The issue of Solar right is probably the hottest issue of the county at this moment and rightfully so. There are many things to consider such as whether subsidies will remain in effect, the effects of property values, the effects on usable farmland, safety and more. However, while these issues can be complex in and of themselves, the issue becomes further complicated because of property rights? Whether for or against solar, we have property owners who have a desire to lease at least a portion of their land to industrial solar. In some cases, the land they wish to lease isn't even usable from an agricultural standpoint. Some of the questions that have been raised because of this is should the property owner have the right to lease their land out and what ordinances should the county put in place to best protect property owners who decide to go that route.
Let’s start with some basic facts. According to NIPSCO’s website, their goal is to retire coal power by 2028 though some reports have stated by 2030. That gives us a minimum of 3 years to figure out how to best deal with the reduction in available energy. The population is also gradually growing and has been since at least the 1970’s. we also want to bring in more businesses to better the economy of our county. Both of these factors will increase the need for more energy.
Jesse Bohannon has expressed an interest in micro nuclear reactors during a candidate night recently. Is that really the direction we want to go? What are the dangers of that? There are studies that show that micro nuclear reactors produce more waste than standard nuclear reactors (www.pnas.org). What will we do with the waste? How much will it cost? There are some estimates that claim 90-120 million dollars (www.freethink.com) and others that claim it could cost as much as 1 billion dollars (www.cnbc.com)! That is a massive margin! Can the county afford that and keep taxes low?
Also, on this issue, it seems to me that the claims of the community have not been well represented by the current county council. Jesse Bohannon and Tim Harman have both claimed that the community has flat out said NO to solar. In Facebook comments, Tim Harman claimed that this was partially based on a survey sent out too 5,000 residents. He admitted they only received just over 200 back. This is less than .01% of the 35,000+ residents of Marshall County who are of voting age. That is far from a consensus. It is also worth mentioning that Harman was asked about the demographics on how the 5000 were chosen and he did not provide an answer. This is far from an unbiased course of action.
One concern that I did hear about solar is that the panels contain toxic substances. At one point that was true. One of the great things about technology is it continues to advance and improve. In this case, solar panels that are made today are safe and contain no hazardous materials as defined by multiple agencies. Speaking as someone who hauls hazmat for a living, this really is a huge deal.
In short, as a county, we will need the energy that we will be losing from coal power to be replaced with something clean and renewable. Solar is just that. At the same time, property owners should have the right to allow solar on their property if they so wish as Marshall County is not an HOA and shouldn't be governed as one. However, I also believe that it is worth it to take the time to make sure that any ordinances and agreements that are put into place do, in fact, protect the property owners as well as the county.
At the Marshall County Commissioners meeting on 9/3/2024, I made a statement during public comment emphasizing the reality of the situation while also showing support to our farmers who make sure that we are able to eat. Below is that statement:
The issue of solar has been a severely divisive topic. Not just in our county but other neighboring counties as well. While some look at it as a simple yes or no to solar, the reality is that it is a much more complex topic. We are not dealing solely with whether or not industrial solar is right for our county. We are also dealing with where the rights of land owners and farmers begin and end. We are dealing with an economic impact either for the better or for the worse. We are dealing with a power supply that is near capacity.
I am not going to come right out and say whether I am for solar or against it. It is a complex situation and requires a complex answer. I can understand the arguments on both sides when it comes to solar specifically. One of my biggest concerns, though, is whether or not this government is going to stand up for the rights of property owners who own their land and pay their property taxes. Will this local government allow our farmers who bust their backsides to make sure we are able to eat, to adjust their business model so they can continue to support their families? Or will this government deny them the freedom to do so.
We have to remember: farms are not only in place to make sure we have food on our table, they are also a business. Not just that, they are a business in an economy based on capitalism and a number of them are looking to capitalize on land that THEY OWN! That is as American as American can get. Now since they are a local small business, that means that they help to support our local economy. By allowing them to utilize their land for solar so they can maximize their financial returns, they will in turn, boost our local economy. This could also show businesses that provide well paying manufacturing jobs who are looking to move into the County that Marshall County is ready and able to meet their energy demands. To me, that would result in a financial win for everyone.
The REMC and Nipsco have both recently mentioned in reports the looming threat of eventual rolling brown/black outs. Simply put, we are nearing our energy capacity. This is a huge problem. Along with this I have heard many officials in recent weeks, both local and state, make comments mentioning that there is a needed threshold of renewable energy that the state may be required to reach. These comments also allude to the potential that if these thresholds are not met then many areas, like ours, could be facing the possibility of eminent domain by the IURC. If that were to occur the Farmers would be forced to sell their land at what is considered the fair market value at the time. And they would be forced to sell. They lose the opportunity to sell to whom they want at the price they want. They would lose the opportunity for a consistent income stream. We would not have the guaranteed protection of setbacks. Whoever would be running the project would have that control and that would not be the county. Also, we would very likely see little to no economic benefit. All of that, and we would still end up having solar but under someone else’s control.
With this information in mind, we, as a community, have an opportunity and a choice. We can either take this issue and run with it under our control and under our terms…or we can sit and wait for the choice and control to potentially be taken from us.
One final note. Back in July, the commissioners for Elkhart County voted to allow a solar project to move forward. At least one of the commissioners, Brad Rogers, who I served as a corrections officer under and have great respect for, is against Industrial solar and STILL voted to allow the project to go through. He was quoted as saying “This solar project is ready to be built and the power will now stay local, so we might as well benefit from it.”