Windmills: Landowners seek cut in tower setbacks

A crowd consisting primarily of landowners from the Colton area asked Whitman County commissioners Monday to reduce the legal distance allowed between a tower and a building in the pending ordinance governing commercial wind farms in the county.

“I want them so close the tip of the blade just barely misses my house,” said Duane Grubb. “That’s how they have them down in Texas. Y’all need to catch up.”

Landowners stand to gain income from the rent paid by wind power companies building towers on their land, but the limit on the distance between a building and a tower could discourage future companies, said those in the crowd.

Several wind companies are already very interested in the wind patterns on the Palouse. Some have already come down to test the wind.

County commissioners conducted a public hearing on the proposed commercial wind ordinance Monday night at the Public Service Building in Colfax.

If approved, the county’s proposed five times tower height setback would be the most restrictive in the state, according to Alan Thomson, county planner.

Commissioners have scheduled a decision on the ordinance for 10:45 a.m. Monday, Nov. 16.

The ordinance has sparked intense debate in the more than two years since the county began crafting it.

With wind power companies on the brink of building a wind farm around Colton, residents from that area dominated Monday night’s discussion.

The proposed ordinance would mandate wind towers be placed five times their height from neighboring houses and one and a half times their height from property lines, though neighbors can sign waivers to eliminate the property line setback. There are no restrictions on the height of the towers.

Tower companies pay rent to the people who own the land the towers sit on.

But many residents have said the five times tower height setback could mean they lose money if the companies are forced to keep the towers so far from residence.

If a company cannot build as close as they need to a residence, their decision to even move into the area could be jeopardized.

“Our energy developer has voiced the opinion that if the setback is five, we may not have a wind farm,” said Charlene Jutte, a Lewiston resident whose family owns farmland west of Colton.

Jutte told the Gazette after the meeting that wind company Iberdrola Renewables, based in Spain, has nearly finished testing winds on the Snake River breaks west of Colton.

Colton landowner Chris Schultheis presented commissioners with figures that showed a five times height setback would make as many as 288 acres of land out of bounds for Iberdrola’s proposed project.

Schultheis said that may cost him, and many others, revenue from leasing their land to wind companies.

“While I’m generally in favor of the ordinance as it is written, we would feel compelled to challenge it,” said Schultheis.

Another faction may also challenge the suit.

Carolyn Kiesz of Thornton said the ordinance discriminates against those that do not want to view turbines from their property.

“If I were you, I wouldn’t be too afraid of being sued by wind companies. I would be more afraid of being sued by constituents,” she commented.

Kiesz and Roger Whitten of Oakesdale have already sued the county. They both filed suits to reverse planner Thomson’s determination under the State Environmental Policy Act that the ordinance does not present negative environmental impacts.

That suit will be heard in Whitman County Superior Court, but not until a final decision is made on passage of the ordinance.

Whitten said the ordinance does not adequately protect public health. He said low-frequency noise vibrations produced by the turbines can prevent neighbors from sleeping through the night.

Erin Anderson, an Ellensburg attorney who has worked on several wind farm lawsuits, said studies have shown turbines do not produce low-frequency noises.

“Where is the harm in outlawing noise pollution that these industrial turbines supposedly do not make?” Whitten asked in response.

County Prosecutor Denis Tracy said the county will need to have definitive, scientifically-based reasoning to justify the five times tower height setback.

In stressing the ordinance would create a set of minimum requirements, Tracy said the state and federal constitutions require governments only restrict private property rights for the general good.

“You can’t go overboard in trying to protect the public health, safety and welfare,” he advised

Ben Fairbanks, a spokesman with First Wind of Portland, said the justifications for the five times tower height setback are unclear. He noted the ordinance exceeds standards set by the state and other county ordinances.

First Wind is considering siting a wind farm on Naff Ridge north of Thornton.

Fairbanks urged quick passage of the ordinance. He said turbines and construction materials have become less expensive since the onset of the recession.

“The passage of this ordinance will allow Whitman County to take advantage of this windfall,” Fairbanks predicted. He added an increase of state and federal subsidies for wind energy makes now an even better time for companies to site wind farms.

Carolyn Kiesz’ husband, Rick, criticized the very benefits of which Fairbanks spoke. He said government subsidies for wind farms often result in higher rates charged electricity customers.

“This is a massive transfer of money from taxpayers and ratepayers to energy companies, wind developers, and others who are in on the scheme,” he said.

Commissioners will accept written testimony on the ordinance until 5 p.m. tomorrow, Friday.