.jpg)
RENEWABLE ENERGY
The Colorado County Commissioners Court voted Monday morning, June 23, to consider a tax abatement for a new lithium- ion battery storage facility by designating the land as a reinvestment zone.
Mission Clean Energy, a renewable energy and storage developer, requested the abatement for the future construction of Cottontail Energy Center. The center would store excess energy from the main public power grid to sell and redistribute during periods of increased energy demand. Precinct 2 Commissioner Ryan Brandt opposed and voiced concerns over the safety of the facility.
“It is concerning the location that Glidden and the residents are almost downwind of the prevailing wind that would come in this direction if there were to be some kind of disaster for the houses,” Brandt said.
The facility would be housed on an 18.3-acre property northwest of the intersection of state Highway 71 and Interstate 10. Head of Development Audrey Copeland said the facility would have an emergency action plan. The facility’s construction would generate an estimated $6.4 million in tax revenue with 100% abatement and create 83 construction and 16 operational jobs.
“This project will take about 18 months, so those are not continuous jobs,” Copeland said. “When folks are building these projects, if the local labor in the area is not sufficient, they maybe have to bring people a little farther than the county.”
Copeland said that the housing, hotel and restaurant industries would benefit from workers relocating to the area. Precinct 4 Commissioner Darrell Gertson questioned the future of the center under the three-year-old company.
“I’m kind of nervous about what we will be left with to clean up if funds dry up,” Gertson said.
Mission Clean Energy does not have any centers currently operating as each facility takes five years to become fully online. The company is focusing on development and acquiring abatements for centers across the country but plans to break ground on Cottontail Energy Center in 2027.
Copeland said the company is open to discussing partial abatement or an agreement of payments in lieu of taxes. County Judge Ty Prause said the county does not have a history of granting many abatements.
“When you give somebody an abatement, it’s now a question of ‘What do they get for nothing if I have to pay my taxes on my five acres that have cows?’ Or whatever the case may be,” Prause said. “The business side needs to be there to be able to say, ‘This is why it does make sense.’” The court voted 3-2 in favor of the reinvestment zone. None of the commissioners spoke in favor of a possible abatement. The county commissioners’ court will meet again Monday, July 14, at 9 a.m.
