Permit decision for large solar project in Minnesota's Renville County likely by summer's end
Apr. 8---- A decision is expected before summer's end on whether to permit a large solar farm proposed in
.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and Department of Commerce hosted the second in-person public hearing for the
project in Olivia on March 31, followed by an online hearing on April 1.
Administrative Law Judge Kristien Butler said he will issue his findings on the application by the project developer, Ranger Power, on June 2. The Public Utilities Commission will decide in July or August whether or not to permit the project, according to the project's timetable.
The environmental assessment for the project is completed and available at the
for the project, according to Jessica Livingston, environmental review manager with the Department of Commerce. Go to
and search Docket No. 24-106.
Ranger Power, headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, is seeking to develop a 200-megawatt solar energy site. The Gopher State Solar project would erect solar panels on 977 acres of land within a 1,645-acre area of leased property located primarily north of Bird Island in Kingman and Osceola townships and a small portion in Bird Island.
Bifacial solar panels that produce electricity from direct and reflected light are planned. They would be aligned to the south and track the sun east to west, said Sergio Trevino, vice president of siting for
, in his April 1 presentation.
The project represents a $200 million investment in Renville County, according to Trevino.
The company representative said the project would provide $32 million in tax revenues to the county and local government units over its project life. It will provide a $79,000 tax impact in its first year while creating 200 construction jobs.
At the April 1 hearing, the lone participant to offer comment on the project was Lucas Franco, representing the Laborers' International Union of North America in Minnesota. He offered support for the project and cited the company's commitment to hire local contractors and workers for its construction.
Renville County has raised concerns about the project. During discussions at the
meeting on April 1, it was also noted that some landowners neighboring the site were present at the in-person hearing.
It was stated at the hearing that property values can decrease by about 4% for residences within a half-mile of a solar site, according to the discussions.
The visual aesthetics, possible glare from the panels, and possible humming and other noise from the electrical equipment were issues raised at an Oct. 29, 2024, hearing held in Olivia on the project.
The Renville County commissioners have expressed concerns that the cost for decommissioning the project could fall on the county if the project fails financially. It is seeking a decommissioning agreement with Ranger Power to provide financial assurance for those potential costs, but the sides differ greatly on what the costs could be.
Ranger Power estimates that decommissioning costs could total $1.4 million. The company's estimate is based on expectations of approximately $5.5 million in salvage value for the solar panels and materials and $7 million in costs for removal and site restoration.
Renville County maintains that decommissioning costs could total $21 million as there is no way to predict the value of the materials two decades or more in the future.
In a letter to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, Scott Refsland, director of Renville County Environmental Services, said a company proposing a 125-megawatt solar project in the county estimates the decommissioning costs at $3.3 million to $5 million, or as much as $6.5 million more than Ranger Power estimates for its much larger project.
The county is asking that if the project is permitted, language in the permit allow the county to pursue all legal options against the project owner — and, if applicable, against landowners — to recover any decommissioning costs that would become the county's responsibility if an agreement is not reached with Ranger Power.
The Gopher State Solar project is one of two large solar projects in the permitting process in Renville County.
of Salt Lake City, Utah, a subsidiary of AES Clean Energy, is seeking to develop a 125-megawatt project in an approximate 1,000-acre footprint in Birch Cooley, Camp and Bandon townships and the city of Franklin.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Public weighs in on proposed Summit Lake Solar project
May 27—WORTHINGTON — The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission joined Summit Lake Solar, LLC Thursday evening to offer a public information and environmental review scoping meeting for Nobles County residents at the Worthington Events Center. Craig Janezich, energy facilities planner, and Sam Weaver, environmental review manager for Minnesota Department of Commerce, were on the panel with Summit Lake Solar's Alia Mohammad, permitting specialist, and Tom Karas, senior developer, as well as Jeremy Duehr, an attorney from Fredrikson and Byron. The meeting began with information about the project, proposed to be constructed on a 1,900-acre parcel near the unincorporated community of Reading, before allowing the public to ask questions. Summit Lake Solar (National Grid Renewables Development), headquartered in Bloomington, develops, constructs, owns and operates renewable energy projects nationwide. Their plan is to construct a 200-megawatt utility-scale solar energy conversion facility and a 200-MW battery energy storage system (BESS) near Reading. The project would connect into the existing Nobles Substation, with targeted completion in 2028 with construction as early as fall 2027. A joint siting application was submitted for both Summit Lake Solar and Summit Lake Storage projects to Minnesota Public Utilities Commission in February. The energy storage system takes in alternating current (AC) electricity then converts it to direct current (DC) electricity to store within its batteries. When needed, the system converts the stored DC power back into AC and reliably discharges electricity to the grid. AC electricity is then sent to homes and businesses to power electronics. The Summit Lake panel explained vegetative screening will be implemented on a case-by-case scenario. The projects are designed to avoid tree clearing and existing trees and windbreaks around residences will be maintained and provide some natural vegetative screening. The economic benefits they listed include $500,500 in total production tax revenue to local governments, $400,500 to Nobles County annually, $100,100 to both Summit Lake and Elk townships and 250 construction jobs at peak construction. Weaver, who works with energy environmental review and analysis at the Commerce department, said their office acts as technical advisors to the commission. They provide data driven objective analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed projects. "We do not advocate for or against projects," he said. "We are just here to say this is what they are proposing. Our goal is to inform the decision making by the commission. The commission are the ones deciding whether or not the project goes forward." Weaver explained that they prepare an environmental assessment, which shares an objective analysis of the project. He said he has already received numerous comments from the public and has appreciated them as they are helpful when preparing the document. "We want to hear from you all about the potential human environmental impacts that we should study," Weaver said. "We want to know about any unique characteristics within the project area that should be considered." He gave an example of a submitted comment about seasonal flooding after large rain events and shared that when driving around the project, he wouldn't get that type of long term local knowledge. Verbal comments were made at the meeting, but residents may make comments online at or by mail or email to Weaver at or to Minnesota Department of Commerce, 85 Seventh Place E., Suite 280, St. Paul, MN 55101. The comment period ends June 5. Marcus Raines was the first to comment before the panel. "As a millwright, I've had the pleasure of installing and maintaining power generation equipment over the past 12 years of my career," he said. "Now I have the pleasure of representing 27,000 carpenters, millwrights and pile drivers across the Upper Midwest. We would like to thank National Grid Renewables for their ongoing collaboration, committing to paying a prevailing wage to a local trained workforce that would be constructing this project." Raines said he looks forward to moving through the process of the project and gaining a positive environmental assessment while making the project a win for local craftspeople. Amy Stefferud spoke next. She lives on the edge of Reading and had concerns about the BESS involving fires and leakages, as well as noise. Mohammad said there would be full-time maintenance staff monitoring on site and explained that while fires are rare, if it does happen, the technology is developed to where they would let the fire burn within the enclosure. It would not be able to spread to other enclosures. Karas assured the public that one would not see any flames. He also explained that noise regulations must be met. Stefferud then asked if the project would decrease their property value. Mohammad replied that property value studies have been conducted by solar facilities in Minnesota and they have shown there little to no effect on property values. Russell Penning, rural Wilmont, shared some of his concerns about the project having to do with setbacks from road right-of-ways and from county drainage systems. "I've been hired by our township in the past when we've had bad snow years to push snow back on township roads," he said. "One concern being, are the setbacks going to be far enough for safe snow removal? If we are blowing snow off roads, who's going to be liable if we're sending rocks through solar panels?" Mohammad said there are county regulations for certain structures and facilities. "From the center line of all roads including fences, from the solar array that are closest to the center line, it'll be approximately 85 feet away," she said. "Then from the BESS, it'll also be 90 feet away." Penning said from his experience, he believes that is too close, stating some years he would push snow back well beyond 80 feet. His next question pertained to replacing solar panels. "From the little bit I've looked online, the technology is growing so fast that by the time we get halfway through these solar panels projected life, they're probably going to be decommissioned and put a newer panel up," he said. "So to that point, what do you do with them?" Mohammad said they recycle the panels after the end of their useful life. She explained they are responsible for the decommissioning process and have financial surety put in place in order to decommission all of the equipment. She then explained in the case of a weather event, the panels can withstand 50 mph winds and golf ball-sized hail. She also said the panels are TCLP tested, meaning toxicity characteristic leaching procedures show very little to no effect of toxicity leaching. Other public comments were made by Dwayne Wienrank, Becky Baumhoefner, James Joens, Phillip Joens, Kevin Schettler, Mallory Fritz, Nate Runke, Rod Burkard, Judy Christians, Nobles County Drainage Coordinator Loretta Halbur, Nobles County Planning and Zoning Administrator Kathy Henderschiedt and Nobles County Board Chairman Gene Metz. While some were against the project entirely, others asked questions or gave advice to the panel. Halbur explained how the project will impact three of the county's drainage systems, causing the system benefits to decrease due to the change in land use. "I do look forward to National Grid Renewables submitting their petition for reroute," she said. "We will have to be in touch." Henderschiedt requested the company be held to the county's zoning ordinance of a 150-foot setback from property lines. Metz made it clear that he wasn't speaking as a commissioner, but as a concerned citizen. He said one of the big questions he is always asked is why can't the county set the setbacks — and they can for small projects — but they have no say on commercial grade setbacks. The Summit Lake panel heard many comments regarding the setback from property lines and Weaver noted those are the comments they look for from the public and will review concerns. Another public hearing is tentatively set for October.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Spokane County, two largest cities agree to share data, coordinate on homelessness response
May 25—The Inland Northwest took a step towards a regional, coordinated response to homelessness this week, although not to the lengths advocates once hoped. Spokane County and the cities of Spokane and Spokane Valley have signed on to an interlocal agreement to work together on the state's housing and homelessness crisis. The agreement ensures coordinated data sharing, award granting, extreme weather responses and development planning. Spokane Valley Mayor Pam Haley said the collaboration should help the region combat homelessness more efficiently and help people achieve better and lasting outcomes. "Addressing homelessness cannot be tackled alone by any single jurisdiction," Haley said. "This collaboration will allow us to pool our resources to coordinate planning efforts, establish priority interventions to meet the needs of our community, and jointly evaluate the performance of providers to maximize the regional funds dedicated to homelessness." The agreement is the first major step towards the regional approach to homelessness posited by local leaders a few years ago. But it's not the regional authority composed of government officials, service providers, business leaders and subject matter experts explored while former Spokane Mayor Nadine Woodward was in office, and that appeared to lose steam over the competing interests and personalities involved, and a wave of new leaders put in office during the 2023 election cycle. "By continuing to collaborate, we can make more efficient use of public dollars and improve outcomes for people experiencing homelessness in our communities," Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown said in a written statement. State law requires counties in Washington to adopt a five-year homeless housing plan consistent with guidelines laid out by the state Department of Commerce, and to provide regular updates through annual progress reports on those plans. The city of Spokane is also required to adopt a strategy as it administers state and federal housing funds. The Valley administers only a fraction of the funding Spokane and the county do, but is included in the region's Continuum of Care 2025-30 Five-Year Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness. George Dahl, Spokane County's housing and community development administrator, said the interlocal agreement is predicated on the five-year plan, ensuring collaboration as each government body works to meet its objectives. Dahl told the commissioners it replaces a 2012 contract between the county and the city of Spokane for homelessness data sharing. "This interlocal really spells out that we will coordinate, collaborate and work well together, whether I'm in the seat three years from now, or if my counterparts of the city or the Valley are there," Dahl said. In addition to sharing data, coordinating inclement weather and emergency shelter responses and having housing and support services staff meet regularly, the three jurisdictions have agreed to coordinate on how they distribute funding for housing and homeless services projects in the region. Spokane Valley City Services Administrator Gloria Mantz said contract requirements and performance measures will also be more consistent between the three when awarding funding. "There are very limited dollars for these purposes, and we can only expect that we're going to see a reduction in the near future with what's happening at the federal level," Mantz said. "So it's very important you know that we pick the best qualified and that they adhere to the contract requirements and that they're meeting those performance measures."
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Yahoo
In the trade war over tomatoes, Trump rightly stands with American farmers
Two recent actions by the Trump administration to protect American farmers clearly demonstrate why stronger enforcement of our trade agreements is long overdue. The Trump administration, led by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, secured a deal requiring Mexico to release water from the Rio Grande to South Texas. For years, Mexico has repeatedly violated the 1944 Water Treaty by failing to uphold its end of the agreement, devastating South Texas agriculture, eliminating jobs and decimating rural economies throughout the region. Similarly, on April 14, the Department of Commerce announced it would terminate the U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement. This decisive action was required under U.S. trade law and necessary to protect American tomato growers from the long-term effects of Mexican exporters flooding the market with tomatoes at prices that undercut American farmers and devastated the U.S. industry. As the department stated, the current agreement 'has failed to protect U.S. tomato growers from unfairly priced Mexican imports.' Starting July 14, a 17% duty will be added to most tomatoes coming from Mexico. These two decisions share a common theme. First, Mexico violated an agreement and broke its obligations. Second, American farmers bore the brunt of those broken agreements. In both instances, the Trump administration stepped in to protect American farmers. Those decisions weren't about politics. They were about fairness and accountability. Since 1996, the U.S. has tried five separate suspension agreements with Mexico to stop unfair tomato pricing. Every one of them has failed. While American farmers followed the rules, Mexican competitors skirted them — routinely selling tomatoes far below the agreed-upon price. The damage to American growers is undeniable. Since 1994, Mexican tomato imports have surged nearly 400%, making up 70% of the U.S. market. Over the same period, U.S. producers' share plummeted from 80% to just 30%. The result? Family farm closures, job losses and entire agricultural communities left behind. If we keep looking the other way, we risk losing the backbone of American agriculture. Critics claim that terminating the agreement could hurt trade and U.S. jobs. That's nonsense. Mexico can — and should — continue selling tomatoes in the U.S., but it must do so at fair, legal prices. Speculation that consumer prices will be impacted doesn't reflect what happened in previous instances of terminating the agreement. In fact, when the agreement was terminated as recently as 2019, consumer prices did not change. Nor is this about blocking trade. It's about enforcing trade laws and ensuring a level playing field. American farmers shouldn't be driven out of business by cheating. Consumers will still find a wide variety of tomatoes in their grocery store, only now from a marketplace that's no longer rigged against American growers. If we held Mexico accountable for violating a water treaty, why should our response be any different when it comes to enforcing laws against tomato dumping? To act on one and not the other is a double standard our farmers can't afford. Let's call it what it is. When Mexico breaks a water treaty, we demand accountability — and rightly so. But when they break trade laws and dump cheap tomatoes into our market, why is it suddenly controversial to enforce the rules? That's inconsistent and indefensible. If you're going to throw stones, make sure you're not standing inside a glass greenhouse full of unfair trade. Terminating the Tomato Suspension Agreement isn't just justified — it's essential. It's a necessary step to defend American farmers, uphold the law and bring some long-overdue integrity to our trade system. Robert Guenther is the executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Trump stands with American farmers in the tomato trade war | Opinion
