Public questions sustainability of proposed county microgrid; officials say system is designed to migrate to solar

During public comment, resident Charlie Kratovil pressed county staff about Resolution 26‑440, a proposed campus microgrid described in prior meetings as partly solar and partly gas (cogeneration). Kratovil said that burning gas is not sustainable and asked for a breakdown of the percentage of power coming from solar versus gas.

County staff said the project’s initial capacity was described in the meeting as "5 megawatts" and referenced multiple cogeneration units alongside renewable solar and a battery component; staff also stated the design intent is to migrate the campus to be driven entirely by solar over time. The transcript contains inconsistent capacity references — speakers mentioned both "5 megawatts" and later referenced "9 megawatts" for different pieces of the project — and county staff did not provide a definitive percent split of solar versus gas at this meeting.

A county official said the approach is a multi‑phase plan that begins with existing technologies (including cogeneration) and includes future retrofits to expand solar generation and battery storage. Kratovil pressed the characterization of the project as "sustainable" while fossil fuel combustion remains part of the initial configuration; the exchange ended when the public‑comment time limit was reached.

No vote or binding design decision on the microgrid was taken at the meeting; staff were asked to provide additional details and technical breakdowns outside the public comment period.