A handful of developers are exploring southeast Iowa in hopes of building the turbines there, but Washington County appears ready to put up hurdles. (AnnaMarie Ward/The Union)
WASHINGTON – The county Board of Supervisors said it has finalized the language of a wind turbine ordinance, and the agenda for the Aug. 13 meeting includes setting the dates for public hearings needed to pass the new local law.
If the county ordinance changes are passed, they will block large-scale construction of wind turbines. Turbines must be located at least a half-mile from occupied buildings unless the building owner signs a waiver. While wind turbine construction would still be technically possible, it has not yet occurred in any county in the state that has passed similar regulations.
“The company that is promoting the project says they can’t go ahead with the project,” said Supervisor Jack Seward Jr. “If this is such a good thing and the people are for it, then they will give up the half-mile … but to take into account the people and their property rights who don’t want to go along with it, I proposed the half-mile.”
Washington County’s proposed rules would impose other restrictions, including a land development guarantee that would require wind developers to compensate landowners within a two-mile radius if their properties are sold below market value. The clause is based on concerns that the turbines could become eyesores and reduce the value of neighboring properties, despite the U.S. Department of Energy and peer-reviewed studies saying otherwise.
Deriva Energy has proposed building a massive 200 MW turbine on leased land north of County Road G36, arguing that the value guarantee would create a risk for investors that may be uncalculable.
A representative for the company did not respond to a request for comment. Deriva spokespeople had previously argued that the controversial regulations would halt development efforts and thwart the opportunity for dozens of long-term jobs and $40 million to $50 million in county tax revenue over 25 years.
Regulators have said, sometimes sarcastically, that the company should walk the talk if it believes studies that suggest minimal impact on property values.
“That’s a little bit ironic,” said Supervisor Marcus Fedler. “They basically said it won’t be a problem… so it won’t be a problem.”
The proposed ordinance includes some changes from a version last discussed in March, including extending property line setback requirements to twice the height of a given turbine. A procedural vote to begin preparations for the public hearing followed, and passed by a 3-2 vote. Board members Richard Young and Bob Yoder voted against.
Young expressed concern that the land value guarantee would be unprovable, as it would require landowners to battle “a whole host of lawyers” for the energy companies. He also expressed concern that the property rights of residents who wanted wind turbines on their land would be unnecessarily restricted – either for environmental reasons or because of the energy companies’ rental income.
“Some of the farmers I’ve talked to have asked, ‘What gives you the right to tell me what I can do with my property?'” Young said. “I’ve always been an advocate of property rights. I agree with them.”
Yoder said he voted despite his constituents’ concerns after hearing people in his district complain that the wind turbines could impact their neighbors’ property rights and others who “just don’t want them,” he said. The supervisor also voted against a similar ordinance in 2021 before that debate fizzled out when a developer abruptly withdrew its plans in the district.
Although final passage of the ordinance will take weeks, last week’s vote does not bode well for future wind developers. A 3-2 result, if maintained after all three required public hearings, would be enough to turn the proposals into law.
“We still have to go through the process,” Seward said. “It’s not a done deal yet.”
Comments: [email protected]
