Sunvest Solar, a solar energy developer, is appealing the validity of an ordinance recently enacted by Jefferson Township that established new regulations for the installation and use of solar energy systems.

The notice of appeal, filed Aug. 18, contends the adoption of the new solar ordinance was not conducted properly, citing terms of Pennsylvania’s Municipalities Planning Code.

Jefferson Township’s solar ordinance, which it adopted at a supervisors meeting on July 14, contains land use requirements for minimum lot size, setbacks, noise, glare and decommissioning surrounding principal solar energy systems.

A principal solar energy system, such as the one that Sunvest Solar is looking to develop in the township, collects energy and distributes it to the wider grid.

But Sunvest’s appeal contends that municipal ordinances, such as the one adopted by Jefferson Township in July, cannot regulate zoning matters unless the municipality has adopted a zoning ordinance, which Jefferson Township does not have.

“A municipal ordinance may not regulate zoning concepts, such as setbacks, lot size and height, unless it has adopted a zoning ordinance pursuant to Article 6 of the Municipalities Planning Code,” the appeal said. “Here, the township has not adopted a zoning ordinance. However, the subject matter of the solar ordinance purports to regulate zoning matters.

“The basis for the procedural challenge to the solar ordinance is that the solar ordinance is, in reality, a zoning ordinance improperly adopted.”

Furthermore, the notice contends the township did not meet their responsibility under the Municipalities Planning Code by holding a public hearing for the ordinance or at least notifying the public that they were holding one. Advertisements for the expected adoption of the ordinance were placed in the Butler Eagle on both June 15 and 22.

“The advertisement did not meet the definition of ‘public notice’ under the Municipalities Planning Code because it did not contain notice of a ‘hearing,’” the appeal said. “The advertisement merely stated that the solar ordinance would be considered at the board’s ‘regular meeting.’ ‘Public hearings’ are distinct from ‘public meetings’ under the MPC.”

Sunvest also took issue with the advertisement itself, saying that it “... does not include a summary ... setting forth all provisions in reasonable detail as required.”

The appeal also claims the solar ordinance “was neither prepared by the township planning commission nor referred to the township planning commission for review.”

However, minutes posted to the Jefferson Township website state that at a meeting on May 19, the planning commission “had a lengthy discussion and review of the Jefferson Township ordinance establishing requirements for the installation, operation and decommissioning of Solar Energy Systems.” The minutes show the planning commission recommended to make changes to the definition of solar array and the arrangement of solar cell, solar module and solar array.

Sunvest Solar is planning to install a solar farm on an 83.66-acre property that it is leasing at the corner of Winfield and Riemer roads. When the company’s plans were last discussed at a supervisors meeting on Aug. 11, it was stated that they were currently “administratively incomplete.”

“Sunvest has an equitable interest in the subject property in order to install multiple photovoltaic solar panels intended to generate electricity for commercial purposes rather than for on-site and is therefore adversely impacted by the adoption of the solar ordinance,” the appeal states

Sunvest Solar is represented by the law firm Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney. The law firm declined to comment.

Representatives from Jefferson Township also declined to comment.