Members of the public including those representing renewable energy developer TED Renewables listen as the five-member Tama County Zoning Commission discusses its draft utility scale solar ordinance during the Wednesday, Jan. 29, meeting held at the Administration Building in Toledo. Commissioners pictured include (back row, from left) vice chair Wade Mitchell, chair Doug Dvorak, Craig Sash, Steven Peterson, and Carol Meyer. PHOTO BY RUBY F. MCALLISTER

TOLEDO – A crowded room greeted members of the Tama County Zoning Commission on Wednesday, Jan. 29, during their first meeting since the Board of Supervisors enacted tandem wind and solar moratoriums on Jan. 6. And while very little action was taken during the nearly 90-minute meeting, incremental progress was made toward the commission’s goal of writing a new utility scale solar ordinance.

After chair Doug Dvorak called the meeting to order, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited and both the night’s agenda and previous meeting’s minutes were approved. Zoning Administrator Bob Vokoun then gave a brief, introductory statement in which he said the only public comments (correspondence) he had received regarding the meeting were from TED Renewables.

Two years ago this Valentine’s Day, four solar energy easements were filed with the county recorder’s office between landowner Terry J. Kucera and the company TED Renewables – also known as Tyr Energy Development Renewables, LLC – involving some 960 acres located across Perry and Clark townships east of Traer near Hwy 8. Since that time, TED Renewables has kept up a presence in the county, attending both Zoning and Supervisors meetings while also holding open houses at the Traer Memorial Building in an effort to bring the project Draft Horse Solar to fruition.

“I haven’t heard anything else – any pros or cons on anything,” Vokoun said. “Usually, pretty much all we’re hearing from is people who do not want wind or solar (development). So, that’s just the comments that come in. Once in a while, there’s one for (wind and solar development), but there’s very few.”

Commissioner Steven Peterson then asked Vokoun to confirm that he receives “a lot of comments against” wind and solar development, to which Vokoun replied, “Most of the time that’s what it is. … The question comes up, does the county want solar? Does the county want wind? When all you’re hearing is the negatives, you know, that’s what the board hears, that’s what you tend to go with.”

Tama County Zoning Administrator Bob Vokoun, center, speaks during the Wednesday, Jan. 29 meeting. PHOTO BY RUBY F. MCALLISTER

The commissioners then dove into reviewing Tama County’s current ‘Land Use Plan’ which was signed on February 4, 1986. Dvorak kicked off the discussion by reading the plan’s Foreword.

“Realizing that a long and wordy document is often put on the shelf, unread and forgotten, this document is being kept brief and to the point,” Dvorak read aloud to the room. “The Land Preservation and Use Commission of Tama County urges the officials of this county to heed these recommendations, and to take appropriate action to preserve our natural heritage for the present and all future generations.”

The document goes on to state the Land Preservation and Use Commission plans to meet at minimum once a year “for the purpose of reviewing” the plan, while special meetings could also be called. Commission members in 1986, according to the plan’s signature page, included Ferdinand Kvidera, Daniel Bruene, Wayne Clemann, Robert Lyon, and David J. Quinlan.

The current Zoning Commission members then took turns providing their opinions on the Land Use Plan. As originally written, the plan discourages “the use of prime agricultural land for anything other than agricultural production, generally this would be land with a corn suitability rating (CSR) of more than 60 … There is adequate land available in Tama County with a CSR of less than 60 for non-agricultural uses.”

According to Iowa State University, CSR is an index used to rate the potential yield production of soil. Ratings range from 100 for soils with “no physical limitations, occur on minimal slopes, and can be continuously row-cropped” to as low as 5 for soils “with severe limitations for row crops.”

The signature page of Tama County's Land Use Plan which dates back to February 1986.

All the commissioners were in agreement that the Land Use Plan was still valuable today but felt at least one change should be made — moving from using CSR, which was developed in 1971, to using CSR2 which was introduced in 2013 and removed the rainfall (weather) correction factor.

“They wanted to protect the high quality Tama County farmland and I agree with that wholeheartedly. It’s our best resource. It’s something that God gave us and we need to take very, very good care of it,” Peterson said before adding he believed it was also important to take into account “modern technology” such as new solar panels that allow crops to grow in-between the panels.

“I think we need to be cognizant of that also. And not just to say, 60 (CSR) or less. What do we do if somebody comes in and says, ‘Hey, I want to have crops and solar together on this.’ Does that change our stance? Does that change our policy? I don’t know.”

Later in the discussion, commissioner and farmer Craig Sash reiterated Peterson’s comments while also addressing the CSR restrictions.

“Do I want to see solar panels cover farms? No, I don’t. But I’m still hung up on, that’s the landowner’s decision,” Sash said. “I don’t like the low CSR restrictions, you guys know that. … That just limits what people can do on their land. I don’t really like to be into that position – I don’t think we should be into that position.”

Tama County Zoning Commission chair Doug Dvorak, a farmer who lives in rural Clutier, pictured during the Jan. 29 meeting held in the conference room at the Administration Building in Toledo. PHOTO BY RUBY F. MCALLISTER

For his part, vice chair Wade Mitchell said he supports the Land Use Plan as written with one “minor change” – changing the CSR requirement to “an average of 60.”

Following discussion, Dvorak asked for a motion to reapprove the Land Use Plan with two amendments: using CSR2 in place of CSR and replacing ‘more than 60 CSR’ to ‘an average of 60 CSR.’ While Mitchell did make the requisite motion, the motion was ultimately tabled to the next meeting – only Dvorak voted against tabling.

“I’m ready to bite the bullet and move on it but my board isn’t,” Dvorak said.

A brief discussion also took place regarding who exactly sits on the Land Preservation and Use Commission.

“A simple google says ‘In Iowa, a land use plan commission is typically referred to as planning and zoning commission at the local level,'” District 3 Tama County Supervisor Heather Knebel, who was in attendance at the meeting as an observer, said at one point while seated in the very back of the room.

Vokoun indicated he would clarify through legal counsel that the current Tama County Zoning Commission also constitutes the Tama County Land Preservation and Use Commission and thus has the power to make recommendations to the supervisors regarding the Land Use Plan, also known as the Land Use Agreement.

Permitting and review of road use agreement

Following the Land Use Plan discussion, the commission discussed and then adopted 4-1 using three pages of the Des Moines County (Iowa) Solar Ordinance as part of Tama County’s new utility scale solar ordinance. Specifically, Des Moines County’s ‘Road Use and Mitigation of Damages’ section was adopted.

Des Moines County’s solar road use agreement reads, in part, “The transport of heavy, oversized equipment during the construction of a Solar Farm Energy System is likely to cause substantial traffic disruptions along public roadways in the project area. It is also likely to cause serious damage to or deterioration of County roadways and other associated infrastructure. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that local residents and officials are fully prepared for the anticipated traffic disruptions, and that adequate mitigation efforts are undertaken for the damages incurred, without the placement of any financial burden on the County and its taxpayers.”

Only Sash voted against the motion although he indicated he was doing so mostly in solidarity with Dvorak’s earlier ‘nay’ vote on tabling the Land Use Plan.

Plea for farmers

Before adjourning, the commission set the next meeting time and date while also expressing a desire for area farmers to attend and weigh in on the Land Use Plan.

The four-page plan contains 13 sections including a section on marginal land.

“Marginal land that is in row crop production should be protected from excessive erosion and degradation by all possible means,” the plan states. “In severe cases, fragile land should be removed from production and seeded to grass. Before marginal land is brought into production, owners and operators should be made aware of the consequences. We recommend an environmental impact statement be filed on any marginal land brought into production. … The County Supervisors should provide incentives to protecting land of this type and deny aid from all county land use programs to all owners and operators who are responsible for land degradation.”

The marginal land section also recommends Supervisors “allocate funds for protecting ditches and culverts.”

Water pollution is also addressed:

“A particular area that will become more critical in the future will be water supply and aquifers. Potential for pollution has increased greatly with advances in agricultural technology and increased sewage treatment demands of populated areas. Non point source pollution (soil erosion) will aggravate this problem. … All possible précautions should be taken to protect the water supply of Tama County.”

The practice of “stream straightening” is discouraged by the plan, while ditch spraying including “general spraying” and mowing on county roads should be “limited to areas where noxious weeds have become a problem.”

One of the plan’s final sections addresses “building sites in rural areas.”

“Resident building sites in good cropland (CSR above 60) should be discouraged by raising acreage requirements to 40 acres.”

Those with an interest in Tama County’s Land Use Agreement, are asked to attend the Zoning Commission’s next meeting set for Wednesday, Feb. 12, beginning at 6 p.m. in Toledo at the Administration Building.

Public comments on agenda items will be permitted during the Feb. 12 meeting. Written comments can also be submitted in advance to the Tama County Zoning Administrator, 104 West State Street, Toledo Iowa 52342, or by email at bvokoun@tamacounty.org.