Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County attorney seeks authority to appeal state approvals for large-scale solar projects
Summary
Montgomery County authorized its county attorney to appeal state administrative rulings it says failed to apply county scenic-byways (2021) and cumulative-impacts (2024) laws to proposed large solar arrays; county attorney said the county filed an 88‑page brief and will pursue appellate review to protect county land-use ordinances.
Montgomery County’s legislature advanced a resolution authorizing the county attorney to pursue appeals of state administrative decisions regarding industrial-scale solar projects, citing the county’s 2021 scenic-byways law and 2024 cumulative-impacts law.
County Attorney Manion told the Education & Government Committee that "Montgomery County does not represent any of the towns" in those municipal cases but that the county has a responsibility to defend its ordinances and legal process. Manion said the county filed an "88-page legal brief written by me" in the administrative proceeding and that the next step — if an executive director decision is unfavorable — is appeal. She described the matter as a procedural and legal dispute: "If our law applies then it should have been applied. Not 'our law applies then you don't have to apply it.'"
Manion explained the administrative history: applications were initially processed under prior state statutes and later the applicable state rules changed during the proceedings; administrative law judges (ALJs) determined county laws apply, but later executive decisions said no analysis of county laws had been performed. The county attorney described the appeal as grounded on an "arbitrary and capricious" theory tied to how the state applied (or did not apply) county law.
Legislators pressed on cost and scope. Manion said the immediate filing fees total "$310" and emphasized that the county has been handling much of the work in-house to limit costs. Several county legislators noted municipalities already have spent tens of thousands of dollars defending local approvals; one legislator said the town of Kaherryi had spent about "$60,000." Manion added the county previously received intervenor funds (about $76,000 per project) and used studies that estimated "hundreds of millions" in potential county economic impacts from development choices.
Supporters said a successful appeal would strengthen county laws and make it easier for municipalities to rely on the county's legal precedent; opponents cautioned that higher appellate review would increase legal costs if the county pursues the case further. The resolution to authorize the county attorney to proceed with appeals moved forward and was sent to the full board.
