By: Diane Benjamin
The State of Illinois stole the ability of downstate counties to deny green energy projects for any reason. If Chicago needs electricity, the state authorizes the raping of prime farmland downstate. The developer of the proposed eastside solar farm can not be stopped unless a lawsuit against the State of Illinois for abuse of local control happens. Where is the McLean County Farm Bureau? They claim to advocate for agriculture.
This bill was passed through what looks like the General Assemblies favorite trick: Shell bills. See this link – the bill title has zero to do with the contents: https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?GAID=16&DocNum=4412&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=137757&SessionID=110
Shell bills replace existing language in bills that has been heard, passed in committees, provided time for public comment and witness slips, usually at least 2 readings on the floor and then passed quickly without any of the above. That’s Illinois democracy!
Senate votes, Dave Koehler was a sponsor: https://www.ilga.gov/Documents/legislation/votehistory/102/senate/10200HB4412_01082023_002000T.pdf
House votes: https://www.ilga.gov/Documents/legislation/votehistory/102/house/10200HB4412_03032022_104028.pdf
Below is a Google AI generated bill summary – the RED is what I think is important. Who is going to prosecute when the solar developer refuses to mitigate damages? Ditto for wind farms. Think developers won’t suddenly disappear? Isn’t it cute the law allows meaningless public input?
Illinois law now streamlines the process for developing wind and solar energy projects. A 2023 law (Public Act 102-1123) limits county authority to regulate these projects, preventing bans or moratoriums and standardizing siting and zoning standards. The law aims to encourage renewable energy development while ensuring some local input and environmental protection.
Here’s a more detailed breakdown:
Key Provisions of the Law:
- No Bans or Moratoriums: Counties cannot prohibit commercial wind or solar energy facilities in areas zoned for agricultural or industrial uses, according to the Illinois General Assembly.
- Standardized Siting: The law establishes specific setback requirements and other siting standards that counties must adhere to. Counties cannot have ordinances more restrictive than these standards.
- Public Hearings: Counties with siting or zoning standards for wind and solar projects must hold a public hearing within 45 days of a project application being submitted.
- Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreements (AIMAs): Developers are required to sign AIMAs with the Illinois Department of Agriculture to ensure agricultural land is restored after construction.
- Reasonable Fees: Counties cannot impose unreasonable permit application fees for wind and solar projects.
- Preemption: The law preempts (takes precedence over) local ordinances that conflict with its provisions, according to the Illinois State Association of Counties.
Impact of the Law:
- Encourages Renewable Energy: By standardizing regulations and limiting local restrictions, the law is intended to accelerate the development of wind and solar projects, helping Illinois meet its clean energy goals.
- Addresses Local Concerns: While limiting local control, the law still allows for public input through hearings and requires agreements to mitigate impacts on agriculture.
- Streamlines Permitting: The standardized procedures and deadlines aim to make the permitting process more predictable and efficient for developers.
Must have been a good bill, the vote was unanimous.
Not in the Senate, lot of House members had excused absences and weren’t there.
Of course she’ll bills don’t allow time to read either
Guess the Democrats don’t really care about the environment after all
Next they’ll link emanate domain and force he sale or lease of land. All for the greater good.
Ahh yea going green. Yeah back in the day that’s how we pegged it. Sounds great! Green energy, save the planet, no more messy oil, kill the oil spills, everything is all good. Yea, going green. Green backs that is. Suckers! That’s goin’ green right into our crooked pockets as we scam you every step of the way. Lol, thank you suckers for lining my pockets with the almighty green. Goin’ green.
Thanks to the State now a county or other NIMBY types can’t tell me what I do with MY land.
They can build green right next to you though. Nobody could ever tell you what to do with your land unless it was seized. It still can be.
You ask where is the McLean County Farm Bureau–they’re very much involved. They are strong advocates for private property rights. Farmers can earn a much more reliable income from solar farms than most conveniental crops. And can still easily revert to row crops after the useful lifespan of the solar installation. This is all despite your frequent incorrect assertions that solar panels are dangerous and leech toxins into your soil. Contemporary panels have very low concentrations of any toxic materials and are completely stable unless damaged or caught on fire.
Whereas conventional power generation from oil, gas, or coal all have significant public health impacts for people living nearby–through just regular day to day operations, without damage or fires.
If you don’t like these solar and wind farms then your best strategy is to buy the farm land and don’t put a solar or wind farm on it. That’s capitalism.
Sell solar panels?
I do not sell solar panels but I work in energy so I have a broad understanding of the many interrelated issues.
Capitalism doesn’t need subsidies. Try again
Then I guess coal, oil, gas, and nuclear aren’t capitalism either as they have all received significant subsidies. So, in summary, ALL energy in the United States has been subsidized.
But actually I wasn’t even referring to those subsidies with my comment. I meant that if you want to have control over private land and NOT see solar or wind there then you better buy it. That’s capitalism.
Solar and wind get far more. Neither would get built without them
Again, incorrect. Please check your sources.
Yes, of course subsidies have increased in recent years for renewables. But if you look at cumulative total subsidies adjusted for inflation, then fossil fuel subsidies greatly surpass renewables.
1900-2024 US Federal Energy Subsidies:
Fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, oil): $1,149.7 billion
Renewables (wind, solar): $261 billion
Hydro: $105 billion
Nuclear: $81.8 billion
Source: US Energy Information Administration
I didn’t realize solar subsidies went back to 1900😂😂😂
This sounds lots like a solar panel pamphlet salesman…… Oops, salesperson.
If that’s your best rebuttal then I guess I’ll have to settle for it *sighs in disappointment*
A better rebuttal….? Okay. The resource used to make solar panels are rare earth, very costly, and toxic. The panels get dirty and lose efficiency so to clean them they’ll use chemicals that will leach into the ground and maybe the ground water over the twenty five to thirty year life of the panels in effect “salting the ground”. They are solely dependent on the sun of course and we have more cloudy days in central Illinois than sunny ones. Then comes winter snow cover. Then there’s night. What, have a warehouse of lithium batteries to account for the night time electric needs? Or are we expected to move our life style back 100 years or more? Are they recyclable… I don’t know that. In short they are inefficient, part time, an inappropriate use of land. A better place would be like in Arizona where parking lots have been shaded by solar panels…..imagine parking in the shade at Wal-Mart. And Meijer. And the mall.
Wind turbines are, from what I understand, not recyclable. It cost more to transport and assemble them than the first several years they produce. They use hundreds of gallons of oil/grease. They need wind. Hey have a limited life span of approximately thirty years. Then what? Land fill somewhere?
Hydro-electric, nuclear, and hydrogen are clearly better sources of reliable power. Clean coal and natural gas are good too. Duck Creek power plant by Canton Illinois is gone, leveled. It was clean coal, one of the countries latest retro fits. Good enough you could stand at the top of the stack and still breath safely. Leveled by self-serving green energy advocates!!
They aren’t recyclable. Picture of trash in the included link
Your information is wildly inaccurate and/or outdated. I believe I already addressed some of those inaccurate assumptions in my previous replies.
I can work on a point by point rebuttal of each one with citations from legitimate sources but that is going to take some time to assemble.
So my short term advice for now is that you check your sources. Whomever has told you these things is not actually knowledgeable on these topics nor using up to date information. There are extensive resources available from legitimate scientific peer reviewed studies and reports that would contradict your assertions here. If I find the time to assemble a summary report with my sources I will try to do so for your benefit.
But it’s really hard NOT to find these. You gotta be looking for incorrect information or just very open to outright inaccurate statements to not see the abundance of legitimate information.
Not Normal……you’re funny! Out dated? Inaccurate? So, the sun will shine at night? No clouds either? No more snow? Panels will clean themselves? The materials used in the panels are bio mass rather than rare earth? The land’s best use is to be covered over rather than crops? Wind turbines don’t require lots of grease and oil? They’re recyclables? They don’t need wind? Not Normal you must take me for a fool. You bs is so thin, so bias, so obvious it is truly funny. But it proves once again “follow the money”. Scientific peer reviewed studies are just as good as their funding.
When you run out of green bs try selling snake oil, it’s been a while since that scam, people do forget.
Miss this story? https://blnnews.com/2025/07/24/the-truth-about-renewable-energy/