Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Senator from Callaway advances solar‑farm substitute, prompting property‑rights scrutiny
Loading...
Summary
Senate sponsor presented a substitute to create a statewide regulatory framework for industrial solar farms — removing county permitting, tying tax rates to land productivity and adding decommissioning and eminent‑domain protections — and laid the bill on the informal calendar after extended debate about tax mechanics and fairness.
Senator from Callaway moved the Senate substitute for senate bill 8 79, a multi‑year effort to set a statewide regulatory framework for large industrial solar farms, telling colleagues the change responds to “so many constituents” concerned about projects proposed near homes and farmland. The sponsor said the sub removes county permitting authority for these massive installations, places investor‑owned utilities under the Public Service Commission and creates a Department of Natural Resources regulatory track for independent developers, municipalities and co‑ops.
The substitute also outlines a per‑megawatt charge that the sponsor described as a sliding scale tied to agricultural land grades. “If you’re gonna ... put these on the prime land of the state ... you’ll pay $4,500 per megawatt hour on the nameplate,” the sponsor said, and the draft moves down to $2,500 on lower‑grade land. He said the bill reduces setbacks from 1,000 to 500 feet for dwellings and adds provisions for bonding and decommissioning at end of life, and includes eminent‑domain protections.
Why this matters: advocates for the substitute say the state lacks a consistent regulatory approach for facilities that can span thousands of acres and hundreds of megawatts, while opponents say the draft tax structure could treat neighboring landowners differently and shift where developers site projects.
Members pressed the sponsor on implementation and tax mechanics. The senator from the eighth and others sought clarity about whether the per‑megawatt charge is in addition to commercial or personal property assessments and how many acres a megawatt represents; one lawmaker noted “about 7 acres is needed to generate a megawatt” and asked whether those acres would be reclassified for taxation. The sponsor said local assessors would continue to make assessments and that the sub ties the per‑MW amounts to USDA agricultural grades and to CPI adjustments; he also said he was open to negotiating a uniform nameplate approach similar to a house version that used $4,000 per megawatt.
A number of senators highlighted the need to balance property rights with a predictable statewide regime. “You don’t treat people differently,” one senator told the sponsor, urging a uniform approach rather than grading land and applying different rates. The sponsor responded that the measure aims to discourage using prime farmland for large projects while preserving local tax revenues for communities that host them.
The sponsor asked for the bill to be placed on the calendar; the presiding officer announced that senate bill 8 79 would be laid on the informal calendar. No final floor vote on the substitute was recorded during the session; the sponsor told colleagues he remains willing to negotiate implementation details, including the tax calculation and assessor guidance, before the bill returns for further consideration.