Solano County land near the site of the proposed Corby Battery Energy Storage System project west of Dixon.

 

DIXON, CA (MPG) - Dixon City Council voted unanimously on Sept. 30 to implement a 45-day ban on both data centers and battery energy storage systems during a special meeting.

But there are questions as to how effective Dixon’s moratorium on battery systems would be if an outside company wanted to press the matter.

At least one other nearby city has discovered that moratoriums don’t always stop battery storage development.

In early 2024, the Solano County Board of Supervisors voted to enact a two-year pause on approving large-scale battery storage projects in order to create safety-focused land-use standards. 

But Florida-headquartered NextEra Energy, seeking to build a battery energy storage system on 40 acres of farmland at the intersection of Kilkenny and Byrnes roads just west of Dixon, instead bypassed local government in Nov. 2024 and submitted an application for the Corby Battery Energy Storage System project to the California Energy Commission.

A year later, Middle River Power of Chicago filed an application with the California Energy Commission to build two battery energy storage systems on 10 acres within Vacaville, called the Vaca Dixon Power Center project.

The Vacaville battery projects were part of the motivation behind the Sept. 30 special City Council meeting, Dixon Mayor Steve Bird said.

“If it can happen there, it can happen here,” he said.

Changes to California law were enacted in 2022 in a bid to boost battery storage plant applications and help the state meet its clean energy goals and bolster power grid resiliency.

Assembly Bill 205, which expanded state authority over clean energy infrastructure, enabled the California Energy Commission to OK projects and bypass the county- or city-approval process regardless of any prohibitions or moratoriums imposed by local jurisdictions. 

“We’re concerned about the legislation and how they’re using it,” Bird said. “They’ve taken away local control, and I never like giving up our local control.”

Dixon City Council is expected to come back within 45 days and vote on extending the moratorium on data centers and battery energy storage system projects for up to two years.

To date, Dixon has not received an application for either a data center or battery storage system, but the scope of the Corby and Vaca Dixon proposals forced city officials to act.

The Corby project would include a 300-megawatt battery energy storage system, associated project substation, inverters and other items such as a sound barrier, retention basins and storage containers. It would connect to Pacific Gas & Electric’s Vaca-Dixon substation across Interstate-80.

The project, with an estimated value of $385 million, represents a significant capital investment in California, according to NextEra Energy, the largest electric power and energy infrastructure company in North America.

“It will provide California with additional flexibility in managing the energy grid, helping keep the lights on even during the hottest months of the year, when demand for electricity is at its peak,” according to the company. “It will also help balance the diverse renewable energy resources on the grid minute by minute, filling in the gaps even when the wind is not blowing, and the sun is not shining.”

The Vaca Dixon Power Center project would include separate 100-megawatt and 57-megawatt battery energy storage systems. A valuation for the project has not been disclosed, but it is believed to be in excess of $200 million.

The project “will help lower energy costs, improve grid reliability and strengthen California’s transition to a more resilient, clean energy future,” according to Middle River Power. It would be built at the northeast corner of Kilkenny Road and I-80 in Vacaville, a short distance from the PG&E Vaca-Dixon substation.

Both projects have drawn opposition from Vacaville residents. The California Energy Commission is expected to vote on whether to proceed with the Corby project at a Nov. 18 meeting in Sacramento.

“It is deeply frustrating to watch our local elected officials establish thoughtful moratoriums and pass strict safety and zoning standards, only to have the state effectively sidestep them,” said Sarah Dunn of the community organization Keep Vacaville Safe. “When local leaders act directly on behalf of their constituents to protect public safety, groundwater and local emergency response capabilities, seeing those safeguards bypassed undermines the core of local land-use authority.”

California has emerged as a leader in energy storage deployment, achieving a 3,000-percent increase in battery capacity since 2019, California Energy Commission Commissioner Noemí Gallardo told Energy-Storage News recently.

Most of this capacity consists of lithium-ion battery energy storage systems. 

As of Oct. 2026, there are 275 utility-scale battery storage projects in California, according to Cleanview, a firm which tracks U.S. power infrastructure and data center development. A majority of those are in Southern California and the Central Valley.

Data centers and, to a lesser degree, battery energy storage system projects have been a growing topic of discussion across the state and nation. Proposals to put facilities in rural areas have raised questions about environmental impact, water and energy use, and safety.

Vacaville resident Briana Miller cited many concerns about the Vaca Dixon Power Center project in a letter to the California Energy Commission in Aug. 2026, including the impact on farmland.

“Building the facility on prime agricultural land in Solano County would result in the permanent loss of a valuable resource and negatively affect nearby farming operations. There is a risk of contamination from fires to irrigation canals and residential well water located nearby,” Miller wrote.

A worry associated with battery storage sites is lithium-ion fires. In early 2025, the Vistra Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility in Monterey County caught fire, generating considerable state and national attention.

Bird said that while state officials may hold ultimate sway over local decisions on battery energy storage system projects, he believes it was important that the City Council took a stand with its moratorium.

“They may allow battery storage facilities whether we like it or not, but our decision sends a message that we have concerns and we’re not going to just open our arms and welcome them in,” he said.