When the general public began to learn the true extent of the High Prairie project, the conversation often turned to the taxes - all the money the counties would get, all the money the school districts would get, just "ALL THE MONEY." This conversation has been quiet lately, but we think it is time to talk about it again.
First, let's go back, and refresh your memories....
In December 2018, Representative Allen Andrews filed a bill (HB 220) that would modify the provisions relating to the taxation of property involved in producing wind energy. Essentially, wind energy facilities that were owned by public utilities would be taxed at the local level for property tax revenues instead of distributed among the areas that the utilities service. We never denied that this bill was necessary. The communities that are affected by wind energy should receive compensation for this. After the destruction we have witnessed here, we are going to need it.
Proponents of wind energy pushed this bill hard, they said how it would help small, rural counties that were strapped for cash, the money would improve roads, it would be a "windfall" for school districts and the additional income to leaseholders would be welcome for those struggling. Senator O'Laughlin was even quoted as saying that counties "fought hard" for these wind project. Interesting choice of words Senator O'Laughlin - especially since we have documents quoting Terra-Gen that they kept the project "quiet." Also, when she made these comments, the project was not permitted in Schuyler County (not until July 31, 2019).
This is an excerpt from a document presented to the Kirksville City County on March 15, 2017.
Ameren even began touting the additional income to Schuyler and Adair Counties and passing fliers like this out to school board members:
Remember, these were Ameren's expectations, their expectations that they would get an abatement from the Schuyler County EEZ Board. Unfortunately for them, the Schuyler County EEZ Board (on October 11, 2019) and then the Schuyler County Commissioners voted to remove utilities as entities that would qualify for abatements.
Things like this were posted on Facebook:
Okay, okay, it sounds like fairies and rainbows and there is no way it could be too good to be true.
Or Could It? Stick with us.
During this legislative session we have been aware of SB 379. This bill would modify provisions relating to the taxation of property associated with the production of energy. The bill summary reads: "Beginning January 1, 2022, this act provides a depreciation table for the purposes of assessing all real and tangible personal property associated with a project that uses wind energy directly to generate electricity. Such depreciation percentages range from 40% in the first year following construction of the property to 35% in the fifth year following construction of the property and each year thereafter." This bill was decided upon by a "Wind Energy Task Force" that was set up after SB 220 was passed. So, what's the big deal?
What prompted us to write this blog was an interaction that Senator O'Laughlin had with Senator Eigel on April 27, 2021. We recommend you take 10 minutes and LISTEN. (We had hoped to have this blog written sooner, but were following up on some concerns first).
During this exchange in the Missouri Senate, Senator O'Laughlin attempts to add SB 379 onto another bill that is being debated, as Amendment 17. Senator O'Laughlin's behavior is not only embarrassing but also questionable. Not only can she not (or maybe is not willing to) answer the questions posed to her by Senator Eigel regarding SB 379, but she also makes comments that led us to further question her motives (if you have read our other blogs, you know we do not think highly of the Senator).
We are trying to figure out if there is an ulterior motive to this bill. After the exchange between the Senator, we were confused and curious. Wind energy is currently taxed on a county by county basis, but there are accepted provisions by the State Tax Commission of Missouri, in the Assessor Manual. This is how wind turbines have been taxed in Missouri at least the last 10 years - 40% good for the first two years, 37% good for the next 2 years and 35% for the remaining life of the project. This ONLY APPLIES to the turbines, it does not apply to the access roads, underground circuit lines, transmission lines, substations, etc.
When trying to further understand SB 379 and the controversy it caused, we contacted the Tax Commission. They were evasive, which we found strange, but essentially, what is written in the Assessors Manual regarding wind energy is NOT law and is only listed as what has been accepted in some Missouri counties. We were then referred to the Missouri Statutes, Chapter 137. We have taken the time to review this chapter and can find no other tax law that gives this much of a tax discount off the top. We believe this is Senator's Eigel's issue with SB 379. Why should utilities get a 60% tax break off the top? Maybe as individuals, we should lobby for tax breaks of 60% off our homes, cars, land, etc. Should everyone not be entitled to a tax break, if the utilities are?
It is bad enough that Senator O'Laughlin cannot explain a tax bill that directly affects the counties she is supposed to represent, and other counties in Missouri that have wind energy. What is worse, is who she is helping. We will give you a hint: It isn't her constituents.
When HB 220 was passed, it set up a "Task Force on Wind Energy." The point of this task force was to discuss and determine how wind energy should be taxed. If you listen to the above video, Senator O'Laughlin references that this group met and decided how wind energy should be taxed and they agreed upon SB 379. She states that this group was made up of 20+ people, yet she does not specifically state who these people are. Frankly, she dances around most of the questions she is asked. This inability or maybe purposeful failure to answer questions made us feel like there had to be more to the story, and we were correct. Below is copy of the "meeting minutes" of this Task Force on Wind Energy. The official Task Force Members are:
Atchinson County Clerk Susette Taylor
Warren County Assessor Wendy Nordwald
Representative Allen Andrews, 1st
Senator Cindy O'Laughlin, 18th
Senator Ed Emery, 31st
Senator S. Kiki Curls (resigned January 16, 2020)
Representative Travis Fitzwater, 49th
Representative Tracy McCreery, 88th
This is what they decided:
The first paragraph of this we feel is misleading, "...several county officials..., wind energy developers, several utility companies...." Now it makes sense. Now we understand why Senator O'Laughlin is trying to pass SB 379, we will just say it, special interests. Also, what is hiding in SB 379? Not the interests of rural Missourians, not the interests of the people she is supposed to represent and not the interests of people whose lives have been affected by wind energy. She is here representing two things - her own interests and the interests of large corporations.
Here were the additional speakers as discussed above:
This SCREAMS special interests. We also do not believe that any of those people reside in Senator O'Laughlin's district. WHO IS SHE WORKING FOR?! It is definitely not the people of the 18th District.
From the beginning she has pushed aside, belittled and ignored her constituents that were and are concerned about wind energy surrounding their homes. We quickly found out it was because she was financially benefitting, not only by providing products for the construction of the High Prairie project by also then providing material to the Missouri Department of Transportation to repair the roads that her trucks help to destroy.
Senator O'Laughlin is bad news for Northeast Missouri and we are still trying to figure out the point of SB 379 (other than to appease her utility supporters) for the communities impacted by wind energy.
We will say this:
It is our understanding that Ameren has been agreeable to the taxes imposed by the county assessors up to this point, and the tax revenue from the project will be significantly more than predicted. This is due to the taxation of access roads, circuit lines, transmission lines, substations, and other infrastructure associated with the project. These parts of the infrastructure are assessed at a higher rate and are not included in the above mentioned depreciation schedule (this only applies to the wind turbines themselves). The county assessors are following the 40%-37%-35% depreciation schedule for he wind turbines, even though this is not written in law. Payment is not due until December 31, 2021.
Comments