Meeting report · Energy Aggregation Committee
Creating this report cost real money.
Help fund coverage →
Energy Aggregation Committee — February 11, 2026
While there was active public engagement and technical questioning, the dialogue was constructive and focused on clarification rather than conflict.
Public impact
Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
01
Solar zoning ordinance change
Changes to how solar energy systems are sited, buffered, and categorized (primary vs. secondary use). Affected: All property owners and developers in Sunapee
zoning change
02
Wastewater treatment plant solar bond
Potential impact on municipal finances and utility costs depending on tax credit success and project execution. Affected: All Sunapee taxpayers
other high impact
Decisions logged
Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Deferral of previous meeting minutes.
Minutes from the last two meetings will be reviewed at the next February meeting.
Unanimous consensus
Approval of informational meeting schedule.
The library meeting is set for March 3rd from 4:30 PM to 5:45 PM.
Consensus
Agreement to explore a second meeting location.
The chair is authorized to contact LSPA to check availability for a potential second session (potentially a Saturday morning).
Approved
Topics discussed
Click a topic to expand quotes and full context.
▶ 03:57 Meeting Minutes
The committee discussed reviewing minutes from the last two meetings. Due to lack of review, they were deferred to the next meeting.
Speakers: Kathryn Beshayev, Steve Munn, Betty Nowak, Doug Kogan, Allison Trigger
▶ 05:57 Solar Energy Ordinance and FAQ Review
The committee reviewed the proposed solar ordinance and its FAQ handout, specifically addressing concerns regarding ridgeline protection (steep slopes) and the distinction between primary and secondary use for commercial solar arrays.
Speakers: Kathryn Beshayev, Doug Kogan, Allison Trigger, Betty Nowak
▶ 30:30 Informational Meeting Planning
Discussion regarding the logistics for a public informational session, including location (Library vs. LSPA), timing, and potential for a second session to increase outreach.
Speakers: Kathryn Beshayev, Steve Munn, Betty Nowak, Doug Kogan
▶ 43:00 Wastewater Treatment Plant Solar Array
Discussion regarding the solar project at the wastewater treatment plant, including a FOIA request for contracts/proposals and the uncertainty of federal tax credits/loan forgiveness.
Speakers: Kathryn Beshayev, Betty Nowak, Doug Kogan
Controversy & dissent
Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.
Potentially controversial issues
01
Solar Energy Ordinance and Zoning
The ordinance involves significant land-use changes, specifically regarding ridgeline protection and the definition of commercial versus secondary solar use, which impacts property development and landscape aesthetics.
Board position: The board is working to refine the ordinance language and FAQ to ensure clarity and compliance with existing steep slope protections.
medium concern
02
Wastewater Treatment Plant Solar Array
This involves public funds, potential federal tax credit uncertainties, and significant public interest as evidenced by a FOIA request for contracts/proposals.
Board position: The board is seeking more information through research and FOIA requests to address transparency and financial viability concerns.
medium concern
Community vs. board tension
Ready to share? AI-written accountability posts about this meeting's controversies.
View posts →
Action items
Who owes what, by when.
Send a message/letter to the Planning Board regarding the committee's work on site plan review regulations.
Assigned: Kathryn Beshayev · Due: Before the next Planning Board meeting
Convey the upcoming informational meeting invite to the Planning Board.
Assigned: Kathryn Beshayev · Due: Soon
Contact LSPA to check for available dates/times for a potential second informational meeting.
Assigned: Kathryn Beshayev · Due: Soon
Review and proofread the updated solar ordinance FAQ handout with the agreed-upon edits regarding site plan reviews and commercial use.
Assigned: Allison Trigger · Due: Before the March 3rd meeting
Inquire about the schedule for the Senior Center meetings to determine if handouts can be provided there.
Assigned: Steve Munn · Due: Next meeting
Provide information/examples of other New Hampshire towns that have successfully implemented solar arrays at wastewater treatment plants.
Assigned: Doug Kogan · Due: Next meeting
Notable statements
The town's steep slope overlay already protects ridgelines; solar systems are treated like any other structure and must comply with existing grade and disturbance regulations. — Allison Trigger · Responding to concerns about solar impact on ridgelines. ▶ 08:00
The determination of whether solar energy is a primary or secondary use for a commercial property will be made through the site plan review process by the Planning Board. — Doug Kogan · Suggesting language to clarify the FAQ for commercial solar users. ▶ 17:40
A FOIA request has been made for all contracts and proposals related to Revision Energy. — Betty Nowak · Updating the committee on recent public interest/transparency regarding the wastewater plant solar project. ▶ 42:40
Member positions
4 issues · 0 explicit · 6 inferred
Present
Deferral of previous meeting minutes
YES
~
Approval of informational meeting schedule
YES
~
Agreement to explore a second meeting location
YES
~
Present
Deferral of previous meeting minutes
YES
~
Approval of informational meeting schedule
YES
~
Present
Deferral of previous meeting minutes
YES
~
Approval of informational meeting schedule
YES
~
Wastewater Treatment Plant Solar Array
✓
Supported transparency via FOIA on Revision Energy contracts
Positions marked ~ are inferred from context and may not reflect the member's explicitly stated position.
Public comment
What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
3
Total speakers
3
Addressed
0
Partial
0
Not addressed
Allison
Addressed
She explains that the planning board will review site plan regulations for solar systems on existing commercial properties. She clarifies that steep slope protections and stormwater management requirements already apply to solar systems because they are treated as other structures under existing zoning ordinances.
Key concern
Clarifying how solar siting, buffering, and steep slope protections are managed under current regulations.
Board responseThe board engaged in a dialogue with her to clarify specific points regarding ridgeline protection and site plan review processes.
The board used her information to refine their understanding of the ordinance and discussed how to implement it.
Doug Kogan
Addressed
He commends the wording of the solar ordinance handouts but notes that the FAQ does not clearly define the limits for commercial-scale arrays. He specifically questions where the line is drawn between a 'primary use' and a 'secondary/incidental use' regarding net metering.
Key concern
Lack of clarity in the ordinance/FAQ regarding the threshold for commercial solar arrays and the definition of primary vs. secondary use.
Board responseThe board (specifically Allison and a speaker) explained that these determinations would be made case-by-case by the planning board during site plan reviews, and they agreed to add clarifying language to the FAQ.
The board explicitly accepted his suggestion to modify the FAQ text to mention that site plan reviews will determine these conditions.
Unidentified speaker
Addressed
He asks for clarification on what 'ridgeline' means in the context of the ordinance and whether it refers to mountain ridges or rooftops. He also later expresses concerns regarding the timing and certainty of federal tax credits and the interconnection study.
Key concern
Definition of ridgeline protection and the financial/timeline uncertainties of the solar project (tax credits and interconnection).
Board responseAllison clarified that ridgeline protection is addressed via the steep slope ordinance. The board discussed the technicalities of the tax credits and interconnection study in response to his concerns.
The board provided technical explanations for both the land-use definition and the financial/project timeline concerns.
Accountability flags
Documented procedural gaps. Each item links to its source.
Agenda items not discussed
Topics discussed — not on agenda
Transcript vs. official minutes
Support coverage
Creating this report cost real money.
MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Sunapee.
Follow Sunapee
One email when a new report is published from the Energy Aggregation Committee — or one weekly digest.
Report composed by
gemma-4-26b, claude-opus-4-7 · analyzed 2026-05-27.