Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Industrial Siting Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge York County Council to halt Silfab Solar permits, citing health and zoning concerns
Summary
Multiple Fort Mill residents, teachers and public-health researchers urged York County Council during public forum to order a cease-and-desist and revoke permits for Silfab Solar’s facility near schools and neighborhoods, citing zoning board decisions and an independent health risk assessment.
Dozens of Fort Mill residents urged York County Council on May 5 to revoke permits and halt operations at Silfab Solar’s manufacturing site near Flint Hill-area schools and neighborhoods, saying the facility is incompatible with its light-industrial location and poses a potential public-health risk.
The complaints came during the council’s public forum, where several speakers cited a Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) ruling, an independent health-risk assessment and local ordinance provisions as grounds to stop Silfab’s activity. “Silence is not neutrality,” Norbert de Kletta told the council, adding that residents repeatedly have followed the county’s public comment rules but seen no effective response.
Why it matters: Speakers said the facility sits close to school campuses and residential areas and that worst-case chemical-dispersion modeling shows a broad area of potential exposure. They asked the council to use its authority to ensure zoning rules and public-safety standards apply to all applicants and to pursue a formal remedy if permits were issued in error.
What speakers said - Brandon Gant, who said his son is zoned for nearby Flint Hill schools, said he and his family are considering moving if the plant remains. “I plead with each and every one of you … to take action,” he told the council. - Brandon Langford, representing Concerned Citizens of Fort Mill, said the Arnold School of Public Health at the University of South Carolina provided a health-risk assessment showing “endpoint toxicity radii” for four chemicals and asserted more than 53,000 residents fall within modeled impact zones. Langford asked the council to issue a cease-and-desist and revoke Silfab’s permits, citing a South Carolina statute that requires permits comply with zoning decisions. - Teachers and school staff who spoke said they were frightened at the prospect of schools opening adjacent to an active manufacturing site that uses hazardous chemicals. One teacher asked why the school district had not fought the project more forcefully.
Legal and procedural references Speakers cited a May 9, 2024 Board of Zoning Appeals decision and invoked state zoning law during remarks. Several referenced an email that allegedly showed library-board appointments were politically motivated; other commenters referenced the American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina in a separate library discussion earlier in the meeting.
County response and next steps Council members did not take an immediate vote on the requests during public forum. Several members said the concerns raised were serious and asked staff for additional documentation and legal review. Councilor comments and questions during the rest of the meeting indicated management would provide follow-up materials and that the issue could be placed on a future agenda.
What the record shows Speakers repeatedly asked for immediate remedies — including permit revocation — and cited the BZA ruling, a university health-risk assessment and local zoning provisions. Council members acknowledged receipt of the materials and asked county staff to return with further information and options.
Ending: The council did not vote on either a cease-and-desist order or permit revocation at the May 5 meeting; residents who addressed the body said they would return if the council did not act.
