A chorus of community voices joined together Tuesday morning at the Saline County Commissioner’s meeting to air their concerns over a proposed energy storage facility.
Those concerns turned to applause as commissioners voted 4-1 to deny the project that would have allowed a Texas based business to place battery storage containers on a 40-acre plot north of K-4 Highway near E. McReynolds and S. Simpson Road.
After the public comment period, commissioners used a 20-minute executive session before returning to vote the proposal down. Commissioners Joe Hay, Monte Shadwick, Rodger Sparks and Annie Grevas all voted to block the facility while District 4 Commissioner James Weese was in favor of following the Saline County Planning Commission’s unanimous approval of the project.
The Planning Commission initially approved the permit on November 25th by a unanimous 8-0 vote after a public hearing and review of the application and staff report.
Following that decision, landowners within the required notification area submitted a valid protest petition signed by more than 20 percent of affected property owners, triggering an appeal under Saline County zoning regulations and requiring the matter to be heard by the County Commission.
Much of the crowd on hand had signed the petition to block Texas based, Power Plus from building the capture and transmit business which promised to grab energy off the grid when power is cheaper – and store it for when more electricity is needed on the grid.
In addition to storing energy the business plan also called to compensate the community with over $18 million dollars paid to several entities over the next 20-years including USD 306 Southeast of Saline School District which was scheduled to receive $1,067,870 in the first year of operation.
Overall, citizens living near the proposed site voiced a belief that the industry did not fit the landscape or their rural lifestyle.
Following the Commission’s 4-1 supermajority vote, the Planning Commission’s approval was overturned, and the Conditional Use Permit was denied based on findings of inconsistency with the character of the community and concern regarding safety.
The County Commission’s action reflects its role as the final decision-making authority when a valid protest petition is filed. The vote does not imply or infer any error on the part of the Planning Commission’s decision for approval; rather, a difference of interpretation of the findings submitted and reviewed.
As a result of the denial, the proposed project may not proceed under the submitted application. The applicant may now file a new conditional use permit after one year.
