Vermont committee hears workers, farmers urge limits on large solar projects to protect farmland

The Senate Agriculture Committee on Tuesday heard an hour of testimony on Section 10 of a miscellaneous bill that would restrict energy development on Vermont’s best agricultural soils and some forested lands and require lifecycle analysis for large projects. Chair opened the session by saying the committee wanted "to spend some time going through, section 10 of our miscellaneous bill," and that Representative Greg Burt had proposed language to start the conversation.

Representative Greg Burt (House Agriculture Committee), who introduced the language to be added to the bill, said the measure is intended to ensure a “balanced approach” to utility-scale solar development. Burt cited the Shaftesbury project as an example and complained that the current regulatory process lacks independent checks on lifecycle impacts: "There's no energy audit. There's no carbon audit," he said, asking whether a 25-year use of productive land produces the net carbon or community benefit intended.

Witnesses from farming and conservation organizations urged strict limits on siting large arrays on high-quality soils. Annette Smith, executive director of Homeowners for a Clean Environment, walked the committee through an 11-page packet of site photos, hearings and decision documents and urged mapping of projects against "primax" (prime agricultural) soils. Smith said the process has been largely developer-driven and called the distinction between "good solar" and "bad solar" essential when choosing locations.

Shaftesbury and other projects were cited repeatedly. Smith said some proposed projects would cut dozens of acres of forest and put arrays over productive fields. She urged moving language in the draft so the standard against "undue adverse effect" would apply up front and not merely be a consideration.

Local farmers amplified the concerns. Greg Cox, a longtime farmer and local-food advocate, said he is "pro solar" but warned that out-of-state developers and investors are increasingly “extracting” land value and leaving communities after selling projects to distant owners. Jesse McDougall, a fifth-generation Shaftesbury farmer, argued that soil is a living ecosystem and said topsoil scraping and stockpiling is not preservation. "These projects are forever," McDougall said, urging legal protections to slow conversion of farmland and forest.

Renewable-energy advocates and regulators pressed caution on policy design. Peter Sterling, executive director of Renewable Energy Vermont, said Vermont’s long-term renewable contracts have helped keep the state’s electric rates low and pointed to lifecycle analyses showing solar’s relatively favorable emissions profile. Sterling told the committee that "for the last three years' 23, 24, 25, there are 417 acres that are within the limits of the area of disturbance" for Tier 2 projects, and stressed that the area of disturbance is larger than the footprint actually taken by arrays. He warned that some draft wording could effectively bar distributed projects above certain sizes and urged the committee to solicit the Department of Public Service and utilities before finalizing language.

Committee members and speakers pressed two recurring trade-offs: protecting productive lands and forests versus ensuring Vermont’s transition to low-carbon electricity and maintaining affordable rates. Several witnesses urged more precise mapping, independent lifecycle audits, stronger protections for landowners who lease property, and clearer rules on decommissioning. Sterling recommended technical input on interconnection costs and the role of utilities as "first gatekeepers" to project feasibility.

The committee did not take a vote. Chair closed by scheduling a follow-up session for Tuesday at 10:45 a.m. to "go down through the language" line-by-line and to invite the Department of Public Service and utility representatives to provide technical comment.

Ending: The hearing laid out starkly different perspectives: farmers and local advocates pushed for legal steps to keep productive soils and forests available for agriculture and ecosystems; renewable-energy representatives warned that broad restrictions could curtail distributed solar and raise costs. The committee said it will continue the conversation and seek technical input before making drafting decisions.