Residents press supervisors to tighten wind‑turbine rules amid mixed support

Public comment at the Dec. 9 De Mo County Board of Supervisors meeting focused overwhelmingly on the county’s proposed wind-energy ordinance, with speakers raising safety, wildlife and property-rights concerns while others emphasized local economic benefits.

Rose Fisher and other residents told the board the draft favors developers on key items such as sound limits, height and setback measurements. Several callers and in-person commenters asked the board to require greater setbacks from property lines and identified wildlife protections — especially for bats and other protected species — as missing elements. One resident urged a four-times-height setback to better protect nonparticipating properties.

At the same meeting, supporters countered that the draft contains many protections while avoiding an effective ban on wind. "I think that it's one of the strongest ordinances in Iowa," said Kenny Olsson of the De Mo County Energy District, praising the balance between safeguards and permitting that allows projects to proceed. Jacob Nye, business manager for International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 13, said simply: "You're generating more electricity. Period," arguing the county needs new generation to meet regional demand.

Attorney Kyler Masser, representing a group of landowners, asked the board to consider extending the moratorium through November so citizens could vote on the issue or allow agencies (including the county board of health) more time to weigh in. Opponents and proponents repeatedly clashed over whether the draft’s two-step permitting process — a preliminary review that can lead to a later final approval — would become a de facto conditional approval that is difficult to rescind.

Why this matters: The board is balancing competing priorities — local property-rights and conservation concerns versus the prospect of payments to landowners and county revenues. Board members signaled they will continue line-by-line review of the ordinance, and public comment underscored the depth of local disagreement going into the final drafting steps.