| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Ruling issued on wind energy lawsuit
Credit: By Anesa McGregor | Emmetsburg News | August 3, 2018 | emmetsburgnews.com ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
A District Court Judge has issued a ruling in connection with a lawsuit filed against the Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors in late 2017. In a documents filed with the Palo Alto County Clerk of Court’s office, the Honorable District Court Judge Nancy L. Whittenburg ruled in favor of the Board of Supervisors in a lawsuit filed by seven Palo Alto County residents.
The lawsuit originally filed by plaintiffs Bertha Mathis, Stephen Mathis, Susanne Reding, Thomas F. Stillman, Michael J Reding, Lois T. Stillman and Tillford England against the Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors, along with Palo Alto Wind Energy LLC and MidAmerican Energy Company. Judged Whittenburg issued her ruling on Wednesday, July 25.
In the original lawsuit, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors had no authority to change the wording of the draft ordinance presented to them by Planning and Zoning nor did they have authority to approve a permit to Palo Alto Wind Energy LLC.
The Court found that the Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors had the authority and followed the required procedure to adopt the Wind Energy Conversion System ordinance. It was determined that the rationality of the adopted terms in the ordinance is fairly arguable and not an abuse of discretion.
The Court decided that it would not substitute its judgment for that of the Board of Supervisors sitting as a legislative body. Palo Alto Wind Energy is the owner/developer for the purpose in applying for the Wind Energy Conversion System permit.
The Court also concluded that the plaintiffs in this case raised no issues of significant fact and only challenged the legal sufficiency of the Board’s actions. The Board’s approval of Palo Alto Wind Energy’s application was reinforced by significant evidence on every issue challenged by the plaintiffs.
In the court documents the judge stated “It is therefore ordered: The Intervenors’ Motion for Summary Judgment, joined by Defendant Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors, is Sustained and the case Dismissed with costs taxed to the Plaintiffs.”
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 educational 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 |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=89274 ]
