MOUNT VERNON — Councilwoman Amber Keener brought a draft solar ordinance opposing the Frasier Solar project to Mount Vernon City Council on Monday night.
“I think this is relevant because there’s also 100 acres within the city that would be part of this, which I was unaware of until quite recently,” she told the council.
A private individual owns the parcel.
Keener said the acreage would house the substation for part of the solar development.
“I think that as the county seat, it’s important for the city to at least acknowledge a highly contentious thing that is happening around us,” she said.
Keener noted she has advocated for high-density housing to “preserve the agricultural integrity” that Knox County has.
“If I sit by as hundreds and hundred of acres are gobbled up by solar, I am not sending the same message,” she said.
Keener invited Ben Dean, Preserve Knox County, and Jared Yost of Knox Smart Development to speak to council. Both actively oppose solar in the county.
Noting there are many facets to the solar issue, Dean said solar energy is inefficient in many ways.
“It’s not just that it’s inefficient in the sense that solar panels do not convert energy at a high rate,” he said. “It’s that because of that, they require a large amount of land to produce a significant amount of energy in order to make them economically viable.”
He noted that the project will retain only five jobs after construction is completed. He said the low number makes solar impractical for job creation.
Future growth
Yost asked council members to consider what the city will look like in 30 to 40 years.
“Do we really want land that could in the future be used for development and expansion, even land that’s not in the city but could be annexed in, tied up in solar panels for the next 30 to 40 years?
“Or could it be used for better purposes, such as housing?” he asked.
Yost cited soil compaction, flooding, and toxic materials stemming from cracked or broken solar panels as other potential issues for the city.
Yost told Councilman Mike Miller that a solar developer does not have to adhere to city stormwater regulations.
Councilman James Mahan sounded a note of caution with creating an ordinance opposing Frasier Solar, specifically with ordinance language.
“There are a lot of reasons to be opposed to solar if you are so inclined,” he said. “But talking about reduction of agricultural land, we have to be careful how we talk about that as a city because we have annexed agricultural land, and we may in the future annex in agricultural land for economic development, either housing or another industry.’
He said that while an ordinance might be a good idea, council members must be careful to address that they are opposed to this project or this solar generation rather than making the crux of the argument reduction of agricultural land.
“We may find ourselves on the other end of that in in terms of economic development around the city,” he said.
Keener said she would consider council members’ comments and meet with the law director later this week.
The Ohio Power Siting Board scheduled a public hearing on the Frasier Solar project on April 4 at 5 p.m. at Knox Memorial Theater.
