Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public pushes for dialogue as Nottoway schedules Dec. 5 solar ordinance hearing
Summary
Speakers at the Nottoway County Board meeting urged the board to allow more dialogue about a proposed solar ordinance, highlighting potential tax benefits and concerns about siting thresholds, environmental enforcement, and how smaller projects might be enabled. A public hearing is set for Dec. 5 at 7 p.m.
The Nottoway County Board of Supervisors announced a public hearing on a proposed solar ordinance for Dec. 5 at 7 p.m. in the General District Courtroom, and residents used the board’s public comment period to press for more information and conversation before formal action.
Vince Gibbs, who identified himself as representing a company called Ampliform, told the board he was "speaking on behalf of solar" and asked the board and residents "to allow us to dialogue." Gibbs said a project his firm has in mind could add "at least $30,000,000 worth of benefits, tax benefits" to local tax rolls and could help fund county priorities including the library, animal shelter and EMS improvements. He also emphasized that the panels his firm would use are not the older cadmium-telluride type he described as potentially toxic.
Multiple board members and residents raised technical and regulatory concerns in the subsequent exchange. Speakers debated the ordinance’s siting threshold — whether projects need to be above five megawatts to qualify for a siting agreement — and noted that local code and past practice affect how smaller projects can proceed. One attendee urged revisiting earlier consultant work and a draft that, he said, better matched neighboring counties’ ordinances and would protect the county while enabling small-scale projects.
Concerns about enforcement and environmental compliance also surfaced. A board member cited recent calls about alleged DEQ-site violations in adjacent counties where companies paid fines but did not complete corrective work; others noted that DEQ enforcement choices can mean fines alone in some cases. Board members said those enforcement questions and legal considerations will be part of the work leading up to the December hearing.
The board did not take final action on the ordinance at the meeting; it directed staff to advertise the hearing and prepare materials for public review. The hearing will include two items related to solar, and the county said it will publish details in the hearing notice.
