On Sept. 9, the Clarke County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to Section 23, Wind Energy Conversion Systems Regulations, of the Clarke County zoning ordinance. After receiving public comment on the ordinance and wind turbines in general, the supervisors approved 3-0 the first reading of the ordinance, then approved waiving the second and third readings. The moratorium, which has been in place since June 12, 2023, was not on the table for discussion, and is still in effect.
This is the fourth meeting to occur about turbines since August of 2023 - one in August 2023 was a public meeting to gain input on the topic of turbines being allowed in the county, one in November 2023 was a discussion with two representatives from RPM Access, and the most recent one was held in May with planning and zoning to discuss changes made to ordinances; RPM Access is a wind energy company based out of De Soto, and the company that has expressed interest in building here.
Public comments
Comments were limited to two minutes per person, and Supervisor Austin Taylor explained that the public hearing was to comment on what was proposed in the ordinance amendment, which had come forth from the planning and zoning board. The main focus of the amendments pertain to commercial wind farms, which are defined in the ordinance as,
“A Wind Energy Conversion System (WECS) of equal to or greater than one hundred kilowatts in total nameplate generating capacity.”
A WECS under one hundred kilowatts is considered non-commercial.
Similar to prior meetings, the overwhelming consensus of those in attendance was not to allow turbines, even with the updated ordinances.
The opening comment was that the landscape in Clarke County needed to be taken into consideration, and not just thinking about the money involved. A following comment was to think of the environmental impact of the turbines, as well as those people who are exposed to the wind, constant motion and humming of the turbines.
Clarke County Conservation Director Scott Kent commented that he appreciated the setback from public parks and lands, but questioned if anyone had looked into adding a setback from bald eagle nesting, as well as other endangered plants or wildlife. The setback for commercial wind farms from public areas, which would be any area owned by a public entity, is two-miles. In Madison County, commercial wind farms may not be within five miles of where bald eagles have been documented. While bald eagles are still a protected species under the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act, they were delisted as an endangered species in the United States in 2007.
An article from 2022 in the Sun-Courier stated that the Iowa DNR’s official recommendation for wind energy companies is to avoid known bald eagle nest sites with unknown activity by at least three miles, and those with known active nests be avoided by five miles. Those, however, are just recommendations to wind energy companies.
Several people brought up the two-mile setback from a town, stating that if those who live in a city or within that two-mile perimeter can have a two-mile setback, then rural people should as well.
“If you don’t want [turbines] in town, don’t bring it to my house,” was a comment made and echoed by others.
Outside of the two-mile setback from towns or public lands, a turbine must be setback 2,000 feet from a property line, unless neighbors sign a waiver. Some counties require a greater setback, and it was suggested that Clarke County needs to have more strict setbacks.
Some felt that if one turbine were to be allowed in, then more will follow. The ordinance states that there can only be a maximum of 400-acres total in the county for wind farms. Supervisor Dean Robins said that while the supervisors had not been given a map of the exact area where the turbines were assumed to go, the only place where the power grid can accommodate them is northwest of Murray, near the Madison County line, in Madison and Troy townships. Originally 26 turbines had been proposed, but due to the increase in size, the number is now about 13.
An opinion was stated that this was not fair to the property owners, to be on the hook for the taxes. The ordinance states that,
“Property tax shall be the responsibility of the land owner should tower be abandoned by last entity with ownership.”
It was suggested by another that property values might even go down with a turbine in the area, as people are reluctant to buy and live next to one.
It was pointed out that shadow flickers were not addressed in the ordinance, which other counties have banned. A shadow flicker is when the turbine tower and blades create a shadow; in July, Adams County approved that no shadow flickers would be allowed on houses of non-participating landowners. A question of if the path for Life Flight had been taken into consideration was asked, as its flies over the proposed construction site.
An updated road-use agreement had been mentioned at the May meeting with planning & zoning, as it was being updated by then-county engineer David Carroll, and was brought up at the public hearing as not having been made available. Impacts on local infrastructure is addressed in the ordinance in section 23.5, subsection 8.
The road use agreement available in the county engineer’s office states in part that the agreement would include who is responsible for the maintenance, repairs and reconstruction on secondary road systems. The wind farm company and contractors will be responsible for maintaining the unpaved roads within the wind farm boundary, with the roads maintained to a standard applicable by county standards as determined by secondary roads. All restorations, etc. shall be completed within six months of the final wind turbine generator component delivery (except in certain instances) where the county may extend that time frame.
The county engineer would approve the road use agreements, which would be filled out by application prior to construction.
A final remark to close out the public comments was that with turbines being an important issue, the public should be allowed to vote on the matter. There was disagreement if that vote should be allowed to everyone, or just those who live rurally.
After the public comment portion, supervisor Randy Dunbar addressed an earlier planning and zoning comment, which had been that the people who lived in the townships affected had not been represented; the board is made up of seven members for 12 townships. Dunbar stated that they’d tried to find a good variety of people from around the county, and that none of them live in a town. He stated that wind companies have to do an environmental study before they can put turbines up, which would include looking at endangered species.
Clarke County zoning administrator Rob McCaulley addressed an earlier question asked about what constitutes a disaster. In the ordinance, it is stated under the cessation of operations subsection that,
“Any WECS that has not been in operation and producing electricity for at least 180 consecutive days, unless caused by a natural catastrophic event, shall be decommissioned.”
“If the Governor declares a disaster, that’s a disaster…can’t argue at that point,” said McCaulley. It was then suggested to take out the verbiage of a disaster completely
Robins spoke about the need for financial growth in the county.
“The biggest thing that we three are looking at is the finances of the county,” said Robins.
The annual estimated income on a $97-million, 13 turbine wind farm would be about $816,000, which would come in after a seven-year tax abatement had passed. A tax abatement is required by Iowa Code 427B.26, “special valuation of wind energy conversion property.” The totals are based on earlier estimates provided by RPM Access.
It was voiced to continue the moratorium, so that the county wouldn’t be faced with the issues brought forth by various expressed concerns.
“The moratorium is not being presented today - it’s the ordinances. It’s not a hard yes or no, this is just a basis for something to be built on,” said Taylor. He added that even though the majority are against turbines, for those few that do want them, they have rights, too.
A final comment from the audience before the vote was cast was that literature on the wind turbine discussion should be sent to all of the citizens of Clarke County.
It is anticipated that more meetings regarding turbines will be held in the future.