Wind turbine protestors persist for moratorium

COLFAX - Save the Palouse not-for-profit members came before the Whitman County Commissioners to ask them to fight against the Wind Turbine project proposed near Kamiak Butte during the Monday, Dec. 2, regular commission meeting.

Colfax farmer and Save the Palouse member Bill Myers asked commissioners to reconsider the moratorium again.

A moratorium is a temporary suspension of an activity, law or regulation.

"It makes absolutely no sense to grant these guys anything," Myers said, noting that he is concerned about subsidiaries when the turbines are passed on.

Whitman County resident and Save the Palouse member Teresa Bannister asked commissioners if they were aware of Benton County's lawsuit against the wind company.

"The lawsuit they are filing against the governor's approval of the project, yes," Whitman County Commissioner Art Swannack responded.

According to Bannister, this opens the doors for the commissioners to join and fight for the county. "Not agree with them, not decide, not lay down and let this happen," she said.

"Can you explain how Benton County sued against the governor and would open the door for Whitman County," asked Swannack, to which Bannister replied they are fighting against the Wind Turbines in Horse Heaven.

Kevin Akesson stated that the governor's ability to impose basically land use regulation by disappointment of the FSEC and the authority it has been given recently is unconstitutional.

Swannack said those issues were dealt with in 2008 and 2012 by the State Supreme Court in regards to the constitution of the legislature setting up for FSEC ruling it was constitutional and their administration processes are constitutional.

"How the governor handled this last issue specifically we'll see what the courts say on that. I don't know if they'll uphold his action or they'll have some remanding saying he went too far," Swannack said. "But they upheld FSEC's ability to be the alternate path for land use regulation compared to the county."

Swannack said he understood and agreed that it should be local but that is what the Supreme Court ruled.

"In my mind, a moratorium would give us some time to do that more thoroughly, utilizing whatever the state is currently studying the issue as well and coming up with documents for non site specific regulations," Akesson said. "I think there's justification for a moratorium and that would help our situation in the county."