Creve Coeur council hears proposal for 100 kW solar array at Dealman Recreation Complex

Creve Coeur city officials on Monday reviewed a proposal to expand rooftop solar at the Dealman Recreation Complex to a roughly 100-kilowatt system, a vendor representative said.

Jason Valvero, the city’s director of recreation, introduced the item and said the current system is a 25-kilowatt direct-current array that supplies about 15 percent of the non–ice-rink building load. Verigee, the vendor, estimated the new package would cost about $275,000 and projected guaranteed annual savings of roughly $8,000 under the firm’s performance guarantee and modeling that factors in an Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) tax credit.

Ellie Blankenship, Verigee’s local government account manager, summarized the recommended approach and financing scenarios and said the company helps clients apply for federal incentives: “We guarantee the savings, so we actually measure and verify the production of the system after the project is installed,” she said.

Verigee told council the new array would be tied to the ice-rink meter and — given recent efficiency gains from a new ammonia refrigeration system for the rink — would likely cover about 20–25 percent of the rink’s energy use rather than the earlier estimate. The company estimated panel life at roughly 30 years and modeled payback timing that includes the IRA credit; Verigee's presenter said the upfront payback horizon is about 14 years in the firm’s conservative scenario.

Saranya Kanala, vice chair of the Energy & Environment Committee, urged council to move now while the federal credit is available, citing her household’s positive experience with a 9 kW rooftop system and a think-tank analysis she cited projecting large wholesale electricity-cost increases in Missouri. She said installing panels while replacing a roof (ideally metal) often lowers long-term costs and insurance rates.

Council members pressed staff and the vendor on several practical points, including roof-penetration and warranty coordination (Verigee said manufacturer sign-off is part of their process), the cost to remove and dispose of the existing panels (the vendor said adding removal within the project could add about $20,000), and the modeling assumptions behind the payback estimate. A council member suggested staff and members work with the Energy & Environment Committee for a short “deep dive” to clarify rebate timing and roofing options before final approval.

The council did not take final action on the project at the meeting; staff were asked to return with clarified cost estimates, roofing and warranty options, and a timeline for contracting that would preserve applicable federal tax credits.