Sussex County Council joined the state’s other two counties June 3, in pushing back on state legislation they say unfairly imposes policies on counties, including a proposed wind power project off the coast.

The resolution unanimously approved by council notes, “The State of Delaware specifically has enabled local governments, including the three counties, to have jurisdictional authority in matters of zoning and land use, recognizing that locally elected officials are the first line of service and ideally positioned to make decisions that are in the best interest of the communities they serve.”

Prior to the vote, councilmen complained about a bill that would clear the way for US Wind’s offshore wind turbine project, despite Sussex County Council’s rejection of a conditional-use permit for a substation in Dagsboro needed to make the project work.

They also objected to a bill that would limit restrictions counties can place on the operation of marijuana dispensaries, a proposed Homeless Bill of Rights and rules for accessory dwelling units.

Council Vice President John Rieley said he supports the homeless, but he does not want the state to supersede the county’s right to establish zoning and other restrictions.

Rep. Claire Snyder-Hall, D-Rehoboth Beach, disagreed June 4 with the councilmen’s criticisms.

“I don’t view it as the state imposing its will,” Snyder-Hall said. 

She said the county is trying to interfere with the state’s authority to set energy policy and legalize cannabis sales. 

“State government is trying to address the housing crisis and the homelessness crisis that we have in the state,” Snyder-Hall said.

The resolution approved June 3 asks the state to work collaboratively with the counties.

“We’re following the suit of the other two counties,” said County Administrator Todd Lawson. “Both Kent County and New Castle County have adopted resolutions that are very similar to the resolution we are asking you to consider today.”

Lawson referenced a hearing he attended June 2 on Senate Bill 159 that would allow the US Wind substation project to proceed.

“That bill ... has really gotten the consideration and concern of all three counties and the League of Local Governments and our local towns and government officials that we have heard from,” he said.

“I strongly agree with the resolution in joining our other counties in condemning this proposed overreach of state authority in local land-use decisions,” said Councilman Steve McCarron. “In addition to the concept of state leaders overstepping their authority, I find it troubling to do so for the benefit of individuals outside our state. This is specifically going back to the transmission substation issue. Owned by US Wind, a Maryland energy company owned in part by an Italian infrastructure firm, there is nothing Sussex County or Delaware in that description, except for the disturbances, transmission lines and view that we will be left with. The state needs reliable, bulk energy production that is affordable to its residents, not windmills for Maryland residents,” he said. “Sussex County boasts the two largest industries in the state – agriculture and tourism. Green initiatives continue to take our fields and threaten our views.”

Councilwoman Jane Gruenebaum disagreed with McCarron’s assessment of energy issues but supported the resolution objecting to state interference in the county. 

“In that regard, I would like to, for me, emphasize the word collaborative,” Gruenebaum said. “I am troubled by the ongoing ‘our rights versus their rights’ discussion and want to focus on benefiting the public.”   

“There are a lot of people who are supporting the position you just took,” Lawson said of the resolution.