Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax And Revenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission discusses taxation, assessment and revenue‑sharing options for battery projects
Summary
County staff and the commissioner of revenue said BESS projects are likely to raise land assessments and may be treated similarly to solar for machinery and tools tax; commissioners discussed the authority to adopt a revenue‑sharing ordinance but noted local context (e.g., existing nuclear plant) affects revenue potential.
The planning commission discussed how battery energy storage systems could affect county tax assessment and whether the county should pursue a revenue‑sharing ordinance. The commissioner of revenue explained that industrial use will increase assessments and that BESS will be evaluated similarly to solar projects, although the assessment per acre and machinery/equipment treatment must be determined for each project.
Commissioners asked whether BESS receive the same certified pollution control equipment tax treatment as solar; applicant representatives said BESS under 150 megawatts qualify for the same type of exemption and that interconnection application date can determine phased exemptions (an '80/70/60' stepdown). The county attorney confirmed the board has authority under Virginia code to adopt a revenue‑sharing ordinance, but noted the relative benefit for Surry County may differ because of the presence of the local nuclear plant and other fiscal factors. Commissioners suggested including revenue‑sharing and technical monitoring language in future drafts and CUP conditions.
