Wind ordinance passed

The Montgomery County Board of Supervisors has taken action on a wind turbine ordinance.
The Montgomery County Planning and Zoning Commission recently approved a new wind turbine ordinance and submitted it to the supervisors for approval. Among the setback stipulations were:
• Adjacent property lines: six times the total height or 3,200 feet, whichever is greater.
• Dwelling: six times the total height or 3,200 feet, whichever is greater.
• Occupied non-residential building: six times the total height or 3,200 feet, whichever is greater.
The supervisors heard comments from John Huff and Jacob Joliet, representing MidAmerican Energy. Huff said the ordinance could have an impact on a wind project in rural Mills County.
“I think it’s no secret at this point that the ordinance and the project are inextricably linked so there may be some crossover there. We do still have active easements and agreements for the proposed Silver Creek wind farm and we understand that it is within the rights and responsibilities of the board of supervisors to enact what they feel is a sensible wind ordinance, with respect to the recommendations of the planning and zoning commission.  We know that there’s still possibility that compromise can be reached there and so we have continued to keep those easements and agreements active contingent upon whether a compromise can be reached,” advised Huff. ”It could be something along the lines of having a designated zone for permitted use of wind. We plan on between 31 and 68 wind turbines and of course it’ll depend on how many turbines actually get placed how much tax revenue will come to the county annually but we project around $33.8 million over the lifespan of the project. We continue to outreach for this project and I’ve reached out to a lot of residents and talked to them about some of their concerns. I just I think that there is opportunity for a compromise here and we’re hoping that we can find it and we’re happy to help with how to reach that.”
Joliet touched on decommissioning fears on the turbines, and said that it was MidAmerican Energy’s goal that if a decommission were to ever happen tthat it would not be borne by the county or the taxpayers and to this date they haven’t had to decommission any of the turbines already in operation.
Planning and zoning chair Barb Allen also addressed the supervisors, saying the ordinance review for wind turbines started in 2021, and it had been worked on for more than three years, and she had heard many comments against turbines.
“There was comment from the public at multiple public meetings expressing concern that a wind energy conversion system would affect property values, tax revenues and the willingness of people to locate to areas that would be near a wind energy conversion system. Limiting housing and business opportunities due to the location of a WECS proximity to existing structures or planned areas for future growth would have a detrimental effect on future growth, property values and tax revenues. Numerous comments from the public echoed these concerns. The Montgomery County Comprehensive Plan as well as the comments of local officials and the public uniformly stressed the importance of supporting agriculture in Montgomery County. The need for an ordinance to protect current and future agricultural uses and the rural residents of the county that work in these occupations is vital to the economic growth of Montgomery County,” said Allen. “The commission has based its proposed ordinance on the Montgomery County Comprehensive Plan, public input they have received and consideration of research. The commission feels that this ordinance will protect the public health and private property rights of residents of Montgomery County.”
Under submitted comments, Margaret and Bill Thomas, Jeff and Kim Soe, Mike Carlson, Ron and Barb Adams, and Molly Carlson were among those urging the supervisors to pass the proposed wind ordinance as presented.
Montgomery County resident John Baker addressed the supervisors and said years ago, he would have loved the opportunity to have something as beneficial as wind turbines.
“We don’t have small livestock farmers. We don’t have anything but large producers. I fully believe in climate change. I fully believe the county needs to regulate and make sure that it’s safe for the people of county not be overrun. Turbines are not a scourge. I’ve seen them all over the world. There’s no reason to be afraid of them. Agriculture kills far more birds than windmills and turbines ever thought of doing. I’m for the county being realistic about allowing turbines in the county. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have regulations,” commented Baker.
Christine Baird then addressed the supervisors, and spoke against wind turbines being constructed.
“My hometown became part of the 2008 Pomeroy Wind Project and one of the largest wind facilities in Iowa, sitting on approximately 8,200 acres of prime farmland in Pocahontas County. I’m grateful that I grew up during a time when every direction I looked was a beautiful, natural landscape. I’m saddened to think that my younger relatives will never know that view. Instead, they’re growing up to see monstrous, ugly, metal wind towers for miles. The once quiet gravel road that I grew up next to has become a busy, packed road with frequent equipment and turbine worker vehicles traveling past. As a child, I rode my bicycle on that same road, but I can’t imagine trying that now with all of the traffic. I urge you to pass the wind ordinance as it has been drafted by the Zoning Board. Consider the many negative impacts the turbines would have,” said Baird.
Bill Honeyman also addressed the supervisors, stating it was safe to say that the rural community of Montgomery County is sick of multi-billion corporations trying to destroy the rural landscape.
“All of us have used up lots of precious time fighting to protect our way of life. Our zoning ordinance in Montgomery County defines our agricultural zone as intended to serve the agricultural community. Residential, commercial, industrial, and government uses should be discouraged. Despite using the term farm, wind projects are not agricultural in nature and not farms. I wish with this information we could simply say, no thank you, we don’t want this, but in 2025 we can’t. This is a good ordinance. I urge this board to adopt the ordinance as is. It has been well researched and suits the desire of people in Montgomery County, especially the rural population,” Honeyman explained.
The supervisors then discussed their thoughts about the ordinance. Supervisor Mike Olson said he has a problem with infringing on landowners’ rights.
“I think landowners have the right to put whatever they want on their property if it meets certain standards that have already been set. But on the other hand, I don’t feel wind is the answer. I don’t think it can ever power the entire United States electrically. I don’t think it ever will unless we absolutely cover the entire country and ocean. We’re going to lose a lot of tax money if we vote this ordinance in favor.
We have issues with tax increases, and I hope those people realize that we are walking away from possibly, who knows, $2 to $5 million a year of revenue coming from us or to us, and also the schools and the hospitals,” Olson stated. “However, I was elected to represent my constituents, and the vast majority are in favor of this ordinance and are against wind energy at this time.”
Supervisor Mark Peterson said he also had concerns about property rights, but wind does not appear to be the answer.
“About three or four years ago I was talking to a supervisor from Adair County, and at that time, I don’t know if they went ahead and passed it or not, but they were working on a $20 million road and bridge bond, and the payments were going to be made in total by the tax money received from the windmills. Now, it can be argued how much of the road and bridge damage will be caused by the turbines that are placed therein. It’s a tough decision, but I was voted in to represent my constituents, and it’s very apparent that they are in favor of us passing the wind ordinance,” explained Peterson.
Supervisor Alex Burton said he can count on one hand how many people have said that they are in favor of wind energy.
“I think one of the people that spoke in favor may be in my district, but absolutely the overwhelming majority of people are not interested in having them within Montgomery County. So I think that we have a responsibility to represent them accordingly. I think the ordinance is well laid out. I think it’s been thoughtfully created, and there’s a lot of information in there that was not just thrown in. So I definitely support that,” Burtin said.
Supervisor Bryant Amos also spoke about the ordinance, having had a hand in working on it during a prior tenure on the planning and zoning commission.
“Everybody knows I’ve spent a lot of time on this. I respect MidAmerica’s views on this, that’s their job. What we’ve got in this ordinance is what a lot of counties wish they would have put in their own ordinances and many of them are changing their own ordinances like we have ours. I hate telling somebody else what they can do with their property, but when it affects my property, that’s a little different. It’s one thing to have a hog confinement built a mile away. That’s agriculture. If you’re going to live in the country, you better expect to live by agricultural products. These are commercial, they are industry. I’ve asked the question many times, if somebody’s going to put a 100-acre farm or 200-acre farm into a wind project, do you just tax the little pieces that the windmill’s on? The whole thing has now become a commercial land, or industrial. I don’t get clear answers on that. I am in favor of the ordinance the way it stands,” stated Amos.
Supervisors Chair Charla Schmid said that from a personal standpoint, she supported the turbines and the potential tax funding they could bring, but that her vote was for her constituents.
“I don’t think they’re ugly, but most people that have talked to me think they are. I have gotten so many emails, and 95% of them are against having the wind farm, and they wanted me to vote for the ordinance,” Schmid said.
The supervisors approved the first reading of the ordinance as presented. Amos them proposed waiving the second and third reading, as he felt that there had been ample time given for proponents of the project to speak up, and most of those that did speak have made similar comments at other public meetings.
The supervisors also approved waiving the second and third readings of the wind ordinance.