Editor’s note: Below are two forum letters received recently by the Bellefontaine Examiner from Bellefontaine area resident Mark Schmieder and J. Scott Duff of Huntsville. Duff’s letter appeared previously in the Aug. 24 edition of the Examiner.
Arguments against annexation of Duff property
I was approached by Hodson Energy back in April 2021 about leasing some, or all, of our 100 acres of woods and pastures to them for a Solar Farm. Our property is adjacent to the subject property that Hodson has leased from Duffs. They offered me $4,744,410 over a 45 year term to lease 70 acres. This equated to $1,200 per acre or $84,000 per year. I mention this to let you know that I was faced with the option of leasing my land to them and enjoying a significant annual payment that would have made my retirement much easier and provided me with much more financial freedom. However, after carefully researching the subject, I decided that the project was a bad idea and no amount of money is worth going against my personal beliefs and principles.
Assuming Duffs were offered a similar deal, this equates to $240,000 per year for 200 acres. This compares to the approx. $200 per acre they get from a local farmer that leases the land for farming. I understand that this is a lot of money. Duffs don’t live on, or near, the property and it was purchased simply as an investment. I don’t fault them for accepting this offer from Hodson and I have no hard feelings towards Dave or Scott Duff. However, my wife and myself, and both my daughters and their sons in laws, along with our seven grandchildren (all boys 11 yrs old and under) live adjacent to their property and would be directly impacted by the Solar Farm. Therefore, I feel it is important to discuss the negative aspects of this proposed project and annexation of the land into the City Municipality. The following paragraphs present numerous reasons why I’m opposed to this project and why I believe the County Commissioners and City Council Members should reject the annexation request.
When Kyle West (employee of Hodson Energy) met with the City Council Members on July 7th, he mischaracterized the area where he wants to install a solar farm. He incorrectly described the zoning by saying four of the five parcels are zoned B-1, which he described as light industrial. He said a solar farm is keeping with the surrounding areas use and “in harmony” with the current use of the land and said the tillable land is not productive farm land and poor soil quality.
In his discussion on why they would like to annex the property into the City of Bellefontaine, he left out the true reason. Hodson Energy knows the Township Trustees, who have been elected by the residents of Lake Township to represent their interests, don’t want a solar farm. Hodson is trying to bypass our constitutional government and take away the voice of the people most heavily impacted by having a solar farm in their back yard, by waving dollar bills at the city and county officials.
Next, Mr. West totally mischaracterized the area. If you review the tracts on the Logan County Auditor’s website you will see there are seven (not five) tracts that make up 226 acres. Due to wetlands on the east and west sides of the property, they can’t use all of the property for their solar farm. In addition, for one of the tracts (5.2 acres) use is listed as “Other Commercial Structures”. There are billboards on this strip of land that runs along Hwy 33. Therefore, they can only use approx. 200 acres of the land for their solar farm.
Excluding the long, thin tract along 33 with the billboards, leaves six tracts, three are used for Grain and General Farming, totaling 186 acres (82% of the total property). This use has been consistent for as long as I’ve lived adjacent to the property, which is over 20 years.
The use listed for the other three tracts, totaling 34.7 acres (15% of total land), is Mines and Quarries. He implies that this area is, or will be, actively mined and compares the sound, traffic, etc. associated with a quarry to that of a solar farm. The truth is this quarry has not been mined for over 20 years (as long as I’ve lived here). It contains river rock, not limestone and the market for small river rock is minimal.
Duff’s have an old quarry pit on a small portion of the 34 acres (I’m guessing around five acres) that contains piles of river wash stone and sand/fine gravel.
The 15% of land associated with quarry is zoned B-1, which is not light industrial. Most people associate light industrial with manufacturing zoning. Lake Township has areas zoned M-2 (Manufacturing), but not in this part of the township.
He states the tillable ground is poor soil quality and not productive farm land. The land has been leased and used for farming for the entire 20+ years we have lived adjacent to the property. Apparently, the farmer thinks it is productive enough to lease every year and it appears to produce good yields of corn and soybeans every year.
What the solar company is trying to do is un-Constitutional and contrary to the principles that the USA was built upon. The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.
Governing at the Township level was set up to align with democratic principles, which is what the Constitution establishes. The residents of the township elect Trustees, who are responsible for making decisions that reflect the desires of the voting public in that township.
The solar company knows that Lake Township Trustees made the decision that they don’t want solar farms in our township and developed and implemented legislation to support this position. Now, the solar company wants to ignore the “will of the people” and try and get the land annexed into the City of Bellefontaine, with the hope that the tax dollars and any other financial incentives they offer will cause the County Commissioners and City Council to go along with suppressing the will of the residents, who have to live right next to this farm. I hope and pray that they will set aside the financial benefit to the City and follow the principles that this Country was founded on, by letting the residents decide what is in their backyard.
The proposed project doesn’t appear to meet the requirements of the regulations that govern annexation in Ohio (Section 709 of Ohio Code). Section 709.02 (A) specifies that “The owners of real estate contiguous to a municipal corporation may petition for annexation”… The Supreme Court determined that at least five percent of the land’s perimeter must be contiguous to the municipal corporation to meet the definition of being contiguous. The drawing provided as Exhibit B to the Petition for Annexation that was provided to the adjacent landowners shows no connection to the Bellefontaine Municipal Corporation. The Supreme Court ruled against “Balloon on a string” annexations, where only a small portion (<5%) of the land’s perimeter is contiguous with City property.
I have heard that Hodson plans on getting the Rail Road (whose tracks form the eastern boundary of the subject property) to agree to annex their land and then claim that the RR land runs through the City property and is contiguous to the Duff property. I think this is a very weak argument, since using that logic, any property that the RR passes through could be annexed into the City of Bellefontaine. I think a strong legal argument could be made for not allowing RR property to be used to satisfy the contiguous land requirements, since RR property is contiguous to every municipality in Ohio that it runs through.
I’ve also heard that Hodson will try to get one of the landowners between the municipality property on the east side of the Duff property (where CenterPoint Energy and Lee’s Famous Chicken is located) to agree to be annexed. I want to reiterate that the Supreme Court has ruled that 5% of the subject property’s boundary must border the municipality property. This would take a very large tract of land, considering the Duff property is over 200 acres.
A Solar Farm on Duff’s property will negatively impact Bellefontaine and Logan County. Hwy 33 and 68 are two major roads on which people travel to, and past, Bellefontaine. Having 200 acres of solar panels, where there used to be farm fields, can’t help people’s perception of the City and County. Traffic will be right next to the solar panels on 33 and I suspect they will be able to see them from Hwy 68. I have yet to meet anyone who says they like the look of commercial solar farms.
The solar farm will negatively impact property values around the farm. The solar companies and their advocates have funded all kinds of studies that say the surrounding property values won’t be impacted, but common sense and an unbiased study of the subject says otherwise. The most comprehensive study I found is a 46 page report titled “Property Value Impacts Of Commercial- Scale Solar Energy In Massachusetts and Rhode Island”. This study determined that property values within one mile of the solar farm will drop 1.7% and properties within 0.1 miles will drop 7%.
I believe this “Green Energy” project will turn into a nightmare for the environment. When Hodson Energy approached me about leasing our 70 acres of woods, they said they would bulldoze down all the woods (and profit from the sale of the timber). How “Green” is a company that wouldn’t think twice about bulldozing an entire forest…
Harvard Business Review “The Dark Side of Solar Power” states “In just a few short years, the hundreds of thousands of panels installed today will be obsolete. As it is with any new technology, the panels of today will be much cheaper to produce and probably more efficient in the near future. In fact, the panels installed today, if all goes well, will decrease in their efficiency at least 1% each year”.
Harvard Business Review goes on to state “According to the EPA, ‘Hazardous waste testing on solar panels in the marketplace has indicated that different varieties of solar panels have different metals present in the semiconductor and solder. Some of these metals, like lead and cadmium, are harmful to human health and the environment at high levels. Solar panels with high quantities of these metals would be considered hazardous waste and would need special care in their removal, transport (only under a manifest designating it as hazardous waste) and long term waste storage’.” EPA.gov “End of life solar panels regulations and management”
“Simple removal costs are conservatively estimated at $4/sqft ($175,000 per acre). Adding the requirement to restore the land to its original agricultural usage (topsoil, drainage, compaction issues, etc.), final costs when the project is either finished or no longer financially viable will be astronomical”.
“Panels are delicate, bulky pieces of equipment. Only experienced, highly specialized workers are required to detach and remove solar panels, otherwise, they shatter to smithereens before they make it onto the truck. In addition, some governments classify solar panels as hazardous waste, due to the small amounts of heavy metals (cadmium, lead, etc.) they contain. This classification carries with it a string of expensive restrictions — hazardous waste can only be transported at designated times and via select routes, etc.”
“By 2035, discarded panels would outweigh new units sold by 2.56 times. In turn, this would catapult the LCOE (levelized cost of energy, a measure of the overall cost of an energy-producing asset over its lifetime) to four times the current projection. The economics of solar — so bright-seeming from the vantage point of today — would darken quickly as the industry sinks under the weight of its own trash”. Harvard Business Review “The Dark Side of Solar Power”
Soil erosion and flooding are likely byproducts of solar farms built on farm land. A study in Virginia states “The concern about solar panels contributing to the degradation of water quality is starting to be realized throughout the region. In March of this year, Virginia announced that solar projects would now be regulated as impervious surface areas in the Commonwealth, due to the amount of stormwater runoff that it generates. Rainwater falls on the panels, flowing off as it would the roof of a house. While some of the rain may be absorbed into the ground, some of it will also flow off the land, causing erosion and carrying sediments and pollution with it downstream. “
“Large-scale solar installations are causing state and local government agencies to look closely at proposed sites and weigh the costs and benefits associated with a reduced dependency on oil and gas against tree, habitat loss, and a decline in water quality. “ www.Chesapeakebay.net “The Solar Paradox”
“A major new study of the economics of solar, published in Harvard Business Review (HBR), finds that the waste produced by solar panels will make electricity from solar panels four times more expensive than the world’s leading energy analysts thought. “The economics of solar,” write Atalay Atasu and Luk N. Van Wassenhove of Institut Européen d’Administration des Affaires, one of Europe’s leading business schools, and Serasu Duranof the University of Calgary, will “darken quickly as the industry sinks under the weight of its own trash.” Forbes “Dark Side To Solar? More Reports Tie Panel Production To Toxic Pollution”.
When taking into account the destruction of fertile farm land, the problems created in watersheds by excessive runoff and soil erosion, the hazardous wastes that will be generated when the soon-to-be-obsolete panels are disposed of and the shear volume of waste that will fill our landfills, it’s hard to view a solar farm as being a “green” project.
Government (tax payer) financial support to the solar energy companies is what makes solar energy cost effective. When the financial incentives are gone, I believe it is doubtful that solar will be able to compete with fossil fuels or nuclear energy. When this happens, what happens to all the solar companies and the farms they have been leased and developed? I believe they will disappear simply by declaring bankruptcy. I found it interesting that Hodson Energy set up a separate LLC just for this project (Hodson Greendefine Blue Jacket, LLC). This is done to shield the parent company of any liability (financial or otherwise).
Here is a list of Hodson’s leadership from their website, including the guys that are involved in solar projects (EVP).
Rahul Gill President & CEO- signed Petition for Annexation
AJ Dhanoa EVP – Development
Sukhin Bhandari – Chief Operating Officer
Shazim Chhapra – Chief Strategy Officer
Khushwant Singh – EVP Development
Shyam Sundar SVP – EPC & Operations
Shankar Nagarajan – Senior Advisor
I wonder if these individuals are going to be concerned with the damage and destruction that could end up occurring in small town USA when their subsidiary LLC goes under and Bellefontaine is faced with the clean-up costs for this environmental disaster?
In summary, I don’t believe the annexation of Duff’s land or the construction of the solar farm has any benefit, other than a financial benefit to the Duffs, the City of Bellefontaine and Hodson Energy. The negative impacts are many, including:
• Loss of fertile farming land (this farm land has been leased and farmed for as long as I have lived here; 20+ years).
• Potential watershed problems, loss of fertile soils, flooding, etc.
• Reducing the appeal of living in Logan County and Bellefontaine
• Reduction of the surrounding property values
Undermining the Constitutional principles that this country, county and city were founded upon, by removing the voice of the people that are most impacted by this annexation/ solar project.
The precedent that an approval of this annexation request would create. If this annexation is approved and legal challenges do not prevent a reversal of this decision, The City Council Members and County Commissioners may be opening up the flood gate for similar actions by solar companies throughout Ohio.
Mark Schmieder
Bellefontaine
A responsible path for Bellefontaine’s future
As a landowner in Logan County, I’ve always valued the freedom to responsibly utilize my property in ways that benefit both my family and the broader community. This belief in property rights, combined with a deep commitment to our local values, is why I’m advocating for the annexation of my land into Bellefontaine City limits. This step is essential for bringing forward a solar energy project that could provide substantial benefits to our community, not only in terms of economic growth but also in preserving the quality of life that we all cherish.
The property in question is far from prime farmland. In fact, it’s quite the opposite — this land is rocky, difficult to farm, and has entertained numerous industrial uses in the past.
If not developed into a low-impact solar project, it could easily become something far more intensive, such as an intermodal operation due its proximity to the rail line. Such an
alternative would bring significant changes to the area — changes that could include
increased traffic, noise, and possibly even environmental degradation. Keep in mind, this site is in immediate proximity to a railroad, utility substation and numerous commercial uses. I view this site as a great way to build on the commercial/industrial corridor
Bellefontaine has in this area.
However, by choosing to pursue a solar project, we have the opportunity to preserve this land as open space. Solar development is a unique use of land that aligns with the
community’s desire to maintain the rural character of our area. Solar panels quietly generate clean energy without the smells, pollution, or traffic associated with other forms of development. In essence, this project allows us to strike a balance—using the land in way that benefits everyone while maintaining the peace and tranquility that
we value.
This solar project isn’t just about preserving the land, though. It’s also about providing
tangible, long-term benefits to Bellefontaine. Over its lifespan, the project is expected to contribute approximately $13 million in local taxes. These funds will go directly into our community, supporting critical public services, improving our schools, and enhancing our city’s infrastructure. This is money that can be used to make Bellefontaine an even
better place to live, work, and raise a family. I’ve never voted against a tax hike to support our schools, but in the future, I do hope our community will find economic development solutions that benefit our kids without putting more of a burden on the backs of our
hard-working community.
It’s important to note that the annexation and the consideration of solar legislation in Bellefontaine are just the first steps in this process. These steps allow the project to be
considered under new, locally-determined rules that reflect the needs and desires of our community. As the landowner, I am fully committed to ensuring that this project is brought forward under these guidelines and that it is designed in a way that benefits
everyone in Bellefontaine. Some may wonder why annexation is necessary. The reality is that Logan County has placed strict moratoriums on solar development, effectively closing the door on opportunities like this one. Without annexation into Bellefontaine, this project—and the significant economic and environmental benefits it offers — simply cannot move forward. By supporting annexation, we’re not only defending the principle of property rights but also making a strategic decision that will position Bellefontaine as a leader in sustainable development and economic
growth.
Moreover, this project is more than just an energy initiative; it’s a powerful statement about the kind of community we want to be. In today’s economy, businesses are increasingly looking for locations that can offer not just a skilled workforce but also access to clean, reliable energy. By embracing this solar project, Bellefontaine can attract new employers, like Honda and Intel, and create jobs that will sustain our community for years to come.
I believe that this project is the right choice for Bellefontaine. It respects our tradition of property rights, it brings significant economic benefits, and it preserves the character of our land. I urge my fellow residents and the members of the City Council to consider the long-term advantages of this project. Together, we can make a decision that
secures a prosperous and responsible future for Bellefontaine — one that honors our past
while looking forward to new opportunities.
J. Scott Duff
Huntsville
