Chambersburg Area SD board authorizes petition to intervene in TransSource PUC proceeding after public outcry

The Chambersburg Area School District Board of Directors voted 7–1 on June 23 to authorize district administration to file a petition to intervene in the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission matter concerning the TransSource Pennsylvania LLC application, a move administration described as a due-diligence step that will give the district a seat at the table as the PUC considers siting and construction issues.

The motion, which the board discussed at length, was introduced by Mrs. Gogler and seconded; the roll-call result was yes from Doctor Dillard, Mrs. Gogler, Miss Gauss, Mr. Haydup, Mr. McKee, Mr. Piper and Mr. Raber; Chair Norcross voted no. Superintendent Bigger said the administration only received notice on June 8 and recommended prompt action so the district can remain informed as more information becomes available.

The petition authorizes the district to file a statement with the PUC that represents concerns about potential impacts to the district’s properties and student population. "We are certainly a novice in this topic and we need to continue to be educated," Superintendent Bigger said, describing the filing as a way for the district "to remain informed and involved as additional information becomes available."

Public comment before the vote was overwhelmingly opposed to the TransSource plan. Laurie Rice, president of the Coalition to Protect Franklin County, told the board that TransSource "does not have a certificate of public convenience" in Pennsylvania and warned that proposed towers could reach 135 feet and require wide, permanent rights-of-way that would affect school lands and farmland near Falling Spring Elementary.

Several parents and residents cited health and safety concerns tied to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) near schools. "Children are considered a particularly vulnerable population," Eloisa Rice said, urging the board to choose reasonable alternatives if they exist. Retired teacher Michelle Henninger cited studies she said showed higher leukemia rates near power lines and called the TransSource facilities "not regular power lines." Other speakers argued the project represents a cost shift that would raise local utility bills to subsidize transmission benefits to other states.

Board members debated the legal and practical meaning of intervening. One board member summarized, "To intervene means we have a seat at the table to share our concerns; it is not the same as approving the project." Several directors said they wanted clearer wording in the authorization to avoid the appearance that the district is allied with any particular private interests; administration and the district solicitor provided language intended to make the petition limited to representing district interests in relation to the district’s schools.

The board did not commit to any specific funding or levels of participation beyond filing the petition and obtaining representation; members asked administration to track any legal costs that result and to report back. Chair Norcross, the lone dissenting vote, said he had concerns about authorizing action without fuller clarity on the timing and implications.

Next steps: administration will work with the district solicitor to finalize and file the petition with the PUC and will return to the board with updates on the extent of participation and any legal or financial commitments associated with the intervention.