Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Affairs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise notice, water and utility concerns as annexation, data center rumors surface
Summary
Multiple residents used public comment at the Oct. 2 Warrenton City Planning and Zoning meeting to say they had not received mailed notice or seen on-site postings for a recent annexation and rezoning and to raise concerns about water wells, public-safety capacity and site certification for large industrial users.
Several Warrenton City residents used the commissionpublic comment period on Oct. 2 to press city and county officials for more information about a recently annexed parcel and talk about a possible data center or other large industrial end user.
Cheryl Roberts Long Hibbler, who said her property borders the annexed tract, told the commission she and several neighbors did not receive mailed notice of the annexation or rezoning and that she did not see a posted notice on the property before the hearing. "According to Warren County statues and most importantly state statues, there should have been a certified letter sent to all adjoining property owners within a thousand feet of that parcel of land," she said, adding that she and neighbors were not notified and that the change "has all been done very quietly." Hibbler said she is "totally against the data center that is being talked about" and expressed concerns about impacts to wells, emergency services and rural lifestyles.
Anna Farrar asked the commission whether the parcel is listed as a candidate on AccessSTL West, who sponsored any site-certification application, and whether planning and zoning had been involved in communications with the Greater Warren County Economic Development Council or Ameren. Farrar referenced regional transmission planning by MISO and asked whether pre-development agreements or retainer contracts exist related to the parcel; she said answers would help clarify whether the community is "locked in" to a particular end user or option.
Another resident, Jessica Sutton, raised questions about the aquifer and the water table and said she wanted more specific answers from staff. Several speakers asked that officials visit properties and speak directly with adjoining landowners before moving forward on decisions they said could significantly change rural properties.
What staff said: Planning staff listened during the public-comment portion. Commissioners acknowledged the speakers and said staff would take the comments into consideration; no formal action on annexation, rezoning or utility extensions occurred during this meeting.
Why it matters: The comments reflect local concern about notice procedures, transparency and the scope of city involvement when private developers pursue site certification or industrial uses that could require substantial utility extensions. Several speakers linked utility and transmission planning to the possibility of a large electricity load at the site.
Speakers quoted in this article are recorded in the Oct. 2 meeting transcript and are attributed as they spoke during the public-comment period.
