As the Michigan House considers two bills that would repeal a 2023 law that wrestled control over siting for utility-scale renewable energy projects away from locally elected officials, Michigan Farm Bureau is making its members voices heard in Lansing.
Sponsored by Rep. Greg Alexander (R-Carsonville), House Bills 4027-4028 would restore local control over zoning decisions, which now rests with the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) — consisting of three members appointed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
The bills were each passed out of the House Energy Committee by a margin of 10-7 after a hearing Tuesday morning where lawmakers heard from numerous supporters of the bill, including Michigan Farm Bureau.
Before calling for a vote at the end of hearing, House Energy Committee Chair Rep. Pauline Wendzel (R-Watervliet) noted that while people can hold elected officials accountable, they don’t have the same ability for “unelected bureaucrats” — like the MPSC.
“They take away your voice, and that's what's happening here,” Wendzel said.
“I believe that’s exactly what happened in my district, where PA 233 overturned our local election. That is not how this process should work. Developers ought to be collaborating with their locals who know their communities the best, instead of steamrolling them. Real progress happens when those closest to the land have a seat at the table, and that’s what these bills aim to do.”
Rep. Alexander shared similar concerns during his comments at the start of the meeting.
“I live in and represent a region in the state where these laws are not theoretical,” Alexander said. “They will change the entire late landscape of the region. They are real, and they're deeply concerning.”
Alexander noted that the area he represents, consisting of Sanilac, Huron, and Tuscola counties, host almost 60% of all windmills in Michigan — more than 1,500 in total — in just three of the 83 counties in the state.
“My communities know firsthand what these projects bring, both good and bad,” Alexander continued.
“Let me be clear, this legislation is not an attack on renewable energy. I'm not opposed to wind and solar program developments when they're supported by the communities who have to live with them. This is about opposing government overreach and takeover. It's about standing up for the right of voters and their elected officials to have a stay in their future.”
Alexander noted support for his bills from MFB, the National Federation of Independent Business, the Michigan Township Association, Michigan Municipal League, and Michigan Association of Counties — many of whom had representatives who spoke during the hearing. He went on to recognize the efforts of a citizen-led ballot initiative that was backed by MFB in the wake of the 2023 law, which attempted to overturn the legislation.
“That effort is now on hold — not because of the lack of will — but because of the astronomical cost it takes to get anything on the ballot today,” Alexander added. “The fact that it emerged at all speaks volumes about the anger and the frustration that these laws have caused.”
In his testimony during the hearing leading up to the committee’s vote, MFB Legislative Counsel Andrew Vermeesch spoke in support of Alexander’s bills sharing farmers’ support of local officials deciding what happens in their communities.
“Michigan Farm Bureau does not oppose renewable energy projects. In fact, we have a lot of members who choose to sign up their land for either wind or solar, as a way to diversify their farm income,” Vermeesch said.
“We also have members who have real concerns about the permanent loss of farmland and the impacts that it has on neighboring land values and land competition, and the overall effects large scale projects will have in rural communities.”
Vermeesch continued by noting this legislation isn't about whether Farm Bureau members support or oppose renewal projects.
“It's about, ultimately, who makes the decision on where these projects should go and how they should be sited,” he said.
“And while our members may differ on individual projects — whether they're good or bad — I think one thing our members do overwhelmingly support is who should decide, and our members firmly believe that they should be made at the local level.”
In responding to questions from members of the Energy Committee, Vermeesch said MFB is balancing private property rights and farmland preservation.
“That conversation is complex, and we believe that it’s much better to have that conversation with your neighbors and individuals in the community versus the Public Service Commission which historically has not had expertise in siting decisions.”
The committee also heard from several township supervisors, farmers and members of rural communities, who all spoke in support of House Bills 4027-4028.
Click the video below to see the full hearing.
