Residents urge Baldwin County to slow proposed large solar project, seek zoning protections for Stockton

Residents from Stockton urged the Baldwin County Commission on March 3 to slow consideration of a proposed large‑scale solar project and grant local zoning protections for lands north of Interstate 65.

Susan Burgerer, a Stockton resident, told the commission the Stockton Landmark District “reflects a place where time has slowed down,” listing creeks and wetlands that she said are central to the town’s history and quality of life. “I’m asking you to allow the residents a chance to appropriately zone these lands north of I‑65 to retain the unique quality of life that it has offered for hundreds of years,” she said.

John Murphy, another Stockton resident, described the project as an industrial‑scale effort that would remove “a lot” of woodlands and harm local waterways and wildlife. Murphy said the site scale has been described in various ways during local discussion — he referenced clearing “2,400 acres,” noted a larger figure of about 4,600 acres cited elsewhere in the room, and said the project could include “somewhere between 700,000 to 900,000 solar panels.” He urged the commission to “slow this down” so environmental and long‑term community effects can be studied.

Georgin (recorded as “Georgie”) Connor, who said Stockton had recently held a town hall with high turnout, expressed enthusiasm about the project’s potential while stressing Stockton’s role as “the front porch of Baldwin County” and asking commissioners to help the community thrive.

The chair told the meeting that CS3 — the agenda item tied to a notice of intent to request a planning and zoning referendum for the area — had been discussed at the commission’s prior 9:00 a.m. work session and would be adopted as part of the consent agenda. Later in the meeting, the commission approved the consent agenda, completing adoption of CS3 as presented.

Why it matters: The comments reflect a split in local sentiment between residents who welcome development and those who worry about ecological impacts and changes to community character. The commission’s decision to place the CS3 notice on the consent agenda means the planning and referendum process will proceed; further zoning or permit decisions would follow procedural reviews and public engagement.

What’s next: Members of the public raised requests for additional environmental study and slower review; the transcript records public comment and the consent‑agenda adoption but does not include subsequent staff reports, permitting outcomes or timelines for any referendum or zoning changes.

Quoted speakers in this article are drawn from the March 3 meeting record.