This is the SHOS response to the op-ed piece in the April 14, 2012 Trenton Times entitled "Opinion: Solar Farms in New Jersey Can Help Light the World, preserve the planet" by Brian D. Haig.

            Mr. Haig’s op-ed is a classic example of not letting the facts get in the way of a wrong-headed opinion. The purpose of Hamilton's Rural Resource Conservation Zone is "to conserve rural character, retain farmland for agricultural use, and protect surface waters, woodlands, and environmentally sensitive lands". Since the RRC rules don't permit solar installations, the applicant needs a variance from the Hamilton Zoning Board.

            If this variance is approved it will open the door for solar complexes on the remaining farmland within the RRC, the last rural area in the township.

            Characterizing 42,000 solar panels spread from one end of the farm to the other as mere "unsightliness" is like calling small pox a mere case of acne. Putting a fence and some evergreens around the complex does not preserve rural character. It destroys rural character. Take a drive along Crosswicks-Hamilton Square Rd. and look at the open fields that stretch back hundreds of feet to distant tree lines. Nearly a half mile of that view will be gone if this project is built.

            FACT: It's a productive farm. The writer's claim that the land "may" have been farmland but “hasn't been cultivated in some time" is just plain wrong. It was farmed last year and is plowed for new planting.             

            FACT: The RRC allows 14 primary uses, 10 conditional uses and 13 accessory uses including roof mounted solar installations. The writer argues for this project by incorrectly implying that there are no other uses for the land.

            FACT: Soil degradation was substantiated by two agricultural experts from Delaware Valley College and a structural engineer at past Zoning Board hearings. It is not speculative as the writer claims.

           SPECULATION:  Mr. Haig’s contention that the panels will eventually be removed and the land returned to its current state.

            FACT: Once a variance for an industrial use is granted, it's there forever.  When these panels reach the end of their useful life in about 25 years, with the farmland degraded, another similar use will be found - and it won't be farming. So the RRC goal of retaining farmland for agricultural use will be violated now and forever.

           SPECULATION: Mr. Haig has thrown out the laughable idea of growing crops under the panels. In fact, the applicant has never definitively said he will do that, or how it can be done, and is currently promoting the dubious solution of meadow grass. We know of no solar complex where crops under solar panels are successfully harvested today.

            SPECULATION: The site will generate $70,000 in annual property taxes for Hamilton. The $70,000 figure came from the applicant's attorney who said at the March 28, 2012 hearing, the state "...is...developing a basis to tax these generation plants and these facilities at about...$10,000 per megawatt." That's hardly a guarantee. He offered no proof, cited no documents, presented no witnesses or otherwise gave any reason for Mr. Haig to claim this speculative statement as fact.

             A large part of his article is dedicated to the benefits of solar-generated power. At least he got that right, and few would disagree.  It is great - just not at the expense of the rural nature of the area and productive farmland!  More appropriate places for large solar complexes are brownfields, landfills, and rooftops, or on sites zoned Manufacturing or Industrial, where it's a permitted use in Hamilton.

             Finally, Hamilton's desire to preserve its farmland is clearly stated in the new solar ordinance that went into effect last January. Because the BKB application was submitted prior to its adoption, the ordinance does not apply, but the ordinance does show the intent of the town, and it reinforces the purpose and values stated in the RRC rules.

            Sixty acres may not seem like much, but according to Hamilton's October 2010 Open Space Plan revision only about 2,770 out of the town's total of about 25,000 acres - approximately 11% - was privately owned and undeveloped at that time. The Hamilton Zoning Board should deny the variance. In Hamilton every acre counts.

SEE THE SITE PLAN