Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Project Cup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Douglas County OKs one-year extension and inspection funding for Kansas Sky Energy Center solar project
Summary
The Douglas County Commission approved a one-year extension for the conditional-use permit (CUP-23-0312) for the Kansas Sky Energy Center and a funding agreement to recover third-party inspection costs; both measures passed on 4–1 votes after public comment and staff explanation of outstanding conditions.
Get email alerts on the Solar Project Cup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Douglas County Board of Commissioners on March 11 approved a one-year extension of the conditional use permit for the Kansas Sky Energy Center solar project and separately approved a funding agreement to reimburse the county for third-party inspection costs.
Planning manager Becky Pepper told the commission that the CUP had been adopted May 22, 2024 and, under Douglas County Code, would expire May 22, 2026 if the approved use was not implemented. Pepper said a timely extension request was submitted Dec. 23, 2025 and that staff recommended setting a new expiration date of May 22, 2027. "If the improvements or uses are not implemented or a building permit is not obtained, we did receive a timely extension request that was submitted on December 23rd of 2025," Pepper said.
Legal counsel explained that a separate court order has limited the applicant’s ability to enter the property and make permanent changes, which has in practice delayed completion of conditions tied to the building permit. Counsel and staff also referenced county code section 12-307-2.10, which allows applicants to request a one-year extension if the request is submitted prior to the expiration date; staff said the code language does not contemplate additional consecutive extensions.
Applicants and their counsel described outstanding items that must be completed before the building permit and full implementation can proceed: a road use and maintenance agreement, a funding agreement, and submission of detailed engineering packages (civil, electrical and related work) that depend on geotechnical testing. Damon Ray, EverG project manager, said geotech field work was "finishing up" and laboratory analysis was pending; he said the engineering packages required for a building-permit submittal would follow those results.
Public commenters raised a range of concerns during the CUP discussion. One commenter tied ownership and corporate accountability concerns to the project’s developer chain; another nearby farmer warned the project could worsen drainage and flooding on her land and urged commissioners to deny further delay.
A commissioner moved to "approve a one-year extension of conditional use permit CUP-23-0312 pursuant to section 12-307-2.10 of the Douglas County zoning regulations establishing a new expiration date of May 22nd, 2027." The motion was seconded and carried on a reported 4–1 vote.
On a separate but related agenda item, staff introduced a funding agreement required by the CUP designed to provide a mechanism for the county to recoup third-party inspection costs (examples cited included bond review and vegetation or plan compliance inspections). Staff said the agreement is with Free State Solar LLC and indicated an approximate building-permit fee estimate of $270,000, subject to change based on final project valuation. "It establishes a mechanism for the county to recoup third-party costs associated with most of the conditions that were put onto the CUP," staff said.
A commissioner moved to approve the funding agreement associated with CUP-23-0000312 for the Kansas Sky Energy Center. That motion also passed on a reported 4–1 vote. Commissioners who opposed the two motions were not named in the roll-call statements on the record.
What happens next: staff and applicants said the remaining steps include finalizing the road use agreement, completing required testing and engineering packages, and then submitting the building-permit materials. Commissioners and members of the public raised questions about ownership transfers and potential ratepayer impacts tied to state-level utility cost policies; staff noted some financial details are confidential and that the county’s role is to ensure the CUP conditions are met before permit release.
The commission returned the item and moved on to subsequent agenda business.

