County holds public hearing on 200 MW solar agreement; payments tied to actual output, developer pledges $200,000 to local center

Sumter County held a public hearing on Jan. 14 during second reading of Ordinance 241014, a premium-tax agreement related to a proposed solar energy project. County staff summarized the agreement’s assumptions and the developer representatives answered questions from the council and members of the public.

County staff told the council the agreement included an assumption that the project would generate 200 megawatts alternating current and noted a calculation in Exhibit D that used $4,500 per megawatt of final output as an illustrative figure — an assumption staff said would equate to roughly $900,000 annually under that output assumption. Staff also told the council the actual net-fee tax payments will be based on actual generation, and there is no guaranteed production minimum written into the agreement as presented.

Marshall Cooper, who identified himself as representing Treaty of Clean Energy, said the company is based in Austin, Texas, and that Sumter would be their first South Carolina project. Cooper said the company intends to be a “good neighbor” and said he brought a written statement from Gwendolyn Hayward of the Raffton (River Rock) Creek Community Center. Cooper read the statement into the record; the statement expressed support for the project and noted a potential $200,000 donation to the community center.

Gwendolyn Hayward’s statement, read by Cooper, said the developer had met the community and that the $200,000 could help renovate the center or buy equipment. A councilmember clarified that district-level discussions have described the $200,000 as jump-start funding for a gymnasium at Raffton Creek Community Center in the Rembert area, where the council said there is no nearby public gymnasium.

The hearing record in the transcript shows the staff summary, the developer presentation and public comments in favor. The transcript does not include a recorded final vote on the ordinance during the segment provided, so no final action on Ordinance 241014 is reported in the transcript.

Why it matters: The agreement ties future county revenues to the facility’s actual electricity generation rather than a guaranteed minimum; that approach affects the county’s expected revenue stream. The developer’s pledged donation has been presented to local stakeholders as support for a gymnasium at a rural community center.

Next steps: The ordinance remained at second reading with the record of a public hearing in the transcript; the transcript segment does not record a final adoption vote. Council staff continue to process the agreement and any related adoption steps.