Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents tell Skagit commissioners they oppose battery storage projects on farmland; commissioners point commenters to EFSEC
Summary
Multiple residents urged the Board of County Commissioners to oppose proposed battery energy storage projects sited on or near agricultural land; commissioners said county opposition exists but that final siting decisions will follow state review by the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC).
Several residents used the May 13 public-comment period to oppose proposed battery storage projects in Skagit County and to urge local officials to block siting on or near farmland and populated areas.
Cindy Weidman, a Sedro-Woolley resident, said she opposed the proposal "not only to go into Sedro-Woolley, but anywhere in Skagit County," adding concerns about risks to wildlife, nearby schools and the community if an industrial accident occurred near the town center.
Ingrid Hinton of Mount Vernon described studying a decision in another city where the council enacted a moratorium while it studied battery storage siting. She read a response she said she received from a mayor in another jurisdiction: "Council passed a moratorium Monday night to ensure there's no development while we are studying the issue. Our team will perform due diligence before providing updates to council for their consideration." Hinton said she believes more study time is needed for such projects near Padilla Bay and farmland.
Celeste Frisbee, who lives near Cedarville, described the projects as "kind of a Trojan horse" and urged clearer public information and stronger public notice when proposals affecting public health are advanced.
A commissioner present said the county commissioners "have absolutely taken a position of opposition to building any battery storage farms, anything on ag land," but noted that siting decisions for projects designated as state-level energy facilities proceed through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) and ultimately the governor. The county advised residents that comments can be directed to EFSEC and that EFSEC makes recommendations to the governor, who makes the final siting decision.
Separately, a resident noted a related federal licensing process for hydroelectric facilities (FERC) and county officials reported a recent visit to Washington, D.C., to discuss a tentative settlement with Seattle City Light and tribal leaders on dam-related matters; that trip was not directly tied to the battery-storage discussion but was announced during commissioner remarks.
No formal county action on battery storage siting was recorded at the May 13 meeting. Several commenters urged further study or local moratoria; commissioners reiterated the county’s opposition stance while directing affected residents to state review processes.
