‘Waste of time.’ Raucous Fort Mill meeting over solar panel plans leaves many unhappy
Neighbors showed up in throngs Tuesday night at Catawba Ridge High School, hoping for answers from their congressman on the controversial Silfab Solar project in Fort Mill. Most left in small groups, grumbling.
“This was a waste of time,” said Alison Dillworth, one of more than 500 people protesting the Canadian manufacturer’s $150 million plan to produce solar panels at 7149 Logistics Lane, off Gold Hill Road.
U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman, a Republican representing Dist. 5,` hosted a forum after fielding numerous questions and complaints about Silfab.
Neighbors worry the company will use toxic chemicals and locally untested processes that might endanger others in the area, including two schools under construction. The company contends its project is safe, and that it’s gone through environmental and other measures set out by the state and county.
Norman introduced a panel of state emergency response, road and environmental officials.
Yet most of the questions asked by scores of Fort Mill residents needed to be answered by agencies that weren’t represented, Norman said. He mentioned York County officials who approved or upheld Silfab’s ability to set up shop in Fort Mill.
Those groups are unlikely to answer many questions due to ongoing or potential litigation, Norman said. “None of you are going to agree that you’re going to get what you need,” he added.
Zoning decisions create questions on Silfab
Many of the questions about Silfab in Fort Mill hinge on three zoning decisions. They’re at odds with one another on whether solar panel manufacturing should be allowed on properties like the one Silfab intends to use.
The Silfab site on Logistics Lane was zoned light industrial in 1992. Three years ago, York County Economic Development asked the county if solar panel manufacturing was allowed in light industrial zoning. It wasn’t listed by name in county code, but the county said it should be allowed under electronic or computer product manufacturing.
Silfab got a confirmation letter from the county in December 2022 that solar panel manufacturing was allowed at its site.
After the appeals period for that decision lapsed, a property neighbor asked the county whether the Silfab proposal should be allowed and appealed the county zoning staff decision. In May, the board of zoning appeals agreed with that neighbor that solar panel manufacturing shouldn’t be allowed in areas zoned light industrial.
But in late June, York County issued a statement declaring the board of zoning appeals decision shouldn’t impact the Silfab project because it was granted the zoning verification letter two years ago. “That official letter gave Silfab the legal right to develop the property for its intended purpose,” the county said in June.
Hundreds of people showed up for each York County or zoning board of appeals meeting on Silfab. Norman acknowledged numerous questions and complaints his office fielded. Other officials said some protests have become personal.
Last month, York County Chairwoman Christi Cox said she received a death threat in a letter to her home related to Silfab decisions. Councilman William “Bump” Roddey said he received a similar letter threatening to harm his family.
Neighbors question Norman’s willingness to help
Among the pointed questions protesters brought Tuesday night, 11-year-old Avery Pysher kept hers simple.
“Will our families be safe?” Pysher asked.
Norman responded that he can’t guarantee anything, but added he wouldn’t have a reservation owning or developing property in the area because of Silfab being there. Norman repeatedly pointed to state and federal environmental processes in place to gauge safety.
“All I can say is, yes, I hope they’re safe.”
The next resident questioned whether Norman would turn his hopes into action.
Another repeatedly asked Norman for a yes or no on whether the congressman supports Silfab operating on the site. Norman didn’t offer either. He “absolutely” supported the plan when he initially saw the 800 jobs and $150 of investment proposed, before public concerns arose on environmental issues, Norman said Tuesday.
“I have not said one thing pro or against,” Norman said. “I’m not part of this.”
Norman framed the decision as one between an organized community and county or state agencies in charge of permitting Silfab. His intention Tuesday was to provide information on how neighbors could contact the right agencies, but not to take a personal stand against Silfab.
“If I wasn’t listening, I wouldn’t be here tonight,” Norman said. “I can make sure you get an answer. I can’t make sure you agree with it.”
Legal, voting options remain for protesters
Deborah Hash was one of many seniors from the Carolina Orchards subdivision who came out Tuesday.
“What you’re hearing is a lot of frustration,” Hash said. “Can’t the city, the county, the state connect the dots to answer these questions?”
The repeated responses from Norman and the panel that environmental or safety concerns were best answered by another agency frustrated Hash and others. Norman had to ask people multiple times to stop shouting from the crowd or leave.
“It’s continued frustration because nobody’s here to answer the questions we have,” Hash said. “It’s a runaround. We’re very tired of it.”
Residents walked out in groups for much of the two-hour forum. Many said their frustration would impact their voting either this fall or in coming campaigns. Many talked about legal options. There’s also a case working through the court system where Silfab appealed the zoning board of appeals decision.
Tuesday’s forum was the latest frustration for protesters since they thought they’d won the issue with that zoning board of appeals decision this spring.
“We felt like we had a victory, and it went down the toilet,” Dillworth said. “This guy has not given us any hope.”
Norman encouraged protesters to continue, and to bring specific concerns to whatever agency has the authority to do something about it. The forum wasn’t about garnering votes for himself, Norman said.
“It’s up to you as an individual and as a taxpayer and as a voter to decide what you want to do,” he said. “All we’re saying is, do it.”
Dillworth, a past Norman supporter, agreed the forum couldn’t have been about the congressman rallying votes for himself.
“You could be a hero if you moved this,” she said.
This story was originally published August 28, 2024 at 10:58 AM.
