This letter is in response to an article in the October 3, 2018 Monticello News entitled “Marcia Elder Vs. Jefferson County”. While the article content was accurate, the headline (and subtitle) has given a false impression about my dispute with the County and the potential impacts on local taxpayers.
The dispute has occurred because of an illegal industrial development on Shiver Road and because of errors and mishandling of related matters by a County employee. Multiple County policies have been violated in the process.
A single staff member made decisions that should have been taken to our locally appointed and elected officials (the Planning Commission for its recommendation and the County Commission for a final decision). Public hearings should have been held with neighbors and other community members having the opportunity to address the impacts of this proposed development. That did not occur and the County Commission had no say in the matter.
Neighbors and the community as a whole are significantly affected. Hence, it was clear from my testimony before the Board of Appeals (a role of the Planning Commission) – and by my strong concerns and substantial investment of money and time -- that I would take the matter to Court if the staff decision was not reversed.
The case was complex and the Board received limited information on it in advance of the hearing. A single evening session afforded inadequate time to address the matter. The meeting could have been continued to a second date so the Board could review and consider the extensive oral and written evidence presented. It elected not to do so.
I took all the steps a local citizen can take in seeking to remedy the situation, but to no avail. I now have no reasonable alternative but to go to Court.
The Board’s decision to stand behind its former staff represents a dangerous precedent for the community with regard to a range of County-adopted policies that have been violated. Though it has cost me greatly to voice my concerns, my focus in doing so has been for the benefit of the community.
As for any ‘potential cost to local taxpayers’, the Court is not being asked to award the payment of my attorney’s fees. Any funds used by the County for a legal defense of the ill-founded staff decision and the Board of Appeals affirmation will, however, come from the County budget.
LP gas is a valuable energy resource and it’s good that our community has a local business provider. But any such plants should be located in one of the County’s industrial land use districts, as required by policy.
Safety is a major concern for this particular type of industrial plant – in particular, the potential for fires and explosions, and the necessity of adequate water capacity and emergency services were a safety incident to occur.
The situation as it stands is an unfortunate one for all concerned. But, having spent much of my career working on community planning and land use policies, I appreciate their importance in safeguarding community interests. I also believe in abiding by the law.
And as I said at the hearing: “What business, homeowner or renter would want to live [next to the development site] now? Or in the future with more tanks, more tanker traffic, more impacts?” Impacts on safety, property values, insurance, community appearance, and other effects?
For those who want to know more about this case, additional details are available at jeffersoncountymatters.com.
Marcia Elder