Commissioners OK hazards mitigation plan; solar projects addressed in recent correspondence
Pictured (l-r) are Highland County commissioners David Daniels, Terry Britton and Brad Roades. (HCP Photo/Caitlin Forsha)
Highland County commissioners David Daniels, Terry Britton and Brad Roades made several approvals, including adopting the county’s hazards mitigation plan and authorizing items related to ongoing construction projects, during a brief meeting Wednesday, May 15.
Via resolution, commissioners adopted the 2024-28 Highland County Countywide All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, pursuant to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000.
As previously reported, Highland County Emergency Management Agency Director David Bushelman and Rob Guentter of RFG Associates discussed county’s revised five-year hazard mitigation plan during a meeting Nov. 1.
The updated plan includes “10 goals and 31 action items which are intended to address and mitigate the loss of property and life because of natural hazards in Highland County,” according to Bushelman.
Included in the plan are a list of priorities for the county, as Guentter said the top five, in order of importance, were adding “emergency backup generators at very specific locations that are identified in the plan; updating some early warning sirens in two key areas; additional public outreach and information so residents can be aware of what to do when a different event might occur; two mobile generators, specifically to use to pump gasoline, if there's power outages; and continuing to expand the MARCS radio tower system.”
According to the handout, the goal is to “purchase and install emergency backup generators for high critical need locations,” including in Greenfield, Leesburg and Hillsboro. The mobile generators are aimed at the north (Fairfield Township) and south (Whiteoak Township) ends of the county. Sirens need to be added in the Lynchburg and Rocky Fork Lake areas, the plan says.
The plan also includes information on “nine different hazards that were of concern to the county,” Guentter said, including: summer storms (thunderstorms, wind, lightning, hail); winter storms (ice and snow); flooding; landslides/road slips; tornadoes; drought/wildfire; extreme heat; earthquake; and dam failure.
For more information, see the story at: https://highlandcountypress.com/commissioners-review-updated-county-haz….
In other discussion:
• Commissioners voted 3-0 to approve a contract with Crane Pumps & Systems for the procurement of grinder pump cores, controls and appurtenances for the Rocky Fork Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant.
“We've got a contract here where we're going to purchase 80 crane pumps for $116,800 and 15 control boxes at $450 [each], for a total of $123,550,” Daniels said. “We're going to buy those this year, and we had bid several more that were to be delivered in phases. If funding allows, we may come back yet this year and buy another batch to offset the CPI [Consumer Price Index] inflation if it goes into the next year.”
On May 1, commissioners agreed to issue a notice of award to Crane Pumps & Systems, who submitted a bid in the amount of $314,500 for grinder pump procurement.
• Commissioners agreed to move forward with a standard commercial security agreement with Greystone Systems, Inc. and the Highland County Airport Authority, with a total cost of $6,775 and the county being asked to contribute half, or $3,387.50. As discussed May 8, the proposal was for updated security cameras.
• Two change orders for the OSU Extension Building were authorized. One was a $10,265 credit to the county for electric work performed by CT Electric, and the other was “a change order for a cantilever gate” from Tag Williams, Inc.
• Discussed, but not acted on, were communications from the Ohio Division of Liquor Control regarding liquor license renewals for the 1st Stops in Allensburg and Rainsboro.
“We always have an opportunity for public comment,” Daniels said. “I think what we'll do is we'll invite any comments to come back to us, and we’ll ask that those be back in here within a period of two weeks.”
• After their regular session, commissioners held an executive session regarding employee compensation at 10:30 a.m. and an executive session to consider employment at 11 a.m. No action was taken, according to commission clerk Ashleigh Willey.
Also approved, each by a 3-0 vote, were:
• A proposal and service agreement with Johnson Controls for fire maintenance at the Highland County Justice Center in the amount of $1,359.83.
• A resolution to adopt a revised travel plan, which Britton said was a “policy update for travel reimbursements.”
• A resolution for a budget modification within the 1000 County General fund in the amount of $3,150.
• A resolution for a modification from County Transfer Out to County Advances Out for $19,184.22. Also requested is an advance to Upgrade RFL and an additional appropriation to fund 4240 in the amount of $19,184.22.
• A letter of support for a grant application being prepared by the City of Hillsboro for Beech Street improvements.
Although not discussed in open session, solar-related topics have been a common theme in recent correspondence received by the commissioners’ office, as listed on the weekly agenda.
On Wednesday, May 15, it was noted that commissioners have been contacted by the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation for an invitation to attend a solar farm tour and panel discussion with participants in the AgriPOWER Institute this summer.
However, most of the recent emails and letters received by the commission have been in reference to Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTs) or other financial concerns in relation to solar projects.
As previously reported, commissioners voted to issue a PILOT invoice for the New Market Solar project March 22, 2023. The first half-year payment of $450,000 was due April 20, 2023, according to the invoice.
The county was later informed that they would not be able to collect payment until “a certificate of verification” was issued by the state for the project.
In March, commissioners received a letter from Lynchburg-Clay superintendent Jack Fisher regarding his concerns about “a negative impact on the district’s funding,” which he perceives as being due to solar projects within the school district. He wrote that the Lynchburg-Clay district “will only realize an increase of slightly over $17,000” in state funding for fiscal years 2024-25, “while the surrounding districts’ state funding increases range between $400,000 to $1,000,000.
“In the case of the Lynchburg-Clay Local School District, the State Department of Taxation reported that 2,900 residents of the school district filed income taxes in 2022 showing the gross income for the school district increased by $40,000,000 between 2021 and 2022,” Fisher wrote. “The State Department stated this, along with a small reduction in enrollment, would be the reason for the negative impact of funding for the district during 2024 and 2025. In conversations with various sources both local and at the state level, the cause for this funding shortage seems to indicate that residents who rented or sold land for the large solar projects within the Lynchburg-Clay School District more than likely reported payments on their land as income during 2022.”
According to board minutes for the Lynchburg-Clay district, later in March, the Lynchburg-Clay Board of Education heard public comments asking the board to reach out to commissioners to discourage future solar projects, due to similar financial concerns.
In a letter to commissioners dated April 23, Innergex community and government relations representative Janet Grothe responded to Lynchburg-Clay’s concerns, saying that “Innergex has made no large land purchases in Highland County that would affect the District’s funding formulas.”
Innergex is the developer for both the Hillcrest Solar farm in Brown County as well as the 200 MW Palomino Solar project in Highland County.
She acknowledged that “one-time purchases of land could temporarily create” a change in school funding during one cycle, but “incomes will return to normal with the next funding cycle.
“It is thus possible that individual landowners received enough additional income from solar farm land transactions in a given year to impact the school funding formula results that year,” Grothe wrote. “However, it is certainly the case that solar projects bring massive benefits for local school funding through the Ohio statutory Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) payments for every year that they are in operation.”
Grothe added that the “PILOT revenues will dwarf any year-to-year changes due to land transactions.”
According to Grothe, Innergex is “contributing $1.8 million per year for the next 30 years” to Brown County schools through the PILOT for the Hillcrest project and will have a “similar payment structure” in Highland County once Palomino is built.
“When combined with other solar projects in LCLSD, resulting PILOT revenue for LCLSD will be advantageous,” Grothe wrote. “And unlike any income changes, this money will have no impact on the school funding formula.”
Grothe wrote that Innergex has “not yet begun construction” on the Palomino project and is still awaiting their “grid interconnection notice,” at which point they will have more information on the PILOTs for that project. She also said that they have “had multiple conversations with” Lynchburg-Clay administration and would continue to do so.
Commissioners also apparently reached out to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio April 4 for an update on local solar projects, with Ohio Power Siting Board community liaison Juliana Graham-Price responding in a May 3 email.
Graham-Price referred commissioners to Steven Fearnow at the Ohio Department of Development for updates on PILOT payments for local projects, and she said that the OPSB would speak to him as well.
“While the OPSB’s role concerning PILOT, or any tax obligations, is remote, we certainly appreciate the frustration that Highland County (and other counties with recently operational solar projects) is expressing as to when to begin budgeting for these payments,” Graham-Price wrote. “We expect to work cooperatively with the affected counties and their respective solar projects to clarify expectations and to ensure that all projects are operating with the OPSB’s certification and PILOT commitments.”
Graham-Price advised that the OPSB has representatives “visiting each solar facility in the state on at least a monthly basis” and summarized the current status of each of Highland County’s five projects.
As noted by Grothe, the Palomino project has been approved, but construction on the facility — which is planned for Union and Dodson townships — has not begun. Graham-Price said that they “have their state permit, a contractor that is working on the project design and an executed purchase order for solar panels” but are still awaiting their Large Generator Interconnection Agreement.
According to Graham-Price, construction is “still ongoing” on the Highland Solar project in Clay and Whiteoak townships. Over the first few months of 2024, the OPSB has “been working with Highland Solar to achieve compliance with the certificate’s conditions and remediate outstanding compliance issues,” she said.
The Willowbrook project in Highland and Brown counties is also under construction, and the feedback on the project — including vegetation, construction, site conditions and road impact — was all positive in Graham-Price’s report.
A third facility under construction is the Dodson Creek project in Hamer and Dodson townships. According to Graham-Price “racking, fencing and solar module installation are scheduled to be installed beginning in the spring.”
The aforementioned New Market Solar project in Clay and Whiteoak townships is partially operational (24 of the 100 MWs). According to Graham-Price, they are still awaiting a decision on an administrative hearing held in November regarding alleged noncompliance with setbacks.
Publisher's note: A free press is critical to having well-informed voters and citizens. While some news organizations opt for paid websites or costly paywalls, The Highland County Press has maintained a free newspaper and website for the last 25 years for our community. If you would like to contribute to this service, it would be greatly appreciated. Donations may be made to: The Highland County Press, P.O. Box 849, Hillsboro, Ohio 45133. Please include "for website" on the memo line.
Comment
Solar
The OPSB had no one inspecting facilities when these projects were being built. The commissioners take no responsibility for poor decisions.
BEFORE THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD
In the Matter of the Application of Hecate
Energy Highland 4 LLC for a Certificate of
Environmental Compatibility and Public Need.
)
)
)
Case No. 20-1288-EL-BGN
Reply Brief of New Market Solar ProjectCo 1, LLC
and New Market Solar ProjectCo 2, LLC
New Market Solar ProjectCo 1, LLC and New Market Solar Project Co 2, LLC’s
(collectively, “NMS”) presented their position in this proceeding in the Initial Brief submitted on
December 19, 2023. NMS files this Reply Brief to reiterate that if the Board finds that the New
Market Solar Project (the “Project”) is noncompliant with the Project’s certificate, then any
remedy the Board fashions should minimize economic waste to protect the public interest. As
explained in the Initial Brief, Ohio appellate courts routinely apply the economic waste doctrine
in situations where the cost of remedying a construction defect outweighs the utility of the
remedy. The doctrine is applicable here and should be adopted by the Board.
Following the doctrine, the Board should weigh the high cost of redesigning the Project
against the fact that strict compliance would negligibly enhance the public interest. The Board
must acknowledge the advanced stage of Project construction (the Project is essentially complete
and is undergoing final testing) and that strict compliance with the 100-foot setback would lead
to economic waste of $7 to $10 million (NMS Ex. 18 at 20, 50; Tr. at 250:9-17). Strict
compliance would also only relocate panels just a small distance from current locations (ranging
from 3 feet to 32 feet), while providing little to no benefit to the local community (NMS Ex. 18
at 19-20; Tr. at 249: 12-22). In short, strict compliance would equal $7 to $10 million of economic waste and offer the least amount of benefit to the public as compared to a remedy that
would improve visual impacts while avoiding economic waste.
The remedy which eliminates the possibility of any economic waste would be to allow
the panels to remain as is with additional screening and fencing changes (NMS Ex. 18 at 20).
The Board has flexibility under Ohio Adm.Code 4906-7-02(G) to allow the panels to remain as
designed and as presently located. This can be accomplished by the Board directing NMS to
update its landscaping plan, for Staff review and approval, to provide for additional screening
and fencing. This additional screening would further mitigate any visual impacts of panels being
left in place, as constructed. Notably, the change to agricultural fencing has already been
accomplished along public roads (NMS Ex. 16; Tr. at 171:23-25; 236:3-19). If the Board utilizes
this remedy, all these changes (current panel locations and screening and fencing changes) would
be reflected on as-built drawings submitted to Board Staff.
If the Board finds it necessary to direct the removal of some panels, the Board should
consider the remedy proposed by Mr. Yuri Otarov, which would minimize economic waste and
serve the public interest. This remedy would consist of relocating panels near primary roads;
enhanced landscaping in areas where panels are proposed to remain; and a change to agricultural
fencing (already implemented) (NMS Ex. 18 at 19-22; Tr. at 250:17 – 251:1).
NMS also clarifies for Staff that it does not dispute that the Project is subject to a 100-
foot setback from the middle of public roads and non-participating boundaries given the
language in the Application and Figure 5 to the Application (App. at 32; NMS Ex. 11), a
December 2020 response to a Staff data request (NMS Ex. 12), and Staff’s understanding of the
setback as presented to the Board in the January 4, 2021 Staff Report of Investigation (NMS Ex.
22 at 6). However, as NMS explained thoroughly in it is Initial Brief, NMS defers to the Board to determine if Condition 8 of the Joint Stipulation (allowing changes post-certificate and after
the submission of final engineering drawings) and Ohio Adm.Code 4906-3-13(D) (allowing
changes post-certificate) provided a mechanism for the Project layout changes that have resulted
in some panels being within 100 feet of non-participating property boundaries and within 100
feet of the middle of public roads.
Finally, now that briefing is complete, NMS urges the Board to promptly issue a decision
on this matter as Project construction is almost complete and the Project is partially operational
(NMS Ex. 14). Fourteen months have elapsed since NMS’s self-report to Board Staff during
September 2022 and NMS seeks to resolve this compliance proceeding as soon as possible.
NMS appreciates the Board’s consideration of NMS’ position in this proceeding and
would like the opportunity to improve the Project’s visual appearance rather than moving panels
a short distance within the Project’s existing fenceline. As always, NMS is available to provide
any additional information or respond to any questions to assist the Board in arriving at its
decision.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Michael J. Settineri
Michael J. Settineri (0073369)
(Counsel of Record)
Rick W. Grady (0090338)
Anna Sanyal (0089269)
Christopher A. LaRocco (0093572)
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
52 East Gay Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
(614) 464-5462
mjsettineri@vorys.com
rwgrady@vorys.com
aasanyal@vorys.com
calarocco@vorys.com
Solar
It appears that Highland County is headed down the same path of hard lessons as Brown County as far as solar farms are concerned.
OPSB Failure?
No economic waste impact to public. The benefit is not to the public. Non compliance is on the developer. Not the taxpayers. OPSB failed to monitor the project. So the economic waste accrues to the developer for failure to follow the agreements they signed off on. Driving South Hollowtown Road on May 16, 2024 there are many missing panels. I can only hope the OPSB ignores the economic waste doctrine. Keep delaying the PILOT payments. Until production is 100%. The County commissioners own the mistakes. The "learning curve" excuse was hilarious. Approve solar without adequate study and ignore the tough questions raised by myself and others. And the power is not for Highland County residents. You GOP voters were duped.
Solar radiation is sun light
Solar radiation management (SRM) is a type of climate engineering that aims to reduce the amount
of solar radiation that reaches the Earth’s surface, thereby cooling the planet.
Look up! This has been happening for decades worldwide but maximized (24/7) over the US
since 2020. Therefore, solar projects are scams.
School funding
Waiting to hear what is broken with school funding. Isn't this how the system is supposed to operate? If 10k an acre for solar is being blamed who will we blame when a large estate is factored in? Solar is an easy target for those who can't see past the ,$$$$.
Hazard Alerts
Over the years, I have discussed with a couple of officials in Highland County the apparent lack of planning to alert the county’s Amish and Mennonite communities of imminent possible hazards (tornadoes, escaped prisoners, etc.). These citizens will not become aware of such hazards as matters now stand. They depend on a loose system of neighbors watching out for neighbors, a system not assured to function when needed. Perhaps something formal could be considered.