Marathon County committee hears public opposition to large energy projects, forwards draft comprehensive plan to board

Marathon County’s Executive Committee on Monday opened a public hearing on the draft Marathon County Comprehensive Plan 2026, heard a series of public commenters urging stronger protections for farmland, wildlife and infrastructure, and voted unanimously to forward the draft and submitted comments to the full County Board for further consideration.

Conservation planning staff told the committee the draft had followed statutory public‑notice requirements and that two written comments had been received in advance. Staff said many of the comments focused on utility‑scale wind and solar and recommended changing draft language under the infrastructure goal from "actively review and engage in planning when allowed by state law" to "actively review and regulate when allowed by state law" so the plan would express the county’s policy preference if state authority changes.

Residents opposed to large projects delivered a string of concerns during the three‑minute public comment period. "Who is going to be repairing the roads? Is it going to be the county or is it going to be the township?" asked Cindy Nelson of Stratford, who described gravel roads and worried that heavy construction traffic would cause lasting damage. Mike Lang, a resident of the McMillan area, said "windmill companies test for noise, but they do not test for infrasound," and cited studies and past complaints he said arose in Brown County. Heidi Pesky told the committee the proposed Hub City wind project sits between protected wildlife areas and warned turbines and transmission lines could harm whooping cranes and other species.

Other speakers asked for clearer, stronger plan language and for mechanisms to preserve local decision‑making. "Utility scale wind, solar, and battery storage are industrial developments," said Wendy Regulski, urging the committee to recognize the scale and to protect farmland, water quality and county infrastructure. Becky Tyro asked the board to establish a task force and improve public education so residents understand what the county can and cannot control under current state law.

During committee deliberations, Supervisor Boots reviewed the legal and practical options available to counties, noting state statutes and Public Service Commission authority limit local restrictions on large projects but that counties can pursue negotiated agreements with developers to secure local benefits (payments in lieu of taxes, ecological assessments, local hiring provisions) or, in some cases, litigation or advocacy at the state level. Administrator Leonard and Vice Chair Dickinson recommended compiling suggested edits and presenting them, alongside today's public input, to the full County Board rather than adopting a large suite of amendments at the committee level.

Supervisor Boots moved and Supervisor Robinson seconded a motion to ratify the committee’s prior action to forward the draft comprehensive plan and the public comments received today to the full County Board for consideration. The committee voted in the affirmative; the motion carried unanimously.

The committee also asked staff and the board to consider whether the plan should explicitly address emerging issues such as data centers and battery storage, given their growing energy demands. The committee scheduled further discussion and an educational meeting before the County Board takes action.

The executive committee’s recommendation is advisory; the County Board will consider the plan and any proposed amendments at a future meeting.