Fluvanna board backs power plant

In 3-2 vote, supervisors reverse earlier decision

PALMYRA - The second time was the charm for Maryland-based Competitive Power Ventures Inc., which after months of lobbying persuaded the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors to reverse an earlier decision and approve a power plant.

The final vote Wednesday on the 520-megawatt natural gas-burning facility was 3-2, the same margin by which CPV was turned away six months ago. The board has considered three power-plant applications - two from CPV and one from Nebraska-based Tenaska Inc. - in less than a year, and has been split every time.

All eyes were on chairman Andrew M. "Mel" Sheridan Jr., regarded by power-plant proponents and critics as the board's swing vote. While the other four supervisors have voted consistently on the issue, Sheridan has vacillated, giving his blessing in November to Tenaska's 900-megawatt plant but providing the third vote that turned CPV away three months later.

Sheridan said at the time that he voted against the application because he wanted to see what effects the Tenaska facility would have on Fluvanna. But in the end, CPV was able to change Sheridan's mind by scaling back aspects of its proposal, leading its opponents - some carrying signs reading "We Will Remember in November" - to accuse the chairman of going back on his word.

"He was the last hope for each of us, the supporters and the people against the power plant," said Maggie Cagnina of Citizens Against Power Plants. "No one seems to know why he made his decision the first time or the last time. Neither one seems to make any sense in reference to the other, so I feel like he must be doing this for personal reasons."

Sheridan said he switched his vote on CPV because of a recently approved Tenaska plant in Buckingham County sited on Fluvanna's southern border - the same explanation he gave months ago when asked why he was reconsidering CPV's application.

"It's become very obvious that we're going to have a second power plant built on our immediate border, and if there are downwind concerns we would certainly inherit those without any of the financial benefits," Sheridan said. "I think this company has worked extremely hard to try to satisfy and overcome the concerns that most citizens had."

Supervisors Donald Weaver and Cecil Cobb, while recognizing that CPV's application had changed for the better, were unconvinced. Weaver said Fluvanna should not conduct its business based on developments across its borders, while Cobb said he could not support the plant because of its pollution, even though it would be profitable for the county.

"If everybody had that philosophy, the world will not survive very long," Cobb said. "There are consequences to our actions, and I think it is irresponsible to think that building two power plants in our county is not going to have a negative impact on not only us but our neighbors and the Earth in general."

But for all the talk of Sheridan's swing-vote status - a position he called "difficult" and "painful" - the chairman pointed out that the application had already passed through the hands of Fluvanna's Planning Commission, Economic Development Commission and Chamber of Commerce. Each agency unanimously approved the plant.

"That's reflective of a large segment of the county, in my opinion. It wasn't a three-person decision," Sheridan said of CPV's final approval. "It was the culmination of a lot of unanimous votes."