Commission endorses two ordinance amendments and discusses solar/wind rules, moratoriums and litigation risks

The Pennington County Planning Commission on July 28 voted to recommend two ordinance amendments to the Board of Commissioners and held an extended discussion about ongoing work by an alternative energy committee to update county rules for solar and wind projects and to avoid litigation risks.

The commission accepted ordinance amendment OA25‑0002 (telecommunications/conditional use language as presented by staff) and OA25‑0003, an amendment to Pennington County code Section 5.11 establishing a $1,000 conditional use permit fee for data processing centers. Commission action on OA25‑0003 added the fee—“data processing center, $1,000”—to the code.

Britney Molitor, planning director, presented the amendments and noted the data processing center fee is intended to align with other permit fees for alternative energy and telecommunications. Commissioner discussion covered technical points in the proposed telecom language such as fencing, buffers and noise limits. Planning staff said the draft ordinance defines the types of actions the planning commission may recommend and clarified buffer and buffering setbacks versus normal setback rules.

Commissioners asked how the noise standard would work in practice; staff explained ambient sound is measured before operation and an added limit (a 55 dB(A) standard above ambient in the draft) would be applied, with a 30‑minute window allowed for short, mitigable exceedances. The draft also requires security fencing and vegetative buffers around equipment pads; staff said fencing is a common industry practice for security though many sites are observed with gates left open in the field.

On alternative energy, commissioners and staff said a multi‑agency committee has met repeatedly and conducted site visits, including to a large solar site in another county. Commissioners discussed local landowner interest, neighboring landowner opposition and the need to craft setbacks and permit language that can withstand legal challenge; staff mentioned an ongoing federal lawsuit involving permitting changes in Kingsbury County, Nebraska. Commission members said they do not support wind or solar in certain agricultural districts in eastern Pennington County and are exploring alternatives such as limiting projects to industrially zoned lands or tightening setbacks.

Commissioners discussed the county’s moratorium and timing: staff reported that federal tax‑credit rules and timelines can create financial pressure to show a project’s initiation and that some external projects may be seeking to qualify for credits by mid‑2026; staff said the county may extend its moratorium while the ordinance is finalized.

A motion to recommend OA25‑0002 as drafted was moved and seconded; that motion carried. A separate motion to add the new fee (OA25‑0003) and set the data processing center CUP fee at $1,000 was moved and seconded and carried. Both recommendations will be forwarded to the Pennington County Board of Commissioners. Staff said the planning commission’s detailed draft defines actions the commission may recommend on telecommunications and provides clarity about conditional use procedures.

Commissioners asked staff to provide training and deployment support for a new agenda/documents software the county is rolling out to make packet materials and comments easier to access on dais devices.

The commission’s discussion on alternative energy focused on balancing landowner interest, neighbor impacts and the county’s legal vulnerability; staff and the county attorney were asked to continue research and draft ordinance language that reduces the county’s risk of successful legal challenges.