Louisiana House rejects statewide solar-siting bill after heated debate over setbacks and local control

The Louisiana House of Representatives voted 47-52 on May 12 to reject House Bill 6 15, a measure that would have established statewide siting rules for large-scale solar projects and related provisions for wind and battery storage.

Proponents said the bill would provide consistent standards where parishes lack ordinances, require decommissioning bonds and create setbacks to reduce impacts on adjacent homeowners. Opponents said the measure would undercut local control and could discourage renewable-energy investment.

The debate centered on an amendment that Rep. Guyman offered to set minimum perimeter setbacks, vegetative buffers and a 75-acre threshold for the statute’s application. The amendment, which the House adopted earlier in the day, would have required perimeter setbacks of 50 feet (or 100 feet of undisturbed timber), a 600-foot setback to an inhabited dwelling with a 50-foot landscape buffer (or a 300-foot option with a widened buffer), and a requirement for a decommissioning bond so the state would not be left to clean up abandoned projects. Wildlife and fisheries and agriculture agencies would serve as commenting—not approval—agencies under the amended measure, and local governing bodies could adopt a resolution to request a waiver for particular siting rules.

“Setbacks and vegetative buffer requirements all over. I’m sure most of you have that in your communities in some way,” Rep. Guyman said while explaining the amendment. “We want these solar developers to come here and do business, but we want them to be good actors.”

Supporters and several parish officials told lawmakers that inconsistent or absent local rules had produced ill-kept projects in some places, pointing to images of derelict facilities and to Tangipahoa Parish’s ordinance as the model the amendment largely mirrored. Rep. Mac, a former parish councilman, described constituent complaints about an earlier unregulated project in his district: “Because we didn't have the right regulation in place, I received more complaints from the people that lived in my district than any other project that was ever developed in my district.”

Opponents framed the issue around economic development and regulatory burden. Several members and witness lists submitted to the chamber included regional economic development organizations and major energy companies that urged caution; Rep. Travis Johnson said, “I oppose this amendment and I oppose the bill,” arguing it could chill investment in new energy projects that state leaders were courting.

The bill’s author, Rep. Sam Diamond, and the Natural Resources committee sponsor said the measure targeted utility-scale projects and would exempt smaller community-solar and rooftop installations. The amended text removed a proposed compensation menu and limited the bill’s scope to projects of 75 acres or larger. It also moved wildlife and agriculture agencies to commenting status and left industrially zoned sites outside the statute’s siting requirements.

Supporters pointed to concerns about so-called orphaned or derelict projects and noted a 2022 law requiring decommissioning processes; the bill would have required an upfront bond to ensure a developer, rather than the state, bore cleanup costs. Rep. Guyman told colleagues the state already handles orphan-well cleanup and the provision was intended to avoid creating a similar fiscal problem for solar sites.

Lawmakers also debated whether the Legislature or agency oversight could block local projects. The amendment included a process for a local governing body to pass a resolution seeking a waiver of specific siting rules; the bill’s sponsor said such waivers would be handled by the Department of Energy and Natural Resources (DENR) and that committee oversight could be exercised in rare cases.

“We're trying to work with local government to help let them have some flexibility,” Rep. Guyman said. “If the developer wants to do a waiver with the neighbor and enter into a contract, they can.”

After hours of questions and personal anecdotes from members representing rural parishes, the House took a final recorded vote. The bill failed, 47 yays to 52 nays.

Following the vote, proponents said they would continue discussions and negotiations with stakeholders if they reintroduce the topic. “We will absolutely continue to tweak it along the way if need,” Rep. Guyman said.

The outcome leaves Louisiana without a statewide siting framework for utility-scale solar, wind and battery-storage projects; proponents said they plan further work in committee and in coordination with local governments and industry groups.