By Heather Michon, Editor
A town hall meeting hosted by Rivanna District Supervisor Tony O’Brien and Palmyra District Supervisor Tim Hodge drew a large and sometimes contentious crowd on Mar. 12, as residents pressed county leaders on rising Aqua water rates, the proposed Tenaska natural gas power plant, and the county’s long-term infrastructure plans.
The meeting was intended as an informal opportunity for residents to ask questions about several issues facing Fluvanna County, including the upcoming budget process and major development proposals.
But much of the discussion centered on two topics that have dominated local debate in recent months: escalating infrastructure needs and the controversial Tenaska project.
“We’re going to talk a little bit about the current state of the budget, talk about Aqua, talk about Tenaska, and invite you to ask questions,” O’Brien said at the start of the meeting.
Aqua rate increases
Many residents raised concerns about steep increases in water bills, particularly at Lake Monticello, where Aqua Virginia operates the community’s water and sewer systems.
O’Brien said the utility has imposed two rate increases of roughly 30 percent within about a year and a half.
“Aqua is, in my opinion, a predatory company,” O’Brien said. “They have put out a 30% rate increase a year and a half ago. They put out another 30% rate increase just recently.”
The supervisor contrasted those increases with typical rate adjustments elsewhere in Virginia, which he said generally range between 3-5%. Some Lake Monticello residents, he added, are now facing water bills of $250 to $400 per month.
O’Brien said local officials have been working with state legislators to address the issue. Three bills related to water utility regulation were introduced in the General Assembly this year. One of them, HB 422, would require utilities to wait three years between rate increases. The bill passed, but includes a reenactment clause requiring lawmakers to approve it again next year.
O’Brien encouraged residents to contact state lawmakers and the governor in support of additional reforms.
Expanding county water system
Supervisors also discussed long-term plans to expand the county’s own water infrastructure, which they said could eventually reduce Aqua’s influence in the region.
The county has already invested in the James River Water Authority project, which is expected to provide water to the Zion Crossroads area beginning in 2027. Additional plans include extending water service to Fork Union and potentially interconnecting water systems throughout the county.
“We can affect their top line,” Hodge said, referring to Aqua’s revenue. “If we don’t let them add new customers to their system, they don’t have an increasing revenue source.”
Hodge said expanding public water infrastructure could also help support economic development, since businesses require reliable water and sewer service.
Tenaska project sparks debate
The proposed Tenaska natural gas power plant generated some of the most heated exchanges of the evening, with residents raising concerns about air quality, health impacts, and whether the county had conducted sufficient independent analysis of the project.
One resident questioned why the county had not commissioned its own environmental study to evaluate the combined impact of the proposed facility and the existing power plant.
“To my knowledge, there has not been an independent study,” O’Brien said, noting that the project would ultimately be regulated by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Some residents said relying solely on regulatory oversight was not enough.
“I want my supervisors to be bulldogs for us,” said Sharon Harris of Fluvanna Horizons Alliance said during the exchange. “I want you to ask the hard questions. I want you to go over and above what you think is the minimum to vet this project.”
Supervisors emphasized that state and federal environmental standards would apply to the project and that emissions would remain well below federal limits for fine particulate pollution.
At several points during the discussion, officials attempted to broaden the conversation to include other county priorities.
“I think it only fair that we don’t let Tenaska suck the air out of the room,” Hodge said, noting that the Board of Supervisors must also address other issues facing the county, including infrastructure and emergency services funding.
Supporters of the project have argued that the facility could generate substantial revenue for Fluvanna County, with O’Brien estimating the plant could produce roughly $250 million in tax revenue over its lifetime.
Opponents, however, said the potential economic benefits must be weighed against environmental concerns and the long-term impact on the community.
Questions about oversight and conflicts
The meeting also included questions about the regional electricity market, environmental studies, and potential conflicts of interest.
Resident Tracey Smith asked about a property owned by O’Brien that could potentially qualify for payments under Tenaska’s proposed “Good Neighbor Fund.”
O’Brien said the parcel has been excluded from the program and that the property is disclosed in his annual financial disclosure filings.
“I am not taking any money from it,” he said.
Budget and infrastructure concerns
Beyond utilities and the power plant proposal, the meeting also touched on broader county spending priorities.
Supervisors discussed the possibility of building a new county administrative complex near the sheriff’s office, a project that could cost tens of millions of dollars if it moves forward. The current budget proposal includes about $3.5 million for preliminary engineering work.
Residents also raised questions about school facilities, property reassessments, and the rising cost of county services.
Supervisors said many of those costs are driven by employee salaries and benefits, which account for the majority of the county’s operating budget.
Continuing debate
Throughout the meeting, residents expressed sharply differing views on the issues facing the county, particularly the Tenaska project.
O’Brien emphasized that the Board of Supervisors, which was scheduled to vote on the project’s special use permits on Mar. 18, had not yet made a final decision.
“The board will make its decision,” he said. “The will of the board may be no. The will of the board may be yes.”
