Residents urge caution on proposed floating solar at Reservoir 5, cite water and wildlife risks

A cluster of public commenters told the Fostoria City Council they oppose or want strict scrutiny of plans to locate large solar arrays — including floating panels — on Reservoir 5 and nearby farmland.

Why it matters: residents near Washington Township and Fostoria said floating solar could harm drinking-water quality, alter aquatic ecosystems and primarily serve offsite customers rather than local residents. Several speakers cited prior encounters with utility-scale lease offers and questioned long-term environmental and contractual risks.

What people said

Rochelle Harmon, a Washington Township resident and Arcadia farmer, said she and neighbors have monitored multiple proposed energy projects near Reservoir 5 and elsewhere in the township. She warned about water-quality risks and wildlife impacts and said: "I don't care how many times it's filtered, the chemicals will still be on the water…this project will change the oxygen levels in the reservoir, causing a possible algal bloom." Harmon also warned of higher installation and maintenance costs for floating solar and said she opposed placing solar on a drinking-water reservoir.

Joy Walters, who identified technical concerns, described cadmium-telluride panels and potential toxicological and aquatic risks, noting that some researchers are seeking further study of long-term exposure and that broken panels can leach chemicals into water. She said: "There are no environmental studies performed on floating solar projects yet," and urged more research.

Clay Wolf, who said he had discussed reservoir systems with a water expert, added that covers or extensive shading can reduce oxygenation: "This could potentially change that…which could potentially…lead to algal blooms, which would be a really bad thing considering as many problems that we've had with our drinking water in Fostoria." He urged the city to proceed slowly and research mitigation and responsibility in case of damage.

Lanny Bose, a local landowner, described being approached by land agents seeking leases for large solar projects. He said the contracts he received asked for broad rights, indemnities and uncertain payment triggers, and warned the city to avoid becoming "tangled up" in contracts that leave property owners exposed.

Context given in comments

- Multiple speakers referenced prior and nearby projects by names given in public comments, including Cypress Creek Renewables and South Branch Solar, and cited a proposed Third Pillar/Glendale Capital project and a planned energy use at a landfill or waste-to-energy facility. Speakers said they feared the energy output would serve offsite customers rather than Fostoria residents.

- Speakers described local township zoning and county exclusions for utility-scale solar in many townships and said Washington Township had adopted rules limiting utility-scale projects.

Council response and process notes

Council members did not take action on the floating-solar topic during the meeting; the public comments were part of the public-comment period. The Director of Public Service and Safety earlier asked council to remove solar-solicitation legislation from the table and to authorize soliciting bids, subject to later council presentations by selected bidders. The mayor said council would not enter a contract until a bidder presents to council.

Ending: Residents asked the city to require careful environmental review, to clarify who would benefit from energy produced and to ensure any leasing or bidding process protects water quality and local property owners.