A solar farm Big Lake Township, just south of Highway 10.
A solar farm Big Lake Township, just south of Highway 10.
BIG LAKE — The Sherburne County Board of Commissioners tabled a vote last week on a request to build a 3.5-megawatt, 30-acre solar farm in Big Lake Township.
The board unanimously delayed action on both a 40-year interim use permit (IUP) and a Comprehensive Land Use Map amendment requested by the Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (MMPA), a publicly owned utility and wholesale power supplier to Elk River Municipal Utilities.
Big Lake and Big Lake Township would not receive power from the project.
The proposed site, about a quarter mile from Elk River city limits, was described by MMPA as “an ideal location,” though the land includes eight wetlands, a private ditch and a high water table — factors the company said limit its use for farming or housing. Construction had been planned for spring or summer 2026.
“Minnesota law requires electric utilities to provide 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2040,” said John Dietz, chair of the Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission, in a letter supporting the project.
Commissioners raised concerns about placing the project in a rural residential area, which would require amending the county’s land use map, as well as potential impacts to wetlands, wildlife movement and nearby property values.
The company plans to use wildlife-friendly fencing and the maximum de minimis exemption allowed under state law for limited wetland impacts. It also received a state “no loss” determination for the remaining wetlands.
Board members also questioned MMPA’s request to waive or reduce the county’s $100,000-per-megawatt decommissioning fee, intended to cover removal of the facility if necessary. Some public comments described the project as a potential “eyesore.”
The Big Lake Township Board of Supervisors did not make a recommendation, while county staff recommended approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 to deny the request.
“This is a request, once again, to change our rules and allow a business in a residential area,” Commissioner Gregg Felber said. “I don’t really feel we have all the information we need to make that decision at this point in time.”
County Attorney Kathleen Heaney said the board cannot deny the project based solely on public opposition but may consider specific land-use concerns.
Commissioner Gary Gray, who said he supports solar energy, questioned the company’s approach.
“The thing I’m disappointed about here is this piece of property was purchased for the sole use for solar without looking into whether the land could even be permitted for solar,” Gray said, noting the property was bought in 2022 for more than three times its appraised value.
Unlike many solar projects that lease land, MMPA purchased the property for more than $600,000 — a potential long-term savings, but also a risk if the project is denied.
The board directed staff to gather more information on wetlands, property values, site access and legal considerations. Tabling the request allows up to 60 additional days for review.
