[ 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 members help decide county’s fate  

Credit:  Kokomo Tribune | October 25, 2013 | kokomotribune.com ~~

At the Oct. 16 Tipton County Plan Commission public hearing on industrial wind turbines, I presented the percentages of people attending meetings voicing opinions on the wind issue. In each case, including the 75 percent that night, the majority has consistently spoken against the placement of turbines in our county.

I consider it contempt of the democratic system that a majority of the eight men on the plan commission could not vote with the majority of the citizens.

New member Carroll Cohee made a motion to adopt an ordinance that was presented to the board that evening by the proponents. Unbelievably, there were two other members who supported Mr. Cohee’s effort to rush something through that the public knew nothing about.

New member Harry Diamond made an eight-minute proposal that neither the public nor the board members had any knowledge of prior to the meeting, and therefore was out of order.

Newest member Jeff Wessel, who does not live in the county and has been employed as the county ag extension educator for one month, voted for the motion submitted by the turbine proponents. One of the presenters of that proposal is on the county extension board that hired Mr. Wessel.

A motion was made by member Jim Ashley for the complete ban of the Commercial WECS, setting the limitations as proposed by Marshall County, Ind. This resulted in a 4-4 tie.

Mr. Ashley then motioned to accept the amendments that were made available for inspection to the public prior to the meeting, but in his motion he also created a new zoning classification and designated the geographical area where that zone would be. This passed 5 to 3. However, there cannot be a change to the zone map without the public first being made aware of where that change is going to be, and the landowners in that area properly notified. Mr. Ashley’s error went unnoticed by the plan director and all other members. The motion was not consistent with how the Indiana Code outlines the process for amending the zone map.

The planning commission is to submit its recommendation to the Board of Commissioners, but its recommendation for a change to the zone text together with a change to the zone map is illegal. It seems the only proper motion made that night was for the full ban. A tie is neither a “no” or a “yes” vote. The commissioners should do the job they were elected to do and end this countywide controversy by making a decision that is consistent with the majority of the people.

The current nine-member advisory plan commission has the responsibility of making a decision that will forever change the lives and landscape of this county. All four of the “no” votes on the “ban” motion were cast by men who each have less than one year of experience on the plan commission. One is an ineligible member but was appointed anyway. Another doesn’t live in this county and has been on the plan commission one month. Another has immediate relatives who are wind farm leaseholders, and the fourth has publicly stated he is in favor of industrial wind farm development “no matter what the people think.”

Of the four men who voted for the ban, three are elected officials and the fourth is a veteran member of the plan commission. How does the public feel that the four novice members, elected by no one and voting against the ban, may have determined the fate of this county?

Nancy Carney


Source:  Kokomo Tribune | October 25, 2013 | kokomotribune.com

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.