Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Line Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Annexation for County Line Solar fails to get required supermajority; board votes to reconsider
Summary
A motion to annex the County Line Solar site and waive a second reading failed because the ordinance needed a two-thirds affirmative vote; the board later voted to reconsider and continued the matter to Feb. 25. Developers urged approval to meet financing and grant deadlines; residents and a landowner letter raised concerns about recapture and visual impacts.
A motion to approve an annexation agreement and waive a second reading for RPIL12 LLC's County Line Solar project failed at the Village of Shorewood board meeting on Feb. 11 after the measure did not receive the two-thirds affirmative vote required for annexations.
Natalie Acker, community development staff, presented the project as a rezoning to I-2 with a conditional use permit for a commercial solar facility and several variances, describing arrays roughly 11.7 feet apart and a maximum array height of about 20 feet. Attorney Ben Jacoby, representing the project, said the annexation agreement includes recapture provisions that would require payments if utilities are extended later and emphasized the project's tax and access benefits. "The annexation agreement requires recapture payments in the event that utilities are extended and we take advantage of them," Jacoby said, adding the project received a unanimous Planning & Zoning recommendation.
An email read into the record from Scott Samuelson, managing partner of S and E Series 6, opposed the project and the variances, calling solar "an eyesore" and alleging rumors that the project would receive utility "recapture breaks" that would advantage some adjacent properties. Jacoby responded to that concern in the meeting, saying those claims were incorrect and that the recapture terms are standard and apply when future development requires utility extensions.
Trustees questioned the practical impacts and tradeoffs of annexing the parcel rather than leaving it in unincorporated Kendall County, noting the site sits adjacent to property the village hopes to bring into its corporate limits. Developer Jeremy Price said the 5-megawatt project would serve about 1,000 homes at maximum capacity and operate as a community solar opt-in program through ComEd credits.
When the board took roll call on the motion (moved by Trustee Brockman, seconded by Trustee Amos), the vote did not reach the 0.667 threshold of the corporate authorities. Legal counsel explained that annexation requires five affirmative votes of the seven-member corporate authorities; at the time of the vote there were insufficient affirmative votes, so the motion failed. The board then considered and passed a motion to reconsider the matter; by procedural agreement the annexation item will be brought back as agenda item 1 on Feb. 25 for further consideration.
The board did not adopt the annexation ordinance at the Feb. 11 meeting; the item remains open for reconsideration and further public input on Feb. 25.
