Sharon residents debate solar plan pros and cons

SHARON — Concerned residents gathered for an informational town meeting Wednesday, Nov. 29, focusing on a solar panel installation planned for town property adjacent to Sharon Center School (SCS). 

About 125 voters attended to learn the evolved status of the project and explore options that might still be available for the project that had received initial approval at a town meeting Aug. 18, 2022.

As a result of the 2022 town meeting, and a unanimous vote by the 14 residents present, the town had signed a power purchase agreement with the Connecticut Green Bank. Preliminary implementation has begun.

A recent lawful petition carrying 209 signatures had asked for reconsideration of the project and the scheduling of a town-wide referendum vote, that has now been scheduled by the Board of Selectmen for Friday, Jan. 5. The referendum will decide by “Yes” or “No” vote whether the project may proceed. Voting will be at the Town Hall between noon and 8 p.m.

Further complicating the issue is a project application submitted by Verogy of West Hartford, installers of the project, awaiting approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) within the 65-day deliberation period due to expire this week. The application details a ground-mount solar photovoltaic array of around 400 panels to be installed on SCS grounds, to occupy the site of a student nature study trail, put in place several years ago, but not in active use.

“P&Z is not a part of this town meeting,” Dale Jones announced after his election as moderator for the meeting.

Doug Rick, member of the Sharon Energy and Environment Commission (SEEC), provided historical context, noting that he also serves as a director of People’s Action for Clean Energy (PACE), having been involved with that organization for the past 20 years. In late 2019, he had learned of a new program offered by the Green Bank called Solar MAP (Solar Municipal Assistance Program).

Rick brought news of the program to SEEC, whose members agreed that participation could bring clean, renewable electricity with no upfront cost while affording savings. SCS was found to be the best site for the program, promising savings in energy costs annually.

Hilltop Road resident David Levinson, who had promoted the petition drive and town meeting/referendum request, outlined neighbors’ concerns. 

At principal issue was the question of the projected savings in energy costs.

“There are a lot of things that don’t make sense,” Levinson said, indicating that savings may not be as large as anticipated in the long run.

“We should have encouraged students to use the nature trail space,” Levinson added.

First Selectman Casey Flanagan agreed that the numbers have been unstable, while noting that the projected electricity savings stand at $524,000 over the 20-year life of the agreement, or about $26,000 annually. The first year of agreement savings, though, would be likely to be more like $16,000.

Noting that the Green Bank has already invested $50,000 toward the project, Flanagan said that the town would likely need to pay back that amount should the project be voted down at the referendum.

“We’re trying to get the benefit of a reduced energy bill. While we won’t own the system, we won’t need to maintain it either,” Flanagan said.

Explaining energy costs and how the annual savings figure of $26,000 was computed, Roger Liddell noted that electrical rates from the grid are increasing. By studying the energy costs for the current year and estimating an amount for December, he found that the estimate was reasonable.

Several residents expressed positions in favor of solar energy, but not at the SCS location near residents’ properties along Hilltop Road and other neighboring streets.

“We are good neighbors,” said school superintendent Doug Cahill. He recalled that the SEEC had suggested a solar array be installed on the SCS roof. He explained that there is too much equipment already installed on the roof and the integrity of the school’s flat roof was also questionable. Now that a new roof has been installed, guaranteed to last 30 years, any installation could void the guarantee. 

Cahill explained that the lower field was considered, as were the neighbors, as the Board of Education considered the proposal at length. 

“We knew that it was proposed to be built within the nature trail area,” Cahill said, but the faculty saw the potential for science learning for the students exploring solar energy while also retaining the integrity of the nature trail to support habitat. Twenty-five percent of the available space will be occupied by the solar array, and 75% will be reclaimed as a natural habitat for native plants and pollinators. “The benefits for the many outweigh the interests of the few,” Cahill observed.

Neighboring property owner John Hecht asked about vegetative screening to mask the panels enclosed within steel fencing, learning that the current P&Z deliberations may include such screening strategies.

“Residents are looking for better landscaping to screen adequately,” added Paree Hecht.

The wording of the resolution being voted upon at the referendum drew heavy discussion, particularly for its use of the word “relinquish” in connection to the town land that is not being relinquished, but rather is being leased for 20 years to the Green Bank for the solar project.

Flanagan noted that at the end of the 20-year lease period, the town can ask Green Bank to dismantle and remove the equipment, the town can extend the lease, or the town could purchase the solar panels. 

Rick said that at the end of 20 years, the panels would be 90% viable.

“It is a long-term lease,” Flanagan said, adding that the Green Bank will maintain the space within the fenced area where the panels are to be located.One resident asked whether the word “relinquish” could be changed, but Jones replied that the call to be voted on needs to remain as worded. The call was checked and approved by the town attorney and cannot be changed.