In a pivotal decision that could shape the future of renewable energy in Michigan, a state appeals court upheld most of the regulations limiting local authority over such projects, while striking down select provisions deemed to overreach.
The Michigan Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel confirmed that state regulators had adhered to legal protocols in implementing provisions of a 2023 law empowering the Michigan Public Service Commission to approve major wind, solar, and battery developments despite local objections. However, the court found that the commission’s interpretation of certain aspects of the law improperly curtailed local authority.
While the implications of this mixed ruling on pending renewable energy projects remain uncertain, the state regards it as a largely favorable outcome. Public Service Commission spokesperson Matt Helms remarked, “While the Commission continues to review the impact of specific findings of the Court’s decision on cases before us, today’s decision largely affirms the Commission’s approach and allows for continued and timely implementation of the law.”
Representing numerous local communities challenging the state’s solar permitting rules, attorney Michael Homier described the ruling as a “mixed bag.” He expressed satisfaction with parts of the decision that supported his clients but was “disappointed the court didn’t apply the same reasoning” across all arguments.
The judgment emerges after prolonged debate surrounding Public Act 233, a contentious 2023 statute pushed through by Democrats to accelerate renewable energy adoption, which had faced intense local resistance.
Local governments retain the option to govern renewable energy projects if they enact a “compatible renewable energy ordinance” meeting the new statewide criteria for noise, setbacks, and other specifics. Absent such an ordinance, developers may seek approval from the Public Service Commission. The local governments argued the commission bypassed proper rulemaking processes and imposed overly restrictive terms for local ordinances.
Judges Christopher Murray, Michael Gadola, and Michael Kelly dismissed these claims and others from the local governments. However, they supported the localities on two key points:
- The law grants local governments 30 days post-meeting with developers to initiate the approval process. The state had set the 30-day timer from the developers’ meeting offer, which judges deemed incorrect, dismissing concerns that locals might obstruct projects by refusing meetings.
- The court agreed that any local government touching project lands qualifies as an “affected local unit” eligible for specific privileges, including developer payments, countering the state’s stance that only zoning-jurisdiction governments qualify.
Renewable energy proponents hailed the decision, with Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council President Laura Sherman stating it “affirmed the ability for Michiganders to use their land as they wish while stimulating job creation and economic development.”
The Michigan Townships Association, critical of the state’s permitting framework and representing numerous townships involved in the lawsuit, has not yet commented.
___
This story was originally published by Bridge Michigan and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
