Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Pace topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clay County hears Show Me PACE pitch, directs staff to prepare commercial PACE ordinance
Summary
Josh Campbell of the Missouri Energy Initiative briefed the Clay County Commission on Show Me PACE, a commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) district; commissioners asked for more information from the assessor and collector and instructed staff to prepare an ordinance for next week's meeting so a property owner can pursue time‑sensitive federal tax credits.
Josh Campbell, executive director of the Missouri Energy Initiative, told the Clay County Commission on the evening the nonprofit administers Show Me PACE, a statewide commercial clean‑energy financing district that uses a property‑assessment mechanism to finance energy efficiency and renewable projects.
For those of you who don't know what PACE is, it is a statutory, program that came out of statute in 2010, Campbell told the commission, describing a program he said involves no public dollars and requires no county staff time for administration. "There is no public dollars involved in these projects, and there is no staff time, on behalf of the county, when these projects come through," he said.
Campbell said the district can finance up to 100% of eligible project costs, can be structured to be transferable with the property, and is repaid via an annual assessment collected in a manner similar to property taxes. He cited statewide totals for the district he administers: roughly $350 million in closed PACE financing and nearly $2 billion in leveraged local economic impact.
Why it matters: a property owner is reportedly seeking PACE financing to support a solar project that aims to claim federal tax credits whose availability requires certain actions this year. Commissioners debated timing, consumer‑protection history and operational details before asking staff to return with additional information.
Several commissioners said they wanted the county collector and assessor to review the proposed ordinance and explain any operational impacts. Commissioner Lawson asked the district to provide staff materials so the commission could review them before a vote; Campbell agreed to provide the PowerPoint and contact information for the property owner. Campbell also said MEI’s commercial program seeks mortgage‑lender consent as an extra safeguard, a step he said did not occur in prior residential programs.
Commissioner Wagner recalled earlier efforts in Kansas City and urged the county to consider opting into the district; other commissioners said they needed time to review technical materials and hear from absent colleagues. The chair summarized the sense of the commission as a directive that staff prepare the draft ordinance and place it on the regular agenda for next week's meeting, and to make sure absent commissioners receive the same information in advance.
What remains unresolved: the commission did not vote on the ordinance. Commissioners requested written materials and an opportunity to hear from the assessor and collector before any final action. The county also awaits confirmation of the property owner’s identity and whether the owner can appear or otherwise communicate urgency to the commission.
Next step: staff was instructed to prepare an ordinance for consideration at the regular meeting next week; MEI will provide follow‑up materials and contact information for the applicant.
