Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transco Ssep topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Davidson County to oppose Transco pipeline expansion, cite safety and water risks
Summary
Dozens of residents urged Davidson County commissioners to oppose the Transco Southeast Supply Enhancement Project (SSEP), citing water-quality, air-pollution, safety and transparency concerns and asking the board to adopt a safety-focused resolution. Commissioners asked staff to draft possible safety language for later consideration.
Dozens of residents told the Davidson County Board of Commissioners on Nov. 24 that the Transco Southeast Supply Enhancement Project threatens local water, air and public safety and that the county should register formal opposition or at least press for stricter safeguards.
At a public-comment segment largely focused on the SSEP, Janine Spadirlo said she attended a Department of Environmental Quality public hearing and was disappointed no county commissioners attended. "You would have heard impassioned pleas from concerned citizens for clean air, clean water, and quality of life," she said. Several speakers accused the company of insufficient outreach and urged the board to act on residents’ safety concerns.
Other residents cited technical and health risks. Crystal Norford, who identified herself as a Clean Water for North Carolina staffer and Welcome resident, warned that proposed dry-ditch open-cut crossings of six streams in the Yadkin River watershed could cause increased sedimentation and turbidity, adding treatment costs and jeopardizing drinking-water supplies. "Cutting multiple open trenches through streams in the same watershed causes cumulative and compounding impacts," she said, and recommended holding Williams/Transco to the highest environmental standards.
Several speakers told the board they feared the county had not received full disclosure about the project. Aden Lorets, an organizer who said he worked with neighboring counties, described campaigns in other counties that produced resolutions and alleged that Williams used coordinated email campaigns to influence county deliberations. "Williams' company admitted to astroturfing," Lorets said, and urged Davidson County to consider similar safeguards.
Board members acknowledged receipt of resolutions from nearby municipalities and counties and told speakers the board would have staff prepare language focused on safety. The chair said staff would draft a safety-focused resolution for commissioners and county attorneys to review at a future meeting.
What happened next: the board did not adopt a formal opposition resolution that night. Instead, commissioners instructed staff to draft potential language centered on safety and to return the draft at a later meeting. The county’s ultimate stance will depend on that future review.
Why it matters: Citizens and advocacy groups told commissioners that the pipeline expansion could carry long-term environmental and public-health consequences for Davidson County and the Piedmont corridor, and they asked local officials to use the county’s platform to press for stricter oversight and transparency.
The board’s next step is for staff and legal counsel to prepare a safety-focused draft resolution for commissioners’ consideration at a future meeting.
