Will County Board rejects solar facilities in near New Lenox, Wilmington
The Will County Board voted 16-5 vote Thursday to reject plans for a solar facility in New Lenox Township that was opposed by New Lenox village officials and nearby homeowners.
Soltage proposed two 5-megawatt commercial solar energy facilities on about 75 acres southeast of Haven Avenue and Gougar Road. The village of New Lenox abuts the property to the west and north and objected to the plan.
More than 80 residents of the nearby Fieldstone Subdivision signed a petition stating the commercial solar energy facility would negatively impact their property values. They also said the height of the vegetation and the minimal times it would be mowed would be an eyesore and create problems with mosquitoes and rodents.
'This proposed solar farm will be extraordinarily close to our homes,' Sandy Wheeler said. 'I was involved in preparing the signatures in opposition to this proposed solar farm. Not one resident that I asked to sign the petition denied it.'
Ray Stanford said residents in the Fieldstone Subdivision believed it would depreciate their property values, saying he researched the impact of property values next to solar farms in states that have had such facilities long before they became popular in Illinois. He said he learned the value of homes about a half mile from the solar farms go down in value.
That claim was denied by Soltage representatives.
New Lenox is recommending a medium density, single-family residential development as part of its comprehensive plan for that land, said Robin Ellis, the assistant village administrator and community development director.
The village has been very deliberate in its planning and has intentionally kept industrial development west of Gougar Road, Ellis said.
The county could generate more in property taxes from a future residential development than a solar plant, Ellis said in a letter to the county, noting the developer estimated the solar facility would generate about $73,000 annually in property taxes whereas a modest residential development could generate $1.6 million annually.
The land owner last talked to the village about building a residential development in 2008, Ellis said. Since then, the village has taken steps to encourage residential development east of Gougar Road by investing nearly $4.5 million in road improvements. The village is also investing in a new wastewater treatment facility to prep the area for residential development, she said.
Board member Frankie Pretzel, the chair of the County Board's Land Use and Development Committee, said this is the wrong location for a solar project.
'I drive by this property regularly,' Pretzel, a New Lenox Republican, said. 'It's just a matter of time that we see homes.'
He said the site is in a highly desired area in the heart of town.
New Lenox Mayor Tim Baldermann said homes are located to the west and north with Lincoln Way West High School to the south. If a solar facility is built, nearby vacant land would not be developed for homes, and an industrial use would likely be proposed.
'It doesn't fit the area,' Baldermann said. 'We are not anti-solar, it just doesn't make sense on this piece of property.'
Baldermann said he believed the solar project would be a tremendous loss of revenue for the area taxing bodies.
Union School District 81 would receive $660,000 a year in property tax revenue if the land were developed as homes as the village wants, said Baldermann, who is also the district's superintendent. As a solar facility, the district would receive $22,000 a year, he said.
The district is also highly sought after and would welcome more students, Baldermann said.
James Brown, fire marshal for the New Lenox Fire District, said he had concerns due to its proximity to schools and Silver Cross Hospital.
Stephanie Sienkowski, director of development at Soltage, said the project would bring about 60 to 75 union contractor jobs during construction, and the solar facility could provide solar energy to about 2,000 homes, helping meet a growing demand for electricity.
She said the company also planned to offer college scholarships to students and gift the New Lenox Fire District with an ATV. She tried to assuage concerns about fire hazards and said the company has an emergency response plan in place.
Andrew Lines, a real estate appraiser for Soltage, said data shows solar energy facilities don't have issues on property values throughout the country including in coveted and scenic areas of Hawaii, California or Colorado.
Soltage attorney Maria Bries said the property is located in unincorporated Will County, which should supersede New Lenox's planning authority. New Lenox's comprehensive plan is only advisory, she said.
Commercial solar facilities are allowed to be located on agricultural land, and the Soltage project meets the requirements for a special use permit, she said. The company has invested $1.6 million in the project thus far, she said.
Bries said the Will County Board cannot be more restrictive than state law in denying an application.
'Decisions by counties based on local resistance rather than objective standards … are yielding arbitrary outcomes detrimental to ComEd's future power supply and the state of Illinois' pressing energy needs,' she said.
State laws governing solar projects have frustrated many county lawmakers, who feel the state is taking the control over local projects out of their hands.
'I strongly believe that the state legislature got this wrong and shame on them for putting us in this position month after month after month,' Pretzel said, adding he would like to put a halt on solar cases.
'The only reason they are called solar farms is because we are putting them on farm land,' said Republican Leader Jim Richmond, of Mokena. 'Really, they are solar utility plants, and we are putting them in close proximity to houses not because this board wants them there but because Springfield has pushed this upon us.'
Democrat Sherry Newquist of Steger, who voted against the project, said she was on the fence. She said on one hand it was a textbook case of a municipality using its future planning area to decide how it wants to grow. But she conceded denying the project would ultimately lead to a lawsuit.
'And how well is that serving the taxpayers,' she said.
The County Board also voted 16-5 to reject a commercial solar energy facility proposed by Nexamp Solar LLC that would have been located on about 34 acres on Wilmington-Peotone Road in Wilmington.
County Board Speaker Joe VanDuyne, a Democrat from Wilmington, said the planned location is next to the community's welcome sign and would be a bad location for a solar farm.
The city of Wilmington objected to the request because it was too close to existing residents and could be annexed to the city for a future residential use. City officials said the solar energy facility would be an eyesore and potentially create glare or contamination concerns, county documents said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful." 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes , as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation . The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful.' 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
CNBC
10 hours ago
- CNBC
Musk's Tesla is launching robotaxis in Austin, Texas
After driverless Tesla Model Ys were spotted traversing Austin, Texas, streets on Sunday morning, CEO Elon Musk posted on his social platform X that Tesla's "robotaxi launch" would start this afternoon with rides for a flat fee of $4.20. A Reuters witness saw several Tesla "robotaxis" on Sunday morning in a popular area of the Texas capital called South Congress with no one in the driver's seat but one person in the passenger seat. Tesla planned to have front-seat riders acting as "safety monitors," though it remained unclear how much control they would have over the vehicles. Videos of driverless Teslas have also been posted on social media but it was not known if the vehicles carried any passengers. As the date of the planned robotaxi launch approached, Texas lawmakers moved to enact rules on autonomous vehicles in the state. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, on Friday signed legislation requiring a state permit to operate self-driving vehicles. The law does not take effect until Sept. 1, but the governor's approval of it on Friday signals state officials from both parties want the driverless-vehicle industry to proceed cautiously. A group of Democratic state lawmakers earlier this week asked Tesla to delay its planned robotaxi trial because of the legislation. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. The governor's office declined to comment. The law softens the state's previous anti-regulation stance on autonomous vehicles. A 2017 Texas law specifically prohibited cities from regulating self-driving cars. In recent days, Tesla has sent invites to a select group of Tesla online influencers for a small and carefully monitored robotaxi trial, which the company has said would include 10 or 20 Model Y vehicles operated in a limited zone of Austin. The law requires autonomous-vehicle operators to get approval from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles before operating on public streets without a human driver. It also gives state authorities the power to revoke permits if they deem a driverless vehicle "endangers the public," and requires firms to provide information on how police and first responders can deal with their driverless vehicles in emergency situations. The law's requirements for getting a state permit to operate an "automated motor vehicle" are not particularly onerous but require a firm to attest it can safely operate within the law. It defines an automated vehicle as having at least "Level 4" autonomous-driving capability under a recognized standard, meaning it can drive itself with no human driver under specified conditions, such as within a limited area. Level 5 autonomy is the top level and means a car can drive itself anywhere, under any conditions. Compliance remains far easier than in some states, most notably California, which requires extensive submission of vehicle-testing data under state oversight. The Tesla robotaxi launch, which the company warned might be delayed, comes after more than a decade of Musk's unfulfilled promises to deliver self-driving Teslas. Most of Tesla's sky-high stock value now rests on its ability to deliver robotaxis and humanoid robots, according to many industry analysts. Tesla is by far the world's most valuable automaker. Musk has said Tesla would be "super paranoid" about safety for the Austin rollout. The company planned to operate only in areas it considered the safest. The service in Austin will have other restrictions as well. Tesla plans to avoid bad weather, difficult intersections, and will not carry anyone below the age of 18. Musk has said he is ready to delay the start for safety reasons, if needed. The planned launch has generated buzz among Tesla fans. "Wow. We are going to ride in driverless Teslas in just a few days. On public roads," posted Omar Qazi, who has 635,200 followers on X, writes often about Tesla using the handle @WholeMarsBlog, and received an invite. Commercializing autonomous vehicles has been risky and expensive. GM's Cruise was shut down after a fatal accident and regulators are closely watching Tesla and its rivals, Alphabet's Waymo, which runs a paid robotaxi service in several U.S. cities, and Amazon's Zoox. Tesla is also bucking the young industry's standard practice of relying on multiple technologies to read the road, using only cameras. That, Musk says, will be safe and much less expensive than lidar and radar systems added by rivals.
