LOCAL

Eaton County has 281,000 acres of farmland for solar companies, but voters may challenge rules

Rachel Greco
Lansing State Journal

BENTON TWP. - Residents looking for proof that large-scale solar energy operations have their sights set on Eaton County will find it at Kelley Coburn-Harris' family farm.

The fourth-generation farming family owns 350 acres off Doane Highway just outside Grand Ledge. In the last year and a half they've received offers from seven solar companies to buy or lease their property.

On Wednesday afternoon Coburn-Harris gestured to a collection of letters from solar companies with operations around the country covering her mother's dining room table. Several were delivered by mail, others by hand, and some even contain purchase agreements ready to be signed.

"Some want 350 acres, some want 200," Coburn-Harris said. "This isn't just about one development. There's potential for all of rural Eaton County to be taken over by solar."

In March, after two years of research and debate, Eaton County's Board of Commissioners passed an amendment to the county's land development code. It outlines where large-scale solar companies that generate and sell energy can locate and what restrictions they'll have to follow.

Kelley Coburn-Harris at her family's farm off Doane Highway with her grandson Mickey Coburn, 17 months. They have been farming in Eaton County for four generations, and oppose allowing large solar operations to locate on farmland.

It allows for solar operations on about 900 acres of industrial land and more than 281,000 acres land zoned as limited agricultural, which accounts for all but about 10,000 acres of land under the county's jurisdiction. Cities, villages, and the charter townships of Delta, Oneida and Windsor are not under county jurisdiction. The amendment also sets minimum setbacks and requirements for a development's approval.

Supporters say the language gives the county tools it needs to regulate solar operations. Those opposed say it doesn't offer enough safeguards, and opens the door to allow solar companies to cover the county's farmland with solar panels.

Now there's an organized effort to put the issue on the ballot, and let voters decide whether the amendment should stand. 

Weighing in on solar in rural Eaton County

Gary Walters, 81, still leases his land off Doane Highway to farmers. He's retired now but once farmed corn and soybeans on the more than 100 acres he owns in Benton Township.

Walters aims to keep 30 acres and continue living there, but he's under contract to sell the rest, 126 acres, to Geronimo Energy, a Minnesota-based solar and wind energy company with designs on constructing a 550-acre solar array in rural Eaton County.

Kelley Coburn-Harris at her family's farm off Doane Highway, says in the last year and a half her mother has received letters from seven solar companies interested in leasing or buying their property for solar developments. Coburn-Harris is helping to circulate a petition that could put Eaton County's new solar ordinance amendment on a ballot for voters to weigh in on.

The $96 million project, entitled "Sandstone Creek Solar Project," would generate 65 megawatts of energy, according to project information on the company's website.

Solar is a reasonable use for his land, Walters said, and the company will pay him "considerably more" than what it's worth as farmland.

Walters said some of his neighbors are under contract to sell their land to the same company, but he knows others are vehemently opposed to seeing solar panels surround them.

"I hope down the road, if this all goes through, people will be happier with it than they think they will be, because I don't want to offend my neighbors," he said. 

Kathryn Conrad, 76, said her mother, Agnes Staron, would have been "elated" to learn her children planned to sell 88 acres of her family's land off Oneida Road in Benton Township to a solar development.

Staron died in 2017 but she and her husband John farmed their property for 76 years, Conrad said.

The couple's children reached out to officials at Geronimo Energy about the project last year. Conrad will keep just over eight acres to live on. Her home will be bordered, on either side, by solar panels when Sandstone Creek is finished. 

"She believed in protecting the environment," Conrad said of her mother. "We feel that the air pollution from fossil fuel is so damaging. What good is prime farmland if you can't breathe the air above it?"

Coburn-Harris said solar companies have offered her family anywhere from $800 to $1,000 an acre to lease her family's land. She understands why residents are agreeing, but said many of the people who live in areas impacted have no idea solar companies could spring up around them in the near future.

She isn't opposed to solar energy, but Coburn-Harris said the community should weigh in on how it develops close to home. She's gone door to door throughout the county, and said most of the people she's talked with didn't know solar operations are interested in farmland, she said.

"It's about allowing the people who live here to have a voice," she said. "Too many of these rural citizens affected by this don't know that it's happening."

Where does solar belong?

April Stopczynski lives in Chester Township and is a founding member of the Eaton County Coalition for Solar Regulation. The citizen group is circulating a petition to bring the new county amendment on solar before voters. 

More than two dozen volunteers have been going door-to-door in rural parts of the county since late March. They have until April 22 to gather 2,152 signatures, according to Eaton County Clerk Diana Bosworth.

"No one supporting this can answer what the direct benefit of this is to Eaton County," Stopczynski said. "We really feel like the commissioners have largely dismissed us."

Board of Commissioners Chairman Terrance Augustine, D-Grand Ledge, said they did listen. Citizen input and push back made the amendment that was passed stronger, he said.

Before the 26-page amendment passed by a vote of 12 to 2, Augustine said the county received a legal opinion. The conclusion was that Eaton County's existing code was vague, but allowed for solar on agricultural land, without offering very many regulations for their approval or operation, Augustine said.

The new regulations require site plan approval, and that companies develop a plan for decommissioning solar operations and preparing them for farming again if an operation closes.

In addition to solar, county code allows for 25 "conditional uses" on farmland, Augustine said, including airports and landfills.

"It feels to me like solar is a passive use for agricultural land," he said.

Eaton County Commissioner Brian Droscha, R-Charlotte, voted against the amendment. He said the county had no "specific language" dealing with large-scale solar developments prior to the amendment's passage, and he doesn't believe what was there would have allowed for those developments to locate on farmland.

Solar belong in industrial areas, Droscha said.

"If you want the best of both worlds you would not remove active farmland and put solar on top of it," he said.

There are other concerns that come with large fields filled with solar panels, Droscha said, citing the possibility of stray voltage and fires at those facilities. He said the tax benefits have never been clear to him either.

Residents attended several commission meetings voicing concerns, Droscha said, and the majority of the commission didn't listen.

County Commissioner Jane Whitacre, D-Delta Twp., said she understood the "passion" of the people who advocated for keeping solar off farmland, but she still felt allowing it was appropriate.

"This sets rules for the future," she said. 

County Commissioner Jim Mott, R-Olivet, gave the amendment his support, even though he admits he doesn't fully support large-scale solar operations in rural areas.

"I think it takes up too much resources for what it produces," he said. 

But Mott said the county needs to have language in place to govern solar projects, and the amendment provides that.

"This places restrictions there that weren’t in place before," Mott said. 

What's next

Eaton County Clerk Diana Bosworth said if petitions being circulated by the Eaton County Coalition for Solar Regulation are submitted on time and all the signatures are certified, the amendment could end up on a ballot by August.

The timeline for Sandstone Creek's development is unclear, but the company website lists a construction timeline of this year.

Geronimo officials were present at several county commission meetings when solar was discussed, but never answered questions about how much property they've secured in Eaton County. 

Lindsay Smith, a spokeswoman for Geronimo Energy, issued a statement via email to the State Journal Wednesday afternoon, but did not answer specific questions about the project itself. 

“We remain convinced that Eaton County could be a leader in solar energy. We were pleased to see local leaders overwhelmingly pass an ordinance that would allow solar development. Solar energy has enormous potential across Michigan and in Eaton County. With that ordinance now passed, Eaton County has an opportunity to gain substantially. Solar energy creates jobs, boosts tax revenue and would be a win-win for the entire community.”

Coburn-Harris' family has received letters from solar companies based in Arizona, South Carolina and California interested in acquiring land in Eaton County to develop solar operations.

As of yet, no solar companies have submitted site plans to the county for consideration, Augustine said.

MORE AT LSJ.COM:

State police inquiring about former Grand Ledge teacher charged with sex crimes

Charlotte food pantry buys land for new facility

Tragedy prompts family of Mason woman to start foundation

Contact Reporter Rachel Greco at rgreco@lsj.com. Follow her on Twitter @GrecoatLSJ.