House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB279 - Committee on Utilities
Short Title
Establishing the wind generation permit and property protection act and imposing certain requirements on the siting of wind turbines.
Minutes Content for Mon, Mar 22, 2021
Matt Sterling, Office of the Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill.
SB 279 would require a developer of a wind generation facility to enter into a facility agreement, comply with certain setback requirements, and have an application approved by the board of county commissioners where the proposed project was located.
The Chairman called for proponent oral testimony on the bill.
Proponent oral testimony
Mike Burns, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He stated five facts are indisputable, and urged the Committee to protect all property owners equally:
- Wind farms are "power plants".
- The negative impact on health, visual pollution, noise pollution, and property values is beyond question.
- These impacts are felt far and wide beyond any county line, for many miles, thereby negatively affecting property owners in other counties, who have no control.
- 51 of 105 Kansas counties have no zoning at all. That number is drastically higher when considering counties with zoning, but no zoning regarding wind power plants.
- There are safely concerns due to mechanical failure, ice, and more. (Attachment 1)
Gayla Randel, private citizen. spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated SB279 must pass because it will:
- Enhance the chance of retaining the rural quality of life of Kansans.
- Ensure ALL Kansans have a voice
- Provide guidance to local elected officials to protect all constituents' health and welfare when working on wind siting and project parameters.
- Ensure homes and properties are protected from overzealous developers who would steal the property rights from nonparticipants.
- Define what is meant by "properly sited" as per 500-foot turbines to ensure health and safety of Kansans.
- Establish a parameter to determine if the wind project is being pushed into a space that is too small. (Attachment 2) (Attachment 3) (Attachment 4)
Byran Coover, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He stated the short duration spiking nature of turbine noise would regularly exceed the 30 DBa that nearly all standards say, including the World Health Organization, is necessary for undisturbed sleep, and dozens of medical professionals around the world have written extensively about health problems associated with having wind turbines to close to homes. He said the wind companies will tell you a 1 1/2 miles is too much distance for siting a turbine, but 1 1/12 miles is the absolute minimum setback for the sound to be tolerable for nearby homeowners. He provided a map showing the homes impacted by a wind turbine farm in his county. (Attachment 5) Mr. Coover said when the wind is blowing, you can't sleep at home, and was appalled when a spokesperson for the wind companies at a county commissioners meeting in Neosho County said he was proud of the fact that "only 9 percent" of the people who live within a mile of the wind turbines can't sleep. (Attachment 6)
Jonathan Sill, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He stated he used to build electrical substations to put wind farms on the grid, and they have a significant impact on the environment they are put in. He said there's a lack of transparency and oversight with the wind industry. He explained the process and his research surrounding proposed wind farms in his area of Kansas, and his dealings with various officials and wind developer representatives. He said promises made by wind company representatives and local government officials have proven to be categorically false. Concluding, he said this bill is a good starting place to give everyone a level playing field. (Attachment 7)
Jessica Schmidt, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated she is a realtor, and home values of homes near wind turbines are dropping. She quoted a study which showed a 12% to 40% loss in property value when located within 2,600 feet of a wind turbine, and stated the further away the home is from a turbine, the lower the loss in value. She said she has done research in Reno County where a wind farm is proposed, and in the last 24 months, the homes closest to the proposed turbine footprint have had reductions in value ranging from $58,000 to $19,000 less than asking price. She also said a sale was canceled when they found out about a wind farm to be built in the area. (Attachment 8)
Kris Van Meteren, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He noted the beauty of the State Capitol building where the hearing was being held, which is 306 feet tall. He said they now have two wind turbines 1,600 feet from their front room that are twice that tall. He said they move, they make noise, they shadow flicker, they blink, they have the potential to throw ice and debris if they happen to fall apart, and basically they have ruined the value of their property. He stated it is the owners of improved property that really are hurt when these farms go in. He said if you have invested your life savings and decades of work into improving and building up a property like theirs, which has a store, a restaurant, cold storage, etc., it devastates the value of everything you have worked for in your life, and it's patently unfair. He said his county is unzoned and they have enjoyed that, but there has always been a respect for your neighbor, and how what you did on your property affected them. He said that went out the window when the wind company came in, and they need some sort of protection for their property rights. (Attachment 9)
Esther Egli, private citizen spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated she and her husband are raising five children on their rural property, and own a Federal Aviation Association certified air strip. She gave a backstory on the fight in Reno County and how that has affected her family personally. She said they have a quarter section of land, and there are three turbines proposed in the traffic patterns of their runway. She stated a 500 foot spinning tower is impossible and deadly for aircraft that would be trying to land on their airstrip. (Attachment 10)
Hal Aggers, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He said when wind farms come in, conflicts result in friends no longer speaking, and you watch as your community falls apart. He asked the Committee to imagine the following:
You buy a piece of property with a beautiful view, good schools, and good churches. You build your dream home, and love it. Then they build a wind turbine 1400 feet from your front door. You walk out the door and it's in your face. At night, you lay down, and all you hear is "whoosh, whoosh, whoosh". You can't sleep. You stare at the ceiling. You have red flashing lights coming in your bedroom window. You're exhausted the next morning because you couldn't sleep. You go out into your living room, and the sun is coming up. You see a flicker, constantly, like someone is turning the lights off and on. You hang your head and you cry.
He told the Committee this was his dream home, and asked who would want to buy it now, and if someone did want to buy it, how much of a loss would he have to take? He stated this scenario is happening all of the state, and SB279 is a regulation to protect the people, the values of their homes, their health and safety. He said it would protect counties who do not have zoning by providing a guideline to follow. He concluded his testimony by saying, "I have to watch 58 flashing lights where I used to watch the stars. Please put yourselves in the shoes of these people who have been taken advantage of". (Attachment 11)
Diane Haverkamp, private citizen spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated her city, Corning, had thrived because of the strong community, work ethic, and community pride. She said they now live in the heart of the Soldier Creek Wind Farm with 54 turbines within their 3 mile city.
She said when the city council found out the project was actually going to consist of 120 turbines surrounding Corning, and encompassing a much larger and more heavily populated area, they became concerned, and decided to pursue zoning. She said their council meetings became chaos, and the wind energy money and power overwhelmed those opposed to the project. She stated it was friends against friends, neighbors against neighbors, family members against family neighbors, the wind company attorneys and representatives intimidated and threatened them every step of the way. She said they did not have the resources to stand up against the giant wind companies. She concluded her testimony saying, "Our community has wounds that will probably never heal." (Attachment 12)
Proponents providing written testimony:
Fisher, David, private citizen, (Attachment 13) (Attachment 14) (Attachment 15)
Westfahl, Steve, private citizen, (Attachment 16)
Kavouras, Beverly, private citizen (Attachment 17)
Heideman, Jackie, private citizen (Attachment 18)
Aberle, Nick, private citizen (Attachment 19)
Lueger, Don, private citizen (Attachment 20)
Deters, Jessica, private citizen (Attachment 21)
Cline, Austin, private citizen (Attachment 22)
Fischer, Jeff, private citizen (Attachment 23)
Pemberton, Mary, private citizen (Attachment 24)
Fincham, Mary Ann, private citizen (Attachment 25)
Oas, Dave, private citizen (Attachment 26)
Novak, Diane, private citizen (Attachment 27)
Allen, Greg, private citizen (Attachment 28)
Hedke, Dennis, private citizen (Attachment 29)
Davis, Dr. Travis, private citizen (Attachment 30)
Armstrong, Harold, private citizen (Attachment 31)
Beene, Janet, private citizen (Attachment 32)
Bergman, K'lyn, private citizen (Attachment 33)
Brack, Cindy, private citizen (Attachment 34)
Carlisle, Robert Mack, private citizen (Attachment 35)
Cullimore, Janeice, private citizen (Attachment 36)
Dare, Ann, private citizen (Attachment 37)
Deay, Gretchen, private citizen (Attachment 38)
Edelman, Brian and Nancy, private citizens (Attachment 39)
Fincham, Chet Jr., private citizen (Attachment 40)
Fincham, Don and Nancy, private citizens (Attachment 41)
Fincham, Kathleen, private citizen (Attachment 42)
Fincham, Linda, private citizen (Attachment 43)
Gillig, Jarrod, private citizen (Attachment 44)
Hawkinson, Melanie, private citizen (Attachment 45)
Hieger, Joseph, private citizen (Attachment 46)
Houghton, Rex and Denise, private citizens (Attachment 47)
Hull, Carol, private citizen (Attachment 48)
Hundley, Kristie, private citizen (Attachment 49)
Kavouras, Larry, private citizen (Attachment 50)
Kee, Micah and Sonya, private citizens (Attachment 51)
King, Gary, private citizen (Attachment 52)
Koch, Gary and Susan, private citizens (Attachment 53)
Koch, Robert and Ellen, private citizens (Attachment 54)
Krohn, Valerie, private citizen (Attachment 55)
Martin, Arletha, private citizen (Attachment 56)
McCoy, Brandi, private citizen (Attachment 57)
Musil, Don, private citizen (Attachment 58)
Musil, Laura, private citizen (Attachment 59)
Musil, Mona, private citizen (Attachment 60)
Nicholson, Kathy, private citizen (Attachment 61)
Olson, Paul and Marabeth, private citizen (Attachment 62)
Parthemer, Joe and Marty, private citizen (Attachment 63)
Raub, Regan, private citizen (Attachment 64)
Roeder, Dennis and Linda, private citizens (Attachment 65)
Schmidt, Dan, private citizen (Attachment 66)
Scopp, William, private citizen (Attachment 67)
Siewert, Jason, private citizen (Attachment 68)
Stewart, Margy, private citizen (Attachment 69)
Taylor, Glenda, private citizen (Attachment 70)
Tolin, Jane, private citizen (Attachment 71)
Young, Ron, private citizen (Attachment 72)
Following oral testimony, The Chairman called for a period of questions and answers.
There being no more time for questions, The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 2:42 pm.
