Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Siting Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debate whether to opt into state'level Eastern Oregon solar siting rules; staff to return with targeted analysis
Summary
The board discussed three options for implementing new state solar-siting rules for EFU and forest lands (do nothing/opt in, opt out, or pursue a customized program) and asked staff to return with parcel-level scenarios and maps before making a final choice.
The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners reviewed new state rules for siting large photovoltaic facilities in Eastern Oregon and discussed three implementation options for county lands: do nothing (automatically opt in on Jan. 1, 2026), opt out to retain existing local review rules, or temporarily opt out while the county develops a customized program under Goal 5.
Tanya Salzman, senior planner, summarized the state rulemaking adopted by LCDC on June 26, 2025. She said the new land-use pathway would allow larger solar installations on EFU and some forest lands (with higher acreage thresholds than the county's existing rules), but would exclude specific resource areas such as sage-grouse habitat, priority wildlife corridors, the Metolius Area of Critical State Concern and EFU land with preexisting water rights as of Jan. 1, 2024. Salzman cautioned that county data is incomplete for key exclusions, notably mapped Category 1 ODFW habitat and EFU lands with water rights, and that available county maps should be treated cautiously.
Salzman summarized the three EFU options: (1) opt out and retain local controls; (2) take no action (automatic opt-in to the new OAR provisions on Jan. 1, 2026); or (3) temporarily opt out and commence a Goal 5 customized program that would allow greater acreage through a public comprehensive-plan amendment and mapping process. She explained that the customized program (option 3) would require a significant Goal 5/EC analysis and a dedicated staff work program.
Community Development Director Peter Gutowski and planning staff said most past Deschutes County solar approvals were relatively small and were handled under the county's conditional-use/site-plan review; staff noted six solar approvals between 2015 and 2019, most on nonarable EFU land and none appealed. Gutowski told commissioners that opting out now does not permanently foreclose future action: "If the board decided to go with option 1, which would be to opt out, that doesn't mean that the that, a future county commission couldn't reconsider it." He suggested staff could return with property-specific analyses if the board wanted concreteness.
Commissioner Chang said she did not see a reason to pursue the extensive customized-program path (option 3) given the county's limited number of large parcels and that maintaining local, case-by-case review under current conditional-use processes could be appropriate unless a specific "Goldilocks" property or applicant emerges. "I don't see the any point in pursuing option 3 just given the size of the properties," Chang said.
The board asked staff to prepare follow-up materials including side-by-side flowcharts showing how a representative large parcel and a county-owned ~500-acre assemblage north of Bend would be reviewed under (a) the county's existing case-by-case conditional-use approach and (b) the new state rules if the county did nothing and thereby opted in. Commissioners also asked for maps comparing forest-zone lands to Goal 5 (wildlife) inventories, and staff emphasized available data gaps (water-rights lists and Category 1 ODFW habitat) that would affect eligibility mapping.
No final action was taken; the board did not adopt an order and directed staff to return with a more detailed, parcel-specific analysis and maps to inform a future decision.
