Kimball officials take stance on 2nd Amendment, parental rights, more in 3 resolutions

KIMBALL TOWNSHIP — In one sitting, Kimball officials took formal stances on three major issues last week, re-establishing a temporary ban on renewable energy projects, designating the township as a "Second Amendment sanctuary," and supporting homeschooling parents.

Each idea has been discussed around St. Clair County before. But in a separate interview last week, Kimball Township Supervisor Rob Usakowski said they were trying to uphold a sect of values locally in opposition to a host of past and approaching action from Democratic lawmakers in Lansing.

“There’s just so much uncertainty right now with the legislation that passed last year,” he said of the renewable energy ban last week. T

he township board had previously passed a moratorium roughly a year ago before it was set to expire. At their June 4 meeting, it was one of the three resolutions passed, extending that ban until November.

That’s when new state rules that empower the Michigan Public Service Commission with the final say in siting industry-scale wind and solar developments — something community officials have widely seen as interference with local control — take effect.

A statewide drive to get something on the ballot to reverse those effects fell short of the required signatures in May to go before voters this year. Moving forward, organizers are pushing for another major election, leaving local elected leaders like Usakowski and the township board with a few unanswered questions.

Usakowski said they still get inquiries from interested wind and solar developers on a weekly basis. By next year, local rules can’t be stricter than the state’s set of regulations passed in 2023.

“So, it kind of leaves us in this gray area for a short period of time,” the supervisor said.

“We’re going to lose local control completely here in November. There’s concerns, obviously, a lot of those projects could move forward without any type of siting from the township, which is difficult,” he said. “We’re trying to protect the balance between (being) rural, which half our township is.”

While other townships, such as Wales, have had moratoriums, Kimball’s Second Amendment similarities fall much more in line with the St. Clair County Board of Commissioners, which passed its second “sanctuary”-related measure at the end of last year.

Traditionally, sanctuary infers a local stance that contested gun laws wouldn’t been enforced if they’re viewed on one side of the political aisle as a violation of the Second Amendment.

Local law enforcement authorities have said they view such measures largely as a political statement rather than a dictation of what statutes they must enforce or ignore — something sanctuary proponents have said they understand.

Kimball’s resolution references the sanctuary movement of other states and spells out the township board’s stance on defending gun rights, adding the board “encourages” elected law enforcement leaders to do their job “in a manner that does not infringe on the citizens’ rights.”

When asked, Usakowski pointed to things like red flag laws as an example of the type of action, they believe, that violates the Second Amendment.

“We don’t actually enforce anyway. It would be the county sheriff that enforces it, and so, we’re asking the county to just stick to the Constitution in and not act on any laws that would be passed in opposition to that,” he said.

The county board also recently OK’d a resolution backing parents who homeschool their kids after discussion at the state level sparked concern lawmakers could require homeschoolers have to register with the state.

Kimball’s “parents rights” resolution spells out opposition to the idea in detail, asking the governor and policymakers not to approach it. “We just think it’s the parents’ right to decide what they want to do,” Usakowski said. “Again, we’re looking at things that are the rights of the people.”

Contact reporter Jackie Smith at (810) 989-6270 or jssmith@gannett.com.