Following an approximately two-hour work session Tuesday July 25, the Washington County Supervisors made a review of the original countywide wind ordinance draft, a key agenda item for its August 1 regular meeting.  Indications at the session’s conclusion were that work would continue regarding developing a wind ordinance.

The draft dates to January 2021, but was never enacted after the initial company that planned to develop a wind farm in the eastern part of county withdrew its plans.  

During last week’s work session, the board was addressed by Eric Briones, president of Sustainable Power Partners (SPP) LLC., energy consultants for Duke Energy, Charlotte, NC, who stressed the move is “just in the infant stage.” 

  Briones, who has experience with setting up the wind energy operation that went online in January of this year in Iowa’s Kossuth County, explained wind energy development could take up to three to six years to go from planning stage to online operational.  He told the board that at this point, there has been no approach to local landowners, that nothing will happen in Washington County “overnight,” adding that in Kossuth County there were numerous open houses, feedback and studies requests by the county before approval of the plan.

The initial wind regulation (a first-ever for Washington County) proposed in 2021 had two segments: one to determine property assessments for land with wind turbines, and a second regulating turbines’ operations. At that time the supervisors indicated it a 2-2 impasse, favorable and opposed.   The actual vote was delayed to allow for swearing in Marcus Fedler, winner of a special election, in March.   However, just before the subsequent meeting to vote on the ordinance, Invenergy, who had ignited the process, notified the board it was canceling its plans to develop a wind farm in the eastern part of the country.  No reason was given. 

In the more than two years since the proposed ordinance was tabled indefinitely, supervisors and county voters still seem to  have divided opinions, with supervisor Bob Yoder telling The News Friday he had concerns about what would happen to the turbines after decommissioning (lifespan for the units is estimated at 20 years) and supervisor Stan Stoops telling The News Monday “it is all on the back of the taxpayers.”  

Stoops’ comment echoes Jack Seward Jr.’s observation at the work session about the effect of subsidies and tax breaks for the companies and impact on the taxpayers, with Seward concluding he was not convinced that wind power energy “is a net positive for everybody.”    

Supervisor Fedler, in the work session, said installation of the wind turbines should be up to the property owners, not the supervisors.  He also had several suggestions for handling possible disputes, stressing that the appropriate policy about the turbines should balance property owners’ rights and neighbors’ concerns.  Both of those issues need to be addressed prior to any construction.  It was likened to the construction process for hog confinements, especially regarding public information and a public hearing.

  Chairman Richard Young stressed the need to have clear setback requirements, and all agreed that protection of county (mainly gravel) roads is needed to deal with the impact of oversize loads that come with construction and installation of the turbines.

Last year, the legislature approved a change to state code that permits counties to enact tax assessments dealing with “wind energy conversion.”   The change means the tax derives from the actual cost of building and to bring turbine windmills online.   However, Iowa law also allows local elected officials to set their own rules about reporting requirements.  The nine-page 2021 ordinance required a wind company to report annually to local boards about all aspects of its operations, including assets and expenses.    Briones indicated that SPP, and by extension Duke Energy, was used in complying with local rules.  

There also was a positive report from Duke Energy about the Kossuth County operation.  However, Seward noted it was different in Iowa County, where the board’s decision resulted in some board members not being re-elected.

If the Washington board agrees to proceed, a revised ordinance is possible, with public information meetings and an official Public Hearing scheduled that could bring official action on the ordinance into October or later.