Council approves inducement resolutions for two solar projects, reads fee-in-lieu title for $500M project

Greenwood County Council · January 7, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Greenwood County adopted inducement resolutions to negotiate incentives for Project Apollo (about $100M) and Project Muskogee (about $500M). Council also read the fee-in-lieu title for Project Muskogee (first reading only); staff said detailed agreement terms will be negotiated before later readings.

Greenwood County Council on Jan. 6 adopted inducement resolutions that authorize staff to negotiate economic incentives for two proposed utility-scale solar projects.

James Bateman, representing the county27s economic-development team, told the council the inducement resolutions are the statutory vehicle that allows the county to enter discussions and later formalize incentives in a fee-in-lieu-of-taxes (FILOT) agreement. Resolution 2026-03 would induce Project Apollo, described in the meeting as a roughly $100 million solar investment. Resolution 2026-04 would induce Project Muskogee, described as a roughly $500 million solar investment.

Bateman explained that inducement does not finalize incentive terms but permits negotiation of a FILOT and related special-source revenue credits. For Project Muskogee staff read the title of the fee-in-lieu agreement into the record for a first reading; Bateman said staff expects a pause between first and second reading while the agreement details are negotiated and prepared for subsequent council action.

Council members moved and seconded the inducement resolutions; motions carried. Questions from council focused on procedure and timing. Council members said inducement is customary and necessary to move forward with potential large-scale economic-development projects; staff emphasized that the inducement is preliminary and that specific payment or tax terms will be presented to council in the future for approval.

No concrete FILOT numbers, tax-equivalent figures or employment guarantees were included in the inducement resolutions read at the meeting; the transcript records that those details will be negotiated and returned to council for later action.