Adams County Board denies special‑use permit for Ghost Hollow solar farm

The Adams County Board voted to deny a special‑use permit for a proposed 3.4‑megawatt commercial solar facility on Ghost Hollow Road after hearing public comment, a project presentation from Pivot Energy and debate over state rules and local impacts.

Pete Pullman, a Melrose Township resident who said he read the 81‑page application, told the board the packet lacked financial statements for the listed owner and did not include a marketing plan for a 3.4 MW project. Pullman also cited an estimated tax valuation of about $247,000 and said the county’s share of property tax revenue from the project would be roughly $1,100 — an argument he used to question the public benefit.

Pivot Energy’s representative Britney Krebsbach described site changes since the public hearing designed to reduce visual and environmental impacts: removing the four southernmost rows of panels to increase the right‑of‑way setback from about 50 feet to more than 300 feet, adding screening on the east side, and reducing proposed tree clearing from roughly 2.3 acres to under one acre. Krebsbach said Pivot holds a fully executed interconnection agreement, will use sheep grazing and will follow Department of Agriculture decommissioning standards; she also said Pivot is owned by Energy Capital Partners and that the project does not rely on upfront state or federal grants but on backend tax incentives and credits.

Speakers on the board raised two central legal and policy concerns: whether pending state legislation (described by one member as proposing larger setbacks) could later change the regulatory landscape, and whether the county could face litigation or damages if it delayed or denied a permit and a developer claimed financial loss. County counsel (unnamed in the record) said retroactivity depends on legislative language and acknowledged potential litigation risk where a county departs from the regulatory approvals it must follow.

After discussion the clerk recorded a roll‑call vote: 8 in favor, 12 against and 1 absence. Chair announced the resolution denying the permit. Pivot Energy asked the board to consider a motion to suspend and reconvene to allow outside counsel time to prepare; the developer said it would continue neighborhood commitments and review legal options.

The board’s denial came despite a prior unanimous committee recommendation to approve; several members said they were following state rules but also weighing local concerns raised in public comment. The matter remains subject to any reconsideration the board may schedule or potential legal action by the applicant.