I’m stepping away from party lines to speak plainly about a bill now moving through the Virginia General Assembly that would significantly change how local governments regulate utility-scale solar, particularly on land zoned for agriculture.
SB 347 would prevent localities from prohibiting utility-scale solar outright and instead require projects to be considered on a case-by-case basis through a standardized review process. Supporters argue this preserves local authority while preventing what they call “blanket bans.” In practice, however, the bill weakens the purpose of agricultural zoning and shifts meaningful decision-making away from the communities most affected.
Agricultural zoning exists to protect land for agriculture. It reflects an understanding that farmland is a finite resource — and once it is degraded, it does not recover on a political timeline or a corporate contract term. As a cattle farmer and former member of the Bedford County Agricultural Economic Advisory Board, I helped write the policy Bedford County currently uses to prohibit industrial solar on land zoned for agriculture. That policy was not written to oppose renewable energy. It was written to preserve productive farmland, protect soil and water, and ensure agriculture remains viable for future generations.
Industrial-scale solar is an industrial land use. That is not a value judgment. It is a functional reality. Large-scale grading, soil disturbance, stormwater infrastructure, access roads, and long-term soil compaction required are incompatible with the purpose of agricultural land. When localities prohibit utility-scale solar in agricultural zones, they are not banning solar broadly. They are honoring the intent of agricultural zoning.
Supporters of Senate Bill 347 point to statewide standards, setbacks and guidelines as sufficient safeguards. But Virginia already has documented evidence that these measures do not reliably prevent environmental harm. In Henry County, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality cited the Sunny Rock Solar facility for erosion and stormwater control failures that allowed sediment to move beyond the project site and into nearby waterways. The developer has faced civil penalties exceeding $100,000 for violations spanning multiple years. That is not a hypothetical risk. It is an established pattern of disregard for rural land.
Once topsoil is lost, productivity declines. Drainage patterns change. Neighboring farms bear consequences they never agreed to. Entire agricultural economies can be disrupted. These are not abstract risks. They are lived realities in rural communities across the commonwealth.
The deeper issue here is an understanding gap between rural Virginians and a select few in Richmond making decisions from urban and suburban vantage points. That gap is not partisan. It is experiential. People who work land understand how quickly soil can be lost and how long it takes to rebuild. They understand that farmland is not simply open space awaiting its highest bidder.
SB 347 treats agricultural zoning as an inconvenience to be managed rather than a protection to be respected. It assumes farmland and farm communities can absorb industrial use without lasting consequence and that local governments cannot be trusted to defend their agricultural base.
That assumption is wrong.
This is not a rejection of renewable energy. It is a defense of local decision-making and of land that feeds people, supports rural economies, and sustains communities. If the General Assembly wants to build a responsible energy future, it should start by respecting the purpose of agricultural zoning, not hollowing it out.
There is no setback, buffer or guideline that makes this a good — or moral — policy for Virginia. Farmland is not a blank check. Agricultural zoning is not a loophole. And local communities must retain the right to protect the land they depend on.
Joy Powers is a cattle farmer, former member of the Bedford County Agricultural Economic Advisory Board and a Democratic candidate for Congress in Virginia’s 9th Congressional District.