Seward County residents and developer clash over proposed wind-moratorium as commissioners meet

Seward County commissioners heard competing public comments on Jan. 27, 2026 about whether the county should impose a moratorium on wind-energy development and how to handle a pending conditional-use permit.

“I'm totally against it,” said Mark Brandstein, a Liberal landowner who said turbines were proposed for his property. Scott Owens of Brule Kismet told the commission he opposed wind farms because of wildlife impacts, noise and flicker effects, fire hazards at turbines and “agreements with the companies” that he said have silenced neighbors. “I would appreciate it if we could have the planning board put on at least a moratorium, much larger setbacks, or if possible, even completely opposing [them] in Seward County,” Owens said.

A representative of the developer said the company and local landowners have followed the county’s process. “My name is Jana Matthews. I am a manager with Innovenergy developing the Fresh Air Wind project here in Seward County,” Matthews told the commission, saying the project represents about 40 landowners who voluntarily chose to participate. She summarized planning reviews and environmental studies, noted the planning commission’s public hearing had been adjourned and continued on Jan. 12, 2026, and said the planning commission is set to vote on the conditional-use permit on Feb. 9, 2026. Matthews called a moratorium at this stage “unexpected” and asked that the commission evaluate the permit under existing regulations.

Alan Kloss Anderson, who identified himself as chair of a law-firm energy practice group and a professor of renewable-energy law at the University of Kansas, told commissioners a moratorium was unnecessary. Anderson said Seward County updated its wind ordinance in 2022 and that decades of experience and engineering guidance support siting decisions. “So there's not something new that has come,” Anderson said, urging the board to review the pending conditional-use permit against the county’s standards rather than imposing a moratorium.

County staff and the commission clarified process and records. Staff said letters and other materials filed with planning and zoning are being compiled into the official record and will be forwarded to the county commission after planning completes its role.

The commission then moved twice to meet in attorney-client executive sessions under KSA 75-4319(b)(2) to consult about wind-energy land use. The first motion, recorded in the transcript as made by Commissioner Mettlin and seconded by Commissioner Stan, was for a 30-minute executive session; the motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. After returning and reporting no action taken, the commission again voted 5-0 to enter a second executive session for 20 minutes under the same statutory authority. The chair reported no binding action resulted from the sessions.

Next procedural steps noted during the session included forwarding the planning record to the board and the planning commission’s scheduled vote on Feb. 9, 2026. The meeting adjourned following the sessions.

Authorities cited in the meeting included a statute referenced in the motions: KSA 75-4319(b)(2), the Kansas statute authorizing attorney-client executive sessions. The planning commission’s public-hearing timeline and the pending conditional-use permit for the Fresh Air Wind project were the primary procedural items referenced by speakers.

No formal land-use decision or moratorium was adopted during the work session. The planning commission’s forthcoming action and any subsequent county-commission consideration of the conditional-use permit remain the next steps.