Marathon County residents sound off against proposed wind farm project

The Hub City Wind Farm could bring 38 turbines to the area — locals want a moratorium against them, the county says they don’t have the authority.

A developer is hoping to build a large-scale wind farm project in Marathon County, but locals are concerned about potential effects on health, homes and property values.

The developer, Alliant Energy, says the Hub City Wind Farm could have up to 38 turbines in operation. Alliant says the project could potentially power 45,000 homes.

At a Thursday meeting of the energy committee created by the Marathon County Board, Alliant said they were working on producing a document addressing more than 100 concerns and questions that had been raised by the public.

The meeting room was packed, with multiple members heading to an overflow room. Public comment lists were long, and people spoke passionately about their beliefs — many against the project.

Marathon County has been trying to collect local concerns about the proposed project, and presented some of the findings of an online survey and a number of public forums, which mostly viewed the project negatively. The Wisconsin Public Service Commission, not the county, will decide whether or not to approve the project.

Concerns collected by the county include noise, effects to livestock, safety, groundwater impacts and blade failures. Alliant, in comments at the Thursday meeting, tried to address construction, environmental studies and safety plans.

Data from the meetings and public comments will be used by Marathon County in potential usage agreements over the project.

More than $22 million worth of power could be generated over the Hub City farm’s  lifespan, according to Alliant estimates. If approved by the PSC, the 150-megawatt project would be built over a three-year period and would come online in 2029.

In September, the PSC approved the Badger Hollow Wind Project in Iowa and Grant counties. It was the state’s first 100-megawatt wind farm approved in 14 years.

While many of the comments were against the project, some did speak in support saying it would be a financial and environmental benefit. One public commenter noted that the top four states for wind energy are controlled by Republicans.

Others said they didn’t trust the developer, and would never have moved to their homes if they had known a wind farm would potentially be built nearby. One commenter compared the impact to a “war-torn country” and said the area’s “rural character will be completely changed.”

Much of the public comment focused on how farms and agricultural land will be impacted, and what the wind farm will do to century farms.

Most surveyed said they oppose project

A draft report, collecting data from local public meetings and an online survey, also shows a strong local opposition to the project, according to the county. 

The committee tried to collect concerns, opportunities and suggestions for the county as the process moves forward. The responses will be included in a report to help guide Marathon County on future negotiations.

Now closed, the online survey collected 1,395 responses, according to county documents.

“While most participants saw ‘no benefits’ from the Hub City Wind Farm project, participants in five groups identified a few potential benefits,” the draft survey report states. 

The survey notes that a “significant portion of the comments” were not directly related to the actual role of the the committee.

During the Thursday meeting, county staff noted that of all responses to the online survey, 9 percent of respondents decided not to comment on the benefit question, leaving that section blank.

The survey also notes the scope and timeline for the committee presented limits on what information could be collected for the report.

“Our (job) is not to pass judgment on the merits of the project, but rather collect the information,” said Marathon County Board member John Robinson.

Main concerns in the survey included effects on property values, loss of tourism appeal, reduction in future development and agricultural opportunities. There were also worries about bird strikes, impacts to soil erosion and road damage from construction. 

The top benefits noted in the survey responses were clean energy production, emissions reduction, economic benefits, payments to landowners and the ability to keep some areas from becoming subdivisions.