The Michigan Court of Appeals issued a split ruling on Thursday in a long-running dispute over how far the state’s renewable energy framework can reach into local zoning and permitting decisions. A three-judge panel largely upheld the Michigan Public Service Commission’s regulations implementing Public Act 233, the 2023 law that allows the commission to approve large wind, solar and battery projects even when local communities oppose them.
In its decision, the court found that state regulators followed proper legal processes as they wrote rules to carry out the statute, which was passed along party lines in 2023 as Democrats sought to accelerate a renewable energy transition slowed by strong local resistance to planned wind and solar arrays. After the commission adopted detailed permitting rules in 2024 to implement the law, dozens of local communities sued the state, arguing the regulations undercut local authority beyond what the law intended.
The law’s structure, as described in the dispute, gives local governments a path to retain jurisdiction if they adopt a so-called “compatible renewable energy ordinance” with terms no stricter than the statewide standards governing “noise, setbacks and other particulars.” If a locality does not adopt that ordinance, developers can instead seek approval directly from the Public Service Commission, effectively shifting the permitting decision away from local officials.
The panel, composed of Judges Christopher Murray, Michael Gadola and Michael Kelly, rejected several arguments from the local government groups challenging the commission’s rules. Those local groups, among other claims, argued that the commission did not follow proper rulemaking procedure and that it wrote overly narrow terms for local ordinances.
Still, the court’s ruling came with limitations for the commission’s interpretation of parts of the law. The judges said the commission interpreted certain aspects of Public Act 233 in ways that improperly limited local power, even as they dismissed other claims brought by the local governments.
One part of the split focused on timing for the start of the local approval process. The state’s regulations set the “30-day” clock to begin when developers offer to meet, but the judges found the law gave local governments 30 days after a meeting with developers to begin the local approval process. In rejecting the commission’s approach, the court also rejected concerns from state lawyers that the decision could allow local governments to block projects by refusing to meet.
The judges also ruled on how the state defines which local governments are eligible for benefits connected to a project. The panel agreed with the local government groups that any county, township, city or village that touches project lands is an “affected local unit,” and thus eligible for certain privileges, including payments from developers. The court rejected the commission’s regulations, which limited that eligibility to governments with zoning jurisdiction.
After the ruling, the Public Service Commission said the decision largely affirms its overall framework. “While the Commission continues to review the impact of specific findings of the Court’s decision on cases before us, today’s decision largely affirms the Commission’s approach and allows for continued and timely implementation of the law,” said Matt Helms, a spokesperson for the commission.
A lawyer for the local communities that filed the lawsuit described the outcome as mixed. Attorney Michael Homier said he was pleased with parts of the decision that favored his clients, but he also said he was “disappointed” the court did not apply the same reasoning to other arguments advanced by the local governments.
Renewable energy advocates said the ruling would help ensure continued momentum for project development. In a press release, Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council President Laura Sherman said the decision “affirmed the ability for Michiganders to use their land as they wish while stimulating job creation and economic development.” Officials with the Michigan Townships Association, which has opposed the state’s permitting approach and lobbied on behalf of the townships involved in the case, did not respond to a request for comment.
Officials and attorneys said the split ruling could still shape how pending proposals move through the state approval process. It was not immediately clear from the decision how the court’s specific findings would affect the multiple renewable energy development proposals awaiting state approval, but state officials appeared to view the overall outcome as supportive of continued implementation of the 2023 law.