Luzerne County Council approves resolution encouraging PPL to consider alternate transmission line routes

After pleas from a crowd on Tuesday, Luzerne County Council approved a resolution encouraging PPL Electric Utilities to listen to concerned residents and consider alternate routes for a southern county transmission line.

The resolution is nonbinding.

A dozen southern county residents urged council to oppose the line during public comment, with other attendees cheering them on, some seated in the courthouse rotunda because the meeting room was full.

The utility is proposing a 12-mile, 500kV transmission line from the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station nuclear power plant in Salem Township to the area of the Humboldt Industrial Park, with the line cutting through Nescopeck, Black Creek, Sugarloaf and Hazle townships. PPL said that the project will provide additional power and support existing and future load growth.

PPL has easements for the line but needs to widen them to proceed, which means the utility may seek to exercise its eminent domain power if property owners won’t agree to expanded easements, officials have said.

Some citizens also pushed for two other council actions Tuesday — suspension of real estate tax breaks that had been granted the last two years for projects south of the Salem Township power plant and issuance of a temporary moratorium preventing future tax breaks for projects in the same geographic area that would be using the new transmission line.

Council members have said the county cannot suspend past tax breaks because the county would be sued. The requested future moratorium was discussed during council’s Tuesday work session, but it’s unclear if a council majority would support passage at a future meeting.

PPL responded in a letter to council last week, saying in part that the alternate routes are also within the Nescopeck/Sugarloaf Valley region and would “shift the impact from one group of landowners to another.”

Sugarloaf Township resident John Zola, who is among the impacted residential property owners, created the Alliance to Stop the Line group opposing the project’s route and gave council a detailed rebuttal to the PPL communication.

Zola and others spoke of concerns the lines would lower their property values and endanger their health.

Ten of 11 council members approved the resolution.

Councilman Kevin Lescavage provided the lone no vote. Lescavage said he does not want to vote until he obtains all information, and PPL representatives are scheduled to meet with council members in small groups next week.

Council Chairman John Lombardo said he had been in contact with PPL and requested company representatives attend Tuesday’s meeting to answer questions. Lombardo said it “completely enraged” him when the company sent a letter to council instead, noting the PPL letter still left many questions unanswered. Lombardo said the PPL representative told him the project will still happen regardless of council adoption of the resolution.

In other business Tuesday, council opted to reconsider a set formula for future tax breaks by category and voted to approve a debt restructuring estimated to save $3.47 million after fees and adopt an annual capital plan.

Tax break schedule

Councilman Harry Haas had requested a vote on the schedule Tuesday, saying council discussed and debated the subject in prior work sessions and heard arguments in opposition from Penn’s Northeast President and CEO John Augustine.

Haas and several council colleagues had suggested the county should take a more proactive and planned approach by setting and publicizing acceptable discounts and fees for warehousing and logistics, manufacturing and tech-based development. Under the proposal, warehousing and logistics development would receive the least favorable break.

Because the schedule is nonbinding, council would retain the power to deviate from the stated tax break parameters based on the specifics of each project.

However, some council members have agreed with Augustine’s concerns that approval of a schedule — even if it is nonbinding — “threatens to derail the positive momentum that our economy is experiencing,” unfairly targets the logistics industry and could prompt prospective developers to automatically look elsewhere to more receptive areas that have no schedules.

After further discussion Tuesday, Councilman Jimmy Sabatino proposed referring the schedule back to the council infrastructure committee he chairs so it can consider concerns raised by some council members.

Haas was the lone council member to oppose referral back to the committee, describing the delay as a “gross lack of leadership.”

Councilwoman Brittany Stephenson said she believes it is great leadership to perform further work to “figure out how to do it properly.”

Debt restructuring

In addition to yielding savings, the debt restructuring won’t extend the 2030 date for the county to be out of debt, according to FSL Public Finance, the county’s outside financial advisor.

County Controller Walter Griffith challenged the initial approval process Tuesday, asserting the ordinance should have been introduced through a council vote two weeks ago instead of an automatic introduction by the county manager.

County Manager Romilda Crocamo said the county home rule charter is “clear and unequivocal” that the manager can introduce the ordinance because it is tied to fiscal responsibility.

Crocamo said Griffith is threatening to pursue the matter with the state Department of Community and Economic Development and indicated she would issue a daily report on the amount of savings lost daily if he follows through.

Griffith said after the meeting he won’t lodge an objection with the state but stands by his position.

Councilwoman Joanna Bryn Smith also questioned the introduction process and voted against the restructuring, providing the only no vote.

FSL plans to close on the transaction in October.

Capital plan

The plan projects a total $4.9 million in spending on capital projects from 2025 through 2027.

Council unanimously approved it.