Montrose County commissioners continue review of renewable energy zoning after hours of public testimony

Montrose County commissioners on Thursday continued consideration of a proposed zoning text amendment that would add use standards for power generation facilities (including utility‑scale solar), natural medicine businesses and massage therapy establishments, setting a time‑certain continuation for 9:30 a.m. on June 4.

The move followed an extended public comment period in which farmers, developers, utility consultants and conservation advocates urged adoption of rules they said would protect landowner rights, preserve view‑sheds and unlock tax revenue. Talmadge, the county staff member presenting the draft, told the board the planning commission recommended approval and noted a moratorium on new applications that expires June 18.

Why it matters: The draft would formally classify and regulate small‑scale (proposed threshold: 5 megawatts) and utility‑scale renewable projects, set setbacks and screen criteria, and require permitting steps intended to balance agricultural uses, local views and county oversight. Supporters said adoption would allow landowners to earn revenue and bring new tax dollars to county services; opponents urged stronger protections for view‑sheds and clearer decommissioning guarantees.

Public testimony and key claims

Tony Hoag, speaking for the Citizens Climate Lobby in Montrose, said the draft "is a workable document that gives the county the oversight control they need" and cited a nearby DMEA project he described as an 80‑megawatt facility in Delta that "will be able to power 18,000 homes and return $13,000,000 to Delta County through its life." Jim Hennigan, an electric utility consultant, recommended flexibility in the timing of financial assurance for decommissioning, noting some Colorado counties require posting assurances partway through a project's life rather than at commercial operation.

Several speakers framed the issue as fiscal as well as land‑use policy. Steve Snyder told commissioners Montrose is at a "financial crossroads" and warned that walking away from the code could mean losing millions in tax revenue. Multiple speakers urged the board to favor a locally‑crafted, compromise code the planning commission had developed.

Concerns raised

Lana Kinsey, a planning commission member speaking as a resident, said she had "serious concerns about what solar energy could do to this county," emphasizing view‑shed impacts and the need for enforceable decommissioning and removal standards. Commissioners and members of the public also questioned whether the proposed 500‑foot substation setback from off‑site residential structures should be reduced to 250 feet to match common existing substations.

Staff options and board direction

Staff outlined four formal options: approve, approve with conditions, deny or continue. Commissioners asked staff to analyze alternative setback distances, clarify what qualifies as a "residential" structure (for setback measurement), evaluate financial‑assurance timing for decommissioning bonds or lines of credit, and confirm whether Colorado Parks and Wildlife consultation would add delay in industrial areas.

Formal action

Commissioner Hansen moved to continue the hearing to a time‑certain on June 4 at 9:30 a.m. to allow further analysis and targeted outreach (including a planned West End listening session). The motion was seconded and recorded as passed. The board closed public comment on the item and directed staff to return with options and clarifications. The portion of the amendment addressing massage therapy and natural medicine businesses was carried to the same date.

What happens next

The board set listening sessions for May 30 (West End) and June 3 (Montrose area) and will take up the hearing again June 4 at 9:30 a.m. The county moratorium referenced by staff expires on June 18. Pending that meeting, staff will provide refined setback options, language clarifying "residential" structures, and alternatives for financial assurance timing for decommissioning.

Quotes

"The draft regulations before you today are equitable and mostly fair to all parties," Tony Hoag said. "Our wish is that you pass the draft regulations as they have been proposed to you."

"This code isn't radical. It's not risky. It's the product of compromise," Steve Snyder said, urging the board not to abandon the locally developed code.

"From what I have read, learned, and witnessed with my own eyes, these large scale solar projects severely impede some of the values that are strong throughout the county," Lana Kinsey said, urging stronger decommissioning protections.

The hearing record: The board recessed briefly and reconvened to deliberate after public comment. With a motion to continue adopted, commissioners closed the public hearing for now and set the continuation date. The board adjourned at 11:02 a.m.