What is our problem?

What is our problem?

#

Stunned is the word best describing the reaction given when residents discover for the first time that their county board of commissioners have already approved the construction of a massive industrial solar power facility directly in the middle of a residential area. Immediately they inquire desiring to know when this planned installation was approved, and when they discover it happened well over three month’s ago, they are left speechless and in a state of shock. This state of shock quickly transitions from paralysis to over analysis, as getting blind sided turns to anger when they discover the industrial power plant had been in planning for over a year and was kept quiet by a minority of the hand picked privileged few in order to trample any protest from citizens whose life and livelihood would seriously be harmed by the planned facility.

Every citizen of Lamar County needs to understand that they can no longer remain unaware of the precedings placed before the county board of commissioners. Because if the proposal pertains to anything commerce related, you could bet your seat in heaven they will approve it blindly, and will act completely unconcerned by doing so. Somehow in the process of being publicly elected, they forget that their duty is not to promote business at any cost, but it is to maintain and uphold the laws and regulations that prevent harm from falling to the county’s residents and business entities.

Not only were the local county commissioners informed of the harmful consequences following their obvious erroneous decision before approval, they were aware that information regarding the appeals meeting was intentionally withheld from the public by persons privately invested in the proposed facility. As we all know, public notices of the appeals meeting and approval meeting are required by state code to be posted in a publicly accessible place and and in a manner where the information is readable. But when it came to this proposed facility exception was taken by the same person applying for the zoning exception.

The first whiff of anything occurring in our community occurred when a dear and loving set of neighbours inquired about signs posted outside the front gate of the planned facility. Our neighbours were quite upset, because they were unable to read one of the signs which was blocked from view. Not more than an hour or two had passed until we finally made the journey down to where the signs were located. One paralleled the road and was within public view, but the other was mounted to a single saw horse, which was pushed up against a length of fence that ran perpendicular to the road, and was facing away from the road where it could not be seen by the public. Pushed up against that signs were not two, but four trash cans resting directly side by side touching the front of the sign. These trash cans formed a blind preventing anyone from reading it or even seeing it. Both signs were completely nondescript, so hoping for the best, and not comfortable with trespassing, we were left with the only choice of hoping both signs would read the same. But, we have never been more wrong, and our trust in others was completely taken advantage of.

Never in our lives has so much been decided over a distance of three hundred feet. Three hundred feet being the bare minimum distance required by law to notify via mail of an application for zoning exception, and they still failed to notify all residents meeting this criteria. Employing the QPublic system employed by the tax accessors office, at least one resident was never notified of the application for zoning exception, and because the sign was intentionally blocked from view, they were never given an opportunity to voice their opinion. If you read that other terrible newspaper, where it states that there was only one person in opposition to the planned facility, this is the reason why. It was all kept quiet in an unlawful action performed to intentionally prevent the public from knowing about it until it was too late.

When we finally learned of the approval meeting, we were given a mere 4 days to react, research, and respond. Hardly fair in comparison to the time allowed to plan, persuade, and collude by privately invested individuals who viewed the proposal as a chance to profit off of a free lunch that would practically be given to them, while their neighbours suffered financial losses while doing so.

In those four days, more research was performed by us than the Board of Commissioners, the salesman, and the property owners combined. To this day, the research completed in such a small amount of time still makes up around ninety percent of the research we rely on to prove the validity of our concerns, and nothing has really ever come close to contradicting or rebuking our findings. In fact, the only problem we have experienced with our research is it’s age. Many of the sources we rely on are frankly to new to enter in the realm of public knowledge. The larger works were published in February and May of this year, but were published by recognized accredited universities, journals, and magazines that have a long standing reputation as reliable resources.

One commissioner claimed that our opinion was not based in documentation. Which we still find comical to this day, since we started this protest with providing the board with a thirty six page document that was our reference sheet. Even in conversation, we asked if Cambridge University located in Cambridge, England would be accepted as a reliable documentation, and were told it was. Which we were hoping it could be, since it is the most recognized research institution in the world.

It is this ridiculous attitude of nonchalantness that has comprised all discourse with the county commissioners. Now, they don’t even show enough concern to respond to emails or return phone calls. The only explanations that we were given for their decision for approval was that they approved it because another commissioner asked them to, and the last time we checked that is ethically reprehensible for an elected official. Several commissioners have even tried their hardest to dodge taking any responsibility for their action, as if they were not even paying attention, or trapped in some stupor. There have been many times in our lives when we wished we could escape all responsibility for our actions, but it simply is not possible in life. As a very honourable and respectable friend told me, “Always remember, if you do anything in this world your name is on it, and there is nothing you can do about it.”

In case you choose to skip the majority of this letter, let me summarize it for you. What happened was some “good ole boys” took care of another “good ole boy” out of political favours, decided to allow the person to profit at the expense of his neighbourhood, and now refuse to do the morally correct thing and reverse their decision. Which is unfortunate and absurd. What is so absurd about it is that we have been prevented from voicing our concerns numerous times. The author has not even been allowed once to finish a speaking engagement without interruption. Also, it is not like we have not tried to warn the board of commissioners that illegal action has prevented us from exercising our God given right to free speech and the enjoyment of personal property. It is not as if, we did not inform them of the certain loss in property values, the high probability of environmental disaster, or the entire new set of dangers that unnecessarily face residents. We did.

So, what we are wondering is, what is it going to take to get ethical treatment? The county didn’t lose once in the cemetery precedings, it lost twice. Twice it was told that it’s actions were not lawful, and did they change their approach to their residents. No, they didn’t. Were they concerned with the expense of all those legal precedings, and the costs passed down to tax payers. No, they aren’t and they are still playing the same game of favouritism. We didn’t mention that they were legally liable for their poor decisions and actions once, we have mentioned it numerous times, which was our mistake. We were hoping to avoid targeting persons for legal action, and we still do. We were taught that it is wrong to profit off of the suffering of others, and this is more or less what we have been fighting since the beginning. But, it has been over three months since approval of the toxic facility now, and we have gotten nothing but grief for defending our property, our livelihood, and our way of life. Which is our God given right. You think our elected officials would know this. So just remember this next time you go to the voting booth, it might be your land on the chopping block someday soon, it might be your ability to care for your family, and you might just find yourself being forced off the farm your family has occupied for over fifty years. How would that change your decision? We know how it would change ours.