Winston Solar PUD
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 12
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Sep 3, 2026.
Public comments (16)
Opposed the amendment, citing missing NDOT encroachment permits, wildlife hazards to birds, and the broken 1,980-foot setback agreement.
Board of County Commissioners - Sep 3, 2026 · 4:50 →Criticized the county for repeatedly changing ordinance standards and asked to be told plainly if North Mason Valley is becoming an industrial valley.
Board of County Commissioners - Sep 3, 2026 · 40:37 →Said Chair Keller gave his word at prior hearings that 1,980 feet was final and urged the board not to go back on it.
Board of County Commissioners - Sep 3, 2026 · 44:49 →Called the claim that power lines are less obtrusive than solar panels ridiculous and asked for easier public access to hearing documents.
Board of County Commissioners - Sep 3, 2026 · 46:02 →Skeptical of promised school tax revenue, questioned whether construction wages and workers would benefit Yerington, and raised traffic and environmental concerns on Highway 95.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:07:27 →Challenged the letters of support as coming from project-connected people, opposed battery storage fire risk, insisted on the half-mile setback to avoid precedent, and asked that the item be tabled.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:10:54 →Supported the staff recommendation to deny for now, opposed undermining setbacks, and asked for a realistic depreciation-based tax estimate and 95A improvement planning.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:14:07 →Representing the Yerington Main Street Committee and Chamber of Commerce, submitted letters of support.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:16:51 →Supported the project but asked the board to explain the difference between a CUP and a PUD.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:17:16 →Questioned whether impact studies were done for past projects like the Parkway road and the substation.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:19:50 →Argued the project should be a special use permit and rezone rather than a PUD, opposed solar on agricultural land, and cited the incomplete traffic study.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:21:50 →Not against solar generally, but said moving the project closer to the highway would block future widening and endanger travelers on 95.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:25:20 →Comstock Metals' permitting director offered the company's services to develop a panel recycling and decommissioning plan under AB 493.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:26:33 →The Yerington city councilman voiced support, citing economic development benefits for Mason Valley.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:27:22 →Said the project should follow every aspect of the amended code and may be better suited elsewhere; urged the board to support the planner's findings and deny.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:28:03 →A Mason Valley landowner who spoke in support of the project.
Board of County Commissioners - Jan 5, 2026 · 2:29:21 →