To the editor:

The media reports extolling the virtues of a proposed solar garden by Marion’s Energy Management Committee sited on the Marion landfill need to be placed in proper context.

An Energy Management Committee objective is to change Marion’s zoning bylaws to allow “as a matter of right” zoning for the purpose of siting its private commercial solar garden on the town’s landfill. Effectively, such zoning would allow the Energy Management Committee to bypass traditional zoning protections. All commercial industrial projects designated as a permitted use by Marion’s zoning bylaws require a special permit and site plan review before they can be built.  At this time, a commercial solar farm is not a zoning permitted use and therefore not allowed in Marion without first changing the zoning bylaws by a two-thirds Town Meeting vote.

Any zoning change regarding commercial solar development in Marion should limit project siting to commercial and industrially zoned districts and require a special permit and site plan review to ensure that our neighborhoods and open spaces are adequately protected. This is just good zoning public policy.

Effectively, the Energy Management Committee is looking to receive “favored nations” zoning privileges for its proposed solar garden not available to other commercial projects. The committee claims a commercial solar garden, like the community vegetable garden, would allow Marion residents access to solar energy not otherwise available to them as the result of geographical constraints precluding roof top solar installations. How wonderful it would be to provide Marion residents with access to solar power similar to the benefits of a community vegetable garden.

A community solar garden has absolutely no corollary to a community garden.
Solar projects are incentive and tax sheltered investments. Without state mandated premium net metering power rates, alternative energy credits, state and federal tax incentives such as the 30 percent federal investment tax credit and accelerated deprecation, there would be no solar.

Solar garden participation would be limited to a small select group of well-heeled citizens. Most Marion residence will have no access to a solar garden. There are several reasons for this exclusion. First it’s necessary to have a large taxable income appetite to be able to take advantage of the tax incentives. Most Marion residents will neither have the level nor the type of income that can effectively utilize the tax incentives such as the federal 30 percent investment tax credit. Only professionally well financed investors with access to the type income that can utilize the tax benefits known as tax assets can effectively invest in solar projects.

Secondly, a solar garden structured to provide the maximum incentive and tax benefit returns sold as an investment interest is considered a security. The securities law regulatory environment is complex and can be very expensive.  Effectively only a limited group of Marion residence who qualify as “Accredited Investors” will be able to qualify to purchases shares or interests in the solar garden.

An Accredited Investor has to be sophisticated as to investment background and knowledge to assume and assess investment risk. Also the Accredited Investor has to have a minimum net worth of $1 million or more excluding his or her house and/or an annual an income of $200,000. The average annual Marion household income is about $80,000.

At this point, it’s fair to ask the question of the Energy Management Committee: How can broad-based community participation by all income levels be achieved with its proposed solar garden?  Also, how can the Energy Management Committee justify using the town as a spring board, either directly or indirectly, to promote and to participate in the sale of private solar investment interests to a few well-heeled town residents?

The commercial solar farm would be located on the environmentally sensitive landfill. Environmental incidents that may result from such an installation are extremely expensive to remediate, and environmental liability insurance coverage is not generally available. The town will have the liability and risk for any activity by a private developer using the site. This project is not such a good idea for our town.

Ted North