Is Peaker Plant finally happening?

 

See previous posting regarding this project:  http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2014/09/peaker-plant-asks-for-annual-extension.html

Oakwood Hills president resigns amid power plant controversy

 

Stacey Wescott, Chicago Tribune

Many residents of Oakwood Hills oppose a plan for a power plant in the area, saying the proposal caught them off guard.

Many residents of Oakwood Hills oppose a plan for a power plant in the area, saying the proposal caught them off guard. (Stacey Wescott, Chicago Tribune)

By Robert McCoppin, Tribune reporter

The village president of Oakwood Hills has resigned in response to outrage over a proposal she helped negotiate for a power plant.

President Melanie Funk resigned Wednesday in a letter, writing, "I no longer feel that I can continue to take the abuse that I have been subject to over these last few months."

The $450 million power plant proposed by Enventure Partners sparked protests by hundreds of people at meetings on the subject in July. Residents are concerned about the plant's potential effects on pollution, noise, water use and property values. The proposed plant would be built about a half-mile from homes and across the street from a grade school.

Village officials shut down village hall for the month of August after they said someone made a threat against public officials over the plant, though they said they had no documentation of a threat.

Village Trustee Beth Gorr and Village Attorney John Cowlin also resigned, Village Clerk Melissa Goldman confirmed.

Trustee Paul Smith, who was president pro tempore, becomes acting president, Goldman said. That opens up two trustee positions for election next April

Read more of the article by clicking on the following:  http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-oakwood-hills-president-resigns-amid-power-plant-controversy-20140911-story.html

Here is the Village’s view of the zoning issue:

Energy Center Information

Upcoming The next Zoning Board Hearing will take place on October 9, 2014 at the Holiday Inn; the time will be posted soon.

Done The Open House will be on Tuesday, July 22, 2014 from 4:00 PM until 8:00 PM at the HOLIDAY INN Conference Room in Crystal Lake.

DoneThe Zoning Board Hearing will be on Thursday, July 24, 2014 beginning at 6:30 PM at the HOLIDAY INN Conference Room in Crystal Lake.

DoneThe additional Zoning Meeting will be held on Thursday, July 31, 2014 beginning at 6:30 PM at the HOLIDAY INN Conference Room in Crystal Lake.

It is apparent from the responses of the public at the zoning hearings on July 24th and 31st regarding the zoning petition that there was a lack of understanding of the process before the Zoning Board and a need for clarification of the process that the Zoning Board is required to follow in considering the Petitioners’ request.

The Zoning Ordinance of Oakwood Hills provides that anyone who is seeking approval for variations, amendments or other zoning requests from the provisions stated in the Oakwood Hills Zoning Ordinance must follow the procedures outlined in the Ordinance.

Once a Petitioner submits a Petition the Zoning Ordinance requires that a hearing be set up not less than 15 nor more than 30 days from the time the notice of hearing is published in the Northwest Herald and is given to the taxpayers of record that abut the property for which the request is made. The initial date and time for the hearing is strictly controlled by when the Petitioner files the notice of hearing set forth in the ordinance.

The hearing held on the Petition filed is a public hearing. It is a process to allow the Petitioner to present its case for what is being requested. As a public hearing, it is also to in favor of Petitioner’s proposal. At the conclusion of the public presentation, the public presentation is closed then the Petitioner has the obligation to respond to the questions and comments raised by the public.

Once the Petitioner has concluded its responses to the questions and/or comments from the public, it is then the Zoning Board members time to raise any questions or concerns that they may have regarding the Petition to the Petitioner. The hearing is over when the Zoning Board members have concluded their questions of the Petitioner. After the conclusion of the meeting, the Zoning board may postpone its vote only once to a future meeting unless a further delay is obtained with the approval of the Petitioner.

The original schedule of meetings listed a meeting on July 24th from 6:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. with an additional meeting, if needed, for July 31st at the same times to allow everyone interested in the proposal to be present and speak. On July 24th, the Zoning Board continued the meeting to July 31st as there were members of the public that had not had the opportunity to speak or make a presentation to the Board. The public was informed that they would also be given an opportunity on the 31st to sign in if they did not do so on the 24th.

The Zoning Board received a Motion for a Continuance of the Hearing to October 9th to allow the Petitioner to obtain new counsel and consider the statements made by the public at the meeting on July 24th. The Petitioners were within their rights in making the request and the decision of the Zoning Board approved their request which effectively brought the meeting to an end on July 31st. At the meeting on the 31st, someone shouted, “Why don’t you just vote no now.” As I have outlined, the Zoning Board is required to follow the rules established by the Zoning Ordinance of the Village, which are not unique to the Village.

The Zoning Board is committed to follow the procedures established in order that both the Petitioners and public are provided due process as required in the hearing process. When the hearing reconvenes on October 9^th the meeting is at the public presentation stage of the proceedings. Those members of the public who have not had an opportunity to speak will be given that opportunity. With the large number of public that has shown an interest in speaking, everyone will be given that opportunity and, if necessary, additional meetings will be held until the hearings are brought to a conclusion.

 

 

See earlier post:  http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2014/09/oakwood-hills-residents-voice-concern.html

Peaker Plant asks for another extension of their special use permit

This month the Boone County Board will consider another extension of the special use permit.  Here is some background on the plant and the 2009 decision to approve the plant.

There are some additional posts from this blog concerning peaker plants and the 2009 board approval.  SEE: 

http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2009/01/peaker-plant-clears-boone-zoning-board.html

http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2009/02/boone-board-delays-peaker-plant-verdict.html

http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2009/02/boone-county-again-debates-peaker-plant.html

http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2009/03/boone-county-government-for-march.html

PHOTO PROVIDED Boone County Board Chairman Bob Walberg stands in front of one of the engines at a peaker plant in Hays, Kansas, on Friday, March 6, 2009. Three board members visited the plant in preparation for their own vote on whether a similar plant should come to rural Boone County.

Peaker plant tour hasn't swayed Boone County Board member's votes

By Kevin Haas
Posted Mar. 10, 2009 @ 12:01 am
Updated Mar 10, 2009 at 9:01 AM
BELVIDERE

Boone County Board members who visited a peaker plant in Hays, Kan., Friday said the trip hasn’t swayed their votes on a proposed project in rural Boone County.

Boone County Board Chairman Bob Walberg and board members Marshall Newhouse and Kathy Donhowe-Hartwig toured the 75-megawatt Goodman Energy Facility to get a first hand view of a peaker plant similar to the one proposed for Boone County. Board members are scheduled to vote on the project March 18.

Newhouse, who had voted in favor of the project at the committee level, said his feelings haven’t changed since the tour. Donhowe-Hartwig, who had voted against the project in committee, said she also hasn’t changed her mind.

“The (Kansas) facility is in the middle of nowhere. There really aren’t any neighbors close by,” said Donhowe-Hartwig, who has expressed concern for residents on Garden Prairie Road who would live near the proposed 100-megawatt, natural-gas-fired peaking power plant.

“My next step is going out to the (Boone County) site, because now I can visualize how large it is,” Donhowe-Hartwig said. “At this point, I haven’t changed my mind.”

If it's approved, developers still need a number of state and federal permits, and someone to purchase and operate the site, before they break ground. The earliest construction could start would be fall 2010, with plans to bring it on line by May 2012.

Would-be neighbors of the plant have contested that the sight and noise of 12 engines, with accompanying exhaust stacks, would lower property values.

“I just think it’s the wrong location,” said Gary Gibson, who lives on Garden Prairie Road north of the would-be facility.

Taxpayer money was not used to pay for the trip, which was financed by Burns & McDonnell, the architectural and engineering firm behind the project. It was offered to neighbors south of the would-be plant, but scheduling conflicts prevented any from accepting, developers said.

Gibson said he felt the board members’ trip to Kansas was an effort to buy their vote.

“That’s easy criticism. The truth is I saw them going the extra mile, trying to do everything they could to present their project and let people know what it is going to be like,” Walberg said. “There was no sales pitch, just trying to get an honest opinion of what they had to offer.”

Walberg, who has not cast a vote on the proposal, said he was impressed by the facility.

The Goodman Energy Facility has nine engines. One of the nine engines was turned on Friday to allow for board members to gauge the sound.

“I did not consider (noise) an issue at all,” Newhouse said. “They started with me standing right next to it and it was incredibly loud. When they shut the door the insulation in the facility did its work. ... At 200 to 240 yards motorcycles running down the highway a half-mile away were completely eclipsing anything the engines at the peaker power plant were producing.”

Read more: http://www.rrstar.com/article/20090310/News/303109868#ixzz3CNlsfn9V

Poplar Grove board approves regulating wind towers - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

a 2,000-foot setback from any primary structure and 1.5 times the height of the tower from property lines. It’s a stingier measure than the laws that cover rural Boone County. Boone County’s code, which was adopted in July, calls for a 1,000-foot setback from homes and 1.1 times the height of the tower from property lines.

Read the rest of the story by clicking on the following:  Poplar Grove board approves regulating wind towers - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

Wind farm hearing continues | Daily Chronicle

public hearing on changes to NextEra Energy's proposed wind farm is scheduled to continue at 9 a.m. Tuesday at the Carl Sandburg Auditorium in the Holmes Student Center on the campus of Northern Illinois

early session's testimony was dominated by attorneys and an expert witness in acoustics, who testified that wind turbines generate dangerous levels of low-frequency noise that can have a negative effect on health

Click on the following to read the rest of the story: Wind farm hearing continues | Daily Chronicle

Boone County gave a $580,000 gift to the “The Glen of Belvidere”, Assisted Living Facility

Since December 2008 I have been asking questions to city and county officials concerning the proposed assisted living facility.  The county has granted a sizeable gift to the developers of this project, the Kensington Group which operate North Woods and Maple Crests Nursing Homes in Belvidere.  The actual transaction for much of this gift was finalized in 2006.  I am very surprise that it has been so difficult to obtain the nature and value of the transaction. 

Value of land, (see the recent email from Mr. Terrinoni):  $470,340

Donations from Maple Crest Charitable Trusts for landscaping:                                                                                         $110,000

Plus there are a few more costs to the county. There also was $7,500 paid in 2007 to a grant writer for an unsuccessful state grant application and the in house costs of the 2008 application.

Previous I have questioned whether a tax  assessment agreement similar to that proposed in the Peaker Plant be attached to the lease.  It is not possible to require Kensington Group (nor the peaker plant) to arbitrate any future tax assessment on the assisted living facility, (see email below.)

 

In response to Mr.. Mattison's letter to me dated March 23, 2009, below are answers to your questions as I understand them:

1.  Regarding questions on tax assessment:

     A.    Per recent legal advice given to the County Board in reference to the "peaker plant" tax assessment, we cannot as county officials involve ourselves in the process of determining taxable value for properties.  In similar fashion we cannot pre-negotiate the property taxes for the new supportive living facility.  I did provide my best guess of those tax revenues and a spreadsheet is attached.

2.  Regarding questions on the lease:

      A.    The final lease is not yet negotiated with the company or HUD and what value is placed  What we have in place now is a Memorandum of Understanding that sets out the obligations of the parties. I sent that to you some time ago.  Adding the land to the proposal gave the County the edge in receiving the state tax credit award of 9%.  In addition to that cash has been pledged for landscaping and other improvements that were necessary to receive the tax credits.  Thus, the land would be considered a financial concession to make the project qualify for tax credits.

3.   Regarding additional costs to the taxpayers:

      A.  I can only think of gain to the taxpayer through additional property taxes and up to 40 jobs being created. The company has promised to cover all costs related to extending sewer and water to the site.

4.   What is the value of the land?

      A. The appraisal at the time placed the value of the land at $470,340.

Mr. Terrinoni

Boone board delays peaker plant verdict - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

This appeared in the ROCKFORD Register Star on Thursday, February 12, 2009.  Below, I have  cut and pasted the article in case you have trouble reaching the link.

Boone board delays peaker plant verdict - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

 

By Kevin Haas

RRSTAR.COM

Posted Feb 12, 2009 @ 12:46 AM

---

BELVIDERE —

Boone County Board members delayed a decision Wednesday that could bring a peaker power plant to rural Boone County.
The board voted 9-3 to postpone the decision to its next meeting after some members felt more research was needed into the plant’s effect on property values, among other things.
“We owe it to the property owners around the project, we owe it to the citizens of Boone County ... to make sure we are completely informed and make an educated decision,” said Anthony Dini, board member.
Developers said the delayed vote does not push back their plans to start construction in fall 2010 and bring the plant online by May 2012.
“There’s a lot of work we have to do. We have nine to 12 months of permitting to go forward with,” said Jeff Greig, vice president of Burns & McDonnell, the architectural and engineering firm behind the project.
Power Ventures Group LLC wants to bring a 100-megawatt natural-gas fired peaking power plant to a 20-acre site east of Garden Prairie Road and south of Interstate 90 in eastern Boone County.
The facility is intended to operate during times of high energy demand — especially hot summer days — to provide stable electric power to the region.
The facility is bordered by I-90 to the north, but otherwise surrounded by farmland. Neighbors to the would-be project said the sound and sight of 12 exhaust stacks, which could be as tall as 75 feet, will lower their property values. They also don’t want to see prime agricultural land lost.
It has board members weighing whether the good of creating construction jobs and a higher property-tax base outweighs the loss of farmland.
The facility would employ four to eight people once online but would create about 125 construction jobs at its peak, developers said.
“I understand the country is going through a rough time right now, as is our community, and nation. But what about all the years that my neighbors and I have contributed valuable tax money to our economy? Does that not count for anything?” said Kevin Ernesti, a neighbor who opposes the project. “Farmland is becoming scarcer every day. You can’t make more farmland. What we have is all we will ever have.”
Staff writer Kevin Haas can be reached at 815-544-3452 or khaas@rrstar.com.

Boone County again debates peaker plant - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

Here is an update  on the Peaker Plant by Kevin Haas.  Because this is just a special use permit, a simple majority is all that is required to allow this new use of the property. The full board’s regular meeting is 6:30 PM on Wednesday, February 11, 2009.  Click below to see Mr. Haas’ story.

Boone County again debates peaker plant - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

To share information, email us at Watchdog.