Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Valley Link topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Buckingham supervisors and residents publicly oppose proposed Valley Link transmission line
Summary
Board members and about a dozen residents urged the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors to oppose the proposed Valley Link transmission line, citing eminent domain concerns, property-value losses, and environmental and health risks; the Board scheduled a special meeting and reconvened session for continued public comment.
Joe N. Chambers, Jr., chairman of the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors, and a majority of the board announced they oppose the proposed Valley Link transmission project and will reconvene for additional public comment. Supervisor Paul W. Garrett told the board the county will hold a special meeting on Thursday at 5 p.m. to take public comment specifically on Valley Link, and the board recessed April 20 so it can reconvene on April 23 at 5:00 p.m. to continue consideration of the project.
Why it matters: Residents and supervisors described the Valley Link proposal as a regional transmission route that would primarily serve large-scale data centers, not local electricity needs, and warned that easements, towers and rights-of-way would permanently change farmland, historic sites and neighborhood landscapes. Several speakers said the project could lead to eminent-domain takings and long-term declines in property values.
At the meeting, supervisors from several districts voiced explicit opposition before the public comment period. "I stand by those citizens and formally oppose the Valley Link project in Buckingham County," Supervisor Paul Garrett said. Supervisor Michael E. Palmore and others expressed similar opposition, and Vice-Chairman L. Cameron Gilliam said he could not "stand beside it at any means." Chairman Chambers said the board would work to protect citizens, citing concerns for churches and historic graveyards.
During public comment, residents detailed the anticipated local impacts. Santoshi Young, a mother of two, said, "The Valley Link Transmission Line is being presented as something for the public good, but in our hearts, we know this is not for our community. This is about powering data centers and maximizing profits for billionaire corporations while asking families like mine to carry the cost." Don Ferrell said the proposed route would pass within 400 yards of his property and criticized the project's outreach as "tables with propaganda posters and maps" rather than meaningful engagement. Barbara Wheeler described the line’s engineering, saying the proposal calls for 765-kilovolt towers roughly the height of a 15-story building and 200-foot easements that would be highly intrusive to the county’s rural character.
Several residents urged coordinated legal and intergovernmental action. Speakers cited precedents, including a 1992 transmission proposal that was blocked after county resolutions and legal intervention. Brother Maximilian Watner urged the board to press the State Corporation Commission (SCC) and coordinate with neighboring counties, noting a pending substation approval in Orange County could be decisive.
What the board did: The board publicly recorded its opposition during announcements and scheduled a special meeting for public comment; Chairman Chambers recessed the meeting with a plan to reconvene on April 23, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. for continued Valley Link discussion.
What’s next: The Board of Supervisors will hold the advertised special meeting(s) for further public comment and may consider formal resolutions and legal options ahead of proceedings at the State Corporation Commission. Residents said they plan further advocacy; the county’s next steps include the April 23 reconvened session.
Attribution: Quotations and attributions are drawn from the April 20, 2026 Buckingham County Board of Supervisors meeting transcript. All speakers are identified by name or district where they self-identified.
