Marathon County advisory committee adopts report, adds recommendation not to pursue a JDA for Hub City Wind Farm

A Marathon County advisory committee voted to adopt and forward a 201‑page draft report summarizing public input and concerns about the proposed Hub City Wind Farm, and amended the report to recommend that the county board not pursue a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) with the developer.

Chair Robinson opened the meeting by describing the committee’s limited, 75‑day charge to summarize local concerns, including impacts on county government, emergency response, decommissioning and community sentiment. Laurie McSimmons, who presented the draft, said the report compiles survey responses, public‑forum comments and Alliant Energy’s written answers and concludes with findings and a list of JDA provisions the executive committee could consider.

The meeting included an extended public comment period in which dozens of residents told the committee they oppose the project or urged caution. Diane Bridal of Old Plain Township said she and her husband oppose Hub City Wind and asked the county not to enter ‘‘any agreements with Alliant Energy,’’ citing worries about well contamination and turbines sited near homes. Nikki Cottrell of Brighton Township urged a temporary moratorium and said modern, larger utility turbines require new study: ‘‘A moratorium is not a permanent ban on wind energy. It’s simply a pause to allow independent research...so that decisions are based on the best available information.’’

Other commenters raised similar themes: concerns about health impacts and infrasound, potential damage to roads and farmland, uncertainty about turbine height and megawatt size, and questions about where the project’s electricity would be used. Several speakers urged the county to intervene at the Public Service Commission (PSC) or advocate for state‑level statutory changes to increase local involvement in siting decisions.

Committee members discussed two paths the executive committee could pursue: negotiating a JDA to secure terms such as increased setbacks, strengthened decommissioning obligations, baseline/ongoing monitoring, community compensation or benefits, and transparency in negotiations; or declining a JDA and considering intervention at the PSC, which would require funding outside counsel. Laurie McSimmons noted the report also recommends the county evaluate the costs and a strategy for possible PSC intervention.

Supervisor Gao moved to amend the draft to insert clear language recommending that the county board not pursue a JDA; the amendment was seconded and carried in a roll‑call vote. The committee then adopted the report as amended and agreed to publish the adopted version online and to share it with town clerks in the affected towns and the executive committee.

Chair Robinson closed by thanking the public and committee members and noting this decision ‘‘is the start of a journey’’: the report is informational and will inform the executive committee and county board about constituent sentiment and potential next steps, including whether to negotiate a JDA or pursue other options. The committee adjourned following adoption.

What happens next: The adopted report will be forwarded to the Marathon County executive committee, highlighted on the county website, and distributed to clerks of the affected towns for local consideration. The executive committee and county board retain authority over whether to enter into a JDA or to intervene at the PSC.