Delaware County to resume review of utility-scale solar ordinance after months of public debate

Delaware County commissioners agreed Monday to take proposed amendments to the county’s utility-scale solar ordinance back up for consideration and tentatively set Sept. 15 as the date to hear the revised ordinance, after extended public comment and a planning commission recommendation.

The planning commission reviewed a revised draft of the ordinance at its Aug. 12 meeting and recommended a set of corrections (largely grammatical and syntactic) by an 8-1 vote, a county staff member told the commissioners. Commissioners said planning and legal staff were continuing work on the draft and that they expected to consider the amendments at a special hearing on Sept. 15.

The matter drew nearly an hour of public comment Monday, with speakers divided over two core issues: minimum setbacks for utility-scale arrays and a “property-value guarantee” provision. Several residents urged the commissioners to keep a 500-foot setback and retain the property-value guarantee; others pushed to reduce setbacks to 250 feet (the state default referenced by several speakers) and to remove the guarantee so projects remain economically viable.

Resident Cheryl Swingley urged the board to delete the property-value guarantees and to shorten setbacks from 500 to 250 feet, saying larger setbacks and the guarantee would restrict farmers’ property rights and reduce opportunities to generate county revenue. “If you don't make these two changes, you will effectively interfere with our farmers' property rights,” Swingley said.

Several other speakers represented the opposite view. Mike Johnson told the commissioners he supports keeping the property-value guarantee and the larger setbacks. Tim Carter, who described examples from other states, asked the county to study “pure tone” noise linked to electrical equipment and suggested the county consult other local governments that have encountered the issue.

Sue Arrington raised a series of technical questions about the property-value guarantee language in the draft ordinance, noting the consultant retained in 2022 had recommended deleting the guarantee. She asked whether the guarantee’s 12-month term would apply if land sold during construction, when an appraisal would be done and who would pay for it — questions the draft language did not specify.

Other speakers, including Dan Berry and Joe Russell, criticized what they described as limited transparency around the newly proposed ordinance and argued the current draft departs in important ways from an earlier nine-member citizen study group’s recommendations. Several commenters warned that stricter rules could deter companies from developing in Delaware County and could jeopardize existing leaseholders.

Commissioners and staff framed the next steps as further review by planning and county legal staff, with a return to the commissioners on Sept. 15 for public hearing and possible formal action. At Monday’s meeting commissioners formally voted to remove the solar ordinance amendments from the table so the draft could be scheduled for future consideration.

Questions remain unresolved in the draft that commenters highlighted: whether the property-value guarantee (as written) would apply if a property changes ownership during construction, how long a guarantee should last, the timing and funding of any appraisals, and whether noise standards for equipment should be added to the ordinance. County staff told the board that legal and planning were working to update the draft and that those clarifications would be shared ahead of the Sept. 15 hearing.

The planning commission’s Aug. 12 vote to recommend amendments and the public comments at Monday’s meeting make the Sept. 15 session a key procedural step: it will be the public forum where remaining technical language and legal questions must be resolved before the board considers final approval.

The county’s review comes amid national and state-level efforts encouraging renewable energy siting while balancing local land-use concerns. In Delaware County, residents, leaseholders and industry proponents remain sharply divided on how to balance agricultural land use, local tax revenues and neighborhood impacts.