The article below explains the thoughts of Virginia leaders and their plan to start uranium mining throughout the state. Look at Virginia's Energy Policy; it includes Nuclear Power and uranium mining. The Virginia Leaders do not care about their people, their care only about their power over MONEY and us!!!! HECK NO, WE WON'T GLOW!!! WRITE ALL LOCAL AND STATE LEADERS AND DEMAND THEM TO BAN URANIUM MINING AND MILLING IN VIRGINIA!!!
By TIM DAVIS/Star-Tribune Editor
Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:36 AM EDT
Pittsylvania County does not have the authority to ban uranium mining, according to a recent opinion by the Virginia attorney general's office.
Late last month, County Administrator Dan Sleeper, acting on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, asked Sen. Robert Hurt to request an attorney general's opinion on whether the county could pass an ordinance banning uranium mining. (well, who is Rob's daddy, well duh, shareholder of the local uranium company!!!)
Hurt contacted the attorney general's office, which referred to a formal opinion issued on Nov. 14, 2008, that says localities cannot enact any law that "nullifies or pre-empts state or federal law." (Well, duh, what about "WE THE PEOPLE, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROTECT OURSELVES AGAINST CORPORATE RAIDS!!!)
To do so without express permission from the General Assembly would be unconstitutional, the opinion states.
The same opinion cast a shadow over so-called "chemical trespass" ordinances, which some localities, including Chatham, were considering for protection against uranium mining.
The idea for a ban on uranium mining was suggested by Karen Maute of Danville, a well-known zoning and environmental advocate.
Other residents opposed to uranium mining also have called for an outright ban.
Supervisors' Legislative Committee met in March to explore tightening the county's zoning ordinance, but tabled a possible ban.
"I think we need to address the issue and look at it closely and not make any hasty decisions one way or the other," said the committee's chairman, Staunton River District Supervisor Marshall Ecker.
The committee also includes Banister District Supervisor William Pritchett and Chatham-Blairs District Supervisor Henry "Hank" Davis Jr.
Davis recently pushed for a stronger resolution from supervisors on uranium mining.
The resolution, adopted unanimously in February, recommends that a state study determine uranium mining will cause "no damage or harm" to the county.
It was sent to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee, which is conducting a comprehensive study on the dangers and benefits of uranium mining. (SENT TO SUB AFTER IT WAS TABLE!!!)
The Coles Hill uranium deposit about six miles northeast of Chatham is one of the largest deposits in the United States.
Even if the Coal and Energy Commission determines uranium mining can be done safely, the General Assembly would have to lift the state's moratorium, which has been in place since 1982.
The board's chairman, Westover District Supervisor Coy Harville, said it's a state issue. (COY, IT IS A LOCAL ISSUE, URANIUM MINING WILL RUIN OUR WATER, AIR AND LAND, LOOK AT CANADA NOW WITH THEIR PROBLEMS WITH URANIUM MINING!!!)
"Right now all we can do is listen," he said. "The state has a moratorium and I respect that. They have more authority than we do." (WIMP!)
According to the attorney general's opinion, "a Virginia locality may not enact an ordinance that diminishes, alters, or eliminates legal rights, particularly where the state or federal government may be said to 'occupy the field," unless given specific authority to do so by the General Assembly or the Congress of the United States."
The four-page opinion was issued at the request of Del. Riley E. Ingram of Hopewell. (ANOTHER PRO URANIUM DUDE!!!)
The attorney general said county and municipal ordinances must be consistent with the laws of the commonwealth.
"Thus, if an entity operates in compliance with state law, a Virginia locality cannot impose a criminal liability on that entity," said the attorney general.
"Likewise, a locality may not prohibit or limit the authority of state or federal agencies to carry out their duties as prescribed by law."
Supervisors could still ban uranium mining, but a ban would likely be overturned in court. (WELL, WE WILL GO DOWN FIGTING TO PROTECT OUR HOMES, AIR AND LAND BECAUSE THE STATE OF VIRGINIA WANTS TO BE THE NEXT NUCLEAR SUPER POWER FOR SOME STRANGE REASON - OLD IDEAS, GIVE GREEN ENERGY A CHANCE, INTSTEAD THE SAME OLD, SAME OLD WAY!!!)
Even if the General Assembly eventually lifts Virginia's moratorium, state and federal laws would govern uranium mining and processing.
Supervisors also would have to rezone the Coles Hill property and Virginia Uranium Inc., which is hoping to mine the deposit, would have to obtain a special-use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Hurt said it appears the attorney general's opinion addresses the county's question on a possible ban on uranium mining. (WHO'S YOUR DADDY, MR. HURT? MAYBE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST???)
However, in a June 3 letter to Sleeper, the senator said, "In the event that you do not believe this opinion fully answers your request , I will be happy to follow up with the attorney general's office." (WELL, DUH, AGAIN, "IT'S WE THE PEOPLE, NOT WE THE CORP!!)
tim.davis@chathamstartribune.com
(434) 432-2791
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/06/10/chatham/news/news51.txt
Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:36 AM EDT
Pittsylvania County does not have the authority to ban uranium mining, according to a recent opinion by the Virginia attorney general's office.
Late last month, County Administrator Dan Sleeper, acting on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, asked Sen. Robert Hurt to request an attorney general's opinion on whether the county could pass an ordinance banning uranium mining. (well, who is Rob's daddy, well duh, shareholder of the local uranium company!!!)
Hurt contacted the attorney general's office, which referred to a formal opinion issued on Nov. 14, 2008, that says localities cannot enact any law that "nullifies or pre-empts state or federal law." (Well, duh, what about "WE THE PEOPLE, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROTECT OURSELVES AGAINST CORPORATE RAIDS!!!)
To do so without express permission from the General Assembly would be unconstitutional, the opinion states.
The same opinion cast a shadow over so-called "chemical trespass" ordinances, which some localities, including Chatham, were considering for protection against uranium mining.
The idea for a ban on uranium mining was suggested by Karen Maute of Danville, a well-known zoning and environmental advocate.
Other residents opposed to uranium mining also have called for an outright ban.
Supervisors' Legislative Committee met in March to explore tightening the county's zoning ordinance, but tabled a possible ban.
"I think we need to address the issue and look at it closely and not make any hasty decisions one way or the other," said the committee's chairman, Staunton River District Supervisor Marshall Ecker.
The committee also includes Banister District Supervisor William Pritchett and Chatham-Blairs District Supervisor Henry "Hank" Davis Jr.
Davis recently pushed for a stronger resolution from supervisors on uranium mining.
The resolution, adopted unanimously in February, recommends that a state study determine uranium mining will cause "no damage or harm" to the county.
It was sent to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee, which is conducting a comprehensive study on the dangers and benefits of uranium mining. (SENT TO SUB AFTER IT WAS TABLE!!!)
The Coles Hill uranium deposit about six miles northeast of Chatham is one of the largest deposits in the United States.
Even if the Coal and Energy Commission determines uranium mining can be done safely, the General Assembly would have to lift the state's moratorium, which has been in place since 1982.
The board's chairman, Westover District Supervisor Coy Harville, said it's a state issue. (COY, IT IS A LOCAL ISSUE, URANIUM MINING WILL RUIN OUR WATER, AIR AND LAND, LOOK AT CANADA NOW WITH THEIR PROBLEMS WITH URANIUM MINING!!!)
"Right now all we can do is listen," he said. "The state has a moratorium and I respect that. They have more authority than we do." (WIMP!)
According to the attorney general's opinion, "a Virginia locality may not enact an ordinance that diminishes, alters, or eliminates legal rights, particularly where the state or federal government may be said to 'occupy the field," unless given specific authority to do so by the General Assembly or the Congress of the United States."
The four-page opinion was issued at the request of Del. Riley E. Ingram of Hopewell. (ANOTHER PRO URANIUM DUDE!!!)
The attorney general said county and municipal ordinances must be consistent with the laws of the commonwealth.
"Thus, if an entity operates in compliance with state law, a Virginia locality cannot impose a criminal liability on that entity," said the attorney general.
"Likewise, a locality may not prohibit or limit the authority of state or federal agencies to carry out their duties as prescribed by law."
Supervisors could still ban uranium mining, but a ban would likely be overturned in court. (WELL, WE WILL GO DOWN FIGTING TO PROTECT OUR HOMES, AIR AND LAND BECAUSE THE STATE OF VIRGINIA WANTS TO BE THE NEXT NUCLEAR SUPER POWER FOR SOME STRANGE REASON - OLD IDEAS, GIVE GREEN ENERGY A CHANCE, INTSTEAD THE SAME OLD, SAME OLD WAY!!!)
Even if the General Assembly eventually lifts Virginia's moratorium, state and federal laws would govern uranium mining and processing.
Supervisors also would have to rezone the Coles Hill property and Virginia Uranium Inc., which is hoping to mine the deposit, would have to obtain a special-use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Hurt said it appears the attorney general's opinion addresses the county's question on a possible ban on uranium mining. (WHO'S YOUR DADDY, MR. HURT? MAYBE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST???)
However, in a June 3 letter to Sleeper, the senator said, "In the event that you do not believe this opinion fully answers your request , I will be happy to follow up with the attorney general's office." (WELL, DUH, AGAIN, "IT'S WE THE PEOPLE, NOT WE THE CORP!!)
tim.davis@chathamstartribune.com
(434) 432-2791
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/06/10/chatham/news/news51.txt
No comments:
Post a Comment