The entrance to the Wegmans distribution center in Hanover County, Virginia. (Sarah Vogelsong/Virginia Mercury)
A years-long legal battle has entered a new chapter as residents of Brown Grove, a historically Black neighborhood in Hanover County, and a neighboring subdivision, have filed their response as part of the appeal in their case against the county’s board of supervisors and Wegmans.
Though the national grocery chain was granted approval by the county’s board four years ago to build a large distribution center, it’s been beset by legal challenges ever since. The residents’ initial lawsuit was dismissed by Hanover Circuit Court; it has now landed in the Court of Appeals of Virginia. This is because last year, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the circuit court’s decision and deemed the residents had the right to challenge the supervisors’ decision.
Supreme Court of Virginia says it won’t reconsider Wegmans decision
In their suit, a group of local residents ask the court to declare the permissions for the project void based on claims that county officials violated state and local laws when granting Wegmans a special permit and an exception to local zoning ordinances that allowed the development of a 1.1 million square foot distribution center to proceed.
Though advance notice was published in a local newspaper ahead of the planned vote, the residents’ indicate that there was no specification about a cap on public comment registrations and restrictions on how many people could have physical access to the board room to observe the proceedings. They also challenge that the Wegman’s project was not an “essential” government function — as outlined in a local ordinance established for continuity of governance during that early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Additionally, by the time the limited public hearing took place, new proffers related to the project were put up for discussion, rather than the documents that some residents had been able to provide virtual commentary on beforehand, the suit states.
State law outlines how zoning changes — which is what an earlier part of the project needed to continue — must give adjoining property owners written notice of the request for modification, and an opportunity to respond to the request within 21 days of the date of the notice.
“It wasn’t ‘in the dark of night’ with it happening at around 2:00 p.m., but it was effectively in the dark of night,” said Rod Morgan, a plaintiff in the case. “When you combine proffers submitted illegally with lack of access for the public, that’s a real issue.”
Just as Morgan and his neighbors have filed a brief, other groups have filed an amicus brief in response to the case as well. The Virginia Chamber of Commerce, Virginia Economic Developers Association, Associated General Contractors of Virginia and others jointly filed a brief defending Wegman’s and Hanover’s board.
That brief said that Wegman’s proffer was submitted before the 21-day deadline, but that the company continued to work with local government on refinements that led to the new proffer.
“As is customary with these types of applications, Wegmans continued to work with the Board, County officials, and the public to address their comments and further revise the proffers,” the brief read.
It also notes another part of state code regarding zoning changes that allow for amended proffers to be accepted once a public hearing has already begun should the amendments “not materially affect the overall proposal.”
In defense of the county and Wegmans, the brief also said that if the court doesn’t side with Hanover County’s board, it “will create disastrous results for localities throughout the Commonwealth and significantly impede economic development in Virginia.”
Wegmans and the Hanover County Board of Supervisors did not respond to request for comment on this article.
History and the present
More than a local land use dispute, the placement of the development and pushback it garnered recalls the industrial encroachment or diminishment of historically Black neighborhoods in previous years, when Black people were disenfranchised in society.
Other examples exist in Virginia, such as how Charlottesville’s city council voted to raze Vinegar Hill in the 1960s , or how I-95 cut through Richmond’s Jackson Ward — a “ Black Wall Street ” in the south. I-95 also halved Brown Grove around that time as well.
Now the once-contiguous community is sprinkled with a municipal airport, an industrial park, a landfill, concrete plants, and an I-95 truck stop.
Brown Grove first took shape from formerly enslaved people following the Civil War — just miles away from Richmond, Virginia’s state capital and the former capital of the Confederacy.
Flash forward to present day, and Brown Grove native Renada Harris lives near several of her family members as land has passed from generation to generation.
“That’s what makes our community unique,” she said. “You don’t see a lot of communities (of color) like this still intact.”
She said that communities that have historically been oppressed “are seen as not as likely to fight.”
She and others founded the Brown Grove Preservation Group a few years ago. Through learning more about local and state laws, she said, neighbors were more equipped to advocate for themselves. The group also had support from the NAACP, Virginia’s chapter of the Sierra Club, and the Virginia Poverty Law Center.
Prior to organizing efforts, Harris said there had been a defeatist attitude among some of her neighbors.
“They said ‘Those white people in Hanover are going to do what they want to do anywhere,’” Harris said both her Black and white neighbors would communicate.
But as the mostly-white neighbors in the subdivision nearby Brow Grove began to be frustrated with Hanover County’s handling of the Wegmans development, deeper neighborhood alliances were formed.
Though Harris is not one of the plaintiffs, she said the lawsuit is important.
“I’m glad it’s out of Hanover County’s hands at this point,” she said. “Because I don’t think it would get a fair trial.”
Brian Buniva, the residents’ attorney who somewhat came out of retirement for this case four years ago, didn’t think at 73 years old, he’d still be defending it.
“In all these years my clients have not been able to be heard in court on merits, it’s all been through demurrers and motions to dismiss and delays and so on,” he said. “Well, we’re not going away.”
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Local News
