A recent decision by Maryland’s Court of Special Appeals highlights the differences that proposed power generation facilities can bring before the Public Service Commission (PSC). For example, a proposed power generation facility can consider applying for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) or for an exemption from the CPCN process. The recent decision in Dan’s Mountain WindForce, LLC v. Shawhighlights the differences between these two processes, which will be vital to understand as renewable energy development in the state increases.
A new livestock operation moving into an area can often cause fears from neighbors over potential changes in the neighborhood. Neighbors may fear new smells, sounds, and sights being a part of daily life or changes in the character of the neighborhood. Many states grant counties (or potentially cities) the power to develop zoning ordinances related to agriculture to help limit some of these concerns. One state, Minnesota, recently saw a court case involving a county granting a conditional use permit (CUP) for a new feedlot challenged in state court by a group of realtors. The realtors claimed approving the CUP was unreasonable or contrary to the law because the record did not reflect that the feedlot would meet the mandatory minimum requirements in the zoning ordinances. The Minnesota Court of Appeals disagreed and upheld the granting of the CUP to the feedlot (Rosenquist, 2017). Continue reading →