Des Moines County supervisors and staff spent an extended work session reviewing a draft wind/solar siting chapter focused on wildlife monitoring and mitigation, debating required consultations, buffers near conservation land and caves, curtailment (shutting turbines), third‑party post‑construction monitoring and reporting, and battery‑storage runoff and insurance protections.

The draft would require developers to document preconstruction field studies and formal consultations with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Des Moines County Conservation Board; operators would submit annual wildlife monitoring reports and carry third‑party post‑construction monitoring for a minimum period. “We do require documentation of consultation and or correspondence, with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and or Des Moines County Conservation Board,” said Chris Lee, identifying himself as the Des Moines County conservation director during the meeting.

Why it matters: Supervisors and residents said the county lies on a major migratory corridor and hosts locally important sites, including Star Cave and Big Hollow, and described large local declines in some bat species. Speakers argued the ordinance is a chance to protect local habitat and give local agencies a formal role in permitting. Developers and their consultants urged site‑specific mitigation guided by federal and state experts rather than rigid, county‑wide curtailment rules.

Key provisions and debate

- Consultations and monitoring: County staff proposed that applicants demonstrate preconstruction surveys, provide the resulting field data and show “demonstrable evidence that none of the components … will have direct or indirect negative impact” on wildlife. Staff indicated U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) wind‑energy monitoring standards (tier 2 and 3 protocols) as the precedent for survey design and recommended that monitoring plans be reviewed by the county conservation board prior to site approval.

- Duration and reporting: Staff recommended two years of preconstruction monitoring and a defined post‑construction monitoring period; one draft item would require a licensed third‑party professional to monitor for a minimum of three years and to submit annual wildlife monitoring reports. Chris Lee said the county should be able to see methods, raw data and analyses: “That was one of the things that I wanted to see rather than, yeah, we did it. Don’t ask any more questions.”

- Curtailment and timing: The draft lists potential operational mitigations, including curtailment (shutting turbines during migration or at night). Libby Forre, representing AES, a wind developer, urged flexible, site‑specific measures coordinated with USFWS, saying, “a blanket strategy of shutting them off at night is actually not the most effective in helping the species.” County staff and several residents pushed back, arguing that county standards should preserve local habitat and not rely solely on federal decisions that could permit mitigation elsewhere.

- Species and local data: Members of the public and conservation staff emphasized Indiana bats and other species on USFWS review lists. A commenter said the Indiana bat is on the agency’s five‑year review and that local populations have dropped sharply; county conservation staff noted Star Cave and Big Hollow as nearby documented habitats and said DNR overlays and acoustic monitoring inform the likely two‑mile foraging radius used in local assessments.

- Buffers and siting setbacks: Iowa DNR written comments cited during the meeting recommended buffers (typically at least 1 mile from state or county public lands, larger buffers for large complexes and 3–5 miles in some bald eagle cases). Staff recommended including conservative buffers near funded conservation lands, and some residents asked for strict, upfront buffers (for example, proposals discussed included 1‑mile and 2‑mile setbacks and special consideration for known hibernacula). County staff repeatedly emphasized the draft intends consultation with local, state and federal agencies so the siting decision accounts for site‑specific conditions.

- Third‑party monitoring and enforcement: Multiple residents asked how the county would verify carcass searches and mortality counts and raised concerns that a landowner could bury evidence. Staff and outside speakers said the industry commonly uses independent, third‑party biological firms to conduct monitoring and that USFWS prefers unbiased contractors. The draft includes an inspection clause allowing the county’s land‑use administrator access to permitted sites to confirm compliance.

- Eagle take permits and mitigation: Developers and USFWS‑aligned speakers explained the federal process for “take” (incidental mortality) permitting under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and noted mitigation typically requires purchasing habitat credits or other offset actions. Several residents questioned whether out‑of‑county mitigation funded by federal permits would protect local interests.

- Battery storage, containment and insurance: County staff proposed additional language for commercial battery‑storage systems to limit placement near waterways and conservation lands, require containment and sampling of runoff after incidents, and require environmental liability insurance and adequate decommissioning bonds. County staff said Flint Creek supplies drinking water to communities downstream and that runoff from a storage‑facility fire or leak would pose a significant local risk.

Process, authority and next steps

Supervisors and staff said the draft is not a final siting permit; it sets ordinance standards and a process. County staff and legal counsel recommended public notice, developer‑funded habitat studies, an opportunity for public comment, and a formal recommendation from the Des Moines County Conservation Board prior to any final approval by the board of supervisors. Staff said the county would continue refining language and meet again; a follow‑up work session was scheduled.

Voices from the meeting

- Chris Lee, Des Moines County conservation director: “We recommend authorizing siting at this particular spot … and post‑construction monitoring will include protocols and annual reports.”
- Libby Forre, AES (wind developer): “Developers go through a pretty extensive process working with the Fish and Wildlife to determine what the appropriate mitigation or avoidance strategies are … a blanket strategy of shutting them off at night is actually not the most effective in helping the species.”
- Darren Shea (commenter/consultant): “They just completed … the five‑year study for that. So … Indiana bat is on that review.”

Ending

County staff and the conservation board will continue revising the chapter to balance local conservation priorities, USFWS and Iowa DNR guidance, and developers’ operational proposals. The board directed staff to keep the public process open, provide the conservation board a formal recommendation stage for monitoring plans, and return with amended draft language at a later work session. The draft remains under review and no final siting permits or ordinance enactments were made at the meeting.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of commercial lease with Imagine the Possibilities (listed county properties; month‑to‑month tenancy starting 08/01/2025): motion approved (see actions array for recorded yes votes).
- Personnel action (attorney’s office, Brandon Loydel): motion approved (see actions array).