As civically engaged, community minded folks, MCA's supporters hear from a lot of different environmental groups. The same is true of county councilmembers and their staff. The question has come - "But why are you and Sierra Club/CCAN in disagreement about solar in the Ag Reserve?"
The answer involves some misunderstanding on the part of our fellow civic groups. While we all want renewable energy and climate solutions, this ZTA is not the way to get there as it lacks protections for the very things that environmental groups usually agree need protecting.
Case in point, this recent jubilant email from CCAN asking supporters to celebrate the "compromise" ZTA that came out of committee ready for debate at the full Council in September. CCAN email in italics, our clearing up of misstatements in below.
The answer involves some misunderstanding on the part of our fellow civic groups. While we all want renewable energy and climate solutions, this ZTA is not the way to get there as it lacks protections for the very things that environmental groups usually agree need protecting.
Case in point, this recent jubilant email from CCAN asking supporters to celebrate the "compromise" ZTA that came out of committee ready for debate at the full Council in September. CCAN email in italics, our clearing up of misstatements in below.
Subject: Good news: MoCo compromise permits solar and farming side by side
...."Which is why I am pleased members of the Montgomery County Council reached an excellent compromise last week to allow solar power and farming to co-exist in our county’s northern region. After much debate and the sharing of data on all sides, the Councilmembers came together and voted 4-1 for a path forward. "
MCA: There is in fact no stipulation for the co-location of agriculture in this bill. As numerous local farmers have testified, the idea that you can grow food/pollinator plants in the drought and shade of a solar array is rather ridiculous. This is not a compromise as no protections for water quality, forests or meaningful soil protections were passed. Be clear - the ZTA has been discussed in Council committees, not voted on by full council.
"That path, as part of a Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA), excludes solar power on “Class 1” soils that are best used for growing crops. That is reasonable. The resolution DOES permit a limited amount of solar only on lesser quality soils -- i.e. “Class 2” or higher. So the final result would be no more than 1800 acres of solar panels -- less than two percent of the County’s agricultural reserve -- and ONLY on sub-Class 1 soils. "
MCA: Class 1 soils constitute very few of the Reserve’s acres and are located in riparian buffers, along the Potomac or streams and on islands in the Potomac. These acres are not suitable for farming. As the map below illustrates the Red parts are class 1- very little. Soils of class 1,2 and 3 are all considered productive soils by the Office of Agriculture and most food and fiber of the Reserve is grown on class 2 and 3 (orange and peach colors respectively.) (see the table of which farms grow on which soils here.) The green of the map is Ag Reserve land with soil classes higher than 3, i.e less than productive soils. It stands to reason that in an area set aside for agriculture, siting a commercial use on productive soils is to be avoided. At minimum, unproductive soils should be the only option for this industrial and commercial use. Those productive soils need to grow the next generation of local food producers.
Additionally, it has become clear in committee hearings that the backers of this ZTA are looking for far more than this first 1800 acres for solar located on productive farmland. Despite the holistic approach of the report from the County's own climate change working group, ZTA architect Councilmember Riemer seems to be putting all his chips on field mounted solar to achieve the renewable/energy reduction portfolio we need to get to the County's climate goals.
Additionally, it has become clear in committee hearings that the backers of this ZTA are looking for far more than this first 1800 acres for solar located on productive farmland. Despite the holistic approach of the report from the County's own climate change working group, ZTA architect Councilmember Riemer seems to be putting all his chips on field mounted solar to achieve the renewable/energy reduction portfolio we need to get to the County's climate goals.
The “ZTA 20-01” resolution will now go to the full Council for a final vote in September. We at CCAN Action Fund -- and our many partners throughout the county -- support a favorable vote from the Council with no weakening amendments.
County government leaders have made it clear that we cannot meet our County’s ambitious climate-emergency goals without allowing a limited amount of solar to co-exist with agriculture. We now have a compromise that gets us there.
County government leaders have made it clear that we cannot meet our County’s ambitious climate-emergency goals without allowing a limited amount of solar to co-exist with agriculture. We now have a compromise that gets us there.
MCA: "Weakening" amendments is a misnomer. Under this ZTA, arrays will still be allowed on slopes of up to 15%, causing serious runoff and subsequent water quality issues. When asked about wetlands at the committee hearing, planning board staff said the ZTA "should protect most wetlands." Most wetlands?! The ZTA may be amended to address no specific forest protection for forests to "forest loss should be minimized." Clearly more protective amendments are needed to avoid harm to existing natural systems.
And one of the best features of the ZTA is that it allows only “community solar” power to be placed on Class 2 soils. This means the electricity will include offerings to low-to-moderate income Montgomery residents -- up to 54,000 homes -- who might otherwise be unable to power their homes with affordable, clean power. During the COVID-19 recession and climate crisis, this is a win, win, win.
MCA: There is still no stipulation in the ZTA that the energy created will be part of the Community Solar portfolio as defined by Maryland and it is frankly upsetting that the very real energy needs of low income people are being used as a selling point for this flawed ZTA. Without clear stipulation that these commercial facilities will be part of the community solar initiative, energy generated will simply flow to regional grid providing neither affordable energy for local consumers nor satisfying Montgomery County’s mandate for carbon neutral by 2035.
And so, MCA, with our supporters and partners, climate change aware and proactive throughout our County, are fully in favor of meeting our climate emergency with decisive action but regard this proposal as producing more harm than good. Best efforts to discuss these concerns with local groups pushing this ZTA have not been fruitful. But we do have solutions - the report of the County's own Climate Change Task Force is ready for implementation. Among the recommendations are projects that MCA has already embarked on, including reforestation along stream buffers and wider adoption of regenerative agriculture.
The ZTA will be moving to the full council in September, we will be asking you to once again arise your voice for a policy that truly does promote renewable energy, natural systems and the 40 year old promise of the Agricultural Reserve.
The ZTA will be moving to the full council in September, we will be asking you to once again arise your voice for a policy that truly does promote renewable energy, natural systems and the 40 year old promise of the Agricultural Reserve.
