University of Michigan graduate student Graham Diedrich polls voters outside a polling place in Richland County, Ohio, on May 5, 2026, after they cast ballots in favor of the county’s renewable energy ban. (Photo: Kathiann M. Kowalski, Canary Media.)
This story was originally published by Canary Media.
Unclear ballot language may have been the reason an Ohio county upheld its renewable energy ban last week.
An early analysis of exit poll responses shows that a majority of voters likely intended to vote against Richland County’s ban on most huge solar and wind projects in the state. 11 with his 18 towns. But content of the voting card he was amazed enough to change the results.
This preliminary finding does not change the result of the May meeting 5 Richland County Elections. The final result was 53%““yes” votes to keep the ban 47%““no” to endure it. But the survey sheds featherlight on how county residents really felt and could inform future work to lift spotless energy restrictions in Ohio and beyond.
The Richland County referendum gained national attention because it was a uncommon instance of residents opposing restrictions on solar and wind energy. State and local restrictions have these increased dramatically across the United States in recent years.
Meanwhile, skyrocketing demand for electricity is creating an affordability crisis. Solar and wind power and batteries for energy storage can be freely available online faster than natural gas power plants to meet some of this demand. Renewable energy sources are also not subject to fluctuations in fuel costs and escalate competition in electricity markets, which can hold down energy prices.
The three Richland County commissioners relied on: 2021 state law, Senate bill 52to be the last to pass the restrictions July. Local residents who opposed the ban quickly began to insist put it to a vote. SB 52 states that for any referendum against a county’s prohibition, the resolution of its commissioners shall require a majority vote in favor come into force.
Thus,“a ‘yes’ vote means that someone opposes referendum efforts to repeal the ban, while a“a “no” vote means that the person supports the campaign to end the ban.
“It’s confusing,” County Commissioner Cliff Mears told Canary Media in March, explaining his support for the referendum and the ban.
Many voters may also have been confused – around one in five across all political groups, early analysis of EU exit polls shows 1,193 With 23,042 people who voted on this matter. “When we model what the outcome would be if everyone voted according to their preferences, the result reverses 54% wanting to lift the ban i 46wants to keep it, said Graham Diedrich, a graduate student at the University of Michigan. candidate who oversaw exit polls in more than a dozen locations in Richland County.
“We expected this to be an issue,” said Bella Bogin, director of programs for Ohio Citizen Action, an organizing group that helps Richland County citizens advocate for property rights and job development through the program““no” campaign.““I think we’ve done everything we can to educate people about this very complicated voting language.”
The disagreements went beyond the voting language, said Brian McPeek, one of the local leaders of the nonvoting group. Supporters of the ban suggested repealing it would open the door to projects in the area, McPeek said. In fact, the county would simply revert to its previous system of approving or denying most up-to-date solar and wind farms on a case-by-case basis before the projects go to the Ohio Power Siteing Board for state permitting.
