The governor got the meeting he asked for, but it didn't produce the consensus he sought.

When the state announced that the eastern Montgomery County community of Elliston is "the only feasible site" in the region for a Norfolk Southern Corp. intermodal rail yard, it also announced that Gov. Tim Kaine wanted the 15 local governments who had supported the idea of an intermodal yard along the Heartland Corridor back in 2006 to "convene as a region within the next thirty days to discuss your shared vision for transportation and economic development."

At the invitation of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, 10 of the 15 convened at the Salem Civic Center on Friday morning. Representatives of Pulaski County and Blacksburg stood with Montgomery County in its opposition to the Elliston site. Representatives of Roanoke, Roanoke County, Vinton and Salem argued that work on the yard should move quickly. Botetourt County, which raised the same issues as Montgomery County over sites near Blue Ridge, also supported the Elliston site. Covington and Franklin County sent representatives, but they didn't take a position.

Del. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, did not speak at the meeting, but issued a statement Thursday strongly supporting the Elliston site.

Calling the intermodal yard the region's biggest economic development opportunity in 40 years, Roanoke City Councilman Bev Fitzpatrick said it must be built despite the objections of Montgomery County's government and citizens.

"One government cannot keep this region from moving forward," Fitzpatrick said.

Pulaski County Administrator Pete Huber took the opposite tack. His board of supervisors' chairman made it clear when the governor's letter was made public that Pulaski County supports Montgomery County's right to make its own economic development decisions. Huber said he came to support those comments, then said, "Projects come and go. Our neighbors, as local governments, don't."

An intermodal rail yard transfers trailer-sized containers between trucks and rail cars. The Heartland Corridor is a $249 million project that aims to move doubled-stacked freight containers between Columbus, Ohio, and Norfolk faster and more efficiently.

The Elliston site could cost as much as $50.5 million, according to state estimates, including a highway that would connect the site to Interstate 81. About $40 million of that would be public money. The state is also spending $9.75 million to increase tunnel clearances along the Heartland Corridor. It's also helping to pay for a $68 million rail line relocation project in Tidewater.

A state study says the rail yard would employ about a dozen people. Its spinoff effects could spread 740 to 2,900 jobs, annual economic output of $140 million to $550 million and $18 million to $71 million in taxes over a nine-county, five-city area from Lynchburg to Radford, from Franklin County to Monroe County, W.Va.

Pierce Homer, the state's secretary of transportation, said an intermodal facility will connect the region to the global marketplace, and areas lacking that connection are not flourishing.

Homer said he spent 15 years working in local government, so he understands how challenging a situation like this can be. Two of those years were in Galveston, Texas. Homer said that while he was there, he saw what happens when a community misses an opportunity like this.

Early in the 20th century, he said, promoters of Buffalo Bayou changed their community's name to Houston and dredged a ditch to create a port. Galveston, which had been a thriving port, decided to keep doing what it was doing, Homer said. Now Galveston hardly has a port and Houston is one of the busiest ports in the world.

Homer did not mention that development on Houston's port began after a 1900 hurricane virtually destroyed Galveston. Some people thought an inland port would be safer from such storms. Their reasoning proved sound. About a year after the Houston port opened, Galveston was struck by another devastating storm.

Del. Dave Nutter, R-Christiansburg, said he doesn't believe the regional transportation grid will support this development and he hasn't seen any studies on the question. If distribution centers and manufacturers really are drawn toward this intermodal yard, he asked, where will all that new traffic go?

Annette Perkins, chairwoman of the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors, appealed to her peers on three grounds: local autonomy, environmental and quality of life effects, and the propriety of this particular public-private partnership.

Norfolk Southern has paid dividends on its common stock for 103 consecutive quarters, Perkins said, yet the state is using taxpayer money to build a facility on the doorstep of taxpayers who don't want it.

Even if this spurs the all the development predicted -- and that seemed dubious to her -- it's not the kind of development Montgomery County is trying to encourage.

Perkins asked local government leaders, "Would $200,000 -- probably less than $100,000 in local revenue -- be worth your locality giving up local land use autonomy?"

Perkins said she'd report to the rest of the board and they'd talk about what to do next. They've already held at least two closed meetings to discuss fighting the facility in court.

Homer said he's sure the state and NS can answer all those questions.

"Norfolk Southern doesn't need this facility," Homer said. It's Virginia that needs it, he said.