I’ve spent most of my life exploring, nurturing, and loving my household’s 855 acres of forests and fields and three miles of perennial streams which can be adjoining to the proposed Rocky Forge Wind Farm web site in Botetourt County.

My mother and father had been decided to preserve some Virginia forest land, and so the land is in a conservation easement. The proposed location for the generators is a wildlife habitat for innumerable species, however my biggest considerations are the recognized impacts on the birds and bats and the aquatic species which can be in danger from soil erosion and stream sedimentation.

I’m blessed to know what clear streams seem like. It’s a privilege nevertheless it shouldn’t be. I do know if development begins on the Rocky Forge web site, due to the land disturbance, this may trigger soil erosion and stream sedimentation into the streams when it rains. Everyone is aware of it, however the decision-makers on this course of haven’t assessed and disclosed the impacts.

Widespread sense tells me that when the proposed generators enhance in dimension, the impacts change. It has been at the very least eight years since wildlife data to evaluate the impacts has been collected.

Eight years is a very long time when terrestrial and aquatic life are being impacted at an unprecedented charge and scale. Local weather change is quickly impacting the environment.

Wildlife research executed eight or extra years in the past are ineffective to explain circumstances right this moment. The proposed turbine web site is within the southernmost breeding territory for the golden eagle. Golden eagles fly from Canada to the mountains in Virginia yearly, particularly the mountain proposed for turbine improvement.

There’s an Indiana bat cave inside 5 miles of the turbine web site and Apex has not up to date any details about the endangered species additionally threatened by a widespread fungal illness particularly since this undertaking was first proposed. The pure world shouldn’t be static, it’s altering extra quickly than ever as a result of growing threats to habitat. Nonetheless, the commonwealth of Virginia is shamelessly poised to authorize a undertaking for which it has no concept of the particular impacts, despite the fact that the Division of Environmental High quality is required to each know what the impacts are going to be and disclose the impacts to the general public. The underlying information right here shouldn’t be significant as a result of it’s previous. Mitigation within the type of turbine operation curtailment means nothing with out an correct baseline of the inhabitants circumstances. The data of the effectiveness of curtailment itself has not been proven.

The American Hen Conservancy (ABC) submitted a remark letter on June 24, which transmitted its prior letters dated Aug. 10, 2020, and Dec. 21, 2021. The ABC argues for present eagle information amongst different issues, offering the scientific and authorized data to help their place. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service additionally weighed in with an email correspondence communication on June 3, 2021, from Thomas W. Wittig, the company’s North Atlantic-Appalachian Area Eagle Coordinator, directed to Jennie Geiger, the senior environmental allowing supervisor at Apex. In February 2021, Geiger had suggested Mr. Wittig that “No modifications have been made to the BBCS [Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy] doc that was authorized again in 2016.” On June 3, 2021, Mr. Wittig straight challenged Apex’s 2016 assertion that no further eagle research had been “warranted or allow really useful” as a result of a lot had modified in 5 years. After itemizing important components that affect the company’s evaluation of danger to eagles, Wittig firmly states, “Within the context of present administration and science, I don’t really feel that the BBCS offers sufficient proof to help that the undertaking is at low danger of taking eagles.” Not sufficient related data.

Wind generators must be geared up with state-of-the-art hearth detection and suppression gear. The hazard and menace of wildfires are scary, realizing that the economic generators can set off a fireplace at any time, however the results of local weather change on the hazard of wildfire haven’t been thought-about. Haven’t we superior past industrializing mountaintop habitats and polluting the water assets that move from the mountains, particularly for marginal energy manufacturing at a price so excessive that the commonwealth successfully bailed out this boondoggle by agreeing to buy energy that nobody else, save Virginia taxpayers, would pay for?

If setting up 50- and 60-story-tall industrial machines on prime of mountains increased than 3,000 toes in elevation in Virginia was such a good suggestion, it might be executed by now.

Hundley lives in Clifton Forge.

4 Florence males made a last-minute effort Monday to get county commissioners to halt improvement of a wind farm by claiming a predecessor proprietor of the mission was concerned in fraud.

Sunflower Wind, now owned by the Danish firm Orsted, will sponsor a floor breaking ceremony Thursday.

Tom Britain, who was scheduled for 1:45 p.m. on Monday’s agenda to speak about corruption, didn’t come to the assembly at his scheduled time. He did seem half an hour later, saying he had anticipated others to look with him.

“I ought to have been right here, and I perceive that,” he mentioned. “Individuals are at work, and I’ve had bother getting them collectively.”

Britain mentioned he’d come again and discuss throughout public remark session.

Paperwork he supplied to the fee final week included media protection of an organization that went bankrupt a number of years in the past. The incidents that passed off at the moment concerned firms that owned the mission earlier than Orsted bought it and renamed it Sunflower Wind.

Britain was joined by Florence mayor Bob Gayle, Ed Robinson, and Gary Williams.

Britain learn from {a magazine}. Fee chairman David Mueller reduce him brief.

Gayle mentioned when he’d tried to speak concerning the wind farm earlier, he was reduce off.

“Since then, I obtained a bit of pissed off and did some research on this,” he mentioned. “I did a bit of digging to see the place the cash got here from, and it’s fairly soiled.”

Gayle mentioned he wished commissioners to “look again.”

Mueller mentioned Gayle was speaking a couple of earlier firm, and Gayle agreed.

“Since a brand new firm is attempting to take over, is that this going to be a rip-off too?” Williams mentioned.

Williams mentioned he didn’t know whether or not it was the fee’s accountability or whether or not “we have now to rent another person to do it.”

Mueller advised the boys Orsted has an extended historical past, not solely in america, however worldwide.

In different enterprise, commissioners:

• Bought a $115,774 safety digicam system for the courthouse and rejected bids for a digicam system on the south street and bridge store.
• Heard a report from county engineer Brice Goebel that Sunflower Wind is placing rock on roads.
• Purchased a $33,686 magnet to take away metallic items from gravel street. The movement handed on a 4-1 vote, with commissioner Jonah Gehring opposed.

After asking the Tama Co. Board of Supervisors week after week to contemplate enacting a moratorium on future industrial wind energy tasks – solely to have the requests denied or dismissed – a petition has been filed towards the board by a member of the coalition Tama County In opposition to Generators regarding the board’s current motion to ‘reaffirm’ the county’s wind energy conversion system (WECS) ordinance.

On Thursday, June 23, Dysart resident and farmer Richard W. Arp filed a petition for declaratory judgment in Tama Co. district court docket towards the Tama County Board of Supervisors alleging, partly, that motion taken by the three-member board throughout its common, weekly assembly on Monday, Might 16, violated Iowa Code.

The Tama Co. Board of Supervisors consists of supervisors Dan Anderson, Invoice Faircloth, and Larry Vest.

A declaratory judgment is a binding judgment to find out the rights and obligations of every occasion.

In his petition, Arp alleges the board didn’t observe each Iowa Code and the county’s personal insurance policies when members voted 3-0 to “reaffirm” the 2010 Tama County Zoning Ordinance VI.I Modification No. 1 – which incorporates the WECS ordinance – “as is” after just one posting of the agenda merchandise no less than 24 hours prior and following no alternative for public enter.

Tama County’s WECS ordinance dates again to 2010 when it was added to the county’s 1998 set of zoning ordinances by modification.

Rely I

Arp alleges in Rely 1 of his petition that the board’s resolution to reaffirm the ordinance is illegitimate and void because the board lacks “requisite authority to behave.” The petition states that each the Code of Iowa and Tama County’s ordinance make no differentiation between “adopting an ordinance” and “readopting” or “reaffirming” an ordinance.

Below Iowa Code, the passage of any proposed ordinance or modification by a county’s legislative physique can solely be achieved following consideration and passage “at two conferences of the board previous to the assembly at which it’s to be lastly handed.” This legislation can solely be circumvented by suspending the principles with a recorded vote of not lower than a majority of the supervisors.

In his petition, Arp alleges the county failed to carry the requisite three readings of the ordinance earlier than last passage and “readoption,” and in addition didn’t maintain a public listening to as required.

Arp additional alleges that the board of supervisors didn’t observe Iowa Code when the board failed to stick to the 15-day discover/publication requirement for any proposed ordinance or modification previous to first consideration.

Arp states within the petition that the one discover supplied that the board meant to “reaffirm” the WECS ordinance on Might 16, was the assembly discover and agenda posted within the Tama County Administration Constructing no less than 24 hours previous to the assembly.

Rely II

Below Rely II, Arp alleges the board of supervisors’ resolution to reaffirm the ordinance “isn’t supported by substantial proof, and is unfair, capricious and unreasonable underneath the circumstances.”

Arp cites the aim and intent of the county’s zoning ordinances – to “promote the security, well being and basic welfare of the residents of Tama County” – was bypassed by the board on Might 16 after they didn’t first “undertake affordable consideration and significant evaluate of the county’s rules.”

By refusing to take a moratorium vote on future industrial wind energy tasks with a view to evaluate the county’s “outdated” WECS ordinance because the coalition Tama County In opposition to Generators repeatedly requested the board to do on a number of events, Arp alleges the choice to reaffirm was not supported by proof.

Arp additionally alleges the “sole said foundation for the Board’s refusal to vote on the query of proposing a moratorium” was the specter of a lawsuit by the wind energy developer Salt Creek Wind LLC which is at present growing a wind farm within the central a part of the county.

The letter Arp cites, dated Might 11, 2022, was addressed to the board supervisors and despatched to Tama County Legal professional Brent Heeren from the legislation places of work of Sullivan & Ward. The letter threatens the county with a attainable lawsuit if a moratorium is enacted however doesn’t point out authorized motion if the county merely determined to evaluate its 2010 WECS ordinance.

The specter of authorized motion alone, Arp states in his petition, “bears no affordable relationship to the promotion of well being, security or basic welfare of Tama County residents.” Arp additional finds it “unreasonable” that the board didn’t think about “on the file” another info past the Salt Creek letter in its Might 16 resolution to reaffirm.

Treatment

In his petition, Arp asks the court docket to declare the Tama Co. Board of Supervisors’ Might 16 vote to reaffirm the 2010 WECS ordinance unlawful and void.

Arp additional asks the court docket to command the board to observe Iowa legislation by publishing discover in accordance with Iowa Code and to carry a public listening to relating to reconsideration of the 2010 WECS ordinance.

Arp would additionally just like the court docket to enact a short lived order restraining the board and different Tama County companies from “authorizing or approving any permits for brand new business wind energy tasks, or extra permits for current wind energy tasks” till after the board has held a public listening to to rethink the 2010 WECS ordinance.

Supervisors retain counsel, Conifer speaks

Throughout the Monday, June 27 assembly of the Tama Co. Board of Supervisors, the board mentioned hiring legal professional Carlton Salmons – Heartland Insurance coverage Danger pool legal professional – as counsel for Tama County within the swimsuit introduced by Arp.

Because the county’s danger pool legal professional, Salmons initially suggested the board to reaffirm their present ordinances and keep away from making feedback on the questions posed by the turbine coalition.

Supervisor Vest made the movement to approve Salmons, which was seconded by supervisor Anderson and finally authorised.

When contacted late final week by the Telegraph relating to each the Arp petition and the query of who could be representing the board towards the lawsuit, Tama County Legal professional Brent Heeren declined to wade into the specifics of the lawsuit. Heeren as a substitute referred to the upcoming June 27 board of supervisors assembly agenda merchandise pertaining to the litigation.

“Any remark could be hypothesis and untimely,” Heeren wrote in an electronic mail. “To keep away from prejudice or drawback relating to the place of the Workplace of the Tama County Board of Supervisors relative to the pending litigation; no remark might be forthcoming.”

Throughout the June 27 assembly, little was stated by the three supervisors relating to the lawsuit though a consultant from Conifer Energy, Tom Swierczewski, which owns Salt Creek Wind LLC, was current through the assembly and a part of the agenda.

Swierczewski stood in entrance of the packed board room to deal with a number of the fundamental issues behind the Tama County In opposition to Wind Generators coalition.

“I’ve stayed silent till now as a result of Confier Energy didn’t really feel the necessity to take invaluable time out of your group throughout these conferences to reply questions on Salt Creek Wind,” Swierczewski stated, “as a result of it has been clear to us that there’s little curiosity within the fact.”

“Put merely, Salt Creek wind as soon as constructed might be an financial engine for Tama County,” Swierczewski additional said.

Swierczewski indicated his presence on the board assembly on June 27 was motivated by a want to coach the coalition on a number of the misinformation that has been going round whereas additionally bringing forth advantages that come from wind energy. Search for future reporting relating to Swierczewski’s feedback in an upcoming version of the Telegraph/Solar Courier.

In a press launch from Tama County In opposition to Wind Generators dated June 24, Arp is quoted as follows, “The present [Tama County] ordinance lacks an in depth public criticism decision course of, and doesn’t present the mandatory readability on Tama County’s position in implementing the ordinance, together with fines and penalties for failing to adjust to it. Neither is there any language about limiting shadow flicker or infrasound that may be dangerous to folks and animals. These are among the many explanation why the coalition has been calling for the numerous essential adjustments to the ordinance to supply better public security for present and future generations.”