The citizen's group The Coalition to Protect Prince William County has launched an attempt to delay the public hearing on the Prince William Digital Gateway rezoning.
Chap Petersen, Esq. of Chap Petersen & Associates sent a letter to Chair Ann Wheeler-D of Prince William Board of County Supervisors, today, that argues the county must postpone the rezoning due to an error it made in advertising.
The Prince William Digital Gateway is an extremely controversial land-use application. It would rezone 2,133 acres of environment conservation/estate land near the Manassas National Battlefield; the rezoning would make way for 37 data center buildings on three campuses.
The public hearing rezoning vote is scheduled for Dec. 12, 2023. Coalition members, who oppose data center development, are not backing down.
Petersen, who is also the State Senator representing Va's 37th District, argued county failed to advertise the meeting in the prescribed amount of time, thus violating its ordinance. As such, legally and ethically, the meeting should rescheduled.
The county advertised the rezoning in The Washington Post on Dec. 2, 5 and Dec. 9, but according to County Ordinance Sec. 32-700.60(1) the second advertisement must be posted a minimum of five days before the hearing.
Prince William County Ordinance Sec. 32-700.60(1) states:
Notice of a zoning map amendment or Special Use Permit shall be published once a week for two successive weeks (with no less than six days elapsing between the first and second publication) in a newspaper having general circulation in the County. Notices for both the planning commission and Board of County Supervisors may be published concurrently. Notice shall specify the time and place of the public hearing, which shall be held not less than five days nor more than 21 days after the second advertisement shall have appeared.
Petersen-D copied to Gov. Glenn Youngkin-R, U.S. Sen. Mark Warner-D, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine-D, State Senator-Elect Danica Roem-D, and Congresswoman Jennifer Wexton-D in the official email correspondence.
The county ordinance dictates there needs to be a minimum of five and a maximum of 21 days between the second notice and the public hearing.
The Dec. 5 announcement does not apply, according to Petersen's interpretation, since it occurs within the same week as the first. That leaves the Dec. 9 post, which was published only three days before the scheduled hearing.
The Prince William County ordinance is copied from the state ordinance, and Petersen recognized that the state ordinance was amended in July 2023. The amendment eliminates the verbiage 'five to 21 days.' However, he argues the change does not apply since the rezoning was scheduled before the state code changed.
He contends the problem is that the county ordinance was violated. While the state allowed jurisdictions to amend their codes, Prince William County never did; hence five to 21 days still applies.
Petersen further asserts it is the county’s fault the advertisement did not run on time, not that of the newspaper.
After filing a FOIA, Petersen learned that the county received a proof sheet from the Washington Post, Nov. 20, but there is no proof the draft was then submitted. “Saved ads will not run unless they are scheduled and submitted,” the correspondence from the Washington Post stated.
In contrast, the county clerk received confirmation of the placements of the Dec. 2, 5 and 9 paid notices.
Watch the Press Conference:
Elena Schlossberg, Executive Director of the Coalition to Protect Prince William County, told Bristow Beat that the Coalition is not aware that the notification ran in any other publication.
It is no secret the Coalition is motivated by its desire to defeat the application, and at this time would settle for a postponement.
The public hearing is scheduled during the lame-duck period for the board: after the election, but before board members are sworn into office.
Should the meeting be postponed, it would have to occur in January of 2024, with the first opportunity, Jan. 19. By that time Deshundra Jefferson-D would chair the board. That is likely to affect the outcome, especially as Jefferson campaigned against the digital gateway.
Petersen said the meeting must be deferred lest the county incur the cost of a lawsuit ont to face the possibility that the board's decision be voided.
"[It is not right] to have people wait hours and hours for a meeting that will be invalid. We are calling upon the county board to defer this matter, to publicize it legally, and to legally move to defer the matter to the new county board," Petersen said at the Dec. 10 media conference.
However, deferral creates another problem as applicant QTS requested Wheeler schedule the meeting before the end of the year as that is also a state and county ordinance.
However, due to the magnitude of the case, one year may be insufficient to analyze all aspects of the data center proposal, especially as the planning department has been decimated over the past two years. The application existed before that, but the county needed to first clear the hurdle of getting the rezoning onto the comprehensive plan amendment, which occurred in November of 2022.
Moreover, there have been various renditions of the applications. This led to some confusion during the Planning Commission hearing. The majority of commissioners denied recommending the application in front of them; however, they some said were impressed by the newest updated version.
The planning department did not have time to properly vet those changes before the planning commission hearing but denied the previous version. Postponing the hearing would also allow more time for the planning department to review the subsequent applications if needed.
The Coalition to Protect Prince William County provided evidence of the FOIA report.
Bristow Beat may update the article with more information.
Support Bristow Beat - Donate Today!