|
Supervisors approve ethanol requests
Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:04 PM EDT
By Lisa Andrews, Staff Writer
BOYDTON - Two applications from Osage Bio Energy for an ethanol plant near Chase City were approved Monday night at the Mecklenburg County Board of Supervisors regularly scheduled meeting, but the process isn't over yet - there will still be a public hearing on July 1 on Osage's request for a special exception permit.
Osage's ethanol manufacturing plant would operate under the name Bluestone Bio Energy. Representatives of Osage were present for the meeting.
More than 30 people attended the meeting opposing the ethanol plant.
Supervisors Chairman Glenn Barbour briefly went over the details of the first application. The application would change the county code's zoning language to include ethanol manufacturing. The Mecklenburg County Planning Commission recommended last month that the supervisors approve the application.
Supervisor Dan Tanner motioned that the supervisors also approve the motion. The members then voted. A shout from the audience interrupted the voting. The person asked, "Who seconded the motion?"
Barbour clarified that the supervisors use modified Roberts Rules (rules of conduct for meetings). The supervisors then voted via a role call. The motion was approved unanimously.
The second application had also been recommended for approval by the planning commission. This application would make it possible for ethanol to be manufactured on what is known as the 354- acre Butler Farm.
Tanner motioned for approval of this application.
Supervisor Glanzy Spain made an amendment to the motion. He said they should postpone the vote until they take a closer look at the road study. The road study was prepared by the engineering firm Dewberry & Davis of Danville and shows what needs to be done to the roads in the vicinity of the proposed ethanol plant to meet the needs of the numerous tractor trailers and increased traffic.
"We will never get all our questions answered," said Spain. "The study talks of 600 trucks coming through the road. They can do; they will do; will all this get done?" He noted that Highway 92 will now have big trucks driving on it toward both the ethanol plant and the landfill.
"Are they trying to get into town and then us be stuck with insufficiencies?" said Spain.
Barbour said there would be another public hearing and clarification would be made by Osage on issues at that time.
The amended motion did not pass. Supervisors Spain, W. P. Hudgins, and J. A. Hudson voted to postpone the approval of the application.
The original motion to approve the application was then voted on and approved by the supervisors, in a 7-2 vote. Spain and Hudgins voted against approving the application.
Barbour then addressed the third step in this process. He said they would be having a public hearing to discuss the special exception application.
This application is necessary due to the supervisors approving the change in the definition of manufacturing permissable in Mecklenburg County to include ethanol manufacturing.
The public hearing will include the board of supervisors and the planning commission. The hearing will be Tuesday, July 1 at 6 p.m. in the gymnasium of Bluestone High School.
During the public input portion of the meeting Claude Thompson, resident, voiced his support for Osage.
"I was hoping to have this resolved tonight but now I see we have another meeting planned," said Thompson. He commended the supervisors for their handling of the project by saying it was done "fair, professional, and skillful and with the best interest of our county in mind."
Steve Hatcher, resident, also voiced his support for Osage. He thanked the supervisors for all their efforts in making decisions about Osage.
Fred Andrews spoke against the supervisor's decision to approve the Osage applications. He praised the supervisor's comprehensive plan but questioned why they would be doing the spot rezoning. "This is opening the box to destroy Mecklenburg County and the nature of Mecklenburg County," said Andrews.
Monty Hightower said he supported the decision to support Osage. "(I) appreciate the job you have done with Osage," said Hightower, "I know you have taken a lot of abuse. I thank you for the job you have done,"
Ida O'Sullivan spoke against the application approvals. She asked what would be happening to the remainder of the land that Osage was not putting the plant on. She also asked the board to investigate who would maintain the roads after they are redone. She said those who did not voice their opinion against Osage have missed an opportunity to be heard.
"Would any of you chose to live next to this?" asked O'Sullivan, "The people of Chase City do not have a choice."
Wayne Carter did respond to her road maintenance question by saying that VDOT and ultimately the taxpayer would maintain the roads.
Munsey Moore spoke representing the Chase City Industrial Development Authority. He presented the supervisors with a resolution from the authority opposing Osage.
He also spoke of the need for the planning commission to have a representative from the Town of Chase City appointed.
Moore also recalled planning commission member and Boydton Mayor Charles Reamy's comment at the last planning meeting about "his constituents". He was not allowed to complete this point as his time was gone.
He did say before he left the podium, "I want to give you all an opportunity to talk on this as a board. To act and to work on it before other measures are taken. I really think the county is in tremendous violation. I think you all need to look at these issues. Some of you all need to call me and talk to me about it."
John H. Kerr Reservoir
John Fields with the (Virginia) Roanoke River Basin Advisory Commission (VRRBAC) presented the supervisors with information on the "water wars."
He said the commission has tried to work with the North Carolina commission and also work through a Bi-state commission on interbasin water transfer but has not been successful.
He said a letter has surfaced dated 2002 that informs the commission that localities in North Carolina (Raleigh, Durham, Cary and Granville County) are requesting to be allocated 50 million gallons of water per day out of the John H. Kerr Reservoir.
Fields said should the request from North Carolina be honored by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers it will greatly limit the amount of water the reservoir will have for any municipal and industrial water supply needs within Mecklenburg County.
Fields said Congress says a reservoir the size of Kerr must provide 50,000 acre feet of water for municipal and industrial water supply.
The VRRBAC sent a letter dated May 16, 2008 to John Warner, Jim Webb, Virgil Goode and Bob Goodlap.
Fields read the letter to the supervisors. It says in part, "Dear congressman, this letter is to bring to your attention what we consider to be a major threat to the economic viability of a major portion of southern Virginia."
The letter said that each of the representatives needed to understand how this will affect the area if action is not taken. He informed them in the letter the North Carolina commission had never met.
The letter tells the congressmen of the "First come first serve" policy the Corps follows. This policy is designed to meet a 1958 ruling which stipulates how reservoirs water supplies are to be distributed.
Fields letter says there is 28,885 feet of water availed currently that could go towards municipal and industrial water supplies. He said the letter from the North Carolina localities is asking for 26,000 feet. This would leave just over 2,000 feet for Mecklenburg Counties own future municipal and industrial water supply needs.
"It is imperative that a hold be put on this request," said Fields to the supervisors and in the letter.
"The U.S. Army Corps has acknowledged that the 1958 policy does not meet the current day's scenario," read Fields, "The agency is having an internal discussion about this issue and they are working to perhaps develop a better protocol. The committee desires a policy or law change which protects the water resource.
"The committee opposes any interbasin transfer, which would have a substantial impact on the area.
"We are opposed to any water withdrawal until such time that the real and potential needs of the future are interned.
"We could be in dire straits if the 2002 request is granted," said Fields.
Fields said an earlier study decided to the State of Virginia and the State of North Carolina remove from the table, for any discussion, interbasin transfer or water allocation.
"So the only recourse is new legislation," said Fields, "Which will cause the Corps to organize a protocol for the water."
Fields said that Goode had responded to the letter. A meeting will be planned in the near future with the entire congressional delegation.
He referred to the water as "our life blood and vitality."
Fields said the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) asked why the commission was so upset with the request from the North Carolina localities.
"We acknowledged, we know, we will need to give some," said Fields, "With (this allocation) we will not only export our water; but our economic opportunities will be hindered."
Fields said that if an industry came in today, it could be that if this allocation with Raleigh goes though, "We will not have the water to support it."
"We don't have the political clout or the money to take on these major metropolitan areas,"continued Fields. "We could agree to a fair percentage."
He said that those who currently have water allocations from the reservoir could seek to have their current allocations increased, based on last year's drought.
The board agreed to draft a resolution to the local representatives in support of the VRRBAC.
Later in the meeting during public input, Munsey Moore said that the board needed to do "whatever was necessary to stop this from happening." He suggested they put together money specifically for this issue. Moore said they need to fight it in order to save "the greatest resource we have in Mecklenburg County: Buggs Island Lake".
Several supervisors thanked Fields for his work later during the board comments. Blalock spoke directly to Fields, at that time, questioning who would have the final say in if the water is sent to North Carolina.
Fields said it was a dual process, "The Corps makes an allocation and the Virginia DEQ issues a withdrawal permit. Unless we can get the congress and the Corps to change the protocol they are currently observing," said Fields. "We are going to be piping water. We can't stop that. We don't have the clout."
"If we can prevail upon what is fair and just, said Fields. "If 80 or 90 percent of this water originates in the Commonwealth of Virginia; and 80 to 90 percent is stored in the Commonwealth of Virginia; then Virginia ought to get a fair share of that water for economic development it should not be going down the pipe line to Raleigh, Durham, and Cary."
"This water thing also concerns me," said Barbour. "I feel like this is another case of a 600 pound Gorilla like Virginia beach was if we don't stand up and fight it all we can we know what is going to happen." |
