Pulaski County commissioners on Monday spent an extended portion of their meeting pressing developers and staff for firmer commitments on safety, enforcement and financial guarantees tied to large solar projects.

The discussion followed staff updates that a recent enforcement period produced an unusually large spike in fines, and a developer representative said the company is reviewing travel and safety measures after an accident that left one contractor dead and another hospitalized. “I was out there... 14, 16 hour days for me,” the sheriff said, describing intensified patrols and overtime deployed to manage traffic and safety concerns.

Why it matters: Commissioners face repeated resident complaints about heavy truck traffic, roadside hazards and reportedly insufficient setbacks and signage around solar construction sites. Residents urged immediate action and funding for security; county officials said they are reviewing contract compliance and road‑use agreements and measuring setbacks as the contract requires.

What was said: A developer representative said fence inspections and site visits are scheduled with the county surveyor and that the company will continue to work with the county attorney. County staff confirmed they will measure fence setbacks and coordinate with the building inspector. The sheriff urged more consistent on‑road patrols and recommended that developers pay for two patrollers while construction continues.

Several commissioners pushed back that patrols and enforcement obligations must be clarified in road‑use agreements and the contract with the developer. One commissioner said, in reference to developers’ assurances, “If they truly cared about the safety of the residents of Pulaski County, they wouldn't have left one family bankrupt with no vehicle,” reflecting frustration voiced by multiple speakers.

EDA guarantee concerns: Commissioners and residents also debated elements of the Economic Development Agreement (EDA) tied to a large project. Staff said Exhibit D (a guaranty form) must be executed no later than 90 days before construction and that a guarantor (identified in current drafts as a project parent company) had been proposed. Commissioners highlighted a mismatch: the guarantee as written terminates five years after construction commencement while EDA payments and benefits are projected to span far longer. One commissioner asked for a fuller, consolidated EDA package and recommended third‑party legal review before final approvals.

Public response: Multiple residents called for greater transparency and faster action. One resident said he’s “been hit almost three times” driving county roads and asked when protective measures will be fully funded and enforced. Another urged a moratorium on some project types until appropriate ordinances and enforcement mechanisms are finalized.

What’s next: Staff promised to circulate a complete EDA draft with all exhibits and to post it on the county website, subject to any commissioner-requested edits. Commissioners directed staff to continue negotiating clearer language on patrol funding and road‑use enforcement and to return with more complete documents at the joint session or mid‑December meeting.