Delaware County adopts temporary moratorium on new large-scale solar applications; planning commission review set for April 3

Delaware County Commissioners voted Tuesday to adopt Ordinance 2025-05, a moratorium on accepting new applications for large-scale solar energy installations, while staff and the Metropolitan Planning Commission prepare a revised zoning ordinance and hold a public hearing.

The moratorium was taken off the table and adopted after the board heard from residents, county officials and advocacy groups. Commissioner Brand, who led the update to the board, said staff had met with “pro, against and neutral” stakeholders and had begun consolidating proposed language from parties including the League of Women Voters and National Grid Renewables. Brand said a draft will be submitted to the Metropolitan Planning Commission for a first reading and public hearing; the earliest likely date for that hearing is April 3 at the Justice Center auditorium.

Why it matters: The moratorium pauses new filings and formal approvals while the county rewrites its rules for siting ground-mounted solar and (potentially) battery energy storage. The issue has drawn sustained public comment and is tied to broader statewide debates over local home rule and bills at the Indiana Statehouse that would shift some decisions on multi-jurisdictional energy projects to the state.

What commissioners said and did: Commissioner Brand summarized two weeks of stakeholder meetings and told the board he had met with roughly 40 people, including representatives of companies, landowners and advocacy groups. He described his review of grid reliability summaries from PJM and the U.S. Department of Energy and said the draft ordinance will also address battery storage and other technical elements. Commissioners Reagan, Graham and Henry voted yes on the final adoption roll call.

Public comment: More than a dozen citizens spoke during the public-comment period. Supporters of faster approval argued the county needs new tax base and economic development; opponents described potential property-value impacts, aesthetic and lifestyle concerns and asked for stronger setback, decommissioning and property-value protections in a new ordinance. Speakers included Linda Hanson of the League of Women Voters, Holly Hanauer, Cheryl Swingley and multiple local residents who said they had recently learned of proposed projects near their homes and wanted stronger protections for nonfarming neighbors.

Next steps and process limits: Commissioner Brand and staff repeatedly emphasized that the planning commission could recommend adoption, send the draft to committee, or request changes; that means no fixed completion date could be set now. The board clarified the next milestone: a first reading/public hearing by the Metropolitan Planning Commission expected at its April 3 meeting (public notice and the draft will be posted in advance of that hearing). Commissioners and staff also noted state legislation (House Bill 1628 and related proposals) had been discussed during outreach; staff said HB 1628 did not advance out of committee before the legislative deadline.

Discussion vs. decision: The meeting included both extended discussion and a formal action. Commissioners explicitly separated the work: staff will submit a consolidated draft to the MPC; the board adopted the interim moratorium (a formal action) but made no final decision on permanent ordinance language at this meeting.

Ending: The county will post the draft ordinance ahead of the Metropolitan Planning Commission’s public hearing and return to the commissioners with the MPC’s recommendation. Residents who wish to comment will have the opportunity at that public hearing and via the planning commission’s published process.