Landowners and county clash over water and long‑term agricultural value at Watoma solar hearing

Landowners who would host portions of the Watoma Solar Energy Project told the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council on Sept. 25 that lease revenue and planned water‑management steps would help them sustain and expand agricultural operations as groundwater declines.

Wally Jossart, investment manager for Watoma Farms, said the purchaser acquired about 1,500 acres that included an underperforming vineyard and that solar lease revenue is part of the capital plan to replant and expand the vineyard. He said the leases were already in place when the farm was purchased and that the project is intended to make on‑farm investment feasible.

Robin Robert, representing Robert Ranch 5+1, described the family’s multi‑generational ties to the land and longstanding investments in ranch infrastructure. Robert described a drop in irrigated acreage from roughly 1,000 acres historically to about 740 acres today across the families as aquifer levels fell; he said the ranch has already invested in deepening wells and that lease revenue would be used to add stock ponds and other infrastructure for livestock and fire response. Robert told the council the property can continue cattle operations while using less groundwater overall once water entries are banked and reallocated, and he supported conditions requiring a restoration bond and five‑year monitoring.

Benton County planners and witnesses, however, stressed the county’s policy interest in ALTEX/GMAD conservation. County planning director Greg Wendt and planning manager Michelle Mercer said the county undertook a multi‑year review (including the 2018 ALTEX study and subsequent periodic update) to identify agricultural lands of long‑term commercial significance; under the county’s code the board removed major commercial solar and wind from the GMAD conditional‑use list in Dec. 2021. Mercer said MDNS environmental conditions (e.g., soil monitoring) address environmental concerns but do not substitute for the county’s interest in maintaining acreage titled as ALTEX; she concluded that converting nearly 3,000 acres of ALTEX for a 30‑year project is not a mitigable land‑use conversion under current county policy.

Both landowners and county staff urged strict SCA conditions if the council recommends preemption: landowners requested clear decommissioning, restoration obligations and bonds; county staff said they would need concrete compensatory measures that actually preserve altEX acreage (which they said were not present in the MDNS or table A‑5). The council heard technical details on water rights reallocation, well deepening costs, and soil‑restoration metrics; it closed the record and will await the judge’s draft findings before deliberating.