The Yuma County Board of Supervisors denied special use permit case number 25-17 on Oct. 6, 2025, rejecting a proposed solar power facility on a 40-acre parcel near Avenue 73E and County 14½ Street North in Dayton after hearing technical briefings, written objections from Yuma Proving Ground and public opposition from local irrigation and recreation groups.

Staff and the applicant described the system as a small, 400-kilowatt solar receiver array on about 8 of the 40 acres, emphasizing that the design uses an insulated cavity receiver and hot-air conversion rather than the molten-salt, steam power blocks used at large commercial concentrating-solar facilities.

Planning staff noted the project had received an earlier special-use approval in 2021 but that approval lapsed because permit applications were not submitted within the two‑year window. The county’s planning commission recommended denial. In the Board meeting, staff presented recommended conditions for approval if the Board chose to grant the permit, including proof of legal access and road improvements within 180 days.

The project’s agent, who identified himself as Marco and said he represented 24/7 Solar and owner Bruce Anderson, said the facility produces no emissions and would be comparatively small. "This is 1/50th of the size of the arrays you see at Ivanpah," Marco said, adding that the system’s aperture is about 1.7 meters and that mirrors focus into an insulated receiver. He also offered to work with neighboring groups to reduce wildlife impacts.

Yuma Proving Ground submitted a formal written comment, read into the record by a county official, raising national‑security and test‑integrity concerns. The comment, attributed to Jonathan Obert on behalf of YPG, said nearby solar arrays had caused interference with sensor testing, could distort test data collection and risked undermining YPG’s expanding missions in unmanned aircraft systems and electronic‑warfare testing. The YPG comment also warned that foreign investment or foreign-built components could create surveillance or supply‑chain vulnerabilities. The minutes read: "Mr. Obert reported that nearby solar arrays have caused interference with test data collection and stressed that encroachment from solar farms posed a significant risk to testing operations."

Local opposition included the Mohawk Irrigation District, Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club and a resident who submitted a letter opposing the request; concerns cited potential effects on pronghorn, birds and interference with military testing. Planning commissioners also heard that no property owners in the immediate notification area submitted written support; staff recorded a small number of in‑zone signatures in favor but also opposition.

Several supervisors cited broader county experience with utility‑scale solar, including past reassessments and litigation that shifted school and county tax revenues. One supervisor said, "solar is just destroying East County" and described financial impacts on local schools and county budgets from prior state assessment and litigation outcomes. Board members also voiced unanswered technical and compatibility questions about military test range overlays and line-of-sight concerns raised by YPG.

After public comment and staff discussion, a supervisor moved and a second was made to deny special use permit 25-17. The motion carried.

The denial preserves the parcel’s current zoning and directs that any future application must address the access, wildlife, and military coordination issues raised during the hearing. The county record shows the planning commission’s denial recommendation and the Board’s motion to deny the permit as the operative outcome.