On March 23 in a special extension to its March 10 regular meeting, the Twentynine Palms City Council rejected the E-Group Solar Project proposed for the Harmony Acres area of the City after hearing about 3 hours of public comments. Residents expressed concerns about dust, water usage, destruction of desert habitat, and health issues. MBCA formally commented in 2024 and several Board members including Twentynine Palms resident Pat Flanagan have continued to comment in writing and at meetings. (Read Pat's most recent comment letter.)

The developer's contention that they could take their project to a state-level review via AB 205 was disputed, as the project doesn't appear to meet those criteria. Instead, residents encouraged the City Council to abide by its ban on utility-scale solar, instituted into its development code in 2012. Board member Janet Johnson commented after the decision, "This shows how having decision-makers living locally, and are accountable locally, and know first-hand that no one wants to live next to solar panels, makes a difference." 

Here is the report from local radio station KCDZ 107.7, and an in-depth review of the entire meeting including quotations from speakers by The Desert Trumpet.

A key concern with development in Pioneertown is the growing number of proposals, leading to significant cumulative effects. MBCA's comment letter points additionally to issues of noise, lighting, traffic, housing availability for workers, and erosion, among others. 

MBCA signed on to two prior substantive comment letters (2022, 2024) protesting inadequate provisions for human and environmental issues in the project plan for the proposed Morongo Canyon Highway 62 Multi-Tenant Wireless Broadband Communications Site. Among the many concerns presented in MBCA's current letter are harm to dark night skies and scenic values, damage to biological resources including habitat connectivity, soil erosion, failure to evaluate lower-impact options, and cumulative impacts. 

 

MBCA's comment letter for the Soda Mountain Solar Project was presented at the February 5 California Energy Commission public hearing. MBCA has followed and opposed this project since 2009. The latest letter references a number of scientific papers demonstrating the likely negative effects of wind and dust, harming both people and the land. Papers cited include Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion  and Sand Transport Pathways. The Desert Under our Feet explains the harm caused by destruction of the critical underground desert biome. A comprehensive overview of these and many other concerns about this project, as well as a sample comment letter, can be found on the Basin and Range Watch website. Comments are due February 27.

You can view the entire Annual Meeting and Greywater presentation via our YouTube Channel. The Introduction to Greywater Irrigation Systems presentation by keynote speaker Nicholas Holmes begins at 1:07:28 in the video, but we encourage viewers to start at the beginning for the presentations on MBCA's issues and programs that precede the Keynote presentation. Below is a timestamp list for all segments of the presentation.

MBCA Annual Meeting, January 24, 2026
Timestamps
   00:08  Welcome and Thank-Yous - MBCA President Steve Bardwell
   04:16  Announcements by meeting participants
              -Desert Video Astronomers
              -Chromium 6 petition
              -Candidate petition
              -Giant Rock Cleanup
              -29 Palms Solar Farm petition
   09:50  Introduction of 2026 MBCA Board of Directors
   12:35  Overview of recent and current MBCA Issues - Steve Bardwell
              -Annual Desert-Wise Living Landscape Tour April 19
              -Water issues
              -Dark night skies
              -Scholarships
              -8^th Grade Field Trips
              -Inland Deserts Working Group/CA 30x30 Climate Change Program
              -Candidate Forum this fall
   18:16  Morongo Basin Development Projects (with PowerPoint slides) - Steve
                   Bardwell
   31:06  Habitat Connectivity (PPT) – Steve Bardwell
   38:59  Education – 8^th Grade Field Trips (video) – Janet Johnston
   46:42  Housing (PPT) – Janet Johnston
1:06:14  Break
1:07:28  Keynote Presentation – An Introduction to Greywater Irrigation
                  Systems, Nicholas Holmes
2:00:30  Question and Answer session
2:14:29  End of Program

 

In support of the California desert environment beyond San Bernardino County, MBCA signed on to a letter outlining concerns about the Bonanza Peak Solar Project in Inyo County. The Old Spanish Trail Association (OSTA) maintains that relying only on an Addendum to the 2015 Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) for the project is not sufficient for measuring the effects of the extensive changes to the original project. They request that a Supplemental Environment Impact Report be performed "to analyze the Project's new and more severe impacts, and to provide meaningful public review and participation."  

MBCA's appeal (with 7 co-appellants) of the Planning Commission's approval of the Sienna II Solar Project in Lucerne Valley was denied by the Supervisors on Tuesday, January 28. 

(Timestamps are from the County meeting video - scroll down the Supervisors meetings page to find the meeting date of 2026-01-27 and its video link.) Supervisor Rowe introduced the topic and the process at 26:40. The review started with the County Land Use Services staff presentation (28:16), followed by MBCA's presentation (44:37). MBCA President Steve Bardwell presented a 15-minute fact-filled and passionate defense of the position that the project approval was flawed. (Here also are the PowerPoint slides in PDF format, Part 1 and Part 2.) The developer, Avantus, then presented its 15-minute summary of the project (1:01:53).

Public comment was opened at 1:17:38 and timestamps are listed below for all comments in support of the appeal. Final 5-minute presentations were offered by Avantus (2:34:55) and MBCA (2:35:34).

Supervisor Dawn Rowe (in whose district the project lies) had extensive questions for County Land Use Services staff (2:42:27 - 2:52:05), followed by her comments (2:52:06 - 2:55:38). Supervisor Hagman commented from 2:55:39-3:00:38. Supervisor Rowe made two more comments starting at 3:00:38, first offering to show those seeking to develop in the desert how the expansive landscapes must be specially considered, and then chastising the "snarky" tone of one of the Avantus speakers (Ann Mudge, "counsel for the project," 2:31:21), while complimenting Steve's professional approach. The vote against the appeal was unanimous (3:02:00).

MBCA's appeal was in great part based on how different the Sienna II Project was from its earlier approved versions. However, a 2019 amendment to the Renewable Energy Conservation Element of the Countywide Plan (4.10, Section 3.) allowed revised but similar previously approved projects to be considered on "policies and regulations in effect at the time the application was accepted as complete." In this case the current project was deemed by the Supervisors to be "equal" to those prior approved projects, despite extensive changes and uncertainties outlined in the appeal. This formed the basis for the Supervisors' decision, as they found no legal justification to overturn the previous approvals so denied the appeal.  

Many supporters of the appeal including MBCA Board members and numerous Lucerne Valley area residents made comments that ranged from dust concerns to economic issues and anger that the formal State Scenic Highway designation was not considered by the Planning Commission. The entire session begins at 26:40 in the County video.  Below are time stamps for comments made on camera by MBCA and other appeal supporters:

1:17:38 David Fick
1:20:08 Janet Johnston
1:23:06 Laraine Turk
1:25:34 Sarah Kennington

1:28:58 Eric Menendez
1:34:55 David Smith
1:38:09 Karen Smith

1:40:35 Bob Howells
1:43:44 Steve Mills
1:46:39 Catherine Howells
1:57:05 Michelle Gibson
2:01:09 Ondine Hollander
2:04:37 Brian Hammer
2:08:30 Neville Slade
2:11:45 Arch McCulloch
2:14:59 Erin Gatlin
2:16:17 Sarah Kennington
2:19:30 Suzy Boyd

2:22:43 Bill Lembright
2:25:15 Linda Gommel
2:28:12 Lorrie Steely

MBCA has issued a statement following the denial by San Bernardino County Supervisors of the appeal by MBCA (and others) of the Sienna II Solar Project in Lucerne Valley. After the County posts the video of the meeting, we will post a more detailed story including timestamps of the video for key moments and comments:

MBCA was very disappointed the County denied our appeal and approved the Sienna Solar Project over the voices of Lucerne Valley and Morongo Basin residents.

The County has chosen to place the development of this massive solar project over the wishes and concerns of its rural residents. 

When RECE 4.10 was adopted in 2019 by the Supervisors, the broadly written “loophole” of Section 3 was inserted and became the green light for this project.

RECE 4.10 was intended to prohibit industrial solar in rural neighborhoods, but the “loophole” allowed Sienna to be relocated and enlarged beyond the original plan accepted before the adoption of the RECE.

MBCA continues to call for the adoption of reliable and resilient roof-top solar in the built environment and appropriately sited utility scale solar to address our growing climate crisis.   

Highway 247 is officially a Caltrans Scenic Highway after years of effort! 

It is deeply ironic that the appeal of the Sienna project became the public venue for revealing this status. This 1800-acre solar farm and its miles of transmission lines will diminish the very qualities that earned 247 its designation and dilute the economic and cultural benefits of this rare designation. 

MBCA is calling for long-range planning and actions by the County to protect Scenic 247 and the High Desert’s unique environment.