WLC Urges County Action on Columbia Wind Project
Updated: Sep 15
TO: Members of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors and Planning and Zoning
Committee
FROM: Concerned Columbia County Landowners & Residents
DATE: August 27, 2026
SUBJECT: Opposition to the Columbia Windfarm Project (PSC Docket 9836-CE-100) on
Procedural and Substantive Grounds; Request for County Resolution Supporting Wisconsinites
for Local Control Opposition
Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors and the Planning and Zoning Committee,
As you meet this Tuesday ahead of the full County Board session, we respectfully urge this Committee to draft and recommend that the Columbia County Board of Supervisors adopt a formal Resolution of Opposition against the proposed Columbia Windfarm Project before the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC).
Under Wis. Stat. § 196.491(3)(d)6, the PSC cannot approve a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) unless it affirmatively finds that the project "will not unreasonably interfere with the orderly land use and development plans for the area involved". The applicant cannot satisfy this statutory standard on both procedural and substantive legal grounds.
We urge the County Board to base its formal opposition on the following findings:
I. Procedural Grounds for Opposition
Failure to Satisfy Mandatory Local Permitting Processes: Sponsoring a state certificate while bypassing local application, review, and permitting frameworks violates the established regulatory sequence. Affected townships—including the Town of Columbus, the Town of Hampden, the Town of Fountain Prairie, the Town of Courtland (where Town Chair Derek Granquist signed our MOU last month), and consideration of the Village of Fall River (where the battery storage substation and interconnection are located)—have enacted comprehensive Wind Energy Systems Ordinances under Wis. Stat. § 66.0401 and Wis. Admin. Code ch. PSC 128. Section 3.1 of the Town of Columbus Ordinance expressly mandates that no person may construct a wind energy system without first obtaining local approval. Furthermore, any project elements must reconcile with Columbia County zoning permits, which are administrative approvals issued by the County Zoning Administrator under Section 12.150.08 of Chapter 12, Subchapter 100 (Zoning Ordinance), last amended August 20, 2025. Projects requiring conditional use permits must navigate the County's CUP standards under Section 12.150.07 prior to zoning permit issuance.
Disregard of Binding Circuit Court Precedent (Marathon County): In Marathon Wind Farm LLC v. Town of Brighton & Town of Eau Pleine (Case No. 24-CV-394, May 19, 2025), the Circuit Court confirmed that local wind ordinances derived from PSC guidelines are fully enforceable under Wis. Stat. § 66.0401. The applicant’s procedural failure to submit local applications, complete pre-application consultations, and provide local financial decommissioning assurances violates valid municipal authority and invites administrative stop-work orders.
Compromised Local Administrative Record: The procedural integrity of the local record is tainted by undisclosed ethical conflicts of interest under Wis. Stat. § 19.59(1)(a), where municipal leadership held personal financial interests in wind leases while gatekeeping local regulatory proceedings. The PSC cannot lawfully rely on local administrative proceedings infected by procedural bad faith.
II. Substantive Grounds for Opposition
Defective Site Leases and Lack of Lawful Site Control (Wis. Stat. §§ 704.03(1), 706.02): Under MPI Wright LLC v. Goodin Co. (2025), multi-year leases must set forth the exact rental consideration on their face with "reasonable certainty". The underlying leases leave essential host, turbine, line, and road payments contingent upon unilateral, future tenant actions. Because these payments cannot be determined from the four corners of the lease, the agreements fail the Statute of Frauds and represent voidable clouds on title. Siting industrial utility infrastructure on legally contested conveyances directly undermines orderly land use.
Severe Property Value Reductions and Economic Loss: Industrial wind developments cause severe, documented diminution in neighboring real estate values. In Wisconsin Realtors Ass’n v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, 363 Wis. 2d 430 (2015), the Wisconsin Supreme Court recognized public evidence and studies detailing steep property devaluation, extended days on market, unsellable parcels, and reduced buyer pools for properties sited near wind turbines. Peer-reviewed research and municipal findings demonstrate that large turbines reduce neighboring property values across a 1.5-mile perimeter, yet the project framework offers zero pre-construction appraisals or mechanisms to compensate impacted non-participating owners.
Constitutional Takings and Constructive Property Destruction (Wis. Const. Art. I, § 13): The project layout places industrial turbines adjacent to non-leased parcels, imposing permanent shadow flicker, low-frequency infrasound pulsations, noise, and structural overhangs that destroy property use without compensation. Attempting to displace full judicial takings remedies with capped administrative stipends (such as nominal $600– $1,000 annual neighbor payments under PSC 128) is unconstitutional, exposing both the utility and the State to joint inverse condemnation liability under Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. and Falkner v. Northern States Power Co.
Unlawful Market Discrimination (Wis. Stat. § 196.60): The utility has structured an exclusionary payment framework awarding massive premiums ($3,500.00/MW) to host parcels while paying nominal sums ($1.00/linear foot) to burdened adjacent properties. This discriminatory acquisition strategy violates Chapter 196 prohibitions against granting unreasonable preferences in utility transactions and destabilizes the regional agricultural land market.
Irreconcilable Conflicts with Comprehensive Land Use Plans: The industrialization of rural land directly violates town and county comprehensive plans dedicated to preserving prime agricultural soils, protecting hydric soils and wetlands, and maintaining rural residential character.
Action Requested from the Committee
Recommend a Formal County Board Resolution declaring that Columbia County officially opposes the Columbia Windfarm Project in PSC Docket 9836-CE-100 on both the procedural grounds (failure to obtain municipal permits, violation of local ordinances, and disregard of county zoning chapters 12.150.07 and 12.150.08) and substantive grounds (defective site control, severe property value loss, unconstitutional takings, discriminatory compensation, and comprehensive plan conflicts) set forth above.
Formally Support Wisconsinites for Local Control (WLC) by submitting the County's resolution and findings into the PSC docket in support of WLC's intervenor stance, demanding that the PSC enforce municipal sovereignty and deny the CPCN.
Thank you for your service and leadership on behalf of Columbia County's citizens, agriculture, and property rights.
Sincerely,
Debby Stone
President & CEO
Frank Liska
CoGeneral Counsel
Erick Kaardal
CoGeneral Counsel
