Residents ask questions about water, pipelines and ownership as Tallgrass solar comes up for vote

Multiple residents used the public‑comment period to press the commission on potential impacts from the Tallgrass solar project.

Mike Worth, who provided a street address for the record, asked whether leasing nearby land before approval could limit protest options and whether battery storage or later expansion would be allowed. He warned of existing topographical issues and multiple buried disposal and water lines near the project and said his rural water district has experienced roughly "a 30% water loss," raising concerns about additional construction impacts and liability allocation.

A landowner who identified herself as Amy Bedford said landowners retain rights to develop and argued the county should not block private leases. She pointed commissioners to the posted economic‑impact study and said negotiated pilot payments would provide county revenue. The developer and engineering team replied to concerns: they described geotechnical and vibration studies, stated the project’s nameplate capacity is limited by interconnection studies, and said the company will be bonded for decommissioning and restoration.

Neither side disputed that underground utilities exist; the developer said setbacks and studies indicate no expected impacts, but residents pressed for clarity on long‑term ownership and liability. Commissioners said permit conditions and separate agreements will govern what the county can require and noted private lease arrangements remain between owners and the company.