Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Wapello County delays renewable-energy ordinance after mediation, hears broad public opposition
Loading...
Summary
The Wapello County Board of Supervisors tabled setting a public hearing on a proposed Renewable Energy Ordinance until May 5, 2026 while the county attorney and an outside mediator review changes. Multiple residents raised concerns about farmland loss, property values, health and turbine ownership.
The Wapello County Board of Supervisors on April 21 tabled scheduling a public hearing on a proposed Renewable Energy Ordinance until its May 5 meeting after a three-hour mediation session and pending review by county counsel.
The ordinance revisions were the subject of mediation with attorney Eric Updegraff of Des Moines, whose packet the board referenced when discussing whether the measure must return to the county Planning & Zoning Commission depending on how much language changes. The board took no final action on the ordinance and set no public hearing date other than the May 5 tentative date.
Why it matters: The ordinance would change local rules governing solar and wind installations on county land. Several members of the public told the board they feared impacts to agricultural land and property values and raised health and safety concerns.
Public commenters at the meeting expressed mostly negative reactions. Craig Sylvester and Susan Sylvester both stated they were not in favor of the ordinance. Carson Smith said he supported the revised ordinance language and the changes made. Mike McCarty told the board the projects would cause "more destruction and damage" and said he opposed both solar and wind turbines, adding concern about who would own turbines in the future. Denise Brain said she did not want prime farmland destroyed. Duane Heisdorffer said he worried about property devaluation, health issues and stray voltage. Jerald Harter and Brent Adam also spoke in opposition; Adam said, "We live in the breadbasket of the world, and we need to grow food for the world."
Board process and next steps: The board said whether the ordinance must return to Planning & Zoning depends on how much language changes after legal review. County staff indicated a Planning & Zoning special meeting may be called after the county attorney or Mr. Updegraff determines whether revisions require another P&Z vote. No vote on the ordinance itself occurred.
The board's action leaves the ordinance in an interim, deliberative phase: county counsel and the mediator will review edits and advise whether the measure needs to go back to the Planning & Zoning Commission before the board schedules a final hearing.