TL;DR
Get backup power and energy gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Cherokee County, Iowa, reversed a moratorium on battery storage after supervisors heard safety information and weighed the potential local revenue from a proposed solar-and-battery project. The Smith family hopes to begin installation next fall, but must first secure the necessary permissions.
Cherokee County, Iowa, has reversed its moratorium on battery storage, allowing a proposed solar-and-battery project backed by the Smith family and energy developer Nomad Infrastructure to move toward permitting. The decision followed local debate over battery-fire risks, land-use rules and the project’s potential to generate county tax revenue.
The proposed installation would be built on Smith family land in partnership with Nomad Infrastructure, an Indiana-based company with experience in solar and battery projects. Thomas Smith, one of the brothers, works for the developer. Mark Smith said the family had received permission from its rural electric cooperative to transmit power over its lines and sell it into the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) grid.
Supervisor Bellefy estimated the project would involve more than $80 million in investment and could bring the county between $60,000 and $80,000 in annual tax revenue. Those figures are estimates, not confirmed proceeds. The county’s zoning board initially proposed broad setbacks for battery facilities; Bellefy argued that extensive restrictions could make projects less viable and reduce potential revenue.
Safety concerns also shaped the discussion. Battery fires can be difficult to control, and supervisors received presentations from Seaberg in February and again in May on battery technology and safety standards. The report says current grid batteries commonly use lithium-iron-phosphate chemistry and modular containers intended to limit fire spread. Bellefy said the local fire chief also addressed concerns raised in the community.
A Path for Rural Energy Investment
The reversal removes a local barrier to a project that could bring private investment and new tax revenue to a rural county. Bellefy argued that smaller communities cannot always attract large developments such as office towers or major housing projects, making energy infrastructure one possible source of economic activity. The projected tax contribution remains an estimate and depends on the project proceeding.
The decision also shows how counties are weighing emerging energy infrastructure against public safety and local control. Battery storage can supply electricity when it is needed, while the MISO region already has substantial wind and solar generation. The source report also points to rising electricity demand from data centers. Whether this particular project will be built, and how much power it will deliver, has not been established.
Products Worth Considering
Bose SoundLink Plus Portable Bluetooth Speaker, Wireless Outdoor Speaker, Up to 20 Hours Battery Life, Waterproof and Dustproof, Black
LEVOIT Air Purifier for Home, Pets, Bedroom, Smart WiFi
Levoit Vital 100S-P Air Purifier for Home and Pets
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Moratorium to Local Review
The Smiths presented their project to county leaders as a way to use family farmland for energy production while connecting to the regional grid through the local cooperative’s wires. In response to concerns about where facilities could be located, the zoning board first considered wide-ranging setbacks. Bellefy warned that such restrictions could undermine the project’s economics.
Battery safety was a central concern in the debate. The report cites the lengthy fire at the Vistra battery plant in Moss Landing, California, in early 2025, as well as a later fire among damaged battery packs being removed from the site. Seaberg told supervisors that battery designs and safety standards have developed since the era of that installation. The county’s decision came after local presentations and engagement, rather than eliminating the need for project-specific review.
Bellefy also drew on the Private Property Rights Institute, a conservative nonprofit that supports local leaders who favor landowners’ ability to build infrastructure on their property. Executive Director Charlie Kolean said the group’s position is that responsible property owners should be able to decide what to build. Kolean did not identify the group’s funders.
“Land in Iowa is our No. 1 asset. It’s a row-crop state, cow-calf operations — it’s what we do.”
— Cherokee County supervisor Bellefy
Permits and Safety Questions Remain
The county’s reversal does not confirm that construction will go ahead. The Smiths still need to secure necessary permissions, and the report does not specify which approvals remain outstanding or when they might be granted. The project’s final design, construction cost and schedule are not confirmed.
The projected $60,000 to $80,000 in annual county tax revenue is Bellefy’s estimate. The available information does not provide an independent fiscal analysis or confirm the amount the county would ultimately receive. Community questions about emergency response, possible smoke impacts and local operations were raised during the debate; the report does not detail a final site-specific response plan.
Project Timeline Awaits Approvals
The Smiths hope to turn the parcel over to grass in the spring and begin installing solar panels and batteries the following fall, once they secure the required permissions. That timeline is the family’s stated plan, not a confirmed construction schedule. The next milestones are the remaining approvals and any further local review of the project’s design and safety preparations.
Until those steps are complete, the county’s action means the project can advance under the revised local rules; it does not establish that work has begun or that the facility will be completed.
Key Questions
What did Cherokee County change?
The county reversed a moratorium on battery storage, removing that specific local obstacle to proposed battery projects. The action does not by itself approve construction of the Smith family’s project.
Who is proposing the project?
The Smith family is working with Nomad Infrastructure, an Indiana-based energy developer, on a proposed solar-and-battery installation on the family’s land.
How much tax revenue could the project bring?
Supervisor Bellefy estimated annual county tax revenue of $60,000 to $80,000. That is a projection; the reported material does not confirm the final amount.
When could construction start?
The Smiths hope to begin installation next fall, after preparing the parcel in the spring. The schedule depends on obtaining necessary permissions and is not confirmed.
What safety concerns were discussed?
Residents and officials raised concerns about battery fires, emergency response and potential smoke impacts. Supervisors heard presentations on battery technology and safety standards, but the report does not provide a final site-specific emergency plan.
Source: rss
