Swift Current Energy’s Black Cherry Wind proposal could change McKean County’s rural landscape. We believe our community deserves the whole record. Read the documents. Follow the changes. Ask the questions.
The developer’s September 2025 letter withdrew MET A to change its proposed location. The next question is where the revised plan stands.
Read the letter. See the context.Our strongest criticism starts with the documents. Every finding links to its source, includes relevant context, and identifies what remains unresolved.
The application describes abandoned equipment. Later correspondence acknowledges an active well nearby. The developer then withdraws MET A to shift its proposed location.
Compare the documentsA recorded release ends one specific MET agreement. What does that mean for today’s development footprint?
Read the recorded releaseThe FAA’s favorable MET B determination covers a specified tower proposal. Future turbines need their own applicable review.
Understand the determinationContext matters: the developer reported no material safety concerns from its MET A field inspection. The well descriptions have not been conclusively survey-matched here. None of these records establishes whole-project cancellation or a safety violation.
Our concern is the place people live, work, hunt, hike, and come home to. Project-specific plans should explain the proposed changes and the protections residents would receive.
Ask for the current design, water-resource studies, sound modeling, emergency plans, and decommissioning security. Those are concrete records the public can examine.
Build a question packet about resident protectionsTurn concern into specific requests. Take a clear, sourced question packet to your next public meeting.
Provide the current project description, development schedule, turbine count and dimensions, and a dated site plan. Identify which earlier filings have been superseded.
Provide any replacement MET A application, its location and engineering, and the current MET B township decision and any appeal disposition.
Explain the effect of the July 2026 release and provide a current, appropriately redacted footprint distinguishing active rights, released rights, and proposed sites.
Provide project-specific sound and shadow-flicker modeling, water-resource studies, emergency-response plans, road-use terms, and the proposed decommissioning security.
These are questions for public review, not a claim that the developer has been formally asked each one or has refused to respond.
Build your question packetApplication packets, developer correspondence, technical findings, and a recorded release. Read the source material in its own words.
Correspondence · R4 · Archive copy
Land records · R6 · Archive copy
Correspondence · R3 · Archive copy