Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garrard County keeps solar ordinance unchanged after months of review
Summary
Judge/Executive Chris Elleman told the Fiscal Court that, after consulting state leaders and KACO, no motion was made to amend the county's December 2023 solar ordinance, so it remains in effect.
Judge/Executive Chris Elleman said Monday that Garrard County will leave its existing solar ordinance in place after several months of review and consultation. The Fiscal Court discussed state-level input and legal advice but took no motion to amend the ordinance, leaving the ordinance adopted Dec. 27, 2023, unchanged.
Elleman told the court the Fiscal Court "has consulted with various state organizations at the request of the Magistrates. We have spoken with state leaders, including Ag Commissioner Jonathan Shell and David Meade, to understand the state's overall perspective on solar energy." He said legal counsel at the Kentucky Association of Counties (KACO) advised the court "to keep our current ordinance as is, without any amendments." He further reported that "KACO expressed concerns that the decommissioning process could make landowners and counties responsible for cleanup."
During the discussion, Elleman also relayed a claim about federal policy: "At the federal level, leadership has halted all tax dollars and funding for solar companies, and there's a push to stop large-scale solar projects on farmland across the United States." That statement was presented as what the judge/executive said the court had been told, not as an independently verified fact.
Because no magistrate moved to change the ordinance at Monday's meeting, Elleman said the ordinance adopted Dec. 27, 2023, remains in effect. No further action was taken and the court did not set a date for additional consideration.
Why it matters: County solar ordinances determine how large-scale solar projects are permitted, sited and decommissioned. The court's decision to maintain the current rules preserves the status quo for landowners and developers pending any future motions or formal proposals.
