Tippecanoe County adopts one-year moratorium on large-scale solar projects

The Tippecanoe County Board of Commissioners voted June 16 to adopt a one-year moratorium on large-scale solar energy systems in unincorporated parts of the county, approving an amendment proposed by county counsel that narrowed the ordinance’s scope.

The moratorium — described at the meeting as a pause to allow staff and commissioners time to review and update the county’s solar ordinance — was passed on its second reading after the board approved an amendment to delete language in the draft that had referred to exemptions for separate jurisdictions. County counsel Doug Mason said the deletion corrects a drafting error and clarified the moratorium applies only to unincorporated areas.

The moratorium and the amendment drew extended public comment from residents, advocacy groups and technical experts. Supporters of the pause, including residents living near the proposed Rainbow Trout (aka Rainbow Trout Solar LLC) site, told commissioners they seek stronger rules on decommissioning, drainage management, financial assurances and developer community outreach. Opponents and renewable-energy advocates said existing rules can be enforced and warned that a pause could chill solar development.

“Not because we want to stop solar or renewables in our county. That's not how we feel at all,” said Catherine Sobrialski, a member of the public who spoke in favor of the moratorium and cited new state guidance on ‘‘solar readiness’’ and decommissioning as reasons the county’s 2021 ordinance needs updating.

Doug Mason, identified in the meeting as county counsel, told the board the amendment was a technical clean-up. Mason explained the change as deletion of language in “section 164.03” that would have referred to jurisdictional exemptions under “section 164.02,” which he said would not apply because the ordinance is limited to unincorporated areas.

Several speakers urged the commissioners to require stronger developer financial assurances and independent third‑party reviews. Joe Soborowski, identifying himself as a sustainability researcher, told the board: “I support solar energy, but I also support responsible planning.” Nearby residents described concerns about potential impacts on drainage, soil health, wildlife habitat and property values; Victor Gervais noted the site footprint described by developers is large. “It is 1,700 acres,” he said.

Other public speakers defended solar or urged enforcement of the existing ordinance rather than a moratorium. Liz Solberg, speaking on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Greater Lafayette, said the group “reaffirm[s] our opinion in support of renewable energy” and asked that any county study group include all parties. Jonathan Veil, who said he has solar on a building he owns, urged commissioners to focus on enforcement rather than a pause.

The board also acknowledged a letter received from Wabash Valley Power Alliance, which asked that a previously circulated video not be presented as the organization’s position on the ordinance. County counsel said a pending Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) application filed before the moratorium would proceed separately under BZA rules.

Formal actions recorded at the meeting show the board approved the proposed amendment by voice vote, then approved the moratorium ordinance as amended. Commission roll-call at the conclusion of the ordinance discussion recorded Commissioner Jennifer Byers, Commissioner Brown and Commissioner Murtaugh voting in favor.

The county indicated the moratorium will provide time to consider updates that speakers and staff identified as lacking in the 2021 ordinance, including stronger decommissioning requirements, explicit financial assurances that survive ownership changes, and clearer drainage and erosion controls. Some callers asked for independent technical reviews paid by developers when necessary.

The moratorium is limited in time to one year; the board did not adopt additional substantive changes at this meeting. The ordinance and the amendment were discussed publicly and will be the subject of staff work and possible committee review during the moratorium period.

Votes at a glance

- Amendment to ordinance (delete exemption language in §164.03 as drafted by county counsel). Motion and second recorded; passed by voice vote. (Text of motion as introduced by counsel; mover and seconder not specified in the record.)

- Ordinance (moratorium on large-scale solar energy systems) — approved as amended. Roll-call recorded: Commissioner Jennifer Byers — Yes; Commissioner Brown — Yes; Commissioner Murtaugh — Yes. Outcome: approved.

Next steps and context

Speakers and staff said the pause is intended to allow the county to bring the 2021 ordinance into alignment with subsequent state guidance on solar readiness and decommissioning and to consider stronger liability, bonding and third‑party review provisions. Several residents said they expect to pursue issues at pending BZA hearings and to request more public engagement by developers. The commission did not specify a date for ordinance revisions; the moratorium period is one year from adoption unless otherwise revised by the board.

(Reporting notes: the board discussed the ordinance on the record and took the votes summarized above. Public comments summarized here occurred during the ordinance public‑comment period.)