Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewables topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solar measurement and exemptions draw competing proposals; industry warns of lost jobs and capacity
Summary
WASIA and solar-industry witnesses urged the SBCC to adopt a dual compliance pathway (watts/sq ft or annual kWh/sq ft) and narrow roof-area exemptions to maintain on-site solar deployment; opponents warned that other proposed changes (24GP187) would reduce solar deployment on affordable housing and cost small businesses.
John Lang, president of the Washington Solar Energy Industries Association, asked the council to adopt WASIA amendments to C411 that would narrow exemptions for low‑productivity roof areas and add a dual compliance pathway (0.75 W/sq ft or 0.875 kWh/sq ft annually). Lang said the change "better reflects the proven effectiveness of these roof types for on-site solar energy production" and would let sunnier regions comply with less installed capacity while producing equivalent annual energy.
Faybra (Pedro) Beckert (executive director, Washington Solar Energy Industries Association) opposed proposal 24GP187 as a package that weakens on-site renewable requirements, warning of cumulative economic harm to small solar businesses. Beckert cited member surveys estimating "approximately $11,800,000 in lost annual revenue, 21 family wage jobs, nearly 5 megawatts of lost installed solar capacity, and about 50 fewer projects per year" if the measure were adopted as proposed.
Speakers across the hearing urged the council to preserve solar requirements for affordable housing and to refine measurement and exemption language to align with the legislative directives in RCW. The council will accept written comments and integrate public input into the rulemaking record ahead of its Sept. 25, 2026 decision.
