Lawmakers are weighing new restrictions and oversight measures on large-scale solar development in coastal Alabama following an outcry from residents in Baldwin County.
Two bills introduced by Representative Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, House Bill 617 and House Bill 618, went to the House Transportation, Utilities and Infrastructure Committee, where lawmakers, local officials and industry representatives debated how to balance economic development, private property rights and environmental protection.
The legislation stems from a proposed solar farm in Stockton, a small unincorporated community in rural Baldwin County near the Tensaw River and Mobile Bay. Lawmakers said residents were largely unaware of the project until recently.
“This kind of just popped up on them, and it’s frightening to them,” said Simpson.
HB618, which advanced out of committee with a favorable report, would give any “governing body of any county that borders the Gulf of Mexico” the authority to regulate the permitting, construction and operation of solar farms.
Currently, lawmakers said, there is little to no local oversight in certain unincorporated areas, particularly designated “landmark districts” that cannot be annexed by cities and therefore lack municipal regulation.
By granting county commissions regulatory authority, the bill would allow elected officials to require environmental studies, impose conditions on development and potentially approve or deny projects.
Simpson emphasized that the bill is not intended to stop solar projects but to ensure accountability and a formal review process. He raised concerns about the environmental risks associated with large-scale land alteration in a region known for its wetlands and proximity to the bay.
“I want to make sure they’re done right, and that there’s someone who has to answer to the people,” said Simpson.
Representative Napoleon Bracy, D-Prichard, said constituents in the affected area feel powerless as the project moves forward.
“They feel they have no one to turn to, no voice. They’re just crying out for help,” said Bracy.
HB617 would go further by placing a one-year moratorium on the construction and operation of large-scale solar facilities that are not already underway. Simpson described the proposal as a temporary pause to give the state time to study the issue and establish a clearer regulatory framework.
“We just want to slow things down for a second. We only get one chance to get it done right,” said Simpson.
The moratorium, however, drew significant opposition during a public hearing.
Industry representatives warned that a statewide pause could send a negative signal to investors and disrupt projects that are already in development. Rob Riley, director of project development for Silicon Ranch, the company behind the Baldwin County project, said much of the criticism surrounding the development is based on misinformation.
He said the project would represent a $350 million investment and generate hundreds of jobs, along with tens of millions in local tax revenue. He also highlighted the company’s approach to integrating agriculture with solar operations, including grazing livestock on-site.
“Recent discussion has been dominated not by evidence, but by speculation and misinformation,” said Riley.
Christina Tidwell of the Southern Environmental Law Center said the moratorium could halt projects that have already received approvals and noted that the bill does not clearly define which facilities would be affected.
She also pointed out that Alabama lags behind neighboring states in solar development, ranking near the bottom nationally, and warned that restricting solar could hinder economic growth.
“With high electricity rates at the top of everyone’s minds, banning affordable solar energy doesn’t make sense,” said Tidwell.
Lawmakers acknowledged the breadth of HB617 and discussed possible amendments to narrow its scope. One proposed amendment, offered by Representative Parker Moore, R-Hartselle, would exempt areas served by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
Simpson said he is open to revisions to ensure the bill does not have unintended consequences across the state, reiterating that the primary concern is the coastal project and similar developments near sensitive waterways.
“I’m not trying to hurt solar farms throughout the state,” he said. “I’m trying to put some brakes on this one issue.”
Local officials also voiced support for greater oversight. Baldwin County Commission Chairman Jeb Ball said he is not opposed to solar development but believes regulations are necessary to guide “the what, when and where.”
HB617 remains under consideration and will return for a vote next week.
