Um, I'll call the meeting to order. Uh, if you can join me in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all. >> Um, we'll start with introductions. is our newest member, Everett Rolfing, uh Warren Township. I'm assuming many of you have familiarity with Everett. Um but, uh he uh took over for
Mike Flynn as he term limited out. So, welcome Reverett. >> Thank you. Our first order of business would be to elect uh a chair who will then um uh take over and uh handle the election of
the vice chair and the secretary. Um if I could have a motion to open the floor to nominations. >> So move. >> I'll second it. >> Second it. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion passes. Um, can are
there nominations for chair? >> I nominate Eugene. >> Eugene. >> And I'll second that. >> Okay. Are there other nominations? >> I'll nominate Jordan. >> Jordan.
Okay. Any additional nominations? Uh, asking for a second time. Any additional nominations? And third and last time, are there any additional nominations? I would entertain a motion to close the floor.
>> Second. >> Second. All all in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion passes. Uh so then I we would have we done
>> with our two candidates should probably say something. Yeah, we need a we need a speech full of >> promises. >> I can make that short something. >> All right. Uh I'm Eugene Hansen and I've been on involved with planning and
zoning since the 70s. I've been this is my second term on the planning commission and I was chairman for quite a while in my first term. Last year I was vice chairman. Um, I would say that I would prefer to
have Eugene be the chair. Uh, as I'm already chairing the board of adjustment. Um, I'm still sort of getting my feet wet in that position. So, >> so Jordan, you're declining the nomination. >> Yeah, please.
>> Okay. >> So, I move that we close all the nominations and we cast a unanimous ballot for Gene Hansen. Sure. >> Second that. >> Okay. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion passes. >> And assume the chair position.
>> Close. >> Uh Eugene has been the vice chair all this time. So now the vice chair is open. >> Yes. >> All the positions are open. They're they're open annually. Okay. >> So each year we have to >> So each year we have to we have to elect all positions. So
>> no, I'm supposed to move there. >> Yep. You rotate. >> We're John. John can take that. I'll take your name tag and reference for the remaining. >> Yeah. >> And you have your
>> Yeah. group one. Okay, at this time I'll open for nominations for the position of vice chairman. >> So moved. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I'll second that.
>> Okay. All those in favor say I. I post nay. Okay. Is we have anybody I nominate Jordan because he knows the procedures from the uh >> I'll accept that. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Okay. All right.
>> And I'll second that. >> Okay. I don't believe we need seconds. Just it says here that we only need once. >> I I always just showing never hurts. >> Yeah. Oh, that's fine. All right. Is
there any other nominations for vice chair? >> Those probably aren't Robert's rules. Those are probably um Marlene's rules or something. >> I don't know. I'm just teasing. It doesn't matter. >> Well, it says afterwards we're supposed to have a review of the
>> rules. >> Rules. So, >> this is kind of backwards. All right. Are there any other nominations for vice chair? For the third and final time, I believe. Are there any nominations for vice chair?
Seeing none, does somebody want to make a motion to close nominations? >> I move. >> All right. Ever seconded it. >> Let's see. >> I can't see your name tag. I forget it. >> Steve. >> Steve. Okay. Steve
>> uh made the motion. All right. Jordan, I don't suppose since there's only one that you have to give a real long speech. >> Yeah, I'll I'll accept this time around. >> Okay. So, does anyone want to make a
motion that he's unanimously elected and we can go on? >> I'll I'll move that we nominations. >> Marsha does that. >> Yeah. Unanimously elect Jordan Potter. >> Steve seconds it. All right. Thanks, Jordan. Uh, I don't know if it's a good
thing that we both got a lot of experience or not. >> We do need to vote. >> Oh, yeah. We need to vote. Uh, all those in favor of Jordan being our vice chairman say I. >> I. I. >> Oppos? Nay.
Jordan, you're our vice chairman. >> All right. Now, let's see which where's the next one? >> Secretary. >> Okay. For secretary. Now, this is more or less just a DIY does the actual secretary work,
right? Okay. Well, are there any nominations for secretary? >> John, did you do this previously? >> Oh, yeah. I served faithfully as a secretary before. >> Happy to do it again. >> I'll nominate John.
>> That's the amount of work I can handle. I'll second that. >> Okay. Are there any other nominations for secretary? >> Are there any other nominations for secretary? Would someone want to make a motion and cast unanimous ballot?
>> So moved. >> Okay. >> All second. >> Jordan moved and Shep seconded it. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Okay. Is there any other positions we have to fill?
Okay. Then I think the next item is we had the flag pledge. We got officers. So, adoption of the agenda. >> Yeah. Approval of the agenda. I'll move.
>> I'll second that. >> Louie. Yeah. Louie moved and Jordan seconded that we adopt the agenda. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Post. Nay.
Okay. Next item is approval of the minutes for the December 18th meeting. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. Louie move to approve and Steve second it.
Uh is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of approving the minutes as written say I. I. >> Oppos. Nay. Minutes are approved. Okay, next item is rules of procedure.
Um, Ross, are you going to take that or because I don't know what we should be talking about. >> So, within your books, the the rules of operation are there. If you are satisfied with how they've operated in the past, you can just um approve them
um to continue. Uh if there are particular procedures that uh you have not uh that you're not pleased with or would may like to see altered, then you would have a discussion to look at amending the rules.
>> Mr. chair. I think one thing I I I don't see here and um we need to at times follow the open meeting law with if we have people that are attending it because I know I have if you're not physically attending the meeting and we we do have the option to uh use uh Zoom
but then and I know uh Mike worked through this a number of times then in those cases you have to do a roll call vote instead of every individual but normally it's just a unless it's close vote, you can call for that. But if it is if somebody is on uh using the um
Zoom feature, then it has to be a um voice. Uh >> do you want to make that a motion? >> Uh I just think it needs to be and um I think >> I think you could you could move to adjust that to bring it in line with county board. >> Yeah, I would I would to adjust our
procedures to adopt any open meeting law uh requirements. >> Okay. Is there a second? Second >> John seconds it Louie. Where does it go in the book? >> I don't have a 1.6 under vote. >> Yeah. Voting. >> We will bring it back for final
approval. >> Yeah. And I Yeah, I don't know that there's anything else, but that that is one thing that they do require. >> All right. Is there any further discussion?
If not, we'll proceed to vote on voting. The item is titled voting 1.6. And we have to have a v a voice vote if there's somebody on Zoom. And what else
did you say, Marcia? >> That that covers it. >> That covers it. >> We need to bring it back before we can actually uh vote on it to actually see how it's written. >> It would it would be best we we'll modify the procedure. will bring it back for review and have you vote on it and approve it. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, this meeting or next >> be the next meeting? >> Monday. So, we don't have to vote on it now. >> If just provide direction that you would like to see that that change directed and brought back. >> Okay. Who's wants to make a motion to
that effect? >> So moved. >> Jordan moves and second. >> Second. >> All right. It's been second. Steve >> going to get hyper technical. If you could adopt these rules on an interim basis just for this meeting and then
adopt the newborns next day. >> Okay. So now we got start over again or >> I'll amend my motion to adopt the current rules and >> uh move forward with the suggested changes by Marsha for the next meeting then.
>> All right. You second. Yeah. Okay. >> All right. Is there any other discussion on this? Hearing none or seeing none, all those in favor of uh adopting the rules for temporary for
this meeting and then getting it back for a final vote at next meeting. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those opposed say nay. Passed. Is there any other thing in the
rules of procedure that you see that should be changed? >> I don't know if this is necessarily in the procedures here, but often enough when we have individuals come up, we ask their address, which I find incredibly like an invasive line of questioning um
to just to ask someone to announce where they exist, like where their home address is. I don't feel as though that gives us any greater understanding of the person who rose to speak as much as it does just potentially open them up to some form of um again they're announcing
where they live publicly and it's being recorded. I'm curious if maybe we could and I would like to hear your comment on that. I'm curious if maybe we could just position our line of questioning where it's more aligned with are they a member of the community or are they um coming
from elsewhere to vocalize? Um, and I'm curious again if any of our rules state that we have to have that observation or if this is just again a a procedure that we've just it's just been kind of uh blobmed on and we've just I'm not seeing
it on here, but I'm curious if where that comes from. >> What was the what was the reason for it? >> Dave, isn't that a um >> a requirement as >> We've just always done it that way. You have to
>> as long as I've been >> believe it's a requirement in state law to identify yourself and where you live. >> Yeah. >> Because it has precedences on the argument if they live within the community or they're not living within the community and people within your community should have more sway than
somebody coming from Kimbuk too. what's and I would like to hear again why maybe if that is a >> so yeah Eric uh was on top of that in rule 3.3 of the rules of of this body uh has uh that the person should give their
name and address when they speak. Um I don't think that there's any law or statute that requires that. It could be more broad like what township they're in or something like that if that was helpful. Um, and I don't I think it's not necessarily required if you don't
want to do any of it. >> Sure. >> And again, I'm just I just again in this day and age, there are uh like a safe at home act where again, we may very well see in front of this board individuals that aren't announcing themselves at all. We'll just identify them as parcel
ID or again I'm representing this interest to do a specific thing. But I just want to bring to everyone's attention there may be a day where someone who is a safe at home participant won't be able to announce themselves because they are in something similar to a uh
like their their identity is confidential in a way. >> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Chair, um somewhat related but not related is um the most recent uh marijuana uh cannabis licenses. Um, what
do we provide the public? We provide them everything. Their name, their address, if they have security cameras, if they have security alarms. I mean, we've just opened up the door for somebody to go to their property and cause possibly,
you know, damage, harm or inflict, you know, some type of uh ill, you know, activities. >> So, again, we do it for the people who are asking for permits to do something. Um, so it's, you know, kind of related, I guess I'd have to say. >> Right. But speaking to that point you
just brought up, there is a capacity for retribution. And I would hate it if someone didn't feel as though they could speak their mind because they simultaneously have to say, "This is my opinion, and this is my home address." >> I I wish we could abstract them in some way. I would It would be I'd feel more
comfortable if we didn't have to pair them this way. And if there's no law stating that we have to >> would uh would you want them to state what town or township >> township or a way of just not making it
I live here and these are my very strong opinions on a given proposal. >> Um >> because we would have people from Minneapolis sometimes will come down to give statements of why we shouldn't do something. They have absolutely no reasoning. >> Exactly. I don't think there's a tour bus out front that's going to be like
we're just going to shop or you know just ship in a bunch of people with a strong opinion on a given way. But I just see your point. Um we could ask are you member of a community? Do you live in a township here? Again just uh making it not as
precise as telling us exactly where you live. For the written record, I think it's important to have some distinction between Bob Johnson's and Pete Peterson's that we have a lot of.
In other words, you know, if you give some geographic reference of some kind, maybe not the exact address, but um for the written record, anyone named whatever it was could have been up there
speaking and we would have no way of knowing really who it was. >> Are you done? >> Yeah, I am. Everett, >> I'm strongly in favor of requiring an address. As being on the township board for over 22 years, we've dealt with
professional paid protesters that come from New York, Minneapolis, all over. Um, we need to be aware of that. This is a county planning commission as I understand. So, if people
are are here from the city of Winona, I think we need to be aware of that. And I totally agree with Louiesie. The people that pay property taxes in Winona County should have more say than the people outside of Winona County. It's one thing if you're living right on the borderline
and you won't land in Winona County and your house happens to be in a adjoining county. That's a unique situation. Those people should have proper say, but we're having too many outsiders come in is
what we're experiencing. So, I would like to see address required. >> A question for Steve. Um, if someone were to send in a you like email or mail a comment and asked to remain anonymous, would it just be would it still be part
of our information or would it get left out? I could check with them, but I assume it would still be part of your information if it was received and you would just receive it as coming from someone who didn't find their address or didn't the name.
>> Feel like that would be the way to do it if you wanted to keep some imminentity. Yeah, >> we're we're conducting public business and situation in here and when you get things in secret or redacted or whatever
democracy dies in in the darkness of night, if you do not want to speak because of it, you're afraid of talking, you should not speak. >> U there should be alternative ways. If somebody uh feels threatened to speak
and he said an email or something be a possibility. >> Uh there is I mean the legislature is looking at this issue in terms of elected officials uh since representative Hortzman was killed. uh and uh they the secretary of state
temporarily made elected official addresses private and then with the expectation that the legislature will address the issue and perhaps maybe in that discussion they'll come up with a with a compromise to to kind of
deal with these conflicting you know valid points. >> Well, I'll take one point there. If they turn around and they don't live in a district they represented, that would cause a problem. >> Yeah, there's there there's a process that the the county auditor confirms
they live where they live. >> There any other discussion? Is there any >> motion? Someone want to make a motion? I'll make a motion to close the uh uh discussion on uh the procedures and
rules laid out in front of us. >> The whole procedure >> I I I would say the correct is to table it to the next hearing to the next meeting. >> Sure. >> And uh I will take the recommendation and I would make a motion to table this discussion until the next hearing.
>> Okay. Is there a second to that? >> Yeah, I'll second that. >> Jordan seconds it. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor of the motion to table the procedure discussion till the next meeting say I
>> opposed. Nay. The motion is passed and it's tabled. Uh what's the next one? >> That would be me, I believe. >> Updates. >> Updates. >> Okay. So Jordan, I guess you should go first, right? >> Yeah. So today at the board of
adjustment, we heard um petition for uh Jake and Edna Shetler who we have here um on our first docket today. It was a prime soils variance uh or class one through three soils
variance and a feed lot setback variance. Um the petitioners were did not attend the meeting and uh our board voted unanimously to table that item until
we get something back from them whether they're planning on attending or not. Um because we didn't feel we had enough information to make a decision. Um there was quite a bit of discussion about after the fact
permitting and the majority of our or should say all of our board members um made it known that they they felt that um this after the fact permitting was not
working well for the county and it's kind of the cause of several townships wanting to and handle their own planning and zoning. Um, we had quite a bit of discussion on that if you have a chance to listen to that
meeting when it's available on YouTube or something, but it's kind of a lot of the stuff we've been talking about at the at our um steering committee meetings as well. And uh it just
um especially Ed on our board um was kind of saying how it it makes him feel like our job is sort of pointless when we approve things and then people will just do things without approval whatsoever and sort of end up with the
same result. Do you have uh any indication of when this was built? >> Um, no. But I believe Is Olivia here? Oh, yeah. Do you know when it was built? I guess we'll get to it when we get to the
>> Right. It's on the docket tonight so we can get into it, but around 2024 is when the structure was moved on site. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> That's the gist of it. >> That's that's your report then? Yeah, that was all we covered today. >> All right, the next one is Marshes.
>> Yeah. Uh, this board, the planning commission hasn't met for a couple months, so there has been nothing on the the county board to approve. >> Okay. And then uh >> although I don't know if anybody wants an update on the um comp plan is going
to do that. >> Okay. It's being worked on. >> Yeah, I'm happy. You can uh jump in as you like here. I don't have a whole lot with that, but just wanted to let the planning commission know that we continue to meet um a little bit more regularly. Um since the last time the planning commission met, we've been meeting at least once a month uh since
January. Um so we've had three meetings. Um we have another one coming up um in the first week in April. Um these have come a little bit faster because we have a lot more to talk about. We're going through the chapters. I'm trying to get feedback from the the
steering committee on each um element of the plan. There's um eight chapters. Um um and uh so it's taking a little bit of time. We're we've been moving through them, getting about two done per meeting. Um next meeting in April will
be on parks um and recreation and wellhead protection. And then the final meeting in this phase of the the plan review will be uh on land use and intergovernmental cooperation. And we're hoping to schedule that at the end of
April, early May. Um after that uh we'll be moving in towards the next phase of the planning process which is looking at implementation. And so then we're looking at more about the um um the actual uh uh policies u and action items
um to be associated with the plan and going through that with the with the steering committee. So um that's where we're at in the process. As always, if anybody has any questions uh whether steering committee members or just planning commission members, um feel free to reach out. Um we're happy to sit
down and um go in more detail and uh and and discuss with you about anything you want to talk about related to the comp plan. Um, with that, we do have um four steering committee members on the planning commission um now. So, if any if you guys want to share anything um um
you can feel free to do so as well. >> Thank you. >> Okay, thanks Lou. Um >> Everett, >> Everett, >> I have a question for Mr. Cray on this Ammy situation or other ones. When you're dealing with after the fact and
the building is already there, what are your legal options? >> Yeah, there was there was quite a bit of discussion about that today at the at the board of adjustment committee. Uh there is a uh administrative penalty
process uh where they could be uh fined for uh the days that they're out of compliance or until they bring it into compliance. Uh there's the potential of uh uh from a public safety standpoint not allowing them to use it as a dwelling uh until it's permitted and
approved. Um those are the those are the the uh uh basic most straightforward things that could be done uh depending on the situation. Uh there might be other options other legal options depending on the
circumstances but uh I don't have that information. Uh now >> there was a mention of doubling the permit fee as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. the uh the uh our rules allow that to charge double for the permit fee for the after the p after the
fact permit uh if if the county chooses to do that. >> Jordan, is that on a slab or on a block foundation or what? >> Believe it's just a slab. >> Has the county ever looked at adopting a set
penalty? Do you build without a permit? It's an automatic $5,000 fine. Not. No, we have the county has not. >> Is that something that should be looked at to deter this continuous actions? >> Guess we'd have to look at I I don't
know that we've had a track record of really too many incidences. I don't know if we track that. I'm looking maybe Eric has some knowledge. I mean, I don't remember a lot of these over, you know, the last >> We've had 23 in Saratoga Township. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Just to Marsha's question, we've um had a history of >> charging like $500 and we used to be like some situations apply multiple 500 and uh we had quite a few um incidences like that. We had some that we went to
court when I was dealing with a person in Marshia's neighborhood. We sent a deputy up there and we find them I think uh every day for 90 days in a row. >> Yeah. and >> and we got that to court and they they threw it all out and and I think fined him a hundred bucks
>> that was >> you know so we don't have a good track record when it gets to litigation when they because anything is challengeable too so ultimately they have a right to appeal you know anything that we do here in
district court so I guess the the mentality has been that we try to encourage compliance and staff has bent over backwards with certain parts of the community to get them to make the appropriate applications so we can at
least write the ship for them. And yeah, I know it's it is what it is. So, >> so are we officially on this? >> No, that's what I mean. I don't want to get into the specifics of that without opening it up. That would be, you know, that's that's a, you know, this is just a general,
>> I guess, response to the question. So, >> is it okay with the planning commission if we do get into the first docket item and then we can make ask questions? >> Yeah. >> Thanks, Eric.
>> All right. Petition docket PC 319261 to consider the petition of Jake and Edna Shuffler who seeks a conditional use permit regarding the following. to allow a single family dwelling on less than 40 continuous acres pursuant to
chapters 10.4.6.36.8 of the Winona County sening ordinance. Uh and it says well that doesn't have anything to do with it right now, does it? All right, Olivia, you go ahead. >> Perfect. Good evening. Um
>> before before we start, I mean I They need the variance for the soils and the feed lot setback. >> Correct. >> So I guess >> I was thinking why don't we just vote take a vote on tableing it. >> Yeah because I can't see trying to make
a reasonable decision not knowing if that it's predicated on those two factors being allowed. >> Both the var the variance has a condition drafted for it that they receive the cup. the C has a condition drafted that they received the two variances.
>> So, I guess my personal feeling is that I need to know that the variants are allowed before I consider it for a conditional use permit. Maybe my thinking's wrong, but >> well, I if I'm understanding correctly, if they if we deny them, they don't get the variance. If they don't get the variance, they the cup is of no use.
Correct. >> If the cup is if they don't have both, they can't proceed. Yep. They can't use it as a living space. view it on its merits for the cup component. Uh if we if it's if this board doesn't find in favor of it, they're kind of sunk in the
water. Correct. >> For the conditional use permit, >> I would unless they >> I would just say make make a motion to uh table it until we the board of adjustment has the chance to >> I would dig into it.
>> All right. >> Uh I have a further question then. So what is in our lane to determine here that the board of adjustment uh we're having two different discussions correct? So we're determining if the setback can be conditionally approved.
>> No. So >> the board of adjustment the two variances that the petitioners need are to allow the dwelling to be on prime soils in addition to the dwelling being too close to a neighboring feed lot. Those are the two things that they need to make a decision on. What you're
considering tonight is for that dwelling to be on a parcel that's less than 40 acres. Typically, we hear the variances ahead of the conditional use permit. So, if something needs both a variance and a conditional use permit, they're going typically earlier in the day to the board of adjustment and then they come
to the planning commission. So, most of the time, you know, of the decision ahead of time. That being said, there's nothing technically against the rules, but if you're voting to table it, we'd want to have a reason why as to table. So, the petitioners are not here tonight. If there's information that you
feel like would be helpful for your decision and tableabling it to to get that information or ask information to staff would be >> we could simply table it until the board of adjustment has made a decision as well, right? >> It seems like the board of adjustment is
>> if that's a poison pill if you guys don't pass it. >> Yeah. I I guess my biggest concern is just the actual building. I you know sure it may fall within the feed lot it may fall within but we just can't have
people building residences out there >> and then afterwards coming and say oh I wasn't aware that there I needed to permit >> for this not sure how we how we can get around that >> they can't certain let Steve have the floor
>> thank you Mr. Hansen. Um, I just want to say if you do table it, you'll probably want to do a motion that you're going to notify them that you're extending your time to make a decision by 60 days because the the general rule that once the application is in and complete, if
it's not acted on 60 days, it's a it's automatically approved. Uh and so you you would have to suspend it for 60 days or or extended for 60 days and you have to have provide a reason and give them a letter and tell them why. There's no
particular reason required under the statute. Uh it just has to be a reason. Uh and uh and they have to get that notification. Uh it's that's an important item because it will if if we missed that 60-day deadline, which I think is April 20th would be 60 days. um
then then it would automatically they'd be approved. >> So they were notified that there was a hearing on this. >> Correct. >> They chose not to come. >> They are not here tonight. >> So I would say let's let's go move forward and discuss this.
>> Uh when is the next planning commission? Will it be before that 20th deadline? >> It would be April 16th. >> Just before. >> See, I'm afraid that we're going to delay this. They're not going to show up again. we're going to kind of waffle and then all of a sudden the permit will
automatically be issued. >> We have a 60-day letter going out for the variance decisions um to extend that timeline an additional 60 days. So it would be till June 18th. >> Well, if we make council if we make a a
motion to send them a 60day delay thing that's legally binding, right? >> Yes. Right. That would give it would tie in with the variance. >> Yes, you uh yes, you have the authority to do that. U they don't need to agree
to it. >> Uh >> right. >> Okay. Does do you want to >> make a motion, John, or you >> somebody else or what are we going to do here? >> Well, we're still in the discussion part. You have to close the discussion
first, I think. Right. >> Well, you could amend your motion to >> technically table. have them on the table and second it either got to be withdrawn or we got to act on that and >> if we vote it down we can keep discussing >> but technically I've been always
educated the table does not allow discussion so we're kind of violating >> we haven't tabled it yet >> yeah we had a table >> we have a motion we didn't approve it >> I didn't actually put in a motion I said we should >> okay
>> because we're in the discussion that has to be closed first >> y And as far as them not showing up, I mean showing up isn't mandatory. It's in their best interest, but it is not mandatory that any applicant show up. >> Correct. >> And so yeah, >> but did they have representation? Well,
they did. Whoever worked at the planning department with them was somewhat quasi representation. They must have uh you know given you the information in some form or manner. The information that I would present to you tonight that is in your packet is their
application. I'm not representing them on their behalf. >> Did they come in and discuss? >> Yep. So, what happened? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. If you want to get into it, we can. Otherwise, we can >> No. No. I know you're not their legal representation, but I mean, they did follow the process of coming in and filing.
>> We were notified that the structure was on site. I sent a letter. They came in the day after receiving that letter to apply for the permits. >> Okay. And is this um well, we're discussing I guess it's kind of like one of those shed houses that I'm seeing pop up all over in my neighborhood
kind of. It was a shed and they put living quarters in it. It's it's it's split half and half. There's a shed and then there's a a housing that has a porch on it uh with with windows. So the shed is on one
side, the other half is the house. Um, I would question if the windows are uh are proper egress in case of fire. They seem to be a little small from my perspective. >> I guess maybe we're getting >> if you want me to give
what we're doing here before we waste more time >> or take more time. I'm sorry. I will I'll move that we table this and send a 60-day extension letter stating that um we don't have enough information until the board of adjustment has made a
decision. >> I second that. >> Okay. Jordan made a motion. John second it. Is there any further discussion? >> Again I just want to confirm our 60-day deadline is just before this next
meeting in April. No, the this additional 60 days would be June 18th. >> Okay. And there is Okay. Y >> that makes sense. >> Are we all clear on what we're trying to accomplish here now? >> Clear or yes. >> Okay. All right. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor of the motion to table this docket number say I. >> I. >> Oppos? Nay. I believe the motion passed. >> You can call for it.
>> Someone want to call for a division of the house. >> Okay. The motion pass. So we don't have to do any more with it then. Right. >> Right. >> All right. All right. Let's go to docket
PC31926-2. uh to petition to consider the petition of Lidol's Orchard property owner and Ice House Solar or LLC the petitioner who seeks a condition conditional use permit
regarding the following to allow a 1.5 megawatt solar energy system to be located within the Agricultural Resource Conservation Zoning District. and Mississippi River bluffs overlay
district on 12 to 18% slopes and within 300 ft of the top of the bluff pursuant to chapters 10.4.6 hypotheses 37 11.6.3
hypothesis 1 and three and 12.2 2 of the or 12.3 of the Winona County zoning ordinance. Lou, it's yours. >> Thank you, Eugene. I know that's a bit of a um a mouthful there for the um um
the request, but I'll just explain it a little bit before we move through the the slides. Um there are four different sections of ordinance that trigger the need for a conditional use permit. So the first one um would be the agricultural district um a resource conservation district that is located in
um that's 10.4.637 requires a conditional use permit for large scale um solar energy systems. Um chapter 12.3 is the chapter on um um solar energy systems and that also um
reiterates the fact that a a large scale solar energy system needs a conditional use permit. So both sections were were noticed. And then it's also located within the Miss Mississippi River Bluffs Overlay District and that has additional triggers for conditional use permits.
This isn't just for um solar energy system. It's for any development within 12 to 18% slopes that fall within that um Mississippi River Bluffs overlay as well as within 300 ft of the top of the bluff. So this proposal is within both
12 to 18% slopes as well as within 300 ft from the top of the bluff. So both of those sections are also noticed. It's the same criteria either way. So um that piece of it what you're weighing the petition on is based on the same criteria, but there are four sections
that trigger that. So just wanted to explain that a little bit for you. Um getting into the request itself, uh the location is in section 32 of Dres Dresback Township. Um it's a 93 acre
parcel uh along County Road One and Burns Valley Road. Um you can see the parcel identified there. Um the county line uh with uh Houston County and the city of Lac Crescent is just uh to the south um just off of the the map there.
So, it's quite quite close to the um request and you can see the u I90 bridge going to Wisconsin on the right hand side. It's that uh kind of the red um um noodles there. Um um junction is the uh is the bridge going to Wisconsin just
for reference. Um so, I guess another um it's a good time to to reference that. In this picture, you can see that there are um two other solar arrays on the property. Um those
are each one megawatt solar arrays that that have been approved in the past and and and constructed. So this would be the third um on this property. Um this is the site plan that was submitted with the application.
Um I'll show you another site plan. This has been modified a bit. So, I appreciate the applicants working with us uh to get a more a little bit more accurate um um um project area boundary uh that meets the setbacks to uh the the
bluff and the 12 to 18% slope requirements. So, um but I did put this on here because this is what was originally submitted and it shows um the neighboring property to the to the north um which requires a 300t setback. The
red area there shows that 300 set 300 foot setback area. Um other uh >> I'm sorry. The red is >> that's the area >> buildable. >> That's not buildable. >> Okay. The red is not >> Yep. And so the project area will be
located outside of that. Um other um applicable setbacks are 130 ft from the center line of the road of County Road One, 65 ft from the center line of Burns Valley Road. Uh 20 ft from sideyard
property line is the minimum requirement. Um there's that neighboring dwelling requirement for solar energy systems, large scale solar energy systems, which is 300 ft. And then there's a top of bluff setback um of 100 ft that this project will will need to m
meet. Um this is the updated um site plan layout to show a little bit more accurate uh representation of um how that will lay out. It looks similar probably, but um it is moved back off of the slopes um
more to the south and to the east um than the previous um depiction. And this uh would be this would be um u meeting the the the slope requirements and the the setback requirements from the bluff. Um you can also see the the neighboring
um solar array there to the south. Uh the uh applicants have stated that the that 300t setback to the neighboring dwelling will actually be 320 ft to the project boundary or the fenced area and 350 ft to panels. So, it's a little bit
there's it's not right up against the 3300 ft setback. There's a little bit of of room there um to meet that setback requirement. Uh here's just another um view just showing the general area of the proposed project uh in relation to mapped bluffs.
Um, these aren't uh exact, but it just gives you a general idea of where the bluffs are located on the property in relation to the um to the uh proposed project. Um, here's a a look at the Mississippi River Bluffs overlay so you can see where that comes to. The um Mississippi
River Bluffs are actually um defined as one mile from the center line of Highway 61. And the purpose of that is to catch all of the bluffs that face the Mississippi River and the Mississippi River Valley. Um,
and then there's a little bit higher um standards and requirements within that area. This is uh of note just because it's on the west side of um County Road One, which runs along the top of the bluff. So, it doesn't have an aspect towards the Mississippi River um but it
still falls within that um that one mile um buffer and those standards still apply to it. So, just wanted to point that out. Um, just a few notes. Uh, um, Ice House 4 Solar 4 LLC is the um, um, the
applicant. Uh, they have a contract with the property owner. Um, so in your in the materials, they are listed as a joint applicants. Um but the um um um ISO solar 4 is the applicant is the um they're the company who have the
contract to develop the solar um project. Um they are a subsidiary of Sunrise Energy Ventures LLC which um is located out of Weisetta, Minnesota. And there is a both the property owner I think they're online and the um the representative of the company are are
here tonight. So they'll have a chance to speak as well um if you have any questions. Um, we talked about the Mississippi River Bluffs um and the closest neighbors getting at the um um the actual distance that is proposed from the neighboring
dwelling to the north. Um just want to touch on some of the requirements that are specific to solar energy systems or large scale solar energy systems and these are all also included in the conditions that would be attached if you were to approve the the the petition. Um you have the
requirement of a landscape plan um including vegetative screening and pollinator friendly ground cover. That's actually located in chapter nine um of the ordinance. Um and then we include it as a a condition to apply it um if you
so choose. Um but that historically in other projects we require that of the applicant that they come up with that we review it with SWCD prior to issuing a development certificate. Um an erosion control plan is required that meets the requirements of chapter 9
of the zoning ordinance. I believe that they also need a NPDS national pollutant um discharge elimination um uh permit um and that's a um um MPCA permit um and that requires a storm water pollution
prevention plan or a SWIP. Um the SWIP generally meets the requirements of our landscape plan and our ordinance um and it's ultimately approved by the MPCA um as part of their um um storm water permit and NPDS permit. But um we'll
also review that with SWCD um prior to issuing our our development certificate. Um there's a requirement for stray voltage stray voltage testing um and the and financial shy um in the
amount of $50,000 cash escrow. Um there's also a solar um the solar contractor is also responsible for any damage caused to the local road. Burns um Burns Valley Road there is a township road. Um if for some reason because of
the truck traffic during um construction that is damaged in any way, the the the company would be required to work with the township to fix that. Um and that's also attached as a a condition. Um,
moving on. Uh, Dresback Township um has um um um considered the request uh at their January 8th um meeting and um submitted no comments but signed the um
township acknowledgement form. Um, as always, the planning commission should um um review all materials and testimony, including um the application um um staff report, the contents of your
packet, um public testimony from both the applicants and the general public. um before making a decision um and make um um then adopt draft findings um or or adop adopt findings that support the
petition based on the criteria in the ordinance. Um that criteria is the general the seven general criteria for approving a conditional use use permit as well as additional four criteria um specifically for solar energy
systems. So um if you look in your in the staff report and the draft findings that um that are attached, it will include 11 criteria. Um the first seven are the general criteria from the ordinance and then the last four are the
ones specific for solar energy systems. Um that said, um this is incorrect. When I when I put together the the presentation originally, there were 16 conditions. There's only 14 if you look in the application um and in the staff report and then the draft findings
that's attached. If you do um end up approving the uh the petition, there's 14 conditions attached. >> Um that's all I have to introduce the project. Um if you have questions, you can feel free to ask now or later. Um and like I said, the um applicants are
also here to um to address the board. I have a question on the shity bond. Is that is that like a standard uh like is it scalable per acreage or per side like how uh how is it assessed? >> Um we require a decommissioning plan um
as part of the application and um part of the decommissioning plan is an is an analysis of what it would take to decommission the project. Um and then um um the applicant um submits an amount that um you know that they would they they think that it would take so and
then we um we ensure it based on that. That said um we have also had just historically we've had just a standard you know amount. Um what the applicants submitted as part of their decommissioning plan came in just under
what um generally we've uh we've had is is $50,000. Um it was it was less and then it over time it kind of it ramped up a bit um to 50,000. I I believe the last ones that though that were um the last project
that was approved was actually 65,000. Um, but I think that that was based on the um that project's um estimate for for their decommissioning cost. >> And then is that that money is just held in an escrow? It's not gaining interest
at all. It's just 50,000 in 2026, 30 years from now when this plan is obsolete due to its planned obsolescence. It's still $50,000 2026. It's submitted um to the county um as $50,000 cash and that's held for
decommissioning purposes, but it's my understanding that the county can, you know, collect interest on that over time. Okay. >> Over the over the time that we that we keep it and then that's >> I would assume would go into our general account, but I don't know the finances enough to
>> to talk, you know, too smart about that. >> Is there any other questions for Lou? I do have some, but I'm I want to wait for the and then get them all. >> All right. >> Sites. Thank you. >> Thank you, Lou. >> Oh, whoops. >> Yeah, Lou. >> What was the uh time frame that that
other project was constructed on? How many years ago? >> Uh the other uh two projects that are on the property? >> Yes, sir. >> I believe that those were approved. I want to say in 2017. Um I think there there was one maybe before that and then maybe 15 or 16 and then 2017 was the
second. um and then constructed in the the year or two after that. Um the applicants um the the company who is here tonight also developed those so they might have um more information on that top of mind.
>> Jordan thought he just answered my question. >> Oh yeah. Okay. >> Anything else by anyone? >> Yes. the uh uh letter from uh the person that was uh had concerns about the project. Are the pictures that they
submitted the actual site? >> Um >> I I'd have to look at them. I would assume so. >> Um the the neighbors Thanks for bringing that up, by the way. I should have I meant to mention it as part of my presentation, but there is a a public
comment a letter that was submitted and that's in your packet. Um and um the neighbors are also here tonight. So um they'll I assume would also be speaking as part of the public comment. Um I assume that those pictures are um of the site. Um obviously
um >> they look like they are >> and yeah they're not uh not recently because I think they're leafon conditions that those are and right now there's a they're covered in white. So >> not today. It's melting fast.
Uh the other thing that the person mentioned was uh they called this Apple Blossom Scenic Drive. It's not officially listed as such, is it? >> It is a um um I think a state designated scenic byway.
>> Um Apple Blossom Drive. >> Yep. >> Yep. You got another >> Yeah. I just had a question. Have we ever uh had a situation where the shity bond has been used and we've decommissioned a project?
>> Um we have not had a solar energy system large scale solar energy system um be decommissioned. I mean they've got a lifespan they say of like 20 to 30 years or something and um you know we've only started approving these probably in like 2013 14 somewhere in there. So yeah we
haven't had a chance to decommission a project. They're all um operating as intended as far as I know. >> Okay. >> But I think to follow up on your I I don't think it's enough with inflation and cost risings. I think it I think we need to review that policy to have some
kind of uh escalator built into it because 20 30 years 50,000 as you alluded earlier isn't going to be worth $50,000. Same today as my point. Thank you. >> Yeah. So we need to somehow look at a um uh some type of uh escalator built into that >> tracks with inflation.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Is there any other questions for Lou? Otherwise, we'll move on. Is there anyone here representing the owner or the builder to state your case?
>> There. Did we open public uh >> No, we don't do that till after he talks. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. I'm Michael Cathkart. I'm with Sunrise Energy Ventures. We are the owner of Ice House Solar 4. Thanks for having me here. We also have our land
owner um via Zoom. Um we're excited to bring this project to you guys. Um hopefully um Sunrise Energy Ventures. We're based out of Weis Out of Minnesota, so we are a small Minnesota company. We've done a lot of these projects within Minnesota and XL Energy
Service Territory. When I say these projects, I mean these community solar projects. So, as uh Lou mentioned, we actually did develop a couple of the projects that are already on the site um as well as a couple more in Winona. Um and and yeah, what I would like to say
is when looking at sites, um the biggest things we start by looking at are going to be uh the feeder and substation within XL service territories that have capacity. um with how mature and
competitive this community solar market has been um there aren't that many locations available and that's because once these substations and feeders reach capacity uh these projects cannot afford for substation upgrades or big feeder
upgrades. So there is a natural stopping point for these projects. Um, for example, like this one, there's there's a little bit of capacity left and XL remains reserves 20%. So, they don't let us get to that 100% of their substation feeder capacity. Um, but they do let us
get to 80% of it. And there are still I'm sorry, >> can you point that out in relationship to the map where that substation is? >> Yeah. So, the substation is actually in Lac Crescent. So, it's going to be south of directly south of this site following one. >> It not in Winona County. It's not in
Winona County. substation. I don't believe it is. >> And will there be uh uh how will the solar energy get to the substation? Overground or underground? >> So it it it's going to interconnect to the lines that are running where those
other two sites are interconnected to essentially similar to that. It will interconnect to the distribution lines. Distribution lines are going to be your standard t-pole lines. They're not going to be the large transmission lines. Um, and those lines run all the way along one, I believe, all the way south to the
Lacrescent substation. Um, >> not need additional uh poles or >> additional poles on the site, but just on this site like there's a typically there's a three pole configuration um that's on the site just like these other sites and and that's all it is and
then it connects to the tapole to the existing XL infrastructure from there. You said that that Excel reserves 20% capacity and that there's remaining capacity here, but on XL's hosting
capacity map, that entire area has been red since the last time we approved one of these. And so, are they saving this space just for large scale solar?
What I would say to that is having so much experience with Excel that hosting capacity map is is one of my, you know, most used tools. I'm on it every day. It's not always accurate. And so they have other tools, too. They have a preapp report um that we can get and
sometimes it does not reflect the information in the hosting capacity map. And so in my opinion, like there's room to do another project perhaps in this area even though the hosting capacity map is telling, you know, you go to it, it looks like there's nothing. >> If we give you a computer right now, can
you look that up for us? >> Look up the capacity. >> Yeah, >> I I can't remember. Did I share a preapp report with you? >> Always been an issue. It's always it's always >> it would it would have been nice if we would have had somebody from Excel here
uh to echo what you were saying about that based off the the map that we're we're seeing. We're going to have to actually take that more >> verbatim. We've talked about this before because we've had projects in other parts of the county where once this map
shows red and someone wants to just have residential solar on their property, XL is telling them no, they need to do a grid capacity study. And that's like insanely unaffordable for someone that just wants to have residential solar. So
it seems to me that these are all going in at the detriment to anyone who wants to have residential solar. So that their only option is community soul. >> And uh my understanding is that that 20% would would
the residential solar would be allowable within that part of it. Um >> should be there in the other parts where we've had this happen and it's and those people are getting told no. And I don't know where you're experiencing that or with substation or feeders. The 20% rule
is relatively new. When I say relatively, like it probably wasn't there for the first two projects we did, but now it's there. Um, it was probably like 2021 or something along there where they added the 20%. Um, but that is something that, you know, is a I guess
somewhat recent change. Um, then I could say like I do have I believe I do have a pre-app report that will show that there's capacity after this site. Um, I don't have it on me. I also have to just make sure that there's no confidentiality issues with Excel. Um, but that is certainly something that I could show you. I mean, I can tell you
right now that, you know, we're still active in this area looking for additional sites because we do think there's a small amount left, not a lot, but a small amount left to get that 80%. That's information that I would need to have to be able to support another one of a project of this size.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Directly from Excel. What >> Yeah. >> Whether what they're looking >> we've had no luck getting them to to give us that information. >> Yeah. They're they're they don't give that out very easily. Um I guess what I
can you know what I can say is we have a full interconnection study. We're in the facility study of this. So, we have all the interconnection costs. So, we do know there's pro there's room for our project, but that's not going to necessarily show the remaining capacity. The pre-application report, which I
believe I do have a pretty recent one, recent being like a 2025 one, that will show that there's capacity at the feeder and substation even after this project goes in and take into account everything that's in the queue right now. Um, >> your report. Yes. >> No, it's an Excel report. >> It is an Excel.
>> It's it's Excel produces that report. >> Okay. Correct. >> So before you leave this picture, so poles are a bigger eyesore to me than solar panels are. So are you saying that that you're going to have poles running down Apple Blossom Drive into Lac Crescent to carry this capacity or that
would already exist? >> No. So it would be new poles and it would be I think right now we have it proposed with XL is right in here. >> There's three poles I think. >> But you got to get to the sub. How do you get to the substation? So then it
just it's just these three poles and then it inc interconnects to this existing line that runs along here. >> Okay. So you're not you're not putting poles down Apple Blossom Drive to Houston County. >> No. So Apple Blossom Drive is that the green line? >> Um
>> the yellow >> yellow number one. I'm sorry. Locally we call it Apple Blossom Drive. The county it's county road one. >> Okay. >> The only the only people that can touch those poles are going to be XL. So essentially our ownership of this project ends at those three pole
configuration. Then it it's XL. So it goes to their grid. Um but yeah uh based on the cost we're getting for this interconnection. They're not going to be doing a massive upgrade of those lines >> and the only power or the power is only going to Excel. None of this power is to
be utilized for the orchard or the people themselves. >> Correct. these projects essentially um all the power that's generated on it goes to Excel's grid and then people from anywhere in Excel's service territory can do community solar guarded
subscriptions which essentially locks them into a rate which is typically either a little bit lower than what they're paying or it just locks them into an escalator that is far less than you know what what we're seeing escalation of inflation of energy rates
I don't know if you have any more maps. Um, can you tell me where you're in a you're in a gray area. Excel has some, my energy has some. So, can you tell me where that magic line is that XL is and
my energy is? >> All right. So, come over here for this one. >> Sure. >> So, just about run up this line. That's essentially where it is on that hosting capacity map. You can actually turn one of the filters as XL energy
service territory. And you can see that line right here. And unfortunately, unfortunately, we are not able to develop any portion of our site outside of that area. Um
>> why I mean if you're harvesting the power, what matter does it where the panel sit? >> I agree with you. And this is a fight that us as developers um we've been very active in Minnesota. I mean we we were you know pioneers of this program. Some of the first to come online. This has
been something we've been fighting for since day one. Um some other programs and some other states and markets allow you to. Excel does not and neither does this program now is now um it's it's XL is a big part of it. But the Department of Commerce is actually running this
program now. We have to go through an application process with them. They're the ones that give final approval to this what's called the low moderate income community solar program. Um and they >> and who came up with that cute little name?
>> Bombers I guess. Um but >> is not low and moderate and energy is the big bully in the in the playing field and they every year they go ask the public utilities for a rate increase and they get it. >> The reason why it's called that is because the subscribers. So now us as
developers, we have to uh our subscriber mix for these gardens, all the people and businesses we're getting to subscribe to these gardens. They've increased the level of low moderate income people that we need to to be able to apply to this program. We
also get better rates for having more LMI customers subscribing to this garden. So, what's the what's the income level that considers low and moderate income? >> You know, I'm not sure off the top of my head. Um, something I can easily find. >> Okay.
>> Um, but, you know, I think on the like a lot of these gardens, we haven't done our application here yet because we're waiting on, you know, further approval and everything, you know, >> cost grow. Um but you know an application here a lot of times like you know on recent projects we're doing 100% low moderate income because the
difference in the rates um for what we get for the power that's going to LMI subscribers is worth it >> and I'm I'm not an Excel user. Excel is not a co-op. Correct. >> Correct. >> No, it's a private publicly traded corporation. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. Yes. Um, do you have anything legal with Excel Energy about this project? Because we have granted cups for, I believe, three projects and they
never got built. So, we've wasted an awful lot of our time and the developers time for not. >> Yes. And what I can say is for this project, so I agree with that and it's always as a developer, it's always difficult to figure out when to go in
and get the permit because the worst, you know, the last thing you want to do is do all this work. You're spending these projects spend there's a lot of dollars spent on the due diligence of these projects. So typically we like to get our land use permit because that's one of the the big things is where there's gray area. There's no certainty
with that. Um and so but I can say for this project so I I get your concern and um you know everyone's kind of run into these issues and and I myself have been in places where we've had to ask for extension for this specific project and based on some of the things that Lou
brought to our attention in the ordinance is this project is actively in study with XL. It's not buried on a queue. A lot of those projects that are having to ask for extensions, it's cuz they were applying for a permit before their project was even up to be studied
with the utility. This project, we've already gone through two of the three studies. We've gone through the system impact study. We've gone through this new study, which is the transmission study, and now we're about 3 weeks away from getting the final study results. The final study results at that point
will have an interconnection agreement in hand ready to sign and fund. So, you know, th this project is very far along that process. Um, an interconnection agreement will be in hand and if everything, you know, if we get this approved, we're talking about uh
construction starting this year. >> How visible are these solar panels from the uh Apple Blossom Drive? >> You know, it's we've done some, you know, we've gone out to the site, we've done some analysis. Um, there are some
exist existing trees there. I think um we have been asked to provide some screening um you know in in these locations of our site obviously you know not here there's a already a solar garden and then here for the most part it's a pluff so here um I believe is
where we were asked to install some screening um so we can do that and I think with that also given the fact that I mean you know it is a little bit on a hill um we do think that it is a good spot for it and from the drive that it
won't be highly visible is our take on it. >> That's a matter of interpretation. >> Absolutely. >> Um they are visible, Steve. And then just to the north and um well, basically north um we we have approved several other uh fairly large solar gardens. So
the neighborhood has gotten quite solar. Um >> do you think there's more solar panels or apple trees on Apple Blossom? Well, unfortunately, the apple blossom, the tree, the apple business is pretty much gone, unfortunately. And that I'm told
that because um many years ago, Winona County denied a packing plant up there and that shut it down many, many years ago. But um yeah, the orchards are nonfunctioning, I'd have to say, there unfortunately. Um but it is still
considered a scenic byways. And so again, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Somebody loves to see solar panels or does somebody love to see the the vegetation and the nasher trees and the deer and everything. It's it's a matter of interpretation, but yes, you can see them. You obviously can see them. >> And I'd have a question about what type
of barrier you'd put up to um block the view. I mean, if it's a tall fence um versus a natural barrier. >> Yeah. I think the barrier um I don't know it off the top of my head but what is recommended in your kind of guidance
packet um I think it would be something along those lines. So it would be a mix of tro trees and shrubs >> um and and yeah and then it would just be you know maintaining that and making sure that it's it's kept in place and you know properly wellkept. And I hate
to say there's a history of the other one where they've had to replant a number of them and it'll probably be close to the end of the life cycle of the solar panels before those trees really do provide any major I mean there's trees planted there. Yes, they
did what they were supposed to do. >> It takes 10 to 15 years to grow up. >> In my opinion, it's a feel-good condition we put on there. But it as is it logical or not? I think there's other things that can be really fast growing that might be better than a a tree every you know 15 20 feet just
>> you know 15 or 20 years or 30 years you know whatever the life cycle of those is doesn't mean that that site isn't going to be used after that by a new generation of solar panels >> because they're putting them in places where energetically it makes sense to to
harvest the solar energy >> y those trees will ever block or anything either. >> And the one thing I would just like to add in just terms of prospecting and um you know I I do think you know us we we do think this is a site that works well
with the county. Um this is a site that is no longer operational as an orchard. Um so we're not taking you know away good crop land. Um this is also a site totally understand you know the the scenic road the view. I do think that
for a site this size, there is only a small portion there that is really, you know, close to the road there. A lot of it is trying to get as far away from that as possible. Um, like I said, I wish we could go all the way west. Um, unfortunately, we can't with this project just because XL Energy Service
territory. Um, and there is no program like this with the co-op. Um, and so and then yeah, and then I would like to, you know, also, you know, say that this is something that our land owner wants. obviously he's got um a couple gardens on his site already. Um so he is very
familiar um with the value that they bring to him. Um and so you know that's another thing that we want to do is is be able to provide some value to our land owner who um right now this is this is land that's not operational pro. >> Have you ever approached the co-op?
Because there you know you talk about service area that's hills and trees and rocks. There's no h, you know, you go to the wet, there's no houses being built there. Is it? So technically, what is a service area? I mean, have you ever contacted the co-op? Would they allow
Excel, you know, panels to be on because they don't own the land. Excel I mean, XL doesn't own the land and and the land owner owns the land and my energy doesn't own the land. It's you're harvesting sun from the land. So, h have they ever been approached? >> We we have done this in the past on some
projects. My understanding is that it it's more of an Excel decision. Um you have to have both, you know, utility and co-op play ball a little bit, but my understanding is that they essentially put a stop to this
because it was happening too frequently um these these service territory things. So my understanding is that we are not we're not going to be able to be able to extend the service territory. >> It's too hard to fight the red tape of
Excel Energy basically. >> That's what I'm hearing. Yeah, >> that's what you're saying. Yeah, it's too bad because um I know that with my energy with uh
doing something like this, the break would go back to the to the co-op. >> Uh there's nothing here that says that Excel is going to do anything for the neighboring neighboring people. Mhm.
Uh you know these community solar gardens in the past have you know made it where the subscribers have to be from the counties and adjacent counties. Um and so a lot of these projects you know they are getting subscribers from um at least the county and adjacent counties.
>> Does the does the federal tax credit go to you the developer then not the land owner? >> It's going to go to the owner operator. So yes, whoever develops and owns and operates it, >> is that is that the same tax credit as there was
>> before January 1st or is it being phased out? >> It is being phased out. Um these projects though, so it's being phased out. Um there's a deadline coming up I think in July. I'm not the finance guy on our team, so I don't know exactly all
the um mechanisms at play here, but what I can say is this program um is still a feasible program with lots of developers look continuing to look for
sites even with that phasing out and even without banking on that credit. Um so it's it's still feasible even without that. So, there really is no other use for this this land at this time. It's
not uh um prime crop land or >> uh I know Kevin's on the phone. I don't want to speak out for for his land. Um if he wants to orchard for >> it was a one time apple, but uh I guess Kevin is a devil's advocate. It's not
they're not putting it out into grade a field either, but uh >> could it be >> could it be utilized? Yeah. Yeah, >> it's either solar farm or pot farm. >> Yeah.
>> I'm sorry. What What's the question? >> What's the use of the land? You you no longer uh intend to grow apples. >> It's no longer economic it's no longer economically feasible to grow apples on that land because of the slope. it. Now,
all apple orchards are trellised and they plant short trees so that it's easier to pick than um the labor is much cheaper doing it that way. It's also cheaper to spray and to prune. Um it's just not feasible to do it on um land
that's sloped and has big trees. And because of the because of the type of the soil that's there, it makes very poor crop land. I tried to get people to rent it and and grow uh corn or beans. Um they basically I I
couldn't get a a tenant. >> Okay. So, uh, since this is called Apple Blossom Drive, is it primarily because of the orchard that was there that that road got the name, or are there other orchards?
>> It was, but I but um several Well, almost all of the big orchards are gone. >> Okay. So, if the orchard's not there, it's no longer really Apple Blossom Drive either. >> No. >> Locals will always call it that. >> They also they'll always call it that. Apple Blossom has more character than
County Road to One. And it is heavily traveled. Uh we get a lot of traffic uh sightseeing because there's a couple uh there's the the um county park up there, Apple Blossom County Park. >> And then um there's a couple uh
overlooks that see the whole Mississippi, you know, you look into Wisconsin, you see the huge Mississippi River Valley and such. You might be able to see John's house from up there, too. Maybe not. if you know where you're looking. >> I'm shocked that Stephen's never been over to >> Yeah, it's a beautiful part of the the
county. Um I do have one question that um I know I've never asked on any of the others. We're really close to the Lacrosse internet airport. Is there any restrictions for air traffic with solar panels? So interfering. So, we do we
have run um it's it's a tool online that anyone can can go in and use and it's an FAA notice determination tool and essentially you plug in your coordinates and it feeds back whether you need additional approval or additional glare studies whatever it is and this did not
meet the criteria which means it wasn't flagged for being in an area that >> it's pretty close you know in the airspace it's pretty close to the airport okay never asked >> anything else for or Louie >> uh figuring the efficiency of the solar
cells that are going in. How much more efficient are these new ones compared to the ones that are there? >> They're more efficient. Um the biggest thing is so you can see the ones that are there, they've got the horizontal alignment. They're running east to west.
They're fixed tilt. Um that used to be back then it was the most economical way to do these smaller projects. The biggest difference right now is that these are tracking systems. Um so just about most of the newer stuff that you're going to see and in my opinion it does look a little bit nicer, but um
it's going to track with the sun. So it's actually going to move. So a lot of the time it's actually going to be flat, but there are going to be portions of the day um where it's more vertical. Um but you know when the sun's not up it's going to be flat and in the morning and then it's going to you know midday it'll be more vertical and kind of track the
sun. Um, and it requires a little bit larger footprint for the most part. Um, but drives up production. >> But it does it drive up the noise. You some kind of motor. How are you moving these back and forth? >> The noise. The noise. I' I've never
noticed that as an issue. I mean, >> what do you have? Some kind of motors. >> I don't know exactly. It's got to be something. I don't know exactly. But um and you know I I do have uh you know Kevin on the phone and also have a um you know neighbor that here in
attendance that lives by them. Um I do think if you get close to it you can hear a hum. Um but um you know part of the thing is we would try to keep that equipment this it's not really the solar panels themselves. It's going to be the equipment that's interconnecting and our plan is to keep it as close to the
existing site as possible. Um so away from uh you know the the neighbors to the north and closer to the existing system which already has that. Anything else? >> Yes. I'd like to hear from you first.
>> We want to open the public hearing. >> If nobody has any more questions, we might as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'll make a motion to open the meeting to the public. >> Second. >> All right. Jordan made a motion. I don't
know who. >> Lou made the second. Okay. So, the motion has been made and seconded to open the public hearing for project 02. Um, there any discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor of opening public hearing for O2 say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? Nay. Public hearing is now open. Anyone wishing to speak, come to the podium,
state your name and address, and tell us what you want to say. Good evening. My name is Jenny Zinci. If we could get the map back up, I'll just kind of show you where we live. Um,
we moved to our house in back in 2014. And I have to say, when I drove down that driveway and looking down that vi valley, I thought it was paradise. We've traveled many places in the United States and this is one of the most beautiful areas I've ever seen. Um it
makes me very sad that in that request that and a lot of you did not know this is a national scenic byway. It makes me really really sad that um can I just get a show of hands? How many of you have driven that drive from Nine to Lacrescent in this room? Okay. Have you
ever experienced a sunset going down that valley? Our daughter asked to have her senior picture right in front of that valley. It's a beautiful beautiful valley when the sun set is it's one of the most beautiful places to watch a
sunset. Um I know it the trees are not they don't pick the apples but the blossoms still come out in that orchard. And there's a Facebook page that people come out of state. Are the blooms out the apple blossoms out yet? If so, let us know because we want to drive that
drive. So um there is another organic just across the road organic apple orchard there that those blossom also. So this apple blossom right here it just it is so close to that national national
scenic byway that people come and take pictures. It's in this area right here. They'll pull over and there's so many pictures down that valley. And when you say screenings, our neighbors, they're fighting about getting new plant, new
treat, new screenings because there's so many deer. They come and eat those trees and there's bushes. So our neighbors had to personally spend thousands of dollars because they wanted the screenings from the um son solar panels that are
currently there. So it makes me very nervous when they say that they're going to be able to block this. They're not. the valley goes down. It's It's a beautiful, beautiful piece of property and it makes me really sad that we had no idea that this was happening um until
like two weeks ago um that the that this was going on. So, we were very sad that no one contacted us that they were going to be that this was going to be happening. We currently do hear a hum from the other solar gardens from the transformers. So, we're very concerned
about the noise. We're concerned about all the the birds and the deer and all the wildlife that live in that orchard where they're going to go. Um, but the biggest thing and this is a national I had a book most scenic drives in America and we're on it. The the the Apple
Blossom Drive is just a a beautiful drive and this is going to ruin I just feel it's going to ruin that um that view. And I know that they have you know it's their property. they can do what they want with it and if you can't grow
apples but um I just think it's a big mistake to ruin this beautiful piece of property and just to take a drive and watch a sunset it's a you say a garden you're going to make a garden well right now it is a garden and you're going to ruin it with these so solar panels um
the other thing is too that the area the neighbors were not benefit benefit anything from it our electric bill has gone up since our solar panels have gone in. So, it doesn't make sense to us. I was thinking that our bill would go down, but it goes up. Um,
so yeah, that those are my concerns is it is a national scenic byway. If you could see all the people that come to take pictures of that spot going down that valley. Um, the pictures that I included, that's out my kitchen window. The one with the ice on the trees, that's right outside my kitchen window.
So, those are current, not right now pictures, but pictures I've taken in the past. It's just a beautiful um view that you can see along the scenic dry scenic drive that I think is going to be an eyes sore honestly. So,
thank you for your time. >> Question. >> The current solar panels that are there, how how visible are they right now to you? >> Um, so the ones to our George Kim, what direction is that? Jordan's to the
>> south. To the south. >> Ones to the south. We cannot. So I >> see the fence. >> Yeah. So there's two sets we have. I don't know which my directions are, but this over here we cannot see, but the ones
when we look out our window and going down our driveway, we can just see the top line of the fence. So the ones that go towards Fern Valley, >> this that right, if I'm looking right? >> Yes. >> We can just see the top fence. Yes. From
our house right now. Because that's kind of like the crest of the hill, right? >> Yes. So, it's a Yep. So, we can just basically see the top fence right now. We >> This would be on your side. Yes. >> Yes. So, right now we can just see that whole slope and all it's all trees. Tonight when we were leaving it was full
of deer. The birds were singing, lots of turkeys. I mean, it's just full of wildlife. So, I just It's such a shame to take all that out and Yeah. to replace it. So, did that help answer your question? >> Yeah. Yes, it did. >> Okay. Well, and those the ones that are
existing there are stationary. And now these we're going to you're going to have rotating back and forth. >> Yeah, because like I say, you can just see that top fence from our from our view now. >> Stay out, right? Beautiful landscape. >> I just feel like the glare too that it's going to be right at our house. Yeah.
So, anyways, >> beautiful landscape fence. >> Since they installed those other solar gardens, have you noticed any erosion on that property? Um Darth has my husband can answer that because I know he has taken the side by side back there and
you can kind of see the erosion more. He can answer that when he comes up. >> Uh can you answer that? I believe we've had some issues with that on >> what's the question? >> Erosion. >> Erosion on the other sites.
>> The previous caused any erosion. >> Yeah. Um >> the best >> Yeah. I mean there some of the other sites have experienced some um some erosion. Um um um not the ones on this site. Um I wouldn't say I think those went in
fairly successfully. So much of it has to do with timing um with construction and um and weather events. But um the the property the the car property just to the north um um that has three um one
megawatt solar energy systems on it. And um the one um the site that's facing um the south did have some erosion that they they struggled to to um take care of. We were up there a number of times and identifying things that needed to be
fixed and um the company would come and fix it and um we I mean it was that summer we we we did struggle to um to uh get on top of that. The company did over that summer, but there were a lot of um heavy rain events um you know um like
we've seen in some recent years uh in the area that um uh that happened during construction. Yep. Um, but they did have their SWIP. I I mean I they had practices in place. Um um but um yeah, it did happen anyways
and there were some some problems. >> But I forgot to ask you earlier um where are they proposing to put driveways? It says on on the conditions both Winona County Highway and then Dresbeck Township. So are they going to ask for a driveway off of County Road One because
that's a fairly good >> Nope. It would come off of um uh Burns Valley Road. the existing access is there. They would use that. >> So, there's no additional driveway. >> No additional driveway access >> off of County Road One. Yeah. Okay. >> Is that okay?
>> Lou. Uh Lou. >> Yeah. >> It says that one of the four things we're supposed to be deciding here is this is proposed on 12 to 18% slopes. What is the actual slope of this land?
um the land um in the that's that the project boundary is on. Um so that area would be from the top you can see where the existing um um utility area is there
from the neighboring um system. Um that's essentially at the top of the hill and it kind of crowns and then falls off on both sides. Um so the existing sites are on one aspect of a slope and then um the proposed um
project is on the other aspect on the slope and that slope then ranges from you know the very top you know down to so 0 to 4% down to the lower portion which is right at about 18%.
One of the things and I have to say that uh I am all for renewable energy uh but I was not aware of Apple Blossom Drive. Never been there and I do see it as a national
uh scenic byway. Putting solar panels there may uh reduce the number of visitors in the area which would also reduce the number of people
stopping in Lac Crescent or other areas to eat or I'm a little concerned about economic issues >> with it if if it's suddenly no longer a scenic >> public hearing close and then we can discuss some more. Anyone else wish to speak?
>> Yes, I'd like to speak. Um, this is Kevin Lidle and uh my my address is uh 1064 Fair Meadow Lake in an Alaska, Wisconsin. Um, I'm the owner of the property and the property has been in the family for several hundred years.
And the whole and the whole gist of this project or the whole reason I'm in favor of this project is I would like to keep the property in the in the uh family's name. And I'm hoping that when when the solar panels have reached their final
days that it will go back to an era of mine and property will continue to be some type of productive profit um generating property for my errors. Um that being said, I'd like to address a
couple of things that uh Jenny said. Yes, it is a national scenic uh byway. Um and at one time part of that was uh the result of the apple blossoms. There are no um orchards on that that drive
any longer. Very few um that we have a very small piece that does have a few blossoms because but we're not picking them. And the the piece that we're talking about has very very few blossoms. Um the real attraction to the
the highway now is the river view. It's absolutely gorgeous. People are still coming up there to to see the view and and visit the park and the overlook um and make the drive, but it's not for the
apple trees any longer. Um as far as the um the trees go, it it was beautiful when it was an operating orchard. It was mowed, it was pruned, the it would blossom, there were apples that were
beautiful on it. It w I I loved being up there as a kid. It was great. It's no longer mowed. It's no longer pruned. Most of the trees are gone. And there's a reason the trees were torn out of the other side. The trees actually torn out of the other side before the solar array ever was even a even a um a
consideration. And the reason is because apple trees that that aren't sprayed um spread diseases to other orchards and they spread pests to other orchards. So the the apple trees on that side, the the parcel that we're considering right
now are probably coming out eventually anyway. And and and they would have to come out because I'm looking for a viable way to generate some property or profit on the property so I can pay the real estate taxes so I can keep it in the family. I mean, that's just
economic reality. Um, as far as the glare from the solar panels, I I have no idea, but your own staff um did an analysis and on page nine of the packet that they handed out, they indicated
that there wasn't any glare from the solar panels. Um, I I'm not an expert on that. I wouldn't know. Um, the wildlife, there's enough of the property that's still not developed. Um, so I think you're going
to see the wildlife hanging around one way or another. Probably not right outside of Jenny's window, unfortunately, but they'll they'll be around. We're not we're not chasing wildlife out of the area. Um, I guess that's really the only
thing I can say. I'm I'm in favor of the project, obviously. Um, it's up to you guys whether you approve it or not. >> Thank you. All right. >> My name is Gar Sinki. Uh 32997 County Road 1, Lac Crescent. Um my wife Jenny
and I live in the the house uh right adjacent to the property and I'm a little bit torn. I guess I I've been on both ends of a conditional use permit. Um, I have received several in the past and uh I do respect the Lidol's uh
property rights and being able to do what they want to do with their property. Um, and uh I don't know them real well, but uh we have gotten along well in the past. Um, but I also want to try and defend my
property rights also. And um you know I guess the the map isn't up there now but the hillside approximately onethird of where those panels are going to go that hillside faces our our home and uh the
view from our from our kitchen window or our our uh back deck uh looks at that property and and the way that it's the way that it faces our house. um it's going to be very difficult to put any screening there uh that's going to be
effective. And of course we if you put screening up, you lose you lose sight of the the view that you had and you you get a view of trees that are 50 ft away. Um so it it will have some impact I think on our property
value. I don't know how much. I don't know if it's if there's if you can put a number on it. I've researched a little bit uh and I I hope you all read my letter, but in there it's uh from what I found 5 to 10% of of property value uh
depreciation on properties that are that are close to these solar uh structures. Um, and I guess the as far as the screening goes, you know, is there going to be enforcement of that the proper one of
the solar installations that uh is not on this property, but uh a neighboring property. Like we said before, they they did plant the trees. They did their duty. Um the trees are about 10 years old and they're probably four or five feet high u because they get eaten off
by the deer. So again, I you know, I understand wanting to try and put screening up. Um I don't think it's terribly effective. Um I do like the idea of moving the site further west, but I guess my
understanding is that's not not possible based on the the uh rules that XL has in place. Um again, I we weren't opposed to the the structure that's on the the other side of the hill. We can we can just see the the chain link fence from
from our property. It's not a big deal. Um the noise is the noise from the transformer is at this point is u is not a huge problem. We do hear it. Um the noise from construction was was went on
for for all summer that the summer that they built it. Um, and again, I I understand their their right to to do this. Um, so it it kind of puts neighbors in a tough position. I guess you you want to
stand up for yourself and and you don't want to make enemies either. And and that's kind of the position that I'm in. Um, I guess that's uh that's probably about all that I that I had. Um, I do
I'm not an expert on stray voltage at all. I do would appreciate if they would would test for that just because of how close we are. We're if this goes through, we'll be surrounded by uh somewhere around 30 or 40 acres of of solar panels in in different
installations. So, I don't know if that's a a factor or not. We don't have livestock. Um but uh I would hope that they would follow through on on all the conditions that are that are placed on this. Um and it is a beautiful site.
It's one thing that that drew us there. Unfortunately, we don't own the property. U but uh we have enjoyed it the last 10 years. I've been a a lifelong resident of Winona County. I moved from from Nodine to to this location. So, um we we really enjoy it
there and um we just we hate to see it uh hate to see the landscape um be dotted with all these these solar installations. So, thank you. Uh and just to answer the
question on erosion, I'm sure that there there is some erosion on the initial install. Um I haven't noticed any on when you're going down Burns Valley on uh on the backside where that installation is now. Uh it appears to me
that it's that it's well uh established where there isn't uh there isn't a significant amount of erosion there. Um but I don't drive that that road too often. So >> it seems like that side is a little less steep than your side. Would that seem
accurate to you? Yeah, I I think there was some excavating that was done there, too. So, they may have uh put a a bench or something in there to try and slow that down. I know there is a retaining pond or a
structure there at the bottom of that hill to to at least slow the water down. I don't think it's a pond, but it >> it's a a catch basin, I guess, maybe call it. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, is there anyone else that wishes to
speak at the public hearing for this proposal? >> CUP permit >> for the third and final time. >> I come back and just thanks. >> Um, yeah, thanks for having me up again. I think the one thing I think with the
storm water management uh and erosion control I think the one thing I just want to reiterate is and it's it's in our packet but just that you know we're we're we typically use a company O they're a Minnesota based company they specialize in this stuff specifically for solar projects um and so we will
have you know a fully baked plan if anything change any changes need to be made they're here they're around they're around we can make it work um and then another thing I just want to mention that um you know We appreciate the neighbors coming out giving their
feedback. We always want to be a good neighbors ourselves. Um, you know, just in terms of the property value, I did want to mention that there is a report um that is on the Winona County uh website that does go through adjacent property values. Now, it is, you know, I
do get property values. It's tough to compare. It's not always an applesto apples comparison. Um so you know but in all the data that we have this is a common I'll step back and say this is a very common question that we get as
developers when developing these sites is what is the impact on neighboring property values in our experience based on the data um that that we found including that report um which is you know based I think it's based off
properties in Minnesota um there it's minimal Um the only time you're going to see it's actually for this size site, they really can't find any material impact to property values. Um the larger scale sites, you see a very minimal
impact to neighboring property values. So I do want to add that like I said it's not always an apples to apples comparison. Um but that is our understanding of neighboring property values. Um and and really that we found that there is no impact to neighboring property values of community solar
gardens. I'm gonna go ahead. >> You said the substation's in Houston County. Does that substation provide electricity back to Winona County then or not? >> Yeah. So the if if the sub if L Crescent is in another county then that's where
it is. I believe it's in the L Crescent um you know city center. The feeder line that runs from the substation goes up through Winona. Um there's power going everywhere. um once it's kind of on the feeder um it's you know the once the
electricity goes to Excel's feeder and substation it kind of goes everywhere there's not much controlling it um so my interpretation would be yes it's absolutely serving uh Winona County residents >> well it it's Excel Energy has the area
under this line because that was given them when and they put in the line from Lac Crescent to Winona to Redwing and all the way up the river. And so that's why the west of it, that's my
energy service territory and that's why you can't build there. And so under this part or in Excel's service territory, they can sell that energy to anybody that's in that territory, but they can't
sell it unless my energy approves of it to a My Energy customer. But um I guess what what I would say is but still there are Winona
>> right >> businesses residents that are XL customers and yeah >> that energy to everybody in the city of Winona. >> Yes. Yeah. >> And between there and Winona too under that line. >> Yeah. It's >> But not if you live in my energy
territory. No. Okay. No. Yeah. Uh I Looking again at these pictures, uh the existing solar panel substation that's uh down below towards the south. I see another sub uh uh solar
panel directly north on the opposite side of the woods. Is that correct? Is that >> um Can you show me? >> Is that what this is? >> Yep. That's the car. Yes. >> Yeah, that's >> property. >> Yep. Okay. Uh I
always like to see if there is some kind of compromise in any uh situation. So I'd like to pose two things. Number one, is there a way to upgrade the current existing
uh panels in order to get more wattage? >> Uh there there it's not our project anymore. um typically that's not economically efficient um until much later on in the project until
panels start to fail. Um and also the project itself has a contract with Excel based on the design that's there. Um and I've never been I guess my opinion is they would not allow that. I don't say
that with certainty because we've never tried it, but that would be my understanding of it is that, you know, it was designed to specifications that um were approved and are part of the interconnection agreement and I'm not sure how much flexibility there is to change that. >> So my next question is
would you possibly be amendable to cutting in half your proposed plan so it moves further to the west? So the problem we run into is so right now it's
a 1.5 megawatt that just very tightly squeezed. So our production is is right now um taking a hit because we're trying to you know follow the ordinance and have all these setbacks and be off the 18% slope. the 18% slope is kind of in that bluff setback. It kind of eaten
into a good portion of the project which unfortunately we we could build on um and still get production and move some of those panels away from the area um that that you know seem like to to be the major issue with the neighbor. Um but because of the current ordinance we
can't. Um now why it's tough to downsize this project? Um couple reasons. One is just the financials. um we've got an interconnection cost and that cost doesn't change with us downsizing um for
the most part. So cutting our production you know if if we cut the project in half let's say into a 75 we can afford the interconnection cost. Um, another thing is this project is because of, you know, some of the feedback I got of this
project should be, you know, actively in study with an interconnection cost like very close to achieving interconnection agreements that we're not wasting anyone's time. We have to go, we have to have an application for a set um, size. And so
going back and asking for that to be reduced typically is not allowed with XL. It kicks it back and would have to be restudied, which means we'd have to start this, you know, eight month study process over again. Um, and then like I said, um, you know, the the financials
just don't seem to work with the interconnection costs we're getting for cutting in half. Um what I could say is you know I I would love to hear a little bit more about if there is some um you know concerns um you know exactly where we would be
thinking of of you know what would make the neighbor to the north happy um and see what we can do. But uh um like right now with all the setbacks, the service territory, the existing garden, we basically have this footprint locked in.
um based on all the ordinance and what's already on the site. Um and we already have our application in um for a 1.5 megawatt project and yeah, it's it's very tough to go back. It's probably >> So, let's let's just say that uh hypothetically we deny
>> this and if we deny it then you can't build it at all. >> No, no, that's not quite true. We advise the county board. >> We advise >> Yeah. We can't cancel or approve anything. But if they if our if >> when we advise it and if they take our
concerns and they say no, we're not going to allow you to do this, then basically you're dead in the water. >> Correct. So >> until they sue us, >> unless you come back with a different plan, >> right? Oh, what um one you talked about
the 1.7 uh >> sorry 1.5 >> the one the 1.5 uh is that the uh >> that's currently that's being proposed >> that's the wattage or >> that's the megawatt production that's the size of the solar garden.
>> Okay. So, can you get the same wattage by I'm looking at this this map here and it's uh there's a rectang or it kind of juts up >> Yep. >> towards the other drive there. If you cut that off
and utilize the area west of that, can you provide close to the same >> if if the service territory didn't cut off there? >> Um, then yes. Well, I I'm talking about the the area
that you already have proposed >> within within the area. So, right now, what we're proposing is essentially that's 1.5 packed in as tight as possible in the only area that we can use with the current ordinance. The only way to, you know, remove some of those
panels on the northeast that seem to be the the biggest concern here, um, you know, in in this area right here. >> This area here. Yeah. Um the only way we'd be able to move those in uh you know keep the project here at the size that it's at where it's
financially feasible would be using some of that area where it would be 18% slope and or within that you know 100 foot bluff setback. Um what I would say to that is is you know just just kind of making a pitch for that is that these
panels um you know we can put these typically in wetlands and it's not considered an impact as long as we're not doing fill or not doing um you know access roads uh the the the padmount area. Those are considered like impacts
to, for example, weapons. Oftent times, like in in some other jurisdictions, just the poles themselves, they're not going to be on cement blocks. They're just piled right in. Oftentimes, they're not considered impacts. Now, your county does consider it a structure. Um, and therefore has to play within the
ordinance, but that is something, you know, we've we've looked at is is going a route where we ask for a variance to get that approved so that we can remove some of those panels from that area. Um or even just make it so we have a little bit better production. Um because yeah, we're you know it's it's a tight spot as
is. All set. >> Yeah, I I guess I'm not questioning so much about the construction. It's just uh the the view for the neighbors, uh their their their property, the view from the road. Uh it seems like it's with the
proposed plan, it's just right up to the road. And if there was a way somehow to just reduce the number of panels that are that are going in or I understand you can't shift it. I mean just reduce
it so that there's so you can have a burm between the road and the and the panels if that might be something that everybody could agree on. Uh,
>> tough question because I >> stop. Yes. Um, I think the titles are still on. Um, and uh, I apologize. I should have looked this up earlier, but I did not. Um, you own more land than just that little parcel, correct? >> Yes, we do.
>> You own like five par five parcels up there. So what what is prohibiting from I'm looking at um a topographical map here with such um moving it to a parcel that um would be to the south of the
current ones. There's a very big large parcel there. Why why not put it there versus why you're putting it >> here? you're looking for economic opportunity. It really shouldn't matter, I guess, to you where the money comes from as long as the money comes to pay
the taxes. So, do you have other plans for that? It and I think it may be a flatter parcel. I I'd have to drive it again. I was >> Well, we we have two parcels obviously. The one across the road is a very nice parcel. It's not >> I don't want it on the Riverside. No,
>> that's that's that's exactly why we're we're not looking at that. going on something on the south >> and then on the uh the the southern we only have one other uh parcel other than that one and that's um midway up just before the park just before the overlook park.
>> Yes. >> And um we we we hope to develop that someday. But even if we didn't, that has some some views that overlook the um it's not really the river, but it's more the um
>> L the Crescent Valley and and and out into the marsh. And it's uh it's more valuable property than you would put a a solar farm on, first of all, and secondly, um we looked at the econ we've actually looked at a solar farm on that piece of property and it wasn't big
enough to support it. like Mike Michael's trying to tell you, it has to be a certain size or they simply have no interest in in uh doing it. >> It's not economically feasible for them. >> Yeah. To do it. So, >> and when you're saying the south, are
you talking about lower like um >> I believe it's Fruit Acres property is to the south. It's it's >> Yeah. Okay. Because >> it's Well, it's not >> I don't think he's talking about the stuff in the lower orchard. >> Oh. Um, yeah, the stuff to the south is
is of of the property that we're the parcel that we're discussing right now. Directly to the south of that is not our property. That's uh Fruit Acres. >> Okay, that is Fruit Acre. It all looks the same. Dead apple trees. I'm sorry, but >> it looks very All right,
>> Michael, a question for you. Um, what are you anticipating the capital cost of this project to be? What ballpark are we talking here? Yeah. So, I think typically it's fair to assume like um at least well I'm not our financial guy. I'll say that. But I think in the past
we've always like just uh you know you can kind of Google a rough rule of thumb is a million per megawatt. >> So we're looking at about a million and a half. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Lidell, so with how you've seen this uh parcel change over time, I'm imagining you're taking on the cost
of that capital improvement um on your property taxes. Do you feel as though that this um expansion is going to uh I guess my question is or concern being is that you're going to see diminishing returns on you know you put on a large
project and then you take on the capital and cost of how that property value is assessed um for every additional uh solar projects you bring on. Is that being taken into consideration with your economic uh calculus? >> Well, I
I couldn't tell you how they calculate my my assessed value, but I know for one one thing that uh it's it's gone up 69% since we put the first solar farm on there, but I don't really think that that has much to do with the solar farm. I think it's just that the market values
in Winona County have just uh the assessed market values anyway have skyrocketed over the last few years. Um, so I I don't if if your question is, do do I think that putting the solar um
array on this property will increase my uh real estate taxes over and above what they would be normally increased anyway. I don't I don't think I don't think that's the effect of it. >> They don't own the solar farm. No, but >> and also I'll add that our lease option
agreement that we have um and with all these sites, if the landowner can show us um that there is a a tax increase as a result of the solar installation, we're we're the one that gets burned with that additional cost. >> There it is. All right. Thank you for
that. >> All right. Thank you. >> You said something that triggered me. So, um, your company developed the first two, >> correct? >> projects, but you alluded that you don't own them anymore. You've already you've already sold them, >> correct?
>> Okay. And who owns those now? >> So, I will have to check. It was >> And this is a common practice in the industry, I understand. >> Correct. Um, it is very common. It's it's part of the reason why they're in um, you know, a project LLC. Um, I believe one of them was a company
Greenark and another one is New Energy Equity. Um, I believe those are the two companies, but like I said, if they've been flipped since, um, it wouldn't be that shocking. >> Sure. Very common practice. But where where my angst comes is you're telling us all these good things and all the good things that your company has been
doing, but I think the people in the room need to know these are often sold, bought and sold, bought and sold, bought and sold. So, we have to hold the land owner responsible, not this company. The the conditional use permit goes with the land owner, not this company. And I do
have some angst, and I've expressed this to staff that we even put your name on the applications because we can't hold you responsible for anything because you're gonna you're going to sell it and we're going to be dealing with somebody else. And again, it's a common practice in the industry. So just so people are
aware of that he can he can promise us you know everything but you're gone once it's built and up and running. >> Can I respond to that? >> Yeah. Um what I would say is so I mean I don't want to speak for anyone here but uh so they I think that's why
the importance of the conditional use permit and having um thorough and well-defined conditions is very important in these situations because that's what's going to get transferred with the project that is part of the
project and you know that's what holds us accountable or anyone else who owns owns and operates these sites accountable. >> Well, we have chased developers around the country with some of these projects. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. Because you're aware of all these conditions, but when this gets sold, you
have no obligation to know to tell them >> anything about these conditions. >> Well, the conditional use permit goes with I mean the lids are applying for the conditional use permit, >> right? >> Not him. >> No, I would Can I can I interject
something here? Um actually we are not applying for the conditional use permit. The the applicant is um we are we are trying to um lease the land to somebody else according to a lease option agreement and it's the lease option
agreement that is actually sold to these other companies. Um, and I my understanding is it has to do with the tax breaks and whatever. But anyway, the point is the obligations are passed on to whoever buys the contract. So, if the
contract is written correctly and the and the and the conditional use um um what's what's the word I'm looking for? That you that you require is written properly. Whoever buys the contract must
abide by that. So, if you're going to lease it, will you receive the property tax bill? >> Yes. >> And still be responsible for that portion? >> Yes. Unfortunately, >> not the least receive it. Okay. >> So, uh why is it that your company
hasn't offered to buy this property outright? >> They don't buy. >> Um I I don't think uh they had an interest in it. We we do do that with properties. Um but typically, >> so I would say we do prefer to purchase the property. um it typically works better economically for us, but I think
a lot of land owners do like to keep the land in their name. Um do like to pass it on to their next generation. Um and so typically I would say lease options seems to be the more frequent um agreement that we have in place with our land owners, but we do oftentimes try to
purchase these properties. >> Okay, I think at this time we're gonna try and get this public hearing closed. All right, for the third and final time. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Uh, I'm just curious what the lease term
is. Is it is it 20 years? Is it is it 18 years? It's renewable five times or >> Well, this just out of curiosity, >> it's Steve, can you answer that? >> Well, and I'm sure he said not them, but their name is on this, not not any
lease. can't yeah I can't speak to the lease but the one thing that I wanted to make clear is the conditions on the conditional use permit they are the property owner's responsibility and they stay with the property no matter what the lease says or who it's sent to right
>> uh there may there may be protections in the contract for the property owner they'll you know uh cover his expenses if if uh they result in him having costs uh but the the conditions you put on those are bottom line uh that can't be changed by
a contract. >> So basically if we if we put on a condition that there has to be a 50 or 100 ft BM that's all trees then uh the lidal family is responsible for doing
that unless it's listed in the lease that the company will do it. Is that correct or >> it's so if you have that if you have that condition in the conditional use permit and it's uh an appropriate condition uh whoever uses the property
has to put that BM in the property owner ultimately if say someone was going to get fined because of the they didn't do it that would go to the the actual property owner regardless of what the lease said. Now again, he may have recourse to the lease under that
agreement to get reimbursed, but it is the property owner. >> I I just I just have a little concern. I'm kind of uh I want to make sure that I'm clear and idols are clear also what uh what could happen down the road just
by uh if this gets approved. >> Yeah. Yeah, and Marca has brought up these concerns before that the we weren't even sure if the property owners understand what they're getting into every time we approve one of these >> because they depend on the developer.
>> Yeah. And if you just take the developer's word for everything, it all sounds great. But okay, let >> Thank you, Steve. Uh for the third and final time, does anyone wish to speak to
in the public hearing for uh COP permit for >> I'll move to close the public hearing. >> Uh Jordan move to close the public hearing and Steve, you second it. Okay. Is there I hope there's no more
discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Nay. The public hearing is now closed. So now I hope we don't have to talk quite as long as we did so far, but >> I got up for you. You I'll let you talk
as long as you can make some sense, John. >> Okay. Um I'll try to keep it short. Um I guess I have uh three observations to make. one, uh, in my opinion,
um, your property rights end at your property line and your neighbor's property rights begin at his. Of course, there are there are, you know, there's wiggle room there because of, you know, something you could be
doing that's offensive on your land affecting your neighbor. We see that when we're talking about people that are moving from the city out in the country near a a feed lot and then they start
complaining about smell, right? I mean um so there are there are certainly those circumstances. Um and um but I'm a strong believer in property rights. Um
secondly, um anything you do that's visible on your land is likely to upset your neighbors because they believe that they're, you know, living in a a great place. It's beautiful
around here. This is a beautiful part of the country. anything that you do that is different and especially different from the sort of idyllic landscape that apple orchards represent. It's going to
upset them. It's going to bother them. Um third, um Marshia and I are very familiar with that stretch of road. You've biked it thousands of times, I suppose. I drive
up and down that road a lot and um um you know it's certainly beautiful but one side of the road is way more beautiful than the other side. It used to be, of course, that you were driving through orchards with all the beautiful
blossoms and everything in the season when when this came out, but now when at least when people come from somewhere else to drive down Apple Scenic Drive, they're looking at the
river valley view, which is fantastic and well worth a trip. Um it's not the the orchards anymore that are the attraction in my opinion to anyone coming from elsewhere. And um
you know I mean things are going to change if we're going to uh develop. We need more energy. This is a kind of energy that we produce ourselves and don't import. And um I favor the the application.
>> Okay. Anybody else have something to say? Marsha, >> I got a quick question. Um, because I had a fellow commissioner in another part of the state of Minnesota. This was a nightmare. Rusty patched bumblebees. It's listed here on page 64.
>> They're an They're a federally endangered species. And that this was another it wasn't a a solar pro. There was a project in another part of the state of Minnesota and they really had to um provide and it just says here incorporate native pollinator vegetation
into site design and reduce moane frequency in spring. So I think it can be maintained but that's when you start messing with federally um endangered species that raises everything to a higher level. So I don't know if just planting planting prairie plants will
suffice to meet that. And who determines if they're uh in compliance? And >> ah not >> I suppose the bumblebee. >> There's Yeah, the bumblebee has representation. >> Um >> well, I can tell you right now that what's there is going to be orchard grass, probably a lot of reed canary
grass. >> Yeah. >> Mostly invasive species right right there that are not very pollinator friendly >> because that's what happens to all these orchards. >> Sure. Well, that's something we have to be aware of. I mean, and we do have in the landscape plan, you know, what what
they've got to Yeah. >> put put in there and stuff. Um, before we do the a couple of the conditions, I do have concern about u the landscaping plan. I think we've all, you know, like I said, I think the plantings we've had people plant are just feel-good uh, you
know, graphics. They are not fast growing. They are not deer resistance. They they haven't they don't grow at a rate that provides any kind of screening for many, many years. There's got to be some other types of uh plants that do grow fat. I know uh I can't remember that. I'm not a plant person, but I know
there's better things maybe to plant along a fence line and that that fence line's going to be just ugly because it's going to have big signs on beware of, you know, high power or something. I saw someone posted and stuff. So, I I mean the and we do have to approve the
um vegetation plan. So, I think we need to really uh hone in on that. Um this whole um especially with the idea that this company isn't going to own it. The lids are going to lease it out and everything. I think the um financial shy
of uh that we've used the formula we've used really needs to be reviewed and looked at some type of uh uh increase with inflation and things like that. Of course, maybe in 30 years we won't even exist. will be blown off the face of the earth and we won't have to worry about it. But but I think just setting a
figure 50,000 today isn't going to cover the cost when it does have to be decommissioned. So >> county board ought to get on that. >> Pardon me. >> County board ought to get on that. >> We should it it definitely needs to be addressed. Um there was a condition here applicant uh driveway Winona County
Highway Department and I really don't want a driveway there. I think it would be detrimental and I that was a condition. So, I was assured there wouldn't be a driveway onto the county road. So, I think we could remove that condition. And, um, at some point in time, uh, people want to make money, and
I know there's a lot of, uh, solar things where they're doing more and more, uh, livestock grazing under them and around them and through them. I I've even read a dairy magazine where they had these things on wagons and they moved them around a yard and they used them for shade for organic dairy grazing
operations. So, Mr. Lidle, you're going to have a really nice fence. Maybe you want to get a flock of sheep in there to to uh and you and and you can sell them in the fall and make more money. >> Um I I do I don't know that we've ever really researched the scen the federal
scenic byways if there are restrictions on that. I'm not familiar. I know we always you know we state that, but I'm not sure if there's restrictions on things that we can do on that part of the road. Um I I don't know. I think we should uh investigate a little bit that we're not infringing on some federally
mandated uh scenic byways restrictions. Um those were a couple things that I had that I think we need to take into consideration. >> And I just uh wanted to say that uh um I've definitely devil's advocate with
all my questions on this. I am all for solar power. I'm for wind power as well. If I'm just cons and I'm also for uh property rights, you know, that people should be able to do what they want to what they want to do on their property.
But I feel if there was a way to uh do it in such a way that it doesn't quite impact the neighborhood as much. >> I you know that that would be um that
would be wonderful. I uh I understand that this orchard you're not going to use it for anything else. So um and it's really not viable for any other use other than this to to make money. But as
good neighbors, if there was a way possibly to work something out with in the neighborhood, I think that would be a great great asset to everybody there. Dick. >> Um, I have several concerns. I heard
once that there was four reasons he needed a conditional use permit. Um, 18% slope. That's there's nothing else that we allow on that kind of slope. Not even close to that. Um, Winona County in the
comp plan has bill banned building houses on top of bluffs on 61 because it was natural beauty we were trying to protect. We seem to have lost all concern about natural beauty by letting solar panels come in along a national
road whether the apple trees are there or not. Um, the land owner's concerned on property rights, wants to generate income. Um, as a farmer, all my woods I pay property tax on. I can't generate any
wood income from it. Nobody feels sorry for us. I mean, it's kind of part of owning land. Some of it does not produce income. Um, I I feel the neighbors have legitimate concerns.
I'm very concerned about the erosion. Um, enforcing any conditions when you're chasing a company is almost impossible. So, you can put as many conditions on as
you want. I don't know how you're ever going to enforce that many to that degree. Number four on the findings of fact, the land is uh related to overall needs and existing land use. No, this is not the
existing land use. We're bringing in something new to put on land that was never intended for that purpose. So, I don't feel it meets the criteria. I mean, I have several reasons I could go on and I'm not going to keep talking, but I don't feel comfortable supporting
this. >> My uh Jordan I I gave a couple reasons earlier about why I couldn't support this being that I haven't I've yet to hear ever anything from XL saying that these aren't
preventing other people from having residential solar which is a big problem for me. Um, but besides that, when when the Zincies moved in to the Egg Resource Conservation District, I can't imagine they ever thought there would be a power
plant outside of their window that they would be looking would be egg related at at worst or best, however you want to look at it. But this is this is so much more industrial than what the
what the name implies. Um but I don't I don't see any way I can support any more of these until we get some definitive answer from Excel or uh I guess I would like to see some changes
going forward with the comp plan too, but we'll have to see how that plays out. or should you still >> Yes. If if we if we use this list of conditions, I I think we need to consider if not built within three years, the conditional use permit goes
away. We've we've allowed, I think, three at least three different solar operations, actually. I think maybe four that have never come to fruition, but a conditional use permit is always out there and and it would always be with uh
would it ever I guess I'm looking to staff if something that got a conditional use permit for solar, you know, 10 years ago, would there be a review process if it decided to build tomorrow on the conditions that were put in 10 years ago?
And part to part of what uh um Jordan's talking is that they've kind of locked in those numbers for production. I think I think they were all XL and so they've locked those numbers in for uh used up production. But have they really and is that impeding somebody from doing a
small individual plant? I you know I don't know. But I know we've got some that uh along I90 uh two of my neighbors were going to build right across the road from each other. They said no they will never happen. I saw Andy Cronabush tonight. Uh XL has now up the something
to put the line in to $3 million or something. So he said probably his will never never see uh any kind of progress, but yet they still have those conditional use permits for those projects. And I find that problematic. >> Yep. And um so the conditional use permit it it technically yes. If they
came back with the same like in 10 years you you grant a permit today it doesn't get built. in 10 years they come back with the exact same >> exact same >> exact same request. Um that could potentially be acted upon without amending the perimeter coming back before a public body for approval. Um
what we found is that usually it's different. Um even Andy Croner Bush's projects um he had two that occurred on the same piece of land. He had the original five megawatt um project that was approved that didn't go forward. Um
later a one mega like I think it was like two one megawatt projects were ca came in afterwards that were proposed and those were approved. It was a smaller footprint. Um there was talk about like oh does it fit within the original um permit. We said no because
it was there were they were requesting completely different um project boundary >> um and and different types of panels. So there was there is different impacts from this um from from those proposals than um what the original one was. So
what we did there is the original 5 megawatt um um permit was revoked. It was removed >> and then there was new um new applications made on the same property in order to keep a clean um uh a clean record.
>> It wasn't I didn't realize that that it was revoked. >> Yep. Yep. So that's how we handle that. >> Okay. We got two of them along I90. was um two different parties and uh uh >> yeah, one was the multiaxis trackers
with the big >> Yeah, they were going to rotate. Yeah, rotate. That was Mike um Modus and then across the road was um buyer Valerie and and uh buyer. But I I've been told personally they said the
buyer said it wouldn't never happen because um XL wanted a million dollars to put a line somewhere. >> Yeah, they need a line upgrade. I think that's what he was talking about um earlier. And that's not really feasible for you know for these projects. It essentially kills the project
>> and those CUP still out there. Correct. >> They're still out there in those cases. Yes. But um with unviable projects um >> um and that's a I would just mention too that's a different feeder line. So um
that's uh as a different um capacity situation than the one that we're talking about tonight. >> Sure. Okay. >> Uh anyone else have anything to say? Otherwise, I guess I'm going to open my mouth.
Uh, I this is basically my opinion, but I read an article not too long ago that states that both solar and wind power are things of the past.
And yes, we do need more energy production, but one of the reasons they're things of the past is they're not reliable 247, and the cost of making them reliable
makes them cost prohibitive. And so I don't I c can't support this project for that and a whole lot of other reasons because
and we just discussed part of it on the proposal for the house that's already built and we we we've done this over and over and over with planning and zoning in the
years I've been involved. We just I guess the simplest way to say it is we better be careful about what we wish for because it might happen. That's what I'm going to say.
>> I'm going to make a motion to take this to the vote. >> Yeah, >> I second. >> All right. Chef made a motion to um now are is anyone you do you want make this
>> I'm gonna I'm going to make a in in favor or against that what you're looking for? >> No, you got to you got to make a motion to include the findings of fact >> and the conditions. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to uh bring this to a vote uh with the findings of
facts and all conditions as listed. All 14. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> I would like to add one condition >> that the project isn't consumed within 3 years. The permit becomes DOA.
>> Uh is are you are you amendable to >> Yeah. Um you've you've convinced me absolutely with uh with the consideration of uh the potential I'd make recommendation for as Louis stated this isn't uh enacted on within three
years uh that it uh it terminates. >> Okay. So we have a motion on the floor by Shep and Steve second it right? >> I'll second it based off of Louis recommendation. Yes. >> Okay. No. Is there any further
discussion? >> What about the the bond? Any consideration at this point about the shity bond? >> I'm not convinced we have enough information to impose what we suppose it should be. Um I I I feel as though what
the uh what it's set at is at least a good start. I'm not sure in 30 years it's going to be enough, but um maybe we'll have it thought of the next time uh this proposal is or rather this subject parcel is brought up for a solar
project again. And I I really did like uh Steve's suggestion of some type of burm along County Road One so that it doesn't deter from the the scenic byways if there's any way to you know to burm it up and do some other and I don't know
if that can be addressed in a v in a landscape plan. >> Well, we're already talking about an area that is is this considered bluff in any way or just they're 18% grade? both. >> Um there is a bluff area to the uh west um but most of the project area is on
what would be considered steep slopes and steep slopes by definition in the ordinance is 12 to 18%. >> Is there any uh restriction just generally on bringing in fill on those areas that you're aware? >> Um there could be depending on how much
fill you're you're bringing in. Um yeah, if you're over a thousand cubic yards of material >> and we've had um several firms. Yeah. >> I I I will say when you're on the site, when the road is is bending, you know, on that left turn as you're going to the
south, it's going like this and the the solar arrays are down an embankment and off to the I guess the south. Um, I don't know how much a burm is going to is going to help that since you're kind
of up higher on the road anyways looking looking down on the project. Um but um um and you know we'd have to look at you know road right away and um there would have to be some um um I mean you can try
to suggest the the condition but I'm just I'm just thinking through the the feasibility of actually you know building the burm and um we'd have to review that and and and >> landscaping. I mean, we could we could look at it as part of the the the landscaping plan. Um, but I just I'm not
quite sure of the feasibility of it. >> That burn or or screening would almost be worse than just looking being able to look over these solar panels to have that view of that Burns Valley view. >> You got to look through a chain link fence with high voltage lines on it
every 5t. >> Yeah, that would be really scenic. >> Yeah. >> All right, we have Everett. I just have one comment on the $50,000. I don't think it's anywhere near enough. If a neighbor got cancer or Parkinson's, I mean, a quarter million dollars wouldn't be enough. So, I don't know how you
realistically set a fig from straight >> hardly tear down a house for that. I mean, let alone a >> $50,000 wouldn't cover erosion building. >> It's not enough. And that's we've had discussions with I've had with other counties in the state and you're right,
that's a topic they're addressing. what is reasonable and I don't have a figure but I think it's something we need to definitely look at and change >> Louie Mr. Chairman, I don't think perhaps how much it would cost to reclamation the site is in the proverb of this committee. I think that would be
more discussion with the county board to figure out what the cost would be to do that >> because we do not have the costs available here to do it. >> Well, the county board has any more common sense than this committee does, Louie, and and lived experiences. >> Well, I could sit from my own experience
what it probably should be said at, but I'm not sitting in there and judge against the site. I mean, I know the pros and cons of solar and wind, and I've known them since they started this boondoggles throughout our society. If it wasn't for the tax rebates, these projects would not simply be going on.
>> True. And that may change very soon, too. >> Well, we had a safe we had an act in Congress that may change a lot of these credits and stuff like this. But it isn't for me to sit there and decide what the property owners want to do. It's just that if I don't want to look at the boondoggle that's going down Apple Blossom Drive, I guess I drive
someplace else. But it's not for me to say not to do this. It's not in the property rights, but but the clean up the affair if it goes on. Good hail storm can raise hell with solar cells, too. >> Yeah. >> And you you do have them down on that
ridges at times. >> Yes, we do. Lou, >> um, if it's all right. I just have a couple of, um, a little bit of information regarding, um, the, um, um, the decommissioning. Um, the decommissioning cost that's in the decommissioning plan is much larger than
the $50,000. Um, that is arrived at when you when you take in the to effect what they estimate the recycling value to be at the time of decommissioning. So, just so you know, like we're not we're not saying that that 50,000 is going to cover the
decommissioning, but we are hoping or they're estimating that it would cover it after recycling of materials that that are there currently. Um, >> but we don't have access to that. That goes to the landowner or the the county wouldn't have access to that. >> Well, the county isn't responsible for
decommissioning either. >> I mean, we would ultimately we would have to cover tech the land owner in some regard. I'm sorry, what? >> The decommissioning bond isn't is I imagine an assurityity to guarantee that there is money set aside for the that
the property owner will take to recover their space after these projects are used up is what I imagine. >> Yeah. If if if it's needed in order to you know in order to do decommissioning unit costs three times the $50,000 is
the land owner's responsibility to cover the rest of it. I >> think so. And that's that's something I imagine the land owner has to >> weigh whether or not it's worth the risk. >> Yep. >> I don't know if they even understand that though is the >> Well, you could ask. >> Also, I mean, when you're looking at
decommissioning, I I know we have done some analysis on what other communities are doing. I would say 50,000 is probably on the lower end of what a lot of communities are looking at these days. There are some that are, you know, 85, 100, even 120, 150. Um I I'm not
sure. We'd have to do a little bit more research to see what kind of um um shity they're using. If it's a bond, that's much cheaper for the solar company. We request a cash escrow, which is is more expensive for them. We ask that upfront um because then we don't have to worry
about, you know, tracking down over over time, making sure that it's actually in place, the bond, because they a lot of times they expire after a year and then they have to be constantly re um re re-upted. Um and that's just really hard administratively for us to track. So we
are putting more of a burden on them um with the cash escrow up front. Um um so there are differences and different considerations when you're talking about different shies. Um and I think you're right. If we were going to look at, you know, changing that, it's probably something that we want more information,
a little bit more research. Um and we'd probably consider it maybe separate from a a request like this. But >> Okay. Is there any more discussion hearing? None. All in favor of the >> Can we have a show of hands instead of verbal? >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Okay. >> Uh all in favor of the motion to accept the CUP application with the findings of fact and the 14 conditions. >> 15 >> 15 now. Okay.
>> Or we could take the county highway department. >> Well, driveway. >> Let's not worry about that. >> Okay. add the 50. >> Uh so we'll start with Shep and raise your hand. All those in favor raise your hand.
>> All right. All those opposed, raise your hand. >> So we >> Let's see. We got one. >> It's an even split. >> Yeah, it's even split. >> One, two, three, >> start over again. All those in favor,
raise your hand. So, we got four there. >> Yep. And you got >> All right. All those against, raise your hand. >> Well, we got four here, too. >> All right. And it's just a recommendation.
>> So, now what do we do? >> Failed. >> It failed. A tie is a fail. >> Okay. All right. Uh, well, I thank you for the discussion. Uh I hate to tell the fellow members of the
board that uh this is kind of mild. I'm sorry we've gone through approved. So uh >> you can take that for what it's worth. >> We still have to have a motion to go the other way. Correct.
>> No failed. It's failed. So, >> we are recommending to the county board that we're not in favor of this, but it still will be acted on by the county board. >> Yeah. >> On April 14th at 9:00 a.m. Is that
right, Ross? >> Yeah, that sounds right. >> So, question. Um, if they come back with a little different plan to the county board, does that make or do they have to present the exact same plan? >> They got to start all over. >> They got to start all over.
>> They got to start all over if that's >> um just we got another technical clarification. Uh you didn't vote against it. You just did not pass a motion in support of it. Right. So that's that's there's four people we
support and four people against. It's just that the motion failed and you you basically have have no recommendation. >> Yeah. No. Yeah. >> It's tough because there's just there's so many there's good, there's bads. It's
just I'm not clear exactly which way we needed to go. Would it be reasonable to table this until we get some information from Excel or even go as far as uh seeing what happens with the new comp plan? I know that's a long ways
out, but >> I don't think we got time for that. >> Well, the county board can, you know, >> yeah, we >> so I mean staff can solicit that information >> for the county board meeting. Well, yeah, I would I would definitely
if I were on the county board, I would want to have that from Excel total spreadsheet and we've asked for that. Well, it's been asked for at this group, but we've never Yeah, Excel is pretty tight lipped on their information. >> Is there anything else we have to do on
this petition? No, I I would say just uh maybe as a formality a vote to uh uh u notify the county board that you're sending it on without a recommendation. >> Okay. >> Just so that you have acted on it.
>> Okay. >> I'm going to make recommendation to pass this on to the county board uh without recommendation. >> Okay. Is there a second to that? >> I'll second. >> All right. Shep made a recommendation that we pass
it on without he made a proposal that we pass it on without a recommendation and Steve seconded it. All those in favor say I. >> I post nay. >> Nay. >> Okay. Well, I'm pretty sure that it will
get there in that method. Uh is there anything else that should come before this? >> Will we move to adjourn? Is there a second? >> I will second. >> I like all those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Okay.