Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Energy Siting topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents express safety and traffic concerns over battery storage and solar projects at commissioners meeting

Dubois County Commissioners · February 2, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public commenters urged caution on a proposed Battery Energy Storage System, raised traffic and site concerns about an AES Solar Park and asked how inspections would be handled under HB 1173; commissioners recorded the comments but took no immediate regulatory actions.

During public comment on Feb. 2, 2026, several residents raised safety, siting and inspection questions about battery energy storage and local solar projects.

Rita Bartelt said she supports the current moratorium and urged elected officials to avoid approving a Battery Energy Storage System she described as unsafe, saying, "She does not want the Battery Energy Storage System and questions its safety. She is scared of the effects." John Kaltenbacher, speaking for the Town of Holland, said the town has been unable to find a site for a dumpster location and invited the Highway Department to discuss the issue at a Holland Town Hall meeting. Kaltenbacher also said he has asked questions about the AES Solar Park and has not received responses and expressed concern about traffic impacts on roads serving a battery storage facility.

Randy Bartelt asked how solar batteries would be inspected and how to obtain the '855 fire code,' noting Representative Mark Messmer sponsored HB 1173, and framed his remarks as driven by concerns for schoolchildren's safety. Laura Marcus offered unrelated remarks about the Chinese Communist Party and cultural events; those comments did not pertain to local energy siting.

The commissioners recorded the public comments during the meeting record; the minutes show no immediate regulatory action or responses from project owners listed in the public record. The board did later approve opioid-fund allocations and other agenda items during the same session.

Next steps: the minutes do not record county staff responses, follow-up actions or responses by the developers mentioned; residents or town officials seeking follow-up were advised to coordinate with county staff and the Highway Department.