Local governments adapt to state preemption by writing compatible ordinances to retain leverage over solar, wind, and battery projects
December 19th, 2025: Headland Solar Files First Major MPSC ApplicationNew here? Follow stories to track developments over time. Create a free account to get updates when stories you care about change.
For decades, Michigan townships held sole authority over whether utility-scale solar farms and wind turbines could be built on local land. That ended in November 2023, when Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed Public Act 233, giving the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) the power to approve large renewable energy projects when local zoning rules are stricter than state standards. Now, nearly two years in, the law has moved from political fight to operational reality: the MPSC is reviewing five project applications across the state, local governments are filing lawsuits and ballot petitions, and counties like Huron are writing new ordinances designed to stay just compatible enough with state rules to keep their seat at the table.
The stakes run in two directions. Michigan's clean energy mandate requires utilities to hit 60 percent renewable electricity by 2035 and 100 percent clean energy by 2040, meaning thousands of megawatts of new solar and wind capacity must be sited somewhere. But rural communities that would host these projects worry about losing farmland, bearing nuisance costs, and watching outside developers profit from their land. The central question is whether the new state-local power balance will accelerate buildout while keeping host communities invested, or whether legal challenges and political backlash will slow the transition to a crawl.
Emergency Fayette Twp Board called on renewable energy ...
FOX 47 News
Michigan authorities sue to roll back energy law
CBS Detroit
Southwest MI township sees record turnout for 300-megawatt ...
WWMT-TV
Videos from YouTube.
Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.
Fictional AI pastiche — not real quote.
"How perfectly predictable: the state, unable to convince free men to surrender their land voluntarily, simply abolishes the freedom to refuse. They call it a "clean energy mandate" — but observe what is truly mandated here: not energy, not cleanliness, but obedience."
Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.
Two rounds, two personas, one winner. You set the crossfire.
Watch two AI personas debate this story using real evidence
Choose one persona for each side of the debate
Select debater for this side:
Select debater for this side:
Make your prediction before the referee scores
Pick the question both personas must answer in the final round
Debate Oracle! You called every round!
Sharp Instincts! You know your debaters!
The Coin Flip Strategist! Perfectly balanced!
The Contrarian! Bold predictions!
Inverse Genius! Try betting the opposite next time!
The state body that now holds siting authority over utility-scale renewable energy projects when local governments lack compatible ordinances.
A rural Michigan county in the Thumb region that hosts 472 wind turbines (32 percent of the state total) and is now navigating solar development under PA 233.
The statewide body representing Michigan's 1,240 townships, which has become the organizational hub for local opposition to PA 233.
A citizen-led ballot committee seeking to repeal PA 233 and restore full local zoning authority over renewable energy projects.
Ranger Power files a PA 233 siting application with the MPSC for the 220-megawatt Headland Solar project in Livingston County after failing to gain local approval.
Commissioners vote to send the 15,000-acre cap back to the planning commission for review, with some arguing it should be lowered. Host community payment formulas are also under discussion.
Huron County commissioners approve a solar and battery storage ordinance aligned with PA 233 state standards, preserving local siting authority. The ordinance allocates up to 15,000 acres for solar development and requires host community agreements.
The MPSC waives the $10,000 base application fee for PA 233 siting applications to encourage project filings.
Michigan's Board of State Canvassers unanimously approves petition language for a ballot initiative to repeal PA 233, clearing the way for signature collection.
The Republican-led Michigan House passes bills to restore local zoning control over renewable energy siting, 58 to 48. The bills face long odds in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
The Michigan Court of Appeals considers the municipalities' challenge to the MPSC's siting implementation order.
The siting law becomes operational. Developers can now apply directly to the MPSC for project approval when local ordinances are more restrictive than state standards.
A coalition of 72 townships and 7 counties files an appeal in the Michigan Court of Appeals challenging the MPSC's order implementing PA 233, arguing it violated administrative rulemaking requirements.
The Michigan Public Service Commission finalizes application procedures for developers seeking state-level siting approval, defining Compatible Renewable Energy Ordinance requirements narrowly.
Citizens for Local Choice registers as a ballot committee seeking to reverse PA 233 through a statewide referendum.
Governor Whitmer signs Public Acts 233 and 234, establishing state siting authority for utility-scale renewable projects and setting a 100 percent clean energy target by 2040.
Voters in Huron County townships reject proposed DTE Energy and NextEra Energy wind farm projects at the ballot box.
Huron County, home to 32 percent of Michigan's wind turbines, imposes a moratorium on new wind farm construction amid growing local opposition.
Discussed by: Graham Sustainability Institute at the University of Michigan; MPSC staff in stakeholder presentations
More counties follow Huron County's model: adopt ordinances that mirror PA 233 standards closely enough to retain local approval authority, while negotiating host community payments and acreage caps as their remaining leverage. The court challenge fails or becomes moot as compliance spreads. The ballot initiative falls short of signatures. Project buildout accelerates through a hybrid system where the MPSC backstop exists but is rarely invoked. This is the outcome PA 233 was designed to produce.
Discussed by: Michigan Townships Association; Citizens for Local Choice; Inside Climate News analysis
The Court of Appeals rules that the MPSC's implementation order violated administrative procedure, forcing a do-over that delays projects for years. Alternatively, Citizens for Local Choice gathers enough signatures for the November 2026 ballot and voters repeal PA 233 outright. Local governments reimpose restrictive ordinances, moratoriums, and acreage bans. Michigan's 2035 and 2040 clean energy targets become difficult or impossible to meet on schedule.
Discussed by: Renewable Energy World; pv magazine; developer industry groups
Most rural townships refuse to adopt compatible ordinances, viewing PA 233 compliance as a surrender of local sovereignty. Developers route applications directly to the MPSC, which approves projects over local objections. Host communities receive statutory payments but feel excluded from meaningful decision-making. Political backlash intensifies, and the 2026 ballot initiative gains momentum from communities that experienced state-imposed approvals.
Discussed by: Bridge Michigan; Michigan Advance political reporting
The Democratic Senate and Republican House negotiate amendments to PA 233 rather than outright repeal. Changes could include broader compatible ordinance definitions, higher mandatory host community payments, farmland protection set-asides, or expanded local intervenor rights in MPSC proceedings. This middle path would defuse the ballot initiative while preserving state siting authority for projects that meet enhanced local benefit requirements.
Ohio went the opposite direction from Michigan. Governor Mike DeWine signed Senate Bill 52 in July 2021, giving county commissioners the power to designate 'restricted areas' where utility-scale wind and solar projects are banned outright. By the end of 2023, 22 Ohio counties had adopted such restrictions, effectively vetoing large swaths of potential renewable development.
Renewable energy development in Ohio slowed markedly. Multiple proposed projects were blocked or abandoned in counties that imposed restrictions.
Ohio's approach became a cautionary example for clean energy advocates, who pointed to it as evidence that unchecked local authority can stall statewide energy goals. The Ohio Supreme Court later weighed in on the scope of local power, keeping the legal framework in flux.
Michigan's PA 233 was designed specifically to avoid the Ohio outcome. Where Ohio gave counties veto power over renewables, Michigan gave the state a backstop. Huron County's decision to write a compatible ordinance rather than simply block projects reflects the incentive structure PA 233 creates: cooperate or lose control entirely.
New York created the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES) with authority to approve major renewable projects and override local zoning when it found local restrictions to be 'unreasonably burdensome.' The state had previously used Article 10 of the Public Service Law since 2011 to site large energy facilities, giving it over a decade of experience with state-level preemption of local zoning for energy projects.
The ORES streamlined permitting timelines and approved projects that had stalled under local review, though it also generated significant rural opposition.
New York's framework became a model for other states considering preemption. It demonstrated that state siting authority accelerates buildout but does not eliminate local political resistance, which can resurface through other channels such as lawsuits, protests, and legislative pushback.
Michigan's PA 233 follows the same preemption logic but adds the 'compatible ordinance' offramp that New York lacks. Huron County's approach, writing rules that align with state standards to retain local authority, is the kind of adaptive local response that the Michigan framework is designed to incentivize.
Huron County, which hosts 472 wind turbines making up 32 percent of Michigan's total, imposed a moratorium on new wind farm construction in 2015. In May 2017, voters in multiple Huron County townships rejected proposed DTE Energy and NextEra Energy wind projects at the ballot box, despite the projects' promise of tax revenue and lease payments to participating landowners.
Wind development in Michigan's highest-capacity region effectively froze. Developers warned they would redirect investment to Iowa and other more welcoming states.
The wind moratorium experience directly informed the Whitmer administration's push for PA 233. It demonstrated that without state-level siting authority, local opposition could block development in precisely the areas with the best renewable resources.
Huron County's 2025 solar ordinance represents a dramatic shift from the county's 2015-2017 posture. The same community that blocked wind projects through moratoriums and ballot measures is now proactively writing rules to accommodate solar development, albeit with acreage caps and host community payment requirements. The shift illustrates how state preemption changed the strategic calculus for local governments.