Michael Goss and Shaena Crossland once again addressed the Tucker County Commission regarding their concerns about the Ridgeline Project. The residents comments came as part of the Commission’s regular August 27th meeting.
Second to speak was Goss who directed his comments to Tucker County Commission President Mike Rosenau. Rosenau commented on the fact that he felt that Goss appeared to single him out each time he addressed the Commission.
“We have three Commissioners here, why you are focusing in on me, I don’t know,” Rosenau said. “I know its ’cause I’m up for election next time.”
Rosenau reminded Goss of a comment that was made at the last meeting he attended about the role a Commissioner has. Rosenau says it is his duty to see that the County is financially secure.
“What did you not know the last Commission meeting you were here, the first a Commissioner has to be is make our County financially secure,” Rosenau said. “By State Code, that’s what we do.”
Rosenau continued that the Ridgeline project could potentially bring millions of dollars to the county. The Department of Environmental Protection has also green lit the project, as well. Rosenau also said that if he had his way, the plant would not be located where it is.
“When there’s a project coming to our County that’s estimated at millions of dollars, its hard for me to say, I’m not for that,” Rosenau said. “Its hard for me to say, when the DEP passed, with all of the tests that they have. I went to the Canaan Valley (meeting) I listened to all of it. The DEP gave the permit to the power plant. They said it was ok. So there’s pros and cons to both sides.”
When confronted on the issue of moving the power plant, Rosenau said that he would prefer it be in a different location in the County, but has no control over what a private company and private land owner do with their own property.
“Have you asked them about moving it further out 93 because you said if you had your way,” Goss said.
When pressed by Goss and Crossland as to the nature of conversations Rosenau has had with Western Pocahontas, the owner of the property, Rosenau said that he would not disclose the nature of confidential conversations.
“My conversations with individual landowners are not public a lot of times,” Rosenau said. “When I come and talk to anybody anytime about their business I’m not going to talk their business.”
Tucker County Commissioner Fred Davis said that it was his belief that Western Pocahontas already had plans for much of the land further out. During a public meeting months ago, representatives of the company presented plans for several phases of housing development construction across the area.
“On out they already had it designed for a housing development and other things out there,” Davis said. “They’d have to change all their plans if they change that because they already have plans for their land is the way I understand.”
Goss contented that he felt that the plans needed to change and that the Commission must sit down with Western Pocahontas to discuss moving the power plant to a location further up.
“You said they have a plan, but all plans are changeable, am I not wrong?” Goss said. “All it would take is a private discussion with just you four. You three and the guy from Western Pocahontas.”
Goss contends that the power plant will contaminate the watershed on the mountain and cause runoff to pollute downhill into the lower part of Tucker County.
“Like I said before, if there’s a problem with the water, everything’ll run down hill,” Goss said. “You’re going to be effected just as much as the mountain is going to be and then you are going to ruin a beautiful. Beautiful part of the State we have and we cherish and we call home.”
Davis asked if the plant was moved, would Goss and Crossland agree to the construction. Goss said he would be all for the project if it were constructed in Grant County.
“So all that water still runs down the hill there,” Davis said. “And all the pollution we have it and we’ll get it, but we won’t get no money.”
Crossland contended that there would be no financial allocation for the schools from the project.
“There’s no school,” Crossland said. “There will be no allocation to the schools.”
Rosenau said that the State would allocate funding to the County Commission to be distributed.
“If we allocate the funds to the County Commission to distribute the funds, there’s always needs for water repairs, sewer repairs, to outlaying areas water, sidewalks, everything. Infrastructure still needs to be redone, but County Commission can allocate all the funds they want to the County School system,” Rosenau said.
Last year, the school aid formula for Tucker County saw $4 million brought into the County by the State. Rosenau said since the funds would be distributed to the Commission instead of to the Schools, the funds would not affect the school aid formula for the County and would allow the County to allocate as much funding as it would like.
“Here’s poor little Tucker County that can’t even survive on its tax base. The State has to supplement us $4 million just to meet the basic standards of a student,” Rosenau said.
Some Counties in West Virginia, like those with gas and oil, do not get State subsidies under the school aid formula, according to Rosenau. In those cases, the County school systems are entirely County funded.
There is a section of HB 2014, Rosenau explained that was designed to allow County Commissions to allocate additional funding to schools for things they need. The designer of the bill explained the section to Rosenau personally, Rosenau said. Rosenau said used the exampled of if the school came to the Commission and asked for funding to astroturf the football field or asked for supplies for the lab or additional funding for transportation for field trips. The section, according to Rosenau was purposely designed to allow Commissions to allocate as much additional funding as possible to schools without jeopardizing the school’s school aid formula funding.
“That’s why House Bill 2014, that section of it, was designed that way,” Rosenau said. “Its easy to say, oh they cut the schools completely out. Because its sellable.”
Goss asked Rosenau once again about how HB 2014 takes power from the local governments.
“You like that part of the bill, but do you like the part where it zaps you of all your power?” Goss said.
Rosenau said he has maintained since the beginning that he does not agree with the State’s disregard of local input and seizing of local control.
“I’ve said repeatedly, Michael, I don’t like local control not being in it,” Rosenau said.
Davis said that Goss and Crossland have no idea how much control has been stripped from the Counties over the past few years. According to Davis, the State has been forcing the Counties to pay for more and more.
“They take more and more every year, you guys don’t have a clue how much they take from us,” Davis said. “How much money we’ve lost in the last three or four years that we have to pay out, that the State used to pay. They keep taking and taking from us and nothing we say will help us.”
The Counties have little say, according to Davis. Even the County Commissions’ larger organization has little sway in what the State does, Davis said.
“We have an organization that is very big, but no matter what we say, we still don’t get it back,” Davis said.
Davis said the fight should be directed to Charleston, not Parsons.
“Where we need to be going, you can come fight us all you want, and Charleston all those people that we talk to, too, that’s where you need to go fight,” Davis said.
