Community Development Director Jason Kjeseth presented an update on Xcel Energy’s “Ten Mile Creek Solar Project” in a June 3 St. Croix County Board of Supervisors meeting, during which he and the county board discussed at length the potential to collaborate with the energy company on a joint development agreement (JDA) — and the limitations to such a plan. 

If approved, the project would generate up to 650 megawatts, providing more than 140,000 homes in the Upper Midwest with energy. According to Xcel’s website, so far the project “remains on track.” 

Currently, the company plans on filing an application with the Public Service Commission (PSC) of Wisconsin, which is responsible for the regulation of the state’s public utilities, by the end of 2025.

“Your choices are: you can do a joint development agreement and reach some sort of compromised position on some of the issues we have, or not do that and contest the project through the PSC,” said County Administrator Ken Witt, adding that in contesting the PSC “you’re not going to be successful. There’s no track record of any success taking that path, so that’s why we’re pursuing the JDA.”

After the meeting, Xcel released its boundary map of the project with alternate sites. The map highlights the acres of land, approximately 5,000 acres across a 40,000 acre span in St. Croix County, the energy company leased from private landowners.

Xcel Energy Regional Vice President Brian Elwood gave an early presentation of the project in a Jan. 7 board meeting. Since then, there’s been pushback.

Over 5,200 people have signed a Change.org petition created on April 18 to stop the solar farm, citing concerns over health, safety and environmental risks, such as exposure to electromagnetic fields and highly caustic non-selective vegetation killing chemicals, runoff pollution and drinking water well contamination. 

Several opponents of the project attended the board meeting — among them Kari Willoughby, who voiced her concerns to the board during the public comment period.

“I do understand why Xcel doesn’t care, but I really hope that you will care for those of us in St. Croix County who are working against this project,” Willoughby said, mentioning the risk to water quality and encouraging board members to take a deeper look into the environmental impacts of the project.

“[This project] is going to be a huge clean up issue and a quality of life issue for those of us in St. Croix County,” Willoughby continued.

After she finished, several of the public spectators clapped in agreement.

Willoughby had covered her car, parked outside of the government center, in lettering that read: No Excel Solar “Farm.”

According to state statute, the county can’t regulate a solar energy system greater than 100 megawatts, which is why this project falls under PSC review. However, it does have the chance to enter into a joint development agreement with Xcel Energy. 

That agreement would bind the company to certain regulations and give the county some say in the project’s operations. Kjeseth said he had been working to develop and engage in talks about a joint development agreement with the energy company, but board members responded with mixed enthusiasm.

“To me, I can’t see any JDA I would vote for, except to not put [the project] here. It’s too big of a project for our county,” said Supervisor Mark Carlson. 

Supervisor Paul Berning added that since the board would not get what they want, even if they were in a JDA they “might as well fight until the bitter end on it.” 

In response, Chairman Bob Long said too much pushback could potentially result in the county losing the already limited power they would have in a JDA to make the area as “livable as possible.” He also reminded the board that private citizens had the right to sell or lease their land. Xcel Energy worked with private landowners, who agreed to lease all of the land needed for the project.

“I don’t think you’ve ever seen me vote against landowners’ rights except when they intrude on other people’s rights,” said Supervisor Carlson, explaining that he believed a project of this size would intrude on the rights of adjacent property owners. “I don’t think they have a right to be able to put such a large project here, even if it’s on private property.” 

Long put an end to the discussion when he said the supervisors had beaten the issue to death. The board must now decide whether to try to intervene in the project or collaborate with Xcel. Long said they will invite a representative of the company to a future meeting to directly relay the board’s concerns and questions. 

Quick Hits:

• The board voted 10-7 against creating an Assistant Health Care Campus Administrator Position. The new position would have provided a succession plan (a common role across various businesses) for the current main administrator. 

• The assistant also would have served as second in command until Administrator Sandy Hackenmueller retires, but there is no guarantee that the assistant would stay once Hackenmueller retires, and as of now Hackenmueller has yet to formally announce retirement. Berning, who voted against the measure, advocated for allocating funds that would have gone to this position to the debt service of the nursing home, which Witt clarified is possible. 

• The board unanimously passed a resolution granting additional step increases for sheriff command staff due to compression. The pay of subordinates has been increasing at a faster rate than supervisors, so they agreed supervisor wages must increase as well. 

• Additionally, the board unanimously passed a resolution prohibiting animals in the workplace, updating the drug-free-workplace policy by requiring post-accident testing for any on-duty accident involving a commercial motor that leads to injury or damage. 

• The board also unanimously passed a resolution confirming and ratifying the authority of counsel for St. Croix County to add additional defendants to opioid litigation. This means that specific law firms are now able to add additional parties to their opioid litigations against manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.

• The next County Board of Supervisors meeting is on July 2.