The Bastrop City Council introduced an ordinance to impose a 12‑month moratorium on the approval of new special‑use permits and site‑development plans for large solar farms, council members said at a council meeting. The introduction begins a required advertising period and the ordinance will return to the council for an adoption hearing after publication.

The proposed ordinance, as read into the record by a staff presenter, would pause the review and approval of new special‑use and site‑development permits for solar projects for a 12‑month period while city staff and council study and develop permanent regulations. "It says that for [a] 12 month period, while they're studying to put in place regulation of it that we currently do not have," the staff presenter said. The presenter added the moratorium would not apply to permits already granted before the date of introduction.

The nut graf: the pause is intended to give the city time to draft a regulatory framework for large solar arrays — covering siting, decommissioning, traffic and visual standards — and to hold public hearings so nearby residents and other stakeholders can comment before the council considers final adoption.

Council and staff described the procedural steps and public‑notice requirements. The ordinance must be advertised in the official journal; council members were told notices are published for three weeks and an affidavit of publication will be filed before a final adoption hearing. "They could weigh in tonight on introduction. They'd weigh in at the adoption hearing," the staff presenter said.

Public commenters and several council members pressed for clarity about how the moratorium would affect projects already in the permitting pipeline. A staff presenter read the ordinance language on the record: the moratorium "does not apply to permits that have been granted prior to the date of introduction of this ordinance." Council members pressed staff about whether any College Lane solar project had permits issued; staff and the recording clerk said they would check records and provide more precise notice and procedural history.

Residents and other speakers raised health, environmental and revenue concerns. One public commenter, who identified herself during public comment, said equipment associated with solar sites "may be harmful" and referenced electromagnetic radiation concerns, saying "there is no definitive safe distance" and recommending a buffer; she also said Louisiana has above‑average cancer incidence rates and voiced caution about siting. That commenter and other speakers urged the council to gather independent data and to hold public hearings before approving regulations or projects.

Council discussion reviewed local zoning procedures and the role of the municipal administrator and planning and zoning. Several speakers said the city currently relies on an administrator to review and notify neighbors for special‑use permit applications; council members noted the administrator role has been vacant for weeks, which they said can delay or block the typical review flow to planning and zoning. Ms. Holmes, the recording clerk, and other staff explained the procedural flow charts in the city code (Title 16) that set out pre‑application conferences, administrator review, planning‑and‑zoning hearings and appeals to a board of adjustments.

Council members also discussed a separate draft ordinance introduced later in the meeting that would require all special zoning permits to be approved by the council rather than by administrative action or by planning and zoning in many cases. That ordinance was introduced for future consideration and discussion on amendments; no adoption vote was taken.

A motion was made during the meeting to halt any further progression of a College Lane solar project until the council receives a formal legal opinion. Councilmember Grant moved, saying, "I want it stopped." The transcript shows the motion was offered but there is no recorded second or final vote in the meeting record; staff said advertisement and statutory notice obligations remain for the introduced moratorium and that any final ordinance would need to be adopted after publication.

The council directed staff to return with the procedural records and notices for the College Lane application and to provide a clearer timeline for the moratorium advertising and the subsequent adoption hearing. Council members said they want the public to have the opportunity to comment at the formal adoption hearing and that the moratorium is designed to create time for that outreach and for drafting ordinances specific to solar farms.

Ending: The moratorium remains at the introduction stage; the city must publish the ordinance in the official journal as required, then hold an adoption hearing before any permanent restrictions take effect. Staff committed to providing records on any existing permits for the College Lane site and to returning to the council with the advertised ordinance and follow‑up information.