The Panther Valley School District’s proposed solar farm project is in limbo as board members on Monday split on a vote due to uncertainty stemming from the Trump administration’s federal funding freeze.

The board voted 4-3 with two members absent in favor of the project, but a five-member majority is needed for the district to enter into a contract.

Board President Daniel Matika said that all of the board members supported the solar project, which would save the district around $4 million over 30 years.

However, the project, which was put together by the Pennsylvania-based McClure Company, would be offset by a $1.47 million federal reimbursement, which gave some board members pause, Matika said.

“I know the three people that voted against the project at this time was because of the uncertainty of the funding from the federal government,” he said this week.

On Wednesday, the White House Office of Management and Budget rescinded a memo that froze federal grants and loans amid confusion and a legal challenge.

Whether the $3.78 million project will come back before the full board again in February remains unclear.

The proposed solar array would power the entire school complex in Summit Hill and allow the district to sell additional electricity back to the grid.

The elementary school in Nesquehoning would be the only district building relying on a traditional electricity supply.

The proposed array could also be expanded to power additional buildings at the school complex in the future.

Business manager Jesse Walck said there is no uncertainty regarding the funding for this project, as the reimbursement comes from the Inflation Reduction Act.

“That legislation would have to be repealed (by Congress) in order for the district to not be automatically entitled to funds,” he said, adding that there has been no movement on that at all.

Even without the federal funding, the project would still be profitable, Walck said.

“The project would still profit the district $2,503,075 over 30 years, and that is using an extremely conservative 3% increase in electricity rates per year,” he said, noting that a 3% increase was a worst-case scenario and savings would likely be higher.

The board could vote on the project again at its next meeting Feb. 19, but whether it appears on the agenda is up to the superintendent and board president, Walck said.