A

The conversation between Moore County and Silicon Ranch continues following another Planning Commission meeting which ended with a new permit fee proposal to be sent to the Moore County Metro Council.

Silicon Ranch’s proposed 1,400 acre solar panel farm has been a topic of discussion for the Metro Council and the Planning Commission since 2021.

After an ordinance for the development of Standards for Ground Mounted Solar Energy Systems (GSES) in November of 2021, discussions for the development of the solar farm have continued.

The county fee schedule was put in place to be effective as of June 2023, and discussion of the solar farm resurfaced in a public meeting held at Moore County High School in September 2023.

The permit fee for the proposed solar farm would be defined by each panel structure included on the 2,000 acre farm. Structure size was defined by the commission as a panel area of 2,400 square feet or less, and the charge per structure was $1,500 for the structure itself, and $2,500 for the environmental impact of each structure.

The commission discussed the permit fee with Silicon Ranch representatives in their July meeting, which clarified the solar farm’s view on the current permit fee.

 “Our experience in other places in the state is that the fee has to have a reasonable relationship to the cost of reviewing the permit, and it doesn’t include the cost to the roads,” Silicon Ranch Attorney Madison Hayes explained.

The meeting ended with the commission planning to have a work/study session to further discuss the permit fee and what might be done to change the current fee.

Chairman Dexter Golden brought the issue of the permit fee before the commission again in their August meeting, following their work session.

Commissioner Scott Truvall asked County Attorney William Rieder if he had any comment regarding changes to the permit fee. Rieder said that in his research, he “found no authority to tie roads or bonds to tie in as a permit fee aspect,” a question that had previously been asked by the commission, as their main concern about the construction of the solar farm was potential damage to county roads.

Rieder added that the fee cost had to be “reasonably related.” He said he understood the confusion because the county has no former precedent regarding solar farms. He said that the permit fee could still be “substantial,” but would have to be adjusted from the current fee listed on the county fee schedule.

Rieder also touched on the state statute required decommissioning plan that the solar farm had to submit, saying that liability could be incurred if the solar farm did not follow through on their proposed plan.

The idea that the Council could still create legislation regarding potential problems the county may incur due to the solar farm was explained by Rieder as well. Commissioner Jim Crawford asked if the county had gotten any figures from surrounding municipalities or counties, but Rieder said because of the specific circumstances of Silicon Ranch, there wasn’t really a comparative example. Golden added that due to the size of the solar farm and the lack of further information provided, it would be hard to match the solar farm to solar farms in surrounding areas.

Commissioner Jeff Ross asked the solar farm representatives if they were federally funded, and was told they were not. Crawford said he felt since they still didn’t have much information to go on, that any new proposal would be “just a shot in the dark.” Commissioner Jimmy Hammond expressed a similar opinion, saying that a proposal might have a hard time getting through the Council.

Rieder suggested adding the phrase “not to exceed” a certain amount of dollars on the county fee schedule. There was then some discussion about taking county labor into consideration. Golden suggested pushing a number back to the Council to “keep the conversation going.” Truvall suggested cutting the current fee (which totals up to $25 million) in half, but it was agreed that was still too high a fee.

After further discussion, the number $350 per acre was put forward as a suggestion for the Council. Hayes said “That’s still half a million dollars,” and added that it wasn’t quite comparable to county labor fees. Golden answered that it was still “something to keep the conversation going.”

Hammond made a motion to send the $350 per acre suggestion to the Council, and Crawford seconded. The motion passed unanimously.