County OKs Solar Farm Abatement
After more than a year of negotiations and weeks of contentious public debate, the Young County Commissioners Court voted Wednesday, Jan. 28, to approve a tax abatement agreement for the proposed Tapaderos Solar Farm in southern Young County.
The meeting, rescheduled twice because of hazardous road conditions from Winter Storm Fern, stretched for more than an hour and featured a detailed financial presentation from the county’s consultant, followed by pointed criticism from landowners and residents who oppose the project.
The Tapaderos project, developed by Titus LCV, is proposed as a utility-scale solar facility capable of generating about 300 megawatts of power, paired with a battery storage component of roughly 200 megawatts.
Jeff Snowden, a consultant with Capex Consulting Group hired by the county, opened the discussion by urging commissioners to view the agreement not simply as a tax break but as “good stewardship” of taxpayer interests.
Mr. Snowden said the county’s only legal opportunity to influence the project’s taxable value comes before construction is complete, citing state law that bars commissioners from attempting to affect property valuations once they are on the tax rolls.
According to Mr. Snowden, the developer’s original application listed a taxable value of $264 million — about 18% of the county’s total taxable value. The negotiated agreement, he said, sets a base value of $512 million, or roughly 35% of the county’s taxable value.
Through a combination of fixing the base value, limiting depreciation during the 10-year abatement period, and freezing the county’s tax rate, Mr. Snowden said the agreement would increase county revenue by an estimated $4.7 million compared to taking no action. That figure includes projected sales tax revenue of about $430,000 from requiring taxable purchases to be made in Young County, as well as a one-time $300,000 contribution to volunteer fire departments and the sheriff ’s office.
Mr. Snowden also outlined non-monetary provisions included in the agreement, including daylight-only construction, dust control, noise and lighting limits, a 75foot buffer and screening plan, road use and repair requirements, and access to environmental and hydrological studies — conditions he said the county could not require without the abatement agreement.
Several landowners and residents urged commissioners to reject the agreement, arguing that the county was offering unnecessary concessions to a well-funded developer.
Tommy Donnell, a landowner, said the abatement amounted to roughly a 20% tax discount and estimated it would reduce taxes paid by at least $200,000 over 10 years. He questioned whether a project valued at more than $500 million would abandon the county over what he described as a relatively small financial difference.
Mr. Donnell also raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest, alleging that County Judge Win Graham’s family owns land within the project area and stands to receive lease payments. Judge Graham abstained from the vote and said he was not participating in the decision.
Other speakers objected to the scale of the project itself. Arwin Johnson, whose property borders the proposed site, said the solar farm would permanently alter ranch land that defines the area’s character. “We don’t need a solar farm to come in here and rape the land,” he told commissioners.
Additional residents questioned whether the project was undervalued, the adequacy of the 75-foot buffer, the noise limits allowed under the agreement, and whether construction activity had already begun.
Some also criticized the timing of the meeting, arguing that icy roads prevented broader public participation despite the rescheduling.
Judge Graham responded to questions about the meeting’s legality, saying state law allows meetings to be moved within 72 hours due to weather emergencies. He noted that a prior public forum had already been held on the issue.
After public comment concluded, commissioners made a motion to approve the tax abatement agreement. The motion passed 4-0, with Judge Graham abstaining.
“We’ve been talking about this for over a year now,” he said before the vote.
The approval clears a major hurdle for the Tapaderos Solar Farm, though the project remains controversial among nearby landowners. Construction timelines were not discussed in detail and opponents indicated they plan to continue voicing concerns as the project moves forward.