NORTHWOOD – The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Worth County Board of Supervisors, declaring that the county has the authority to enforce new restrictive ordinances on wind energy developments even if a project is already underway. The decision, filed on April 24, 2026, reverses a previous district court ruling that would have allowed a developer to proceed under older, less-stringent regulations.
The legal battle began after Worthwhile Wind LLC, an affiliate of Chicago-based Invenergy, spent several years and millions of dollars planning a commercial wind turbine project in Worth County. At the time the project started in 2018, much of the county was unzoned, and there were no countywide ordinances regulating the construction of wind turbines. However, following public complaints about existing turbines, the Worth County Board of Supervisors adopted a moratorium in April 2021 and later passed a new ordinance in June 2022 that imposed strict setback distances, noise restrictions, and height limitations.
The developer sued, claiming it had acquired “vested rights” to complete the project under the prior legal framework because it had already invested approximately $2.8 million in preliminary activities like environmental studies and land leases. While a district court originally agreed with the developer, the Iowa Supreme Court ultimately rejected that argument.
Writing for the majority, Justice McDonald stated that a developer’s right to complete a project does not “vest” until they have obtained a valid construction permit and made substantial expenditures in reliance on that specific permit. Because Worthwhile Wind had never applied for or received a permit to build the turbines, the Court ruled that their preliminary expenditures were not enough to shield them from the county’s new regulations.
Justice McDonald wrote that no property owner has a right to be an island unto itself and insist that the Board of Supervisors be divested of the power to make and apply new law in a previously unzoned area of the county. The Court also rejected claims that the county acted in “bad faith” to deliberately frustrate the project, noting that the board’s decision to create a regulatory framework for large-scale developments is a legitimate exercise of police power intended to protect the health and safety of Iowa residents.
Dissenting Opinion
In a dissenting opinion, Justice McDermott argued that the ruling effectively kills a project that was already in an advanced stage. He contended that the developer had made significant, legitimate investments—including signing 162 easement agreements with local landowners—and should have been allowed to rely on the county’s original lack of permit requirement.
The case has been remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion. For local officials and residents in North Iowa, the ruling affirms that county governments retain the legislative power to update zoning laws even as major industrial projects are in the planning phases.