t-r photo by ruby f. mcallister Attorney Michael Reck speaks as counsel for the Tama County Board of Supervisors during a Board of Adjustment appeal hearing held last Tuesday in Toledo. Also pictured are Salt Creek Wind attorneys Sarah Franklin (front left) and Spencer Willems behind her; Supervisor Mark Doland (standing back right); Supervisor Heather Knebel (seated back row, third from left); and TCAT leadership Janet Wilson (seated to Knebel’s left), Jon Winkelpleck (second from right), and Richard Arp (far right).

TOLEDO – During an appeal hearing held on Tuesday, June 17, the Tama County Board of Adjustment voted 3-2 to reverse a Dec. 13, 2024 decision by then-Tama County Zoning Administrator Bob Vokoun to extend the expiration dates of Salt Creek Wind’s 61 zoning certificates – thereby setting off a windstorm of controversy in the ever twisty saga to build a commercial wind energy project in thr central part of the county.

The day before the hearing, Nancy Smith was appointed by the Board of Supervisors to fill a vacancy on the Board of Adjustment following the resignation of Nikki Novak. While Novak went on record last November as holding a “good neighbor lease” with Salt Creek Wind, Smith self-identified as early as Nov. 2022 as a member of the coalition Tama County Against Turbines (TCAT) during a public Zoning Commission hearing.

The Board of Adjustment currently consists of chair Nancy Yuska, Mike Seda, Smith, John Wagner, and Berleen Wobeter.

Just before the hearing began inside the Administration Building’s meeting room in Toledo, Tama County Sheriff Casey Schmidt briefly addressed those in attendance, including attorneys for both the Board of Supervisors and Salt Creek Wind, as well as members of the public who occupied almost every available seat in the room plus a large portion of the overflow seating in the nearby hallway. Three supervisors – Mark Doland, Heather Knebel, and David Turner – were also in attendance.

“We’ve had a lot of meetings lately, a lot of emotionally charged opinions and different viewpoints, but the only way we’re going to move forward is if we all keep it civil,” Schmidt said. “I’m not here to limit anybody or to threaten anybody, I just want everything to remain civil. I think that’s the best plan forward … I value everybody’s First Amendment rights, but let’s make sure we do it civilly.”

Salt Creek Wind has been described by developer NextEra Energy Resources as a 170 megawatt (MW) wind project located southwest of Traer and consisting of approximately 60 turbines plus a substation. According to testimony given on May 27 in Tama County District Court by Dexter Liu, assistant vice president for Salt Creek Wind, nearly 50 people were working in the county on the project, with that number expected to swell to nearly 250 at its peak later this summer.

Supervisors take over Espenscheid’s appeal

Before the appeal of Salt Creek Wind’s zoning certificates’ extension could even be considered Tuesday evening, the board first had to decide whether the Board of Supervisors could intervene and join the appeal after Beverly Espenscheid, the original petitioner, dismissed the appeal earlier this year. Attorney Michael R. Reck represented the Board of Supervisors, while attorneys Sarah K. Franklin and Spencer Willems represented Salt Creek Wind.

“The residents of the county have every interest in this matter,” Reck told the board, in part. “It is hard to imagine who has a greater interest in this matter, thus, the supervisors’ motion to intervene. … Intervention means a third party is permitted to become a party to an action between other parties. That’s what the supervisors are seeking to do on behalf of the residents of this county.”

Salt Creek Wind’s counsel rebuffed Reck’s argument, stating that the Board of Supervisors lacked jurisdiction.

“This is a real simple issue,” Willems said. “This appeal has been pending since late 2024, more than six months. There’s no reason to get into the fits and starts of what took so long or why we’re finally here, because, frankly, we shouldn’t even be here. Everyone should be at home right now, finishing their supper. We should not be here because the one person who submitted a timely and valid appeal of Bob Vokoun’s Dec. 13 (2024) granted extensions for those zoning certificates, as alluded to, she’s already dismissed her appeal. Heck, she dismissed her appeal before this board could even schedule this hearing. We should not be here because once Bev Espenschied dismissed her challenge, there was no longer a valid legal dispute for you all to hear, to evaluate, and ultimately to rule upon.”

Willems also said the county’s ordinances and the Board of Adjustment’s own rules of procedure don’t allow for intervention or joinder, telling the board there is “no Iowa court decision that would enable them to intervene and carry on the dispute here.”

“The supervisors didn’t formally get involved in this dispute until May 25, 2025,” he continued. “That’s more than six months after Ms. Espencheid filed her timely appeal, and far more than the six months after Bob (Vokoun) granted the extensions to these zoning certificates. The Board of Supervisors missed their window, and they know it.”

Following the attorneys’ time, the first motion made by the board came from Wobeter, who motioned to deny the Board of Supervisors’ attempt at intervention and joinder.

“And I do not do that lightly,” she added.

Seda seconded the motion.

During a brief discussion, Wobeter explained her reasoning.

“This has nothing to do with whether I approve of wind energy or disapprove. It is all down to the legal question. … I’m not sure if this is a tag-team? I’m a little confused (about) why the Board of Supervisors has come into this so late in the process,” she said. “My concern is that if we don’t stop it here and it continues on, all of these questions get put in front of a jury that does not have our emotions involved … that could just get super expensive.”

Using a roll call vote, the motion failed 2-3, with only Seda and Wobeter voting in favor.

Wagner then motioned to grant the supervisors’ request to intervene; the motion passed 3-2 along the same lines but with Smith, Wagner, and Yuska voting in favor.

Board of Supervisors’ position

Much of what was addressed during the appeal hearing was also brought up during the May 27 hearing in Tama County District Court as part of the Feb. 5, 2025 lawsuit filed by Salt Creek Wind LLC against the Board of Supervisors and the County – a hearing extensively reported on by this newspaper.

Using slides to further the Board of Supervisors’ case Tuesday evening, Reck addressed the multiple extension requests granted by Vokoun (or a previous zoning administrator). A slide titled “Salt Creek Timeline & Delays” included a breakdown of the permitting process juxtaposed against world events in an attempt to highlight the length of time that has passed since Salt Creek Wind’s conditional use permit (CUP) was first granted in December of 2020.

“Salt Creek Wind had more than enough time,” a slide declared. “Tama County has laws. Its ordinances require a substantial beginning on construction within 90 days.”

That seemed to be the crux of Reck’s argument – Salt Creek Wind did not make “substantial progress” in the 90 days allowed following Vokoun’s decision in Sept. 2024 to grant a new set of 61 zoning certificates after the original certificates, granted in 2022, were surrendered in August 2024. The new certificates expired on Dec. 15, 2024. NextEra Energy Resources assumed ownership of the project in November 2024, and the next month was granted one-year and two-year extensions, per Reck.

“They thought [by surrendering their zoning certificates in Aug. 2024] they could start the clock again,” Reck said. “They’re playing games because they weren’t ready. They didn’t respect the laws of Tama County.”

Reck also took issue, as he did during the May 27 court hearing, with Vokoun’s status as a “losing supervisor candidate who actively advocated for wind farms” while holding the role of zoning administrator. Vokoun resigned from his job this past April. In June of 2024, he lost the Republican primary for Tama County Supervisor District 3, a seat Heather Knebel now holds. Up until December of 2024, Knebel was an active member of TCAT.

“He was appointed zoning administrator immediately after voters rejected him as a supervisor candidate. Is that the appearance of propriety that we want?” Reck asked.

Reck then played a portion of a recording of Vokoun allegedly speaking on Jan. 30, 2023. “I’m not going to stop my neighbors from doing it,” the recording abruptly boomed throughout the meeting room, taking many by surprise. Reck never made clear in his testimony where the recording was made, nor gave any further context.

Reck also charged Vokoun with “ignoring” and “misrepresenting” the advice of counsel during his time as zoning administrator, showing the board an email sent to Vokoun by attorney Steve Leidinger, then-acting counsel for the Board of Adjustment during the Nov. 2024 Espenscheid appeal hearing.

“In the future, if you have not specifically relied on the advice of counsel, do not testify that you have relied on the advice of counsel. It’s OK to say you don’t know or that you didn’t review something if that is the case,” the email written by Leidinger to Vokoun reads. “Specifically, you never brought to my attention the discrepancy in the turbine models, never inquired about security or decommissioning, and we never spoke about any possible issues with the location of the substation (which you should also explore further). I asked you whether you compared the applications against the CUP and whether everything matched up. You indicated that you had and that it did. I relied on your review of the applications and the CUP as the Zoning Administrator. I did not go through them independently with a fine tooth comb (although I would have had you asked me to or had you raised specific questions or concerns). Unfortunately, your testimony made it sound as if I co-opted your role in the process, which only plays into Mr. Shearer’s ridiculous conspiracy theories. I only raise these issues so that you can learn from them moving forward.”

Shearer was acting as Espenscheid’s counsel in the appeal.

Former Tama County Zoning Administrator Bob Vokoun addresses accusations made against him including ‘misrepresenting the advice of counsel’ during the June 17 Board of Adjustment appeal hearing in Toledo.

Vokoun winds up

Bob Vokoun was then given 10 minutes to address the board and attorneys, immediately taking issue with the recording by asking Reck to “play the whole thing.”

“[W]hen we had the discussion, it was because I’m not going to stop my neighbors from doing something that’s legal, just because I may not like it or somebody else doesn’t like it,” a clearly frustrated Vokoun said. “Yeah, I don’t have a wind turbine. I’m not going to have a wind turbine. I’m not going to stop my neighbor from having one if they are following the code, which is what they are doing… This has been a big mess from the start.”

He again asked Reck to “play the whole thing.”

“They don’t get the whole story. Fine. You’re doing your job,” he said, addressing Reck. “You’re spending our taxpayers’ money. This has all been a big spending of money for everybody, for Tama County, and it’s going to get worse. You know, I’m sorry, but I followed the code. If there would have been a way to deny it, like I told (Mark) Doland and (Heather) Knebel, I would have denied it so I wouldn’t have to listen to their crap. And that’s just what it is – is crap all the time. They have a personal agenda. I’ve got three members on the Board of Adjustment that are involved with TCAT, and there’s a lot of personal agendas going on,” he said. “People need to start standing up for their rights and quit being silent. … I’ve had enough, and a lot of people have had enough, and they’re going to start speaking up. … You’re turning families against families, and it shouldn’t be.”

Reck was then given time to question Vokoun.

“Did you use the word crap?” Reck asked at one point.

“Yes, I did, and I was being nice,” Vokoun replied.

When asked if he was a proponent of wind energy development, Vokoun said he “supported everybody,” likening himself to a neutral party.

During Reck’s extensive questioning, Vokoun reiterated that he was following the law while working as the zoning administrator. Concerning the email from Leidinger, Vokoun said he spoke to several attorneys during his time as the zoning administrator, including Tama County Attorney Brent Heeren.

Salt Creek Wind’s counsel was also allowed time to question Vokoun, with attorney Sarah Franklin taking the lead.

“You a liar, Bob?” she said, diving right in.

“Pardon me?” he asked.

“You a liar?” she forcefully asked again.

“No,” Vokoun responded.

She then asked Vokoun a string of rapid-fire questions about whether or not he had lied regarding his work as zoning administrator – or was lying now; to every question he responded, “No.”

When asked if he was an “advocate” for wind projects, Vokoun said, “No, not at all. I’m for what’s right. I’m for both sides. Both sides come up with good points. … I tried to be neutral on it and follow the code.”

She then turned to the extensions, taking Vokoun through the process he followed after receiving the extension request letter from Salt Creek Wind, a process he said included talking to the county attorney, attorneys for the Heartland Risk Pool, and the company itself.

“So this wasn’t Salt Creek getting special treatment, right? Franklin asked.

“No, not at all,” Vokoun replied before later affirming that the process he used to approve the request was the same process he used with any person or entity requesting a permit.

Franklin also addressed the “substantial beginning” required within 90 days when a zoning certificate is issued.

“They were working on the driveways and all kinds of things that a person can’t see,” Vokoun explained in describing what progress Salt Creek Wind had made before Dec. 2024. While being questioned, Vokoun agreed with Franklin’s assessment that “32 access road approaches” had been completed and “construction had commenced at all 61 certificate sites” before he granted the extension request on Dec. 13, 2024.

“When you looked at the code section about extensions, did it put any limits on the amount of extensions you could provide?” Franklin asked.

“No, I don’t believe that it did,” Vokoun responded. “As long as they were showing that they were making progress, there was nothing that said anything about limits on the extensions.”

“Did you grant these extension certificates because you were unhappy about an election result?” she later asked.

“Absolutely not, I [couldn’t have] cared less about that election.”

Salt Creek Wind’s position: No limit on extensions

Following Vokoun’s testimony, Salt Creek Wind was then given time to present its argument as to why the extension request granted by Vokoun should be affirmed. Franklin was quick and to the point, citing two sections of the Tama County Ordinance she believes are relevant to the decision.

“I have spent a lot of time reading this section,” Franklin said. “A lot of time. It is one short paragraph. What I have never seen in this paragraph is anything that limits the amount of time that an extension can be for. Now, I understand from Madam Chairwoman that you all have the ability to modify the extension, and that is your prerogative, but there is nothing in this section that limits the amount of time that an extension can be granted.”

She also addressed the board’s role – deciding if Vokoun made an “error” in granting the extensions.

“I understand that the Board of Supervisors do not like these extensions. I understand that they want to stop this project. I understand that they will stop functionally at nothing to stop this project. There are any number of lawsuits pending at the courthouse across the street about this project, but your job here is very narrow. Your job is to decide whether Bob made an error in granting these zoning certificate extensions. It is our position that he did not,” Franklin said. “Tama County ordinances provide for two things. They specifically provide for C-WECS, which is commercial wind energy development, and they provide for extensions to be granted. You have to read those in harmony. … Your zoning administrator is allowed to grant extensions, and your zoning code, your ordinances allow for commercial wind development.”

She continued.

“The timeline that you have in front of you shows why Salt Creek Wind asked for a two-year extension. This is a complicated project. Significant amounts of money have been spent in this county to develop this project. It is simply not possible for a commercial wind energy conversion system, which is permitted under the statute, to be completed in the timeframe. Which is why this extension provision exists,” Franklin said.

Garwin resident Blake Warren speaks during the public comment portion of the June 17 Board of Adjustment appeal hearing. Warren was one of nearly 10 people who spoke in support of affirming Salt Creek Wind’s zoning certificates’ extension during the hearing. Also pictured (from left), board member Nancy Smith, chair Nancy Yuska, and board member John Wagner.

Pro-wind voices swell during public comment

The public was then allowed time to weigh in on the issue of extensions, and for the first time in years, voices in support of Salt Creek Wind slightly outnumbered those against (at least during a public hearing held to address some aspect of wind energy development).

It should be noted that one of those voices in support was Kimberly Dickey, a project director for NextEra Energy Resources based in Cedar Rapids. Dickey focused her comments on Salt Creek Wind’s decommissioning bond.

“A corrected bond has been issued to Tama County addressing scrivener’s errors, and it is a continuous bond. It is unfair to continue to perpetuate misinformation that the bond expires at the end of next year,” she said. “It guarantees the proper decommissioning and site restoration when the project reaches the end of its operational life. This project is proposed at a minimum for 25 years.”

Brent Wellik of Britt in Hancock County also spoke in support of the extensions, describing himself as a third-generation farmer with a NextEra Energy Resources wind turbine lease. According to an August 2022 blog by the company Blattner Energy, Wellik has worked as a site manager for a large number of Midwestern wind energy projects.

During his brief comments, Wellik focused on the amount of revenue his county has received from commercial wind energy development, describing it as “tremendous” while telling the board much of that revenue is “spent back into the county.”

TCAT leadership, including Richard Arp, Janet Wilson, and Jon Winkelpleck, also provided public comment with Arp succinctly stating, “The people of this county and this state live by rules and laws. It was evident at the court case a couple weeks ago, that all the building permits that were approved by Bob Vokoun had huge differences in what is proposed right now for construction. What scares me is the change in where the electric lines are to be laid. What happens 20 years down the line when someone wants to lay tile?”

As a Salt Creek Wind leaseholder, Kurt Boerm – part of the ‘Big Six’ group of landowners who worked to bring a wind energy project to central Tama County as early as 2010 – spoke in support of the extensions.

“Yes, I am a permit holder for Salt Creek Wind turbines. My family farm, six generations, and there will be wind turbines on it. That is my right, my family’s right as landowners,” he said. “The other thing you’ve heard complaints about was that no one ever shows up to these meetings that are in support of the wind turbines. There’s a whole bunch of people here that are the silent majority, that are in support of continuing these extensions on these permits, but they’re silent because they don’t want to be beat up on social media or verbally.”

Many of those in the room applauded following Boerm’s comments.

Another member of the ‘Big Six,’ former Tama County Supervisor and Salt Creek Wind leaseholder Keith Sash – sporting a NextEra Energy ball cap – also spoke.

“I think as a farmer, as a landowner – and longtime landowner – my desire for my land should have as much effect as those who don’t want me to have [a wind turbine]. I feel like I have the right to that windmill. … Come out my way and see the actions going on. There’s contractors going every single day. … I’ve got cement poured on my ground, I’ve got the driveways in for my turbine site. … These windmills will bring in $2 million a year to the taxpayers of Tama County. I think that’s a pretty important deal, and I think it’s important to be remembered,” he said.

One of the youngest speakers was Garwin resident Blake Warren, whose comments also garnered healthy applause.

“I see a lot of people not my age here,” he said, looking out at the overflow room. “I’m the next generation of Tama County, and we have a bankrupt county, schools that are failing, and we want to deny money coming into our county? Because you don’t like what someone’s doing with their land? … I’m the next generation and my kids – who want to go to [Tama County] schools, (and) I want to stay here – if we don’t have any schools left because we’re broke, because you guys don’t let the windmills happen, well, I hope you’re happy.”

Winkelpleck, a Dysart-area farmer who has helped lead TCAT since its inception, also received applause for his comments, which characterized the wind energy companies as using the people of Tama County as a “doormat.”

“This is not small, trivial,” Winkelpleck said, in part, about the extension decision. “This is whether you allow a large wind energy company to walk over this county. If this is allowed, there’s not much point in having laws and regulations for this county for anybody to follow.”

The decision, the money

After allowing time for Vokoun and the attorneys to each provide one final rebuttal, the meeting was approaching two hours.

Seda then made the motion to affirm Vokoun’s decision to grant the extensions; Wobeter provided the second.

After acknowledging the passion “on both sides of the fence,” Seda explained his reasoning.

“If you look at the ordinance … there isn’t a limit of how many times they can extend. As long as there’s progress being made, you can continue to extend it. And this is a huge project which is going to take a long time.”

For her part, Wobeter said that she and her husband Pete declined signing a wind turbine lease with Salt Creek Wind for their farm north of Toledo.

“I really don’t want them in the county, but I have to follow the law,” she said, in part, while addressing Reck. “I’m sorry, but your argument is not compelling, and I just don’t think it’s going to hold up if this goes beyond here. I’m extremely concerned about what happens after this.”

She then turned to her fellow board members: “Listen to what he said, is that really compelling?”

The motion failed 2-3, with only Seda and Wobeter voting in favor.

After declining, seemingly as a board, to modify the extension, Wagner moved to reverse Vokoun’s decision “as he exceeded his authority by granting excessive extensions of the zoning certificates.”

Smith provided the second. The motion passed 3-2 with Smith, Wagner, and Yuska voting in favor, and the meeting was promptly adjourned at 8:04 p.m.

The newspaper submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on June 6 for “a list of expenditures, including attorney fees, incurred beginning on Jan. 1, 2025 through the present day related to any civil petitions (lawsuits) that have been filed against Tama County and/or any of the County’s boards, and/or any of the County’s employees in their official capacities.”

On June 11, Tama County Auditor Karen Rohrs responded to the request with a report showing a total of $82,053 paid during the period requested to two different law firms; however, the costs were not broken down by specific lawsuit. During that period, the county was involved in at least four lawsuits, including three concerning Salt Creek Wind. As of press time, at least two had been dismissed, including the case lodged by Bev Espenscheid.

A total of $1,220 was paid to Lynch Dallas, P.C. for legal and professional services, while $80,833 was paid to Belin McCormick, P.C. for legal fees and services. Belin McCormick has been representing Tama County as the defendant in its current lawsuit(s) with Salt Creek Wind.

“The county has been reimbursed $25,000 through the Risk Pool to offset some of the county’s costs,” Rohrs said in an email.

As of press time, Salt Creek Wind continues to operate in the county. In a subsequent release, Doland and Knebel praised the Board of Adjustment’s decision.

“This ruling is a victory for transparency, accountability, and the rule of law,” said Doland. “The Board of Adjustment demonstrated integrity and independence in allowing the Supervisors to intervene and in recognizing the overreach of the former zoning administrator. This is about protecting the voice of our community.”

“We are grateful to the Board of Adjustment for their thoughtful and fair handling of this matter,” Knebel added. “Their decision reflects a commitment to good governance and ensures that major land use decisions are made with full transparency and community involvement.”