A coalition of farmers, landowners, business leaders and energy exports, are pushing for legislation that would allow more small community solar farms. Farmers say on-farm solar fields would help generate income as they face declining commodity prices and rising input costs.
A bill in the Wisconsin Assembly that would authorize more community solar programs was heard by the Assembly’s Committee on Agriculture last week. The measure, AB 493, is designed to expand access to affordable, locally generated electricity in the state.
A coalition of farmers, landowners, business leaders and energy exports, joined the bill’s sponsor Rep. Scott Krug (R-Rome) in pushing for the measure. Farmers testified that this type of solar development could help them generate income as they face declining commodity prices and rising input costs.
There were 14 witnesses, including Wisconsin farmers, who offered testimony in favor of the bill that would allow small solar “gardens” – typically 20 to 30 acres – that would avoid larger developments that sometimes face local opposition. Backers involved in the Coalition for Community Solar Access said the legislation would lower energy bills for all Wisconsinites, strengthen the grid and return decisions-making power to local communities.
One of those farmers who testified was Duane Hinchley, a Cambridge dairy and grain farmer who states that community solar is a “new avenue, a new opportunity to support and sustain our farm.” Hinchley, a fifth-generation farmer recently taped an ad in support of the legislation in which he states that a program like community solar would help his family stay on the property they’ve farmed since 1961. The low margins in dairy are contributing to problems for dairy farms; an added income stream like solar would help farmers like him who are interested in adding outside income to their farm.
Duane Hinchley along with his wife, Tina, says a community solar program would help his family stay on the property they’ve farmed for over 60 years near Cambridge, Wisconsin.
In the ad, Hinchley said “It’s all about something owing to the last generation. I think of my Ma and Dad every day. Community solar is a way we’re going to be able to stay on this property.”
Farmers, he notes, are at the whim of the weather cycles and drought can literally “put you out of business in one summer. Commodity prices have seen very low margins.”
He said that this community solar bill provides a new avenue, a new opportunity for farmers like him because it can utilize smaller parcels of land on their farms – maybe a sandy area in the back of the farm or rolling terrain or some land that may be marginal for crop production. “This is definitely the way to go,” he said. A parcel on the farm at the size of 20 acres could become part of the system under this bill, he added.
“It’s a win-win for everyone who’s involved. You can utilize the infrastructure that’s already here. Pretty much the sun is guaranteed. That’s what I love about this, we can harvest 365 days a year.”
Hinchley said that this measure, if passed, could provide “another leg of that three-legged stool to support and maintain our farm” and he believes that there could be a very quick startup time to provide a reliable power source to the community while providing an income stream to farms like his.
The state’s investor-owned utilities have been staunch opponents of measures like this that expand competition and customer choice. Lobbyists for the utilities, some of which are owned by out-of-state shareholders – were at last week’s hearing to testify against it. These utilities are currently reporting record profits, which was discussed at multiple points during the hearing.
The bill was referred to the Assembly’s Committee on Energy and Utilities and then was quickly re-referred to the Agriculture Committee for the most recent hearing. The measure authorizes the establishment of community solar programs through which retail electric customers of an investor-owned electric utility may subscribe to a community solar facility and receive credits to their electric bills for electricity produced by this new facility.
Under the bill, entities called subscriber organizations may own or operate community solar facilities, which use solar energy to produce electricity. The bill stipulates that the community solar facility and its subscriber must be located within the service territory of the same investor-owned electric utility.
Rick and Bonnie Beyer say their Shiocton, Wisconsin farm has been in the family for over 125 years. The couple is considering a community solar project on a portion of the farm that would supplement their retirement and keep the land available to farm once the lease has expired.
Witnesses who testified in favor of the bill included Rep. Krug, Craig Bain, a farmer from Arpin, Bonnie Beyer, a farmer from Bovina and Phillip Ley, a landowner from Dodgeville. They believe that the measure would allow multiple customers to subscribe to a shared local solar project that could lower energy costs, create new income streams for farmers and other landowners and improve Wisconsin’s energy resilience.
Will Flanders of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, testified that the model would expand energy choice without state subsidies, without mandates and “without turning more power over to monopoly utilities. In fact, it introduces competition at precisely the moment Wisconsin needs it most.”
Krug said his measure’s community solar “is about lowering costs, strengthening rural economies and giving Wisconsin more control over their energy future. This bill creates new income opportunities for farmers and landowners, supports local jobs and helps protect families from rising utility bills.”
There has been widespread support for the bill and statewide news organizations discovered that AB 493 is one of the most “lobbied against” measures in the legislative session. Utilities have reportedly spent heavily to block the prospect of community solar, which backers of the bill say underscores the high stakes of a policy that would give customers more choice and competition in the energy market.
Companies testifying against the measure included Xcel Energy, Alliant Energy, Madison Gas and Electric and the parent company of We Energies as well as Wisconsin Public Service. They generally testified that credits awarded to members of these new community solar subscribers might raise bills for other customers because non-subscribers would be “subsidizing” the cost of connecting community solar projects to the grid.
Polling on the legislation shows overwhelming support for locally controlled community solar in Wisconsin with 79 percent of voters statewide in favor of the measure based mostly on the potential for lower energy bills. Support is especially strong in key battleground legislative districts where 66 percent of voters said they would back a lawmaker who votes for this bill. The polls show that a majority of voters in both parties favor urgent action and local control.
The companion bill, Senate Bill 559, was introduced in October by Senators Patrick Testin, R-Stevens Point, Romaine Quinn, R-Birchwood and Eric Wimberger, R-Oconoto. A public hearing on that twin version of the measure was held on December 9. If the measure passes, it would require the Public Service Commission (PSC) to create the rules under which these community solar installations would operate.
Wisconsin Farmers Union testified in favor of SB 559, noting that their group supports community solar generation and encourages communities to offer these programs to local citizens. Michelle Ramirez-White, WFU’s government relations director, told the committee that these projects can be done almost anywhere and are often placed on small portions of farmland. “They can provide another more palatable option for farmland owners who are facing the sale of large parcels of their land to developers or to larger-scale renewable energy projects.
“The opportunity created by this bill to access smaller solar projects that are supported by the community provides a new potential income stream to family farmers in Wisconsin and can help preserve the majority of prime farmland for agricultural production.” Ramirez-White added that the bill also puts local control of these projects back into the hands of the communities in which they are, allowing farmers to keep their own independence, while expanding income streams.
There are 24 states that already have such legislation allowing for private community solar projects. Also backing the measure in Wisconsin are the clean energy group RENEW Wisconsin and the conservative law firm Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, while electric utilities are generally opposed to it.
Lawmakers who sponsored the bill said that it would allow people who are not property owners or who do not have rooftops to mount solar panels to access solar energy and perhaps cut costs on their electric bills.
“This change will open a new market sector and high energy industry,” said Sen. Testin, “attract economic investments in Wisconsin, create local jobs, drive innovation and competition and ultimately save consumers and small businesses money on their energy bills,”
Rep. Krug said there have been attempts to pass such community solar legislation in the past but said this bill was an improvement on those earlier, failed proposals. It doesn’t change the process for large, utility-sized solar projects, but would create smaller, locally approved alternatives that may be a better fit for a local environment and would allow farmers who have smaller parcels to devote to solar “gardens” to do so.
Karl Rabago, with Rabago Energy testified that “utilities have said a lot of false, scary things about the costs of this program. To set the record straight, non-subscribers will not be asked to pay for benefits that only subscribers receive. New, local, in-state generation boosts reliability and affordability for all customers – reducing charges from inflated monopoly utility spending.”
