By KALEY LYON

klyon@dailynews.net

As Jan. 1 creeps closer, 2008 is another year soon to be gone with the wind.

For at least two years, a proposed wind farm project located southwest of Hays has been a subject of much discussion and controversy.

Earlier this year, approval of the 200-megawatt project was granted by local governing bodies, only to be tied up in district court.

Following the county commission's 2-1 vote of approval in July, with commissioner Perry Henman dissenting, opponents of the project filed suit in district court in late August.

Thus, the final verdict of whether or not the project will be constructed remains to be determined.

The county commission's vote followed a public hearing of the Ellis County Joint Planning Commission, which recommended approval in a 5-2 vote in June.

"The zoning board did vote 5-2 for approval," Commissioner Vernon Berens said in casting his affirmative vote. "All I can say is, I think it's an excellent benefit economically and otherwise for the county."

In dissenting, however, Henman expressed concern at the current Ellis County zoning regulations, which include about two pages of rules for governing wind energy development in the county, and frustration at the planning commission's time lag in revamping these regulations.

"I think it's our duty then, if they won't do it, that we need to put conditions on a project of this scope so that people do have some protections, or at least some minor protections," Henman said at the commission's July 28 meeting.

The planning commission has been working to review and possibly amend existing zoning regulations since early 2008, and opened up the process for public input.

Shortly following the commission's decision, a group of 44 plaintiffs -- represented by Wichita attorney Patrick Hughes -- filed a lawsuit hoping to overturn the vote of approval.

The lawsuit claims the proposed project requires the use of land not included in the conditional-use permit application, and that the commission's decision to grant permission was unreasonable and unlawful.

Proceedings for the case are scheduled to continue with a pretrial conference Feb. 27. If needed, additional evidence will be heard from March 30 until April 3.