Citizens Alliance for Government Integrity President Andy Lytle speaks at the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on May 9, 2024.
Written by John Lee, a Move Silfab contributor
In June 2024, York County issued a public “Management Statement” assuring residents that concerns about the Silfab Solar facility were based on “misinformation,” and that the Board of Zoning Appeals’ (BZA) May 9 decision was narrow, generic, and did not apply to Silfab’s project.
But in a sworn court filing submitted on December 22, 2025 by the same BZA, the Board explicitly states that the zoning interpretation was binding, enforceable, site-specific, and directly applicable to Silfab’s facility.
Both declarations simply cannot be true.
The June 25, 2024 management statement made three core claims:
1. “The decision by the BZA on May 9th did not apply to Silfab”
2. “The BZA decision on May 9th applies only to future projects in the light industrial district.”
3. An advisory zoning verification letter written by a zoning technician “gave Silfab the legal right to develop the property for its intended purpose”.
Taken together, the message was clear: Silfab’s project was untouched by the BZA’s decision and would proceed full steam ahead.
In stark contrast, the BZA’s formal court brief states:
1. The zoning interpretation was binding and enforceable, not advisory.
2. The interpretation was appealable precisely because it had real legal effect.
3. The appeal was properly brought by a neighboring landowner because it concerned Silfab’s proposed facility at 7149 Logistics Lane, not a hypothetical future project.
4. The BZA’s decision, following a finding of fact, determined that solar cell and panel manufacturing, based on Silfab’s actual operations, is an unlisted and therefore prohibited heavy industrial use in a Light Industrial district.
The brief repeatedly references Silfab’s specific facility, its emissions, scrubbers, hazardous air pollutants, and operational characteristics, relying on Silfab’s own permit applications and filings as evidence.
In other words, when speaking to the public, County managements states “this isn’t about Silfab.” When speaking to a judge under oath, the County’s Board of Zoning Appeals states “this is very much about Silfab and their project at 7149 Logistics Lane in Fort Mill”.
This contradiction is not a matter of tone or nuance – it goes to credibility and governance.
The court filing acknowledges the legal reality: the ruling directly affects Silfab, carries enforcement consequences, and confirms that the facility does not comply with current Light Industrial zoning.
This was not a harmless misunderstanding; the management did not simply get this wrong. It was a material mischaracterization of a legal ruling that attempted to insulate a controversial industrial project next to schools and neighborhoods. The statement was issued to silence opposition, marginalize citizen concerns, and deprive the public of informed participation in the zoning process.
At this point, the core issue is no longer Silfab alone. It is whether York County management knowingly misled the public and whether any official will now take responsibility for correcting the record.
Light Industrial Zoning Classification shown at May 9, 2024 BZA Meeting
Silfab Solar’s Fort Mill Facility and the surrounding schools
SCPIF is not directly affiliated with any litigation of this issue