[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind farm lawsuit won't include zoning board members  

Members of the McLean County Zoning Board of Appeals will not be included in a lawsuit filed by opponents to a wind farm planned for construction near Carlock.

McLean County Judge Charles Reynard denied a motion Thursday to reconsider an earlier ruling that dismissed the zoning board members from a lawsuit filed by Information Is Power. The group has accused the zoning board and the McLean County Board of denying their rights during the process of awarding a special use permit last fall.

The group opposes construction of the $250 million wind farm by Chicago-based Invenergy Wind along the McLean-Woodford county border.

Reynard ruled in December that the county board may be included in the lawsuit, which was filed about their decision to accept the zoning board’s recommendation to award the special use permit.

In arguments Thursday on behalf of Information Is Power, attorney Melissa McGrath said the zoning board is not entitled to legislative immunity under state law because its actions are not legislative in nature.

Opponents to the wind farm were denied their constitutional due process rights during public hearings last fall, said McGrath, when opponents’ comments were limited.

Assistant State’s Attorney Brian Hug told the court that the disagreement over the White Oak Energy Center falls short of a constitutional debate.

“We have a garden-variety zoning dispute,” said Hug.

The fact that no property rights are at issue also removes the case from the federal level, said Hug. “What they’re complaining about is how someone else is using their property,” said the county attorney.

McGrath countered that her clients have a right to a review of the decision.

“They don’t want the public to have any right to a review of what happened in the zoning board of appeals hearing,” said McGrath.

The next hearing in the case will be Jan. 15 when other pending motions will be heard.

By Edith Brady-Lunny

Bloomington Pantagraph

4 January 2008

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.