SitePath › County map › Kansas

Kansas solar permitting

More than half at low to moderate risk A minority at high risk Active solar moratoria on the books
State policy: RPS on file · no % target

Grade distribution

ABCDF

Overview

Every Kansas county is scored on the SitePath solar permitting index. More than half are graded A or B, meaning they present low to moderate permitting risk for utility-scale solar projects. A minority sit in the C range — moderate risk with meaningful process uncertainty. A minority are rated D or F — high to very high risk, often due to active moratoria, restrictive setback ordinances, or strong local opposition.

The most favorable jurisdictions in Kansas include Jefferson County (grade A), Gove County (grade B), Wyandotte County (grade B). The most challenging include McPherson County (grade F), Bourbon County (grade F), Pottawatomie County (grade F).

Kansas's RPS framework (RPS on file · no % target) has a mixed effect on local solar permitting: state incentives can accelerate projects, but county boards often act independently of state policy direction. Harvey County, McPherson County, Bourbon County, Pottawatomie County currently have active utility-scale solar moratoria. These represent hard barriers where project approvals are unlikely until the moratorium is lifted by county vote.

All counties — sorted by risk score (best first)

County Grade Score Trajectory Moratorium
Jefferson CountyA29—
Gove CountyB30—
Wyandotte CountyB31—
Atchison CountyB32—
Doniphan CountyB32—
Ottawa CountyB33—
Sherman CountyB33—
Marion CountyB33—
Logan CountyB33—
Clark CountyB34—
Butler CountyB34—
Marshall CountyB35—
Neosho CountyB35—
Republic CountyB36—
Ford CountyB36—
Lincoln CountyB36—
Mitchell CountyB37—
Barber CountyB37—
Anderson CountyB37—
Chautauqua CountyB37—
Rooks CountyB37—
Stevens CountyB37—
Comanche CountyB38—
Kiowa CountyB38—
Finney CountyB38—
Cowley CountyB38—
Montgomery CountyB39—
Seward CountyB39—
Brown CountyB40—
Nemaha CountyB40—
Wilson CountyB40—
Clay CountyB40—
Wabaunsee CountyB40—
Russell CountyB40—
Labette CountyB40—
Morris CountyB40—
Pawnee CountyB40—
Ellsworth CountyB40—
Gray CountyB41—
Greenwood CountyB41—
Harper CountyB41—
Scott CountyB41—
Norton CountyB41—
Washington CountyB41—
Phillips CountyB41—
Allen CountyB41—
Woodson CountyB41—
Chase CountyB41—
Haskell CountyB41—
Kearny CountyB41—
Meade CountyB41—
Rush CountyB41—
Osborne CountyB41—
Smith CountyB41—
Trego CountyB41—
Stafford CountyB41—
Riley CountyB41—
Ellis CountyB41—
Hamilton CountyB41—
Hodgeman CountyB41—
Jewell CountyB41—
Lane CountyB41—
Rawlins CountyB41—
Sheridan CountyB41—
Wallace CountyB41—
Morton CountyB41—
Graham CountyB41—
Greeley CountyB41—
Ness CountyB41—
Miami CountyC42—
Thomas CountyC43—
Franklin CountyC43—
Pratt CountyC43—
Leavenworth CountyC44—
Saline CountyC44—
Edwards CountyC45—
Lyon CountyC45—
Rice CountyC46—
Cloud CountyC46—
Geary CountyC46—
Stanton CountyC46—
Dickinson CountyC47—
Decatur CountyC47—
Sumner CountyC47—
Wichita CountyC47—
Osage CountyC48—
Elk CountyC48—
Shawnee CountyC49—
Grant CountyD52—
Johnson CountyD53—
Kingman CountyD53—Not verified
Crawford CountyD55—
Cheyenne CountyD56—
Cherokee CountyD56—
Coffey CountyD57—
Barton CountyD59—
Douglas CountyD59—
Reno CountyD63—
Jackson CountyD64—
Sedgwick CountyF66—
Linn CountyF72—Not verified
Harvey CountyF100—Active
McPherson CountyF100—Active
Bourbon CountyF100—Active
Pottawatomie CountyF100—Active

See the full interactive map

County grades, scores, and ordinance data are also available on the interactive county map with filtering by grade, state, and risk factor.

Open the county map →

About SitePath scoring

Every U.S. county is scored 0–100 on solar permitting risk (lower is friendlier to development). The grade is a weighted composite of compliance stringency, market saturation, regulatory trajectory, and data uncertainty. Every figure traces back to a primary government document. Read the full methodology →

SitePath Intelligence is a research platform. Data verified as of 2026-05-02. Scores update on a quarterly review cycle.