State Supreme Court Looks at Wind Farm Case

Yesterday afternoon, my colleague Chris McCabe and I took in oral arguments at the Temple of Justice in Residents Opposed to Kittitas Turbines v. the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council.  The case involves the effort to site a wind farm in the Kittitas Valley between Cle Elum and Ellensburg in response to Washington's mounting push toward alternative energy sources.  The AP briefly noted yesterday's arguments here. 

Some neighboring landowners object to the project on what appear to be mostly aesthetic grounds, and have appealed to stop the project.  Kittitas County objected to the state siting scheme which would preempt its local zoning and land use ordinances, and  appealed to stop the project.   But because of the strong push in our state energy policy toward renewable and alternative energy sources (with I-937's unfortunate statutory exclusion of hydropower as a renewable resource), AWB has vigorously supported the project through the EFSEC and gubernatorial approval process.

And so AWB, joined by the Northwest & Intermountain Power Producers Council, filed an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief in this case which can be read here. 

Much of yesterday's argument appeared to turn on the justice's interest in whether the Supreme Court actually had jurisdiction to hear the appeal or whether the case had to proceed through a lower court first.  This important but seemingly arcane issue somewhat obscured interest in the bottom line that AWB put forward in its amicus brief:

Energy developers are already anxiously awaiting the outcome of this case as an indicator of the regulatory climate for future energy investment in Washington.

That is, with the clear public policy push toward renewables, will the regulatory process to site new facilities be fast, fair, expedited, and efficient, or will it be, like all too many land use processes, slow, cumbersome, and litigious?