Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Solar Rezones topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors approve multiple utility‑scale solar rezones; county says insurance and decommissioning are private responsibilities
Summary
The board approved several industrial rezones for utility‑scale solar projects, with staff and applicants clarifying that insurance arrangements are private contracts and decommissioning obligations are written into operator stipulations.
Maricopa County supervisors approved a cluster of utility-scale solar rezoning cases after staff and applicants answered questions about insurance, land ownership and decommissioning responsibilities.
Planning staff told the board the projects require IND‑3 industrial zoning and an IUPD overlay tailored to allow solar generation while prohibiting most other industrial uses. Tom Ellsworth, the county’s planning director, said the county reviews sites for compliance with the comprehensive plan, building and fire regulations but does not regulate private insurance arrangements: “The regulation of insurance on a property or anything that has to do with the funding, the sources for acquiring a property… those are all private agreements between the private property owners and we as a county do not get involved in that,” he said.
Applicants and their counsel clarified ownership and land‑lease arrangements. Carolyn Oberholtzer, counsel for Long Road Solar, said most parcels involved are state trust land under leases administered to maximize revenues for beneficiaries of the trust, chiefly the K‑12 Common Schools Fund. She said trust leases “do require insurance.” An applicant for a private‑land project in Buckeye told the board that his project is on private property and not state trust land.
Staff also described decommissioning stipulations that place responsibility on the operator to remove structures when a project ceases operation. Planning staff said the stipulation “is actually applying to the operator that they would be responsible for the decommissioning of that site.”
Supervisors asked for clarity on how insurance cancellations might affect neighboring homeowners; staff reiterated that those contracts are private, while board members pressed that decommissioning language would aim to prevent future liability shifting to taxpayers.
The board approved the rezones (items 5–11 and 13) in a single motion after presentations and brief public comment. The motions were carried unanimously.
