Families sue St. Joseph in solar panel dispute

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

ST. JOSEPH (AP) — As St. Joseph leaders work to clarify the city’s laws regulating solar panels, two families have filed lawsuits claiming they have a right to install the panels on their homes without city interference.

Milton and Mary Boyles were informed in November that their newly installed solar panels violated city ordinance, which applies to accessory structures. A second couple, Stephen and Annette Balogh, were denied a variance that would allow them to place solar panels on their home.

“Not every property is going to be able to utilize solar collectors because there may be trees in the way or other obstructions,” City Planner Dustin Smith said.

The Boyles’ lawsuit cites a state law requiring all solar panels be placed at a location on the property that allows the system to use 85 percent of the solar resource.

The city’s ordinance requires all accessory structures to be located at least 50 feet from the front property line or behind the front of the main building. The Boyles lawsuit, filed in Cole County Circuit Court, claims the state Public Service Commission’s regulations on solar panels trump city ordinances.

However, Smith said the more restrictive ordinance often takes precedent in such disputes.

“I think that they may be misinterpreting that piece of the PSC regulations to imply that they can put them anywhere,” Smith said.

The Boyles’ attorney, Stephen Jeffery, believes the lawsuit will succeed because of a doctrine of pre-emption, which means state regulations authored on the same topic trump local ordinances.

Smith said the city is working on a new code to address solar panels, and he’ll check with the PSC to make sure it doesn’t conflict with state rules.

“I don’t want it to sound like I am against solar panels,” Smith said. “I don’t think you’ll find anyone that’s more supportive for alternative energies. But there are some standards that need to be followed and I think our codes reflect that.”

More like this story

Paroquet 4 months, 3 weeks ago

To Dustin Smith and the PSC:

Dustin, the purpose of the city ordinance is for what? Appearances, maybe nuisance noise and odors. Here's your answer: exempt private alternative energy options using the best affordable technology.

PSC, you all need to do something to make alternative energy options, especially parallel ports, more affordable. I understand there are insurance requirements associated with installation of parallel ports that make private utilization of alternative energy resources cost prohibitive. Feel free to correct me if I am mistaken.

Thank you.

spelchek 4 months, 3 weeks ago

So a government loving liberal (I assume by the solar panels), living in a lib town, found a government rule they don't like so what do they do? They sue the government to get their way. You can't make this stuff up.

Sequoia 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Spel, on what political axis is St. Joseph, Missouri a "lib town"?

And, surely you're not saying that conservatives don't sue over government rules they don't like? Do you even remember the past year and a half? What exactly is your point? What exactly is the "stuff" you're unable to make up?

As for the merits of the story, I'm not sure why one person should be denied solar panels because trees might obstruct other people's solar panels. That seems like an odd and burdensome standard by which to make zoning decisions. Not sure what the city's logic is there.

Just because another person's property couldn't accomodate a swimming pool or a dog kennel doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to build one, eh?

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune

Breaking News