[ 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

New judge named in Walnut Ridge suit  

Credit:  Donna Barker, The Bureau County Republican, www.bcrnews.com 9 December 2011 ~~

PRINCETON – A new judge has been assigned to the Walnut Ridge lawsuit filed against the Bureau County Board and other defendants.

The case has now been assigned to Judge Richard J. Lannon and will be heard in the LaSalle County Courthouse in Ottawa. The next court hearing will be at 10 a.m. Jan. 12 for hearing on the motion filed by the defendants to dismiss the lawsuit.

A group of 37 Walnut area residents filed the Walnut Ridge complaint June 30 against the county of Bureau, the Bureau County Board, each county board member as individuals, and against the Walnut Ridge wind farm developers, Walnut Ridge Wind LLC. The goal of the complaint is to stop the building of the proposed 150-turbine Walnut Ridge Wind wind farm in northwest Bureau County.

Both Walnut Ridge LLC and the Bureau County defendants have filed motions to dismiss the 117-count lawsuit, which challenges the Bureau County Board’s actions taken in 2008 and in 2011, concerning the proposed Walnut Ridge project. According to the motions to dismiss, the plaintiffs’ claims within each count are based upon conditional use permits granted by the county board in 2008 and are all untimely and should be dismissed, with prejudice.

The plaintiffs in the 450-page complaint are 37 Bureau County residents whose properties are located in the vicinity of the proposed Walnut Ridge Wind site. The plaintiffs claim the Bureau County Board did not have the authority or jurisdiction to grant the original conditional use permits to Walnut Ridge Wind LLC in August 2008, nor the authority to approve the permit extension requests granted by the county board in April 2011.

According to the plaintiffs, the county board’s decisions also failed to consider the negative impact of the proposed turbines, including, among other things, annoying and incessant noise, visual disturbances from flashing lights, turning blades and massive unsightly towers, shadow flicker, negative health affects, including sleep deprivation, and the impact to pets, livestock, birds and wildlife.

Source:  Donna Barker, The Bureau County Republican, www.bcrnews.com 9 December 2011

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.