I am shocked and disappointed to see a recent social media comment stating my brother, the late state Sen. Jim Isgar, must be rolling in his grave because of Primergy Solar’s proposal to build a solar farm on part of his land.

As his sister and aunt to his four children who own the land that will host part of the proposed solar facility, I can tell you that Jim would have welcomed this development. As a senator, Jim took pride in promoting agriculture, water rights and conservation.

He never stopped looking for new ideas. In 2007, Jim visited Beijing as a legislative appointee to the Energy Council to open dialogue on moving toward solar power and other alternative energy.

Not only would Jim understand the need to move away from carbon-based energy, but he would be proud to know his children and community embraced this effort.

That being said, he would have given considerable thought to the questions and concerns his beloved community would have about this project. Addressing those takes dialogue, which is a two-way street.

A recording of the opponents’ meeting at the Breen Grange shows the folks opposing the project, and audience members raising issues and reasons why they don’t want the project in their backyards.

I kept wondering what Jim would think. But I know he would have been disappointed the committee did not invite Primergy Solar.

I can almost hear him say that if the project were as detrimental as the group says, then having representatives from Primergy in attendance should not be discouraged. This transparency would allow the community members a broader perspective, especially important when asked to sign a petition.

Bottom line: If I could ask my brother what he would do, he would say that concerns should be listened to and validated with factual, objective answers from both sides.

For this reason, I would like to delve a little deeper into some of the questions and concerns, which we as a family had when we first considered hosting the solar farm on our land. After all, 45 years is a long time and we wanted to be certain.

First, we are confident our land will be returned to the same if not better condition. It’s the law of La Plata County and we insisted on it being followed. We are equally confident there will be no water contamination or fire issues. What ranchers would willingly risk their water source or accept greater fire hazards?

Primergy’s plans for a winter elk corridor also give us great comfort. And Colorado Parks and Wildlife agrees with the design. Many of the answers to questions and concerns are in Primergy’s permit application. We are confident our county commissioners will thoroughly vet the plans and hear the public before deciding.

To those who say they have no problem with solar but don’t want a solar farm in their backyard or community, I would like to ask what it is about solar that you like? I imagine the answers would reflect why we must look at the big picture, and strongly consider what we can do as a community to make cleaner energy a reality.

Above all, I know my brother would look at farming the sun as he would any other crop – something to be harvested responsibly, and another way to make a living in an era when family farms and ranches nationwide must work hard to stay afloat.

Joan Kellogg’s children are among the sixth generation to grow up in La Plata County. Kellogg has lived here her entire life and worked for more than 30 years as a 9-R elementary teacher.