NAHUNTA — The Brantley County Board of Commissioners saw another great — if disgruntled — turnout during Tuesday’s work session and meeting.
Residents have been habitually filling public participation slots at commissioner meetings since the January 20 called meeting to discuss a proposed amendment to the Land Use Ordinance to add data centers as a special exception under light industrial zoning.
Though no formal proceedings have taken place to the public’s knowledge regarding the land use amendment, it remains at the forefront of public participants’ conversations.
Shannon Denbow, Nick Dunegan, Lily Fulk, Ruby Thomas, Tanya Tomanek, James Duncan, Kathy Wainright, Shannon Gregory, J.T. Flanders, Lynne Marsh, Robert Wilson and Scott Schmitt stepped up to the podium Tuesday night to express their concerns.
Denbow reiterated her opposition to a data center in Brantley County, presenting a petition with 1,310 signatures. She pushed commissioners to consider installing suicide barriers for the Sidney Lanier Bridge.
“Just saying no doesn’t work anymore,” Dunegan stressed, citing several states who have allowed data centers in despite public outrage. “Saline Township, Michigan, said no, their zoning was leveraged. Box Elder (County in Utah) said no, commissioners bypassed. Pulaski County (Arkansas) said no … they added a special exemption in there, so they still got a data center.” He expressed concerns over noise, water, air and soil pollution, as well as Brantley County’s infrastructural inability to combat any natural disaster that should befall a facility of this size.
Fulk used her time to remind the board of their duty to protect the interests of their constituents. She also claimed Brantley County’s proposed 202731 Comprehensive Plan insinuated commissioners would be moving forward with the proposal to have an addition to the land use ordinance The Brantley Beacon received a copy of the 25page draft of the proposed addition (Data Center) to Section 4-1.2 of the Brantley County Land Use Ordinance Saturday, May 23, according to Publisher Rick Head. He is currently reading over the addition to the ordinance.
Thomas again urged the board to set its sights on the Lord and to be transparent with the public.
“All eyes are on Brantley County,” said Tomanek. “I’m not even talking just Florida, or our surrounding neighbor counties. I’ve heard from people in Illinois that their eyes are on Brantley County.”
“We (the citizens of Brantley County) are (the Board of Commissioners’) employers, and I can guarantee you haven’t had this kind of turnout in I don’t know, maybe ever. … Brantley County Inc., we’re all equal owners in this company. And when you have a crowd like this that shows up month after month to let you know how we feel, and we get total disregard … not answering open records requests … this is not how I would expect my employees to act.”
Duncan said he would like to see Georgia’s Appendix Q on tiny homes adopted in Brantley, in light of housing destruction from recent wildfires. “(Appendix Q) needs to be voted in for people that have very little, especially now — with these fires — to be able to build. If we don’t do it now, we need to do it within the one year that you’ve given them to get their stuff together, which is really too short a time.”
Duncan also made comments on a hypothetical data center coming into the county.
“When you talk about the difference between light industrial and industrial (M1 and M2),” he stated, “light industrial means you don’t have the noise all night long, you have it early in the morning, no smells, no contaminations of that sort.”
County Manager Joey Cason responded the land is, in fact, currently under light industrial, as it has been since before he took office.
“How could it be light industrial if we’re also talking about it becoming a landfill?” asked Duncan. “(A landfill) would be in category M2 — it would smell. So let’s look into that and see if that’s the way we get around this whole data center and the dump.”
Wainright relayed a detailed account of the Board’s communications in recent months in response to an allegedly denied open records request.
“To act like you have no avenue to respond to the public is unacceptable,” she said. “This board can choose to protect the public’s rights, or you can choose to violate the rights ... which is it?”
Satilla Waterkeeper Shannon Gregory came to report on the state of the river after recent fires and extreme weather. She reported littering remains a prevalent issue.
“They always say that the solution to pollution is dilution, right?,” Gregory said. “But unfortunately, we don’t have water in our river to help dilute any pollutants that are entering the water right now.”
In addition to trash, Gregory said locals are contributing to the sickly state of the Satilla.
“Permanent campers and weekend recreationists will literally defecate into a bucket and toss it into the river,” said Gregory. “When we have no water in the river, that presents a problem. So, yes, the E coli levels are going through the roof.
“We’ve got people riding up and down the river constantly, destroying the bluegill fish beds … riding up and down the river, doing wheelies, mud bogging. All that fun stuff is illegal, and that’s an enforcement issue.”
Gregory stated PFAS — forever chemicals usually found in industrial waste — have also recently become a concern.
“We don’t have a lot of industry that’s discharging into the river, which is wonderful,” she said. “But imagine my surprise when I looked at those results testing for PFAS for the first time last month, and I found them here in Brantley County.
“In Ware County, there was only one PFAS chemical detected, whereas in Brantley County, at one site seven were detected, at another site eight were detected.”
She speculated the 32,000 gallons of fire retardant dropped over wildfires could have something to do with this unc haracteristic contamination and asked commissioners to look into the chemicals used.
Gregory also wanted to clear up rumors claiming she has been working closely with the county to develop a data center ordinance.
“Somehow (my involvement) got misconstrued to where now I have the public accusing me of bringing in data centers to Brantley County,” stated Gregory. “I can’t tell you how many threats and ugly phone calls I’ve received. I did submit my comments on that (ordinance) draft on March 2, and that’s the last we had really spoken about data centers.
“I did speak out at the April 7 meeting in regards to data centers, but that’s it. That’s the extent of it.”
Other topics discussed Tuesday night included removal of RV and tiny home restrictions (Flanders and Marsh), and other community concerns (Wilson and Schmitt).
Darrell Collier and Mathew McGrath were also on the agenda for public participation, but were unable to attend.
