There's a good article in the PD about where and how much solar should go as Sonoma Clean Power creates more demand for local solar projects.
As the PD article suggests, it does indeed scramble standard lines ag/money versus the environment.
Should vineyards and orchards be protected/prevented from conversion into a solar development?
In this case the grape growers are joining many environmentalists with support looser restrictions, where as the Sonoma County Farm Bureau and some environmentalists want tighter restrictions (such as the percentage of a property that can be developed for solar.
It's worthy to note the Efren Carrillo is in the minority as he supports looser restrictions to allow more solar development.
Again the article worth a read for the shifting political considerations now that solar development is ramping up!While taking no formal action, a short-handed board without Shirlee Zane sided three to one — with Mike McGuire, Susan Gorin and David Rabbitt in the majority and Carrillo in the minority — in favor of a ban on commercial projects on 70,000 acres of cropland, including vineyard and orchard properties. That includes state-designated prime, unique and important acreage, farmland set aside through the tax-shelter Williamson Act program, and the 16,000 acres of hill- and riverside property disputed by Anderson, the winegrower representative.
What do you think?




Facebook
StumbleUpon