Monona committee advances solar-panel removal to council without recommendation

The City of Monona Finance and Personnel Committee voted June 16 to advance a resolution on removal, acquisition and transfer of solar panels from the Public Works garage to other city facilities to the full City Council without a committee recommendation.

Committee members and staff said the city must either allow the contractor to remove the panels with no city cost, buy the panels at a low purchase price and store or redeploy them, or pay for relocation and ground-mount infrastructure. The committee and staff repeatedly said current information about redeployment costs and expected energy value is incomplete and needs more analysis before a final decision by the council.

“Once you have them, you have them, and you have to do something with them,” said Francis, a committee member. “There isn't a no-cost option for the city,” she added, describing three options: no acquisition, acquisition at a stated purchase price, or acquisition plus immediate redeployment as a fixed ground-mounted array.

Staff described three specific cost points. An early resolution text listed $40,000 as the acquisition amount, but staff said Curt (a contractor contact) clarified the purchase price is about $10,000; staff warned that additional capital costs would be required to ground-mount and commission the panels. A vendor contact, Mr. Reinhold of Lexi Solar, said, “at least 50% of the solar panels you start with today would still be producing power in 20 years,” and noted an annual degradation rate in output.

Public works staff and an outside technical reviewer (Brad) told the committee that redeploying the panels at Well 3 could increase the share of generated power used behind the city meter—reducing the amount returned to MG&E for credit—but that staff need a consultant-level scoping and pricing to convert the panels into a biddable capital project. Brad said, “10,000 is not much for the amount of solar panels that we're gonna be getting,” but also cautioned about storage, maintenance and inverter replacement costs.

Committee members pressed staff on storage and staging: staff said the city currently lacks interior storage capacity and panels may need to be stored outdoors under tarps if acquired. The committee discussed phasing approaches (removing and storing panels in stages) and the risk that newly purchased ground-mount infrastructure might not be compatible with future new panels the city expects to buy in three to five years.

Councilmembers and staff also noted an operating-cost comparison: staff estimated the existing array on the Public Works garage delivers roughly $5,500 in avoided energy cost per year for that facility when the third-party lease arrangement is in place; when the city owns arrays and places production behind the meter, the value can depend greatly on whether production offsets on-site demand or is exported to MG&E. Several committee members said that, given an uncertain capital cost that staff estimated could be in the tens of thousands for ground mounts, the payback did not clearly favor purchase at this time.

The committee voted to send the item to the City Council without a recommendation, so the council will decide whether the city will (1) refuse acquisition and allow the contractor to remove the panels, (2) purchase and store them, or (3) purchase and redeploy them with planned capital investment. Staff committed to provide a more detailed cost analysis, including a consultant scoping to create a biddable ground-mount project and an updated net‑metering/behind-the‑meter estimate for Well 3 before council action.

The council will consider the resolution and an associated budget amendment at a future meeting.