By Nick Reiher

They pleaded for a postponement, denials outright and threatened election reprisal and lawsuits, but in the end, the Will County Board at its May 21 meeting approved a 6,100-acre solar farm composed of 90 separate parcels throughout three townships.

Earthrise Energy’s Pride of the Prairie Solar farm, a patchwork of solar farm plots connected by rights-of-way, that in total would be seven times larger than Midway Airport. A plan the county’s Land Use and Zoning Commission twice voted to reject recommending to the full County Board.

Voting for the Special Use Permit were board members Sherry Williams, D-Crest Hill; Sherry Newquist, D-Steger; Herb Brooks Jr., D-Joliet; Denise Winfrey, D-Joliet; Dawn Bullock, D-Plainfield; Mica Freeman, D-Plainfield; Mark Revis, R-Plainfield; Destinee Ortiz, D-Romeoville; Kelly Hickey, D-Naperville; Elnalyn Costa, D-Bolingbrook; Jackie Traynere, D-Bolingbrook; and Joe VanDuyne, D-Wilmington.

Voting against were Jim Richmond, R-Mokena; Katie Dean-Schlottman, R-Joliet; Judy Ogalla, R-Monee; Frankie Pretzel, R-New Lenox; Dan Butler, R-Frankfort; Steve Balich, R-Homer Glen; Vince Logan, R-Joliet; and Julie Berkowicz, R-Naperville.

Board Member Dave Oxley, R-Lockport, was absent for the vote. Board Member Raquel Mitchell, R-Naperville, was absent from the meeting.

Manhattan Township Clerk Kelly Baltas said she is not opposed to solar, but she asked the board to postpone their decision until the Legislature can restore local control of solar farms taken away by Senate Bill 25 in 2023.

She pointed to legislation proposed in the current session by state Rep. Anthony DeLuca, D-Chicago Heights to restore those local controls.

State Rep. Larry Walsh Jr., D-Elwood, has said the bill passed then because at least one downstate county rejected every solar farm application.

By contrast, County Board Member Judy Ogalla, R-Monee, has said earlier this year that since solar projects began appearing in Will County in earnest, 84 applications have been submitted. Of those, 17 were withdrawn, often after developers failed to secure state subsidies. The County Board has approved 57 projects and denied 10.

The board approved seven solar farm plans at the April 16 meeting, including Earthrise’s 2,400-acre Plum Valley solar farm and six they had previously denied in 2024 and 2025. Associate Judge Ben Braun on April 8 ruled the county did not have the authority under state regulations approved in 2023 to reject those plans.

Walsh said the Legislature is working on a bill now, but he isn’t sure it can be done by the end of the session on May 31.

Supporters from the affected area said they would rather see solar farms than warehouses springing up throughout much of the same area. They say it will help provide an alternative to dependence on fossil fuels which are susceptible to market demands and global conflicts.

Union representatives said they have been behind the project and similar ones from the beginning because they provide good-paying local jobs. But others wondered how many of those workers are from the affected area, or even the county.

The County Board Republicans sent a press release before the meeting condemning the Will County Land Use Department for waiving mandatory zoning and environmental protections for the massive solar development.

They charged the department advanced special use permits to the County Board without requiring applicants to complete essential, legally mandated prerequisites, including comprehensive wetland
delineations, precise solar array and panel calculations, and fully executed heavy-haul agreements with local township road commissioners.

“The County Board is being asked to sign a blank check,” said Board Member Dan Butler, R-New Lenox.

In response, Will County Executive Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant chastised the Republican Caucus at the beginning of the meeting for slandering Land Use officials. In response, her office sent out a release stating, in part:

That allegations of violating environmental protections, hiding the scope of industrial projects, undermining township authority.

“The zoning ordinance requires only a preliminary site plan from an applicant, identifying certain features such as wetlands and floodplains. This is a local ordinance requirement and is not related to state law. The applicant submitted a preliminary site plan, which is what is required by county ordinance.
“What is required: If the special use application is approved, the Land Use Department will review the applicant’s building and site development permit to ensure that the specific building request meets ordinance requirements. This includes any environmental regulations.

“The County Board is only approving a zoning of the property. They are not involved with any of the details regarding buildings or structures. These issues are all reviewed by the Land Use Department once the applicant submits a site development permit.

“Any wetlands identified will follow environmental regulations, including approval by the US Army Corps of Engineers. IDNR prohibits development on any floodplains.

“What the applicant submitted for this special use permit was exactly what is outlined in the county ordinance and state law: a preliminary site plan.

“16,921 solar arrays are identified in the preliminary site plan. This is Exhibit C in the Staff Report provided to the County Board, which is clearly visible for Member Butler’s review.

‘The applicant followed the process outlined in ordinance that includes either a Letter of Intent with the local road district or a certified letter with return receipt requesting evidencing a good faith effort to contact them. A certified mailing was provided as proof of notification by the applicant.

“Again, this is following the process outlined in the ordinance approved by the County Board. The applicant was treated the same way any applicant was treated by the Land Use Department.

“No building permit will be issued by the Land Use Department unless the applicant has approval from all corresponding local road districts.”

One woman believes Earthrise is getting special treatment. She said to get a special use permit for her dog operation, she had to have all the boxes checked, including approvals from other government entities, complete before it was considered.

“If this passes,” another opponent said, “we are toast.”

“But these guys think they can come in here and get this rubber-stamped.”

Board Member Frankie Pretzel, R-Frankfort, noted a fellow board member said Pride of the Prairie isn’t being treated differently from any other land use case.

It is different, he said, because of the size, and chastised supporters on the board who are scared of the state law. This has emboldened the applicant, he said, who didn’t even bother to send representatives to the meeting.

Attorney Steve Becker said the state law county officials say they are bound by is unconstitutional and, regardless, is being misinterpreted. The county board can decline if it is incomplete, he said, adding the Pride of the Prairie plan is incomplete.

Becker said county officials need not be concerned about a lawsuit from their actions. If the plan is rejected, he said, Earthrise may or may not sue. But if it is approved, he promised the residents would.

Will County Board leaders on May 14 narrowly voted to recommend the full board approve the plan for a controversial 6,100-acre solar farm spanning three townships.

After lengthy discussion, the Will County Board’s Executive Committee, composed of board leadership and committee chairs, voted 6-5 on ay 14 to recommend the full board approve Earthrise Energy’s Pride of the Prairie plan at its May 21 meeting.

Prior to that, the Will County Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 at a special meeting on May 12 to reject the Pride of the Prairie plan.

The special hearing was held after Associate Judge Victoria Breslan ordered the commission to re-open the hearing to allow cross-examination by the public, a practice not allowed previously by the commission.

The commission in March had voted 4-2 to reject the Pride of the Prairie plan, and the County Board’s Land Use Committee also voted to recommend denial to the full County Board. A vote by the full County Board on April 16 was delayed by Breslan’s order.

Following nearly two hours of public comment, Butler made a motion to postpone consideration until Earthrise completes the application.

Assistant State’s Attorney Kevin Meyers said the Land Use officials are the experts, and they have said the application is complete.

The vote to postpone failed with 12 of 19 opposed.

Nick Reiher is editor of Farmers Weekly Review. Freelance reporter Andrea Arens contributed to this story.