[2. Joint Public Hearing - Consideration of an ordinance establishing a one-year moratorium on receipt of applications for utility scale solar energy projects]

WE ARE NOW GOING TO ENTERTAIN THE TIME FOR OUR JOINT PUBLIC HEARING, AND I'M GOING TO ASK IF MRS. LEWIS, IF SHE WILL ELABORATE ON THE PROCEDURE THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO UNDERTAKE.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO FIRST NOTE THAT ATTORNEY REILLY IS ON THE PHONE TONIGHT.

HE COULDN'T BE HERE THIS EVENING, BUT HE'S HERE BY PHONE.

THIS IS A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONSIDERING A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS.

THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.2-1427 AND 15.2-2204 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA 1950 AS AMENDED TO ORDAIN SECTIONS 18-623.1 OF THE SOUTHAMPTON

[00:05:10]

COUNTY CODE, ESTABLISHING A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS.

IF ADOPTED, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 10, 2021.

THE NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE TIDEWATER NEWS ON AUGUST TWENTY FIFTH AND SEPTEMBER 1, 2021.

NOW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, BEFORE I BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, A COUPLE OF ITEMS I MISSED.

CERTAINLY, MR. JOHNSON OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, I DID NOT RECOGNIZE YOU, SIR, AND I APOLOGIZE AS WELL AS OUR ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR AND ALSO MR. DALLAS JONES. WE ARE JUST GRATEFUL THAT HE'S IN OUR ATTENDANCE TONIGHT, BEING THAT HE'S MISSED A FEW MEETINGS RECENTLY.

BUT SIR, WE'RE GLAD YOU COULD BE IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT.

SO THAT BEING SAID WE WILL GO FORWARD.

BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE PROCEED.

IF NOT, I WILL OPEN A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, IF ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD TO SPEAK AT THE MATTER AT HAND, WHICH IS POSSIBLY THE CREATION OF A MORATORIUM, AS MS. LEWIS HAS SPOKEN EARLIER ABOUT ANY ANY APPLICATIONS COMING FORWARD THAT HAVE NOT ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED FORWARD.

SO IT'S ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF INITIATING A MORATORIUM ON SOLAR PROJECTS FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO MAKE, PROVE FOR, ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE ITEMS FOR US, WE ASK THAT YOU COME FORWARD NOW, COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

SO ANYONE MAY COME FORWARD IF YOU LIKE.

THANK YOU, MS. WRIGHT.

SHE'S, WHILE SHE'S WORKING ON THAT, I GUESS.

CAN I ASK BETH A QUESTION? HAVE WE HAD THE COUNTY RECEIVED ANY APPLICATIONS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS? NO, I HAVE NO COMPLETED APPLICATIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

WE'RE GOING TO GET MS. WRIGHT JUST ANOTHER MINUTE TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT MIC WORKING.

IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE LAPEL.

OKAY. JUST CLIP IT ON.

OK, [INAUDIBLE], POCKET AREA, WHATEVER.

OKAY. NOW, IF ANYBODY LIKE COME FORWARD THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN, MAY COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME. COME ON UP, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, I'LL DO MY BEST.

YES, SIR. SPEAKING IN A MASK.

SCOTT FOSTER, I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH GENTRY LOCKE OUT OF RICHMOND.

I LIVE IN WILLIAMSBURG.

I TOOK THE FERRY OVER HERE THIS EVENING.

WE PROVIDED MR. REILLY WITH A LETTER REGARDING THE OPINION AND THE STATUS OF LEGAL MORATORIA IN VIRGINIA AS IT RELATES TO FILING THE ZONING APPLICATIONS THAT CONSENTED TO THAT SORT OF MORATORIUM IS GENERALLY DISFAVORED IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY PRACTICE

[00:10:02]

GROUP, WE FEEL THAT THAT THEY'RE GENERALLY INVALID.

SO AS AN ALTERNATIVE, WE WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU ALL WOULD ENGAGE WITH US ON BEHALF OF THE INDUSTRY TO TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR ORDINANCE.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THE STATUS OF SOLAR IN SOUTHAMPTON.

TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR ORDINANCE, WHICH I THINK IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD.

WE'VE GOT SOLAR LAND USE APPLICATIONS IN OVER 70 JURISDICTIONS IN VIRGINIA, SOME OF WHICH HAVE SOLAR ORDINANCES. SOME OF THEM DON'T.

AS YOURS GOES IT'S PRETTY GOOD.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SUBSTANTIVE MATTERS I COULD SUGGEST THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU ALL MORE COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD.

BUT ON THE WHOLE I FEEL LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE TODAY, BOTH WITH REQUIRING A REZONING TO INDUSTRIAL AND THEN REQUIRING A USE PERMIT.

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS IN CONTROL OF SOLAR MOVING FORWARD.

WE'VE HAD GREAT SUCCESS WORKING WITH LOCALITIES, ON BEHALF OF THE INDUSTRY TO COME TO CONSENSUS ORDINANCES THAT ARE REALLY REFLECTIVE OF ALL THE REALITIES OF SOLAR DEVELOPMENT. FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE, AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THE PERSPECTIVE OF LOCALITIES WANTING TO RESTRICT AND PROVIDE REASONABLE REGULATIONS AS TO BUFFERING SETBACKS, PROXIMITY, ET CETERA.

SOME OF THE MOST RECENT ONES WE'VE DONE THAT I'M PROUD OF ARE IN CAROLINE COUNTY AND LANCASTER COUNTY, AND I WOULD POINT TO THOSE AS TWO REALLY GOOD EXAMPLES FOR YOU ALL TO REFERENCE. WE HAVE ONE CLIENT WHO IS CURRENTLY INTERESTED IN SOUTHAMPTON.

SEVERAL OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED INTEREST.

THAT ONE CLIENT STILL WORKING TO TIE UP LAND TIE OPTIONS TO LAND.

BUT ONE THING THAT HAS CHANGED.

THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH CHIP DICKS WHO IS THE LEADER OF OUR PRACTICE GROUP WITH MR. REILLY. THAT'S CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY SINCE YOU ALL HAVE APPROVED A PROJECT IS THE REVENUE SITUATION AS IT RELATES TO SOLAR.

THE EARLY PROJECTS WERE EITHER COMPLETELY EXEMPT OR PARTIALLY EXEMPT FROM MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX. WE REALIZED THAT MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX IS NOT A VERY GOOD METHOD FOR TAXING SOLAR FACILITY. YOU'RE SUBJECT TO DEPRECIATION SCHEDULES SO OVER THE LIFE OF A PROJECT, THE PAYMENTS' DECLINED, THERE ARE APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS WHICH THEY'RE LESS THAN IT USED TO BE, BUT THEY ARE STILL 80, 70, 60, DEPENDING ON WHEN THE INTERCONNECTION WAS FILED.

THAT'S THE MOST RECENT ITERATION FOR MACHINERY OR TOOLS TAX.

HOW IN THE 2020 SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY CHIP [INAUDIBLE] OUR PRACTICE GROUP DRAFTED LEGISLATION PROVIDING FOR WHAT THEY CALL SOLAR REVENUE SHARE, WHICH IN ITS FIRST ITERATION WAS A SOLAR CAPACITY TAX OF FOURTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS PER MEGAWATT.

THIS PAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THEY ADMITTED THAT MANY PROVISIONS THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE FOR AN ESCALATOR.

IT'S AN ESCALATION OF FIVE PERCENT, EXCUSE ME, 10 PERCENT EVERY FIVE YEARS, BEGINNING IN 2026. MEANING THAT FIRST ACTUAL ESCALATION WILL HAPPEN IN 2026.

IT'S NOT THE YEARS IN TIME A PROJECTS EXISTS, SO THAT MONEY IS GOING TO AUTOMATICALLY DECREASE AS TIME MOVES FORWARD.

THE BEAUTY OF SOLAR REVENUE SHARE IS BECAUSE IT'S A CAPACITY TAX AND IT'S A LOCAL OPTION TAX. YOU ALL WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SOLAR REVENUE SHARE WHEN A LOCALITY ADOPTS AN ORDINANCE.

THAT REVENUE GENERATED BY THE SOLAR REVENUE SHARE IS MUCH HARDER FOR THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO REALLOCATE. AS YOU ALL KNOW.

STATE COULD PASS THE BUDGET.

TAKE MONEY FROM LOCALITIES AND REALLOCATE IT TO THE STATE.

I SERVED EIGHT YEARS ON WILLIAMSBURG CITY COUNCIL AND WE REFERRED TO THAT AS DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS, SO WE WOULD HAVE A GOOD THING GOING AND THEN STATE LAW WOULD CHANGE.

SOLAR REVENUE SHARE IS PROTECTED FROM THAT, SO AS AN EXAMPLE.

SO SAY A HUNDRED AND THIRTY TO ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MEGAWATT PROJECT OVER ITS LIFETIME WITH SOLAR REVENUE SHARE.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT FIVE TO SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE LIFETIME OF THAT PROJECT SOLELY FROM SOLAR REVENUE SHARE.

THE OTHER NEW ELEMENT, AND I'M NOT SURE ONE HAS BEEN ADOPTED IN SOUTHAMPTON JUST YET, BUT IS A SOLAR SIDING AGREEMENT.

SO LOCAL GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS AND COUNTIES REALIZED THAT SOLAR DEVELOPERS WERE PROPOSING WHAT THEY REFER TO AS VOLUNTARY PAYMENT AGREEMENTS TO HOUSE ADDITIONAL MONEY BEYOND THEIR STATUTORY TAX OBLIGATIONS TO BE PAID TO THE COUNTY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES ASSOCIATED WITH A SOLAR FACILITY.

THAT WASN'T A GOOD FIT, SO THERE NEEDED TO BE SOME OTHER VEHICLE TO HOUSE THAT ADDITIONAL VOLUNTARY FUNDS FLOW INTO LOCALITY.

THAT'S WHY WE CAME UP WITH THE SITE AGREEMENT PROCESS.

IT'S LOOSELY MODELED BASED ON THE AGREEMENT PROCESS THAT WOULD RELATE TO A SITING OF THE

[00:15:04]

LANDFILL. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THE IDEA STARTED.

SO ADDITIONAL REVENUE CAN BE ROUTED THROUGH THE SITING AGREEMENT, AND THAT'S PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE COUNTY ON A VOLUNTEER BASIS.

BEAUTY OF THE SITE AGREEMENT IS ONCE THAT MONEY PASSES THROUGH THAT DOCUMENT IT CAN REALLY BE USED FOR ANY LAWFUL PURPOSE BEFORE THE LOCALITY, SO IN HALIFAX COUNTY, WE HAVE FUNDED A MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR EMS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.

IN [INAUDIBLE] COUNTY, WE ON BEHALF OF A DIFFERENT CLIENT, WE FUNDED THEIR VATI MATCH FOR THEIR BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT.

IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS WE'VE HELPED DEFRAY THE COST FIRE TRUCKS, ET CETERA.

IT'S REALLY A BEAUTIFUL TOOL IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TOOLBOX TO ROUTE THAT MONEY.

SECOND FEATURE OF THE SITE AGREEMENT IS REALLY SPECIAL IS BECAUSE THE REVENUE IS FLOWING THROUGH THAT DOCUMENT IS CREATED BY STATUTE.

IT CAN BE USED AS A FINANCING INSTRUMENT TO SAY THAT A SOLAR FACILITY WILL PRODUCE SEVEN OR EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS OVER ITS LIFETIME BECAUSE THAT MONEY IS SECURED BY A SITE AGREEMENT, YOU CAN REDUCE THAT TOTAL VALUE.

YOU CAN REDUCE THE TOTAL NUMBER TO NET PRESENT VALUE AND FLOAT A BOND TO SECURE THAT MONEY UP FRONT. THAT'S THE NEWEST AND FRANKLY THE BEST FEATURE OF THE SITE AGREEMENT THAT IS NOW A DISPOSAL OF LOCALITIES.

ON THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS FOR SOME TIME, THE REVENUE DYNAMIC FOR SOLAR HAS SHIFTED DRAMATICALLY.

SO WE'RE ON SOMEWHAT OF AN EDUCATIONAL MISSION AND ALSO SOMEWHAT OF JUST A GENERAL MISSION TO MAKE SURE FOLKS UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE POWER OF THE LOCALITIES NOW HAVE AS IT RELATES TO SOLAR.

THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, IS MEETING THE SOLAR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS MEETING THE LOCALITIES HALFWAY. SHOULD BE PROPOSING A SITE AGREEMENT FOR A LARGE PROJECT IS NOW STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE.

WE KNOW WE NEED TO COME UP WITH AN ADDITIONAL PROPOSITION TO MAKE SURE THAT SOLAR IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO ADOPT A SOLAR MORATORIUM AND ABSOLUTELY PUT MYSELF AT YOUR DISPOSAL TO RELY ON FOR POTENTIAL ORDINANCE UPDATES OR OTHER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT SOLAR ENERGY IN GENERAL.

THANK YOU. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. FOSTER.

I'M OUT OF BREATH COUNCIL. I HAVE LOTS OF QUESTIONS.

GO AHEAD. YEAH. OKAY.

SO YOU'RE WHO DO YOU REPRESENT? I REPRESENT A COMPANY CALLED [INAUDIBLE].

AND YOU'RE SPEAKING OF.

I WILL SAY, ALSO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE REPRESENT THE ORGANIZATION CALLED [INAUDIBLE], WHICH IS THE SOLAR TRADE ASSOCIATION IN VIRGINIA.

SO WE'RE ATTUNED TO AND REPRESENT THE INDUSTRY GENERALLY AND SAY HERE ON BEHALF OF [INAUDIBLE].

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND YOU SAID THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING A SOLAR DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.

WHAT IS THAT? I'M THINKING YOU MISHEARD ME.

I APOLOGIZE. OKAY, MAYBE I DID.

BUT I HEARD SOLAR DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.

DID ANYONE ELSE HEAR THAT? I WAS REFERRING TO THIS SOLAR SIDING AGREEMENT.

OKAY, THAT'S YEAH.

THAT'S THE NEWEST INSTRUMENT TO HOUSE THE FINANCIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PIECE TO SOLAR.

OKAY. AND I COULD HAVE MISHEARD YOU.

NO, I'M SORRY.

I'M STUCK ON THIS MASK. BUT THAT'S OKAY.

SO YOUR BELIEF IS THAT THE MORATORIUM SHOULD BE DISFAVORED.

IS IT YOUR VIEW THAT IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL? IT IS. OKAY.

AND YOU SAY THAT SOME LOCALITIES HAVE AN ORDINANCE AND SOME DON'T.

CORRECT. NOW ARE YOU? I'LL TAKE THAT A STEP FURTHER.

OKAY. SOME LOCALITIES HAVE A SPECIFIC ORDINANCE LIKE YOU ALL, AND IN SOME, LOCALITIES JUST HAVE IT LISTED AS A SPECIFIC USE THAT IS ALLOWED WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT OR CONDITION USE PERMIT. AND THOSE GENERALLY APPLICABLE SUP OR CUP CONDITIONS WILL APPLY TO SOLAR DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN SOME DON'T REGULATE SOLAR AT ALL.

AND THEN JUST IT'S REALLY [INAUDIBLE].

NOW IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA, WOULD YOU SAY IT'S SPLIT FAIRLY EVENLY WITH THOSE WITH ORDINANCES AND THOSE WITHOUT.

I WOULD SAY IT'S MOVING RAPIDLY THAT FOLKS ARE ADOPTING ORDINANCES.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT YOU ALL ARE AHEAD OF THE CURVE, BUT IT'S A MINORITY NOW THAT DO NOT HAVE SOME SORT OF ADDITIONAL SOLAR REGULATION [INAUDIBLE].

BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFERENT LAND USE THAN OTHER USES TYPICALLY PERMITTED BY CUP OR SUP.

[00:20:06]

AND YOU REFERENCED A FIGURE OF FIVE TO SEVEN MILLION FROM A PROJECT.

SURE. SO IS THAT A HYPOTHETICAL SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY PROJECT OF TWO HUNDRED ACRES? I MEAN, I DIDN'T KNOW WHICH REALLY WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO.

SO THAT BALLPARK IS FROM LIKE, LET'S SAY, A HUNDRED AND ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY HUNDRED AND THIRTY TO ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MEGAWATTS PROJECT OVER IT'S LIFETIME.

AND HOW MANY ACRES WOULD THAT BE? SO LARGELY DEPENDS ON SITE CONDITIONS, BUT YOU CAN BET THAT ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ACRE PROJECT, GIVEN EACH OF VIRGINIA'S DENSITY OF WETLANDS, ET CETERA, IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE ABOUT A THOUSAND ACRES IN SOUTHAMPTON.

I THINK THAT'S A SAFE ESTIMATE.

AND THEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE ECONOMICS HAVE SHIFTED DRAMATICALLY TOWARDS THE LOCALITY.

BINGO. OKAY.

AND ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH OUR HISTORY? I AM. YOU ALL APPROVED A NUMBER OF PROJECTS, ONE OF WHICH IN THE NAME OF WHICH SHOWS UP ON MY DOORSTEP MULTIPLE TIMES A WEEK, YOU GOT A BIG AMAZON PROJECT? OKAY. AND YOU REFERENCED A LITTLE BIT OF DEPRECIATION AND THE TAXES THAT RELATE TO MACHINERY. CORRECT.

AND YOU SAID IT SHIFTED DRAMATICALLY, DEFINE DRAMATICALLY BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT SPECIFIC NUMBERS, MY OPINION, WHICH IS JUST SUBJECTIVELY, MY OPINION IS SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY DO NOT BENEFIT SIGNIFICANTLY MONETARILY FROM THE ONE LARGE PROJECT THAT WE HAD.

NOW THAT'S MY SUBJECTIVE OPINION.

THAT HAS A 2017 APPROVAL.

IS THAT RIGHT.

I BELIEVE SO. CORRECT. YES. SO THIS NEW LEGISLATION IS EFFECTIVE JULY ONE 2020.

OKAY, SO.

JUST GIVE ME JUST A QUICK SUMMARY OF HOW IT SWUNG TO THE GOVERNMENT'S FAVOR.

SURE. AND NOT BUSINESSES FAVOR WITH DEPRECIATION SCHEDULES BECAUSE MY CPA WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU. SO I WANT YOU TO EDUCATE ME AND I COULD BE WRONG.

ABSOLUTELY. SO THE OLD REGIME MACHINERY, TOOLS, TAX SUBJECT TO EXEMPTIONS AND DEPRECIATION. SWITCH, WELL, IS IT.

THERE IS NOW A LOCAL OPTION TO CREATE A SOLAR REVENUE SHARE ORDINANCE, WHICH REPLACES THE OLD [INAUDIBLE] REGIME WITH A CAPACITY TAX AT 1400 DOLLARS PER MEGAWATT.

SUBJECT TO THE 10 PERCENT ESCALATOR EVERY FIVE YEARS, YOU'RE GETTING 2026.

SO. AS THE REVENUE GOES OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT, M&T WILL KEEP, THIS IS JUST LET'S SAY IT'S A HYPOTHETICAL ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY MEGAWATTS PROJECT M&T WILL KEEP PACE WITH SOLAR REVENUE SHARE FOR, LET'S SAY, THE FIRST 10 TO 12 YEARS.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, ONCE YOU GET ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH THE LIFECYCLE OF A PROJECT, THAT'S WHEN REVENUE SHARE REALLY PICKS UP AND THE ESCALATOR KICKS IN.

SO IF IT WAS ON A GRAPH RELATED TO A PARTICULAR PROJECT, M&T STARTS HERE AND GOES DOWN AND EVENTUALLY FLATTENS OUT.

REVENUE SHARE IS A STRAIGHT.

STRAIGHT LINE UP, SO.

BUT CAN'T A COMPANY, OK, JUST SAY COMPANY X, THEY START THE PROJECT, GET IT APPROVED.

AND THEY HAVE THE OPTION OF THEIR DEPRECIATION ON THE FRONT END HEAVY OR THE BACK END HEAVY. AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO FLIP THE PROJECT.

OH, SO CAN YOU ALL ADOPT A SOLAR REVENUE SHARE ORDINANCE.

YOU ALL ARE TAXING THE FOURTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS A MEGAWATT SUBJECT TO THE ESCALATOR AND THE DEPRECIATION QUESTION ENMITY IS OUT OF THE QUESTION.

YOU ALL, AS A LOCALITY WOULD SAY WE'RE GOING TO ASSESS SOLAR FACILITIES ON A PER MEGAWATT BASIS MOVING FORWARD.

AND YOU HAVE MOVED AWAY FROM THE [INAUDIBLE] AND THE DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE IS SET BY THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION.

IT'S THE SAME WON'T APPLY TO EVERY PROJECT ACROSS THE STATE.

AND THAT'S MOVING FORWARD, BUT NOT BACK.

CORRECT. YOUR EXISTING PROJECTS AND YOUR PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED OR [INAUDIBLE] APPROVED. SO I GUESS THE DISTINCTION I WOULD MAKE IS SOLAR IN SOUTHAMPTON TO DATE IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF WHAT SOLAR IS SOUTHAMPTON WILL BE FROM A REVENUE PERSPECTIVE.

NOW WHAT DID YOU CALL THAT ORDINANCE.

SOLAR REVENUE SHARE.

OKAY, SO THE SOLAR REVENUE SHARE ORDINANCE WOULD BE SEPARATE FROM OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT WE STARTED WORKING ON.

MIKE, WHEN DID WE HAVE THAT WORKSHOP TO START WORKING ON THE ORDINANCE? DO YOU REMEMBER THAT DATE? MAYBE THREE YEARS AGO.

THREE OR FOUR? YEAH.

YOU MEAN TALKING ABOUT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOU'RE.

YES. ADDING TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

YES. IT WOULD GO IN A DIFFERENT PART OF YOUR CODE AND I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE YOU ALL WITH A DRAFT ORDINANCE AND THE WAY THAT I READ IT.

[00:25:01]

SO IT WOULD WORK IN CONJUNCTION.

CORRECT. AND IT REALLY ONLY RELATES TO THE REVENUE PAID BY A PROJECT.

IT DOESN'T RELATE TO ANY LAND USE APPROVAL WHATSOEVER.

OKAY. IT'S ONLY HOW YOU TAX IT.

ALL RIGHT. MY NEXT QUESTION.

SO IF, HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, AND YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW MY POSITION HERE IN A SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. WE REPEALED THE CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON SINCE 2017 AND SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS UPON HOURS AND TALKED ABOUT THINGS THAT NO ONE HAD IS EVER GOING TO KNOW THE ANSWER ON. AND WE DID IT BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, LIKE MANY LOCALITIES DO.

CORRECT.

WE COULD STILL HAVE THE SOLAR REVENUE ORDINANCE WITH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND STILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT CONTROL. ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL.

ALL THAT I NEED RIGHT THERE.

LET'S KEEP IT IN PERSPECTIVE.

WE'RE NOT HERE TONIGHT TO DECIDE ON AN ORDINANCE OR CONDITION USE PERMIT.

WE'RE HERE TO DECIDE SOLELY ON THE MORATORIUM.

AND THAT WOULD GIVE US TIME TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO.

THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE TONIGHT.

AND IF IT WOULD INTEREST YOU ALL.

I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE SOME FINANCIALS ON MODEL PROJECTS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, SO YOU COULD SEE WHAT YOU WOULD DO ON FROM A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE UNDER THE M&T REGIME VERSUS THE REVENUE SHARE REGIME ON JUST A HYPOTHETICAL PROJECT WITH A HYPOTHETICAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE VALUE, ETC.

IT'S CONSIDERABLE.

AND MOST OF THESE LOCALITIES WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING A PROJECT [INAUDIBLE] THAT ARE CONSIDERING REVENUE SHARE AND WHEN WE'RE PROPOSING A SITING AGREEMENT THAT HAS SOME OTHER ADDITIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VALUE, IT CAN BE A GAME CHANGER.

I MEAN, IT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FINANCING PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS AND NOT WORK IN ONE LOCALITY. I MEAN, IT'S BEEN IN THE RED FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND WE'RE PROPOSING ONE PROJECT THAT WILL COMPLETELY FLIP THE COUNTY FINANCES ON ITS HEAD.

IT'S A WHOLE NEW LOOK IN SOLAR.

THE OTHER THING I'LL SAY.

THE SOLAR INDUSTRY HAS GOTTEN A LOT BETTER AT HIDING PROJECTS, SO WE ALL DROPPED PAST PROJECTS THAT WERE APPROVED TIME IN THE EARLY DAYS FROM A BUFFERING AND SETBACK PERSPECTIVE. AND FRANKLY, THEY MAKE ME CRINGE BECAUSE IT'S MY JOB TO GO GET PERMITS FOR PROJECTS TODAY AND THOSE OLDER NOT WELL SET BACK, NOT WELL SCREENED PROJECTS ULTIMATELY MAKE MY JOB A LOT HARDER.

SO THE INDUSTRY IS RESPONDING TO THAT.

THEY ANTICIPATE HAVING TO HAVE ROBUST BUFFERS AND SETBACKS.

AND LIKE I SAY, THEY'VE GOTTEN A LOT BETTER AT HIRING PROJECTS AND UNDERSTANDING THINGS SO I'LL SAY THAT.

IF YOU COULD PASS THAT ALONG TO MS. LEWIS' OFFICE, WE WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT'S CHANGED. I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

YES. WHICH COUNTIES HAVE ADOPTED A SOLAR REVENUE SHARE ORDINANCE.

THE LANCASTERS, THE MOST RECENT ONE THAT I'VE BEEN IN CAROLINE COUNTY, HAS AS WELL.

MIDDLESEX COUNTY PROBABLY WILL WITHIN THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, WE JUST DEVELOPED AN ENERGY STORAGE FACILITY THERE THAT IF THEY WANT TO USE THE CAPACITY TAX ON.

LAST FEATURE OF THE SOLAR REVENUE SHARING CAPACITY TAX.

BECAUSE IT IS A CAPACITY TO TAX IT IS NOT A FACTOR IN YOUR LOCAL COMPOSITE INDEX FOR CALCULATION OF SCHOOL COSTS.

SO TODAY, THE AN INPUT INTO YOUR COMPOSITE INDEX CALCULATION FOR SCHOOL FUNDING.

SOLAR REVENUE SHARE IS NOT PART OF THAT FORMULA.

SO LOCALITIES A, WE'RE SUBJECT TO A STEEP DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE AND SUBJECT TO EXEMPTIONS. AND THEN B TOOK A DING ON YOUR LOCAL ABILITY TO PAY WHEN LOOKING AT THE COMPOSITE INDEX CALCULATION.

SO IT WAS KIND OF A.

IT'S LIKE A DOUBLE WHAMMY FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, AND SOLAR REVENUE SHARE IS NOT A FACTOR THERE.

I COULD TALK ABOUT THIS ALL DAY Y'ALL YOU HAVE TO REIGN ME IN.

ALL RIGHT I'VE GOT A QUESTION.

YOU KEEP REFERRING TO THE LIFETIME OF A PROJECT.

WHAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF A LIFETIME? SO THE INDUSTRY SAYS THAT THESE PANELS ARE ANTICIPATED TO LAST AT FOUR YEARS.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE CONSIDER THE LIFETIME OF THE PROJECT.

NOW. WHAT WE DO KNOW IS PANELS ARE INCREASING IN EFFICIENCY.

SO IT'S MY THEORY THAT IN 15 OR 20 YEARS, THE PANELS WILL BE MORE EFFICIENT SO THAT WE CAN GET MORE MEGAWATTS OUT OF A CERTAIN ACREAGE.

OH, SUCH THAT IT WILL BE FINANCIALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE LOCALITY AND I MEAN THE DEVELOPER AND LOCALLY TO RETOOL THOSE PANELS AND ESSENTIALLY EXTEND A LOT OF THE PROJECTS.

SO BEGINNING TO END OF A SPECIFIC PANEL IS 4 YEARS.

[00:30:04]

BUT ODDS ARE I COULD SEE US RETOOLING PROJECTS JUST FROM A GAIN AND EFFICIENCY PERSPECTIVE. OKAY, SO THE FOURTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS PER MEGAWATT IS BASED ON WHAT THE FACILITY WAS DESIGNED FOR INITIALLY, CORRECT? WELL, THE FOURTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS.

CORRECT. BUT ANY EVENT THE CAPACITY OF THE FACILITY WOULD EVER INCREASE DUE TO INCREASES IN EFFICIENCY, ET CETERA.

THAT MEANS YOUR PAYMENT GOES UP.

SO IN ESSENCE, YOU COULD TIE OF THIS SAME AMOUNT OF LAND AND INCREASE THE OUTPUT, WHICH WOULD. FRANKLY, IT'S GOOD FOR EVERYONE.

SO WHEN THEY INCREASE THE MEGAWATT PER FACILITY, ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COUNTY TO GET A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AN AMENDMENT OR SOMETHING? DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DRAFT IT. WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS LEAVING IT OPEN ENDED SO THAT MAKING SURE THAT THE COUNTY REMAINS ON NOTICE SO THAT IF THE MEGAWATTAGE INCREASES AND THE FOOTPRINT STAYS THE SAME THEN YOU ALL GET AN ADDITIONAL A LOT OF LOCALITIES SAY, HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A 150 MEGAWATT PROJECT, AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE MEGAWATTS, YOU'VE GOT TO COME BACK TO US TO MAKE IT PERMANENT.

BUT MY PERSPECTIVE IS IF THE FOOTPRINT STAYS THE SAME AND THE OVERALL LAYOUT AND FUNCTION STAYS THE SAME, THE MEGAWATTS OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO INCREASE WITHOUT BOTHERING EVERYBODY WOULD COME BACK AND PERMIT THE PERMIT SO LONG AS YOU ALL ARE PUT ON NOTICE OF WHEN THAT MEGAWATT CAPACITY DOES INCREASE.

RIGHT. SO THERE HAVE BEEN NO MEASURING OF HOW MANY MEGAWATTS THE FACILITY PUTS OUT ON A PER YEAR BASIS.

WELL, THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS TAX.

CORRECT. BECAUSE IT'S THE TAX IS BASED ON WHAT THEY CALL THE NAMEPLATE CAPACITY OF THE PROJECT. SO IF IT'S RATED AT ONE HUNDRED FIFTY MEGAWATTS, YOU ALL GET THE PAYMENT FOR 150 MEGAWATTS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT IT ACTUALLY PRODUCES, SO LONG AS IT'S SO LONG AS IT'S, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO EXCEED THE NAMEPLATE CAPACITY.

OBVIOUSLY WOULDN'T WORK WITH THE INTERCONNECTION.

RIGHT? WELL, I DRIVE BY FACILITIES THAT YOU SEE THE PANELS THAT ROTATE, AND I WOULD IMAGINE IT'S DESIGNED FOR IT TO BE EFFICIENT AND BE X NUMBER OF MEGAWATTS.

BUT THEN YOU RIDE BY AND YOU SEE SPOTTED OUT THERE THAT SOME OF THE PANELS ARE NOT PIVOTING AND YOU WOULD THINK THAT WOULD GO ON MAYBE A WEEK.

RIGHT. AND IT'S GONE ON FOR MONTHS.

SO SOMEBODY IS NOT MAINTAINING OR KEEPING AN EYE ON IT.

SO, RIGHT YOU KNOW, TO ME, I WOULD THINK THEY'D WANT TO KEEP IT EFFICIENT, BUT IT BRINGS THE POINT THAT EFFICIENCY IS NOT NECESSARY.

AND TO YOUR POINT THERE IT IS BASED ON THE RATE PASSING OF THE PROJECT, NOT ON ITS PRODUCTION. SO IT WOULDN'T AFFECT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THEN WILL MOVE ALONG, AND I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE MR. REILLY A SANITIZED SIGNING AGREEMENT SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

THEY'RE OUT THERE.

I GUESS THE CLOSEST ONE WE'VE DONE TO YOU ALL, AND I THINK IT WAS THE FIRST ONE THAT'S DONE IN THE STATE IS OVER IN SUSSEX COUNTY.

THAT WAS THE CATA POINT SOLAR PROJECT THAT WAS PERMITTED IN THIS TIME LAST YEAR.

AND THAT'S THE ONE WHERE WE ASSISTED IN ADDITION TO A NUMBER OF THINGS PURCHASED A FIRE TRUCK, ALL THAT INFORMATION IS OKAY ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. CHESSON, HAVE YOU SEEN ANY STUDIES IN YOUR WORK THAT AND I GUESS WE'VE BEEN PROVIDED A STUDY BY MAGNUM ECONOMICS THAT WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT.

HAVE YOU SEEN IN YOUR EXPERIENCES ANY STUDIES THAT HAVE AN IMPACT OR THAT STUDY THE IMPACT ON THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF TAKING AGRICULTURAL WORKERS OUT OF THE ECONOMY AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECTS? SO YOUR QUESTION IS THE YES, SIR. YES, AND I BELIEVE [INAUDIBLE] MAGNUM HAS OFFERED SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT AND THE CONCLUSION IS ON THE MACRO SCALE SOLAR STILL IS MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN THAT UNDERLYING AGRICULTURAL OR FROM A MACRO TANGENTIAL RIPPLE EFFECT IN THE ECONOMY PERSPECTIVE . ONLY SINCE THE SOLAR REVENUE SHARE AND THE SOLAR SITING AGREEMENT CHANGES.

WOULD YOU SAY.

THAT HAS CERTAINLY HELPED THE ECONOMY MORE SO SINCE THE LAW HAS CHANGED AND THE LOCAL REVENUE HAS INCREASED.

THE DISTRICT DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB AT QUANTIFYING AND EXTRAPOLATING WHAT HE CALLS LIKE

[00:35:02]

THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF SPIN AND ET CETERA AND WHAT THAT DOES ACROSS LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECONOMY. SO SOLAR STANDS OUT.

ISN'T IT NOT TRUE THAT WE'VE NOT HAD THIS SITUATION LONG ENOUGH TO SEE WHAT SIDE EFFECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE OR WHAT CONSEQUENCES? THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT IT.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY SAYING, THAT'S FINE.

IT'S GREAT. WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT MUCH EXPERIENCE WITH IT.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

AND I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMEBODY FROM THAT INDUSTRY JUST TELL US, OK, WE HAVE NO IDEA.

WELL, YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.

IT'S A YOUNG INDUSTRY. YOU KNOW, I MAKE THE POINT THAT WE'VE NEVER DECOMMISSIONED A SOLAR FACILITY. THEY'RE ALL TOO NEW BUT WE KNOW HOW TO DO IT AND WE KNOW HOW TO ESTIMATE THE COSTS. BUT TO YOUR POINT? THIS IS WE'RE STILL HANGING OUT.

I SEE US WE'RE STILL THIS IS STILL A VERY, VERY MUCH A DEVELOPING INDUSTRY.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT WE KNOW, BUT THERE'S A LOT WE DON'T.

I CAN SAY THAT ONE OF THE REPORTS I READ THAT FLETCHER HAD DONE TOOK ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF THE REVENUE PAYMENTS TO THE LANDOWNER AND WHEN LANDOWNERS LIVE IN A JURISDICTION AND OUR LOCAL.

THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF THAT ADDITIONAL INCOME IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE PER ACRE, I MEAN, IT'S ONE HECK OF A LAND USE FOR THOSE WHO OWN THE LAND.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE THAT IN A LOCALITY AND IT'S LOCAL LANDOWNERS WHO ARE INVOLVED, IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. ONE OF THE EXAMPLES OUT OF THE LANCASTER PROJECT WE HAVE.

THAT PROJECT IS PRIMARILY ON TIMBERLAND, BUT I'D SAY ABOUT 30 PERCENT IS CURRENTLY ON ACTIVELY FARMED LAND.

THOSE FARMERS ARE ONLY USING PART OF THEIR PROPERTY AS PART OF THE PROJECT HAVE MADE A VERY STRONG POINT THAT THAT GUARANTEED REVENUE YEAR OVER YEAR FROM THAT SOLAR LEASE IS A WELCOME BENEFIT TO SOMEONE WHOSE ANNUAL PAYCHECK IS NOT GUARANTEED.

SO IN THAT SITUATION, THOSE FARMERS HAVE SAID THAT KIND OF GUARANTEED INCOME IS ALLOWING THEM TO A TO FARM BETTER, BUT B TO EXPERIENCE SOME FINANCIAL SECURITY, THEY HAVEN'T OTHERWISE. SO DONE RIGHT AND WITH THE RIGHT LANDOWNERS AND THE RIGHT PARTIES, IT CAN BE A REAL SHOT IN THE ARM TO THE LOCAL COUNTY.

HOW DO YOU FARM BETTER? I'M [INAUDIBLE] I'M JUST GOING TO PICK AT THE POT A LITTLE BIT.

HOW DO YOU FARM BETTER WITH HAVING A SOLAR LEASE.

WHAT'S THAT MEAN? I MEAN, THERE'S MORE MONEY COMING IN.

YOU CAN PAY YOUR BILLS, YOU CAN INVEST IN NEW EQUIPMENT, YOU CAN FARM THE REMAINDER OF YOUR LAND WITH A BETTER CASH FLOW.

THEIR BALANCE SHEET LOOKS GOOD.

SO IT'S NOT AS MUCH OF A YEAR TO YEAR REVENUE PERSPECTIVE.

WELL, WE ARE A FARMING COMMUNITY.

THAT YOU ARE. YOU ALSO MADE THE COMMENT THAT IT HAD NO EFFECT.

YOU MADE IN THE COMMENT EARLIER.

NO EFFECT ON THE FARMING ECONOMY.

HOW DO YOU SAY THAT WHEN YOU DISPLACE THE ACRES THAT WOULD TAKE WOULD BE FARMED? HOW DOES IT NOT AFFECT THE FARM ECONOMY? WELL, I COME AT IT FROM THE LANDOWNER PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT? AND FROM IF YOU OWN THE LAND.

SOLAR FACILITIES ON YOUR LAND GENERATING REVENUE AND MAYBE YOU'RE STILL FARMING LAND ELSEWHERE. YOUR BALANCE SHEET LOOKS BETTER.

NOW. I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IF YOU LEASE LAND AND HAVE TO COMPETE WITH THE SOLAR FACILITY. THAT'S NOT ITS DIFFICULT SITUATION BECAUSE SOLAR CAN PAY MORE PER ACRE THAN A FARMER. IT'S A FACT, BUT IT'S YOUR PROPERTY AND YOU'RE LEASING IT.

YOU'RE IN A GOOD POSITION.

WELL, WHY DON'T THE ELECTRICAL COMPANIES BUY THE PROPERTY, INSTEAD OF LEASING THEM.

THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, IT REALLY, AND I'M THINKING ABOUT OUR CLIENT BASE.

IT'S A MIX AS TO ONES WHO WILL COME IN AND PURCHASE AND ONES WHO WILL SPEAKERS]. SO YOU MIGHT AS WELL SELL IT.

YOU CAN'T GO OWN IT.

THAT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF COMPLAINTS OVER THE NEWSOMS PROJECT.

THEY CAN ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY.

IT'S UNDER THE LEASE, SO IT'S GATED AND I'M REALLY GETTING OFF THE SUBJECT BECAUSE THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE MORATORIUM TONIGHT.

BUT WE MIGHT WANT TO HAVE YOU BACK AGAIN.

YES I'M HAPPY HAVE A POINT OF INTEREST.

AND WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT WE WORKED WITH BOTH FROM LIKE THE APPRAISER COMMUNITY AND THE ECONOMICS COMMUNITY WHO WOULD BE HAPPY TO COME BACK AND DO A WORK SESSION AND SPEAK ABOUT THE STATE OF THE INDUSTRY AND THE STATE GENERALLY.

BECAUSE LIKE MR. EDWARDS POINTED OUT, IS A DEVELOPING INDUSTRY.

WE'RE TRYING TO ASSEMBLE AS MUCH HARD INFORMATION AS WE CAN BECAUSE WE'RE COMING TO THE

[00:40:05]

COUNTY JUST LIKE YOU.

WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT A REALLY GOOD LAND USE CASE WITH A TRUE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSITION. WE WANT TO GO INTO IT EYES WIDE OPEN.

I THINK WE'RE DOING BETTER AT THAT AS AN INDUSTRY THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST.

WELL, I'M GOING TO LEAVE THIS THOUGHT WITH YOU, WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO SOLAR.

UNDERSTAND. WE ARE I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM.

WE ALL LOVE OUR ELECTRICITY.

WE LOVE IT. WE JUST DON'T KNOW IF SOLAR IS RIGHT FOR SOUTHAMPTON.

THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION.

WE'VE GOT TO DECIDE IS IT RIGHT FOR OUR JURISDICTION? AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO EXPLORE THIS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

BUT WE DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING TONIGHT AND WE WILL CERTAINLY BE IN TOUCH.

MR. LEWIS WE DO HAVE HIS CONTACT INFORMATION AND WE MAY ACTUALLY INVITE YOU BACK AGAIN SIR. HAPPY TO DO IT. IT'S AN EASY AND NICE SCENIC ROUTE OVER HERE FOR ME.

AND THE FOLKS WITH [INAUDIBLE].

IT'S A REALLY GOOD COMPANY.

I HOPE THAT THEY'RE GETTING THEIR OPTIONS TIED UP.

SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAYBE TALK BRASS TACKS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

CAN I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION. DO YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION ON OTHER SOLAR REVENUE ORDINANCES THAT YOU'VE ADVISED ON OR CONTRIBUTED TO? THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

HYPOTHETICALLY, IF YOU WOULD COME BACK, BUT I'M FOR HIM COMING BACK.

BASIC RUN OF WHAT A PROJECT DOES OVER ITS LIFETIME OF FOURTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS PER MEGAWATT WITH THE ESCALATOR, AND YOU CAN PUNCH IN THE DIFFERENT PROJECT SIZES.

IF YOU WOULD SEND THAT TO MS. LEWIS, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

I'LL DO IT. AND THE LAST POINT I'LL MAKE IS, YOU ALL KNOW THIS BECAUSE YOU APPROVED SOLAR PROJECTS. WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WHEN LAND'S COMING OUT OF LAND USE, WHICH MOST OF IT IN RURAL VIRGINIA IS AND GOING INTO THE SOLAR USE, THE ASSESSED TAX VALUE THAT PER ACRE GOES ANYWHERE BETWEEN 10 TO 12 FROM WHATEVER IS LAND USE TO ABOUT TEN TO TWELVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AN ACRE. SO THAT IS KIND OF THE HIDDEN REVENUE INCREASE FOR LOCALITIES FROM SOLAR. YOU'RE STILL PAYING FULL FREIGHT AT A HIGHER INTENSITY OF USE ON YOUR UNDERLYING REAL ESTATE, SO YOU KNOW YOU BREAK UP THE STREAMS OF REVENUE GENERATED BY SOLAR FROM REAL STATE TAXES, SOLAR REVENUE SHARE AND THEN POTENTIALLY ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS TO BE A SIGNING AGREEMENT, IT BECOMES BECOMES A PRETTY GOOD VALUE PROPOSITION.

THANK YOU. I GOT ONE OBSERVATION AND SOMETHING THAT I'VE NOTICED THAT SINCE JULY, WE'VE DONE A LOT ABOUT THE REVENUE, BUT DECOMMISSIONING IS A BIG CONCERN OF OURS.

AND THAT'S NOT GETTING ADDRESSED ENOUGH.

AND 40 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, THE COST OF DECOMMISSIONING THE FACILITY.

I DO NOT WANT TO SEE IT HUNG AROUND THE NECK OF THE COUNTY THAT IT'S IN AND THAT NEEDS TO BE ENGRAVED IN STONE.

NOT WHERE SOMEBODY CAN FILE BANKRUPTCY AND HIDE BEHIND AN LLC OR CORPORATION.

SO I'M NOT ASKING FOR AN ANSWER TONIGHT.

SURE. THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT IF YOU'VE GOT SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THAT, YOU CAN FORWARD TO THAT. BUT THAT IS A BIG FACTOR FOR ME.

IT'S GREAT TO GET PAID NOW, BUT AT SOME POINT YOU GOT TO PAY LATER ON.

AND YOUR CONCERN IS ECHOED IN EVERY JURISDICTION WE'RE IN.

AND WHAT I CAN DO IS PROVIDE SOME USE PERMIT CONDITIONS ON DECOMMISSIONING THAT WE'VE COME UP WITH. IT DOES THE BEST WE CAN DO TO TIE UP THAT LOOP OF POTENTIAL ABANDONMENT OF A PROJECT. I HATE TO USE THAT WORD BECAUSE IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

STATE CODE REQUIRES SOLAR OPERATORS TO REEVALUATE THEIR FACILITIES EVERY FIVE YEARS AND UPDATE THE COST OF DECOMMISSIONING.

AND PROVIDE THAT UPDATE TO THE JURISDICTION THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER STAMPED.

SOME LOCALITIES ALLOW FOR THE CALCULATION OF SALVAGE VALUE, SOME DON'T.

THAT ENSURES THAT A INFLATION WHICH WE'RE ALL EXPERIENCING AND THEN B THE COST OF RECYCLING AND DISPOSAL IS ACCOUNTED FOR OVER TIME, SO REQUIRED BY STATUTE EVERY FIVE YEARS TO UPDATE THAT. SOME EARLY PROJECTS DIDN'T HAVE A CONDITION TO THAT EFFECT.

THEY ALL DO NOW AND A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE PRETTY SPECIFIC.

SO LIKE I SAY, I PROVIDED SOME MODELING.

WELL ABANDONMENT OF A PROJECT IS POSSIBLE AND IT DOESN'T TAKE BUT ONE PROJECT TO BE ABANDONED AND THEN ALL THE REVENUE WE'VE GAINED IS GONE.

RIGHT. IF THE COUNTY HAS TO PAY FOR THE CLEANING IT OUT.

AND SOME OF THESE PROJECTS ARE ULTIMATELY PURCHASED BY PEOPLE LIKE [INAUDIBLE], WHO IF YOU'RE A RATE PAYER, YOU'RE A GUARANTOR OF THAT PROJECT TO SOME DEGREE.

SO IN THOSE SITUATIONS, USUALLY PARENT GUARANTEE WILL SUFFICE.

BUT THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE OWNED AND BUILT AND OPERATED AND THE POWER SOLD BY THE PRIVATE COMPANY, YOU KNOW THERE'S A BOND TO THAT EFFECT.

[00:45:01]

WE'VE BUILT PROVISIONS INTO A USE PERMIT WHERE THE COUNTY IS MADE PUT ON A REGULAR NOTICE THAT THAT BOND IS IN GOOD STANDING AND EVERYTHING HAS BEEN PAID SO THAT THE COUNTY COULD TAKE REMEDIAL ACTION IN THE EVENT THAT SOMEONE WASN'T GOING TO MAKE THE BOND PAYMENT.

PULL A LOT OF EXPERIENCE OUT OF SADLY OUT OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROCESS AND THE BONDS THAT WERE ISSUED DURING THAT TIME, THE 2008 FINANCIAL CRISIS AND LOCALITIES HAVING TO FIGHT TO GET THEIR BONDS SECURED SO THEY COULD CALL THEM AND COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS AND A LOT OF LESSONS LEARNED FROM THAT INDUSTRY THAT WE'RE APPLYING NOW.

WELL, YOU MADE NOTE OF OWNERSHIP OF THE FACILITY, BUT SEE THOSE ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE BACK TO THOSE COMPANIES DO NOT OWN THE PROPERTY.

CORRECT. SO THAT IS A RED FLAG TO ME.

MOST OF THEM, THEY DON'T WANT TO OWN THE PROPERTY, THEY WANT THE LEASE.

SO IN THESE CONDITIONS ON REFERENCE, WE AGREE TO ADD THE LANDOWNER AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURER AS IT RELATES TO THE SECURITY.

SO IN THE EVENT THAT THE COMPANY WERE TO GO BANKRUPT AND GO AWAY, THE LANDOWNER WOULDN'T BE SITTING IN THE VULNERABLE POSITION OF HAVING THIS THING ON THE PROPERTY THAT THEY COULDN'T GET RID OF. THEY COULD CALL ON THAT BOND INSURANCE AS WELL.

THEY HAVE IT. SO WE'RE COMING AT THIS THE SAME WAY YOU ARE TRYING TO PROTECT EVERYBODY INVOLVED BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS ABANDONED SOLAR FIELDS IN 15 OR 20, OR 30 YEARS.

WITH THAT SAID, I'M A CALL FOR QUESTIONS SO WE CAN GIVE OTHER PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING TONIGHT.

APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

SO AT THIS TIME, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING RELATING TO THE MORATORIUM THAT WE ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THE TOPIC TONIGHT.

YES, SIR. COME ON FORWARD SIR, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

YES, SIR, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

GIVE ME YOUR NAME, PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD.

PHIL BAIN THANK YOU. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE MORATORIUM THAT IS BEING PROPOSED.

I GO BACK IN HISTORY A LITTLE BIT.

SMITHFIELD FOODS.

I REMEMBER WHEN THE HOG FARMS CAME OUT MUCH OPPOSITIONS TO A HOG FARM.

THEIR GROUP'S SOUTH DOGWOOD ALLIANCE.

THEY'RE A NONPROFIT. THEY'RE OPPOSED TO CUTTING ANY TREES.

WE HAVE OPPOSITION TO THE FARMING COMMUNITY AND I'M IN AGRICULTURE MYSELF.

RIGHT.

PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES, SEDIMENT DISCHARGE.

THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO VARIOUS BUSINESS TYPES.

I FEEL THAT THE SOLAR INDUSTRY HAS BEEN CAUGHT UP IN THIS, AND I HOPE THE COUNTY CAN TAKE THAT OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXCUSE ME TO TAKE THAT INTO REVIEW AND LOOK PAST THAT.

AT THE PAST MEETING THE JOINT MEETING AT THE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.

EXCUSE ME, AT THE HIGH SCHOOL.

THERE WERE SOME NEGATIVE COMMENTS ABOUT THE PANELS, BUT KNOW ABOUT THE DISCHARGE OF THE HARMFUL EFFECT, HARMFUL CHEMICALS.

I'LL SAY IN THE PANELS, I HEARD NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE CITED FROM ANYBODY WHO SPOKE AND FEARED THE CHEMICALS OR THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS THAT COULD COME FROM THOSE PANELS AND NEGATIVE CHEMICAL FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD.

THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE BEFORE ME TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE REVENUE STREAM.

I DIDN'T HEAR ANYONE AT THE LAST MEETING SITE AN ALTERNATIVE.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO REPLACE? WHAT CAN YOU USE FOR A REVENUE STREAM IF YOU HAVE A MORATORIUM THAT BLOCKS THE REVENUE STREAM THAT THESE SOLAR FARMS WILL GENERATE? THESE SOLAR FARMS DO NOT REQUIRE MORE SCHOOL BUSSES, MORE INFRASTRUCTURE.

NONE OF THAT TAKES PLACE GRANTED THERE ARE POTENTIAL THREATS WITH THE REMOVAL OF THESE PANELS IF A SITE IS ABANDONED.

I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT FINANCE AND BANKING.

AN UPFRONT LUMP SUM BOND CAN BE PURCHASED AND WHETHER THE COMPANY GOES BANKRUPT OR NOT, THAT BOND IS IN PLACE.

I HOPE THAT COMFORTS SOME OF THOSE MAKING THIS DECISION.

I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO TECHNICAL, BUT A UTILITY SCALE.

I HOPE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL LOOK CAREFULLY AT HOW THEY DEFINE UTILITY SCALES.

[00:50:05]

SOME OF THESE PROJECTS I'VE LEARNED CAN GO INTO A TOWN SUBSTATION, PROVIDE ELECTRICITY FOR THE TOWN AND POTENTIALLY PROVIDE OTHER BENEFITS FOR THOSE RESIDENTS IN THAT TOWN.

IF THAT DEFINITION OF A UTILITY SCALE IS TOO TIGHT AND I'VE HEARD ANYTHING OVER TWO ACRES OR OVER X NUMBER OF KILOWATTS THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE CHANCE FOR THESE COMMUNITY SOLAR FARMS, THAT ARE NOT UTILITY SCALE.

SO PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND.

WHERE YOU DRAW THE LINE ON UTILITY SCALE? I HAVE HEARD COMMISSIONER CHESSON SAY THAT HE FAVORS VIEWING THIS ON A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASIS.

THAT WAY, IF IT'S A GOOD PROJECT, IF THE PROJECT IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE, YOU CAN TAKE EACH PROPERTY AND EVALUATE IT ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS.

THE OLD SAYING DON'T THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER.

I FEEL A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DOES JUST THAT.

AGAIN, I HOPE THE COUNTY DOES NOT ADOPT SUCH A MORATORIUM.

I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD THAT CAN COME FROM SOLAR.

I'M IN AGRICULTURE MYSELF.

I'VE ALSO LEARNED THAT SOLAR PROJECTS CAN'T GO ANYWHERE, THEY HAVE TO BE WITHIN A CERTAIN PROXIMITY OF A HIGH VOLTAGE LINE OR A SUBSTATION.

YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO RUN MILES AND MILES OF POWER LINES.

THIS WILL BY IN BY ITSELF, LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE IT IS TRANSITIONED FROM AGRICULTURE TO A SOLAR PROJECT.

I THINK THE BOARD, THE COUNTY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FOR ALL THE WORK, YOU ALL DO.

YOU DO A GREAT JOB. THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING A GOOD COUNTY FOR US TO LIVE IN.

I HOPE YOU WILL LOOK AT THE POSITIVES OF THIS AS WELL AS THE NEGATIVES.

AND CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? YES, SIR. HOW WOULD A MORATORIUM AFFECT ANY OF THE POSITIVE THINGS THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT? HOW WOULD THEY AFFECT THE POSITIVE? HOW WOULD A MORATORIUM HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TONIGHT? I'M NOT SURE IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, BUT MY ANSWER WOULD BE THAT A MORATORIUM WOULD NOT ALLOW A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO BE PRESENTED.

THEREFORE, WE.

NO YOU'VE GOT THE WRONG IDEA, THEN.

THE MORATORIUM IS A TEMPORARY THING SO WE CAN DECIDE HOW WE WANT TO DO THIS.

WHETHER THROUGH ORDINANCE OR CONDITION USE PERMIT, ULTIMATELY, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE FOR WILL PROBABLY BE ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE LINE.

WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, GET FOR, WHETHER THE MORATORIUM FOR A YEAR, WHAT ARE WE SET? BUT IF DOWN THE LINE, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANY OF THE POSITIVE THINGS THAT YOU SAY.

BUT LET ME REPHRASE MY ANSWER, THEN, PLEASE.

WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR, IT WILL PREVENT ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR A SOLAR FARM TO BE DEVELOPED AND THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THESE POSITIVES WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR.

SOMEONE SAID THEY'VE BEEN EXPLORING, I THINK, MR. JOHNSON SAID, FOR THREE YEARS BEEN LOOKING AT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

I WOULD THINK THE COUNTY COULD HAMMER OUT A GOOD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THREE YEARS.

MY POINT IS A MORATORIUM IS NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANY OF THESE POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE THINGS.

YOU KNOW IT, IT'S GOING TO DELAY THEM, MAYBE A YEAR.

OKAY, SO WHAT IS WRONG? WE'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TONIGHT.

WE'RE NOT HERE DISCUSSION TO ORDINANCE VERSUS CONDITION USE PERMIT.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE PLAN ON DOING.

IF WE GOT A MORATORIUM, WE'D HAVE TIME TO SIT AND LOOK AT IT, SEE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE, WHAT PROBLEMS THEY'VE HAD, AND MAKE A VERY GOOD SCIENTIFIC MORAL DECISION ON WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO. SO IN ESSENCE, IT MIGHT DELAY YOUR GRATIFICATION OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO.

BUT THAT WOULD BE, IN MY OPINION, THE BENEFIT OF THE COUNTY AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE. UNDERSTAND.

MAYBE I'M UNDER THE WRONG IMPRESSION.

I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT'S WHAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING FOR THREE YEARS, AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TIMEFRAME INVOLVED.

BUT I THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON IT AND HOPE YOU CAN UNCOVER ALL THE FACTS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. BAIN.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

[00:55:04]

ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD? I'M GLEN UPDIKE FROM NEWSOMS. AND I THINK YOU ARE A LITTLE BIT.

THANK YOU CAN DO A LOT MORE THAN YOU CAN ON THE TIMETABLE.

I WOULD SUGGEST A MINIMUM OF FIVE YEARS.

SO YOU GIVE YOUR TIME, AND HE ADMITTED THAT GOT ALL THESE NEW IDEAS WERE GOING TO GO BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND ALL THAT STUFF, THEY HADN'T SETTLED ON ANYTHING.

JUST LOOK AT THE TROUBLE THE SOLAR PANEL PRESENTED TO THE COUNTY IT COSTS CITIZENS EXTRA THREE TO FIVE CENTS FOR THE ELECTRIC BILL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT EFFICIENT AND THEN YOU CAN'T SHOW ME THE EFFICIENCY OF PRODUCTION WHILE YOU DO WANT TO PUT THE CITIZENS, NOT JUST AT ONE PERSON, THEN MAKING A WINDFALL PROFIT.

WHEN IT GOT EIGHTEEN HUNDRED OTHER PEOPLE PAYING THE BILLS, PLEASE TAKE US POOR PEOPLE THAT DOESN'T NEED THESE NEW SO-CALLED FEEL GOOD PROPOSITION OF OUR POLITICAL OFFICIALS.

NO NEW TAXES, BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO AWAY WITH A GAS LINE THAT FORCES ME TO PAY AT LEAST 30 DOLLARS EVERY TIME I FILL UP AN OLD PICKUP, THE GAS GUZZLER.

THAT IS A HUGE TAXES.

FOOD. THEY GO ON DOWN THE LINE.

TIMBER. ALL OF THIS IS TAXES.

LOOK AT THE TOTAL EFFECT OF THESE PROJECTS.

GOODNESS SAKES. DON'T JUST GO.

WELL, THIS PERSON IS GOING TO MAKE A MILLION DOLLARS OFF A DEAL, AND HE'S GOING TO PAY THE POLITICAL OFFICIAL TO WRITE ARTICLES TO BENEFIT US.

JUST LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED IN [INAUDIBLE].

WHAT IT DO. LIKE CHINA RUSSIA AND ALL THE FOREIGN COUNTRIES PAY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO OUR PRESIDENT'S SON.

AND WHAT DID HE DO? PUT THE GAS ON AND PUT US IN A BIG HOLE IN ECONOMICS.

SO LOOK AT THE ECONOMICS OF EVERYBODY.

EVERYBODY, NOT JUST A ONE PERSON.

GOODNESS SAKES. AND A HALF OF THE PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTY DON'T EVEN THAT OR THE SOLAR PANELS DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN THE COUNTY AND [INAUDIBLE], I MEAN, NORTH CAROLINA, OTHER COUNTIES THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.

WHAT BENEFIT IS WE'RE GETTING BESIDES LESS FARM WORKERS, LESS FERTILIZER, LESS BUSINESSES? I JUST CAN'T SEE HOW NARROW MINDED WE ARE IN COMING UP WITH SOLAR PANELS. ALSO, TWO, I'M ON THE FIVE YEARS.

I'M NOT A PREDICTOR.

BUT WE CAN VERY EASILY LOSE THE WESTERN PART OF THE UNITED STATES IN DROUGHT.

CALIFORNIA, OREGON, WASHINGTON, YOU NAME IT ALL THE WAY UP AND DOWN THE WEST COAST.

WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GROW FOOD? AND I STILL HAVEN'T HEARD THE FIRST ONE TO GET UP HERE AND SAY.

THOSE SOLAR PANELS ARE GOING TO TAKE OUT THE CARBON OUT OF THE ATMOSPHERE.

I WANT SOME GOOD OXYGEN.

AND THE ONLY WAY I'M GETTING OXYGEN IS BY THE PLANTS PRODUCING IT FOR ME.

I CAN'T EAT AND CAN'T SURVIVE ON SOLAR POWER BECAUSE THEY DONE A LOT AGAIN, PRODUCE ANY BENEFIT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.

[01:00:06]

I CAN GO ON LONGER, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE UP ANY MORE OF YOUR TIME.

I'LL BE BACK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

[LAUGHTER] ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD.

LAST CALL, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD.

YES, SIR.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD.

[INAUDIBLE] GARY CROSS FROM BLACK CREEK, VIRGINIA.

I AM ONLY GOING TO MAKE TWO STATEMENTS TONIGHT.

IF A MORATORIUM IS ILLEGAL AND THERE'S A LOT OF JURISDICTIONS AROUND IS IF WE ARE BREAKING THE LAW. AND THIS PAID EMPLOYEE WITH A SUIT ON HIM SPOKE THE FIRST TIME, IF YOU HEARD ONE THING HE SAID WAS HE ENJOYED THE SCENIC VIEW, RIDING OVER HERE TO SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY.

THANK Y'ALL. THANK YOU, SIR.

PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN.

ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD? AGAIN, LAST CALL.

IF NOT, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

THANK YOU ALL FOR ALL THE ONES THAT CAME TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

THERE'S SOMETHING TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE GO FORWARD.

MS. LEWIS, OUR NEXT MOVE MAYOR IS TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION, IS THAT CORRECT?

[3. Joint Closed Meeting - In accordance with Section 2.2-3711 (A) (8), Consultation with legal counsel employed by the governing body to hear and receive legal advice associated with enactment of zoning moratoria]

YES, IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO NOW CONDUCT A CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROVISION AND PURPOSE SET OUT IN THE CODE OF VIRGINIA 19 50 AS AMENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.2-3711A 8.

CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNING BODY TO HEAR AND RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE ASSOCIATED WITH ENACTMENT OF ZONING MORATORIA.

SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ARE GOING TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION WITH MR. REILLY ON THE PHONE AND.

WE WILL REMAIN INSIDE THIS ROOM IT'S CORRECT.

WE WILL REMAIN INSIDE. I MAKE A MOTION WE GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

AND BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NEED TO MAKE A MOTION AND APPROVE THAT. SO.

YOU WANT TO GO FIRST. I GUESS WE I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO GO SEPARATE OR WE CAN ALL DO IT AT ONE TIME. WE NEED TO DO IT SEPARATELY.

YES. OK. SO ARE YOU ACTING AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR WHAT OKAY.

YES I'M THE PLANNING COMMISSION? OKAY SECOND IT.

HAVE A PROPER MOTION AND A SECOND TO GO INTO A CLOSED MEETING.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION AMONG THE PANEL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.

IF NOT, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION SAY, AYE.