Nortex Times

When the Jack County Commissioners Court convenes this Monday to consider offering a special tax break to investors in a wind farm, it looks as if the best interests of county residents will be secondary to the interests of the county judge and commissioners.

Depending on your perspective, the best interests of the county would be served by either 1) bringing in the full amount of taxes due from the investments made by the wind farm or 2) keeping the disruption to lives and property of such a massive industrial operation out of Jack County altogether.

Instead, the county judge and commissioners are considering a third way: reducing the amount of taxes the county will receive while still disrupting the lives and reducing the property value of the many residents who will have to live in the shadow of hundreds of wind turbines. 

Energy Alliance's Bill Peacock | Energy Alliance

Many commissioners courts and school districts around the state have rejected this approach. For instance, commissioners courts in Clay and Montague counties recently passed resolutions that they would not give abatements to wind farms. Similarly, Troy ISD just rejected by a 6-1 vote an application from a solar farm for tax breaks. 

Why would the court consider doing what their neighbors are rejecting? 

One reason may be that they fear the consequences of raising taxes on their Jack County voters. 

We all understand that people are always going to the judge and commissioners wanting more money spent on one project or another. But the court has a problem; they don’t have any money of their own. The only way they can get more money is to raise property taxes. 

With a new wind farm, though, the court can get more money to spend without raising taxes! There is one problem though. Despite wind farm investors claiming they will build the farm with or without the tax break (which they will have to do to qualify for a tax break from Jacksboro ISD), the judge and commissioners may not quite believe them. Which is why they are considering giving up a lot of new tax revenue in order to make sure they get at least some more revenue to keep a few of their constituents happy. 

Whatever decision the court makes on this, it is an important decision affecting all of their constituents on which all members of the court should weigh in on. However, that is not going to happen.

Two members of the court, commissioners Henry Birdwell and Terry Ward, have recused themselves from this matter. Why? Because they have signed leases with the wind farm and stand to benefit financially if the tax breaks are granted and the wind farms are built. 

While we can all appreciate the fact that they should not vote to approve something they will benefit from, their recusal creates a number of problems. 

If they had not recused themselves and the county judge and all four commissioners had to vote, it would take at least three votes in favor to approve the tax breaks. With Birdwell and Ward out of the picture, however, only two votes out of the five member court are needed for the wind farm to get the tax breaks.

In addition to the problem of a minority of the commissioners court making a decision that affects the entire county, the recusal of Birdwell and Ward take them off the hook for being accountable for their position on the wind farm. Voters--and potential challengers--will not be able to see their voting record on this issue because they will not have one.

The end result of the decision of Birdwell and Ward to recuse themselves is that they are more likely to increase their personal  income while avoiding scrutiny from the public over their position on the wind farm abatements.

While what they are doing is not illegal, it is wrong. County commissioners should not be able to benefit directly from a decision made by the commissioners court. Birdwell and Ward should either resign their offices or negate their agreements with the wind farm and then vote so that their position on this issue is known.

Whatever they do, though, the county judge and two remaining commissioners should vote against the tax breaks for the wind farm. If the wind farm developers want to come, let them come, but without receiving special tax breaks that are unavailable to most Jack County residents.

Bill Peacock is the policy director of the Energy Alliance.