Council hears case for solar on new Department of Social Services building; payback depends on federal tax incentives

Speakers at the June 12 meeting urged the council to keep solar panels in the design for the new Department of Social Services (DSS) building, while staff described the financial tradeoffs and schedule constraints.

Catherine Harbor, a Lexington resident who signed up to speak during citizen remarks, urged council to include solar now rather than retrofit later: “put the solar panels on it while you're building the building… it's so much cheaper to do it now and then to retrofit it.” Steven Morris Trimmer, who also spoke during public comment, likewise supported rooftop solar for environmental and financial reasons.

City staff and the city manager told council the rooftop solar option had been included in the project’s bid alternates and that the contractor’s bid included a $340,000 alternate to install the array. The city manager said using steps taken to date would likely preserve eligibility for the Inflation Reduction Act investment tax credits; with those credits the projected payback for the panels was “just under 19 years,” he said. Without the IRA credits, the projected payback would be closer to 29 years.

Project status and finances: Lexington is the fiscal agent for the joint project with Rockbridge County and Buena Vista. The city manager reported a project contingency of $781,000 and that roughly $50,000 had been used so far, including a change order the manager signed for roughly $43,000 to address wet soil and material import on site. Substantial completion is currently scheduled for June 10, 2026; final completion is tied to DSS’s lease timeline through March 2027.

Council logistics and policy considerations: - Staff advised that cancelling the solar now would likely incur small costs (vendor/shop‑drawing work already under way), perhaps in the “under $5,000–$10,000” range at present, and that there is a point of no return the project must meet. The city manager said sooner is better if council wished to cancel the solar alternate. - Council members noted the array is a small share of project cost (approximately 3.5% as presented by staff) and that any change should be discussed with Rockbridge County and Buena Vista because the three governments approved the project jointly. - One council member noted solar can void roof warranties if installed after a roof is completed; staff said installing panels concurrent with roof construction minimizes that risk.

Council sentiment at the meeting was generally inclined to continue with the solar alternate while the city manager and staff were asked to coordinate with joint partners and return with any changes. The council did not take a formal recorded vote on cancelling the solar during the meeting.