Hearing covers only fiscal court moratorium and wind energy conversion system definitions
The Henderson City-County Planning Commission on Tuesday set the date for the first public hearing regarding wind energy systems.
But officials say it’s important to note that the Sept. 2 meeting will only deal with a Henderson County Fiscal Court proposal to institute a moratorium on applications and permits of wind energy projects to any county governmental bodies until July 1, 2026, and the definitions involved in wind energy conversion systems—and not anything that would establish a wider wind energy system ordinance.
At the fiscal court’s July 22 meeting, it approved a resolution that directs the planning commission to hold at least three public hearings, the first of which asks the planning commission to make a recommendation about the moratorium and the definitions that are contained within the resolution. That will occur Sept. 2. This first public hearing will be in the Fiscal Court Courtroom on the third floor of the old courthouse.
The resolution also asks for a second public hearing, which doesn’t have a date currently, the planning commission is asked to hold a fact-finding public hearing to “gather testimony and evidence” from which a comprehensive wind energy conversion system regulations can be crafted.
Brian Bishop, the planning commission’s executive director, said there could be more than one fact-finding public hearing.
Furthermore, in regard to this second public hearing, the planning commission follows a standard procedure in which meetings begin at the normal 6 p.m. time and run until everyone who desires has had a chance to speak. If by 9 p.m., people are still waiting to voice their comments, the hearing is stopped for the evening and continued till the next evening at 6 p.m. The same pattern continues until everyone has had a chance to speak.
After the fact-finding public hearing(s), the planning commission will create the text amendment to the county zoning ordinance that will regulate wind energy systems and will include such specifics as turbine height, shadow flicker, noise and more.
Bishop said it has not yet been determined precisely who will write the text that deals with wind energy, but he expects that it will consist of a group of officials, including the planning commission staff, county codes administrator and county attorney. The regulations will be written using the information presented at the public hearings that include residents’ comments, experts that testify and internal research, Bishop said.
The planning commission is then directed to hold another public hearing regarding residents’ opinions about the proposed comprehensive wind energy regulations.
Officials say focus on the first meeting
Though at least three public hearings will occur along the road to create the regulations surrounding wind energy in the county, both David Dixon, the planning commission chair, and Tommy Joe Fridy, its attorney, cautioned residents to take the process one step at a time.
They urged understanding that Sept. 2’s meeting will only involve the moratorium, proposed to last until July 1, 2026, and the definitions integral to the wind energy conversion system regulations. They asked that residents and wind energy officials—at the Sept. 2 meeting—not speak about specifics that might be used in the creation of wind energy regulations, such as shadow flicker, wind turbine height, noise and health effects, and narrow public comments specifically to the moratorium and definitions.
After the planning commission hears comments about the moratorium and the definitions at the Sept. 2 meeting, it will make a recommendation to be sent back to the fiscal court, Dixon said.
He said the planning commission may decide to recommend an increase to the length of the moratorium or it may decide the July 1, 2026 end date is suitable. The fiscal court is not bound to approve the planning commission’s recommendation.
“I’m wondering if a year is enough time,” Frank Boyett, a planning commissioner, said during Tuesday’s planning commission meeting.
“That’s something we’re going to discuss,” Dixon responded.
The issue of wind energy in the county, and more specifically giant wind turbines, blew up late spring after the Federal Aviation Administration released information that it was taking public comments about the energy company Cordelio Power’s plan to erect 93 wind turbines in eastern Henderson County, each reaching about 700 feet tall. (Cordelio said the 93 turbine locations submitted to the FAA represent the largest possible footprint of the plan, and not the number they are shooting for, which is 50-70.)
Since the FAA study became public, public sentiment on social media has roasted county officials, with many of the outraged comments suggesting that elected officials have not been transparent in the process. Those officials, including Henderson County Judge-Executive Brad Schneider, have countered that the process hasn’t started yet and begins with public hearings conducted by the planning commission.
Two speakers at Tuesday’s meeting
Also at Tuesday’s meeting Kyle Gerking, a vice president of engineering for Tenaska, a partner of Cordelio, read a letter detailing the project’s positives. After he finished, though, Fridy said that because the planning commission is currently preparing to deal with the moratorium and definitions, his letter would need to be read into the record when the planning commission holds public hearing about the county-wide wind energy ordinance.
Shannon Hill, a Bluff City Road resident who is fighting against the wind turbines, offered opposition to the project and Gerking’s comments. Fridy also told her that her comments about the wider ordinance would need to come during the public hearings regarding the wind energy ordinance.
“Please, there’s going to be a time and place, and the planning commission very much wants to hear it,” Fridy said.
Hill agreed but said she still wanted to speak to offer an opposing view to Gerking.
Among other comments, Hill said county residents don’t want what has happened in Robards to happen to Henderson County, referring to the thousands of acres on which solar panels have been erected around the southern Henderson County town.
In other planning commission news:
- A plan to build a new laundromat on North Green Street was withdrawn by the submitter. Brad Woosley said the planning commission staff’s plan only allows for 10 parking spots for a business that would have 10 washing machines. Woosley the requirement of equal parking spots to the number of washing machines would cause him to go broke in six months. “This is not feasible,” he said. Planning Commission Assistant Director Jennifer Marks said that businesses must come into compliance with current city regulations when a new business is built in response to Woosley’s argument that other laundromats have more machines and fewer parking spots.
- The planning commission approved a site plan to build a new building on the campus of Henderson Veterinary Medical Center at 3143 U.S. 41-North across from Audubon State Park.
- The planning commission approved a 2% merit pay increase for Bishop after he received a 95.2% average evaluation score from the planning commission.
