[{"_1":2,"_94":-5,"_95":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,84],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6321644,"mediaKeyId","2349330-7f113ae108475ff106a8d4df9eb5afee","parentId",2349330,"title","Commissioners hear hours of pro and con testimony on NextEra’s Persica solar project and vote to table the conditional-use appeal for 30 days","audioSeconds",3717,"startMs",2623000,"endMs",6340000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2349330-7f113ae108475ff106a8d4df9eb5afee&start=2623&end=6340","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6321644/Wagoner-County/Oklahoma/Commissioners-hear-hours-of-pro-and-con-testimony-on-NextEras-Persica-solar-project-and-vote-to-table-the-conditional-use-appeal-for-30-days","mediaUrl","author","Wagoner County, OK","date","2025-02-10T00:00:00Z","article","Wagoner County commissioners paused action on NextEra’s conditional-use appeal for the Persica solar project after a multihour public hearing featuring dozens of pro- and anti-project speakers and detailed staff comment. The board voted unanimously to table the request for 30 days and asked staff and the company to provide additional documents and clarifications.

The meeting included standing-room public testimony both for and against the project. Supporters described the project as a property-rights exercise and pointed to potential local benefits: Jerry Walker, a retired educator, urged commissioners to consider “industrial taxes” as a long-term boon for school funding and said local schools and students would benefit; other proponents, including landowners who signed leases, said the project would produce revenue (project proponents referenced a 30‑year payment stream and an estimated $31 million in tax revenue spread over contract life) and improved roads and local hiring during construction.

Opponents raised questions about environmental review, wildlife and the accuracy of application answers. Speakers cited concerns including possible \"polarized light\" impacts on insects and birds, effects on bats and bald eagles, missing or nonpublic environmental studies and a lack of independent decommissioning escrow. Darren Blanchard and others referenced 50 C.F.R. § 17.3 and endangered-species concerns for the northern long‑eared bat. Julian Davis and others said they had not seen an independent environmental impact study and asked that the county obtain independent reviews before acting. Multiple residents expressed concern about long-term decommissioning, potential impacts on well water and the local rural character, and whether electricity from the project would serve Wagner County residents.

County staff and speakers addressed taxation and valuation. Wagoner County Assessor Sandy Hodges told the board the land under panels would be valued commercially for ad valorem purposes (not at agricultural rates), that equipment would be billed as business personal property and that the project did not appear to qualify for the state’s 5-year manufacturing exemption. Hodges confirmed she was not aware of any TIF (tax increment financing) for the project and that equipment and real property are assessed separately: “We would value that at a commercial value,” she said.

Speakers also debated noise, property values and whether state legislation might alter how such projects are regulated. Several residents requested that the county delay a decision until bills pending in the state legislature were resolved; other speakers argued legislation is uncertain and should not delay the county’s decision. Some speakers urged the county to consult federal agencies: the FAA for flight-safety issues and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding protected species.

NextEra representatives said they had completed technical studies (company consultants produced a glint/glare memo and other materials) and that the project would not include on-site battery storage in this application. A company environmental representative said independent consultants had not found evidence that a ‘‘lake-effect’’ glint problem in the Desert Southwest would be relevant in the project area and that the firm had a technical memorandum to that effect. Cody Bing, identified as environmental staff from NextEra, said the independent consultant found “there's no documented evidence of any fatalities directly because of, lake effect.” Project team members also said the company would propose a road-use agreement and insurance coverage for convective storms and other damage; a company official said construction and asset insurance would be in place for the project from start of construction through decommissioning.

Commissioners asked for additional detail across several areas before rendering a final decision: final copies of environmental/habitat reports, any FAA communications or required filings, confirmation about whether battery storage will be added in the future and decommissioning escrow language or bonds. The board asked NextEra to provide insurance certificates, haul-route plans and the technical memoranda cited by the company. The county planning staff confirmed an internal 250-foot setback guideline is used from residences as a design reference though no county ordinance established that figure; county planning staff noted the national electrical code and typical 10-foot equipment setbacks for electrical infrastructure.

After hearing testimony and staff comments, the board voted unanimously to table the conditional-use appeal for 30 days to allow staff and the applicant to produce the requested documents and to give commissioners time to review. The roll call showed unanimous ayes. Commissioners said they would schedule the item to return to the agenda after the 30-day period or when they determine they have sufficient documentation to continue deliberation.

Ending: The county asked NextEra to provide requested documents (insurance certificate, glint/glare and habitat reports, FAA communications, haul-route plans and decommissioning funding assurances). The commission set a 30‑day hold and said it will reconvene the matter after staff and the applicant supply the additional materials.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Board of County Commissioners Meeting Agenda for 02-10-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Wagoner County commissioners paused action on NextEra’s conditional‑use appeal for the Persica solar project after a multi‑hour public hearing featuring dozens of speakers and voted unanimously to table the item for 30 days while staff and the applicant supply additional documents.","taxTitle","Wagoner County, Oklahoma","taxId",52821,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6321649,"Commissioners approve new electrical conduit contract for jail after assessment found existing conduit crushed",354,2200000,2554000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2349330-7f113ae108475ff106a8d4df9eb5afee&start=2200&end=2554","/articles/6321649/Wagoner-County/Oklahoma/Commissioners-approve-new-electrical-conduit-contract-for-jail-after-assessment-found-existing-conduit-crushed","Wagoner County commissioners approved a contract to replace damaged electrical conduit under the county jail after an assessment found the existing conduit crushed and unusable, a condition that disabled door controls and other systems.

County staff briefed commissioners that the existing conduit under the concrete slab serving G- and J-pods was crushed by foundation movement, and contractors Weatherby and ECC concluded it was unsafe to reuse. As a result, the replacement approach is to install new conduit overhead inside the facility’s ceiling space where practical so future access does not require digging beneath concrete. Staff said the rewiring will serve door controls, emergency buttons and related electronics.

During discussion, commissioners and staff reviewed the contract cost. The contract figure in staff materials was shown originally as $176,036.64; later in the discussion staff said the cost had risen (a figure in the record referenced roughly $267,800). County staff said part of the change was added scope identified during the on-site assessment and that the contractor’s proposal followed state pricing for the specialized work. Commissioners asked about water/sewer conflicts beneath the slab and whether moving conduit overhead would create future access advantages; staff replied that moving conduit overhead would reduce the need to dig under concrete for future maintenance.

After discussion, the board voted to approve the contract to replace the electrical conduit serving jail doors and intercom systems. The motion passed on roll call (commissioners voting aye). Commissioners asked staff to finalize the contract and to present a timeline for work to minimize disruption to jail operations.

Ending: Staff said they would finalize the contractor agreement, coordinate a construction schedule to limit downtime for door systems and provide a summary of changes in contract price and scope for the board.","After contractors found underground conduit under the jail crushed and unusable, commissioners approved a contract to run new conduit (overhead where appropriate); commissioners discussed cost increases and access to systems before voting to approve the work.",{"_33":85,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":86,"_41":87,"_43":88,"_45":89,"_47":90,"_49":50,"_51":91,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":92,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":93,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6321654,"Wagoner County commissioners pause courthouse roof and waterproofing decisions after ongoing leaks and contractor disputes",3564,376000,3940000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2349330-7f113ae108475ff106a8d4df9eb5afee&start=376&end=3940","/articles/6321654/Wagoner-County/Oklahoma/Wagoner-County-commissioners-pause-courthouse-roof-and-waterproofing-decisions-after-ongoing-leaks-and-contractor-disputes","Wagoner County commissioners on the record heard multiple updates about persistent leaks, incomplete contractor pricing and unresolved warranty inspections tied to the courthouse roof and exterior waterproofing, and voted to table final decisions while staff pursues more inspection and pricing information.

Officials said the courthouse has several leak locations, including a recurring stain above the first-floor entry and water in the court clerk’s office. Ed, the county facilities representative, told commissioners, “We found the source of the leak in the court clerk's office, but we weren't able…to do that,” and said crews will continue moisture scans and monitoring after forecast rain to determine whether the leak source is intermittent or persistent.

The discussion followed reports that some roof coating has split and that prior holes made for ladders or scaffolding may be contributing. Facilities staff said they have requested change-order pricing from the roofing contractor for work such as metal counter flashing and crossovers (steps to safely traverse two different vertical roof levels), but several quotes were missing or incomplete. Ed said the roofing contractor appears to be “not actively working on the project” and that submitted pricing appears inflated, and that waterproofing subcontractors have agreed to coordinate with the roofer to repair damage they acknowledge.

Commissioners and staff discussed short-term options. County staff described a possible temporary fix: applying a solvent-based, flexible sealant that remains pliable when dry; staff suggested the product could be applied even if rain is expected within a few hours. Commissioner questions focused on whether temporary repairs would create a long-term maintenance problem and whether moisture is trapped in roof layers that would need desiccation before sealing. One commissioner asked whether a cavity desiccant (a drying system) might be required “before the repairs” to avoid future blistering.

Facilities staff said the sheriff's office leak (separate from the primary roofing contract) drew attention from the manufacturer holding the roof warranty, and the manufacturer has acknowledged the problem and is arranging an inspection from its home office out of state. Staff said they had not yet received a scheduled inspection date.

The board also considered change order No. 3 for Mid Continental Restoration, described in staff comments as a $3,600 item to reseal failing sealant around a portion of masonry flashing as a temporary measure until a permanent metal flashing solution is agreed. Staff and commissioners debated whether the sealant work would meaningfully stop water intrusion or only delay recurring problems if the underlying flashing and roof transitions remain unresolved.

Because staff said they still lacked vendor pricing for metal counter flashing and the roofing contractor had not responded to some pricing requests, Commissioner Kelly moved to table further action on the waterproofing and roofing items to allow a separate, focused review. The motion to table carried by unanimous vote (roll call: aye, aye, aye).

Commissioners asked staff to arrange a dedicated, special meeting on roof and waterproofing issues once weather allows and moisture scans can be completed; staff recommended waiting one to two weeks for better conditions and to gather outstanding contractor quotes and the warranty-inspection schedule. Facilities staff said they will continue moisture scanning, coordinate with warranty inspectors and subcontractors, and prepare a consolidated change-order recommendation for the board once pricing and the manufacturer inspection are available.

The board also noted multiple active leak locations (court clerk's office, entry corridor, assessor offices and west end areas) and asked staff to produce a prioritized list of locations, moisture-scan results, outstanding contractor estimates and any warranty correspondence before the follow-up meeting.

Ending: Staff said it will return a schedule and recommended next steps after additional moisture scans and the manufacturer’s inspection have been set. Commissioners directed staff to pursue temporary measures where practical to limit further interior damage but withheld final approval for larger flashing or change-order work pending receipt of full pricing and warranty inspection results.","Commissioners heard detailed updates on persistent leaks at the courthouse, roofing contractor nonresponse, change-order pricing gaps and possible temporary repairs; staff said further investigation and a special meeting are needed and the board voted to table pending more information.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commissioners hear hours of pro and con testimony on NextEra’s Persica solar project and vote to table the conditional-use appeal for 30 days

Commissioners approve new electrical conduit contract for jail after assessment found existing conduit crushed

Wagoner County commissioners pause courthouse roof and waterproofing decisions after ongoing leaks and contractor disputes