1/25 a.m. u-news
Comments from KM: A lot in this one...kinda' going in every direction!
Confirmed on the agenda for House Finance Sub #1 is HB 1804 monday @ 8:30 a.m.
http://leg2.state.va.us/
Language:
| Chief Patron: Herring | ||||
 | ||||
| Central Appropriations | | | | |
| Central Appropriations | | | | Language |
Language:
| Page 435, after line 42, insert: "M. No state funds, regardless of source, shall be expended from this or any item in this act for the regulation, development, or study of regulation of uranium mining, until and unless the General Assembly amends the provisions of § 45.1-283, Code of Virginia, or otherwise provides for a program for the permitting of uranium mining, and only from such funds as specifically appropriated by the General Assembly for this purpose." |
Ruff: Uranium bill should die in Senate
State Sen. Frank Ruff, R-Clarksville, says he expects the uranium mining bill’s travel to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources to be a one-way trip.
The bill in question would lift the moratorium on uranium mining and milling — and it will be up for discussion in next Thursday’s committee meeting.“I think we have the votes to stop it,” Ruff said Thursday.
He added, “I believe we also have the votes in the Senate.”
State Sen. John Watkins, R-Powhatan, and Sen. Richard Saslaw, R-Springfield are co-patrons of Senate Bill 1353, the “Virginia Uranium Development Corporation Act.” The bill directs the state to write regulations for uranium mining and milling.
Virginia Uranium wants to mine a 119-million-pound uranium ore deposit six miles from Chatham. The company has been lobbying the General Assembly to write regulations for uranium mining and milling, a move that would effectively lift the 1982 moratorium on the industry.
Eighty percent of Senate Commerce and Labor Committee members have taken money from Virginia Uranium in the form of campaign contributions and travel to uranium mining sites in France and Canada. Virginia Uranium has spent $54,426 since 2008 on those committee members. In contrast, the majority Senate Agriculture Committee members have not received campaign contributions from Virginia Uranium. Campaign contributions to members of that committee in the last four years total $6,750.
The Senate bill’s companion in the House faces a different climate. House Bill 2330, an identical legislation introduced by Del. Jackson Miller, R-Manassas, is being considered in the House Commerce and Labor Committee.
Del. Don Merricks, R-Pittsylvania County, says he thinks the bill could face a friendlier reception the House committee.
“I think it would pass the Commerce and Labor Committee, but about the full house, I don’t know,” he said.
Sixty-eight percent of House Commerce and Labor Committee members have taken more than $68,000 from Virginia Uranium in the form of campaign contributions and trips.
The Senate Agriculture Committee and the House Commerce and Labor Committee meet at the same time next Thursday.
Del. Danny Marshall, R-Danville, says Commerce and Labor Chair Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City, has agreed to postpone the hearing of H.B. 2330 until the fate of the Senate bill is known. Marshall, Merricks and Del. James Edmunds met with Kilgore to make that request.
Marshall said delegates wanted more time.
“A lot of the delegates are sitting back and seeing what happens in the Senate,” he said.
The bill in question would lift the moratorium on uranium mining and milling — and it will be up for discussion in next Thursday’s committee meeting.“I think we have the votes to stop it,” Ruff said Thursday.
He added, “I believe we also have the votes in the Senate.”
State Sen. John Watkins, R-Powhatan, and Sen. Richard Saslaw, R-Springfield are co-patrons of Senate Bill 1353, the “Virginia Uranium Development Corporation Act.” The bill directs the state to write regulations for uranium mining and milling.
Virginia Uranium wants to mine a 119-million-pound uranium ore deposit six miles from Chatham. The company has been lobbying the General Assembly to write regulations for uranium mining and milling, a move that would effectively lift the 1982 moratorium on the industry.
Eighty percent of Senate Commerce and Labor Committee members have taken money from Virginia Uranium in the form of campaign contributions and travel to uranium mining sites in France and Canada. Virginia Uranium has spent $54,426 since 2008 on those committee members. In contrast, the majority Senate Agriculture Committee members have not received campaign contributions from Virginia Uranium. Campaign contributions to members of that committee in the last four years total $6,750.
The Senate bill’s companion in the House faces a different climate. House Bill 2330, an identical legislation introduced by Del. Jackson Miller, R-Manassas, is being considered in the House Commerce and Labor Committee.
Del. Don Merricks, R-Pittsylvania County, says he thinks the bill could face a friendlier reception the House committee.
“I think it would pass the Commerce and Labor Committee, but about the full house, I don’t know,” he said.
Sixty-eight percent of House Commerce and Labor Committee members have taken more than $68,000 from Virginia Uranium in the form of campaign contributions and trips.
The Senate Agriculture Committee and the House Commerce and Labor Committee meet at the same time next Thursday.
Del. Danny Marshall, R-Danville, says Commerce and Labor Chair Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City, has agreed to postpone the hearing of H.B. 2330 until the fate of the Senate bill is known. Marshall, Merricks and Del. James Edmunds met with Kilgore to make that request.
Marshall said delegates wanted more time.
“A lot of the delegates are sitting back and seeing what happens in the Senate,” he said.
Jackson reports for the Danville Register & Bee.
Comments from KM: In case you forgot...lee ware,.. coal and energy commission, uranium mining "zealot", and other things i will not mention. I do not think agenda 21 has anything to do with this particular issue. uranium mining does.
Scenic river designation sees opposition
January 24, 2013 1:02 PMBy Brennan Long Staff Writer, The Capital News Service
The Virginia Tea Party Patriots Legislative Action Committee opposes legislation that makes state rivers part of the Virginia Scenic River System, a river designation that encourages preservation and protection.
Carol Stopps, the head of the committee, said that projects such as Virginia Scenic River System aim to protect the earth so that people cannot use the land.
“When environmentalists talk about saving the earth, basically takes it away from human use in a lot of cases,” Stopps said. “If you happen to be living there or own property there you lose property value. ”
A scenic river system designation promotes sustaining important river resources and designating a river as scenic does not use any part of the state budget, officials said. To construct a dam in a river that is part of the system requires General Assembly approval.
“Benefits are that it brings a lot more awareness to the inherit resources of the river. It adds for some added protection for that awareness,” said Lynn Crump, environmental programs planner for the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Del. James Edmunds (R-Halifax) presented a bill Wednesday that would make a 38.4-mile section of the Banister River part of the Virginia Scenic River System.
Edmunds’ bill passed the House Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee, and Del. Tony Wilt (R-Harrisonburg) and Del. R. Lee Ware (R-Powhatan) were the only committee members to vote against the bill.
Wilt and Ware also voted against another Virginia Scenic River System bill by Del. Danny Marshall (R-Danville).
Marshall’s bill, making a 15-mile portion of the Dan River a part of the Virginia Scenic River system, passed the House on Monday despite 13 Republican delegates voting against it.
This is the first time that a Virginia Scenic River System bill has been contested in the House, said Edmunds, a co-patron of the bill.
“Some Tea Party enthusiasts see designating highways and rivers as a part of Agenda 21,” Edmunds said.
Agenda 21 is a non-binding set of guidelines to protect the environment that were established at the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit. More than 170 governments, including the United States during the first Bush Administration, ratified Agenda 21.
river bills infringe on personal property rights.
“It’s out of a lack of education,” she said. “There is nothing in this legislation that keeps people from doing what they want with their land or doing what they want with their land in the future.”
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 7:32 pm, Thu Jan 24, 2013. Times-Dispatch
Legislation is now before the General Assembly to remove the ban on mining uranium. I do not believe it is in the best interests of the commonwealth and its citizens to remove the ban.When the costs of mining uranium are weighed against the benefits, the decision is clear.Many proponents of uranium mining allege that a refusal by the assembly to allow mining might somehow be a deprivation of private property rights. This analysis ignores the good neighbors of the Coles property, many of whom have owned family property for hundreds of years.
Arguments relative to energy independence are also unpersuasive. The market for any uranium mined in Virginia is not Virginia, or even the United States, alone. Uranium is like all other commodities — coal, natural gas, oil — and is sold on a global market.
In most cases, uranium is traded through contracts negotiated between a buyer and seller. Pricing can be as simple as a fixed price, or based on various reference prices with economic corrections built in. Nuclear energy producers will purchase uranium at the best price, not because it is produced in a particular location.
I have heard no outcry from the commonwealth’s chief energy suppliers that this bill is either needed or required. Additionally, this is not oil; most of the uranium imported into the United States is provided by two of America’s best allies and trading partners — Canada and Australia — and suggestions of harm to America’s energy independence if uranium is not mined in Virginia is unpersuasive.
The anticipated economic benefits of the proposed mining operation are speculative. The operation of uranium mining is price-dependent. That high demand didn’t last. The decline in the need for uranium at the end of the Cold War, paired with the discovery of a higher grade of uranium in Australia and Canada, created a drop in the price and the closure of mines and mills throughout the United States.
In 2001, there were only three operating mines in the United States. In 2007, with the announcement that Japan, Germany and France would begin phasing out the use of nuclear energy, uranium prices fell precipitously and mines closed. The “Boom to Bust to Boom to Bust” cycle is well-documented in the uranium mining industry, and has shown amazing consistency over the past 25 years.
The economic consequences for the local region in the event of a long-term price-driven production disruption cannot be ignored, particularly when local economic development professionals have openly suggested that the stigma of uranium mining and milling could have a chilling effect on other kinds of business recruitment for the region.
Environmental concerns are not to be ignored. The property in question is within two miles of 250 privately owned artesian wells. The Coles property is drained by Mill Creek, which empties to the Kerr Lake Reservoir, the second largest freshwater reservoir in the United States and supplies water to nearly 1.2 million people.
Finally, there is almost unanimous opposition among my colleagues in the House of Delegates and the Senate who represent the people in southern Virginia to removing the ban on uranium mining. It is revealing that the people who allegedly stand to gain the most economically from lifting the ban have expressed the greatest concern about the financial rewards promised by uranium mining. These leaders have reached the conclusion that supposed economic benefits do not outweigh the health, safety and economic risks that they are being asked to take.
Traditional local businesspeople and organizations in the region — such as the Danville/Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce and the Halifax Chamber of Commerce — have come out in strong opposition to removing the ban on uranium mining. Our state’s chief jobs creation officer, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, has recently announced his belief that the state’s ban on uranium mining and milling must remain in place. Virtually every jurisdiction from Danville to the Atlantic Ocean has enacted a resolution in support of keeping the ban.
As I weigh the costs versus the benefits of uranium mining, I believe the risks of economic speculation, environmental concerns and the adverse affects on local property owners far outweigh the benefits cited by the bill’s proponents. It is my intention to oppose this legislation and I will work in a bipartisan way to defeat the lifting of the ban on uranium mining.
G. Manoli Loupassi represents the 68 th District – the city of Richmond and the counties of Henrico and Chesterfield – in the Virginia House of Delegates. Contact him at delMLoupassi@house.virginia.
Arguments relative to energy independence are also unpersuasive. The market for any uranium mined in Virginia is not Virginia, or even the United States, alone. Uranium is like all other commodities — coal, natural gas, oil — and is sold on a global market.
In most cases, uranium is traded through contracts negotiated between a buyer and seller. Pricing can be as simple as a fixed price, or based on various reference prices with economic corrections built in. Nuclear energy producers will purchase uranium at the best price, not because it is produced in a particular location.
I have heard no outcry from the commonwealth’s chief energy suppliers that this bill is either needed or required. Additionally, this is not oil; most of the uranium imported into the United States is provided by two of America’s best allies and trading partners — Canada and Australia — and suggestions of harm to America’s energy independence if uranium is not mined in Virginia is unpersuasive.
The anticipated economic benefits of the proposed mining operation are speculative. The operation of uranium mining is price-dependent. That high demand didn’t last. The decline in the need for uranium at the end of the Cold War, paired with the discovery of a higher grade of uranium in Australia and Canada, created a drop in the price and the closure of mines and mills throughout the United States.
In 2001, there were only three operating mines in the United States. In 2007, with the announcement that Japan, Germany and France would begin phasing out the use of nuclear energy, uranium prices fell precipitously and mines closed. The “Boom to Bust to Boom to Bust” cycle is well-documented in the uranium mining industry, and has shown amazing consistency over the past 25 years.
The economic consequences for the local region in the event of a long-term price-driven production disruption cannot be ignored, particularly when local economic development professionals have openly suggested that the stigma of uranium mining and milling could have a chilling effect on other kinds of business recruitment for the region.
Environmental concerns are not to be ignored. The property in question is within two miles of 250 privately owned artesian wells. The Coles property is drained by Mill Creek, which empties to the Kerr Lake Reservoir, the second largest freshwater reservoir in the United States and supplies water to nearly 1.2 million people.
Finally, there is almost unanimous opposition among my colleagues in the House of Delegates and the Senate who represent the people in southern Virginia to removing the ban on uranium mining. It is revealing that the people who allegedly stand to gain the most economically from lifting the ban have expressed the greatest concern about the financial rewards promised by uranium mining. These leaders have reached the conclusion that supposed economic benefits do not outweigh the health, safety and economic risks that they are being asked to take.
Traditional local businesspeople and organizations in the region — such as the Danville/Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce and the Halifax Chamber of Commerce — have come out in strong opposition to removing the ban on uranium mining. Our state’s chief jobs creation officer, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, has recently announced his belief that the state’s ban on uranium mining and milling must remain in place. Virtually every jurisdiction from Danville to the Atlantic Ocean has enacted a resolution in support of keeping the ban.
As I weigh the costs versus the benefits of uranium mining, I believe the risks of economic speculation, environmental concerns and the adverse affects on local property owners far outweigh the benefits cited by the bill’s proponents. It is my intention to oppose this legislation and I will work in a bipartisan way to defeat the lifting of the ban on uranium mining.
G. Manoli Loupassi represents the 68 th District – the city of Richmond and the counties of Henrico and Chesterfield – in the Virginia House of Delegates. Contact him at delMLoupassi@house.virginia.
Uranium mining bill hits initial setback
SoVaNow.com / January 24, 2013
The legislative push to lift Virginia’s ban on uranium mining may have suffered a setback this week with the assignment of a Senate bill to the Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources committee, considered hostile to the idea.
Senate Bill 1353, sponsored by pro-uranium Republican Senator John Watkins of Powhatan, aims to establish regulations for the permitting of uranium mining at the Coles Hill site in Pittsylvania County. Watkins had pressed to hear the bill in the Senate Commerce and Labor committee, which he chairs, but instead it will go to the agriculture committee.
Clarksville Senator Frank Ruff, reached yesterday in Richmond, said “we are all delighted that the bill was sent to AG and Natural Resources. We believe that was the proper placement because all mining issues go there. We also believe we have more allies there.”
Ruff counts between eight and 11 members of the Ag and Natural Resources Committee opposed to Watkins’ bill. The committee has 15 members.
The Senate Ag and Natural Resources Committee is chaired by Emmett Hanger (R- Mt. Solon) and includes Republicans Ruff (Clarksville), Harry Blevins (Chesapeake), Mark Obenshain (Harrisonburg), Richard Stuart (Montross), Bill Stanley (Franklin), Richard Black (Leesburg), and Watkins. Democratic members are Phillip Puckett (Tazewell), Donald McEachin (Richmond), J. Chapman Petersen (Fairfax), Ralph Northam (Painter), David Marsden (Burke), John Miller (Newport News), and Adam Ebbin (Alexandria).
As of Wednesday, the bill was not on the schedule for a hearing. The Ag and Natural Resources Committee meets Thursday afternoons, immediately following Senate sessions.
A companion bill in the House of Delegates has been assigned to that chamber’s commerce committee. The House legislation is sponsored by Manassas representative Jackson Miller, acting on behalf of Virginia Uranium, Inc., which wants to mine the Pittsylvania ore deposit, estimated to have a market value of $7 billion.
The House and Senate bills spell out conditions for mining uranium in Pittsylvania, including a requirement that VUI pay both application and annual fees, which would be used to defray the cost of administering any uranium mining program.
The bills’ sponsors note that although Virginia would be establishing a regulatory framework for uranium mining, the decision on whether to permit mining at Coles Hill would rest in local hands.
In a recent op-ed piece for The Richmond Times-Dispatch, Watkins wrote, “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the final authority to approve the Coles Hill project will remain in the hands of the Pittsylvania Board of Supervisors. In other words, the elected leaders of Pittsylvania County, not members of the General Assembly, will have the final say on whether uranium will be mined there. That is as it should be.
On Wednesday, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted 5-1 in support of a resolution asking the General Assembly to keep the ban, and not consider legislation to lift the moratorium, said Andrew Lester, Executive Director of the Roanoke River Basin Association.
Lester said the vote by the governing body of Pittsylvania County sends a clear message: “The only people who are in favor of lifting the ban are those who are going to make money or think they are going to make money on mining. We are very happy with the vote and cautiously optimistic that the legislature will not move forward on lifting the ban.”
Virginia has had a moratorium on uranium mining since 1982.
Even with the recent stance taken by the Pittsylvania Board of Supervisors, Lester said he and supporters of keeping the ban are not standing pat. The next step for opponents is a rally in Richmond on Monday to urge the General Assembly to keep the ban.
On Monday, a busload of opponents from Southside are traveling to Richmond to rally against uranium mining. Anyone interested in joining the rally should contact Sarah Dunavant at 434-572-7329.
Senate Bill 1353, sponsored by pro-uranium Republican Senator John Watkins of Powhatan, aims to establish regulations for the permitting of uranium mining at the Coles Hill site in Pittsylvania County. Watkins had pressed to hear the bill in the Senate Commerce and Labor committee, which he chairs, but instead it will go to the agriculture committee.
Clarksville Senator Frank Ruff, reached yesterday in Richmond, said “we are all delighted that the bill was sent to AG and Natural Resources. We believe that was the proper placement because all mining issues go there. We also believe we have more allies there.”
Ruff counts between eight and 11 members of the Ag and Natural Resources Committee opposed to Watkins’ bill. The committee has 15 members.
The Senate Ag and Natural Resources Committee is chaired by Emmett Hanger (R- Mt. Solon) and includes Republicans Ruff (Clarksville), Harry Blevins (Chesapeake), Mark Obenshain (Harrisonburg), Richard Stuart (Montross), Bill Stanley (Franklin), Richard Black (Leesburg), and Watkins. Democratic members are Phillip Puckett (Tazewell), Donald McEachin (Richmond), J. Chapman Petersen (Fairfax), Ralph Northam (Painter), David Marsden (Burke), John Miller (Newport News), and Adam Ebbin (Alexandria).
As of Wednesday, the bill was not on the schedule for a hearing. The Ag and Natural Resources Committee meets Thursday afternoons, immediately following Senate sessions.
A companion bill in the House of Delegates has been assigned to that chamber’s commerce committee. The House legislation is sponsored by Manassas representative Jackson Miller, acting on behalf of Virginia Uranium, Inc., which wants to mine the Pittsylvania ore deposit, estimated to have a market value of $7 billion.
The House and Senate bills spell out conditions for mining uranium in Pittsylvania, including a requirement that VUI pay both application and annual fees, which would be used to defray the cost of administering any uranium mining program.
The bills’ sponsors note that although Virginia would be establishing a regulatory framework for uranium mining, the decision on whether to permit mining at Coles Hill would rest in local hands.
In a recent op-ed piece for The Richmond Times-Dispatch, Watkins wrote, “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the final authority to approve the Coles Hill project will remain in the hands of the Pittsylvania Board of Supervisors. In other words, the elected leaders of Pittsylvania County, not members of the General Assembly, will have the final say on whether uranium will be mined there. That is as it should be.
On Wednesday, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted 5-1 in support of a resolution asking the General Assembly to keep the ban, and not consider legislation to lift the moratorium, said Andrew Lester, Executive Director of the Roanoke River Basin Association.
Lester said the vote by the governing body of Pittsylvania County sends a clear message: “The only people who are in favor of lifting the ban are those who are going to make money or think they are going to make money on mining. We are very happy with the vote and cautiously optimistic that the legislature will not move forward on lifting the ban.”
Virginia has had a moratorium on uranium mining since 1982.
Even with the recent stance taken by the Pittsylvania Board of Supervisors, Lester said he and supporters of keeping the ban are not standing pat. The next step for opponents is a rally in Richmond on Monday to urge the General Assembly to keep the ban.
On Monday, a busload of opponents from Southside are traveling to Richmond to rally against uranium mining. Anyone interested in joining the rally should contact Sarah Dunavant at 434-572-7329.
Posted: Thursday, January 24, 2013 1:04 pm
To the editor,I am responding to the misinformation published by Coy Harville in the Rich-mond Times-Dispatch on Thursday, Jan. 17, 2013.
In this low opinion of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors I am not alone: it is an opinion also shared by Virginia Uranium Inc.
More than two years ago, I was assured by one of VUI's principals, who understood my very public concerns re-garding the incompetence of our county board, that VUI would make sure that any taxable income from uranium mining would go into a trust, and would not be made avail-able for discretionary spend-ing by the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervi-sors.
Sure enough, the proposals put forward by VUI's lobby-ists, through the two legisla-tors from Powhatan County, include a provision that any tax proceeds from VUI's uranium mining and milling activities must go into a trust, and not into the hands of Pittsylvania County's Board of Supervisors.
Harville may still think uranium money will be coming his way, but if he were truly convinced that citizens of Pittsylvania County are the ones who must answer the "important questions" regarding whether or not to allow uranium mining, as he claimed in his Richmond Times Dispatch piece, Harville would be asking the Virginia legisla-ture to enact Local Option legislation similar to that in Code of Virginia 4.1-121 et seq., ( allowing citizens to vote by referendum).
"Local Option" legislation would take the uranium mining question out of the hands of local politicians and their political cronies ap-pointed to planning commis-sions, and would allow the electorate directly to decide the question of whether or not it wants uranium mining and milling in their locality.
I'm fairly certain that Danville-Pittsylvania Cham-ber of Commerce, in ex-pressing its opposition to uranium mining, reflects the majority of the electorate here in this locality, and in doing so has rejected Harville's bald and incredible assertion that uranium mining and milling is a perfectly safe activity.
Barbara Hudson
Chatham
Free bus trip for opponents of uranium mining
http://www.yourgv.com/index.
We the People of Virginia, Inc. is sponsoring a free bus trip for opponents of uranium mining on Monday, Jan. 28, but they bus will leave earlier than previously announced.
According to Jack Dunavant, chairman of We the People, the bus will leave St. John’s Church parking lot in Halifax at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, Jan. 28, instead of the previously announced 9:30 a.m. because the group needs to be in Richmond earlier.
The bus will return by 5 p.m. the same day.
Dunavant encourages those going on the trip to bring lunch or have money to buy lunch.
“The people need to descend on the Capitol in the hundreds even thousands to send a message to our elected officials to stop uranium mining in Virginia now,” he said. “Our politicians will decide our fate in the next few weeks. They need to know that the people overwhelmingly say no to uranium mining.”
“Please take a day from work to save your property values and your family’s health. Come join us, and let’s take our message to Richmond,” he added.
Also, Dunavant urged opponents of uranium mining to visit www.generalassembly.gov and call or email all the representatives and tell them to keep the moratorium on uranium mining.
“We all can play a part, but we really need you on this trip,” he added.
For more information or to register for the bus ride to Richmond, call 434-476-6648.
As an attorney who has practiced in the Pittsylvania County area for some 20 years, and with ample op-portunity to observe the Pitt-sylvania County Board of Supervisors at work - at board and committee meet-ings and in work sessions - I believe I speak with some authority in asserting that the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors is, has been, and will continue to be, a pervasively dysfunc-tional, embarrassing, self-serving political body inca-pable of competent govern-ance.
More than two years ago, I was assured by one of VUI's principals, who understood my very public concerns re-garding the incompetence of our county board, that VUI would make sure that any taxable income from uranium mining would go into a trust, and would not be made avail-able for discretionary spend-ing by the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervi-sors.
Sure enough, the proposals put forward by VUI's lobby-ists, through the two legisla-tors from Powhatan County, include a provision that any tax proceeds from VUI's uranium mining and milling activities must go into a trust, and not into the hands of Pittsylvania County's Board of Supervisors.
Harville may still think uranium money will be coming his way, but if he were truly convinced that citizens of Pittsylvania County are the ones who must answer the "important questions" regarding whether or not to allow uranium mining, as he claimed in his Richmond Times Dispatch piece, Harville would be asking the Virginia legisla-ture to enact Local Option legislation similar to that in Code of Virginia 4.1-121 et seq., ( allowing citizens to vote by referendum).
"Local Option" legislation would take the uranium mining question out of the hands of local politicians and their political cronies ap-pointed to planning commis-sions, and would allow the electorate directly to decide the question of whether or not it wants uranium mining and milling in their locality.
I'm fairly certain that Danville-Pittsylvania Cham-ber of Commerce, in ex-pressing its opposition to uranium mining, reflects the majority of the electorate here in this locality, and in doing so has rejected Harville's bald and incredible assertion that uranium mining and milling is a perfectly safe activity.
Barbara Hudson
Chatham
Free bus trip for opponents of uranium mining
http://www.yourgv.com/index.
We the People of Virginia, Inc. is sponsoring a free bus trip for opponents of uranium mining on Monday, Jan. 28, but they bus will leave earlier than previously announced.
According to Jack Dunavant, chairman of We the People, the bus will leave St. John’s Church parking lot in Halifax at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, Jan. 28, instead of the previously announced 9:30 a.m. because the group needs to be in Richmond earlier.
The bus will return by 5 p.m. the same day.
Dunavant encourages those going on the trip to bring lunch or have money to buy lunch.
“The people need to descend on the Capitol in the hundreds even thousands to send a message to our elected officials to stop uranium mining in Virginia now,” he said. “Our politicians will decide our fate in the next few weeks. They need to know that the people overwhelmingly say no to uranium mining.”
“Please take a day from work to save your property values and your family’s health. Come join us, and let’s take our message to Richmond,” he added.
Also, Dunavant urged opponents of uranium mining to visit www.generalassembly.gov and call or email all the representatives and tell them to keep the moratorium on uranium mining.
“We all can play a part, but we really need you on this trip,” he added.
For more information or to register for the bus ride to Richmond, call 434-476-6648.
