Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local union urges county to require labor agreement on commercial solar projects; open house for proposed Grandview site announced
Summary
A representative of IBEW Local 725 urged Edgar County to require a Tri-Trade labor agreement on commercial and industrial solar projects to ensure local hiring; county staff announced an open house for a proposed solar site northeast of Grandview required by ordinance.
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jerry Windfall, representing IBEW Local 725, told the Edgar County Board that the county should require a Tri-Trade (union labor) agreement on commercial and industrial solar projects to protect local workers and keep economic benefits in the community.
"When a project is built under the Tri-Trade agreement, workforce is primarily local," Windfall said. He warned that, without such a requirement, developers often bring transient work crews from out of state; he gave an example of a project where roughly 90% of the workforce came from Texas and said wages largely left the region.
Windfall urged the board to act before permits are issued and contracts finalized because "decisions made in the early stages of these projects shape everything that follows." He recommended that the board require the use of the Tri-Trade agreement on commercial and industrial solar projects or, at minimum, make it a condition for the next project if changing the ordinance by then is not possible.
Separately, county staff announced an open house for landowners and residents near a proposed commercial solar system northeast of Grandview (just south of Route 16). The open house will be held at the old Evelyn Gym from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. on the scheduled date and is intended to satisfy ordinance notification and meeting requirements; staff reminded the public that the ordinance requires tracked notice (registered mail or other tracked mechanism) to affected landowners and an open meeting as part of the permitting process.
Board members did not vote on an ordinance change at the meeting. The board heard concerns about transparency and local benefit and noted that state policy increasingly drives renewable-energy expansion, which can limit counties’ authority to block projects but not their ability to set local expectations about workforce and standards.

