Residents pack church to oppose Xcel solar farm planned near Rolling Hills

Inside Pleasant Valley Methodist Church on Tuesday evening, Oct. 7, the crowd spilled into the aisles as neighbors voiced anger over Xcel Energy’s plan to build a massive solar farm north of Loop 335 — in close proximity to homes and within sight of Rolling Hills Elementary School. Folding chairs scraped the tile floor as residents filled the sanctuary, some holding the company’s newly distributed fact sheet while others clutched hand-drawn maps. The low hum of side conversations turned to applause when one speaker called on Xcel to “find another site.” 

The meeting began with an overview from Xcel Energy’s regional team before quickly turning into a question-and-answer session that stretched for nearly three hours. As residents grew frustrated with the lack of specific answers, the tone shifted from curiosity to confrontation, with several attendees standing to demand the company abandon the proposed site altogether. 

A full contingent of Xcel Energy and Southwestern Public Service representatives attended the meeting, including land and engineering officials, who fielded questions about flooding, safety and environmental impact. 

‘An act of love from the community’ 

Taylor Brewster, whose property borders the proposed site, helped organize the meeting after neighbors began receiving letters from Xcel Energy. 

“This was an act of love from the community, not because of anything Xcel did,” Brewster said. “We just wanted to make sure everyone understood what was being proposed before it was too late.” 

She said the first notice she received was “so vague it didn’t even explain what was coming,” prompting her and several others to go door to door to spread the word. 

“When I realized how close this thing was, I thought, ‘no one knows what’s about to happen here,’” Brewster said. “We’ve had people out here for decades who’ve built their lives and raised families. To find out a project this big could pop up almost overnight — it just didn’t sit right.” 

Brewster said residents have nothing against renewable energy itself but believe the placement of the proposed site is “a step too far.” 

“We’re not against clean energy,” she said. “Most of us support renewable power, but there has to be a better place for it than right behind our homes and next to an elementary school.” 

She added that the turnout, which filled the church to capacity, “shows what happens when people realize their voices matter.” 

“This wasn’t about politics,” Brewster said. “It was about protecting the community we love. We showed up because no one else was going to do it for us.” 

‘We stood up for our neighborhood’ 

Stephen Saunders, whose property also borders the project site, said she learned about the plan from a confusing notice letter. 

“Our property line is only the width of an alley away from where they want to put the solar farm,” Saunders said. “Seeing everyone packed in that building made me proud. We stood up for our neighborhood.” 

“I’m all for clean energy,” she added. “But this is the wrong place for it. If they want to build solar farms, do it farther out where people don’t have to live with the noise and glare every day.” 

Many residents said they first learned of the project through letters that offered few details beyond a project name and a map outline. Several said they weren’t sure what the company was proposing until neighbors began comparing notes online. 

Residents press for answers 

Throughout the evening, residents pressed company representatives for specifics about how close the solar field would sit to Rolling Hills Elementary and whether it could worsen flooding along East Amarillo Creek, where water already backs up during heavy storms. Others asked if the panels would increase glare, disturb wildlife, or reduce nearby property values. 

Parents of Rolling Hills Elementary students voiced fears about construction dust and long-term safety, noting that hundreds of children play outside daily within sight of the proposed fence line. 

Applause broke out when one resident asked why Xcel couldn’t use open land farther east, while others called on the company to release its full environmental study before regulators decide. 

When fire hazards were raised, several attendees pointed to the proximity of the proposed solar panels to dry grassland and power lines. One man asked whether Xcel had a plan for emergency response in case of a wildfire — a question the company said it would follow up on. 

Commissioner: ‘It’s not a good fit for any neighborhood’ 

Potter County Commissioner John Coffee, whose precinct includes the Rolling Hills area, said he has received between 30 and 40 calls and more than a dozen emails since residents learned of the proposal about two weeks ago. 

“I feel like there’s a lot of pushback,” Coffee said. “The citizens spoke, and I listened to them. I don’t think this is a good fit for that community — or any community that close to homes and schools.” 

Coffee said the project raises safety questions given the Panhandle’s wildfire history. 

“If we had a big fire out there, that could produce very toxic smoke,” Coffee said. “I don’t think it’s the right thing to do to the people who live there.” 

He said he hopes Xcel will move the project east to a less populated area. “I support renewable energy,” he said, “but it’s got to make sense where it goes. Out there, it just doesn’t.” 

Environmental and wildlife concerns 

Several residents cited threats to Texas horned lizards, deer, foxes and nesting birds that roam the open land between Broadway and Western streets. Others worried about vibration noise, water runoff and the “heat-island effect” from acres of reflective panels. 

Xcel officials said they are coordinating with Texas Parks and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, plan to restore native grasses beneath the arrays, and will post their environmental assessment online once completed. 

Copies of Xcel’s fact sheet and aerial maps were passed among neighbors, with several attendees marking how close their homes sit to the project boundary. 

Xcel acknowledges communication gap 

Adrian Rodriguez, Xcel Energy’s New Mexico–Texas president, opened the Oct. 7 meeting by apologizing for the confusion. 

“We recognize we didn’t communicate as well as we should have,” Rodriguez said. “We heard a lot of feedback tonight and will take it seriously.” 

He said the company recently filed its proposal with both the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, and that construction cannot begin until regulators approve. 

In a follow-up statement Wednesday, Rodriguez said Xcel selected the Rolling Hills site for its proximity to existing infrastructure and flat terrain, which he said reduces both costs and environmental impact. 

“Our goal is to balance reliable, affordable service with clean-energy growth,” Rodriguez said. “We recognize this site has drawn strong community feedback, and that’s exactly why we’re meeting early in the process — to make adjustments if they’re needed.” 

Broader energy transition 

The proposed project, officially called the Oneida 2 Solar Project, is part of Xcel Energy’s regional investment in renewable generation through its subsidiary Southwestern Public Service Company (SPS). The company is developing more than 800 megawatts of new solar and wind power across the South Plains to replace aging units and strengthen the electric grid. 

Across the Panhandle, solar developers have increasingly targeted open ranchland near transmission corridors, where the terrain is flat and leases are inexpensive. But proposals closer to Amarillo’s neighborhoods, like Rolling Hills, have drawn sharper resistance. 

According to Xcel’s informational sheet, the Oneida 2 project would occupy roughly 1,349 acres within a 1,886-acre lease area in Potter County — land tied to the historic Bivins family holdings — and connect to the Southwest Power Pool grid via a seven-mile, 230-kilovolt generation tie line to the Harrington Substation. Construction is expected to begin in April 2027, with commercial operation slated for October 2028. 

The company said the project will not increase Texas customer rates because its costs will be allocated to New Mexico under that state’s Renewable Portfolio Standards. New Mexicans will pay for the resource, while the Texas community benefits from construction jobs, infrastructure investment and local tax revenue. 

Community mobilization 

The Rolling Hills Community Association plans to meet Oct. 20 to coordinate public comments before the Nov. 10 deadline in the PUCT docket. Under state rules, residents may submit comments or formally intervene — allowing them to question filings and present evidence during hearings. 

Before leaving, residents signed contact sheets to stay informed and discussed forming a volunteer committee to gather formal comments for the Public Utility Commission before the Nov. 10 deadline. 

Coffee urged residents to stay engaged but civil. “I know emotions are high,” he said, “but everyone’s trying to do what’s best for the county. We just need to respect each other’s roles and keep the focus on what’s right for the community.” 

As the meeting ended late Oct. 7, exhausted residents filed into the cool night air, many exchanging phone numbers and promises to return. 

“I’m hopeful,” Saunders said. “If we can show them how united we are, maybe they’ll finally listen.” 

What’s next 

• Next meeting: Rolling Hills Community Association, Oct. 20 

• Public comment deadline: Nov. 10 before the Public Utility Commission of Texas 

• PUCT docket number: 58664 

• Project size: 254 megawatts on 1,349 acres within a 1,886-acre lease 

• Status: Pending approval from Texas and New Mexico regulators