Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers and unions spar over labor, wages for proposed Morrow County solar project
Summary
A Solar Systems/Q Cells solar project cleared Ohio Power Siting Board approval and drew extended discussion at the Morrow County commissioners meeting over local‑hire targets, prevailing wage coverage, apprenticeship rules and a $495,000 road‑upgrade commitment.
Colin Kelly, a representative of Solar Systems, told the Morrow County Board of Commissioners that his company acquired a multi‑year solar project and received an interconnection agreement with FirstEnergy and approval from the Ohio Power Siting Board to begin construction.
"We committed to $495,000 worth of road upgrades," Kelly said, describing a road lease agreement the developer signed with county contacts and noting coordination with local staff. He said the developer selected Q Cells as the construction contractor and that Q Cells "is targeting 80% local labor, and they are also going to pay prevailing wage." Kelly added that bidders were required to meet local labor thresholds during procurement, though contractors were not required to use union labor.
During a public question period, local union representatives challenged assertions about worker benefits and apprenticeship requirements. A union spokesperson described the pilot program's updated apprenticeship rule and the union's training programs and funds: "Apprenticeship requirements…15% of the man hours on projects with pilot status have to come from registered apprentices," the representative said, and added that union members contribute to health care and pension funds.
Travis, identified in the meeting as a Q Cells speaker, told commissioners the company’s direct hires are fully covered: "Direct hires through Q Cells is fully funded," he said, and said third‑party providers offer 401(k) and health insurance as part of their packages. Union members pushed for documentation that third‑party labor suppliers are registered for Ohio apprenticeship programs; developers said they would provide backup documentation and pointed to previously executed Ohio projects with similar requirements.
The meeting also included an exchange about a protest outside the developer’s office. Kelly said the developer had no coordination with protesters and invited union representatives to meet: "We are open to feedback or input…anything that you require of us, please just let us know," he said. Union organizers invited commissioners and developers to a local job‑fair and training demonstration the next day.
Why it matters: The project affects local employment, county roads and county planning and will involve federal and state regulatory processes. County officials recorded the developer’s commitments—road upgrades and stated hiring targets—and requested documentation on apprenticeship and labor supplier registration before construction proceeds.
Next steps: The developer said construction planning will move forward following documentation and coordination; union organizers are scheduled to hold a training/job‑fair in the county the following day.
