Democracy at work

Short video of last week’s board of supervisors where two hot topics — wind generators and and tourism — dominated the agenda.

This video was shot for The Floyd Press and can be found on the paper’s web site as well.

9 thoughts on “Democracy at work”

  1. Coming from a place that already had all the arguments of wind turbines , and now has hundreds of them , talking to land owners of the turbines and owners around the area, that love them now.
    if Floyd does not get turbines installed it’s just foolish on the part of the folks that run the area, it’s a VERY good thing to do.

    So many people in Floyd are so green this is the answer to clean power, like I have said before make the folks installing the turbines to give Floyd residents cheaper power to use their county for clean fuel generation the landowners will become rich from it.

    Floyd needs change to make the future better, it’s hard to change old set ways of thinking, I hope there is much change in Floyd, I now live in a town that once was like Floyd small , but now a booming well thought out huge town, the people setting the rules many years ago were excellent in the setting out of plans for the future, I hope it happens there.

    There are no jobs and nothing at all to do in Floyd, I mostly feel sorry for the kids growing up there, there is nothing to do for them.

  2. Do residents actually accept the claim that citizens who own a resource may not develop it because it affects the view from neighboring property? This does not seem fair, or prudent, and does not embrace our tradition of tolerance for individual responsibility.

    If this logic holds, wherein a “majority” wishes to limit property rights of a “minority” we ought to look to the logical progression. Will there also be limits on homes, businesses, forestry and farming on ridges or elsewhere? Sounds like this opens the door to zoning.

    It seems some of the “greenest” people have signed petitions which oppose wind energy development. I can think of no simple argument to persuade these people, or which might reduce their fear of change. But I hope that the County does not make laws which limit opportunities for progressive people to demonstrate better ways to solve problems. Floyd County has a long tradition of tolerating, if not encouraging, our people to make do with what we have.

  3. To Bob Taylor, I just want to say that I believe there are many people who like Floyd like it is, for the most part. If they want a huge town with alot to do, they can move to one – instead of turning Floyd into one. Yes, it is difficult on the youth, but the youth also gain very precious experiences living in a small community that they could NEVER have in a huge town. There is always a trade off, no matter where you live.

  4. Jeff,
    One thing that most have assumed is the petition opposes wind energy. This is not the case or I would not have signed. What the petition asks is for the board of supervisors to adopt an ordinance to regulate, BIG difference. There are legitimate concerns including set back from existing homes, water impact from blasting, where transmission lines will be placed. These things can and should be addressed by the BOS. They should NOT adopt a banning ordinance or in any way take property rights from the citizens. Adopting an elevation construction height ordinance would limit housing and farming construction at elevations of approximately 2500 feet and above. I look out my window and see 13 765KW transmission towers and 3 cell phone towers everyday. Do I like it? No, but it is the price I pay to keep my rights on my property. I feel that as long as what you are doing on your property is not harming the health of your neighbors it not anyone’s business but your own. Old fashion way of thinking? Yes. This county is changing everyday but unfortunately greed is the driving factor. This was not always true. Time was when neighbors worked their problems out one on one. Now everyone expects the government to solve their problems and usually they make it worst. The zoning issue is coming faster than most think. People should look at the counties around us that have zoning and see how well it’s worked for them. If they do maybe they will stop and think again and realize it just trades one set of problems for another. Jeff glad to see someone else is at least paying attention to what is happening take care and keep your eyes open. It should be an interesting time come January.

  5. Jeff, to follow your logic, if I have a uranium deposit on my land and want to strip mine it I can count on you to help argue for my right to develop that resource?
    You are a little late to be jumping on the bandwagon of limiting property rights. The board of supervisors passed a manufactured home ordinance in 1989 and 2004 which tells property owners what type and how many homes are allowed on their property. I don’t remember much tolerance for mobile homes nor any groundswell of property rights advocates at that time.
    As far as the government telling you what you can do with YOUR land. Is it really your land or are we just renting it from the government and paying rent in the form of property taxes every year. If you think you own it just try skipping your rent (property taxes) and see how long it takes to get evicted. And by following this train of thought since the government owns the land and we are just renters, the government should be able to tell us what we can do with their land while we occupy it.

    • I’m not ready to carry water for or against a new regulation, and have not read the proposed ordinance. We all choose a private position, some choose to take it public via forum such as this. I’ve had over 25 years experience watching political choices here, and while not always consistent we have had a strong tradition of considering a broader array of consequences.

      The law of unintended consequence has resulted in a Sub-Division Ordinance which encouraged residential development of prime agricultural lands, since these lands are most concentrated along the state roads, which logically took the easiest routes, or those most convenient.

      The mobile home ordinance affects all property, not just those above 2500′ of elevation. Regulating Uranium mining is not a County’s right, however Floyd’s BOs did come out in support of continuing the ban. I submitted a report to the NAS, which was copied to our BOS concerning the leases and options on Floyd property which were held, and abandoned in the past. I can distinguish between aesthetic choices and physical impacts, and know wherein my interests lie. It has been my business to define opportunities and limits on land, I don’t usually take sides as I believe my service is to educate landowners about their choices.

      County’s do not hold all the cards when it regulates development. The Dillon Rule only assigns rights by legislative action in Richmond. My comments were intended to alert landowners that Mr. Cornwall has been asked to draft regulations on ridge top development, that this has been an issue driven by a vocal subset of citizenship, and will affect a minority of owners.

      I believe that the benefits of wind energy outweigh the costs. I have professional experience with wind, solar, bio-gas, energy recovery, water, soil, geology, biology and terrain, and could make arguments on any of these aspects. A balanced consideration is not likely to occur in this forum, nor by legislation. In my opinion there are selfish interests at work which are one of the worst reasons to implement zoning, the regulation of other peoples choices.

Comments are closed.

Share on facebook
Share on twitter