Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wapello County supervisors set public hearing on renewable‑energy ordinance after heated public comment
Summary
Supervisors set a public hearing for a proposed renewable‑energy ordinance and said they will consult the county attorney and planning and zoning commission after extended public comment raising concerns about setbacks, road damage, foreign ownership and large solar tracts.
Wapello County Board of Supervisors moved to set a public hearing on a proposed renewable‑energy ordinance after nearly an hour of public comment both opposing and supporting wind and solar development.
The board’s chair said the mediation results with an attorney from Des Moines required the board to set a hearing date so the ordinance could be discussed in public meetings. A supervisor noted the zoning commission had recommended approval but questioned whether any substantive changes would require a return to the planning and zoning process.
Residents warned that proposed setbacks of about 1,500 feet were too small and cited safety and land‑use concerns. “1500ft, one of these catches fire… Does that fiberglass go all h*** and back,” one resident said, raising the risk of burning turbine blades and debris. Another resident said a proposal that includes “15,000 acres of prime flat solar farm is just a lot of… farm ground to be taken out of the farming system.”
Board members responded to specific concerns with procedural and contractual clarifications. One supervisor said road‑damage provisions are included in developer agreements and that landowner property rights are a central consideration. On whether state action could supersede local rules, a supervisor said the state legislature is debating the issue and that state law can override local ordinances.
The board did not adopt the ordinance on the spot. The chair said he would check with the county attorney about whether the ordinance needs to go back to the planning and zoning commission. The item was placed on the next agenda and the chair suggested a tentative public hearing date of May 5 to continue the process.
The discussion brought a mix of technical questions, local objections and economic arguments. Speakers questioned who would receive economic benefits, whether foreign entities could own projects in the future, and how long‑term site cleanup would be guaranteed. Supporters and property owners also spoke of potential income and the county’s fiscal outlook.
Next step: the board will consult the county attorney and confirm whether the ordinance must return to the zoning commission before the public hearing is scheduled.
