Locals speak on turbines at Commissioner's workshop

COLFAX -Members of the public gathered for two workshops Whitman County Commissioners held presenting the process, code, and laws surrounding the possible development of a proposed wind turbine farm near Kamiak Butte.

Workshop presentations

County Planner Alan Thompson spoke at the morning meeting addressing the process that the planning department goes through with applicants. During the afternoon session Public Works Director Mark Storey was there to explain in his place.

Thompson clarified to the public that there have not been any applications received by the county yet and explained that as County Planner, it is his job to make sure that the application once received is a full application.

Whitman County Prosecuting Attorney and Civil Attorney Denis Tracy explained the process.

Tracy said that any wind turbine company, or those associated with wind companies, has to obtain the conditional use permit by going through a process.

The process, Tracy said, is part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and has to present this to a Hearing Examiner who may potentially give them the conditional use permit.

"So the county, through the Planning Department, has a court process and we're responsible for putting together the conditions and also the SEPA," Thompson said, "When the final draft is done, that will be presented."

Thompson said that it is then the Hearing Examiner who decides if that is accepted or not. "He will take public comment as well," Thompson said, noting that after going away for a month, the examiner will come back with a decision.

Thompson said that the conditional use permit has conditions related to noise, visual aspects and setbacks.

"Slightly before the application there is going to be a pre-application meeting, a public meeting, so we'll know that the application is coming in the day after we have that meeting," Thompson said, adding that the public meeting will be the first thing they organize.

Thompson explained that once he determines it's a full application he then has to distribute twelve copies to county commissioners, public works, the roads department and environmental health.

This would then trigger an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which requires a consultant hired by the applicant to work for the county called TetraTech to take them through the process and involve the public in possible environmental impacts.

Thompson said the next step is a scoping process, open to the public, to what they have to look at in the environmental review. "After the scoping then we'll have a draft, which I have to put together," he said, adding that it involves review from the company on potential adverse environmental effects put together by the consultant and analyzed.

"Then finally there is going to be a final EIS," Thompson said, "That whole process is going to take a lot of time, it's going to take several months to get through all that process."

State law, Commissioner options

Tracy explained that if a conditional use permit is issued, or denied, by the Hearing Examiner that the outcome can appeal and be appealed to the Superior Court, called a Land Use Petition Act (LUPA), which starts a review process through the judicial court of the state.

If either side is dissatisfied, it can be appealed to the State Supreme Court.

The Energy Facility Site Evaluation and Council (EFSEC) was created, Tracy said, as an alternative process to comply with the local zoning code, or to have the project reviewed.

"It provides an alternative and the person that gets to choose is the applicant," Tracy said, "the developer, can anytime, for whatever reason, say 'I've decided not to go through the county review process.'"

Tracy explained that the developer can then decide to go through the state review process or EFSEC, and if they do then the project no longer has to comply with all zoning provisions for the county. In this scenario, Tracy said that the county planner is not the one who does the SEPA analysis, but it is done at the state level and approved or denied by the governor.

"There has not been a project considered by SFSEC that has been rejected," Tracy said, "every project, every recommendation to approve a project that was made to the governor has been approved by the governor."

Tracy said that the only option for commissioners would be to declare a moratorium or a pause to review county code, but they would need a good reason such as health issues, or an interim zoning change which would pause to allow them to review the code.

"Depending on what the commissioners do, that might dictate to the applicant what they can do," Tracy said, "Keep in mind that the applicant can decide to go the SFSEC route, and remove themselves from the local process. And remove the project from local codes."

Tracy said that a moratorium would not bind the state process.

"There are limited legal options available to the county," Tracy said, "You want the county to follow the law."

Harvest Hills

Harvest Hills Project Director Shane Roche was present at the April 29 meeting and commented that the Commissioners put on a good workshop and were informative.

"We are here to work with the county," Roche said, adding that they hope to continue to work with the county and look forward to working with them through the process.

Roche said that the company is relatively familiar with the code, and have been reviewing it since the beginning, which is what's been dictating the studies that they have done to meet the current ordinance.

"We appreciate the process for this, and we are listening to what the community has to say," Roche said, "We're working on having better answers for the community."

Roche expects to have more information in July.

Opposition

Colfax School District Superintendent Jerry Pugh gave a presentation at the morning meeting. Pugh, stated that the School Board had issues with the proposed wind turbine project concerning assessed values.

"I've met with the company, there's not enough information to tell us what that assessed value will look like, because there's no cost associated with it," Pugh said, "So far my view on this, and as we've discussed it as a board is, that this is not a positive thing for the Colfax School District."

Pugh explained that this is in the sense of receiving funding due to assessed value growing at a slower rate in Whitman County than other counties..

"It's about $285,000 in our last levy that came, so as the assessed value hits a sharp increase that will affect $285,000," Pugh said, adding that it will also be met with declining enrollment.

Pugh said that this was concerning to the School Board, and they have been studying hard to understand the impacts that it could have.

Whitman County Assessor Wraylee Flodin spoke to this by stating there is a local levy and a state levy, and that is the state levy that she believed Pugh was speaking about. "We don't calculate that here, it's calculated through the state and it's not a very clear process where they get that funding from," she said.

Several spoke up in opposition during the public comment portion of the Monday workshop. One was Colfax resident farmer Art Sager, "I would totally support this whole wind project to be built in Thurston County,"he said, "There's plenty of wind there. Right in front of the Governor's mansion."

Pullman resident and business owner Judy Cole urged commissioners to do what they could to keep it in locals hands.

Farmer Jack Lien cited his concerns on tourists not wanting to bring revenue to the county and mentioned that this could have been addressed three years ago when leases were signed.

"None of this is for us," said Dusty resident and farmer Bill Myers, "They don't make country like this anymore. This is it."

Landowners

While many spoke up against the wind turbines, two local farmers who signed leases spoke on their decision to sign up their land.

Colfax farmer Greg Jones, said that he is in favor of the project.

"I am one of the guys who signed up for the lease, because I want the money," he said, "Having an extra source of income on a farm is a good idea."

Jones said that he has driven around and seen other places where they have turbines and the people he's talked to seemed happy.

"Having more income for the county and the assessed value is a good idea," Jones said, "I like the government services and I would prefer someone else paid for them other than me."

Jones also mentioned, in regards to changing the view of Kamiak Butte, that there are currently four Washington State University radio towers on the butte that they said would ruin the view and it didn't ruin his view.

"I really don't want someone telling me what I can and cannot do on my place," Jones said, "It's a private properties rights thing, I am in favor of it and I want to say so publicly."

Multi-generational farm owner Martin Marler said he had also signed up his land for the proposed wind turbine project.

Marler said that his farm has passed through three generations and will be 150 years old next year.

"Our place is not in view from Kamiak Butte State Park, if there's any wind turbines placed on my ground you will not be able to see them," Marler said, "We're off to the west end to being a little on the south edge."

Marler said that if people wanted to fight this they should have been in Washington D.C. when it was passed to make energy out of wind. "It's too late," he said, "The government thinks we need turbines to produce power, we know we're going to have a shortage, so here we are."