Outside of the Hinds County Chancery Court building Monday morning, Raymond residents opposing a solar farm development walked up and down the sidewalk with signs saying “Say No To Big Solar.” Inside the building, the Board of Supervisors voted to approve the project.

A few dozen of the residents against the solar farm made it inside the board's meeting room, most of them wearing green shirts that said “Not in my backyard #NIMBY.” Many of the same faces at Monday's meeting were also at the Hinds County Planning Commission meeting last month, where the commission voted not to recommend the project, titled “Soul City Solar,” to the Board of Supervisors.

The vote was 3 to 2 in favor of Soul City. Supervisors Robert Graham, Tony Smith and Wanda Evers, whose district is where the project will be, voted for the proposal, while Supervisors Deborah Butler-Dixon and Bobby “Bobcat” McGowan voted against.

The company in charge of the project, Virginia-based Apex Clean Energy, said it plans to begin construction next year and have its panels operating by 2027. Since 2021, the company has worked with private landowners between Raymond and Bolton to enter into lease agreements to house the solar panels, which will take up just under 6,000 acres. The company says Soul City will produce 396 megawatts of electricity, or enough to power 95,000 homes. That power production would make Soul City the largest solar development in Mississippi.

Apex also says the project will create about $150 million in county tax revenue over the initial 30-year lifespan of the facility, in addition to 10 full-time jobs and 400 construction jobs. Last November, the Hinds County Board of Supervisors voted in favor of an ad valorem tax agreement for the project. Brian O'Shea, director of Public Engagement for Apex, said the agreement saves the company money in the long-term, but didn't have an exact percent. (Hinds County officials weren't available Monday to provide the terms of the agreement).

Paulette Robinson, who said her home is adjacent to where the new panels will be, told the Board of Supervisors at Monday's meeting that she and other neighbors of the project area only found out about the proposal last month when Apex held a local public meeting.

“I understand the need for those (tax) dollars in Hinds County,” Robinson said. “I also understand that solar is the energy of the future. But not at the expense of the residents that make up the county.”

Robinson and others, including Raymond Mayor Isla Tullos, asked the board to delay the approval to provide time to establish clearer rules and guidelines for solar developers to follow.

“Your no vote would be for the purpose of setting a one-year moratorium (on the project),” Tullos said. “During this one-year period, you will be leading our state in developing best practice guidance for solar development.”

At both Monday's meeting and the Planning Commission meeting last month, a vast majority of Raymond residents attending were against the solar farm. Opponents to the project said there was a petition going around with over 1,100 signatures (an online version of the petition has close to 800 signatures).

And their concerns are far from just about the short notice they received about the proposal: A number of Raymond residents have talked about the potential for toxic chemicals to leach from the solar panels, as well as fears about increased heat near the facility and impacts to the local wildlife.

But experts, including those from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center, have largely denounced theories that solar panels have any harmful impacts to humans.

“Photovoltaic (PV) technologies and solar inverters are not known to pose any significant health dangers to their neighbors,” the North Carolina center wrote in a 2017 paper. “The most important dangers posed are increased highway traffic during the relative short construction period and dangers posed to trespassers of contact with high voltage equipment.”

While research from 2016 supports the belief that solar panels increase nearby temperatures, an article about the study says the effect can't be measured 100 feet from the power source. O'Shea, from Apex, said Soul City will be at least 300 feet from any neighboring occupied property.

At last month's Planning Commission meeting, Apex representatives said Soul City would include a “nature corridor” to allow wildlife to move freely through the project area. Local opponents remained skeptical though, arguing that installments could disrupt habitats for nearby species like deer, black bears and birds.

Another study from 2016 estimated that utility-scale solar farms kill tens of thousands of birds per year nationwide. The Audubon Society, though, says that photovoltaic panels, the ones Soul City would include, do not pose such a risk, and that the long-term benefits of using renewable energy outweigh any concerns for birds.

Smith, who represents District 2, said his research didn't back up the concerns that opponents were relaying, and that the he supported something that was going to lower energy costs.

“I pay a lot of money for energy, and if this is something that can lower the cost of energy, I'm okay with it,” he said.

Apex said it plans to sell the energy it produces through the MISO power grid, which manages energy transmission through a regional marketplace.

Brent Bailey, the former Central District Public Service commissioner, spoke in favor of the project on Monday, saying it would increase access to clean and cost-effective energy, as well as add local revenue for infrastructure in schools.

“Nearly 40 large utility-scale solar farms have been approved for construction and operation in Mississippi,” Bailey said to the board, before making a quip about the opposing attendees' green shirts. “These communities did not say, ‘Not in my backyard,' they said, ‘Yes, in my backyard.'”

After the meeting, one of those in the green shirts walked up to Bailey, pointing a finger and said, “You don't live here. I do.”

McGowan, District 5 supervisor who was one of the two votes against the project, said the decision should come down to whether or not those in Raymond want it.

“Why do we want to put something in somebody's area that they don't want to be in the area?” he asked. “I don't get that.”

Allison Lauderdale, a Raymond resident and organizer of the opposition to Soul City, recently set up a GoFundMe to raise money for legal funds to fight the project in case it was approved. Lauderdale told Mississippi Today after the vote that she plans to file an injunction and has 10 days to do so.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

It's well known that Mississippi teens give birth at one of the highest rates in the nation. But how does this affect the lives of adolescent mothers?

A recent study from the University of Alabama at Birmingham looked at how, statistically, teen motherhood may not be a universally negative life event. Rather, teenage mothers from more privileged backgrounds face a greater “opportunity cost,” which is the loss of potential economic gain, compared to their less-advantages peers.

That's due to a simple fact about what it means to have and to lose access to higher education, a good-paying job and quality healthcare. Teen mothers from higher-socioeconomic backgrounds have more opportunities and therefore more to lose, the study says. It also goes to show that teen mothers from lower-socioeconomic backgrounds face greater barriers to getting an education than just childbirth, said Joseph Wolfe, a sociology professor who worked on the study that analyzed longitudinal data spanning thousands of women across the 20th century.

“One of the many things associated with not having lots of opportunities” is teen birth, Wolfe said. “It can't affect the opportunity cost if there are no opportunities.”

Wolfe added that childbirth, on its own, likely didn't prevent a low-income teen mother from graduating college if she was never going to be able to afford tuition.

Therefore, policies that solely aim to reduce teen birth, such as sex education, may not be as effective in increasing educational attainment for these mothers as ones that reduce the cost of college, combat generational poverty or increase the availability of childcare or well-paying jobs in economically deprived areas of the state, Wolfe said. 

“We no longer have the kind of society where the village is going to come in and help you raise your kid,” Wolfe said. “We really do need to have social structures that are … available freely for anyone who wants to use it.”

In fact, Wolfe added, an approach to solving teen birth that only focuses on sex education may be more likely to benefit women from wealthier backgrounds for whom teen childbirth is one of the only barriers they face on their path to college.

“Those are the individuals that would actually have the resources to implement what a sex education would ask them to implement,” Wolfe said.

This is especially true when a college degree remains the door to good-paying jobs, the study noted.

At the same time, teens across Mississippi face a dearth of accurate information and available resources to help prevent teen pregnancy, said Hope Crenshaw, the executive director of Teen Health Mississippi.

“We don't dictate or we don't narrate how much information people get if they are living with cancer,” Crenshaw said. “We give them all the information. We tell them about dietary options, we tell them about medicine, we tell them about support groups. When it comes to this (teen pregnancy), why are we regulating information?”

Crenshaw works with teens across the state, and she said they have a range of perspectives on what it would mean for them to have a child as a teenager and the “opportunity cost” it might pose for them. Some are excited about the idea; for others, it wasn't a choice, or the person they thought would help raise their child decided not to commit.

“They don't necessarily see it as, ‘if I have a child, I can't do these things,'” Crenshaw said. “They're trying to balance them both and that can be difficult.”

This is especially the case for teen parents who are not white and from a lower socioeconomic background, Crenshaw added. Due to implicit bias, they are less likely to be taken seriously by adults in the medical system. They are more likely to live in a healthcare desert or to struggle to find childcare.

Even so, Wolfe noted that teenage mothers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may also be more likely to have a family network that can help them raise their child.

“The implications of having a child are way different for different families,” he said.

As society has become even more stratified, that has become even more true, according to the study, which looked at longitudinal data on women across generations from 1922 to 1984. 

“The world opened up for some women,” Wolfe said. “It should have opened up for everybody.”

In the post-World War II baby boom era, teen births were “common and unremarkable.” It was permissible for schools to expel pregnant students. A teen birth was almost twice as likely for women as earning a college degree. 

“In the 50s and 60s, who cares if you have a teen birth because your husband is going to be your bridge to (a higher) social class,” Wolfe said.

After the social movements of the mid-20th century, that began to change, the study found. The U.S. became more economically stratified, a country of “diverging destinies.” The Food and Drug Administration approved the first oral contraceptive, and teen births dropped for those who could access it.

By the 1990s, teen births were “an indicator of social class,” Wolfe said.

A number of policies exacerbated this. In the information economy, a college degree became more salient, but the cost of tuition began to rise as states pulled back funding for higher education. And welfare reform resulted in some states withholding previously available child care benefits from teen mothers.

Still, opportunities for adolescent mothers have grown across the board. The study found that millennial teen mothers were more likely to have a college degree than women from the silent generation, those who became teenagers in 1950, who did not have a teen birth.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/?p=367788

Despite a recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court ensuring the availability of the abortion medication mifepristone, most abortions will remain illegal in Mississippi.

The nation's highest court in a unanimous decision struck down a lawsuit attempting to limit availability of mifepristone, which is widely used to induce abortions. But use of the drug remains illegal in Mississippi and 13 other states that have near total bans on abortion.

“Unfortunately abortion remains illegal in Mississippi whether by medication or other means,” said Rob McDuff, of the Mississippi Center for Justice and the attorney for the last abortion provider that remained in the state before the Supreme Court overturned the national right to an abortion in 2021.  “However, the Mississippi law banning abortion specifically states that a woman cannot be prosecuted for having an abortion.  Anyone who helps her might be prosecuted, but not the person who has the abortion.”

Technically, a woman could receive the abortion pill from an out-of-state provider through the mail and it could prove difficult for the state to pursue any prosecution. PBS News Hour reported studies found that at the end of 2023, about 8,000 women a month in states where abortions were banned were receiving the abortion pill via mail from states where abortions are legal and providers who perform them are protected by state law from prosecution.

State Attorney General Lynn Fitch's office did not answer questions about the most recent Supreme Court ruling. Fitch filed the lawsuit that led to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, which was the 1973 landmark case that guaranteed the national right to an abortion.

While Fitch's office did not respond to questions about the most recent Supreme Court ruling, in the past Fitch has attempted to force the Biden administration to provide to her office or other law enforcement medical information on women who leave Mississippi for abortions.

McDuff said the Center for Justice is willing to represent for free anyone who is prosecuted under the state's abortion laws.

While state law bans most abortions in Mississippi and there is no clinic providing abortions, a 1990s' state Supreme Court ruling said abortions were legal under the Mississippi Constitution. That ruling, which would theoretically trump state law, has never been reversed by the current Supreme Court.

A lawsuit by anti-abortion groups is seeking to have the 1990s' opinion reversed.

Mississippi Rep. Zakiya Summers, D-Jackson, said she does not know if it would be feasible to introduce legislation based on the most recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling ensuring the availability of the abortion pill.

“It would be DOA,” she said. “The (Republican) majority does not want to touch anything dealing with abortion. They have been given their marching orders.”

Summers said she will continue to focus on trying to pass legislation guaranteeing access to contraceptives, which she says is a different issue than what was decided in the most recent Supreme Court ruling on the abortion pill.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.