- SparkNotes
- Posts
- Demystifying Multi-Jurisdictional Permitting for Renewable Energy Projects
Demystifying Multi-Jurisdictional Permitting for Renewable Energy Projects
One of the most complex aspects of developing renewable energy projects is navigating the multilayered, fragmented permitting system across different levels of government. Each jurisdiction—state, county, and local (towns, cities, and municipalities)—plays a distinct role in the approval process, creating an intricate web of requirements that developers must navigate.
Why Multiple Jurisdictions?
The multi-layered permitting system exists because different levels of government have distinct responsibilities and regulatory powers over construction and development. While this system ensures comprehensive oversight, it also creates complexity that distributed and large-scale solar/storage developers must carefully manage.
State Level: The Big Picture
State governments typically focus on broader environmental impacts and large-scale infrastructure. They maintain authority over:
Environmental protection and permits
Major infrastructure projects
State-owned lands and buildings
Critical area oversight
Wetland protection
County Level: Regional Coordination
Counties serve as important intermediaries, often handling:
Building and electrical permits
Environmental health permits
Regional planning review
Subdivision oversight
Conservation district requirements
Local Level: Community Impact
Local governments (cities, towns, and municipalities) control:
Zoning approvals
Certain building permits
Local safety inspections
Historic district oversight
Community development standards
Understanding Home Rule: The Foundation of Local Authority
Before discussing specific permitting requirements, let’s examine the concept of home rule, which influences how local governments can regulate renewable energy development. Home rule is a legal principle that grants local governments the authority to govern their own affairs without needing explicit authorization from the state legislature for each action. This contrasts with Dillon's Rule, which limits local governments to only those powers expressly granted by the state.
Home Rule Status Across the United States
Strong Home Rule
Broad local authority through constitutional provisions
High degree of local autonomy
Examples: Alaska, Iowa, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah
Modified/Hybrid Systems
Population-Based Home Rule
Authority varies by municipality size
Examples: Illinois (>25,000), Tennessee, Texas
Issue-Dependent Mixed Systems
Different rules for different types of decisions
Examples: California, Colorado, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
Optional Home Rule
Local governments can choose to adopt home rule
Examples: Maryland (11 of 23 counties have adopted)
Strong Dillon's Rule
Local governments limited to explicitly granted powers
Examples: Nevada, North Carolina, Vermont, Virginia
Mixed/Unclear
Practice differs from constitutional/statutory framework
Rules vary significantly by locality type
Examples: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii
Impact on Renewable Energy Development
The distinction between home rule and Dillon's Rule becomes crucial for renewable energy development in several ways:
Local Authority Scope: In home rule states, local governments can typically create their own comprehensive regulations without specific state authorization. This can lead to more varied requirements across jurisdictions.
State Preemption: Even in home rule states, state governments can pass laws that override local control. We're seeing this increasingly with renewable energy permitting, as states work to streamline development processes.
Example: New York (traditionally strong home rule) has ORES (Office of Renewable Energy Siting) process for large projects. Michigan allows the state to override local decisions for large renewable projects. Illinois prohibits local bans on renewables despite home rule tradition
Permitting Complexity: Home rule jurisdictions may have more unique local requirements, potentially increasing the complexity of the permitting process for developers working across multiple areas.
State-by-State Breakdown
Home rule status determines the autonomy local governments have in creating their own renewable energy regulations. Even in home rule states, however, we're seeing a trend of state governments asserting more control over renewable energy permitting to accelerate clean energy deployment.
Let's examine how these dynamics play out across several states:
Key Renewables States Permitting Authority Breakdown
Note: This table reflects current permitting structures as of January 2025. State and local requirements may change as new legislation is enacted and implementation of existing laws continues to evolve.
Real-World Examples
Example 1: New York's Reformed Process
New York has made significant strides in streamlining renewable energy permitting through the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES). Projects 25 MW or larger must obtain permits through ORES, with decisions required within:
6 months for brownfield/industrial sites
1 year for all other projects
This reform has reduced the average permit processing time from 5-10 years to approximately 8 months.
Example 2: Pennsylvania's Local Control
Pennsylvania maintains a more traditional approach where local governments retain primary authority over renewable energy siting and permitting. The Department of Environmental Protection's role is limited to:
Stormwater management permits
Environmental review
Education and outreach
This structure highlights how permitting approaches can vary significantly between states.
Example 3: Maryland's CPCN Process
Maryland's Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) process represents a unique approach to large-scale renewable energy project permitting. The CPCN is required for:
Solar projects 2 MW or larger
Any overhead transmission line 69 kV or higher
Any generating station over 70 MW
The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) administers the CPCN process, which serves as a "one-stop-shop" for many state and local permits. The process includes:
Pre-application planning
Public hearings and comment periods
Environmental review
Technical analysis
Final PSC decision
While the CPCN can preempt local zoning requirements, developers are encouraged to work closely with local jurisdictions throughout the process.
Key Considerations for Developers
When navigating this complex system, developers should keep the following in mind:
Overlapping Authority
Multiple agencies may have jurisdiction over the same aspect of a project
Requirements can vary significantly between jurisdictions
Some authorities may defer to others in certain situations
Sequential Processing
Permits often need to be obtained in a specific order
Some permits may be prerequisites for others
Timeline planning should account for all jurisdictional reviews
Coordination Requirements
Different agencies may need to review the same documentation
Some jurisdictions may require concurrent submissions
Communication between agencies may be necessary
Recent Trends and Evolutions in Permitting
States are fundamentally rethinking how they handle renewable energy permitting, with three key trends emerging in their approach to local authority and process efficiency:
States are increasingly willing to override local control specifically for renewable energy projects, even in traditionally strong home rule jurisdictions. Michigan's PA 233 exemplifies this shift, allowing state authorities to override local decisions for projects over 50MW solar or 100MW wind. Illinois has gone even further, explicitly prohibiting local governments from banning renewable energy projects altogether.
Government structure continues to shape permitting approaches, though these distinctions are becoming less rigid. Dillon's Rule states like Virginia tend toward uniform, state-mandated standards. This contrasts with home rule states like Pennsylvania, where we see more variation in local requirements. However, even Pennsylvania is moving toward more consistency through recent legislation.
States are actively streamlining their permitting processes through automation and standardization. New York's Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES) now guarantees permit decisions within one year, significantly faster than the previous 5-10 year timeline.
These changes reflect a growing recognition that achieving renewable energy goals requires balancing local autonomy with streamlined development processes. States are increasingly willing to modify traditional governance structures when they conflict with clean energy deployment objectives.
Looking Ahead
The permitting landscape continues to evolve as jurisdictions balance thorough oversight with efficient project development. Success in this complex environment requires a deep understanding of each jurisdiction's specific requirements, from state-level policies to local ordinances. Developers must engage early with relevant authorities across all jurisdictional levels, coordinating multiple parallel permit processes while maintaining strong relationships with key stakeholders. As regulatory frameworks rapidly change, staying current with new requirements and emerging opportunities becomes increasingly challenging.
Technology Solutions for Modern Permitting
To address these challenges, developers increasingly turn to technology solutions that can automate and streamline permitting research. For example, Spark's new zoning feature, released today, automatically retrieves and analyzes zoning ordinances across Authorities Having Jurisdiction. This eliminates the need to manually search, download, and run CTRL + F to analyze ordinances—a process that traditionally takes weeks of research time.

Spark AI for Zoning
If you're a developer looking to streamline your permitting process and stay ahead of regulatory requirements, we'd love to show you how Spark can help! Respond to this email or book time with us to learn more.