I believe we should start by looking at Figures 53 and 54 from the relevant documents, the 2018 Wind Technologies Market Report, which detail wind power purchase agreement (PPA) prices as they change through time:
In $2018, it seems that the PPA prices hovered around $15-20 per megawatt-hour, or about 2 cents per kilowatt-hour, which matches the claim.
PPAs are essentially just long-term agreements between the plant producing energy and the entity purchasing it - the latter of which is often state or local government. These PPA prices do take into account factors like turbine prices and "installed project costs"(2018 Wind Technologies Market Report, page 58):
Earlier sections documented trends in capacity factors, wind turbine prices, installed project costs, O&M costs, and project financing—all of which are determinants of the wind power purchase agreement (PPA) prices presented in this chapter. In general, higher-cost and/or lower-capacity-factor projects will require higher PPA prices, while lower-cost and/or higher-capacity-factor projects can have lower PPA prices.
PPA prices vary from plant to plant, of course, as the report notes, and each seller will likely put different factors into their calculations, so I would assume it's possible for one plant to include the startup costs of any construction changes to roads required to let large turbine parts or heavy equipment through, for example. However, if the roads are preexisting, it seems like they would not affect the cost of the project, research and development, maintenance, etc., and therefore would not be included in PPA prices.
There is also a second - incompatible - claim in the article:
These lower construction costs have enabled aggressive wind power pricing, and after topping out at 7 cents per kWh in 2009, the average levelized long-term price for wind power has dropped around 2 cents per kWh.
The data shows that across the United States, PPA prices did indeed hit a maximum of a bit over 7 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2009, but the drop over the past ten years has been approximately 5 cents - not 2. I agree with Oddthinking that this may be a typo on the part of CleanTechnica, and I can find no evidence to indicate otherwise.