Vote on solar farm postponed again

Though dozens of landowners anticipated a decision on a 3,600-acre solar farm in Custer and Reed townships, the Will County Board voted to table the issue until Feb. 20, 2025.
At its Nov. 21 meeting, board members voted 12-8 to once again delay a decision on the solar energy facility proposed by ACCIONA Energia, headquartered in Spain.
Project history
ACCIONA presented plans for the solar energy facility to Custer and Reed townships during an informal meeting on Nov. 18, 2021.
The facility would be located in District 1 between Essex and Zilm roads from east to west, County Line and Smiley roads from north to south, with a substation at Smiley and Essex roads.
Once completed, the solar energy facility would have a 30 year lifespan, representing $300 million in private community investment.
On Sept. 10, 2024, the Will County Land Use and Development Committee rejected a special use permit for the proposed facility, the largest ever submitted for approval to the county board.
On Sept. 19, the Will County Board ended up tabling the proposal until Nov. 21, when it was again postponed until February 2025.
Supporters and
detractors
On Thursday residents packed the board meeting awaiting the opportunity to share their opinion.
The majority asked the board to reject the solar energy facility, citing issues such as runoff polluting private wells, plummeting property values, loss of productive farmland and threats to the environment.
Supporters cited the creation of jobs, tax dollars, and the benefits of green energy.
“This is all about money––not money for us, but money for a foreign company,” Patricia Malcolm said. “I am very concerned because my home is 215 feet from the proposed site. The community elected you [the county board] to take care of us.”
Resident Peter Cristodolos refuted previous claims that soil in the area is of poor quality, not suited for agriculture.
“It's a sandy soil everything grows wonderful,” he said. “What do you think is going to happen when they take away the corn? This is China trying to do this to us, trying to take away our food supplies.”
Dante Domenella, speaking on behalf of ACCIONA, touted the benefits of the facility, including job creation and economic growth. Though detractors claimed the soil will be useless after the duration of the project, Domenella said the facility is not permanent, and land can be returned to agricultural status.
In addressing the issue of well contamination, Domenella noted the effects of agriculture on the environment, noting that agricultural giant, Monsanto, dumps tons of chemicals on the fields for the raising of crops.
“It’s difficult to drive a car when you’re looking in the rearview mirror, you’ll get into an accident” Domenella said to detractors. “You have to look out the windshield.”
Closer to home, Mark Mitchell, superintendent of Reed-Custer Community Unit School District 255-U, spoke in favor of the facility.
“Review the tax benefits to the local taxing bodies.” He said. “The projections of $1 million the first year, and $800,000 every year after, for a total of $24 million over life of the project,”
Mike Newbrough, whose land would be leased by ACCIONA, shared his opinion that the corporation has done its due diligence, meeting legal requirements, codes and statutes in planning the solar facility.
“If you own a farm and you want to grow bees and have honey, and the neighbor's kid is allergic to bees,” he said. “do they have the right to tell you, ‘No, you can't have bees, you can't have honey?’”
After interjecting a “rebuttal” to Newbrough from the back of the courthouse, Peter Christodolos was urged to return to the podium.
“If I do something that is going to affect the people around me––if I put something in my garden that's going to contaminate the wells of my neighbors, then there's a problem,” he said.
Vincent Burke, a landowner, shared his thoughts on green energy.
“I've heard the term solar farm. This thing is no more a farm than a cemetery is an amusement park.” Burke said. “Please vote today on this issue. We've had enough continuances and time spent on this thing. Enough wasting our time.”
Power of the state
Despite the anticipation among supporters and detractors alike, Land Use Committee Chair, Frankie Pretzel (District 2, R-New Lenox) made a motion to postpone the decision. He said he wants to give ACCIONA the opportunity to address issues with landowners.
Pretzel also noted that rejecting the solar energy facility proposal would most likely result in a lawsuit, since the state of Illinois has taken away the power of county boards to reject approved green energy projects.
In addition to Pretzel, Joe VanDuyne (District 1, D-Wilmington) agreed the decision should be postponed until February.
“What I can say is I've had verbal conversations with them [ACCIONA] for quite some time and they're willing to continue to work with all the landowners in this area to make this project more acceptable for them,” VanDuyne said.
Katie Deane-Schlottman (District 1, R - Joliet) disagreed with postponing the issue until February.
“I do not think the solar company is going to make enough concessions to make the project palatable,” Deane-Schlottman said. “People have been waiting for an answer and deserve one from their county board. The solar company has already had one extension. I'm not in favor of the project. The only concession I would support is the project completely withdrawn.”