This Siting Solutions Project monthly newsletter identifies national trends in renewable energy siting legislation and profiles key bills to watch. 

National Trends

• The busy legislative season continues! So far this year, we’re tracking 67 siting bills introduced in 31 states. Most of these bills seek to restrict new clean energy development by creating onerous statewide requirements or by shifting state permitting authorities to the local level.
• The vast majority of siting bills—including both restrictive and permissive legislation—have been introduced by Republican legislators. This trend may be indicative of both the increasing political polarization of renewables and the extent to which renewable siting is primarily a rural land use issue. Sponsorship of the bills we’re tracking is: 48 Republican, 14 Democrat, and 5 by policy committees.¹
• As some states wrap up their sessions (Virginia, Utah, and Wyoming), others are navigating the crucial crossover deadline, requiring bills to pass their house of origin in order to continue advancing. See this resource for more details on legislative session dates and deadlines.
• Many restrictive siting bills failed to advance through the legislative process (AZ HB 2223, MT HB 389, WY SF 0183, UT HB 241) or were significantly amended to minimize their impact on renewable energy deployment (FL SB 700).
• Establishing restrictive setbacks in statewide standards is a commonly proposed siting reform in states without state-wide siting frameworks (AR HB 1198, OK HB 1451, KY HB 790, TN SB 132, TX SB 819). Establishing permitting processes specific to renewables, where no similar requirements exist for fossil resources, is also a common proposal for states without state-wide siting frameworks (KS SB 173, NM HB 435, OK HB 2155, TX SB 819).
• Bills allowing for, or requiring, public referendums as a condition for site approval are proliferating, too (ID SB 317, TX HB 4353, NY A 4682).

Session Updates

Sensible Spotlight | Highlighting a policy that shifts the narrative or moves the ball.

• Iowa Senate and House subcommittees voted to advance permissive siting legislation (SF 376 / HSB 317), but neither bill passed committee before the first “funnel” and both are likely dead. The companion bills establish permissive state standards for siting wind and solar facilities, including: reasonable setback distances, limits on the local governments’ ability to adopt greater setbacks, standards for noise and shadow flicker, and flexibility for neighboring property owners to waive setbacks. The bills also establish efficient timelines for project decisions, as well as reasonable decommissioning requirements. Finally, the legislation prohibits exclusionary zoning based on corn suitability, zoning district type, and the setting of any acreage caps

Still in Play | Bills that are alive and under consideration.

• A bill establishing restrictive setbacks for wind turbines in Oklahoma (SB 2) narrowly advanced out of the Energy Committee on a vote of 5 to 4 and is on the Senate floor. The bill establishes setbacks for wind turbines of 0.25 nautical miles (1,500 feet) from residential dwellings and non-participating properties. Currently, Oklahoma requires 1,500 foot setbacks for wind turbines from schools, hospitals, and public-use airports. 
• Regressive legislation introduced in Florida (SB 700 / HB 651) was amended to remove solar siting elements from the bill. The original bill required the electric utility to submit 10-year site plans for proposed power plants to the respective county commission if a site has been classified as agricultural at any time during the past 5 years. The county commission is granted similar authorities to the Public Service Commission, including determining whether the proposed site plan is suitable.
• In Washington, SB 5317, which clarifies the local government’s role in the state siting process, is advancing through the legislature. A more comprehensive reform (SB 5359) enacting recommendations from 2023 legislative report findings, such as providing more technical assistance to local governments through the Department of Commerce, passed out of a policy committee but stalled at the crossover deadline.
• A raft of bills introduced in Texas to restrict renewable development are still in play, though none appears to be moving yet. SB 819 requires state-level siting through the Texas PUC, plus restrictive setbacks and changes to tax law. HB 5576 codifies the best management practices for wind and solar facilities, and requires a signed attestation of compliance, but precludes a local or state permit. HB 4353 requires a local referendum for individual project approval for all renewable energy projects in counties with a population greater than 10,000, and HB 3056 establishes 500-yard setbacks for solar energy facilities. Specific to battery storage, HB 1343 requires a state permitting process through the Texas PUC, and HB 1378 establishes minimum 500 yard setbacks.
• A novel approach introduced in Nebraska (LB 503) allows for counties to voluntarily become “American Energy Friendly Counties.” The designation would come with prescribed zoning standards for wind and solar in exchange for an increase in nameplate capacity tax revenue from projects within the county’s borders.

Bills That Stalled | Legislation that failed because of a vote or procedural hurdle.

• A bill establishing restrictive setback distances failed to advance out of committee in Montana (HB 389). The proposed legislation would have required wind turbine setbacks of 1,250 feet from all property lines, 3,000 feet from public roads, and 1.5 miles from neighboring property lines.  
• Legislation in Utah (HB 241) that would have significantly constrained renewable energy deployment was amended to pass the House, but it failed in the Senate. The original legislation required restrictive state standards for renewable energy projects and prohibited construction in certain areas. The amended version reduced farmland tax incentives for projects located in prime farmland, established a local permit application and review process, and required a decommissioning plan.
• A highly restrictive bill specific to wind energy in Arizona (HB 2223) failed to pass the House. It was voted down 25–33. The bill would, among other things, have established the ability for individuals to file a referendum petition against County conditional use permits; prohibited wind farms from being located within 6 miles of a non-participating property, or 12 miles of a residentially-zoned parcel; and required extensive permitting for leases on state and federal lands.
• A comprehensive policy reform introduced in Maryland (HB 1036) failed to pass the House by the March 17 crossover deadline. HB 1036 would have established a siting process through the PSC, including a set of standards for setbacks, fencing, vegetative screening, site maintenance, and more. The bill also would have prohibited local jurisdictions from adopting regulations to constrain or deny site development under certain conditions, and requires expedited reviews of site development plans that meet the standards in the legislation. Finally, the bill would have allowed localities to require payments in lieu of taxes of $5,000 per MW from a solar project.
• A bill has been tabled in New Mexico (HB 435) that would have empowered the Public Regulation Commission with permitting authority for renewable generation projects >5 MW. The bill also directs rulemaking at the Public Regulation Commission to evaluate project impacts, including scenic, cultural, and environmental impacts.
• In Virginia, the legislative session ended without passage of a siting bill, despite the introduction of several potential reforms. HB 2438, which would have established statewide standards for local governments to incorporate into zoning ordinances, advanced furthest, narrowly passing the House but failing to pass out of the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee. More opportunities will emerge next year, with a renewed focus on siting policy if Democrats win the Governor’s seat.
• Indiana reached its legislative halfway point, with several potential siting reforms missing the cutoff. One bill which is still live (SB 425) would have accelerated siting on certain brownfield sites but was amended to remove applicability for renewable energy projects. Advocates are considering options for reviving either of the dead bills (HB 1420, HB 1628).
• In Wyoming, a committee voted down a problematic bill (SF 0183) to establish a moratorium on new solar and wind projects through 2030

On the Horizon | What hasn’t been introduced yet, but we’re keeping an eye out for.

• In Pennsylvania, Governor Shapiro announced legislators who will be spearheading different components of his “Lightning Plan” — an all-of-the-above energy plan. The Plan includes the creation of the Reliable Energy Siting and Electric Transition (RESET) board, a centralized state siting authority, which will serve as a one-stop-shop for permitting energy projects larger than 25 MW. We are keeping an eye out for related legislation.
• Positive siting reforms may emerge in Ohio through proposed amendments to proposed expansive electric utility reform bills (HB 15 and SB 2). SB 2 advanced out of committee on March 18.
• According to advocates in Wisconsin, a bill may be coming together to address some concerns of rural communities, including topsoil management, visual impacts, decommissioning, and impacts to prime farmland.

If you’d like more information, or if there’s anything we’ve missed, please reach out to siting@cleantomorrow.org. 

1.  In some states, including Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, and Kansas, bills may be sponsored by legislative committees rather than individual legislators. ↩︎