Planning and Zoning Meeting Synopsis
(UPDATED 12/12/24)

P&Z Meeting to discuss proposed draft of Energy Ordinance 12/10/24 5:30 PM

The meeting was held in the Gooding County Courthouse, Courtroom 1. This room seats approximately 100 people, and there was standing room only by the time the meeting began. 

Before people were invited to speak, a statement from Jupiter Energy was read out loud by P&Z. It is now public record and can be obtained from P&Z via a formal request, but basically it was an admission that the project is being considered, but on a slightly smaller scale. Keep in mind that each SUP application includes plans for “augmentation”, for which the limits (if there are any) are not defined. In other words, a project can sneak in with a proposed small footprint, and then expand significantly over time. It went on to elaborate about how they were looking forward to working with P&Z, the county and the community, and how, in their opinion, this would all be to everyone’s benefit.

After this, all the people who signed in to speak were invited to do so. Most of these were opposed to the proposed BESS project in Hagerman and/or the wind and solar projects going up around us or being proposed. All made excellent points which will be summarized below. 

There were also a few people who spoke in favor of “green energy”. Two were wind energy installers, one was a “rancher” from another county, and one was the owner of the proposed site in Hagerman. Their perspective is easier to summarize: MONEY. The installers (who were given 10 extra minutes to speak) argued that they install wind farms because they install wind farms. They do studies beforehand, and then they obtain SUP’s and “Eagle Take Permits”, and they move forward with their projects. They made statements about the safety of their systems which were substantiated by nothing, but they stated that this would all be good for the private landowners and the surrounding communities. The private landowners stated that they have the right to develop their land as they see fit in order to create an income stream for themselves. They also stated that this would be good for the surrounding communities. All of them stated that our power bills would be reduced by their actions. Ironically, not one of them mentioned the Biden/Harris administration's stated goal of zero carbon emissions by 2035. But they did mention their right to make MONEY. 

The people who were opposed to the intrusions and dangers of “green energy” projects were long-term residents, shorter-term residents, realtors, business owners, and people connected to the tourist industry. They were well-informed. They all shared a deep concern for their home state, home community, families, friends, neighbors, farms, water supply, way of life and surrounding landscape. They emphasized the following points:

They are opposed to Idaho becoming a favorite dumping ground for these projects that ruin our landscape and endanger our lives and our native wildlife.

They are very concerned about all the ramifications to our water supply. These are NOT being considered by the developers, and our water supply is NOT being protected.

They do not want to live next to dangerous systems that could harm (even fatally) their families, homes, livestock, local firefighters, etc. Several people explained the specific dangers associated with BESS fires - the extreme heat, the gases, the explosions.

They requested of the board that the language in this ordinance be clarified and/or rewritten to categorically exclude such systems from residential areas. Vague or omitted language in the proposed draft was pointed out several times. Several people strongly supported an outright ban - which many counties in the US already have in place. 

They raised concerns about the language surrounding the “bond” issue, and how exactly that money could be guaranteed if a project went bankrupt. They also raised concerns about systems being safely “decommissioned” and the landscape being returned to its original state. They gave examples of systems in other states that remain scars on the landscape.

They talked about our local income from tourism/hunting/fishing/birdwatching. One person read a description of our valley and scenic byway, making the point that this is what draws people to our area.

Several people raised concerns about BESS toxic gases and drainage post-incident. They explained how complex the cleanup would be, and how it would contaminate the surrounding land, air, and water. They stated that this is not a matter of “if” but “when”, as these occurrences are not rare. They reiterated that nobody wants to live anywhere near such a dangerous facility. 

Some speakers shared experiences they had in other states where these types of projects are not allowed, and the residents benefit from this protection. Some testified of opposite, negative experiences in other states where projects were too numerous, or had been built near residential areas.

Our local fire chief made a statement about the difficulty our local fire companies and their supporting local teams would have in dealing with a BESS fire, since they can’t be contained through conventional measures. 

Many voiced their concerns about Special Use Permits. Some called them “permits to legally break the law”. The general impression was that they are far too easy to obtain, and that they are used to override the guidelines in any ordinance that seeks to set limits. 

Everyone, in one way or another, appealed to the board to do their job very, very carefully and generate a final ordinance that would protect the citizens of this county. 

The board stated that they had already started revisions to the proposed draft based on written comments, and that another public meeting would be required before anything could be adopted. There was a QR code that was supposed to represent this revised version, but for some reason it did not. We should be able to obtain a copy from P&Z.

Contact Us