Obvious to the Oblivious

"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." -Leo Tolstoy

For some time now our community has been locked in battle over a proposed wind development on the outskirts of Hays. In full disclosure, I too have been involved in this debate and am decidedly against the location presently under consideration.

One of the most astounding things about the industrial wind debate in Ellis County is the polarization which has occurred. Polarization has been evident since the debate emerged in the public eye several months ago. Since the Commission vote, it seems to have intensified. Meanwhile, Iberdrola completely ignores the invitation to engage in an open community discussion, and the division rages on.

When reading the evidence concerning industrial wind power, it becomes quickly apparent that conclusions are mixed at best. There may be positive aspects of industrial wind generation but these benefits are very often offset by poor planning and placement. It also bears mentioning that the issues surrounding industrial wind projects are complex and difficult to sort out. That however does not excuse us from our responsibility to wrestle with the dissonance.

As such, I have been struggling to make sense of various claims and positions of some of my fellow citizens on both sides of this debate. Recently however, as I read an opinion piece in the HDN, the admonitions of my research dissertation chair began to reverberate loudly in my head, “BEWARE OF SELECTION BIAS”.

Regardless of which side a person is on in this debate, it seems that he or she has all the evidence on their side. If you don’t believe me, just ask them. Of course it is also apparent that their claims are biased. More specifically they reflect a particular type of selection bias known as “confirmation bias”. Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek information that only supports your position while ignoring data that contradicts it. Therefore, you seek only what you want, and find it every time.

Confirmation bias explains a tremendous amount of what has occurred in this debate. It is evident that this “my side” bias accelerates polarization and distortion of logic. As just one of many examples, project proponents claim that a wide majority of perhaps 80% of the county populace supports them. On what basis do they make these claims? It’s simple really, because they associate with people that share their views, look for evidence that supports that view and discount the evidence that doesn’t fit well with their position. To be fair, there is a slim chance that 80% do agree with them, but they don’t know this and they display no intention to find out. It’s like saying “I have made up my mind already, so don’t confuse me with the facts.”

Even the most touted aspects of this proposal are wrought with confirmation bias. The economic impact questions are far from known. Those for the project are convinced it will be positive, while those against it, argue more will be lost than gained. Ask either side and you’ll hear an “irrefutable” answer that just so happens to agree with them.

This bias is so rampant that logic bears no burden in carrying even the most basic questions. It is nearly impossible to effectively argue (when considering all the issues) that the proposed location of this industrial development is the best location available in Ellis County. Other wind projects are almost always placed in isolated or economically declining areas. This project is proposed next to the only growing city in northwest Kansas. This obvious problem does not trouble those committed to this wind development. They skirt the issue entirely, try and confuse the issue by injecting arguments not related to the question and engage in defensive posturing, all in the effort to avoid challenging their pre-existing bias and thereby risk their personal interest.

As the interested parties of one side or the other bicker over who possesses the correct information regarding this proposed wind development, the real travesty continues unabated. While it may be academically interesting to posit who is right, the independent data that would support an unbiased answer to that question has never been collected. Meanwhile, the county commission is busy determining what will actually happen.

Though the vote has been taken and the project declined, Iberdrola vows to push on, in the effort to have this development approved. Many feel this decision is the most important decision Ellis County will face in our lifetimes. With these stakes, we should demand our decision makers base this decision on unbiased information collected by independent scientific study. We must demand a moratorium on this and future applications in order to take the time necessary to candidly study the impacts of developments this large on the city of Hays and the outlying county. This objective information can then be utilized to create a comprehensive land use plan, and reform the various zoning regulations that fail to support this plan. With this new vision and regulation, we can finally rest knowing that the true purpose of zoning, to protect all the citizens of Ellis County, is our authentic goal.

As it stands, two commissioners have signed letters of support fully two years prior to the application and subsequent public discussion. If they continue to deliberate, they do so without the benefit of a single independent study to shed light on even one of the many questions of this development. Without a comprehensive plan, better regulations and impartial information to inform the questions of this project, what will guide their decision? You guessed it, confirmation bias.

Character & Vision

Ask anyone, “What are the three most important factors in real estate development?” and they will tell you, “Location, location and location”. Consequently, it is no surprise that the selection of the location for the industrial wind development proposal in Ellis County is at the center of the current debate. As most are aware, substantial problems have been identified with this particular location. Even still, I would submit to you that the debate about the location of this development is about more than just physical space occupied by the monstrous industrial machines; it’s about the character of an entire community.

As we all know, various communities have differing interests in the types of development they desire. For example, Lawrence (Douglas County) has depicted itself with a progressive flair, with the University of Kansas at the center of its image. Dodge City has held out the “Cow-town” banner, accompanied by large feedlots, packing houses and images of the old west. Larned has sustained their community with a multitude of programs housing both patients with severe mental illnesses and high risk criminal populations. Each community has its own image and as a result, attracts that type of development.

What kind of image does Hays want? Currently we have two major industries here, education and medical service. Hays is not an “industrial” town. In this way, we attract developments, and have an image more like Lawrence than Larned or Dodge City. Most of the people who stay in or relocate to Hays chose to do so, at least in part, for that reason.

To maintain an image, communities are cautious about the types of development they allow. For instance, it is unlikely that Lawrence and Douglas County would allow the types of development that Larned or Dodge City attract. In fact, it’s not just unlikely, it is well documented.

A couple years ago, Lawrence garnered state wide news coverage after it was revealed that a single sex offender from Larned was set to be released and housed in a state operated and staffed facility inside the city limits. Despite the fact he was to have around the clock supervision, the community reacted with fury, resulting in the passage of very restrictive zoning laws regarding where such individuals were allowed to live.

In effect, Lawrence used the power of zoning to protect the character of the community. Lawrence has long cultivated their image as a hub of education and culture, and their leaders rightfully recognized that if developments of this kind were allowed into their community, it would certainly begin to change the way people perceive them. This change would ultimately result in an overall loss of economic opportunity, as they would no longer be able to attract or maintain the kind of development they desire.

Interestingly, this same individual lived for many quiet years in Larned prior to his proposed move to Lawrence. What is more, it may surprise some to learn that Larned welcomed not just this one offender, but entire facilities of them. The community of Larned has also worked hard to cultivate an image, and this in turn has lead to the attraction of these programs. When one looks at the realities that Larned and other small Kansas towns face, it makes perfect sense. Without a niche, these communities could not survive in the current economic reality of Northwest Kansas.

Spearville, Montezuma and other communities that have welcomed industrial wind have difficulty attracting development of any kind. If industrial wind developments do have a positive economic benefit, they are far more likely to do so in communities such as these. Whatever the case, it is obvious that when a community allows a wind development, it changes the character and image of that community from that point forward. (What do you think of when you think of Spearville?) Unfortunately, these small communities have little to lose, either accept a new image or slowly decline into oblivion.

Ellis County is the largest population center in northwest Kansas and the only one not declining over time. Hays is the economic, educational, medical and cultural hub of Northwest Kansas and as such, we have the luxury of being more like Lawrence than Larned. We can be more selective about the kind of development we allow. It is essential to continue to mold the character of our community in harmony with the image we would like to project. If we allow a development of this kind, it will surely result in a change of character, a net economic loss and a reduction of overall development and growth.

Zoning was designed and implemented to promote a vision for Ellis County and to protect against threats to that vision. Soon our elected representatives will decide whether or not to rezone over 20,000 acres of Ellis county land for an industrial wind development right next to Hays. Before they do, there are two questions that they need to ask themselves. What is the vision for the character of our community? What kind of development is consistent with that character?

As they weigh these and other questions regarding the industrial wind proposal, we all should do the same. This is our community, our character and our vision. Our voice should be heard.

To Sign the Petition:
If you are an Ellis County, Kansas, resident and you wish to support a petition to stop this wind farm from being constructed next to Hays, Kansas, you can follow this link and leave your name, real address, and a single comment about your support of this petition. Click here now!

Confessions of a NIMBY Obstructionist

Insight is a quirky phenomenon. If one will only linger long enough to permit it, much more can be learned in a debate than that which is readily accessible. I, like many in the community, have been wrestling with the realities of the current industrial wind proposal in Ellis County. As affected community members, some others and I have voiced concerns.

As a result, we have been categorized by some as “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY) opponents of progress. As labels go, this one is uniformly negative, leveled at those not enlightened enough to see the big picture or too self centered to sacrifice for the greater good.

Having invested a significant amount of personal time and resources in a graduate education and teaching at a state university, I have an affinity to think of myself as, at the very least, marginally “enlightened”. However, having been castigated for my position, I am forced to consider the possibility that my educational investment has gone the way of an Enron retirement account. Determined to rebuff the charge, I spent some time examining the accusation. The results of my scrutiny were, at first, a tad disturbing. As is the case in many debates, listening fully to the statements of others, often brings insight into your own.

While reflecting on the validity of the charge, I found no escape from the precision of the indictment. The hard truth is, I am much more interested in this debate than I would otherwise be, if only I had the fortune of being blissfully unaware of the predicament of those faced with the realities of this proposed industrial development. No doubt had I lived east of Hays, I would have found many other “important” things to occupy my time. After all, like most of us in the modern world, I’m a pretty busy guy. If it were not for the “misfortune” of living in the center of an area proposed to house eight to ten 400 foot towers within a half mile from my house (and at least three within half that distance), I may likely have continued with my day, perhaps pausing slightly to consider with genuine sympathy, the plight of those poor souls west of town. Though it pains me to say it now, (most personal growth is uncomfortable), if it were not for living in the proposed area, I would have missed several truths ranging from the mundane to the sublime.

One of the simple truths I have come to understand is that even if I lived east of Hays, I would not have escaped the potential adverse effects of this proposal. In the case of 140 structures each one at least 50 feet taller than the tallest building in Kansas, sweeping an area of the sky larger than a Boeing 747, a mere few miles won’t make much of a difference. For reasons far too numerous to enumerate here, the specifics of this proposal could potentially have a negative impact on every single person residing in Ellis county (perhaps excepting those few whose land they sit on). It’s not just those living underneath the giant turbines that will experience the ill effects of them.

A more meaningful truth I have come to realize is that people, who accuse someone of being a NIMBY obstructionist, do so thinking they are illuminating some great character flaw in the recipient. That being the case, if the accusation has merit, it certainly is an indictment of humanity as a whole. The thing is, people do and should care about what affects them, and those close to them. When this accusation is leveled, it is done so because of an agenda, in this case, a strong financial incentive and a wish to discredit those expressing concern. In reality however, it is a natural and healthy reaction for those who must live with the consequences of an action to proceed with concern.

I would propose that it is the actions of the “PITBY” (Put In Their Back Yard) variety that can be the most insidious and that must be scrutinized with tremendous caution. What would motivate a developer from the Denver Colorado area, representing the interests of a Spanish utility company, to place an industrial utility development covering almost 12,000 acres in the center of Ellis County on the doorstep of the most populated city in northwest Kansas?

Though the preceding truths I mentioned are significant, they pale in comparison to the most profound understanding I have come to through this journey. As I mentioned previously, I am without a doubt “guilty” of the NIMBY syndrome. Of greater consequence, I sincerely hope that as many people as possible will step forward to share my “guilt”. Citizens taking responsibility to become involved in what happens around them is one of the core principles on which this great American experiment was founded.

Responsible citizens are compelled to watch over their backyard. For instance, we try to keep poverty, not poor people, out of our back yards by developing social programs, giving to the United Way and our local churches. We invest in public education programs to warn others of the dangers of addiction and other heath hazards. We endeavor to rid our society of child sexual abuse and spend our time and resources both caring for those victimized by sexual abuse and punishing those perpetrating it.

Many citizens have concerns about how this particular industrial development will affect them, their family and their community. At the present time, these concerns are so strong that they are compelled to declare to the decision makers, “Not in our backyard!”

Well meaning people on both sides of any debate may differ as to the best course of action. In some situations there are no simple solutions. However, as luck would have it, this is not one of those situations. We need renewable energy to power the world. We also need to protect the health and well-being of those in our back yard. Fortunately, in this situation, we can have both. Build the turbines in areas of Kansas where it limits the impact on their neighbors, keeping them out of everyone’s back yard. There are literally hundreds of sites in western Kansas where if need be, thousands of turbines can be built, with corresponding setbacks measured in miles, not feet, from residences.

If standing up for what I believe is the right thing to do for myself, my family, my neighbors and my community, results in some labeling me a NIMBY obstructionist, I for one will proudly wear that label. Perhaps in some small way these efforts will encourage others to exercise their voice as well. Conceivably it may also result in a more productive conversation and produce a more collaborate effort to engage the issue at hand. In the meantime, I will continue engaging my convictions and maintaining involvement in the discourse, in the effort to keep something that threatens the physical, social and economic well-being out of my community, and out of my backyard.

To Sign the Petition:
If you are an Ellis County, Kansas, resident and you wish to support a petition to stop this wind farm from being constructed next to Hays, Kansas, you can follow this link and leave your name, real address, and a single comment about your support of this petition. Click here now!