A group of Warren County residents whose homes are next to proposed sites for two massive solar farms are upset that they weren’t made part of the discussion over solar power until too late to protect their interests.

The Record spoke to three homeowners who live along Highway W, where energy company Invenergy has proposed developing 4,400 acres of solar farm. The homeowners said they, and many of their neighbors around the site, only became aware of the development proposal when they received a notice from the county government in October.

Another 1,800-acre solar district has been proposed by Ranger Power off of Highway 47 at the north end of the county.

The problem, the homeowners said, is that before they found out about the developments, the Warren County Commission had already approved rules and conditions for solar farms to operate. The notification homeowners received was just to attend a November hearing about the exact boundaries of the two solar districts in northern Warren County.

“We’d heard rumors about it for maybe a year-and-a-half, but there was nothing from the county for anything specific,” said homeowner Zac Smith, whose property could eventually have solar panels to the north and west. He and others are frustrated that they didn’t receive direct notification of multiple planning and zoning hearings in August and September to discuss the rules for solar farms. 

While the meetings were announced online and in the newspaper, and some area landowners were present, Smith said those who weren’t aware of them now have little recourse to change how or where the energy companies will operate.

“I think with this affecting the surrounding property owners, who will be dealing with this from here on out, I think we should have known about the planning and zoning meetings ... when they were coming up with the solar district requirements,” Smith said.

If he had been there to speak, Smith said he would have pushed for 1,000 foot setbacks of solar panels from homes. As it is, the county approved 200 foot setbacks, potentially putting future solar panels right across Smith’s property line.

Smith said his biggest worry, shared by many homeowners not participating in the solar districts, is for his property value.

“I bought this house in 2007. ... I spent a great deal of money and time making it what is,” Smith said. “Now, if I go to sell, how many people are going to look at this house and turn it down because of what’s to come?”

Leia Burt, who also lives along Highway W, said the property value concern is shared by most owners who aren’t leasing property for the solar farms. She said the county government hasn’t properly addressed questions and concerns about the long-term environmental and economic impacts of the solar farms.

“It doesn’t fit here. Solar farms need to be in places where no one lives around them,” Burt said. “If they put it to a vote of everyone in this area who it affects, I guarantee, without a shadow of a doubt, it would not pass.”

She said opponents will continue to speak out against the solar farms, but feel the county commission’s final decision on the developments has been predetermined.

Kevin Derby, who lives nearby, said if he and others had been involved in the discussion starting two years ago when the solar companies first contacted landowners to lease their land, people who live around the proposed solar farms might be a little more comfortable. He said it seemed like anyone not being solicited to lease property for solar was kept in the dark.

“Had these (companies) come to a lot of the homeowners in good faith and said, ‘This is what we’re proposing,’ we could have asked questions, we could have dialogued,” Derby said. “We could have come to solutions.”

Derby and others have suggested that the county or solar companies should have established protection or compensation for people outside the solar districts who lose property value. He added that he’s concerned about safety and noise issues during construction, and doesn’t think the county government has asked enough questions about potential negative impacts.

“Everybody here has the sense that we’re getting this shoved down our throat and don’t have a say in it,” Derby said.

The solar farm controversy has torn apart the local community, Derby said, with opponents now in conflict with landowners who chose to lease their properties for the solar developments.

What’s next

The next step for the solar district proposals will be two more public hearings Dec. 16 and 17 before the Warren County Commission.

The Dec. 16 hearing will focus on the Ranger Power solar district off Highway 47. It will take place 6 p.m. at Creekside Place Church.

The Dec. 17 hearing focuses on the Invernergy Highway A/Highway W solar district. It will take place 6 p.m. at the Warrenton High School Commons.

The county commission has not yet announced a date for its final ruling on the solar energy districts.