Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners plan zoning follow-up after public comments on solar and consultant work
Summary
Commissioners said they will revisit proposed zoning changes and invited Marvin Consulting back for discussion after public comments urged careful solar rules and a resident questioned consultant value and recent litigation elsewhere.
York County commissioners said they will continue discussion of proposed county zoning changes and scheduled further public discussion after the county zoning board returned the proposal last month.
Commissioners emphasized the need for all members to be present for the next discussion; the board agreed to discuss zoning at the April 1 meeting and to invite Marvin Consulting back for an informational session. "I would really like to shoot for the first meeting in April," a commissioner said.
Public comments during the meeting included a presentation by Kale Geese of Omaha Public Power District and remarks from a resident who questioned consultant spending and referenced litigation over solar rules in Lancaster County. In public comment, Kale Geese said OPPD is "committed to working with your county, to ensure responsible energy development aligns with the county's priorities," and encouraged thoughtful zoning and site-specific review during conditional use permit processes.
A resident identified as Lord Peterson (address provided) told the board he had followed Lancaster County's solar hearings and litigation and said he was concerned about the county's consultant work and how much the county was paying. "My concern when it comes to money is you guys decided to spend a bunch of money on a consultant," the resident said. "And quite frankly, so far, it doesn't really seem like you really care what they've been saying. And if that's the case, why are we spending money on that?"
Why it matters: the county has been updating a proposed zoning ordinance related to development including solar; the zoning board previously returned the proposal to the commissioners without change. Commissioners said any major changes after their review would require another public hearing; if no substantive modifications are proposed, another hearing would not be necessary.
Next steps: the board asked staff to resend the proposed ordinance and the zoning board's recommendations, to provide commissioners with consultant Marvin Consulting's recommendations, and to schedule the zoning discussion for the April 1 meeting with Marvin invited to appear. Commissioners also discussed logistics for ensuring full attendance at the meeting so that members can deliberate together.
What was not decided: commissioners did not adopt new zoning rules at this meeting. They said they would review materials and determine whether to propose further changes or to move forward with the current text.
