Documents from Wisconsin

Village of Montfort Appraisal: Impact of Cardinal-Hickory Creek Project

Forensic_appraisal_group_property_impact_-__village_of_montfort_2c_iowa_and_grant_counties_2c_wisconsin_thumb This appraisal examines the impact of the Cardinal-Hickory Creek (CHC) Project on properties in the Village of Montfort in Wisconsin. The CHC is a proposed 345kV high voltage line that will run between 84-105 miles long traveling from Cassville to Middleton in Wisconsin. The project also includes a 22-acre substation. The CHC 345kV will carry energy from the proposed Red Barn wind farm and the Badger Hollow solar farm. The conclusion of impact cited from the report is provided below. The full report can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.  
25 Apr 2019

Professional Caution to Brown County Health Director Chua Xiong

Rand_to_evans_and_tibbetts_23feb16_631pm_thumb In this powerful letter to the Brown County, Wisconsin Health Board, acoustician Robert Rand explains his obligations under INCE Rules of Practice to notify the appropriate authorities if he believes his professional judgment pertaining to human health impacts has been overruled. In this instance, Mr. Rand is responding to a decision by the county's health officer, Chua Xiong, to rule against the work of the Health Board and find that there is insufficient evidence to show a relationship between wind turbines and health concerns. Mr, Rand was one of four acousticians who studied the noise issues at the Shirley Wind facility. The final report showed that all of those involved with the study, including acousticians who work largely for the wind industry, agreed they had found sufficient evidence to classify low-frequency noise and infrasound emanating from the turbines as a serious issue.
23 Feb 2016

CEnergy-Glenmore Wind Farm #1 v. Town of Glenmore

Cenergy-v-glenmore13-2633-2014-08-07_thumb Plaintiff CEnergy-Glenmore Windfarm #1, LLC, obtained a conditional use permit from the town of Glenmore, Wisconsin, to develop a wind farm there. But the company did not obtain required building permits in time to take advantage of a lucrative opportunity to sell electricity generated by wind turbines to a Wisconsin power company. CEnergy then filed this lawsuit against Glenmore claiming a denial of its right under the Fourteenth Amendment to substantive due process and a violation of the town’s state law obligation to deal in good faith. The district court dismissed the due process claim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and declined to retain jurisdiction over the supplemental state law claim. CEnergy has appealed. The appeals court upheld the lower court's ruling. The facts and procedural background of the case is provided below. The full decision can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
7 Aug 2014

Town of Forest Petition for Judicial Review: Highland Wind Farm

140110petitionforjudicialreview_thumb Town officials in St. Croix county are suing Wisconsin's Public Service Commission after the regulator reversed itself and approved the Highland Wind Farm last year. Emerging Energies is seeking to erect 44 wind turbines, each standing up to 500-feet tall, in the Town of Forest. In February 2013, Wisconsin's Public Service Commission denied a permit for the project due to noise concerns, but Emerging Energies officials urged the commission to reopen the case, citing new technology that permitted the project owner to control the turbine speeds at night. The PSC agreed and approved the permit shortly after.
10 Jan 2014

Direct Testimony of Paul D. Schomer re: Highland Wind proposal

Paulschomer-highlandtestimony072913_thumb In testimony provided before the Wisconsin Public Service Commission in reference to the Highland Wind Farm proposal (102.5 megawatts), acoustician Paul Schomer provides important perspective on why modern wind turbines installed today are creating a greater risk to nearby residents. Excerpts of his testimony are provided below. The full testimony can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
29 Jul 2013


Cenergy-v-glenmore_thumb In this case, Glenmore Windfarm # 1, LLC obtained a conditional use permit from the town of Glenmore, Wisconsin, to develop a wind farm there. The company failed to obtain the necessary building permits in time to take advantage of an offer to sell the project's output to a Wisconsin utility. CEnergy sued the town claiming its Fourteenth Amendment due process were violated. In this decision, the district court dismisses CEnergy's complaint. A portion of the decision is provided below and can be accessed in full at the links on this page.
3 Jul 2013

Wisconsin Towns Association adopts wind turbine moratorium resolution

13-01-21_wis._town_assoc._calls_for_moratorium_thumb NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Wisconsin Public Service Commission and the State of Wisconsin enact a moratorium to stop the permitting and installation of industrial wind turbines until further studies are done, solutions are found, and the State's wind siting rule (PSC 128) is modified to implement standards that address ultra low frequency sound and infrasound from wind turbines that will protect the health and safety of residents.
21 Jan 2013

Low Frequency and Infrasound at the Shirley Wind Farm in Brown County, Wisconsin

Report_number_122412-1_21-18-12_final_(3)_thumb This report was the focus of a study requested by, and partly sponsored by the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. The purpose was to determine whether infrasound was present in the homes of three families in the footprint of the Shirley Wind project owned by Duke Energy. These families have reported adverse health effects since the wind turbine facility commenced operation. Two have been forced out of their homes. The Shirley Wind project consists of eight Nordex N100 2.5 MW wind turbines. The below excerpt includes important recommendations for avoiding similar noise complaints at future project sites. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
24 Dec 2012

Wisconsin Citizens Safe Wind Siting Guidelines

Wisconsin-citizens-safe-wind-siting-guidelines_thumb These guidelines were developed based on a need to protect Wisconsin Citizens. The population densities in the areas that most interest wind developers are much higher in Wisconsin than in other parts of the country. Wisconsin citizens are forced to live within wind generation facilities and among industrial wind turbines to a much greater extent than those in other states. The guidelines place the health of the people of Wisconsin first.
6 Dec 2011

Ground Current Investigation at Denmark, WI Residences

Stetzer-ground-current-denmark-wi_thumb This important report documents the finding of 'stray voltage' in the vicinity of the Shirley Wind Energy facility located in Brown County, Wisconsin. Shirley Wind was placed in service in 2011 and consists of eight Nordex 2.5 wind turbines. The facility was developed by developed by Emerging Energies LLC but is now owned and operated by Duke Energy. A portion of the report is provided below. The full report can be downloaded from this page. 
28 Nov 2011

Forest Voice LLC federal suit: Allege violations of due process and equal protection

Forestvoicellcfederalcomplaintfiled_thumb The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by attorneys Glenn M. Stoddard and Patricia Keahna, of Stoddard Law Office, alleges that the Town of Forest, its former board members, Roger Swanepoel, Carlton Cress and Douglas Karau, and Emerging Energies, LLC, acted in concert to intentionally violate the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of the law, by approving two different wind energy development agreements during 2008 and 2010.
9 Feb 2011

Wisconsin Wind Siting Council Final Report

Wsc_final_report_and_cover_letter_8-9-2010_thumb This document represents the WI Wind Siting Council's final recommendations to the Public Service Commission regarding the proper siting of wind energy facilities. The Council was unable to achieve consensus on its findings and recommendations. Included in the document is a minority report prepared by four of the fifteen members sitting on the Council. Appendix B contains the straw proposal proffered by the Chairman of the Council, Dan Ebert. The straw proposal formed the basis of the recommendations.
9 Aug 2010
back to top