Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ranger Power says Harrison County template would effectively block most solar projects; commissioners call for local vision before drafting rules
Summary
A Ranger Power representative told the Washington County Plan Commission that a Harrison County‑style solar ordinance would ‘zone out’ most projects in the county because of industrial‑zoning limits, soil‑productivity restrictions, acreage caps, slope rules and a 3.5‑mile well‑testing radius; commissioners proposed a local visioning session to define goals before drafting rules. Company representatives said they are open to negotiated, clearly written requirements.
A representative for Ranger Power told the Washington County Plan Commission that a draft ordinance modeled on Harrison County's rules would effectively prevent most large solar projects in the county, prompting commissioners to propose a visioning session to set local goals before the commission adapts or adopts ordinance language.
The company representative identified five main elements in the Harrison County model that, as written, would rule out many Washington County projects: limiting utility‑scale solar to industrially zoned land; excluding sites with soil‑productivity values above a specified threshold; putting a 200‑acre cap per project and a 2,000‑acre countywide cap; requiring a >6% slope in certain provisions; and imposing a well‑testing radius of 3.5 miles that the company said would be onerous. "It's a zone out of solar in this county," the company representative said, arguing the text, as drafted, would leave little qualifying land.
The representative, who identified their affiliation as Ranger Power, said some requirements are negotiable if they are better defined — for example, well testing can be targeted to adjacent residences rather than a multi‑mile radius, and decommissioning bonds can be negotiated to avoid duplicative or punitive costs. The company also said it typically offers lease terms of 25–40 years and is willing to accept construction and decommissioning safeguards written into county agreements.
Commissioners expressed mixed priorities: several emphasized property‑owner rights and local control, others focused on neighboring homeowners' protections and environmental safeguards such as setbacks and decommissioning bonds. One commissioner expressed interest in reserving a local benefit (for example, keeping a small percentage of generated power local), but the company representative said tying generation outputs to local use is operationally complex and typically handled by utilities and market purchases.
Multiple commissioners said the county should not simply copy another county's ordinance; instead, they proposed a short visioning workshop to agree on three local priorities — protect property‑owner choice, protect neighbors, and ensure safety — then draft ordinance language that meets those goals. The commission also acknowledged landowners and companies with pending projects are waiting on a policy decision and asked staff to prepare a focused work plan and timeline.
What happens next: The commission asked members and staff to draft a concise list of local goals and to return with recommended ordinance language and comparative examples from counties such as Miami and Jackson for reference. Ranger Power offered to provide examples and to work with staff during the drafting process.
Why it matters: The commission's choices will determine whether and under what conditions utility‑scale solar projects are allowed in Washington County — affecting landowners who have already signed leases, companies preparing projects, and neighbors concerned about environmental and community impacts.
