(A week ago today, the Tribune published a guest column written by Rich Voss, vice president of Great Northern Power Development, one of the partners involved in planning a coal mine and gasification plant at South Heart, west of Dickinson. This response was written by Mary Hodell of South Heart, a member of the Badlands Area Resource Council, an affiliate of the Dakota Resource Council. - Editor)

South Heart area residents are facing a coal mine and gasification plant moving into our backyards and are struggling to get solid information. Community members have heard promises, but there are no actions to back them up. The people in the South Heart community deserve better.

Perhaps one of the most misleading statements made yet is the "numerous meetings" Great Northern Power Development has held. On Wednesday night, a public meeting was held in South Heart, a meeting that, had it not been recommended by the Stark County Commission, would not have been held. GNPD spokesman Neal Messer opened the meeting with the line, "This is the first of many public meetings." Project Development V.P. Rich Voss went on to say, "Our plans have changed since we last had a public meeting, four years ago, in August 2003." Is this the "project transparency" and "due diligence" we were promised?

An environmental impact statement is what is commonly used to evaluate the impacts - good or bad - of a proposed project like this one. An EIS would cover everything from economic benefits to social and environmental impacts. South Heart area residents submitted a petition to Stark County officials asking them to require Great Northern to complete an EIS. Great Northern publicly stated they will not do an EIS because an EIS is not required. If, indeed, this plant is going to be as "environmentally sound" as they say, why wouldn't GNPD welcome the opportunity to prove it? In the spirit of project transparency, what are they trying to hide?

County officials and South Heart area residents cannot be expected to make a sound decision as to whether or not the gasification plant and mine are going to be good for the community if they don't have all the information.

Voss stated they will be "providing the public credible information," but he left the audience with many unanswered questions. This meeting provided an outline of the proposed project. No real details could be given, because they haven't been figured out yet. When a question was asked about visibility from the national park, technical consultant Al Lukes assured us that there would be no visibility. Then, a couple of minutes later, when asked about the plant's stack height, his response was, "Wish I knew," and he went on to say they haven't finalized any of the plans yet. But they can assure us that it's not going to affect the park? This seems a little premature.

Everyone wants economic development, but we want it to be good for the community. We want real, sustainable economic development that will allow us to keep our water and maintain the integrity of our land. This proposed plant is on some of the best agricultural land in the area and neighbors even better land.

Granted, I may be a little biased, given that one of those three-generation farms neighboring this project is where I grew up. My great-grandparents settled there with a vision for the future. My grandparents and parents have taken their turn at enhancing and expanding on that vision. I too, have a picture in my head of what my children will have handed down to them someday, and nowhere in that picture are there giant pits in the surrounding fields and dry water wells.

I stayed after the meeting, since my questions were not among the chosen few to be answered. I asked what the expansion plan is, for after the 15th year of mining, who will be standing here next to fight for their land? The answer from Voss was, "I don't know. We don't know yet."

You are going to build a $1.4 billion plant and you haven't thought about where you are getting coal after 15 years? I don't believe that. Why not be forthcoming and tell your new "neighbors" whose farm or land you will be after next?

There are better, cheaper and cleaner ways we can fulfill energy demands and have economic development, ways that we would be proud to leave to future generations.

Fourth-generation farmer Myron Eberts said it best: "My grandfather left this land for us to take care of it, and that's exactly what I am going to do. I am not going to have my grandkids stand here and fight this someday and wonder why their granddad didn't put his foot down and stop this thing from moving in when he had the chance."