Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Administrator outlines next steps on farm‑lease proposal, battery storage inquiry and Schilling Road dust concerns
Summary
County administrator Philip Smith Haines recommended further study and legal review of a proposed farm lease parcel (Goshen Farms), agreed to pursue conversations about a potential battery energy storage pilot requested by USD 306, and reported options being explored to address dust complaints on Schilling Road.
County Administrator Philip Smith Haines used his May 13 update to summarize several items that will return to the commission for further review: a proposal to remove one parcel from an upcoming farm lease bid process for a potential long‑term project, a request from USD 306 to explore a framework for a pilot agreement for a battery energy storage facility, and ongoing concerns about dust and maintenance on Schilling Road East of Ohio.
On the farm parcel, Haines described a presentation the commission had received and asked whether staff should pursue discussions with the interested party (referred to as Goshen Farms). Commissioners said they supported further study, with one commissioner asking for a joint study session with county legal counsel to explore lease terms, impacts to scholarships and community uses tied to farm revenue, treatment of permanent structures, lease duration and disposal of structures if a tenant leaves. Haines said staff will agendize a follow‑up discussion and gather additional legal input.
Regarding a letter from USD 306 about a potential battery energy storage facility in the county's southeast, commissioners directed the administrator to open conversations with the entity and report back. Commissioners said they want conditional‑use application materials and clear proposals (including projected revenues and local impacts) presented up front so benefits to the school district, fire district and county are clear during permitting and public review. Several commissioners reiterated that conditional‑use permitting is the point where detailed information should be required and discussed.
On Schilling Road, Haines said county counsel advised that a specific agreement governing that road (tied to prior flood‑control work) may control the situation more directly than a general city/county annexation agreement. He said staff and the county engineer are pursuing dust‑control and other mitigation options but emphasized that annexation alone would not automatically resolve the dust problems. Commissioners cautioned against creating precedent by granting special treatment without countywide policy.
Haines also provided a brief tally of allocation requests received at prior meetings (totaling $858,593). He did not ask the commission to take immediate funding action at the meeting; staff will return with additional details if commissioners direct further action.
