Rentech biomass incinerator

Dear Editor:

I was one of the citizens who spoke out in opposition to the Rentech Biomass Incinerator at the recent City Commissioners Meeting. I expressed my concern about the proceedings at the Planning & Development Review Board (PDRB) meeting which was held on Aug. 30.

It became very obvious that the decision to accept or deny the Technical Advisory Committee's recommendation had been made even before the meeting was held. The "findings" sheet had already been typed up and included a statement that the PDRB's recommendation to approve the Development Order be presented to the City Commissioners. Opposition affidavits, petitions for public meetings, letters and exhibits from an environmental lawyer had been either sent to the PDRB or presented at the meeting.

Yes, there was time allocated for input from the public. Yes, several people made comments raising questions or speaking out in opposition. The PDRB members neither asked questions nor made comments. They did not even consider the topics brought up by the citizens.

The words "mockery" and "travesty" come to mind when describing the proceedings at this meeting. Why bother having time allocated for public input if the PDRB will not even address the citizens' comments? Is this democracy at work? I addressed this situation when I spoke at the City Commissioner meeting on Oct. 4. I stated that my fervent hope was that this type of behavior would not be repeated a second time. At the Oct. 4 meeting, more than 24 people spoke regarding the biomass incinerator. The vast majority of these folks spoke in opposition to the approval of the Rentech Development Order. The Commissioners heard the comments, made a few replies, and then voted unanimously to accept the PDRB's recommendation that they approve Rentech's Development Order.

Does the phrase "rubber stamp" come to mind?

Landy Luther

Port St. Joe