Residents Raise Concerns Over Proposed Sheriff’s Firing Range in Bentonville, Virginia

On Saturday, October 5, 2024, a group of concerned Bentonville residents gathered to express their opposition to the proposed Sheriff’s Department firing range at the local landfill near the Warren County Transfer Station. Organized by several residents, the gathering aimed to voice worries over noise, environmental impact, and overall quality of life for nearby communities.

The Sheriff’s Department’s proposal involves creating a new firearms training facility for law enforcement officers, who must complete annual training and certification on their weapons. The department argues that building its own range will reduce travel and overtime costs associated with using outside facilities. However, residents are convinced that the long-term financial and environmental costs may outweigh any potential savings.

Noise and Safety Concerns

One of the primary issues raised was noise. David Brotman highlighted the disturbing levels of noise pollution that a firing range would create. “The noise is a significant concern,” Brotman explained. “We’re talking about rifles and pistols being fired up to 30 days a year, for up to eight hours a day. That kind of intermittent shooting noise can be extremely disruptive to our community.”

John Jenkins, who lives nearby, also emphasized the excessive noise. He mentioned that sound tests at his property showed that noise levels were above the legal limit. He expressed his worries about safety, pointing out the proximity of the range to homes, Shenandoah National Forest, and Skyline Drive. “My father always taught me you don’t point a firearm where people are at, and here we are, firing in directions where people could be impacted,” Jenkins said. “This isn’t just a matter of convenience; it’s about safety.”

Environmental Impact and Previous Issues

The landfill has a contentious history with the Bentonville community. Lorraine Smelser, who lives directly across from the transfer station and has been a resident since 1958, recounted previous county decisions’ negative impacts on local water quality. “The county has made poor decisions in the past, costing us millions,” Smelser said. “They contaminated our wells, and now we’re worried about lead from bullets further polluting our water. This would be yet another costly mistake.”

Leslie Mathews, another long-time Bentonville resident, echoed Smelser’s sentiments. She pointed out the ongoing costs associated with mitigating the landfill’s environmental impact and suggested the county-owned Esa Lane property as an alternative site. “Esa Lane is already centrally located and hosts a fire and rescue training facility. It just makes sense for the Sheriff’s Office to use that land instead of creating more problems here,” Mathews stated.

Effect on Quality of Life

Several residents spoke of the potential impact on their quality of life. Chelsea, her husband, Justin, and their three-year-old son, Theo, live in the nearby Gimlet Ridge community. Chelsea noted that they moved back to Bentonville for a peaceful life in the countryside, and the idea of having gunfire nearby was deeply troubling. “We moved here for peace and quiet,” Chelsea said. “Having constant gunfire isn’t what we imagined for our son as he plays outside. It’s heartbreaking to think this might become our new normal.”

Justin, a childhood therapist, emphasized how detrimental the noise could be for children. “I’ve worked as a therapist for ten years, and I’ve never read a study indicating that exposure to this type of noise is healthy for children,” Justin explained. We chose this community so our children could grow up in a safe and peaceful environment.”

Seven-year-old Nela Martin, one of the youngest voices at the gathering, shared her simple yet poignant perspective: “If they have it in town, they won’t hurt the environment like they do out here. We have beautiful land, and if you miss, you’re killing wildlife,” Nela said. Her words were a stark reminder of how the proposed range would impact nature and the community’s way of life.

Stacy Wise, a resident of Shangri-La Road, voiced her concerns about the proposed firing range, particularly regarding the impact on quality of life due to noise levels. “When they conducted the sound tests that morning, I wasn’t notified, and it was incredibly loud,” Wise said. “I have a special needs daughter with epilepsy, and loud noises can trigger her seizures. I can’t imagine her being exposed to the constant sound of gunfire.”

Wise added that the noise from hunters is occasional, but the repeated gunfire during the tests was far more disruptive. “It’s not something I want to hear on a regular basis,” she explained. “The sheriff initially mentioned the range would be used 22 days a year, but by the end of the HOA meeting, it seemed like it could be more. I’m concerned that the usage will only keep increasing. I urge the county to vote no and find a more appropriate location—not in our backyard.”

Proposed Alternatives and Lack of Transparency

Residents also raised issues regarding transparency and the process by which the firing range was approved. John Jenkins noted that the range proposal had been submitted to the Planning Commission without proper application paperwork, and residents were not given sufficient input into the decision. “It just doesn’t seem fair that the Sheriff’s Department already decided on this site without proper community input or consulting the Board of Supervisors,” Jenkins said.

David Brotman reiterated that the Sheriff’s Department’s current analysis lacked sufficient transparency. He suggested that the county undertake a comprehensive assessment using mapping technology to determine the best location for the range. “If this is the best site, then so be it,” Brotman said. “But we need a fair process to prove that this is the best option—not just for the Sheriff’s Department, but for our community as well.”

Emotional and Economic Costs

Victoria Martin, another Bentonville resident, stressed that noise pollution from gunfire would make her home feel like a “war zone.” “We’re all hunters here, and we understand what guns sound like during hunting season, but this is different,” Martin said. “I feel for people who live in actual war zones, but I don’t want that for my child.”

Economic concerns were also highlighted. Several residents pointed out that establishing a firing range could lead to a decrease in property values. “They say it won’t cost the county anything, but what about the loss in property value?” asked Jeff Baggarly, who recently purchased a farm near the proposed range site. “It’s going to cost us lost revenue and a decline in the value of our land. It’s just not worth it.”

Diane Popek added that there seemed to be little regard for community wishes. “This isn’t just about noise and property values—it’s about how our officials are making decisions. There are clear conflicts of interest here, and someone stands to gain financially at the expense of our community’s well-being,” Popek asserted.

Calls for a Fair and Thorough Evaluation

Many residents called for a more thoughtful and inclusive evaluation process. Frank Grimes, who had researched best practices for building a firing range, emphasized the importance of proper studies to mitigate issues like noise, ballistics, and environmental contamination. “Let’s stop the rush and make sure we get this right,” Grimes urged. “The Sheriff’s Department needs the training, but we also need to make sure we aren’t creating a new set of problems for the community.”

Another local resident, John Swenson, emphasized the need for an unbiased, professional assessment of all possible sites. “We need an outside evaluation to determine the best location for the range,” Swenson said. This isn’t about stopping progress—it’s about ensuring we all make the best decision for our entire community.”

David Brotman wrapped up the meeting by reiterating that while a firing range may eventually need to be near someone’s backyard, the decision must be made fairly and transparently. “If this process proves that Bentonville is indeed the best location for the firing range, then I would accept it and adapt,” Brotman said. “But until then, we need to ensure that every alternative has been evaluated fully and fairly.”

A Community’s Plea for Consideration

The residents of Bentonville came together not just to oppose a firing range in their neighborhood but to make a broader point about responsible governance and community inclusion. They want the county to consider the long-term effects—on the environment, on the economy, and on residents’ quality of life—before making decisions that could significantly alter their way of life.

As David Brotman stated, if Bentonville proves to be the best location, then it should be pursued, but it must be through a fair, transparent process that serves both the Sheriff’s Department and the community. This plea is not just about rejecting an inconvenience; it’s about ensuring that county officials take the time to truly assess and understand the needs of all residents, making decisions that are in the best interest of the entire county.