Lawsuit against Duane Arnold Solar projects dismissed

A Linn County District Court judge has rejected a civil lawsuit filed by a group of county residents seeking to block construction of a pair of utility-scale solar projects near the former Duane Arnold Energy Center. The ruling by Chief District Court Judge Lars Anderson, filed July 20, denies all the claims in the lawsuit against the Linn County Board of Supervisors. Among those claims were allegations that the project was an unsuitable use of largely agricultural land, that the supervisors’ decision to approve rezoning for the solar projects were not permitted under Linn County’s land use regulations and comprehensive plan, and that the county’s approval of a renewable energy overlay for the projects comprised “illegal spot zoning.” The lawsuit was filed in September 2022 by county residents Joseph Kerner, Theodore Hoffman, Randy Lane, Brenda Lane, Jessie Newman, Melissa Newman, David Rutledge, Donald Nelson, Traci Nelson and Randy Banes. Duane Arnold Solar LLC, as the developer of the projects, and Interstate Power and Light, as the eventual owner, were later added to the suit as intervenors. Capping a long and often contentious evaluation process, the Linn County Board of Supervisors voted 2-1 in September 2022 to approve the rezoning requests for a pair of industrial-scale solar projects near the former Duane Arnold Energy Center in Palo. Under the plan, Florida-based NextEra Energy Resources – which announced plans for the solar installation on the former Duane Arnold site in March 2021 – will develop and install 200 megawatts of solar generation and a 75-megawatt battery energy storage facility.

The project will be constructed in two phases. Duane Arnold Solar I is a 50-megawatt solar energy project on approximately 316 acres of agricultural land within an 857-acre area project site in Linn County, while Duane Arnold Solar II is a 150-megawatt solar energy project and a 75-megawatt battery energy storage system on approximately 815 acres of largely agricultural land within a 1,780-acre area project site, also in Linn County. Between the two, the projects are expected to produce enough energy to power 40,000 individual homes per year. In his ruling, Mr. Anderson wrote that there were no errors in the approval of the projects regarding the requirements of the comprehensive plan. “The Comprehensive Plan provides for preservation of agriculture as well as protection of resources, under which the development of renewable energy is appropriate,” he said. “The Court is not persuaded that the Comprehensive Plan places one of these areas at a higher level of importance than the other … Plaintiffs have not shown that the actions of Defendant were arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory.” Mr. Anderson also wrote that “the Court is not persuaded that the rezoning ordinances constitute spot zoning,” since the property in question encompasses nearly 2,000 acres, and that “even if the rezoning ordinances do constitute spot zoning, the spot zoning her would be valid because the ordinances are germaine to (the) protection and enhancement of the health and safety of all Linn County residents through the use of renewable energy.” Finally, Mr. Anderson rejected the plaintiffs’ claim that the plan to use the rezoned property for electrical storage was not a permitted use under the county’s zoning ordinance. “The Court finds nothing in (the ordinance’s language) that prohibits the use of electrical storage,” he wrote. “There is nothing in the record to support a finding that electrical storage is not a permitted use under Linn County’s zoning ordinance.” The ruling is among the final hurdles to be cleared before construction of the solar projects can begin. The ruling comprises the second time this year that a legal challenge to a Linn County solar project has been turned aside. A lawsuit brought by a group of Linn County landowners regarding the board’s approval of the Coggon Solar utility-scale energy project was dismissed in February.