Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tallgrass Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews Tallgrass solar CUP and 10‑year contribution agreement; no vote held
Summary
County administrator presented the Tallgrass solar conditional use permit and a contribution agreement that would start when the project begins delivering power; staff cited a first‑year payment of $1,100,000 and identified outstanding permitting and decommissioning items. The commission did not vote on the documents and will post materials for public review.
County staff summarized draft agreements for the Tallgrass solar project southwest of Hays and asked the commission to begin a public discussion of the conditional use permit (CUP) and a contribution agreement offered by developer IBV Energy.
Darren Myers, the county administrator, told commissioners the contribution agreement would begin once the project is producing power and that “that 1st year agreement is 1,100,000.” Myers said the county has hired legal and technical consultants (a legal consultant from Folston in Wichita and an engineer from AcreStrong) and that the developer is reimbursing the county for consultant fees into an escrow account. He said the agreements address many concerns raised during planning and zoning and that some items — including a decommissioning plan, an emergency response plan, road and entrance permits, and certain federal/state permits — still must be completed before later approvals.
IBV Energy’s engineer, Pat Ripa, described the stormwater work planned for the site: the company will prepare a detailed stormwater analysis including calculations up to a 100‑year storm to ensure no increase in runoff to existing areas and to detain any increased flows on site.
Myers emphasized that the documents are being posted for public review and that the county is not voting on the CUP or contribution agreement at the meeting: “we're not voting today, so this is the opportunity for the public to see it,” he said. Commissioners said they have been working with the developer and consultants for months and that more detailed agreements (road‑use, decommissioning, emergency response) will return for later consideration.
The commission did not take a final vote at the meeting; staff asked members of the public with questions to submit them to county staff for responses prior to future action.
