Representative Trey Caldwell presented House Bill 2751 as an attempt to balance competing property rights: landowners’ rights to host energy projects and neighbors’ concerns about setbacks, visual impacts and local control.

Key provisions described by the sponsor include a minimum setback measured as the greater of a quarter mile (0.25 mile) or 2.5 times the turbine tip height from property lines, a process for participatory landowner waivers, and a county-level referendum mechanism that allows county electors to accept or reject the statute locally. Caldwell said the bill is intended to provide a negotiated baseline and to allow counties to modify or adopt different rules at the local level.

Committee action included a technical amendment to the oversight committee substitute. Representative Caldwell moved an amendment that corrected a drafting error by inserting the word "both" and replacing an "or" with "and" where appropriate; the committee adopted that amendment without objection. Caldwell said the amendment matched legislative intent to distinguish Eastern and Western Oklahoma in certain provisions.

Members raised concerns about legal challenges, potential patchwork rules across county lines, and the effect on developers who often lease large acreages before final siting decisions. Representative Rusty Cornwell and others pressed the sponsor about why the bill would single out wind development and whether the state has previously regulated other energy industries; Caldwell pointed to existing regulation of pipelines, oil and gas and county authorities.

Sponsor remarks emphasized the regional differences across Oklahoma and the need for a baseline. Caldwell said, "When you make it local, you can have the regulatory authority respond better to the will of the people." He also acknowledged that stakeholders on all sides were not completely satisfied with the current draft.

Action: The committee adopted the sponsor's amendment and later voted to report HB 2751 do pass with a final committee vote of 10 ayes and 6 nays. The committee recorded the motion and vote; the measure will go to the House calendar.

Discussion versus decision: The amendment adoption was a formal, unanimous (no objection) committee action; the final do-pass recommendation was a recorded committee decision. Several members indicated they expect litigation if the bill becomes law; the sponsor characterized the bill as forward-looking and not retroactive.

Clarifying details: Sponsor and questioners discussed how the quarter-mile or 2.5x tip-height formula would operate on a quarter-section parcel and noted participatory leasing practices typically require very large contiguous acreage before developers pursue construction.

Next steps: HB 2751 proceeds to the full House. The sponsor said caucus and stakeholder negotiations will continue as the bill moves through the process.