Duane Nichols, Marge Batton (Ft. Martin Community), Betsy Lawson and I, had a one-hour work session Wednesday, August 5th, with the three commissioners, Ed Hawkins, Tom Bloom and Sean Sikora. Duane is getting a copy of the video recording so we can get the specific words down, but here are some of my notes.

1) The Mon County Commission (MCC) has not had communications with Longview for several months, and the PILOT Agreement (Bloom calls it a PILT) has not been a priority for MCC, as they deal with the COVID-19 crisis. They were aware that Longview has emerged from bankruptcy, but the status of air permits or the Longview I greenhouse gas permit appeared to be news to them.

2) The PILOT will not be made public until a final negotiated document is presented to the Commission. Public comment may be considered then, but they do not currently plan any extended public comment period, it would be handled the same as any other contract before the MCC.

3) The MCC acknowledged concerns about the traffic and road conditions affecting residents on Fort Martin road, and had taken a site visit last year. But

I think their real attitude was expressed when Hawkins said "That's the DOH" (as in it is DOH's responsibility) and a couple indicated that "There are lots of bad roads in Mon County". They (at least Sikora) were aware of the PSC Order that Longview should use the northern route where feasible, but did not seem to recognize that they could or should make that a mandate in the PILOT.

4) Preservation of the old Fort Martin school was discussed, but the MCC had taken over several old schools in the past and does not see a need for another museum or community center because the upkeep of those buildings is a significant budget strain.

5) Duane raised an issue of the excessive steam plumes in the neighborhood as well as GHG from three power plants in one community, but it did not really get a response from MCC.

6) When asked about climate change and carbon capture, MCC indicated that CCS is "not in our jurisdiction" and did not seem inclined to make it an issue for the PILOT. We came back to the greenhouse gas issues repeatedly, but it just was not getting through to MCC that they could or should consider it as a condition in the PILOT.

7) They do not like to think of the PILOT as a "tax break", as the current taxes on the land is only a few thousand dollars a year, and the PILOT would generate ~$3 million. But they were willing to acknowledge that the property taxes would be significantly higher without the PILOT.

8) They also do not see any tie between a PILOT for Longview II, versus the PILOT for Longview I, the need for Longview I, or the jobs there. I think Hawkins is resigned to the early closure of Longview I, and he went into a long description of the number of dairy farms in Mon County (which is now down to one, soon to be none), implying that those changes in the economy are inevitable and out of their hands. They do not seem to recognize the relevance of the low market demand for electricity, versus their policy decisions and the role of government tax breaks in driving those economic decisions.

9) They did not seem to respond to the idea that the PILOT statute may be unconstitutional. But they were aware of the change in the school funding formula, as it cost Mon County Schools ~$930,000 per year. They did not describe any alternative approaches, and we did not really get a chance to press them on their ideas (While I am sure they would like to capture the PILOT money AND keep their school funding from the state too, I don't know any mechanism to do that. We may need a tax expert if they try something other than a PILOT).

10) Betsy raised the concern about the noise, dust, pollution and trucks associated with fracking wells in her end of the county, but that did not seem to phase MCC.

Two new points that I learned:

11) The MCC does expect that the PILOT for Longview II will be distinct from the solar farm (Longview III, AKA Longview Renewable Energy). While the total dollar amount is fixed, those two will be separate in a PILOT. We had proposed this a year ago, but they seemed surprised when I thanked them for it. I expressed our concern that we need to phase out of fossil fuels and a gas-fired plant cannot be expected to pay off, whereas demand for solar is increasing and costs keep coming down, so it is a better long-term decision. They repeated the concern that solar is too expensive, and Bloom promised to send me his economic data demonstrating that.

12) The current proposal has a "5-year financing limit". I inferred this to mean that a PILOT expires if Longview does not get financing within five years, but Duane interpreted it that Longview has financing, which expires in five years. We need to get clarification, and probably cannot until a PILOT is made public.

Conclusions:

13) Tom Bloom clearly stated that a PILOT is in the best interest of Mon County, and he supports it. Hawkins also appeared to support a PILOT, but did not state it clearly, and tended to wander off into tangents that distracted from the main issue. Sikora seemed open minded and willing to consider new ideas, but is not clearly on our side.

Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Sierra Club