2 York County leaders say they received threatening letters over Silfab Solar plant plan

Two York County Council members say they’ve received letters threatening their lives or families over a controversial decision in the Fort Mill area regarding the planned Silfab Solar manufacturing plant .

“Our country is in a very dangerous and dark place right now,” said Chairwoman Christi Cox, speaking at Monday night’s council meeting. “And I feel like some of that is spilling over into our community.”

York County clears path for solar panel site, blames misinformation for public protests

Cox said she received a death threat recently in a letter to her home that she sent to law enforcement. Councilman William “Bump” Roddey received a similar letter. Both letters were anonymous.

“I received one that I opened sitting here tonight,” he said, “basically threatening my house and my wife and my family — based off of what’s going on with Silfab.”

Fort Mill residents have been vocal in recent months in opposition of Canadian company Silfab Solar manufacturing solar panels at 7149 Logistics Lane. The county had approved the $150 million plan for 800 new jobs with Silfab, then stated the company still should be allowed in Fort Mill despite a zoning appeals board finding it did not fit in light industrial areas.

Several community members came out Monday to oppose Silfab. At recent council meetings, the county had to set up overflow rooms after several times more people than could fit into council chambers came out to protest Silfab operating in Fort Mill.

Cox is a Republican. Roddey is the lone Democrat on council.

Cox said she wasn’t going to address the letter she received publicly, until events this past weekend unfolded. Former President Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt during a GOP campaign rally in Pennsylvania that saw a rally-goer and the shooter killed.

While Cox didn’t name Trump or the shooting, she referred several times to weekend events and how “tragic, deadly and toxic” politics have become.

“I can no longer be silent,” Cox said.

Dangerous public discourse

Cox called it extremely disturbing to receive a death threat related to a council decision.

Cox doesn’t know who sent the letter.

“It was sent directly to my personal home,” she said. “My children checked our mail, and my whole family was gathered around our kitchen table when it was received, and we read it.”

There wasn’t anything on Monday night’s council agenda specific to Silfab. Cox wouldn’t discuss the decision but instead focused on what she said are rampant lies, fear-mongering, anger and hate that have public and political discourse at an all-time low.

“Words have power,” Cox said. “We all have power within our families, communities and social connections to change the rhetoric that is happening in our country.”

Roddey has been on council more than a decade. He’s gotten hundreds of letters on controversial decisions, he said, but agreed with Cox that the recent ones are a new low.

“It’s never gotten to the point of death threats or threatening letters over any vote,” Roddey said. “This is far beyond reasonable disagreement.”

Lies and dangerous discourse incite people to think things that aren’t true, Cox said. Threats and fear-mongering put officials in danger, she said.

“The ‘us vs. them’ mentality has got to stop,” Cox said. “There are very real legal issues... and they have to be evaluated. We need to look for common ground. We need to think the best about the people that serve.”

Why is the Silfab issue so controversial?

Neighbors near the Silfab property say dangerous chemicals used at the site are a threat to the surrounding area, including an adjacent property where two schools are under construction.

Silfab contends that there isn’t a toxic chemical threat and strict measures used at the site will prevent negative environmental impacts.

In recent weeks the argument has come down to zoning regulations, and what York County is legally able to do.

‘This fight is not over’: Neighbors balk at York County response to Silfab controversy

The Silfab site has been zoned for light industrial use since 1992. The county approved subdividing a larger property four years ago to allow three new buildings, including the Silfab location.

Though solar panel manufacturing wasn’t named in the county code, county planners told York County Economic Development three years ago it was allowed in light industrial areas. The county confirmed that stance with a December 2022 letter to Silfab, stating the company could operate on Logistics Lane.

Two months ago, the county Zoning Board of Appeals agreed with a resident who appealed the planning decision. The board voted unanimously that solar panel manufacturing shouldn’t be allowed in light industrial areas.

But late last month, the county issued a statement saying the appeals board ruling doesn’t apply to Silfab. The county contends that 2022 confirmation letter can’t be revoked by an appeals board decision that only applies to future projects.

Neighbors, including one who addressed council Monday night prior to Cox and Roddey revealing they’ve received threats, balked at the idea that council can’t stop Silfab.

Cox mentioned there are legal issues related to Silfab that still need to be addressed. Her focus, though, is on the way politics have become divisive to the point of death threats.

“Let’s step up,” Cox said. “Let’s be the example. Let’s do better.”