Hotly contested Easley solar project near Desert Center wins OK from Riverside County

A bitterly contested commercial solar project in the California desert was unanimously approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday after what one official described as a "doozy" of a public hearing in which retirees begged the board to consider an "environmentally superior" alternative further from their homes.

Federal land officials must still sign off on the Easley project, which would sit next to several others off Interstate 10 between Palm Springs and Blythe.

Developers of the 390-megawatt solar array near the tiny community of Desert Center said they had already made numerous changes and concessions over more than two years of negotiations and planning reviews. They said to move it a full mile away from the Lake Tamarisk Resort retirement community, as outlined in the environmentally superior option, would "kill the project" because of millions of dollars in new costs, particularly to relocate tie-ins to an existing Southern California Edison owned substation that carries power to coastal cities.

The project, which includes a four-hour battery storage component as well as solar panel arrays, is expected to supply electricity for 250,000 homes. Riverside County will be paid $136 million in related fees by the company.

"The unanimous Conditional Use Permit approval by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors marks an important milestone in the development of the Easley project, concluding a rigorous multi-year environmental review process," said Elizabeth Knowles, Director of Community Engagement at Intersect Power, in an email. "The project is in the final stages of (a federal review) process, with a final decision expected in upcoming weeks."

She added, "We remain committed to engaging with the communities in Lake Tamarisk and Desert Center throughout the construction and operational life of the Easley project, maintaining proactive communication and actively working to address neighbors’ future questions and concerns. We look forward to ... continuing our support of local nonprofits, community organizations, and schools throughout the life of the project."

But seasonal and full-time residents at Lake Tamarisk vigorously contested the company's claims and said they remain concerned about heavy construction dust, impacts on a groundwater aquifer and steep declines in property values due to lost scenic views. They and an attorney for the group stressed they are not opposed to renewables and large-scale solar projects, but want a mile-wide buffer between their homes and any future projects, including the Easley solar and battery development.

Intersect Power's Senior Director of Environmental and Permitting Camille Wasinger defended the project vigorously during the hearing and pushed back against residents' concerns, saying more aggressive dust suppression measures would be employed than had been used at Oberon, an earlier large project they built near area homes, and that an expert's study had shown it would use little water and have no groundwater impact. She and a contractor hired to help build the project also noted the company had agreed to move it back to between half and two-thirds of a mile from existing homes to reduce glare from lights and reduce visual impacts.

Representatives of several labor groups whose members would be hired for the expected 20-month construction schedule also expressed strong support. The project is expected to create 530 union construction jobs and 10 permanent operations positions.

But for opponents, the loss was deeply frustrating.

"Beyond disappointed," said Teresa Pierce, 71, who has owned a mobile home at Lake Tamarisk for seven years. "The Supervisors drank the Kool-Aid without even challenging (the developers) ... I'm numb. I will have to move because of the dust."

Fourth District Supervisor V. Manuel Perez, who represents the area, at one point requested the lengthy public hearing be continued until next month, so that he could better understand an application by veteran residential developer Alan Grant to build 300 homes at Lake Tamarisk that would sit 100 feet from the solar arrays, and have their desert views blocked by the industrial solar farm.

But after hearing from Wasinger, Intersect's representative, that further delay would "kill the project," he withdrew the request, and ultimately made the resolution to approve it.

Industrial solar projects "are very difficult to site," Perez said. "No one wants to really see these in their back yards, including here I guess." He said the major county funds that would result were important, and noted county officials had worked closely with state and federal counterparts to carve out appropriate areas for large-scale desert energy projects. He concluded, "So I think this is a good compromise and I'm going to go ahead and support this measure."

Board chair Chuck Washington appeared to not understand completely the voluminous environmental review documents that had been prepared by project consultants and county staff, saying the option proposed by area residents, known as Alternative C, had not been analyzed.

"We don't know exactly what alternate C represents because it wasn't analyzed by staff and presented to us," said Washington.

He was quickly corrected by the developer's representative and a county planner who said it had been completely analyzed as an alternative to the "original" and "preferred" option. Neither mentioned that the review had concluded the residents' choice was found to be the environmentally superior option, under criteria set by state law.

Instead, staffers recommended the modified option that moved the project between half and two-thirds of a mile from existing Lake Tamarisk residences, and reduced by 50 acres and 10 megawatts the original application.

"They don’t read anything," said Vicki Bucklin, 72, who bought her seasonal mobile home unit at Lake Tamarisk three years ago after visiting her sister and other relatives there for a decade. "It’s all a show and they like playing with us."

Mark Carrington, 73, who bought his trailer pad in 2021, said in an email he is "disgusted and disappointed with our supervisor weakness."

But he said the fight would continue, with their efforts turning to federal lands also needed for the project. He and others said "the next step is to save public lands within a one-mile setback."

Federal approvals still needed

The approval process is not over. Tuesday's vote okayed part of the project on nearly 1,000 acres of private lands, including plots formerly zoned for agriculture. That is about a third of what Oregon-based Intersect Power needs to move forward with the Easley project. Up next is winning approvals from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management for use of 2,700 acres of adjoining public lands. Public comments are being accepted through Sept. 20 and BLM will hold two hearings before issuing a written decision.

BLM said in a news release, "the proposed project aligns with President Biden’s goal of a carbon free electricity sector by 2035 that creates good-paying jobs while ensuring that consumers across the country have access to affordable, reliable electric power."

Still, a top regional official encouraged the public to participate. “The public comment period is an essential step in the environmental analysis process,” said the agency's California Desert District Manager, Shelly Lynch. “Public participation helps BLM identify issues and concerns to address in the environmental assessment. We highly encourage the public to share their perspectives about the proposed project.”

Carrington, Bucklin and Kevin Emmerich with Nevada-based environmental group Basin and Range Watch said they will continue scrutinizing the federal documents, and have already uncovered one potential major land use mapping error. The National Audubon Society, by contrast, is supporting the project.

BLM will hold a virtual meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 10, from 5 to 6 p.m. People are asked to register to attend virtually. A separate in-person public meeting will be held on Wednesday, Sept. 11, from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the Palm Springs Field Office, 1201 Bird Center Drive, Palm Springs. Written comments may be submitted through the “Participate Now” function on the BLM National NEPA Register (preferred), emailed to blm_ca_cdd_easley_solar@blm.gov, or delivered to the Palm Springs – South Coast Field Office at 1201 Bird Center Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262

Janet Wilson is senior environment reporter for The Desert Sun and co-authors USA Today Climate Point . She can be reached at jwilson@gannett.com

This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Hotly contested Easley solar project near Desert Center wins OK from Riverside County