Board continues discussion of proposed solar pilot payment-in-lieu agreement; vote planned next meeting
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
District staff briefed trustees on a proposed solar payment-in-lieu (pilot) agreement for two arrays, describing a precedent with a Greenhaven array and an IPP Solar proposal (rate discussed in the record as $6,000 with a 2% escalation over 15 years); trustees asked clarifying questions and indicated the item will come to a vote at the next meeting.
The Arlington Central School District Board continued a discussion begun at a prior meeting about a proposed solar pilot payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement for arrays sited in Pleasant Valley and other locations.
Kevin and Steve, who presented background research, said a previously approved array at Greenhaven has an arrangement under which the owner pays for the solar improvement at the same rate being proposed by IPP Solar. Trustees were told the Town of Union Vale’s array on Route 55 is municipally owned and therefore not subject to the same taxation in the district’s records. Staff summarized the pilot framework under New York law, noting pilots in the state typically run 15 years, and the proposal under discussion would include a 2% annual escalation over the pilot term.
Presenters described a pilot rate discussed in the record as "$6,000"; the transcript uses inconsistent phrasing when naming its units (references alternate between "per megawatt hour" and "per kilowatt hour"), and presenters noted Central Hudson and NYSEG range guidance sets pilot values within statutory limits. Trustees asked about project lifespan and what happens at pilot expiration; staff said after the pilot ends the property is taxed on the full assessed value of the property and improvements. Trustees also asked whether the district was already receiving payments from Greenhaven; staff said a resolution accepting that project was passed on Nov. 28, 2023, and that payments were anticipated to begin soon.
Board members indicated they were "reasonably comfortable" with moving toward a vote at the next meeting but asked staff to continue to surface any follow-up questions. No formal vote or binding agreement was recorded at this meeting; staff and the proposer (IPP Solar, as discussed in the presentation) will return with the finalized proposal for board action.
