Chants such as, “What do you want? Clean air! When do you want it? Now!” and “Healthy air, healthy homes, Christiana, David, Opel Jones!” echoed in front of the George Howard Building Monday, as residents gathered to support a bill that would have prevented chemical company W.R. Grace & Co. from establishing a plastics recycling pilot facility at its Columbia headquarters.

They held signs, some reading “Stop the permit! Protect the vulnerable!” and “W.R. Grace hands off ‘our clean air,'” while speakers, including Howard County Council member Deb Jung, called for passage of the legislation.”

But, the Howard County Council voted against the bill, 3-2, with Council Chair Liz Walsh and Jung casting their vote in support, and members Opel Jones, Christiana Rigby and David Yungmann voting against the bill.

“We’re going to keep building this effort no matter what happens tonight, we’re going to keep working on this issue so that communities are protected” said Lisa Krausz, a resident of the Village of River Hill and co-founder of Stop Grace Plastic Permit Project.

The legislation came after W.R. Grace filed an application with the Maryland Department of the Environment for an air quality permit that would allow it to build a proposed plastics recycling facility at the company’s Columbia campus on 7500 Grace Drive, prompting a monthslong fight from community members. Jung sponsored the bill, amending a Zoning Regulation Amendment filed by Village of River Hill residents, Cedar Creek residents and the HOA seeking a 1,800-foot setback between the W.R. Grace facility and the community.

Speaking to the council in February, W.R. Grace said the company is seeking to build a pilot-scale facility to test a catalytic chemical conversion process for recycling plastics, which a company scientist said would break down plastic pellets into gases and liquids.

The bill would have added research and development use to the Planned Employment Center zoning district, the type of district in which W.R. Grace is located, but prevent research and development activities that involved plastic pellets that produce flue gas and require a state permit. Jung proposed an amendment that would have changed the bill language to prevent catalytic conversion of plastics, but the amendment failed along with the bill.

In a statement after Monday’s vote, W.R. Grace said: “We appreciate the Council’s decision on this matter. The status of our permit application belongs under the MDE, and we will continue to fully and faithfully participate in that science-based process as designed. We recognize and agree with our neighbors’ desire for this to remain a safe, healthy community, and we are committed to being responsible, engaged members of our shared community for years to come.”

The council’s decision followed a legislative public hearing in February that had so many people signed up to speak that an overflow session had to be held the next night. Community members, from children to adults, shared over four hours of testimony regarding their fears of having the facility operate so close to their homes and their distrust of W.R. Grace because of its involvement in past lawsuits for asbestos exposure and payments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the cleanup of Superfund sites.

W.R. Grace employees spoke in opposition of the bill, assuring the community that the facility is safe and emphasizing the company’s commitment to safety for its employees. A research and development employee explained that the gas produced by the recycling process cannot contain forever chemicals PFAS, benzene or other heavy chemicals. Another staff member said that certain emissions would be less than those emitted by cars traveling short distances.

The council members in opposition had concerns that the bill was a special law, that the county council is not the body to regulate such a zoning matter and that there wasn’t an official report from the Maryland Department of the Environment on the proposed plastics recycling pilot facility. The opposing votes were often followed by “boos” with some in the audience interrupting as council members explained their votes.

“I value my integrity too much to vote yes on CB 11, knowing that it would be undone in a matter of months, rendered moot and at a great cost to our residents. I don’t think that’s right for anybody, least of all, the residents of Howard County and of Cedar Creek,” Rigby said.

Expressing appreciation for the community’s passion after receiving ample testimony, Rigby said she understands the community’s concerns about the project, and she regrets “whoever told you that this would be an effective solution.” The legislation would likely be deemed a special law targeting W.R. Grace and undone, and it would be irresponsible to spend county funds on a legal battle, Rigby argued.

Yungmann and Jones shared the same concerns about the legislation being considered a special law as well as “spot zoning,” which Jones said is problematic. Both explained that they’re not scientists nor “subject matter experts” and wished MDE had weighed in with a report.

“I am concerned about the air that people are breathing. I am concerned about everything everyone said,” Jones said. “The question is, what is the truth?”

Though Jones, Rigby and Yungmann highlighted issues with the bill as spot zoning, Walsh said that spot zoning has previously been approved by the council. She argued that the council is the zoning authority for the county and encouraged the community to remain involved.

Jung explained that the bill would not be a special law because “it applies to an entire class of research and development laboratories.” The council has the ability to define the compatibility for land uses with the community, and the use of the land for the proposed facility isn’t compatible, Jung said.

“The health and safety of our community must come first in our land use decisions. CB 11 puts people over profits. It’s the least we can do, and I vote yes,” Jung said as she cast her vote.

Have a news tip? Contact Kiersten Hacker at khacker@baltsun.com or @KierstenHacker on X.