Adelanto council advances 400‑MW Hidalgo battery project after debate over $100,000 expediting fee

The Adelanto City Council voted to advance for first reading an ordinance and development agreement that would allow the Hidalgo (Jupiter) Energy Storage project to proceed toward entitlements, approving a location and development plan and conditional‑use permit while making final approval contingent on a fully executed development agreement.

The project, proposed for a 40‑acre site at Raccoon Road and Holly Road, would include a Southern California Edison line‑break substation and battery storage acreage with up to 400 megawatts of capacity, developer Kurt Nelson told the council. Nelson, development director for Jupyter Power, said the company expects to create about 200 construction jobs and 6–10 permanent operations jobs and estimated local receipts including a $1,000,000 community benefit payment, $1,600,000 in development impact fees and $2–4 million in point‑of‑sale sales tax tied to equipment brought to Adelanto.

“Batteries are becoming really important in California because grid operators are constantly having to balance generation with demand,” Nelson said during the public hearing, describing the facility as a regional transmission‑level resource that would be used to store and deliver electricity for grid reliability.

The council’s discussion centered on several recurring concerns: public safety and emergency response for battery incidents, whether the community would see local power or only regional grid benefits, and governance and equity questions about a $100,000 expedited‑processing fee negotiated into the development agreement so the project’s hearings could be advanced by about six weeks.

James Caulfield, a firefighter and consultant with Fire Risk Alliance, described the emergency‑response approach the developer plans to follow: “We are going to train [the fire department] on what the response looks like... application of water is about managing exposures” and the developer will work with San Bernardino County Fire to develop a site‑specific emergency plan required before operations.

Councilmembers pressed the developer and staff on how the negotiated fees were set and whether the city has a written policy allowing projects to pay to accelerate review. “If we do not have a policy that expedites projects, how did we come up with a $100,000 for them to pay?” Councilwoman Evans asked. Staff and planning reported they used comparable agreements in other California jurisdictions and argued the negotiation secured greater community benefits than the city would otherwise receive.

City planning staff recommended, and the council approved, adding a condition that the LDP and CUP approvals be contingent on execution of the development agreement. On the roll call the motion passed 3–2: Evans and Updegrove voted no; Mesa, Mayor Pro Tem Ramos and Mayor Reyes voted yes.

What happens next: the council introduced the ordinance and advanced the project to subsequent readings and final action contingent on execution of the development agreement; the developer still must satisfy interconnection timelines with Southern California Edison and CAISO processes, obtain building permits and meet the agreement’s payment and decommissioning bond requirements.

Authorities and conditions noted at the hearing included the city’s reliance on CEQA guidance (cited in the staff presentation as Public Resources Code and CEQA guidelines section 15183) and a requirement that the developer post financial security for site decommissioning and remediation. The city attorney asked that approvals be explicitly tied to a fully executed development agreement so that entitlements and the DA are bound together.

If the project proceeds to construction it will also require the developer to submit the emergency response plan and incorporate San Bernardino County Fire Department conditions before any building permits are issued.