Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Battery Energy Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kalamazoo-area residents urge MPSC to block battery storage project over aquifer, safety and wildlife concerns
Summary
At its April 30 meeting the Michigan Public Service Commission heard several hours of public comment opposing a proposed 250–260 MW battery storage facility on a 52‑acre site near Weeds Lake Substation in Oshtemo Township, citing shallow aquifers, wetlands, rare prairie fen habitat, pollinator impacts and emergency-response risks.
Residents of Oshtemo Township and surrounding Kalamazoo County told the Michigan Public Service Commission on April 30 that a proposed 250–260 megawatt battery energy storage system (BESS) sited on a 52‑acre parcel adjacent to the Weeds Lake Substation would threaten groundwater, wildlife and neighborhood safety.
Katie Schneider, a resident of Oshtemo Township, said the parcel "borders eight homes" and several certified specialty farms and sits above a major aquifer about 70 feet below the surface, calling the location "one of the worst possible" for a large battery facility. Schneider asked the commission to consider amending case U-21547 to separate siting standards for battery storage from those for wind and solar and to clarify that Public Act 233 does not override local locational standards under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act.
Ken Snyder, an adjacent neighbor, raised concerns about interference with amateur emergency radio communications, asserting that inverter-related radio-frequency interference (RFI) could undermine an essential local auxiliary communications capability. "Inverters are historically known to generate significant sources of RFI," Snyder said, adding that nearby specialty farms rely on bees that could be disrupted by the facility's noise and lights.
Donita DeBruyn told commissioners the developer, New Edge, leased the site in 2023 and aims to have the project operational by mid‑2028; she and other speakers said the township has a moratorium and is drafting an ordinance. "There are seven housing developments within a two‑mile radius," DeBruyn said, arguing the site is rural residential and not appropriately zoned for an industrial BESS.
Barbara Manzone, who identified herself as a child specialist, said the facility posed risks from "thermal runaway" events that could release toxic fumes and contaminate groundwater, and warned of chronic stress impacts on children living near a large industrial battery farm. Victor Manzone and other speakers emphasized local ecology, naming the Martha Mott Bird Sanctuary, a fish hatchery run by the Department of Natural Resources, and other preserves they said are hydrologically connected to the site.
Other commenters raised broader criticisms of siting practice and the agency's approach. One remote speaker, Mr. Hunt, accused the commission of favoring utilities in past proceedings and urged the commission to listen to community concerns; the transcript shows no immediate agency response or formal action taken at the meeting.
Commission staff and officials did not rule on the project during the public‑comment period. Chair Dan Scripps reminded attendees that written comments can be submitted to lara-mpsc-commissioners@michigan.gov and that case‑specific filings should go to lara-mpsc-edockets@michigan.gov and that the public may continue to provide input. The Commission did not vote on any change to the referenced case during the meeting.
What happens next: members of the public may file comments to the Commission's email addresses and the commission will consider filings and dockets already open; no formal adjudicative action was taken during the April 30 meeting.
