Revamp Of Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Regulations Complete

By Gordon HopkinsAfter two years of work, Jefferson County’s Planning and Zoning Commission voted to approve a revamped County Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations at a public meeting. Only five of the eight commission members were present at the meeting and some of them made clear they were unenthusiastic about what they were voting for. Nevertheless, the commission opted to send the results to Jefferson County Commissioners for their approval. Reason For The ReviewA Comprehensive Plan is intended as a guide to direct future growth and development opportunities in Jefferson County. The current Comprehensive Plan was completed in 2001 and was last updated for a 10-year planning period, from 2013 to 2023. The county is working with Marvin Planning Consultants of David City, which completed a county survey in advance of the new Comprehensive Plan.In addition, the county began working on updating zoning regulations two years ago. The Planning and Zoning Committee held a public kickoff meeting February 8, 2024, at the county courthouse.Public HearingPrior to the vote, a public hearing was held to give citizens a chance to voice their concerns. Approximately 15 members of the public attended.One of the speakers was former Planning and Zoning Commission member Bruce Weise, who expressed frustration that he could not determine what zoning changes had been made prior to the hearing, “I’m not too concerned about the comprehensive plan. We’ve never held to it in the past. So, the zoning regulations are the only thing that I’m concerned about. I went to the clerk’s office to get a copy of the changes. All they had was a book that was four inches thick. I did not have the time to decipher from my old copy to what the new one is. I think before you decide anything, the public needs to know what changes we have.“I want the changes on the zoning regulations,” said Weise. “We’re not informed.” Ag Versus Residential ZoningRegarding the Comprehensive Plan, commissioner member Kevin Banahan was blunt in his assessment.“This Comprehensive Plan we’ve got, what, 165 pages now, compared to what we had before,” said Banahan. “I’d say about 75 percent of this is a pile of s**t.”A major concern for Banahan and others is people building homes in areas with farms and agricultural facilities.Livestock producer Brandon Pullman of Plymouth also spoke, “I haven’t seen new regulations, but I’m guessing you’re still going to ban livestock within half a mile of a paved road. My question is, why not put stuff that’s going to have a heavy semi, on average one a day, for a confinement, feedlot, cattle situation on the highway? Let Nebraska pay for the road repair. Why are we making them build 10 miles in the middle of nowhere? Have the county rock and maintain these roads, have that much extra truck traffic?”“When are you going to change it to where the Ag district is for ag, not acreages?” asked Pullman.The concern many livestock producers have with people building homes in agricultural areas is that they may then complain about the sights and smells that accompany such operations.That is an argument Weise has been making for several years. He said, “The original comprehensive plan that we had probably 20 years really didn’t change it much, but in there we said we wanted to keep the rural areas rural and have the people be in urban areas. But then we went for 20 years, meeting after meeting, we approved the little residential houses out in the country where the ag is supposed to happen. We didn’t follow a comprehensive plan.”“We have the ag residential thing along the highways. The idea originally was that people would put their house on a paved highway instead of 10 miles up,” said Banahan. “It doesn’t work. So, like you said, we’ve got all this peak highway with nothing along it. Remember, we’re sticking livestock facilities 10 miles down a crappy road somewhere. Doesn’t make sense. I brought it up here. It went nowhere.” Solar RegulationsA moratorium on new Commercial Solar Energy Conversion Systems applications instituted by Jefferson County Commissioners on February 11, 2025, for the purpose of reviewing and revising regulations governing solar farms in the county.Some in attendance express concern that the revised solar regulations, particularly the setbacks, would make solar commercial energy impractical in Jefferson County.Attorney Spencer Hosch of Baird Holm, LLP, was present. Baird Holm represents NextEra Energy, which owns and operates numerous wind and solar energy facilities, including Steele Flats in Jefferson and Gage Counties.“There is guidance as to what sort of dangers the county can attempt to avoid. They can’t be speculative. Tey can’t be conjectural. They have to be based in evidence. Looking at the setbacks, for example, 200 feet from a non-participating property line. What’s the danger that we’re attempting to advert there? I mean, in a lot of these projects, commercial scale, utility scale will be in general, agricultural where the neighboring property owner may have cattle or is farming some sort of grain, there’s nothing within that 200 feet that necessitates that particular setback,” said Hosch. “The other one is the requirement that for a solar farm, the lot coverage ratio has to be beneath 50 percent. I’m told there was discussion at prior hearings that the concern is that you don’t want to convert 100 percent of good farmland. That’s a reasonable thing to be worried about. However, that cuts against that individual property owner’s ability to put their land to the use that they would like to pursue.”Another proposed limitation of solar regulations concerned Raymond Schoenrock of Fairbury, “It says no more than 10 percent of prime farmland in any one section of land. What does that mean? That means you can only 16 acres out of a section of land?”The definition of prime farmland is determined by the USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture).“How many acres of prime farmland and acreages occupy in this county?” asked Pullman. “So, the argument that any other use, livestock, solar, wind, is taking prime farmland, that’s crap. So, unless you’re going to ban acreages in the prime farmland of this county, why are you going to ban other stuff?”Michael Baumfalk of Beatrice talked about the increasing need for electricity in Nebraska, “How can we meet the energy needs that we know we all have when we know that solar is a viable option, wind is a viable option?”Baumfalk said, “You’ve all heard about how this AI (Artificial Intelligence) is changing technology to a tremendous extent, but it’s going to require a lot more energy, a lot more electricity. If we don’t take action in a community to generate some of that energy, those AI companies will do it themselves.”The county previously addressed zoning for wind energy facilities, which was an extremely contentious. The majority of people who attended wind zoning meetings were opposed to wind energy development in the county. In contrast, no one spoke against solar energy. Planning and Zoning Chair Randy Welsch asked those attending this most recent meeting if anyone was against commercial solar energy in the county and no one spoke up.

The City of Fairbury City Public Forum

Keeping Pace

Related Articles

High Winds Fuel Multiple Wild Fires in SE Nebraska

Sen. Ricketts Makes the Case for War

City Offices Closed During Move

A Broken Wire Over Railroad Tracks Leaves City in the Dark