Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marlboro County Council tables two solar proposals pending more information
Summary
At its March meeting the council voted to table a resolution and an ordinance tied to two Wallace-area solar projects, citing the need for more detail on location, megawatt capacity and community impacts before taking a formal position.
At its March 2026 meeting the Marlboro County Council voted to table Resolution 032601 and Ordinance 880, measures tied to proposed solar projects in the Wallace area, after council members said they needed more concrete details about the projects’ size and exact locations.
The measures were introduced by county staff to enable economic-development incentives under Title 12, Chapter 44 of the South Carolina Code for a company the county identified in the meeting as “Project PocketPony” and a related Wallace-area solar farm. Council discussion focused on basic project facts that staff did not yet supply, including the megawatt capacity and precise siting. "We'll get some more information about the magnitude, the megawatts of it, and the exact location," said Mr. Clavin, who asked staff to return with that data so the council could make an informed decision.
Council members voiced different views on utility-scale solar; one member said that even when proposals are at the first-reading stage, advance notice and technical details would help the body make an informed choice. A motion to table both the resolution and the ordinance was moved, seconded and approved by raise-of-hand vote.
The chair recorded that no final readings or fee-in-lieu agreements were approved at the meeting and that the tabling preserves the council’s option to revisit the proposals once staff supplies the requested information. Staff did not provide a timeline for the follow-up briefing during the meeting.
What’s next: The council asked staff to return with project maps, the proposed megawatt capacity and any related economic-development terms; no additional public hearing or vote date for these items was set at the meeting.
