The Adobe Flash Player is required to view this multimedia interactive. Get it here.

Residents divided on SunCoke plant

Gene Wagers walks his dog down Carol Ann Lane in Monroe, Ohio Monday, Aug 31, 2009. The neighborhood is close to the site of the new SunCoke plant, against which the city of Monroe has filed legal actions.

Gary Stelzer/Staff photographer Gene Wagers walks his dog down Carol Ann Lane in Monroe, Ohio Monday, Aug 31, 2009. The neighborhood is close to the site of the new SunCoke plant, against which the city of Monroe has filed legal actions.

ENLARGE PHOTO

Staff Dan Jordan of Monroe

ENLARGE PHOTO

Staff Donna Doyle of Monroe

ENLARGE PHOTO

Blase Doyle pushes his sister Cecilia in a wagon in front of his home on Niederlander Lane in Monroe, Ohio Monday, Aug 31, 2009. The neighborhood is close to the site of the new SunCoke plant, against which the city of Monroe has filed legal actions.

Gary Stelzer/Staff photographer Blase Doyle pushes his sister Cecilia in a wagon in front of his home on Niederlander Lane in Monroe, Ohio Monday, Aug 31, 2009. The neighborhood is close to the site of the new SunCoke plant, against which the city of Monroe has filed legal actions.

ENLARGE PHOTO

Lebanon racetrack questions new plan
2/3/12
Court news: See who was indicted from your neighborhood
2/3/12
State group pushing to revamp top county jobs
2/3/12
Liz Claiborne distribution center to close Sept. 1
2/3/12
Middies honor Nardiello for career contributions
2/3/12
> More headlines

By Jessica Heffner, Staff Writer Updated 12:13 PM Tuesday, September 1, 2009

MONROE — When it comes to the $340 million SunCoke Energy coke plant planned in Middletown — and the $358,245.96 the city of Monroe has spent in legal actions fighting it — residents are on both sides of the fence.

A random sampling of more than a dozen city residents Monday indicates neighborhood opinions are as divided on SunCoke as their locations are split by Ohio 63. The closer they live to the plant —Niederlander Lane, Carol Ann Lane and Serena Way — the more strongly they oppose the project.

However, on the other side of town, residents who were asked Monday had little to say against it — if they even knew what the plant was — and felt there were better ways Monroe could be spending its tax dollars.

Many residents still associate Monroe as an Armco/AK town, and generally agree on the importance of the SunCoke project for the local steelmaker’s viability since it will sell AK coke and energy for the next 20 years. Equally as many are aware of the new air permit SunCoke is seeking and plan to attend the Ohio Environmental Protection agency hearing Wednesday, Sept. 2, on it.

However, most are not fans of the AK pollution they already deal with or the potential emissions from another nearby plant.

“I’m not against the project, I just don’t like where it is going to be,” said Gene Wagers as he walked his dog on Niederlander Lane. “I’m not against the jobs or AK, I just don’t want it next to a neighborhood.”

Wagers used to live in Oneida near the AK Steel property line, He said he remembers as a kid taking a magnet into the backyard to catch the particles emitted from the facility and play with them on a piece of paper. The 60-year-old said he thought he was safe about four miles away, but finds himself at the mercy of another manufacturer: SunCoke.

“You’re talking quality of life as far as I am concerned,” Wagers said. “This is a quiet neighborhood and no matter what they say, that plant is going to bring so much pollution and so much noise.”

But Danielle Short, who lives on the other side of town in Easton Manor, said she knows about AK Steel, but didn’t know what SunCoke was and therefore was not worried about it, especially since it was being built in Middletown. She felt there were better causes the city could spend its money on.

“I think that is a lot of money for (Monroe) to spend if they are not going to stop the plant from being built anyway,” said the 29-year-old mother of three. “It’s not even in our area.”

Tax money used for legal dispute

Residents have a lot of opinions on how Monroe should spend its tax dollars in regards to its legal actions against the SunCoke Energy plant — they just don’t agree on how much.

Monroe City Manager William Brock said the city has spent $358,245.96 for legal counsel and expert opinions in its fight against SunCoke for its plant set to be built near its border in Middletown.

Actions have focused on the air permit issued by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency in November — including an appeal of the permit — a federal Clean Air Act lawsuit and an appeal of the decision of the Ohio Power Siting Board concerning the coke plant. The federal suit has since been dismissed and the air permit appeal has been temporarily canceled.

While in a statement Monroe officials said the actions have been expensive, “there have been positive results since Monroe took legal action,” including the voluntary halt of construction by SunCoke, further review of the air permit by the U.S. EPA and an application for a New Source Review permit by SunCoke, which includes a reduction 400 tons/year reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions.

But whether residents think those tax dollars spent and legal actions filed were warranted depends on which side of the city they live.

Near the plant border

Rachel Watkins, 36, a resident on Carol Ann Lane near the plant site, admitted she is not entirely sure what SunCoke is, but said she is confident it will bring more pollution and noise to her quiet neighborhood where she has lived for 11 years raising three children.

“Sure, the plant is bringing the type of jobs (Middletown) wants, but they could move into a less residential area,” she said.

While she is not thrilled about the plant, she isn’t quite satisfied with the money Monroe has been spending fighting it. Watkins said she appreciates that city leaders “care about the community,” but her kids are having classes in trailers because there isn’t enough room in the schools.

“If (Monroe) has got that much money, maybe they should improve the schools a bit with it,” she said.

Donna Doyle, 36, who lives on Niederlander, said she thinks Monroe’s fight “is a good use of our tax money and is hardly anything compared to what SunCoke and AK have put into it.”

She moved to the neighborhood two and a half years ago and was disappointed to find that also meant moving next to a future coke plant site. With four children and another one on the way, she’s concerned about the potential health effects from SunCoke emissions.

“It doesn’t seem the EPA is protecting the people and their health at all,” she said. “I know this is supposed to be a ‘green’ plant, but it’s still going to create more pollution than is already here.”

1 | 2 next page »

Share this article