After months of discussion, the Public Benefit Program that for the first time sets guidelines for proposed solar developer projects placed on farmland, was approved Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors.
The biggest change from the previous PBP draft is that instead of being a requirement, the program is now voluntary.
The PBP sets fee guidelines, which the county has the flexibility to revise if needed, said Andy Horne, Imperial County deputy executive officer.
The PBP establishes that any fee will be negotiated with solar developers on a case-by-case basis, according to a report to the board.
The voluntary and negotiated payments are intended to mitigate impacts to the farming industry, create economic development opportunities and infrastructure projects.
Aside from trying to maximize the benefits from solar projects, the PBP also places extra costs on those developers who establish in so-called prime farmland, which is high-quality land.
A $5,000-per-acre payment is asked if a solar project is placed on prime farmland, according to a report to the board. This payment is reduced to $2,000 when the project is placed on land of lesser quality.
In addition, the guidelines call for annual payments of $150 per acre during the first decade of a solar project, and a $200-per-acre payment every year after that. There are also credits available for solar developers who hire full-time workers locally or veterans, the report reads, without specifying what these credits are.
The resolution received a unanimous vote of approval after a lengthy discussion where stakeholders voiced their thoughts. While most congratulated the board for the PBP, others expressed concerns.
“I have some real concerns about the (PBP),” said Edie Harmon from Ocotillo, “but I also have real concerns that the course of action the county is taking is inconsistent with the general plan.”
When she looks at the map where solar projects are being put “to me it looks like hop-scotch development,” Harmon said. Another concern was the public health impact of solar projects, which isn’t addressed in the guidelines, she said.
Linsey Dale, executive director of Imperial County Farm Bureau, commended the county for recognizing that solar projects “may not create the economic advantages or permanent employment opportunities that other development opportunities could.”
But Dale had a concern with the PBP being voluntary.
“We hope that this will not be taken advantage of,” she said.
Kristin Buford, policy director for the Large Scale Solar Association, said the changes are “moving in the positive direction” and “I’m glad we’ve moved away from a one size fits all.”
Still, the agricultural payments “are quite high,” she said, adding her association is also interested in knowing how the credits to solar projects are going to be included in the negotiation process.
Aside from calling for the guidelines’ approval, the agenda item also asked the board to give direction regarding the accounts were the money collected will go, and to set up an advisory committee to develop recommendations on how the funds could be spent.
Supervisor Gary Wyatt said 50 percent of the collected money could go to the general fund, 25 percent could go to a fund benefitting the communities neighboring solar projects and the rest could be used for an infrastructure and development fund.
The advisory committee, Wyatt suggested, could have about nine members from the Board of Supervisors, the Imperial County Farm Bureau, the Imperial Valley Vegetable Growers Association and members of the community.
“I’d like to see that come back to us,” said Supervisor John Renison, who volunteered to be part of the advisory committee and said more money should go to infrastructure.
“We got to get this thing done,” said Wyatt, who urged board members to come up with more ideas. “The longer we wait, the worse it is.”
The board may look the issue in about two weeks, according to County Executive Officer Ralph Cordova.
By the numbers
$5,000 — Fee per acre for solar projects placed on prime quality farmland
$2,000 — Fee per acre when placed on farmland of lesser quality
$150 — Annually per acre for a solar project during the first decade
$200 — Annually per acre after the first decade
The biggest change from the previous PBP draft is that instead of being a requirement, the program is now voluntary.
The PBP sets fee guidelines, which the county has the flexibility to revise if needed, said Andy Horne, Imperial County deputy executive officer.
The PBP establishes that any fee will be negotiated with solar developers on a case-by-case basis, according to a report to the board.
The voluntary and negotiated payments are intended to mitigate impacts to the farming industry, create economic development opportunities and infrastructure projects.
Aside from trying to maximize the benefits from solar projects, the PBP also places extra costs on those developers who establish in so-called prime farmland, which is high-quality land.
A $5,000-per-acre payment is asked if a solar project is placed on prime farmland, according to a report to the board. This payment is reduced to $2,000 when the project is placed on land of lesser quality.
In addition, the guidelines call for annual payments of $150 per acre during the first decade of a solar project, and a $200-per-acre payment every year after that. There are also credits available for solar developers who hire full-time workers locally or veterans, the report reads, without specifying what these credits are.
The resolution received a unanimous vote of approval after a lengthy discussion where stakeholders voiced their thoughts. While most congratulated the board for the PBP, others expressed concerns.
“I have some real concerns about the (PBP),” said Edie Harmon from Ocotillo, “but I also have real concerns that the course of action the county is taking is inconsistent with the general plan.”
When she looks at the map where solar projects are being put “to me it looks like hop-scotch development,” Harmon said. Another concern was the public health impact of solar projects, which isn’t addressed in the guidelines, she said.
Linsey Dale, executive director of Imperial County Farm Bureau, commended the county for recognizing that solar projects “may not create the economic advantages or permanent employment opportunities that other development opportunities could.”
But Dale had a concern with the PBP being voluntary.
“We hope that this will not be taken advantage of,” she said.
Kristin Buford, policy director for the Large Scale Solar Association, said the changes are “moving in the positive direction” and “I’m glad we’ve moved away from a one size fits all.”
Still, the agricultural payments “are quite high,” she said, adding her association is also interested in knowing how the credits to solar projects are going to be included in the negotiation process.
Aside from calling for the guidelines’ approval, the agenda item also asked the board to give direction regarding the accounts were the money collected will go, and to set up an advisory committee to develop recommendations on how the funds could be spent.
Supervisor Gary Wyatt said 50 percent of the collected money could go to the general fund, 25 percent could go to a fund benefitting the communities neighboring solar projects and the rest could be used for an infrastructure and development fund.
The advisory committee, Wyatt suggested, could have about nine members from the Board of Supervisors, the Imperial County Farm Bureau, the Imperial Valley Vegetable Growers Association and members of the community.
“I’d like to see that come back to us,” said Supervisor John Renison, who volunteered to be part of the advisory committee and said more money should go to infrastructure.
“We got to get this thing done,” said Wyatt, who urged board members to come up with more ideas. “The longer we wait, the worse it is.”
The board may look the issue in about two weeks, according to County Executive Officer Ralph Cordova.
By the numbers
$5,000 — Fee per acre for solar projects placed on prime quality farmland
$2,000 — Fee per acre when placed on farmland of lesser quality
$150 — Annually per acre for a solar project during the first decade
$200 — Annually per acre after the first decade
