Solar company proposes mitigation fund

WASCO CO. — A company planning to install 5,442 acres of solar panels on 25 leased properties in Juniper Flat, amounting to a 12,532-acre corridor, is working on how to offset lost farm income within the project’s footprint.

As part of its fulfillment of requirements by the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, solar company BrightNight sought input from Wasco County on its proposed Community Investment Fund, a payout of $148,060 per year for direct impacts and $89,134 for indirect impacts to impacted agricultural organizations upon the completion of the Deschutes Solar and Battery Energy System. The initial estimates project $2.1 million for the site’s 30-year duration.

At a regular board meeting on June 17, Community Development Director Kelly Howsley-Glover presented suggested changes to the fund’s advisory committee members and selection criteria, inviting public input into these two specific areas.

“The selection committee, according to the plan that was sent to us, evaluates funding requests intended to mitigate impacts to agriculture, and then those selections would be forwarded to the board for approval,” Howsley-Glover said.

According to a preliminary version of BrightNight’s Agriculture Mitigation Plan, some of the potential beneficiaries of the fund are the Juniper Flats Irrigation District, Juniper Flat Rural Fire Protection District and the Pine Grove Irrigation District.

The plant is still in the planning and permitting phase, but is projected to produce 1,000 megawatts of energy.

A solar plant on farmland

The project gained county-wide attention in April when county planners reviewed the site proposal and made recommendations to the Oregon Department of Energy, the state oversight body. Much of the meeting’s discussion touched on the site’s zoning designation as largely exclusive farm use, which aims to protect farmland from development.

Jaron Wright, a senior developer at BrightNight, told Columbia Gorge News his company pursued the Juniper Flat area specifically because the land’s agricultural outputs have greatly diminished.

“Most of these people that we’re working with don’t farm anymore because the land is terrible. It’s rocky. The irrigation district can’t provide the valuable resources of much-needed water on a regular basis,” Wright said.

He pointed to a resource analysis conducted by energy consulting firm E3 that found the Pacific Northwest will have a 9-gigawatt resource gap by 2030 if energy output growth remains the same.

“If every project we proposed were built, we still wouldn’t even come close to reaching the nine gigawatts we need,” Wright said. “We take power for granted, and everything is becoming electrified, from our cars to our houses to our toothbrushes.”

How did BrightNight determine lost farm income?

According to a land use exhibit submitted to the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council, consulting firm ERM conducted an Agricultural Impact Analysis by surveying 15 of the 19 landowners holding the site’s 25 parcels. These owners represented 92% of the site’s acreage.

The survey was a structured questionnaire asking about current and past agricultural activity, crop/livestock type, farming income over the last five years, reasons for leasing the land to the project, and how many people work the land.

Where a landowner didn’t answer a question or gave conflicting info, ERM filled the gap using the U.S. Department of Agriculture pasture rental rate ($11.50/acre for Oregon) as a conservative stand-in value. For the landowners who weren’t surveyed at all, ERM assumed their land was used entirely for cattle grazing and applied that same rate.

Who chooses where the money goes?

Howsley-Glover’s main tweak to BrightNight’s proposed selection committee was adding more representation from experts and residents.

The initial plan included one member from the Juniper Flat Irrigation District Board, Juniper Flat Rural Fire Protection Board, Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation District Board, Wasco County Sheriff’s Office, and a Pine Grove community member living within one mile of the solar facility.

The county tweaked this plan, suggesting:

• One member from the Juniper Flat District Improvement Company Board,

• One representative from an academic institution conducting agricultural research in Wasco County or a similarly-oriented nonprofit

• One member from the Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation District Board,

• One member from the South Wasco Alliance Board, and

• Two members from the Pine Grove community living within one mile of the Facility, one of whom must be engaged in agricultural practice and is not part of the project footprint or receiving lease funds from the project.

How will the committee decide who deserves the money?

Howsley-Glover specifically asked for community feedback on the selection criteria. She asked citizens to reach out to her and express whether the following criteria resonate or don’t resonate:

• Improving resiliency and efficiency of south Wasco County’s agricultural economy;

• Improving agricultural wildfire protection and risk management capacity;

• Modernizing local irrigation systems to minimize water losses due to evaporation or seepage, mitigate risk of infrastructure failure, and improve resiliency of pumping infrastructure;

• Improving soil health and water quality; and

• Improving infrastructure essential to the long-term resiliency of Wasco County’s agricultural industry.

Following this public input period, Howsley-Glover said her next steps would be to make proposed draft changes to the investment fund proposal and send it back to BrightNight for negotiation.

County still seeking public input

Several community members weighed in during the meeting, expressing concerns that the fund wouldn’t be enough to cover their farming losses.

Connie Lee, a Maupin resident, noted that there are 47 residents adjacent to the proposed site and 13 non-participants surrounded by properties that have opted into the site footprint.

Wright pushed back on some community perception that non-participants of the site would be “surrounded” by panels. He said with the 5,442 acres of panels disbursed across 12,532 acres, in addition to the required setbacks, the visual impact will be minimal.

“These panels are 10 feet tall. If I’m five-foot-nine and I’m standing 300 feet away, we’re talking about a pretty long distance and a pretty low profile,” he said. “Basically, what it’s going to end up looking like is a thin black line.”

Lee’s major concern was with the size of her operation compared to the allocated mitigation funds.

“I own 1,000 acres. I have 30 cows. I produce 30 calves a year. A calf is going for about $3,000 a piece. Now that’s $90,000 and that’s just one crop,” she said.

Farmer and Maupin resident Ailey Aschoff also expressed doubt about the Agricultural Impact Analysis and fund amount.

“I got one of their surveys for how they figured out their $148,000,” she said. “It was very specified for their interests. It didn’t really give you a way to give your full scope of what you actually produce on your land.”

She suggested that more residents near the facility be invited to the selection committee.

Wright told Columbia Gorge News he and other BrightNight staff want to continue hearing from the Wasco County community.

“We’ve taken much time to answer questions, listen, and work with people’s needs,” he said. “I just want people to realize the value of this project [and] come in with an open mind.”

To provide Wasco County with additional feedback and comments, email the Community Development Department at wcplanning@wascocountyor.gov.