Supervisors split on JDA strategy as concerns about water, health and property values surface

Board members voiced competing views about whether negotiating a joint developer agreement with Alliant or pursuing other paths would best protect residents. Supervisor Carvelli warned about risks to aquifers and wells and flagged an example where a developer’s project could stake up to about 48,000 acres of farmland in another county. He said he hoped the resolution would let the county 'move forward' to address those issues.

Opponents argued a JDA could signal premature commitment. Supervisor Dickinson criticized the process as moving toward a predetermined direction and said, "I'm not voting for a JDA." Supporters countered that a JDA could secure concrete protections: Supervisor Rosenberg suggested mechanisms such as a trust fund for potential health effects and other negotiated safeguards to protect property values and water. The record shows a mix of viewpoints and no formal board decision yet on which strategy to adopt beyond requesting Alliant’s proposal.