DeKalb County wind farm lawsuit moves forward

Posted June 11, 2010 at 5:13 p.m.

ct-wind-biz.jpgDon and David Halverson stand near one of two wind turbines they allowed to be installed on their property in DeKalb County, March 4, 2010. They get paid about $9,000 annually for each wind turbine. (Alex Garcia/ Chicago Tribune)

By Julie Wernau | A Circuit Court judge cleared the way this week for a lawsuit filed by a group of DeKalb County residents who claim 126 wind turbines are there illegally and want them torn down.

The wind farm was the subject of a Tribune story this March that highlighted the health complaints of residents living near the structures. Residents who live nearthe turbines, which are about 400 feet high from blade to tip, have complained of sleep disturbances, illnesses and vertigo from strobe-like flashes produced by the whirling blades.

On Wednesday, Judge Michael Cowell of the 16th Judicial Circuit Court denied a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the wind farm’s developer, FPL Energy Illinois Wind LLC (a subsidiary of NextEra Energy), the DeKalb County Board and landowners who have agreed to lease land for turbines and transmission lines. In a 15-page opinion, the judge said the residents complaints’ had the legal standing necessary for the case to move forward.


Residents living near the turbines say the DeKalb County Board allowed a special zoning permit for the turbines, although it did not meet the board’s own definitions of a permitted use. They also say the board failed to issue a permit within the time period allowed under state statutes, and that they did not fully consider the impact the turbines would have on  surrounding residents.

“Our complaint seeks to have the turbines removed,” said Richard Porter, attorney for the residents’ group. “If the zoning that was issued was void, they were put there improperly.”

The defendants in the case have 28 days to respond to the complaint. Porter said he plans to move forward with discovery motions and depositions of the DeKalb County Board members and FPL employees related to the case. A status conference has been scheduled for Aug.12.

 

28 comments:

  1. John in Glenview June 11, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    “the subject of a Tribune story this March that highlighted the health complaints”
    Sweet. Does the Tribune ever do a story longer than 100 words with a subject about something good?
    Let’s see… no turbines, no off-shore oil, no coal.
    Bur remember to check. All the attorneys and execs of “non-profit” groups that pursue these issues pull in high-five into mid-six salaries and great benes. And they rely on Internet, not printed, word-of-mouth.
    I going long on firewood!

  2. Joshua Towle June 11, 2010 at 6:52 pm

    Wow…this makes me sad and sick. People are willing to pollute the air with emissions from cars, use electricity burned from coal and nuclear power, support landfills rather than 100% recycling efforts and yet have the audacity to complain about efficient, 100% clean energy. Every day it saddens me that people are so selfish as to think only of their immediate needs that are actually destroying possibilities for each forthcoming generation.

  3. Adrian Spencer June 11, 2010 at 7:20 pm

    Joshua–I’d suggest that you just move right in underneath one of those turbines, and see how you like it….of course you would have the advantage of knowing it was there BEFORE you moved in….

  4. **** Bacon June 11, 2010 at 7:30 pm

    What a load of crap. They’re just jealous because it’s not on their land.

  5. Brian June 11, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    “Joshua Towle | June 11, 2010 6:52 PM | Reply
    Wow…this makes me sad and sick. People are willing to pollute the air with emissions from cars, use electricity burned from coal and nuclear power, support landfills rather than 100% recycling……”
    He said typing on his computer made from all the things he claims to dislike so much. I’m betting you’re one of those “not in my backyard” kind of enviros too. As long as everyone else gets with the program you’re in the clear.
    Don’t you know those things kill birds? Don’t you care about that? What about the future generations of those birds that future generations of our children will never get to enjoy? How dare you take away that joy from all of them for your own selfish desires!
    Basically, I’m saying good luck trying to walk your talk Joshua.

  6. ejhickey June 11, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    I hate windmills

  7. riffles June 11, 2010 at 8:36 pm

    Wake up, DeKalb County! You’re fighting against clean energy so you can breathe poisonous, sooty air produced by fossil fuels.????!!! Die now, so we can get you out of the way and proceed with a clean future. You’re impeding progress; just put your mouths to a tailpipe, suck the emissions you love and live happily ever after…

  8. AAP June 11, 2010 at 9:24 pm

    “Wake up, DeKalb County! You’re fighting against clean energy so you can breathe poisonous, sooty air produced by fossil fuels.????!!! Die now, so we can get you out of the way and proceed with a clean future. You’re impeding progress; just put your mouths to a tailpipe, suck the emissions you love and live happily ever after…”
    Most amusing comment I’ve read today. Hope the judge laughs this one out of court. Are they claiming epileptic seizures like the Pokeman viewers, too? Any word as to if they are of the “teabagger” variety?

  9. Jim June 11, 2010 at 9:43 pm

    This is comical. Lawsuits in the past have consisted of angry landowners who weren’t included in the “grid” and therefore, aren’t making any money. The flashing lights are there solely for the purpose of preventing aircraft from hitting them. Thus, they flight UP. They are not engineered to flash on the ground at all. These ex-city folk who infested the farm country should move back to their cities where they belong. All the do is complain about farms.

  10. Katelyn June 11, 2010 at 11:42 pm

    They’re putting these up near my hometown but I’m pretty sure there are rules for a minimum distance from homes etc. there. I wonder if these windmills had those same rules? Anyway, I haven’t heard any similar complaints and when I’ve stayed there haven’t had any trouble even though they are pretty close to my parents’ place. I don’t think they really have a case.

  11. Todd Olson June 12, 2010 at 12:30 a.m.

    Have lived in DeKalb county, and in European countries where wind power is an integral part of energy supply. Here’s the comparison in dialogue.
    DeKalb: “I don’t like these big spinny things.”
    Europe: “Wind farms provide clean, renewaable power.”

  12. Southsider June 12, 2010 at 1:08 a.m.

    While the electricity from the windmills may be clean it is not cheap. It is about 3 times as expensive as a conventional power plant. The people building them don’t care how much they cost as long as the government subsidies keep rolling in.
    T. Boone Pickens is making another $100M and sticking the taxpayer with the bill.

  13. ChiWatcher June 12, 2010 at 4:42 a.m.

    To Jim’s comment at 9:43 PM:
    This is what the article says: “…vertigo from strobe-like flashes produced by the whirling blades.” I believe they were talking about the sun light that gets blocked/unblocked while they’re spinning, not the lights on top of the tower. I have a ceiling fan with that problem, so I can relate.
    Although the article didn’t mention it, those things can also be really loud.
    To the others criticizing the law suit, if your family was being physically affected, you’d want them down too.
    Finally, this is yet another example of the government breaking its own rules and doing whatever they want.

  14. bob June 12, 2010 at 6:25 a.m.

    If you didn”t want them why did’t you vote against them in the first place .or are you jealous you are not getting some of the money the farmer is getting payed for them on his property

  15. Rachel June 12, 2010 at 7:28 a.m.

    I think the flashes they are referring to are the blades reflecting sunlight as they whirl around. I haven’t seen this myself, but then, I haven’t seen too many turbines.
    And Joshua, while I like the idea of clean energy, I also support individuals’ rights not to be physically affected. Perhaps these turbines really do affect the health of a large portion of the population. If so, that needs to be taken into account. I hardly consider that to be a case of selfish people considering only their immediate needs.
    And I agree with Brian. When we first started hearing about these, people talked about the birds and bats who were killed, but we hardly hear about that anymore. I would like more research in that area, as well.

  16. fiji1973 June 12, 2010 at 7:49 a.m.

    I find this quite amusing. I live, farm and work in an area where there has been a wind farm put in place with more on there way. And I could not name one individual who is suffering health consequences related to the wind turbines. My shop has several wind turbines around it, not on my ground, and I hardly notice the noise. I will admit it is an eye sore during the night time hours, the red beacons can be seen for 20 plus miles on a clear night.

  17. DAG June 12, 2010 at 8:39 a.m.

    From what I’ve heard, this “clean” energy is a money loser on its own. The energy companies are making their money (and a lot of it), not on the energy itself, but on the federal grants and subsidies we’re funding so politicians can ballyhoo such “progress”. The turbines are only about 30% efficient (compared with 98% for coal and nuclear) and there is no financial incentive to maintain them. Once the feds stop the incentives and force wind energy to compete with conventional energy sources, the wind farms will be abandoned.
    Your tax dollar at work (against you).

  18. position June 12, 2010 at 10:30 a.m.

    This is another example (or excuse) of no matter how much this country attempts to get off its addition to oil, avoid polluting the air burning coal or avoid dependence on the automobile, people find an excuse to return us to our old fashion energy-consuming ways. Somewhere here there needs to be a common ground, a give-and-take on this. I can only guess that this lawsuit is being sponsored by the oil companies so they can continue to keep Americans dependent on the consumption of their crude oil.

  19. JohnCU June 12, 2010 at 12:26 pm

    DAG is confused. Wind turbines are no less efficient than other electric generators at energy conversion. Wind doesn’t blow continuously and overall output is often around 30% of the machine’s maximum capacity, averaged over time. But most people don’t realize that in good areas, wind turbines are producing power 70-80% if the time. And it is even better with offshore wind. Last year the US installed 9 GW of windpower, equivalent to the output of 3 nuclear plants. They only take 2 years to build, they are very safe and the cost of the fuel is unbeatable.
    I attended a county board meeting on wind. Two opponents from McClean Co were there, talking about how terrible it was to live with turbines nearby. An autistic child seems to be badly affected by one. I did not rate the presentation of the opposition as convincing or effective. Neither did the board. They voted for the ordinance by a wide margin to set standards and control development.

  20. JohnCU June 12, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    DAG is confused. Wind turbines are no less efficient than other electric generators at energy conversion. Wind doesn’t blow continuously and overall output is often around 30% of the machine’s maximum capacity, averaged over time. But most people don’t realize that in good areas, wind turbines are producing power 70-80% if the time. And it is even better with offshore wind. Last year the US installed 9 GW of windpower, equivalent to the output of 3 nuclear plants. They only take 2 years to build, they are very safe and the cost of the fuel is unbeatable.
    I attended a county board meeting on wind. Two opponents from McClean Co were there, talking about how terrible it was to live with turbines nearby. An autistic child seems to be badly affected by one. I did not rate the presentation of the opposition as convincing or effective. Neither did the board. They voted for the ordinance by a wide margin to set standards and control development.

  21. jerry b. June 12, 2010 at 4:23 pm

    Wind farms kill birds? What about glass skyscrapers. Should we tear all of them down as well? Have you any idea how many birds get cleaned up daily on the streets of Chicago?
    Wake up and get with it.

  22. Hu June 12, 2010 at 7:00 pm

    I have a few questions to those that demand we stop producing/using oil -
    1. Can you live without it? No you can’t or you would be showing us how right NOW!.
    2. Will you throw away and promise (a real promise not a politician’s promise) NEVER to use anything that was produced with oil or oil by products be it plastics, medicines, electric power, that shiny computer screen you are looking at when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining?
    3. Will you start driving on roads that are dirt only? no cement, rock or whatever and no road graders to level it out?
    4. will you live in mud hut, teepee, sod walled, or bamboo hut?
    5. Will you forgo any surgery in a clean sterile operating room?
    6. Will you give away every possession you own that was made, shaped, improved, transported, designed with oil?
    7. WIll you poop in a hole in your yard, pee in the vegetable garden, throw you glasses away, turn off your refridgerator, throw out all your medicines, refuse to read newspapers (the ink may be soy based but growing the soy, manufaturing it into ink, etc will need oil).
    8. Please consider the sanctimoniousness of preaching about the environment. Park your cars, turn off everything you own that runs on man made energy, throw out medicine that needs refrigeration, grow your own food, carry water into your house after hand pumping it into a bucket made without any man made energy, poop in a bucket, wipe yourself with Birch Bark – wait that tree may have it’s feeling hurt, pee in your own yard, blow up your flat tire with man made 35 psi and get a grip. We are Americans. We have the cleanest country on earth and are the ones looked to to clean up other country’s messes. Don’t tell me how to live and I’ll do the same for you. If you want to live in mud huts for the planet go for it – send me a post card by carrier pigeon. If you are for wind and solar replacing traditional sources of energy then get your “green” energy (Wind, Solar) supplied surgery at night when the wind is calm. Let me ask you this – Your loved one is in for emergency surgery to save their life – will you choose wind, solar or Coal fired energy? Better pray for sunshine or a windy day but not too windy as the windmills will be shut down for safety.
    Is this the world you want to be forced to live in? Not me

  23. Tim June 12, 2010 at 11:26 pm

    Since I’m currently purchasing one, I’ve done the research and have a few facts to toss out there:
    1. “They kill birds” – actually, they don’t. This used to happen because the old wind turbines used lattice type towers. The turbines today use tube type towers. The lattice used to be a nice home for bats and birds… This is why they were getting hit….
    2. “They are loud” – not really. Unless you erect a really bad one, most are pretty quiet. The “engine” noise is not audible enough to be heard on the ground. Only the wind whooshing noise can be heard. Far less annoying that a truck passing in the distance.
    3. “They don’t produce energy cheaply” – somewhat true, but not like you might think. It is true that a utility company produces power at about .03$/kwh and sells it to you for about $.10/kwh. If you put a turbine in your backyard and used it to offset your .10$/kwh energy bill, your investment could pay for itself in about 7 years (if you had enough demand to use all that power). It is true that the old way is cheaper, but once these government incentives provide enough incentive, you will see more competition in the US to make and erect these turbines. The price will come down. It already has.

  24. James June 14, 2010 at 11:27 a.m.

    This is interesting. I forgot how much money the remaining schools could make from the penatly fees. The remaining 5 schools could try to broker a football alliance with the Big East but remain the Big 12 in name.
    Officials from five Big 12 schools — Kansas, Missouri, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor — held a conference call on Saturday, The Kansas City Star reported. The schools agreed they would like to continue as members of the Big 12.
    The five potential teams that could be left in the Big 12 if the exodus of five others continues to the Pac-10 would be wise to remain together, a conference commissioner with experience dealing with expansion told ESPN.com’s Andy Katz.
    The reason is simple: The five remaining schools would be due a huge payday and ultimately could salvage automatic berths to the NCAA tournament and possibly the BCS through expansion themselves.
    The commissioner, who didn’t want to be identified because he’s involved in the ongoing realignment of college athletics, told Katz it would be critical for Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Baylor and Iowa State to maintain the Big 12 as an entity or corporation.
    “The assets, the amount of money that they would be due by exit fees back to the corporation would be huge,” said the commissioner. “Rather than dissolve the Big 12, they are better off as a Big 12 entity then moving to the Mountain West.”
    Taken from:
    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5282178

  25. Steven June 14, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    The conspiracy theorist in me says this is Big Coal and/or Big Oil money at work behind the scenes. This suit is in Illinois, and Southern Illinois is the “Saudi Arabia of coal”. Downstate Illinois also has a notorious nationwide reputation as a place to successfully host frivolous lawsuits against big corporations.

  26. nanette June 15, 2010 at 7:15 a.m.

    Please educate yourselves before you comment. The turbines are very disruptive to neighboring properties and wildlife. There are complaints about them all over the world. In addition, this form of energy is inefficient and wildly expensive (which will be passed onto the consumer, BTW) and will never power the nation, not even close. It exists only due to incentives and tax breaks.
    Here are some sites to get you started:
    http://www.windaction.org/
    http://www.wind-watch.org/

  27. Felicity Martin June 16, 2010 at 3:11 a.m.

    It’s amazing that you and others with no experience of the turbines make such vexacious statements about people impacted- perhaps you should consider that wind farms should be exempt from the basic need to minimise impact on the environment and people. You obviously think human rights are only for those who facilitate your energy greedy lifestyle while letting others suffer the impact of the so-called clean turbines. A big step forward is an industry that takes into consideration ethically and morally established guidelines that comply with the ‘do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’

  28. Boris Baek June 17, 2010 at 11:59 a.m.

    Hello ,In order to receive an accurate quote for auto insurance personal information such as address, date of birth, drivers license number, and social security number are required. This is exactly the information identity thieves need to destroy your financial credibility. Another concern is unwanted solicitors contacting you. It is completely unnecessary to receive an accurate quote for your car insurance by submitting this information online. It does indeed make perfect sense to make contact with an insurance agent in person or on the telephone.When contacting an agent in person or on the phone be sure and ask a few questions of your own, such as, how long they have been in business, and how will they safeguard your personal information. If you don’t like the answers say thanks and hang up. If your reasonably confident with the person your speaking to then proceed. Another benefit of speaking with a “live” agent is your ability to ask questions and receive professional advice.