The end result left some feeling disappointed, others were frustrated, and a few even left happy that they got their way. Most notably, the solar project representatives and the local property owner went home empty handed.

The Town Board rejected the Williams Street solar project proposed by Solar Liberty Energy Systems, Inc., by a vote of 3-1. Town Board member Shari Miller voted in favor of the project, while Board member Bob Price was absent. Members Phil Leone and Jean Crane voted against the project, followed by Town of Dunkirk Supervisor Priscilla Penfold’s deciding vote that sealed the project’s fate.

“I think it needs to be said that the job isn’t always hard, but a lot of times, it’s hard,” Penfold said. “This was hard.”

The project’s plans called for a 3.75 megawatt solar energy system of approximately 14,580 ground mounted solar panels across three parcels of land, located at 3751 Williams Street East in the Town of Dunkirk. The land is owned by John Dach, who has previously harvested grapes at the property before it became too difficult to do so. The land is located in a Residential Zoning District.

Town Board member Jean Crane voted against the Williams Street solar energy system proposal. Crane said, “We developed these laws in the best interest of the Town. I think we have to follow through with them.”

Plans for the project have been in motion since 2019 when Solar Liberty first started negotiations with Dach for the land to host the project. The Zoning Board granted a variance request for the project to proceed, despite the Residential Zoning restriction the Town had set.

Still, the Town Board had the final say, and its decision was to favor the Town Law, rather than the variance.

Penfold stated, “Despite the grant of a variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals, in the Town of Dunkirk, the ultimate permitting body under the Town of Dunkirk’s local solar facility law is the Town Board.”

Speaking to the Town’s existing zoning laws, Penfold said the Town Board feels that the proposed project is “contrary to that legislative policy enactment.” Penfold also said the proposal “further diminishes the agricultural nature of the Town of Dunkirk”, and that it is “not consistent” with the residential development of the neighborhood.

Earlier in the meeting, one resident spoke out against solar projects in the Town, while another — James Dimmer, a resident neighboring the property — interjected just as the meeting reached the point where the project was listed on the agenda. Dimmer shared his opposition of the project on several occasions throughout the process.

Town Board member Shari Miller was the Board’s lone supporter of the project.

Leone was first among the Board members to speak on the proposal just before voting took place. He referenced the Town’s Zoning Law of 2021 — issued to revise a previous law in 2017 — that stated solar energy systems should not be located across multiple parcels of land or exceed 40 acres. The Williams Street solar project planned to span three parcels of land totaling over 45 acres. The Town Zoning Law referenced by Leone also did not permit solar projects in residential zones, which the Williams Street project was located in. Those issues were what warranted a variance request for the project to come before the Town Board.

Miller followed Leone by highlighting the Zoning Board’s decision to grant a variance for the project to proceed. Miller, a resident of Williams Street, spoke to the conditions of the land that made the loss of agricultural land less severe than it appeared as the soil is not suitable for farming and drainage concerns would first need to be addressed.

Crane then spoke prior to the vote about the timeline of the Zoning Law when it was crafted. “We worked on that law for probably almost three years, going back and forth with that solar law. It was a long time,” Crane said. “We decided we did not want them in the residential areas. We developed these laws in the best interest of the Town. I think we have to follow through with them.”

Prior to the special use permit application vote, the Town Board issued a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, meaning that the Town saw no negative impact to the environment itself should the project proceed. The Town Board voted 4-0 in favor of a negative declaration.

Shortly after, Miller made a motion to approve the special use permit application for the project. Miller looked to fellow Board members for support, but the motion did not receive a second.

Leone then made a motion to deny the special use permit application for the project. Crane seconded the motion. They each voted in favor of denying the application; Miller voted against denial of the application; and with Price absent, Penfold was left with the decision to deny the application or force a 2-2 tie. Penfold sided with Leone and Crane, rejecting the special use permit application.

Dach, the property owner, calmly asked to speak following the vote. He asked if the vote could have been postponed until Price was present, as the five-member board only had four potential votes in play at the meeting. Price’s absence also left the Board one less member to potentially second a motion from Miller that did not proceed to a vote.

Penfold responded by saying Price being in attendance would not have changed the Board’s ultimate decision. Even if Price had been present and sided with Miller, a three-fifths majority still could have rejected the project.

Dach peacefully exited the meeting following the vote and brief discussion, as did many others in attendance, including a representative from Solar Liberty. Dach thanked Miller for her support before leaving.