Letter to the Editor: GIVING AWAY THE FARM(S) to Solar
The Hardeman County Commission will meet Tuesday, March 18, 2025, to consider a Solar Siting Agreement negotiated by Mayor Pulse and SR Middleton, LLC (a Delaware company) and subsidiary of Silicon Ranch Corporation. A new state law allowing these agreements was sponsored and introduced to the state Senate by Page Walley, in 2024. The Act known as Public Chapter 814, amends TCA code 5-6-119 and grants county mayor’s the ability to enter into energy siting agreements. The County mayor negotiates these agreements with Developers (including private corporations; foreign or domestic). All siting agreements must be authorized and approved by the County Commission. The agreement, if approved by the County Commission, will bypass all Solar zoning regulations, zoning boards and reviews and zoning enforcement provisions adopted by the County through a zoning ordinance.
In March 2023, Silicon Ranch requested exemption from the Solar moratorium in order to move quickly to buy a 900-acre tract of land near Middleton, Tennessee. The Commission held a hearing on the resolution. There was overwhelming opposition from the public. The only supporters of the resolution were solar companies, attorneys, local politicians, and BEA. Still the Commission granted Silicon Ranch its request. The exemption allowed Silicon Ranch to make application for the 55 MW Solar Farm under the 2015 solar siting provisions and existing zoning ordinance. The company made application in January 2024, days before the moratorium expired and was subsequently granted “site” approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals in April 2024 (the first required step to obtain a building permit). Since then, neither SR Middleton or Silicon Ranch has attempted to move forward with the project by applying for a building permit and submitting the required site plan for the review by the Planning Commission. SR has refused to complete the requirements of the process they signed up for; perhaps for the opportunity for a siting agreement which became an option just two months following the BZA site approval. SR is required by state law to meet the requirements of TCA 13-3-413 (c) and (d) in order to secure their vesting rights.
A copy of the Agreement was sent to the Planning Commission by Commissioner Bell for review and opinion. The planning commission was unaware of the negotiations between the mayor and the developer. The Commission responded via letter informing Comm. Bell the Planning Commission is capable and willing to continue to properly review all zoning regulations related to Solar that were adopted in the public’s best interest.
The SR agreement is on the March County Commission agenda and is available to the public. Several paragraphs of the agreement “recitals” allude that some sort of assumed pending action by the county is causing “uncertainty” regarding vesting rights and is inhibiting investor participation. Any action by the County of this sort would violate State law. Another point refers to “uncertainty for power purchasers” for a similar reason, even though TVA has contracted with Silicon Ranch in 2022 to purchase the power generated. In 2023, Silicon Ranch boasted publicly of obtaining over $1 Billion of Solar investment funds; one of the largest investments in solar in history, yet the company now asserts in the Agreement that little ole Hardeman County is scaring away potential investors.
The “Agreement” includes provisions such as: the Developer has the right to transfer the land, project and/or agreement, in whole or in “part” without the County’s consent; requests a five-year vesting period; and limits development requirements strictly to terms of the agreement and removes all other requirements and fee’s (County zoning provisions, enforcement and boards). The agreement also includes previously approved provisions of fencing, set-backs and tree buffering; however, the SR agreement will allow the company to omit a large portion of the required buffer. SR has “sweetened the pot” to obtain a waiver of this required provision by promising a $10,000 annual scholarship for 20 years. Further, the agreement declares it is in the “county’s best interest” by placing the industrial energy power plant on Agriculture zoned land. (A determination that is in direct conflict with the decision made by the County Commission in February 2024 when they adopted new Solar regulations in the “counties best interest” and deliberately removed Solar from Agriculture zoned land and put these projects in I-2 Restricted Industrial zones where they were required to be pre-2015).
Multiple county Commissioners have reached out to CTAS for comment and opinion. At least one County commissioner asked CTAS specifically: What would CTAS advise as a best option in this situation: the County Zoning ordinance or Siting Agreement? The CTAS response was the “zoning ordinance”. When asked the potential downfalls or the county’s potential liability by entering into a siting agreement; CTAS responded that once a siting agreement is granted to one Developer, it would be difficult to deny other Developers a siting agreement and believes counties are going down a slippery slope. CTAS highly recommended the Commission seek advice from the County attorney prior to entering into any type of siting agreement. CTAS has forwarded questions from another county Commissioner on to the State attorney for further review and opinion.
The obvious solution to this matter is to “table” the Siting Agreement or not take up the matter at all, and remind SR to file a building permit application, review fee and the required site plan for their final review by the Planning Commission before their vesting time expires. SR can easily do this in time for the April Planning Commission meeting. If approved, SR can subsequently pay the $1,000 permit fee and go to work! The County should wait on the State attorney’s response as to the legality and the potential impact on the county regarding siting agreements before considering moving forward on any siting agreements. If the legislative body desires the ability for future “siting agreements”, then, they should set a minimum standards and provisions for all siting agreements before entering into the first agreement blindly.
SR Middleton, LLC/Silicon Ranch is a mere $1,450.00 review/permit fee and site plan review away from being granted full permission from Hardeman County to proceed uninhibited and be in compliance with the zoning ordinance and related solar regulations they agreed to in 2024. Once this is done, SR will have secured their state-given vesting rights. SR’s required hydrology study has already been submitted and reviewed by TDEC and the Federal required Environmental Assessment has been completed.
The fact that Zoning supervision and enforcement has been “bought out and by-passed” by the mayor’s negotiated agreement is a slap in the face of all citizens who are governed by our zoning ordinance. Once the “seal is broken” upon granting the first siting agreement, it will be virtually and legally impossible to deny any and all other Developers of solar the same deal and terms. Even though the law allows siting agreements on a case-by-case basis; the County will have no sound basis for limiting future and similar projects. Once one Siting Agreement is granted, Hardeman County will be “forced by precedence” to GIVE AWAY THE FARM(S) and all the thousands of acres Solar Developers have in their sight. The fact is, there will be no utility-scale solar project already in the hopper that will be fully functional and have taxable assets installed and assessed prior to January 2029. If the idea that giving away 10-15,000 acres of farmland to Solar development is going to pay for lawsuit debt, wake up. The county is going to have to find other ways to finance that bad decision. It will be at least 4 years before any of these unbuilt projects will be online and the first dollar of “asset taxes” collected. Only land taxes can be assessed and collect once Solar permitting or ownership takes place; not the bigger money asset taxes.
Thank you, Senator Walley for this crappy legislation that makes it easier for Solar developers, mayors, investors/landowners to grab thousands of acres of prime farm land and convert to power plants. Thank you, Mayor Pulse, for placing our County Commissioners in this position with very little knowledge, with such short notice, with no public hearing to assimilate information, not posting this matter on the County Website to let us know what you are up to and spend your time negotiating a “piddly” scholarship fund and setting precedence in these matters. The County Commission has done two (2) very huge favors for SR and gone above and beyond what they have done for any other company in the history of zoning (1993). SR promised to move forward in the name of “economic development” and give us tax benefits from the developed project. They have not. They bring us an agreement with stated fears of the county being the problem. They told us they want to be our neighbors and own all their properties, but the Agreement states the ability to sell it without County consent.
It is highly likely the real reason SR is here today, is because the Feds are likely to “pull the plug” on Solar, and they need extra vesting time to wait until the next election for a policy change and move forward. Investors are nervous for this reason. The truth will set you free! When do we stop believing these Developers are here for our “best interest” and making special provisions for this Developer?
Submitted by Mike Mitchell
Read more local news by clicking here.
Stay informed on what’s happening in Hardeman County by subscribing to Hatchie Press e-mail updates.
Do you have community news you’d like to share? E-mail us at news@hatchiepress.com.
