The city is contemplating whether it will continue to say no to any businesses that seek to develop land and install infrastructure to support energy storage systems (ESS) in Auburn.

On Oct. 20, the Auburn City Council pulled from its agenda an ordinance that would have extended the moratorium it first enacted on May 10. This was done to give time for staff to redefine certain land use categories in the city code so they include recent technological changes as well as business models in ESS and their supporting infrastructure.

City officials say that applying the present regulations to new technologies could lead to approval of projects that are undesirable, unsafe and/or inconsistent with the city’s long-term planning goals and objectives.

The council will revisit the moratorium issue at an as-yet undisclosed date.

Energy storage systems use common technologies like battery energy storage systems (BESS), thermal energy storage (TES), power conversion systems and control equipment to store excess electricity the electrical grid generates during periods of low demand, or high-renewable energy production, such as from solar and wind sources. The stored energy can then be discharged when demand is high or when renewable energy generation is low, stabilizing the electrical grid and improving overall efficiency and reliability.

City officials also hope to integrate renewable energy sources like solar and wind into ESS so when those transitory energy sources are unavailable, the systems could continue to provide power, helping in those cases to manage peak demand and balance electricity grids.

The city council held a public hearing on May 5, 2025, and afterward adopted findings of fact identifying the issues it must first address before removing the moratorium.

One big problem is that the city lacks specific zoning or development standards applicable to ESS, and without them, they and their supporting infrastructure could end up anywhere in the city. But city documents suggest that because of their size, land use, and potential impacts to the life and safety of the general public, it may be appropriate to restrict them to the city’s industrial zones.

Another issue is that a fire involving a BESS presents a significant burden to emergency personnel, as they may burn for an inordinate amount of time, requiring increased lengths of time for monitoring and containment, and leaving other areas of the city vulnerable at high-response times.

Such fires also require exceptional amounts of water to protect other cells from reaching a critical temperature, and to suppress the compromised cell. Given the amounts of water required, the city needs time to determine whether the surrounding water districts have the capacity to provide a constant flow of high-volume water.

In addition, the water used to control the emergency may contain hazardous chemicals and materials such as cyanide and hydrofluoric acid, which could leach into the city’s protected critical areas.

A BESS may create potentially hazardous air-quality concerns in an emergency, and the city has not yet determined what the impacts to regional transportation routes, businesses, and residents would be if an evacuation zone is established.

ESS facilities within the Airport Landing Field District may pose a significant risk to public health, safety and welfare if an aircraft collision occurs.

The city has yet to determine what fiscal or economic development benefits would flow to it if it permitted ESS facilities in Auburn.

The city has said it needs more discussions with industry leaders to better understand the potential impacts of ESS facilities and the effects of any proposed code-amendments staff would write on behalf of the city.