The Marshall County Commissioners were again asked to place a temporary moratorium that would ban the filing of commercial solar applications and ban the filing of applications for battery storage systems while the county considers ordinance amendments pertaining to those projects.
Ordinances are in place for solar installation in Marshall County, but opponents to large solar projects believe those ordinances need to be improved to include additional regulations.
Attorney Jason Kuchmay represents Concerned Citizens of Marshall County against Solar which involves several property owners in the county who want a pause on large solar projects until government leaders can review solar projects and the effects of projects.
“A moratorium, I would say, is not saying ‘no’ to solar, it’s just temporarily maintains the status quo while allowing time to get proper regulations in place so solar can be done right,” said Kuchmay. “It’s being responsible, it’s protecting the county, it’s protecting the residents in the county, and it’s protecting the rights of the non-participating property owners while allowing also for proper development.”
Kuchmay said the Concerned Citizens of Marshall County against Solar supporters want officials to look at property value loss, limiting the number of agriculture land for solar projects, residential setbacks, economic impacts, job impacts, farm business loss, loss of agricultural land, restriction of ownership of the projects, the inclusion of a specific fire safety plan, and an ordinance that would focus on battery storage systems.
Commission President Stan Klotz made a motion to impose a moratorium on the solar and battery storage projects through at least January 1, 2025. Commissioner Michael Burroughs did not second the motion and Commissioner Kevin Overmyer was not in attendance during Monday’s meeting. The motion died for the lack of a second.
Burroughs gave his explanation for his lack of a second.
“As I’ve stated in public opinion before in public meetings, there is a process to bring before us an ordinance, and that process is to go before the Planning Commission and the BZA and whatever they bring before us we will listen to and we will vote on it then,” stated Burroughs.
Kuchmay clarified that the Board of Zoning Appeals is not usually involved with ordinance decisions which County Attorney James Clevenger agreed.
Deb VanDeMark commented that she is concerned as there is a battery storage project in the county and an ordinance is not in place that puts regulations on those types of projects.
“I don’t know what else to do to get some action,” stated VanDeMark. “If you’re waiting on the Plan Commission, how do we know this isn’t just – this delay is going to cause some of these actions to happen. Some of these projects are going to start happening.”
Burroughs and Klotz made additional comments at the end of the commissioners meeting.
Burroughs commented, “I’ll just say on behalf of me personally I did not say I’m opposed to a moratorium. I said I’m waiting on the Plan Commission to bring before us a recommendation.
Klotz stated, “I will say that I sit on that committee. I believe a moratorium is reasonable –I think it’s more than reasonable because we have nothing for battery. Every chance I get I’ll make it known that I will push for a moratorium. It scares the you-know-what out of me when I think about what can go wrong with some of these things. Right now there are too many unknowns. We don’t know.”
The Marshall County Plan Commission will next meet Thursday, August 24 at 7:30 p.m. ET in the second floor meeting room (Room 203) of the Marshall County Building at 112 W. Jefferson Street in Plymouth.
