Water pact inflames Fluvanna residents

PALMYRA — As of now, it looks unlikely the ailing economy will stop Fluvanna officials from joining their counterparts in Louisa in forming a joint authority to oversee construction of a water pipeline intended to service both counties.

But while the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors may have the votes to establish the authority next month, the move is drawing the ire of locals who say the plan is too expensive and short on transparency. The board delayed a vote on a resolution to form the authority late Wednesday after approximately 120 people raised concerns during a heated public hearing at the Fluvanna County Courthouse.

At issue is the creation of a James River Joint Water Authority designed to oversee operation of the pipeline proposed to extend roughly 20 miles from the James River on the southern end of Fluvanna County north to Zion Crossroads in Louisa County. The pipeline could draw as much as 3 million gallons of water from the James each day, Fluvanna Public Works Director John Robins said.

Louisa officials see Zion Crossroads, where many businesses currently rely on wells, as the center for economic growth for the county.

Leroy McCampbell is a Fluvanna resident who in the last two weeks helped gather more than 2,100 signatures from county residents against creation of a joint authority. At Wednesday’s meeting, McCampbell submitted that petition, which asked that the question of forming a joint water authority be put to a voter referendum.

While he’s not against the idea of the pipeline, McCampbell said now is not the time to spend money pursuing the project.

“This is not the time that people are eager about going into debt,” McCampbell said.

He and other residents are also concerned about the power and responsibilities of the proposed authority. There were also concerns raised about the route the pipeline would take and how much care the authority would exercise in keeping the pipeline from cutting onto private land not designated for utility easements.

Ultimately, the authority would settle on the line’s route.

Adversarial tone

Throughout the close-to-three-hour public hearing, a somewhat adversarial tone emerged between a few of the supervisors and the packed gallery, which in some instances heckled the supervisors — some of whom added to the tension by blasting other supervisors’ opinions.

Much of that tone began to surface after County Attorney Frederick W. Payne said it appeared the rules for submitting a proposal for the referendum might not have complied with state law. The tension was further elevated after the board later voted 4-2 not to put a referendum on the ballot in November.

“Will this referendum solve the questions you’re talking about?” asked Supervisor Mozell Booker, who voted against the referendum. “I don’t think so.”

Booker favors creating the pipeline authority because the county needs the water infrastructure to develop economically, she said. She also cited the plan’s proposal to bring water to residents in Fork Union, where a drought in 2002 sapped wells.

“Water is a lifeline,” Booker said.

Looking ahead

Supervisor John Gooch came down along similar lines, saying, “Our wells are already not giving us what we need. ... The way I see it, if we don’t get that water line up there, then we might as well go ahead and shelve the Comprehensive Plan,” which the board approved earlier in the evening.

Fluvanna County Administrator G. Cabell Lawton IV said he would talk with Payne to see if the county legally needed to further address the petition for referendum, which Supervisor Gene F. Ott supported and feared would lead to a lawsuit between the county and its residents if not approved.

Ott also does not believe the county has provided enough detailed information about the proposed joint authority.

“It’s like you’re getting married to somebody you met yesterday and you can’t get a divorce,” said Ott, who was joined in support for the referendum by Supervisor Donald F. Weaver.

Creation of the authority calls for three representatives from each county to serve on the authority, including each county’s administrator, a supervisor and a county resident. The supervisor and resident representatives would serve four-year terms.

The supervisors voted 4-2 to take up the issue again April 15. The board wanted to wait until Louisa County had selected its proposed supervisor and resident representatives, likely during the Louisa Board of Supervisors’ April 6 meeting.

The Louisa board is also expected to vote on a resolution on whether to join the joint authority at the same meeting.

Zion growth

For years county officials have looked at the proposed pipeline as necessary to economic development at Zion Crossroads but also as a way to provide water service in the Fork Union area, where many residences rely on wells. In addition, the county said the pipeline is needed to improve service to the Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, in the northern end of the county.

The project is projected to cost between $45 million and $50 million, which would be split evenly between the counties, Lawton said.

Both counties’ boards of supervisors would be responsible for approving the financing for their respective halves of the project.