EARL WATT

    • Leader & Times

EDITOR’S NOTE — This is the first in a series of stories of reactions to the proposed wind turbine Conditional Use Permit that was released to the public Wednesday.

Now that the conditional use permit for Thresher Wind has been released publicly, Seward County residents are getting their first look at what has been negotiated for more than a year between the Seward County Commission and the wind company.

Rural resident Neal Coffey, who said he is not opposed to wind projects but wants to make sure all citizens are protected, said he had some concerns about the agreement and the recommendations that were provided by the public.

“The commissioners didn’t listen to us at all,” Coffey said. “Let’s start with the setback. They didn’t touch it, and it is not close to what was asked of them during meetings and public comments.”

Some requested a two-mile setback, which Coffey said was an unreasonable request.

“But what is realistic is a mile away from an occupied residence,” Coffey said.

Coffey also has done research on the value of a wind turbine and what rates would be if they were actually taxed, and he said the financial contribution to the county was well below market value.

“I am very concerned the dollar amount on the payment,” he said. “I don’t think they got close to where that should be relative to lost tax revenue for 10 years.”

Coffey has a background in the wind farming industry, and he verified with business associates on how to reach the proper value. He shared that data with the commission, but it was not used in determining the values.

“I researched install costs, right of way, and the turbines themselves to determine their install cost broken down to a  per megawatt basis,” Coffey said. “I fed that number into the process so they would have a monetary number in front of them to know what they are actually worth. I gave that to a commissioner to introduce. Dr. Carolyn Huddleston reached out and got financial numbers as well. When you look at what those numbers were relative to value and what property taxes could be, from an in lieu of payment, it isn’t even in the 1 percentile, and perhaps it was never intended to be.”

Coffey also said the decommission component of the agreement was lacking.

“The decommission plans are not adequate relative to concerns I’ve shared with commissioners,” he said. “The road use agreement doesn’t have the necessary elements from a bonding perspective.”

Coffey also believed the offers to accept public input moving forward are limiting and still lack a dedicated meeting to the topic of commercial wind turbines in Seward County.

“My concern is it sounds like there will not be a separate session to comment on this, only whatever public comments they decide to allow prior to their vote,” Coffey said. “I have no confidence anything we send to them will be read.”

After reviewing the agreement, Coffey still believed an advisory vote was necessary.

“We absolutely should have an advisory vote, and it should have been done a long time ago,” he said. “I don’t understand why we would be opposed to that.”

Ryan Martin is also a rural resident, and he, too, had concerns about the proposed agreement, but beyond that, believed an agreement should have waited until the public was asked whether or not they wanted wind turbine under any circumstances.

“If they are paying are legal bills, where did we come up with $287,000?” Martin asked, refering to the more than $300,000 in legal expenses that Seward Count has already incurred working on an agreement.

Martin also looked at the 10-year payments to the county and believed they were far lower than expected.

“That’s just $4650,000 per year,” Martin said. “That is miniscule to the whole scheme of things That won’t buy a road grader. That’s pennies for a corporation that big who stands to make what they will make. It’s insulting.”

He also believed offering those who do not want to be a participant in the program a $500 annual payment was also a worthless gesture.

“How did they come to that?” Martin said. “That doesn’t buy you much. If you are going to offer compensation, offer compensation. Don’t offer an insult.”

Martin participated in providing feedback, something he believed had no effect on the final proposal, and he believed it was very limited.

“There was very little opportunity for input with planning and zoning,” he said. “For the whole county, maybe 12 to 18 minutes devoted to any county input. That’s what you had.”

“I’m glad to see they added 900 feet to the 1,000 feet, but the rest of us want more than 1,900 feet,” Martin said. “That is not that far. That is just a tick over a quarter of a mile. That has to be increased.”

Martin said the setback would be fought by the wind company, but to represent the people, the commission had an obligation to increase the setbacks for those who do not want to be a part of the project.

“The reason why it didn’t get set back more is the wind group will kick and scream, because the further that setback is, the more difficult it is to find a place to put a turbine,” Martin said. “You move it from this house, now it is closer to this house. You say 3,000 feet, now it is not on top of a hill, it’s in a low spot. That setback without a doubt has to be addressed. From what I have perused, the setback was not addressed at all. No one is going to say moving it from 1,000 feet to 1,900 feet satisfied their concern. You still have a wind turbine in front of your house.”

Martin also had issues with the 50 decibel sound limit and how it would be monitored and also the 30 hours of allowing shadow flicker on a non participating home. But more importantly, Martin said it is not the details of the agreement that are as important as to the overarching concern of whether the residents of Seward County want wind turbines at all.

“I appreciate the work, but they put the cart in front of the horse,” Martin said. “It was done backwards. It was a ridiculous amount of money being spent that should have been done after deciding we wanted it to happen. I was not impressed with the agreement. It was not that different than what we saw before. But I still don’t want wind turbines.”

Martin said a public advisory vote was still necessary.

“Apparently the commission from Day 1 has decided we should have them,” he said. “The public says we should not have commercial wind turbines. They have totally ignored the people. I have stood up, sent facts, and others have for different reasons, and we go back and work on a compromise or some degree of CUP. They are missing it. We don’t want them, no matter what is negotiated.”