The Grundy County Board voted 13–1–1 on June 10 to approve a special‑use permit for the Gore Road Community Energy Initiative (GRCEI), allowing a 6.16‑megawatt ground‑mounted solar facility on a 155.47‑acre parcel at 1745 Gore Road.

The permit includes 29 conditions addressing stormwater, electrical and building code compliance, certified local installers, landscaping buffers and fencing, construction hours, a required preconstruction meeting with fire and highway officials, a decommissioning plan with escrow, an annual maintenance report, a designated community liaison and fines for noncompliance.

The project had a split procedural history: the zoning board of appeals (ZBA) evaluated the proposal under the county’s LaSalle factors and returned a unanimous vote of “non concern” but issued a negative recommendation 3–2. The Land Use Committee later forwarded a positive recommendation to the full board, 6–0–1. The city of Morris submitted an official letter of opposition claiming the solar farm conflicts with the city’s comprehensive plan and could hinder future municipal annexation and industrial/commercial growth.

Developers and project representatives said they sited the array on the southern portion of the parcel to preserve about 118 acres for future development and to avoid blocking sunlight and agricultural uses. Vincent Moschella, chief development officer for ECA Solar, said the layout “kept our access to the sun” while leaving northern acreage open for future uses. Attorney Savannah Barlow, representing GRCEI, told the board the project meets the county’s solar ordinance and LaSalle factors and noted a recent ruling by Judge Sobel that the state siting statute can require county approval when local requirements are met.

County planning staff summarized the application packet, noting compliance materials including an interconnection agreement with ComEd, a completed lease, stormwater and drainage studies, an NRI with a moderate rating, cultural and wildlife clearances, a road use agreement and a proposed access off Ashton Road. Saratoga Township input was referenced; one board member who farms the property said the developer had tracked tile lines and upgraded clay tile where needed and described the developer as cooperative.

Board discussion touched on timing and legal risk: a county attorney present said the Sobel ruling has been interpreted to limit municipal objections when county ordinances and application checklists are met; some board members urged updating the county comprehensive plan before approving further solar projects. After roll call (13 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain) the motion to approve the special‑use permit passed.

The county manager asked parties to weigh the factual record presented through ZBA, Land Use Committee and public comment in making the final determination. The approval allows GRCEI to proceed subject to the stated conditions and required permits.

The board did not amend the conditions at the June 10 meeting; further actions will follow through the county’s building‑permit and code‑compliance processes.