, as legislation with this language already failed in the Senate Energy Committee. In its current form, this bill would arguably legislate an industry out of business and likely draw legal challenges.”

To which Shaw replied, “Let’s be clear: that excuse doesn’t fly. The Senate leadership is hiding behind procedural excuses. This same Senate leadership team circumvented this very rule to help millions in taxpayer dollars for a prospective aluminum smelter company. This move wasn’t about rules—it was about power, money, and protecting the wind industry from accountability.”