Vernon County considers investing in solar systems to capture federal incentives and stabilize utility costs

Sept. 8 2025

VIROQUA, Wis. — Vernon County officials are weighing the installation of solar energy systems at county facilities, a move that could save taxpayers millions over the next 25 years, according to presentations and discussions at two recent General Government Committee meetings on Aug. 6 and Sept. 3.

At the Aug. 6 meeting committee members heard from Ethos Green Power, a regional solar installer, about the potential for solar and battery systems on county buildings.

“Now is actually a positively interesting time,” said Katherine Lewison, technical sales expert at Ethos, citing a 30% federal tax credit for solar projects and looming utility rate hikes. “Installing solar is a way to protect county buildings from rising utility costs. It allows you to produce your own electricity and avoid paying the increased utility costs that are likely coming.”

Lewison also warned of the potential for significant utility rate increases from Xcel Energy who has proposed hikes of 11.8 percent this year and another 17 percent in the following year.

Committee members discussed the types of systems that could be installed, including both roof-mounted and ground-mounted solar arrays, and the possibility of adding battery storage for backup power. Lewison explained that the county could receive a direct pay incentive from the federal government, even as a non-tax entity, covering 30% of project costs.

Lewison said the potential savings could be significant.

“The average payback for solar in Wisconsin is 10 to 12 years. We would be looking at five to seven years in the highway department’s case,” Lewison said, referencing a ballpark example of a 120-kilowatt system that could offset up to 88% of the department’s annual electricity costs.

Committee members also raised questions about system maintenance, the impact on building infrastructure, and the need to prioritize buildings that house people 24/7, such as Vernon Manor and the county jail. “I just would like to know those buildings that have humans in them. I want to know what that would look like,” said Supervisor Mary Henry.

Ultimately, the committee directed Ethos to conduct site assessments and provide detailed proposals for several county buildings.

The committee agreed that more information was needed before making a decision, with Supervisor Wayde Lawler emphasizing the importance of acting quickly to take advantage of expiring tax credits: “30% is nothing to sneeze at when we’re talking about installations the size that we would be.”

Assessments presented at Sept. 3 meeting

At the September meeting, Ethos returned with a comprehensive assessment of eight county buildings:

• Erlandson Office Building
• Sheriff’s Department and Jail
• Vernon Manor
• Vernon Acres
• Courthouse
• Banta Building
• Highway Department
• Solid Waste and Recycling

For Vernon Manor and the Courthouse, Ethos provided two proposals each, reflecting different system sizes and configurations. The proposals included detailed cost estimates, projected payback periods, and total savings over 25 years.

“If the county should elect to put in every single system that we’ve got here, after the cost of the initial investment, $1.7 million net savings would be realized, and with the direct pay incentive, we’re sitting at $2.09 million of savings for the county over the next 25 years,” Lewison told the committee.

Ethos also explained the technical considerations behind system sizing, such as utility net meter caps and available roof space, and addressed questions about maintenance, snow load, and the impact on utility demand charges. The firm recommended a phased approach, starting with high-priority buildings and those with the greatest potential for savings.

Lewison’s explanation of recommendations at the September 3 General Government Committee meeting:

Metering Options Explained

• Net Meter Cap (Most Favorable)
• Most county buildings on Xcel Energy have a 100 kW AC net metering cap.
• Under net metering, the utility compares total monthly solar production vs. usage and credits excess generation at the retail rate.
• This allows summer overproduction to offset winter usage (annual “true-up” with Xcel).
• Best value because it maximizes credits and shortens payback.
• Over the Net Meter Cap
• If a system exceeds the cap, the utility switches to an instantaneous net energy tariff.
• Production and usage are measured in 15‑minute intervals; excess power in one interval is sold back at a lower wholesale rate instead of offsetting later usage.
• Less favorable financially, especially for buildings with high overnight or variable loads.
• Vernon Electric Territory
• One county site (Solid Waste & Recycling) is on Vernon Electric, which has a 20 kW AC cap and monthly true-up (no banking summer credits for winter).
• This limits system size and savings potential compared to Xcel’s policy.

Lewison’s recommendations

• Design each system to be as close to the net meter cap as possible for that utility, unless roof/ground space is the limiting factor.
• For buildings with enough space (Vernon Manor, Sheriff’s Department, Highway Shop), size systems right up to the 100 kW AC cap to maximize return.
• For smaller roofs (Erlandson, Vernon Acres), install the largest system the space allows, even if it’s under the cap.
• Focus on solar-only systems (no batteries) because: County bills show ~60% of costs are from kilowatt-hour usage, which solar offsets well. Batteries are better for shaving short demand spikes, but county facilities tend to have sustained demand that batteries can’t cost-effectively reduce. Solar-only yields faster payback and higher lifetime savings.

Why this approach?

• Financial Return – Staying under the cap maximizes retail-rate credits and shortens payback periods.
• Space Efficiency – Uses available roof/ground area to hit the most cost-effective size.
• Policy Advantage – Xcel’s annual true-up lets summer overproduction offset winter use, increasing total savings.
• Simplicity & Reliability – Solar-only systems have low maintenance needs and predictable output over 25+ years.
• Projected Impact – If all proposed systems were installed at recommended sizes, net savings after costs could be ~$1.7M over 25 years, rising to $2.09M when federal direct-pay incentives are included.

“So we’ve what we’ve tried to do is maximize either the net meter cap size of the system or the amount of space available,” said Lewison

Next steps for the county include deciding which buildings to prioritize, developing specifications for a request for proposals (RFP), and determining how to finance the projects.

Ethos provided a detailed PDF proposal to county staff and offered to assist with RFP specifications. The committee plans to continue the discussion at its next meeting, with the goal of moving forward in time to secure federal incentives before they expire in 2026.