Following the Patrick County Board of Supervisors’ request for a legal review of both draft utility-scale solar facility ordinances, the Patrick County Planning Commission tabled choosing which ordinance to forward at its Tuesday, July 15 meeting.
Planning Commission Chairman Kurt Bozenmayer said the board’s action at its July 14 meeting “got us a little derailed.”
“At the very end of the meeting, after the executive session, the very last motion of the evening was to have the county attorney review the draft ordinances,” he said. The board passed the motion unanimously.
“That kind of threw a wrench into the plans for tonight,” Bozenmayer said. “I was hoping we would come out of this with a decision. I think, in order to not leave this hanging, we need to go forward with a motion—even if that’s just to table activity until we receive feedback from the attorney.”
Two drafts are under consideration: one created by Commission member Ed Pool and another by the Berkley Group, a consulting firm previously contracted by the county. Pool’s version is 42 pages long; Berkley’s is slightly more than 12.
Pool said he incorporated feedback from fellow commission members into his draft and addressed issues of federal and state law preemption.
“I tried to incorporate against federal supremacy and Richmond supremacy law, which did need some expansion and change from the draft you all worked on,” he said.
Pool also expressed concern about a potential conflict of interest in having Guynn, Waddell, P.C.—the county attorney’s firm—review the drafts, citing its relationship with the Berkley Group. He recommended instead using independent law firms from the Washington, D.C., area that specialize in energy-sector legal issues.
“It might cost twice as much, but you’re going to get a totally unbiased opinion, and they have energy-sector attorneys for complex litigation,” he said. “If you mess up on your disposal, you’re looking at over $100 million in cleanup minimum, and you can’t afford to make a mistake.”
Commissioner Vance Agee supported Pool’s ordinance.
“We don’t need something open-ended, loose, and incomplete,” Agee said, adding that he believes Pool’s draft seeks to avoid or minimize litigation.
“The more subpoints you have, the more detail you have, the more the judge is going to like you,” Pool added.
Commissioner Michael Tatum questioned the motivation behind the board’s request for legal review.
Andrew Overby, vice chairman of the Board of Supervisors, said the goal was to obtain a legal opinion on whether the drafts or any revisions are valid and lawful.
“If they have issues with any parts, (the attorney will) point those out to us so we can make changes,” Overby said.
Tatum stated the county attorney’s job is not to decide what is good or bad, but to make the commission’s decisions legally sound.
“That’s their job—to make it legal,” Tatum said. “Not tell us what’s good or what’s bad.”
Overby agreed but said the board’s current path required legal input.
Pool asked if the attorney’s opinions would be issued in writing. Overby confirmed they would.
“I’m saying it upfront. I’ll dig my heels in on that … I don’t mind you going third-party.” Pool said.
In other matters, the commission:
- Held a joint meeting with the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and heard about its priorities and projects.
- Approved the June 24 meeting minutes.
- Discussed a proposal from the West Piedmont Planning District Commission (WPPDC) to assist with the county’s comprehensive plan.
