Snopes.com are on the case. First, their verdict:
CLAIM: Residents of a North Carolina town rejected the local installation of a solar farm over fears the technology was harmful.
WHAT'S TRUE: A North Carolina town rejected the further installation of solar panels; some residents registered fears that the panels would disrupt the local ecosystem, while many others worried property values would be affected.
WHAT'S FALSE: Concerns hinged solely on the dangers of solar panels.
As for their evidence and reasoning, they mostly draw on analysis of existing reports, highlighting that the more outlandish claims weren't the only objections:
While both [speakers] cited ambient fears about the panels' effect on the local ecosystem, the latter concern spoke more directly to general worries about large-scale changes to the local economy.
They also did research of their own - directly questioning the journalist who broke the story:
We contacted the Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald and spoke to author Keith Hoggard about the article and its unexpected reach. He confirmed that The Independent's take was mostly accurate, and that the residents didn't want another solar panel installation.
However, it's worth mentioning that Hoggard's original article mainly addressed residents' concerns about the impact of multiple solar farms on property values and local commerce. Some residents expressed fears about solar panel safety, but they were not the sole voices of dissent at the council meeting.
(this is the Independent article referred to, which had one of the most outrageous headlines, phrased "US town scraps solar panels in case they suck up all the sun’s energy" in the shortened version on their homepage):
If their "mostly true" conclusion seems surprising when there were economic concerns raised as well as the wilder safety concerns, keep in mind that it appears the two concerns were not wholly separate.
Some of the economic fears appear rooted in general economic gloom: (from Snopes' summary - and note that none of the original reports give any more detail on why it's theorised that the local expansion success of the solar industry would harm the town economically)
...some residents simply worried that the burgeoning solar industry would further depress the local economy and tank the values of their homes (asserting that such damage had already been done.
...but some economic fears were rooted in the safety fears: (from the original report)
“You’re killing your town,” [Bobby Mann] said. “All the young people are going to move out.”
He said the solar farms would suck up all the energy from the sun and businesses would not come to Woodland.
Like with other sources investigating the claim, it's difficult to give a complete answer because the councillors' don't need to publish the reasons for their votes. So far, they appear to have chosen to not comment (this might change).
One important thing highlighted however is that it wasn't just one solar farm application rejected - the town proposed and the councillors voted for a moratorium on all new solar farm developments. So the explanation must be about solar farms in general, and not the particulars of any one farm application.