Public hearing set for today on amended solar ordinance in Tazewell County
The public hearing stems from a proposed solar energy project in the Southern District of Tazewell County. Today's public hearing is scheduled for 6:45 p.m. before the county Board of Supervisors and will be held at the Tazewell County Administration Building located at 197 Main St., Tazewell.
The supervisors passed an ordinance last year pertaining to solar energy facilities in the county.
That ordinance requires that potential large-scale solar energy facility operators provide to the board and the Tazewell County Planning Commission a list of 21 specific documents prior to approval of any large-scale solar energy facility. The amended ordinance also requires Material Safety Data Sheets and Product Safety Data Sheets concerning any potential exposure to hazardous chemicals, according to a legal advertisement that appeared in the May 30 edition of the Daily Telegraph.
Tazewell County Administrator Eric Young said the amended solar energy facilities ordinance was initiated by the county's planning commission.
'What this would do would simply require the company that was installing the solar panels to provide a data sheet containing the component and chemical composition of the components,' Young said.
Young said the amended ordinance is in response to potential environmental concerns associated with the proposed project.
The solar energy project is planned at a site not far from the Cavitt's Creek Recreation Area, which is also near the municipal limits of the town of Tazewell.
The solar energy project is still in the planning stages and the developer has not yet applied for a building permit, according to Young.
As currently proposed, the project would generate almost a quarter of a million dollars a year in annual tax revenue for Tazewell County. At least one full-time job would also be created to oversee and make sure the solar panels are functioning correctly.
'It's actually two separate projects that will be done in stages over the years,' Young said. 'The tax revenue would be about $240,000 a year for us, which would be significant.'
Contact Charles Owens at
cowens@bdtonline.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Woman Upset After Mom Secretly Makes Changes to Apartment While She's Away on Vacation
She asked her mom to only wash the curtains, but returned to find multiple unapproved changes NEED TO KNOW A woman's mother promised to only wash the curtains while she was away, but made several other changes without asking The family repainted, moved furniture, and attempted repairs the woman had planned to do later She asked Reddit if she was wrong to feel hurt over what she sees as a breach of trust A young woman seeks support from the Reddit community following an emotional dispute with her family over home renovations done without her permission. In her post, the 25-year-old explains that she and her fiancé live in an apartment owned by her mother, and while it has 'its problems,' they love it and consider it in 'good condition.' Shortly after moving in, they went on a family vacation with her fiancé's parents, and her mother entered their home and cleaned it without telling them. 'We felt very uncomfortable,' she writes, adding that it felt like 'a breach of privacy' and that it made her feel her efforts to make the space theirs were 'not enough.' The young woman says she spoke to her mother after that incident, expressing gratitude but also setting a clear boundary. 'I told my mum that while we were thankful for the help, please don't do it again because we are not comfortable.' This year, she says, there seemed to be progress in respecting her boundaries when her mother approached her before their trip. 'My mum asked me if she can wash our curtains while we are away… since I need help with that anyway I said yes and decided to trust her.' However, when they returned from vacation, it became clear that more had been done than they had agreed on. 'It was obvious more things changed than what we know about,' she writes, describing duct tape covering damaged furniture, a ripped rug, and rearranged belongings. She points out that the bathroom cabinet seemed to have been broken off from one of the places it was attached to the wall. There was also a fresh paint job on the bathroom ceiling and toilet wall, which concerned her because she knew 'a simple paintjob won't fix it' given the existing issues from a previous renovation. The young woman stresses that she understands her family wanted to help, but says these were repairs she had intentionally delayed. 'I would rather wait for a good job that needs to be done once than fix it over and over again,' she explains, noting that her fiancé's father had done 'an amazing job in the kitchen' and she was willing to be patient for similar quality. When she asked her mother why these changes were made without discussion, the conversation turned tense. 'They could tell we were upset but they did not know that my silence and short answers was because I was trying not to cry,' she shares. She insists she was not trying to be ungrateful but was looking for understanding. 'It is not about the help but the trust… their trust in me to being able to do things, to be on their level,' she says. Instead, she says her mother and grandmother seemed to take her question as a personal attack. 'They basically sent me away, clearly thinking that my fiancé was turning me against them,' she writes. The emotional core of her frustration lies in feeling excluded from decisions about her own living space. 'Them not including us,' she says simply, capturing the heart of the dispute before asking if she was in the wrong. In the thread, one commenter asked if she has a written agreement about living in her mother's flat or if she pays rent. They pointed out that without such an agreement, her mother 'has every right to feel concerned about the loss of value' during the time she lives there, while also noting it's 'not ok that she doesn't communicate openly about it.' In response, the young woman revealed that they only have a spoken agreement. 'We wanted to pay rent but they said it was for us… if we ever wanted to have our own place,' she explains, adding that the only condition was to pay the bills, which she and her fiancé split between them. She also says that repairs have been done in the past with family involvement. 'We did repairs in the past together,' she notes, which makes the recent lack of communication even more hurtful. While she acknowledges her family's intentions, she feels that decisions about her home should involve her. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Boston Globe
4 days ago
- Boston Globe
Critics say President Trump's push for fairness in college admissions is leaving out legacy preferences
Advertisement 'It's hard to think of a more flagrant way in which the system is rigged than legacy preferences,' Kahlenberg said. 'Rarely is a system of hereditary privilege so openly practiced without any sense of shame.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up In recent weeks, Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. His administration negotiated settlements with Brown and Columbia universities that included provisions to share admissions data. Last week, Trump issued a call for colleges nationwide to submit data to prove they do not consider race in admissions. Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. Alex Brandon/Associated Press Some are urging Trump to go further. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., applauded the settlement with Brown requiring the university to turn a blind eye toward race — even in application essays. But 'restoring meritocracy warrants more,' said Young, who cosponsored legislation in 2023 aiming to end legacy admissions. Advertisement 'Federally accredited institutions should eliminate ALL preferences grounded in arbitrary circumstances of ancestry that students have no control over, such as legacy status,' Young said on social media. Many selective colleges consider family ties Sometimes called 'affirmative action for the rich,' the practice of legacy admissions remains widespread among elite colleges even as it faces mounting bipartisan opposition. Virginia's Republican governor signed a bill last year barring legacy admissions at public institutions, following similar measures in Colorado, California and elsewhere. Some Republicans in Congress have worked with Democrats on proposals to end it nationwide. Roughly 500 universities consider legacy status when evaluating applicants, including more than half of the nation's 100 most selective U.S. schools, according to 2023 disclosures to the federal government. A few have abandoned the policy, but it remains in place at all eight Ivy League schools. Stanford University said in July it will continue considering legacy status, even after a California law barred it at institutions that receive state financial aid. Stanford opted to withdraw from the state's student financial aid program rather than end the practice. The university said it will replace the funding with internal money — even as it begins layoffs to close a $140 million budget deficit. Stanford officials declined to comment. Last year, as part of a state transparency law, the school reported that about 14% of its new students were relatives of alumni or donors. A push for merit, but no mention of legacy admissions The executive action signed by Trump last week requires universities to turn over more information about students who apply to and are accepted to their campuses. Taxpayers 'deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity' of decisions, his memorandum said, adding that more information is needed to ensure colleges are heeding the Supreme Court's decision. Advertisement A week earlier, the Justice Department issued a memo clarifying what it considers illegal discrimination in admissions. It takes issue not only with overt racial considerations but also 'proxies' for race, including 'geographic targeting' or personal essays asking about obstacles applicants have overcome. Similar language requiring 'merit-based' admissions policies was included in the government's resolutions with Brown and Columbia universities. None of the actions made any mention of legacy admissions. Trump's silence caught the attention of the nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights, which has an open complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard University's use of donor and alumni preferences amounts to illegal racial discrimination. The group's 2023 complaint says the practice overwhelmingly benefits white students. If the Trump administration wants to make admissions a meritocracy, it should start by ending legacy preferences, said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director for the group. 'These deeply unmeritocratic preferences simply reward students based on who their parents are. It's hard to imagine anything more unfair or contrary to basic merit principles,' he said. Few Americans support legacy or donor preferences Colleges defend the practice by saying it builds community and encourages families to become donors. Some backers say it increasingly helps nonwhite students as campuses become more diverse. Then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, urged colleges to rethink legacy preferences in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, saying it expanded 'privilege instead of opportunity.' Some feared it would drive up white enrollment as affirmative action ended. Georgetown University reviewed the policy but kept it in place this year after concluding the pool of legacy applicants had a similar makeup to the wider admissions pool. Advertisement An AP-NORC poll in 2023 found that most Americans have a dim view of legacy and donor preferences, with few saying either should play a strong role in decisions. Universities are required to tell the federal government whether they consider legacy status, but they don't have to divulge how far it tips the scale or how many legacy students they admit. Among the 20 most selective universities that say they employ the practice, none would tell The Associated Press what percentage of their incoming class has a family connection to alumni or donors. Trump's blitz to root out racial preferences has hinged on the argument that it undermines merit. New scrutiny is needed to ensure colleges are following the Supreme Court's order and 'recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists' and other workers, he said in his executive action. That argument sends the message that minority students are 'intellectually suspect until proven otherwise,' said Justin Driver, a Yale law professor with a forthcoming book on affirmative action. He worries Trump's latest actions will intimidate colleges into limiting minority enrollment to avoid raising the suspicion of the government. 'I believe that the United States confronts a lot of problems today,' Driver said. 'Too many Black students on first-rate college campuses is not among them.'
San Francisco Chronicle
4 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
In his push for fairness in college admissions, Trump has been silent on legacy preferences
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump attempts to reshape college admissions, he's promising a new era of fairness, with an emphasis on merit and test scores and a blind eye toward diversity. Yet the Republican president's critics — and some allies — are questioning his silence on admissions policies that give applicants a boost because of their wealth or family ties. While he has pressed colleges to eliminate any possible consideration of a student's race, he has made no mention of legacy admissions, an edge given to the children of alumni, or similar preferences for the relatives of donors. Trump often rails against systems he describes as 'rigged,' but he has overlooked a glaring instance in higher education, said Richard Kahlenberg, a researcher at the Progressive Policy Institute think tank who has written about admissions. 'It's hard to think of a more flagrant way in which the system is rigged than legacy preferences,' Kahlenberg said. 'Rarely is a system of hereditary privilege so openly practiced without any sense of shame.' In recent weeks, Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. His administration negotiated settlements with Brown and Columbia universities that included provisions to share admissions data. Last week, Trump issued a call for colleges nationwide to submit data to prove they do not consider race in admissions. Some are urging Trump to go further. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., applauded the settlement with Brown requiring the university to turn a blind eye toward race — even in application essays. But 'restoring meritocracy warrants more,' said Young, who cosponsored legislation in 2023 aiming to end legacy admissions. 'Federally accredited institutions should eliminate ALL preferences grounded in arbitrary circumstances of ancestry that students have no control over, such as legacy status,' Young said on social media. Many selective colleges consider family ties Sometimes called 'affirmative action for the rich,' the practice of legacy admissions remains widespread among elite colleges even as it faces mounting bipartisan opposition. Virginia's Republican governor signed a bill last year barring legacy admissions at public institutions, following similar measures in Colorado, California and elsewhere. Some Republicans in Congress have worked with Democrats on proposals to end it nationwide. Roughly 500 universities consider legacy status when evaluating applicants, including more than half of the nation's 100 most selective U.S. schools, according to 2023 disclosures to the federal government. A few have abandoned the policy, but it remains in place at all eight Ivy League schools. Stanford University said in July it will continue considering legacy status, even after a California law barred it at institutions that receive state financial aid. Stanford opted to withdraw from the state's student financial aid program rather than end the practice. The university said it will replace the funding with internal money — even as it begins layoffs to close a $140 million budget deficit. Stanford officials declined to comment. Last year, as part of a state transparency law, the school reported that about 14% of its new students were relatives of alumni or donors. A push for merit, but no mention of legacy admissions The executive action signed by Trump last week requires universities to turn over more information about students who apply to and are accepted to their campuses. Taxpayers 'deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity' of decisions, his memorandum said, adding that more information is needed to ensure colleges are heeding the Supreme Court's decision. A week earlier, the Justice Department issued a memo clarifying what it considers illegal discrimination in admissions. It takes issue not only with overt racial considerations but also 'proxies' for race, including 'geographic targeting' or personal essays asking about obstacles applicants have overcome. Similar language requiring 'merit-based' admissions policies was included in the government's resolutions with Brown and Columbia universities. None of the actions made any mention of legacy admissions. Trump's silence caught the attention of the nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights, which has an open complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard University's use of donor and alumni preferences amounts to illegal racial discrimination. The group's 2023 complaint says the practice overwhelmingly benefits white students. If the Trump administration wants to make admissions a meritocracy, it should start by ending legacy preferences, said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director for the group. 'These deeply unmeritocratic preferences simply reward students based on who their parents are. It's hard to imagine anything more unfair or contrary to basic merit principles,' he said. Few Americans support legacy or donor preferences Colleges defend the practice by saying it builds community and encourages families to become donors. Some backers say it increasingly helps nonwhite students as campuses become more diverse. Then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, urged colleges to rethink legacy preferences in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, saying it expanded 'privilege instead of opportunity.' Some feared it would drive up white enrollment as affirmative action ended. Georgetown University reviewed the policy but kept it in place this year after concluding the pool of legacy applicants had a similar makeup to the wider admissions pool. An AP-NORC poll in 2023 found that most Americans have a dim view of legacy and donor preferences, with few saying either should play a strong role in decisions. Universities are required to tell the federal government whether they consider legacy status, but they don't have to divulge how far it tips the scale or how many legacy students they admit. Among the 20 most selective universities that say they employ the practice, none would tell The Associated Press what percentage of their incoming class has a family connection to alumni or donors. Trump's blitz to root out racial preferences has hinged on the argument that it undermines merit. New scrutiny is needed to ensure colleges are following the Supreme Court's order and 'recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists' and other workers, he said in his executive action. That argument sends the message that minority students are 'intellectually suspect until proven otherwise,' said Justin Driver, a Yale law professor with a forthcoming book on affirmative action. He worries Trump's latest actions will intimidate colleges into limiting minority enrollment to avoid raising the suspicion of the government. 'I believe that the United States confronts a lot of problems today,' Driver said. 'Too many Black students on first-rate college campuses is not among them.'
