The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.

-Anatole France

I began this series with one question: how can a decision of the Botetourt Board of Supervisors drain Roanoke’s water supply? Answering it has taken me through municipal government code, various contracts concerning the Botetourt data center installation, the agendas and minutes of the Botetourt Board of Supervisors, and the authorizing statutes for the Water Authority, for Appalachian Power, and for county government. 

The impression left by all of this reading is that law in the Commonwealth has been manufactured to prioritize corporate access. There are countless instances of this, but we’ll start with a practical example—but you need first to understand the basics of land use and zoning. I’ll be quick. 

There is a permission structure for land uses, as follows: 

1. “Permitted uses” require no attention from the Board of Supervisors or zoning, and can be conducted “by right”;
2. ”Special exception uses” are permitted by zoning and by the municipal code, but require the approval of the county; 
3. Other uses may be permitted generally by the municipal code, but not in the district in which a property is situated, necessitating the county to “rezone” it; and
4. Lastly, some uses will not be permitted in the county at all, and the municipal code itself will require amendment to proceed. 

Now for our example. In January of 2021, Botetourt’s Colonial Elementary School was closed. Two years later, the Economic Development Authority learned that a homeschooling cooperative wished to use Colonial’s facilities, and in June of 2023, transferred the property to this group for a nominal fee. This was a property zoned to be a school, and proposed to be used as a school. Despite this fact, a special exception permit was required. 

The homeschool group filed an application with the Planning Commission on July 19, 2023. On October 10, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter, which it referred to the Botetourt Board of Supervisors. The Board, in turn, approved it at another public hearing on October 24, 2023. The submissions here occupy about 40 pages of Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors’ minutes. 

A five months’ turnaround supported by 40 pages of material is pretty normal for a special permit, but things work differently when you’re Google. 

Before November 26, 2024, the land on which the data center is to be constructed was zoned “A-1” for agricultural uses. Before November 26, 2024, it would have been illegal to erect a data center anywhere in the county, as the municipal code did not allow it. You would expect the process of changing the county’s code to take longer than a mere special exception permit, allowing county residents ample time to learn of the proposal, and to oppose it—but again, you’re not Google. 

This change to the code and the rezoning of Google’s property happened at a special joint session (again November 26, 2024) of the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission. Notice of the code amendment was provided on November 13, 2024, in the Fincastle Herald, and on November 18, in the Roanoke Times. It took a local homeschool cooperative 5 months to get a special exception permit for a school. It took a foreign corporation 2 weeks to amend Botetourt’s code, permitting a disastrous installation that may affect the well-being of every resident of Botetourt, Roanoke, and Franklin counties, and leaving residents no time to organize opposition. This momentous matter, moreover, occupies only 13 pages of the minutes.

What’s worse, at this November 26 meeting there wasn’t a whisper of Google’s involvement. The plan was worked out exclusively in closed sessions of the Board of Supervisors (beginning in 2023 I have reason to believe) and remained undisclosed to the public until 2025. 

And the point here is that both procedures—the five month multi-session special exception permit for a school, and the 2 week joint session code amendment for equipment of the surveillance state—are permitted by the Virginia Code. The law, in its majestic equality, probably allows anybody with pocketbooks as deep as Google’s to obtain the same result. 

Let me leave you with two more outrageous examples. We’ve seen that a foreign corporation has easier access to county government than county residents. Well, it turns out that at least one foreign government has easier access to the Commonwealth than its residents. Please peruse the 2018 statutes creating the Virginia-Israel Advisory Board, whose purpose is to “improve economic and cultural links between the Commonwealth and the State of Israel, with a focus on the areas of commerce and trade, art and education, and general government.”

Lastly, for your consideration, I present the doctrine of “sovereign immunity,” which protects the Commonwealth from litigation. This means that if your car, or your child, is pancaked by a firetruck, you’re probably out of luck. Corporations’ interests are, however, protected: while sovereign immunity generally bars actions in torts, lawsuits may be brought against the Commonwealth to enforce contracts. 

Also in this series:

If It’s Not Love, Then It’s the Data Center That Will Bring Us Together

The Botetourt Data Center: A Bad Deal with a Scammy Cherry on Top

The Botetourt Data Center, The Water Authority, and an Invitation to Corruption