Contact supervisors to support water studies
When people hear about my proposed Virginia Water Transparency Act, one of the first questions they ask is, “Does it protect the environment?”
The answer is yes, but perhaps not in the way they expect.
This legislation does not create new endangered species protections. It does not rewrite air or water quality laws, regulate noise, or replace Virginia’s existing environmental permitting process. Those laws already exist.
Instead, this bill addresses a different problem: the public’s ability to know what is happening before major decisions involving our public water resources are made.
In Botetourt County, many citizens have spent months trying to obtain public records related to a proposed data center and the associated water infrastructure. Information that should have been readily available often required Freedom of Information Act requests, significant expense, and in some cases litigation before documents were released.
Regardless of where someone stands on the data center itself, I believe most people can agree on one principle: decisions involving public water should be made openly.
Transparency is one of the strongest environmental protections a community can have. Citizens cannot ask informed questions about water availability, environmental impacts, endangered species, wetlands, or infrastructure if they do not know what is being proposed until after decisions have effectively been made.
When information is available early, scientists can evaluate it. Engineers can review it. Property owners can understand it. Conservation groups can weigh in. Local governments can make better-informed decisions. Most importantly, the public has an opportunity to participate before commitments become irreversible.
The Virginia Water Transparency Act is designed to ensure that major commitments involving public water resources cannot be hidden behind non-disclosure agreements or negotiated without meaningful public awareness. It strengthens accountability without creating unnecessary bureaucracy or duplicating existing environmental regulations.
Whether you support or oppose a particular project, transparency benefits everyone. Good decisions are strengthened by public scrutiny. Poor decisions are exposed by it.
Here in Botetourt County, we have an immediate opportunity to put that principle into practice. On July 28, the Board of Supervisors is expected to vote on whether to authorize independent water studies related to the proposed Google data center. I encourage every citizen, regardless of your position on the project itself, to contact your supervisor before that meeting and ask them to support the independent studies. Facts should never be feared. Independent science and due diligence benefit everyone.
Water sustains every person, every farm, every business, and every ecosystem. Data centers can bring investment and innovation, but data itself is not a resource we drink, grow crops with, or leave to future generations.
Water is life. Data is just data.
Chad Bean
Fincastle
Urges supervisors to approve public water forum
As a Botetourt County landowner, I urge the Board of Supervisors to authorize the Planning Commission’s request for a public forum on the water supply implications of the proposed Google data center at the Botetourt Center at Greenfield. The board will consider this request on July 28.
Agreements released by the Western Virginia Water Authority show that the project would initially reserve up to 2 million gallons per day from Carvins Cove Reservoir, with the potential to expand to 8 million gallons per day. These figures were reported in The Fincastle Herald (March 3, 2026) and by WSLS-TV and Virginia Business. County and authority statements note that Google would follow the same drought restrictions as other customers and would fund much of the associated infrastructure, while a new regional supply source was already anticipated for the 2040s-2060s.
Current conditions highlight the need for transparent review. As of July 18, 2026, the Western Virginia Water Authority reports Carvins Cove at 15.3 feet below full pond (64.5% capacity) and Spring Hollow at 18.6 feet below full pond (77.1% capacity), with voluntary conservation in effect. During the severe 2001-2002 drought, Carvins Cove experienced substantial drawdown before recovery.
Analyses presented to the Planning Commission demonstrate why independent examination matters. Reservoir levels depend on the balance of inflows and outflows. When outflows exceed inflows over time– as in past droughts– the level declines at a measurable rate. Adding significant new demand would accelerate depletion during low-inflow periods. For claims that the system can accommodate this use without affecting residents or necessitating new supplies to hold true, the reservoirs would need to maintain levels well above critical thresholds even under drought conditions similar to 2001-2002, with replenishment rates consistently offsetting the added draw. Current drought trends and historical performance indicate that verifying these conditions through open discussion is prudent.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously on July 13 to submit its water situation summary, infrastructure request, and Primary Water Assessment White Paper, and compiled questions to the board and to request authorization for a public forum featuring expert perspectives. Virginia law positions the commission in an advisory role, making board approval the appropriate step.
A forum would promote informed decision-making without prejudging outcomes. I encourage the board and readers to support this request.
Larry Ceola
Fincastle
Urge Cline to support Alzheimer’s bill
There is a bill in Congress that should be a no-brainer.
But then in Ben Cline’s district, that could mean two different things.
The bill is ASAP, the Alzheimer’s Screening and Prevention Act. It would require Medicare to cover dementia screening for people without symptoms. Just like Medicare covers cancer screening for people without symptoms.
It is endorsed by the Alzheimer’s Association.
It makes all kinds of sense and provides savings for patients, families, Medicare, and Medicaid… saving government funds with early prevention and early treatment.
ASAP would allow Medicare to take good, commonsense medical steps. The bill is now endorsed in the U.S. Senate by 18 Republicans and 8 Democrats; in the U.S. House by 37 Republicans and 65 Democrats.
His opponent in the coming election, Beth Macy, will support the bill if elected.
So, you would think Rep. Cline would join 128 other U.S. elected representatives (so far) to support this bill. Nope, the “no-brainer” tag is only a shameful title for Congressman Cline.
Many have reached out to Cline with no response. If you get a chance, reach out to him yourself. Let him know there is a bi-partisan solution to a bi-partisan problem that he can help fix.
Bill Tanger
Hollins
(Amsterdam area)
Data centers are a necessary evil
I am usually confident that whatever position Bob Patterson takes, I should believe the opposite. But his recent defense of the Google data centers coming to Botetourt made me pause. Do I like Google as a company and its track record of using our personal information and manipulating searches? No. Do I know many wonderful people who are passionately opposed to data centers being built in Botetourt County? Yes. Do I believe that AI has the potential to dumb us down even more than we already are? Yes. But there is something bigger going on. We are in the equivalent of an arms race with China for AI supremacy. Is China feeding us misinformation about data centers to fuel American opposition? Probably.
Take electric costs. I looked at average residential electric costs in Ashburn, the data center capital of the world, and they are cheaper than the current rates in Daleville. And there is the concern about noise. I have driven through Ashburn many times in the past eight years and have often stopped in traffic next to a data center. They make noise but they are no louder than the Munters facility currently operating in Greenfield. The concerns about water consumption, however, are another story. The severe drought we are in seems providential, occurring as the arguments against the proliferation of data centers in rural areas have become more heated.
The actual misinformation on data centers may be coming from closer to home. What we’re being told and not told by Google, the county administration, and the water authority on what will be Google’s actual water usage – is it two, six, eight, 12 million gallons a day? – and the impact on areas served by private wells have been muddy at best. It’s been documented that a low reservoir, like Carvin’s Cove, can affect wells whether they are tapping into an unconfined or confined aquifer.
Loudoun County – where Ashburn is located – has experienced an increase in wells going dry over the last couple of years even though the primary source for data center water there is the Potomac River. Another concern is the current plan for Google to return the water it uses, which will have added chemicals to prevent corrosion in its equipment, back into Carvin’s Cove and Smith Mountain Lake after it has been “treated.” Clean water like clean air shouldn’t be gambled away on a bet for a theoretical amount of tax dollars in the county coffers.
In conclusion, data centers are a necessary evil in the world we live in as AI does have positive applications for national defense, medical research, etc. But does it make sense to build data centers in rural areas where the infrastructure is fragile and the natural resources are already threatened by irresponsible growth?
Charles Ruhl
Fincastle
Honest research needed to settle water issue
For several years now, I have used every means possible to encourage the members of the Botetourt Board of Supervisors to invest time and energy in learning basic leadership skills and practices. I have repeatedly explained that those skills can be learned and are advantageous. I have explained the essential need for and how to build trust among the people they are supposed to be leading. Although two of our newer board members have displayed those skills, the rest continue to undermine that essential trust, through secret agreements (NDA’s Google), surrendering their elected authority to a major for-profit company, and unilateral decision making that overrides community input.
Now comes the real concern.
The board and the “administrator” signed a secret contract with Google, knowing the data center would be a massive consumer of public water. There was no community input or even knowledge of that risk to an essential public necessity. When the public attempted to find valid information on the water use, the BOS, “administrator,” and the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) conspired to prevent the public from getting that information. Eventually, after FOIAs and having the court order that the information should be public, and after threat of ongoing legal action, we were told up to 8 million gallons per day. Then, the public has repeatedly been told 2 million gallons, which is just for the first of three buildings. Now, a FOIA has uncovered conversations mentioning 10-11 million gallons! So what is the truth??
When pressed for valid information instead of having Google approve all communications from elected officials, there has been no proof of actual study or investigation into the actual usage or into whether our public system can successfully function with such massive water consumption. There has been a lot of obviously inaccurate information from both the public and more importantly, those who claim to serve us as officials. We have been told they will find a new water source, but nothing but vague promises, references to a 2029 plan, and a $200 million citizen price tag.
When a member of the Planning Commission suggested that we conduct a water study hearing to clear up the confusion and possible deception, he met with resistance, delays, obstruction, and anger. His suggestion, as clearly stated in his white paper, is to settle the confusion and anger by doing actual independent research (which was not done prior to the contract) with professional experts with no conflict of interest with Google. His goal is to get dependable information and end the fear and anger of uncertainty and lack of trust. Such a study could also possibly improve the trust level of county leaders IF the experts support their decisions.
So why are the BOS and “administrator” opposing and trying to invalidate such a study? There in no evidence that they conducted such a study before the contract was signed. Why have they publicly said that the Planning Commission is to advise the board, but openly opposed the commission’s efforts to provide valid, supported advice?
I don’t know the details of (Commissioner Mark) Tyson’s plan, but I suggest a combination of people from the Planning Commission and the BOS (those who did not sign the NDA or vote for the data center through process), and selected members of the public to meet with non-Google affiliated researchers and professionals to learn and report on the viability of the required water supply, including provisions for severe drought. We need honest research and reporting to settle the conflict.
The main reason seems to be that the board and “administrator” seem to think that they can use their elected positions as they choose and are not accountable to the citizens. Ironically, on our nation’s 250th anniversary, they seem to have forgotten the very foundations of our government. It is time for them to be reminded that they work for the citizens and are accountable to them. Contact your district supervisor by phone, email, etc. and let them know you need facts from people who are not under Google’s thumb!
Rick Painter
Blue Ridge District
Will the Board of Supervisors kill water investigation?
Botetourt County and surrounding area residents have been asking for full transparency and protection for our water supply since 2024. Now, the fate of a widely popular water investigation rests with the very board that made it possible for Google’s proposed “Project Raspberry” to take root in Botetourt. If it is allowed to proceed, this hyperscale data center project is slated to be one of the most water-intensive ever constructed.
The Botetourt County Board of Supervisors, the county administrator, the Western Virginia Water Authority, and the Roanoke Regional Partnership cleared the way for data centers to come to the Historic Greenfield area with blatant disregard for the horrific overall risks. This is shocking. Officials have suffered no consequences whatsoever and, feeling they answer to no one, have instead awarded themselves with praise for how well they fast-tracked the process to avoid scrutiny from the people of Botetourt and the surrounding areas.
Thankfully, many other local officials have started to see the seriousness of the issue. Roanoke City Vice Mayor Terry McGuire has stated that city “made a terrible mistake” in initially supporting the project, and the Botetourt Planning Commission has repeatedly called for a full assessment and public forum on the lack of water.
In their June meeting, the Planning Commission voted to conduct such a meeting only to have the county administration issue a media release using a narrow interpretation of the law rather than a chance for collaboration. The official statement read that “the [Planning] Commission does not have the legal authority to independently convene or direct public hearings.” When the Planning Commission still pressed forward on the issue at their last meeting, they were joined by an unprecedentedly large crowd of residents showing support for water transparency. When Commissioner [Mark] Tyson insisted on discussion of the media release and the legality of scope, Botetourt County dispatched a sheriff’s deputy to sit directly behind him. The action appeared to visually demonstrate that Botetourt County administration was prepared to arrest Commissioner Tyson. In doing so, Botetourt County also intimidated all of the concerned citizens who attended the meeting in a unified display of support for a water hearing. Whether you agree with his methods or not, Commissioner Tyson is expressing the views of the vast majority of area residents – the people that he and the rest of the county officials are sworn to represent.
It is a travesty that the same Board of Supervisors and the county administrator with an undue amount of influence will now decide on the outcome of a public hearing and investigation into their own credibility. They may have the legal authority to either approve, limit, or deny the Planning Commission’s motion, but without citizen input, their decisions will be considered suspect by definition – a public relations gesture as useless as Google’s (Un)Fair event in which conflicting or little information was provided – rather than an opportunity to give the community even a modicum of the transparency we have been asking for.
To Achieve A Truthful Dialogue:
- We call upon the Botetourt County Board of Supervisors to approve the motion to have a full, unbiased assessment and study of the site and the area’s water concerns as well as providing a forum and full transparency to the public.
- We encourage the citizens of Botetourt County to turn out in overwhelming numbers at 2 p.m. on July 28 at the Botetourt County Board of Supervisors meeting at 57 South Center Drive Daleville, to demand the following:
– An unbiased and unconstrained water investigation and assessment led by a committee with full transparency and no further suppression.
– That the water investigation be unbiased – scientists, investigators, and any experts involved should not have conflicts of interest such as “Google scholar” or any similar funding or standing.
– A joint hearing with both Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors but administered only by those that are not conflicted in having voted to allow data centers. That would exclude all supervisors aside from Linda Rottman and planning commissioners aside from Steve Hartman and Mark Tyson. Those who voted in favor should be available for questions on their actions.
– Adequate funding must be made available to cover all expenses for the appropriate, unbiased experts to attend the joint hearing.
– That a member or members of the public be invited to serve on the committee who would manage all the public’s submitted questions to the panelists and ask those questions on their behalf.
This is a watershed moment for the well being of Botetourt County and our community at large. We must get the full truth regarding our precious and limited water supply that is now at risk. New documents released through a Freedom of Information Act request show that the first data center building will use more water than what current contracts have described and that the construction timeline is far more aggressive than the community was originally told. Further FOIA requests have been paid but are still pending far beyond their normal delivery date.
We call on Google, the Western Virginia Water Authority, and Botetourt County to provide full disclosure and contractual protections for residents – now – before any permits are granted or ground broken for this project that could permanently fracture the health and well being of our entire area.
Members of Southwest Virginia Data Center Transparency Alliance
Bring Planning Commission notices back to The Herald
Following up on last week’s letter, I have now seen the exact figures regarding the amount which was spent by Botetourt County on legal advertisements in all media it used (The Fincastle Herald, The Roanoke Times and Cardinal News) for Planning Commission (PC) matters over the past five fiscal years. That total is shown to be $51,845.08, or an average of $10,369.02 per year. The 2020 census said the population of Botetourt County was 33,596, so that comes out to less than 31 cents per citizen per year.
Is it possible that the Disgruntled Californian Buchanan District supervisor’s math ($2.4 million for 800 school employees said by her to be $30,000.00 per employee, instead of the actual $3,000.00 per employee) came out to a much higher figure for which she could take credit for saving so many taxpayer dollars?
And the 31 cents per citizen per year was not spent solely on PC legal advertisements in The Fincastle Herald! It was difficult, if not impossible, to tell from what was furnished exactly how much was paid to The Fincastle Herald, but you may rest assured it was far less than 31 cents per citizen, maybe more like 15 to 20 cents per citizen? Furthermore, a large percentage of those expenses were collected from the entity requesting consideration of their matter by the PC, so that figure goes even lower if we are talking only of spending taxpayer dollars.
Maybe the PC can schedule a public hearing, which many citizens will not even know about unless The Fincastle Herald writes and publishes one of their informative and free detailed articles regarding same, to delve deeper into this huge drain of taxpayer dollars!
Or, maybe Botetourt County can just return to publishing PC legal advertisements in The Fincastle Herald? By so doing, their over 4,000 weekly consumers (who may or may not look at Cardinal News online) can continue to learn of these matters as they have done for the last 40-50 years, or longer?
The PC meeting on July 13 was an experience few, if any, Botetourt County citizens would want to experience, which is why few of them who are not members of the Chronic Complainers Club (CCC) attend such meetings. Government meetings should be conducted with some semblance of behavior that is polite, proper, dignified, and well-suited to the conduct of governmental business, but this meeting (and others recently held) exhibited the continuing and unpleasant rudeness and bad manners displayed by the CCC members and one of the PC members who may be a member of the club, or maybe he is just the head coach of the cheerleading squad? It was more like a three-ring circus rather than a governmental meeting!
At the next CCC meeting, maybe the recording of the legally advertised joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors (BoS) and the PC held on November 26. 2024, should be shown. It was at that meeting that approval was granted for (1) the rezoning requested by the Economic Development Authority of Botetourt County (EDA) which added 62.767 acres to the Research and Advanced Manufacturing (RAM) Use District in Greenfield, and (2) the text amendment requested by the BoS adding data centers as a “By-right” use in the RAM Use District in Greenfield. Four people spoke at those two public hearings (one of them speaking twice, as usual) and not one of them ever even mentioned the word “data center,” as it appeared they were only concerned about green spaces and a 200-foot buffer zone. But yet, they still are heard to whine and moan “We didn’t know.”
The public hearings held that night regarding the request of the EDA for the aforementioned rezoning and the request of the BoS for text amendment lasted about 42 minutes. Where were all of those who so vehemently oppose data centers when all of this occurred? Whatever the reason was for no one mentioning “data center,” or expressing any opposition to the proposed text amendment which was passed, it certainly was not because “We didn’t know”!
Bob Patterson
Fincastle (Buchanan District)
