Louisa County Seal, click for homepage Louisa County Seal, click for homepage
Contact    Sitemap    Search    

Menu
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
MARCH 3, 2008
6:00 P.M.



Board Present: Fitzgerald A. Barnes, Dan W. Byers, Willie L. Gentry, Jr., Willie L. Harper, Richard A. Havasy, P.T. Spencer, Jr. and Jack T. Wright
Others Present: C. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Patrick Morgan, County Attorney; Darren Coffey, Director of Community Development; Will Cockrell, Senior Planner; Jason Pauley, County Engineer; Kevin Linhares, Director of Facilities Management; Bob Hardy, Director of Information Technology; Sherry Vena, Director of Human Resources; Jane Shelhorse, Director of Parks and Recreation; Amanda Lloyd, Office Manager; April Jacobs, Revenue Recovery Administrator; and Zuwana Morgan, Records Clerk

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Harper called the March 3, 2008 regular meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 6:00 p.m.  Mr. Barnes led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD


Mr. Roger Mathias, Spotsylvania, VA, stated he was with Docks Inc. and questioned if the Board could assist with expediting the permit process with Dominion Power.  Mr. Mathias stated in order for Docks Inc. to build docks and boat houses on Lake Anna, permits were required from Dominion Power before a permit was issued from the County.  Mr. Mathias said there has been a several month backlog, dating as far back as August, where Docks Inc. had not been able to get permits.  Mr. Mathias stated he thought Dominion Power might have had some policy changes and requested that the Board please assist them with this matter.  

Mr. Steve West, Non-resident of Louisa County, stated he was the owner of Shoreline Services and a dock builder at Lake Anna.  Mr. West said the purpose of him speaking was to see if the Board could help move Dominion Power along with regards to the permit process.  Mr. West said it had been several months since he received any approval from Dominion Power to start construction and it was coming to the point where he would have to lay his employees off.  Mr. West requested that the Board determine why the process from Dominion Power took so long.

Mr. Harper requested Mr. Lintecum to determine what the issue was.

Mr. Gilbert Kellison, Jackson District, stated he was speaking in regards to the Rural Development Program.  Mr. Kellison said the Program made it possible for him and his wife to get a home.  Mr. Kellison added that the Program included guidelines that must be followed and he felt that any changes to the program would be a mistake.  Mr. Kellison said if the requirements to obtain money were made easier more people would take advantage of the Program and it wouldnt be as much of a benefit.  Mr. Kellison said if the requirements were harder, he would not have been able to take the opportunity to be a part of the Program; therefore, he thought the guidelines were fine the way they were.  

Mr. Howard Loudin, Mineral District, stated he was in the process of helping Mr. Howard Evergreen with his second house.  Mr. Loudin said the Rural Development Program is helping people who are trying to help themselves.   Mr. Loudin stated that it has been a pleasure working them because the Program really makes the applicant work.   Mr. Loudin said that he thought the Program is doing a great job.

Ms. Kathleen Dahowski, Louisa District, stated she had lived in an apartment in Louisa for three years and had been looking for a home since then.  Ms. Dahowski said she had been unable to get financing; however, the Trust Fund Program was giving her the opportunity to buy a house this year.  Ms. Dahowski said the starting price on a three-bedroom house in Louisa was approximately $155,000.  Ms. Dahowski stated with a $30,000 down payment, at a 5.25 percent interest rate, the payments would be $873 per month.  Ms. Dahowski stated based on the financial calculators online she could afford a $90,000 house.  Ms. Dahowski stated it appeared that the Board wanted to cut the Program because they thought there wasnt a need for it.  Ms. Dahowski said there was a great need; however, there was no publicity about the program.  Ms. Dahowski added that if more people were aware, the funds would get spent.  

Mr. Harper said he was not aware that anyone wanted to cut the Program.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

Mr. Harper stated he would like to add a resolution recognizing Patrick Morgan for his years of service to the County of Louisa to presentations.  Mr. Harper said Mr. Spencer previously requested that a discussion of Bio-Solids be added to old business.  Mr. Harper stated he would like to add a resolution opposing House Budget 140, #5 to new business.  Mr. Harper stated he would like to add a discussion of the request by the Electoral Board to new business.  Mr. Lintecum stated he would like to add a discussion of personnel reporting directly to the County Administrator and a discussion for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel to closed session.

        On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the March 3, 2008 agenda was adopted as amended.

PRESENTATIONS

Presentation - Donation of funds from Updike Industries Inc. to LinkAges for the Aquatic Facility

Mr. Graven Craig received a check for $12,000 from Updike Industries, Inc. made payable to LinkAges of Louisa.  Mr. Craig noted that the funds would be immediately applied towards the Aquatic Facility.  Mr. Craig thanked Updike for their generous support of Louisa County.  

Mr. Gentry said LinkAges is a 501(C) 3 organization and is able to accept donations on the Countys behalf.  Mr. Gentry said this donation would be transferred from LinkAges to the County to help with for the Aquatic Facility. Mr. Gentry stated that Updike was the first to donate to this project and the County was looking for many more donations.

VDOT Monthly Update - Jamie Glass, Resident Administrator, provided an update of VDOT activities, which included the following:

Maintenance:

Construction: Land Use: Traffic Engineering:

Mr. Lintecum stated the Board of Supervisors was provided with a memo from the Department of Transportation that discussed that there would be a forty-four percent reduction of funds.  Mr. Lintecum said Mr. Glass was now having a problem with the Six-Year Plan because of the reduction.

Mr. Harper questioned if the County was still on target with the Six-Year Plan.

Mr. Glass stated the County was still on target for the public hearing where the priorities were going to be set.  Mr. Glass said the allocation to the County was going to have to be applied where it could. Mr. Glass stated the County was going to have to look at the projects they currently had to determine what projects could be completed quickly.  

Mr. Barnes said it was the Countys responsibility to inform the citizens about the cuts.  Mr. Barnes stated when the citizens see the Six-Year Plan, they dont necessarily understand how the budget affects the plan.  Mr. Barnes suggested the possibility of having a public hearing after the budget was adopted to explain some of these things to the citizens.

Mr. Harper said he thought that was a very good point.  Mr. Harper stated that the Board should be continually educating the citizens through the entire budget process.  

Mr. Gentry agreed with Mr. Barnes and said when the County held a public hearing about the Six-Year Plan and emphasized the priority list, the citizens would understand better.

Resolution - Recognizing Patrick Morgan for his years of service to the County of Louisa

Mr. Harper presented a resolution to Mr. Morgan recognizing him for his dedicated service to Louisa County.

Mr. Morgan said it had been an honor and privilege to serve the Board of Supervisors.  Mr. Morgan stated the support he had received from the Board was outstanding.  Mr. Morgan said he thought the Board had one of the best groups of County staff to work with and he would truly miss everyone.  

Mr. Wright said he respected Mr. Morgan for everything he had done.

On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution recognizing and extending their appreciation and thanks to Patrick Morgan for his dedicated service to the County of Louisa.

OLD BUSINESS

Discussion/Decision - Surplus Revenue Sharing funds

Mr. Gentry questioned Mr. Glass if the surplus Revenue Sharing funds could be used toward the new elementary school road project.  

Mr. Glass said he spoke with the Central Office and they indicated that the funds could be transferred after the application was accepted.  Mr. Glass stated the Central Office recommended leaving the funds where they were until the application was approved.

Resolution - To take three (3) streets in the Forest View Subdivision into the Secondary System of Highways in Louisa County, Virginia

Mr. Lintecum stated Mr. Morgan included a memo in the Board Packet about the process of taking roads into the Secondary System of Highways.  Mr. Lintecum said the developer must post bond until VDOT accepted, then the Board of Supervisors would pass a resolution.

Mr. Harper said he understood that sufficient research was completed in each instance to verify that the County had the right-of-way.

Mr. Gentry said the biggest problem was usually a utility issue.  Mr. Gentry stated that the specification of the utilitys release and the slope easement was something that really needed to be checked out.  Mr. Gentry stated that he wasnt sure how far VDOT had gone, but the County was expected to guarantee it.  Mr. Gentry stated the County should get quit claim releases from the utilities in order for it to be a clear and unrestricted right-of-way.  Mr. Gentry said that County should have someone in house to follow up because it was not done automatically.  

Mr. Lintecum suggested that Mr. Pauley will be assigned to work with the Community Development Department to make sure follow up was done.

Mr. Spencer stated he was still going to vote against the resolution because he wasnt comfortable with the County guaranteeing anything.  

Mr. Barnes stated the citizens were being affected because mail carriers and school buses couldnt travel down those roads until they were adopted.  

Mr. Gentry questioned if the three streets on the resolution had been looked at since the last meeting.  Mr. Lintecum said no.

Mr. Coffey noted that he hadnt done a field inspection on the three streets but from a subdivision standpoint, they were good.  

Mr. Lintecum requested that Mr. Coffey and Mr. Pauley complete a field inspection and this topic would be place on the next agenda.

Discussion/Decision - Abandonment of right-of-way along Route 749

Mr. Morgan stated in August 2007, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether or not to abandon the right-of-way on Route 749.  Mr. Morgan stated there was a problem with one of the owners that lived close to that property.  Mr. Morgan said the attorney for Shenandoah Crossings has reassured him that those issues had been taken care of and asked that it be put back on the agenda.  Mr. Morgan noted that included in the Board Packet were emails from Mr. Glass stating that VDOT Headquarters expected another public hearing before the County went through with the abandonment; therefore, another public hearing had to be set.  

Mr. Gentry questioned if it would be a joint public hearing between the County and VDOT.

Mr. Glass stated that VDOT didnt own the right-of-way.  Mr. Glass said there was a 40-foot easement dedicated to the County for public use.  Mr. Glass said the County would have to send a notice of intent to the Commissioner requesting that VDOT relinquish responsibility.

Mr. Harper questioned if the notice of intent was to be sent before or after the public hearing.

Mr. Glass stated the notice of intent had to be sent before the public hearing and at the public hearing, he would present the letter and whether the request was approved or not.  

Mr. Morgan said the State required a 30-day notice for public hearings.    

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried a voted of 7-0, the Board voted to schedule a public hearing on April 21, 2008 pertaining to the abandonment of the right of way for Route 749.  

Discussion - Bio-Solids
Mr. Coffey stated the Community Development Department had a responsibility to administer this Program under the County Ordinance and State Code.  Mr. Coffey said after reviewing the codes, the program was being operated under the correct parameters.  Mr. Coffey stated there were some conflicts in the County Ordinance and the State Code in the areas of notification and timing.  Mr. Coffey explained that his staff was enforcing the ordinance under either the County or State Code, whichever was most applicable.  

Mr. Coffey stated one of the issues that came up was the notification of application.  Mr. Coffey said the State Code required a 100-day notice.  Mr. Coffey noted that the County Administrators Office received the notification about 180-days in advance, of all the possible sites the application could go on.  Mr. Coffey stated the Bio-Solid was rarely spread on all of the sites they noted. Mr. Coffey said the County ordinance required 30-days of signage and it was typically being done five to seven days in advance.  Mr. Coffey indicated that State Code only required 48 hours and his Department has been holding them to the State Code standard.  

Mr. Coffey stated his Department had applied for reimbursement for everything they could, include checking the signs, flagging and making sure the proper buffers were in place.  Mr. Coffey said so far, the County had received $3,000 in reimbursement and had another $800 outstanding.  

Mr. Coffey explained the responsibility for Bio-Solids at the State level switched in January of this year.  Mr. Coffey said it switched from the Health Department and was now with DEQ.  Mr. Coffey stated the County had two pending reimbursements with the Health Department and one with DEQ.    

Mr. Coffey stated there has only been a hand full of complaints over the last year and a half.   Mr. Coffey said his inspectors had made it clear to the distributors to make sure their trucks stayed clean or they would be shut down.  

Mr. Harper questioned if the County had personnel that had been trained on Bio-Solids.

Mr. Coffey said he had three trained personnel; however, they were not trained where they could perform testing on-site.  Mr. Coffey said they were trained on what to look for and who to call.  

Mr. Havasy questioned what type of paperwork the truckers were required to carry regarding the ingredients in the product.

Mr. Coffey said they were required to have paperwork of exact contents and what the pH levels were when they left the factory.  Mr. Coffey said his staff had not been routinely checking that.  Mr. Coffey explained that the pH on those loads was supposed to be balanced when they left the site.  Mr. Coffey said because of the lack of complaints, it seemed to be balanced.  

Mr. Spencer stated he was very familiar with Bio-Solids.  Mr. Spencer said companies like Synagro needed to get rid of the Bio-Solids and the farmers in Louisa could use them.  Mr. Spencer explained that the pH definitely needed to be tested.  Mr. Spencer stated he would like to have someone qualified in the County Office to be able to test pH levels.  

Mr. Harper questioned Mr. Coffey if he was going to work on getting someone certified for testing.  Mr. Coffey stated his department would do what the Board asked; however, to get someone certified with his current staffing level would cause them to suffer in other areas of code enforcement.  

Mr. Wright said he understood that six years ago the soil was tested at the plant before it was loaded on the truck.  Mr. Wright questioned how could the pH change from the time it left the plant to the time it got to the field.  Mr. Coffey said it his understanding the soil was absolutely tested before leaving the plant.  Mr. Coffey stated in the three years he has been with the County there hadnt been any examples of bad loads.   Mr. Coffey said in past years he believed there were problems with bad load; however since then everything has improved including enforcement.  

Mr. Wright stated it was his understand to make the Bio-Solid odor free you would have to double treat it, which would also make it very expensive and they would not be able to provide it free to the farmers.  Mr. Coffey said according to DEQ and Cooperative Extension it should smell and if it does not smell, its not being broke down.  

Mr. Byers questioned how much time it takes to train a person to be proficient in testing.  Mr. Coffey said he was unable to answer that question.  Mr. Byers said that would be good information for the Board to know.  Mr. Byers asked how many applications the County has a week in a normal season.

Mr. Lintecum stated its a cycle type system that you apply heavily for 1 year, and then the land has to lie for about three years before its applied again.  Mr. Lintecum said there would be heavy and light years.  

Mr. Byers questioned who would pay for the extensive training.  Mr. Lintecum said you could request reimbursement.  Mr. Lintecum stated reimbursement was based on dry tonnage and you get more money for dry than wet.

Mr. Harper asked what the County would get out of a typical truckload.  Mr. Coffey stated it was based on time spent by staff.  Mr. Coffey said $2.50 per dry ton, per acre was how it was calculated for maximum possible reimbursement.  Mr. Coffey explained that amount wasnt what you actually received for reimbursement and there was actually no way you can hit those maximum targets for reimbursement.  Mr. Coffey stated his Department is aggressively applying for the reimbursement.  

Mr. Byers said if the County had someone trained it would make the process simpler.

Mr. Barnes stated he didnt think there was a problem.  Mr. Barnes noted the Board hadnt dealt with Bio-Solid in a long time.  Mr. Barnes said with the high cost of gas and diesel, the County will see more farmers really wanting to use Bio-Solids.  Mr. Barnes stated he wanted to make sure the panic button was not getting pushed, there may have been some isolated issues, but not a problem.  Mr. Barnes stated Louisa was fortunate to have a producer like Synagro that wants to do it right.

Mr. Gentry said this situation was a win, win situation, Synagro needed to get rid of the Bio-Solids and the farmers could use it. Mr. Gentry stated if the code enforcement officers were making sure its done properly, he wouldnt see any problem.   Mr. Gentry said basically there would a slight odor, but the County doesnt have a problem with bad Bio-Solids.

Mr. Havasy said the cost of fertilizer has tripled because of gas prices.  Mr. Havasy stated as the County grows, people have to understand that the farms were here first.  Mr. Havasy stated the subdivisions built by a farm should be notified by their realtor.  Mr. Havasy said he thought the Board should reestablish that they had always stood behind the farmers right to farm in this County.

Mr. Spencer said Synagro was paying the County so our people would do the testing.  Mr. Spencer stated he thought there should be someone in the County doing the job the County is getting paid to do.

NEW BUSINESS

Update Affordable Housing

Mr. Howard Evergreen stated that before the Down Payment Assistance Fund was in place, the Housing Department had almost stopped doing counseling with first time homebuyers because there was almost no opportunity for them to get the funds.  Mr. Evergreen said since late fall of 2006, when the program was started, two families had been approved and eight families were now going through the process.  

Mr. Evergreen said the monies are secured by a deed of trust, the money would be returned and would continue to grow over time.  Mr. Evergreen stated he looked at the fund more like a Capital Project Fund opposed to an expenditure fund.  Mr. Evergreen stated there are other ways the fund can grow, for example, developers could make proffer offers that could go into the fund.  

Mr. Evergreen stated Mr. Spencer had sent quite a few people to inquire about the fund.  Mr. Evergreen stated that Louisa is the only rural community in this area that has such a program.  Mr. Evergreen explained a message was being sent to young families that the County wants them in the community.  Mr. Evergreen stated he hoped the fund would be able to continue.  

Mr. Byers asked the price range of the two houses the families had purchased.  Mr. Evergreen said $174,000 was the average of the two houses.

Mr. Evergreen said typically the families the program serves usually make between $25,000 to $45,000 annually.  Mr. Evergreen noted the houses participants can buy are between $160,000 to $190,000.   Mr. Evergreen indicated that it depends on several factors and the interest rate would be one.

Mr. Gentry asked if the word on the street was that the County was trying to do away with this program.

Mr. Evergreen stated they were very concerned.  Mr. Evergreen said he knew there was enough money for another year.  Mr. Evergreen explained the program works with the participants sometimes longer than a year.  Mr. Evergreen said if the money were to stop it would be hard for them to work with people the way the program was intended.  Mr. Evergreen stated they are concerned that the Board of Supervisor may not continue to fund the program.

Mr. Gentry said he didnt want the wrong message to get out.  Mr. Gentry said he would like to get a copy of the minutes from the Affordable Housing Committee.

Mr. Spencer stated he had first opposed the program and then he realized how many people in the County need it.  Mr. Spencer said the word of this program has to get out.  Mr. Spencer noted he has posted information about the program on Louisa online and had been stopping people in shopping centers telling them about it.  Mr. Spencer emphasized information needs to get out to those can use it in the County.

Mr. Havasy stated this is an area where the Board wants the money to be spent. Mr. Havasy said young and working class families need to be able to take advantage of the housing assistance the County offers.  

Mr. Barnes stated he has always been in support.  Mr. Barnes said the Board needs to get out to see what houses really cost.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Annual Report; Dominion Virginia Power North Anna State of the Station

Dan Stoddard, Dominion Power Site Vice-President, gave an overview of the report given to the Board members prior to the meeting on the 2007 State of the Station update. The topics included:

  • Operating Performance
  • Hydroelectric Operations
  • Industry Recognition
  • Regulatory Issues
  • Emergency Preparedness
  • Industrial Safety
  • Business Impact
  • Dominion Proposes Hybrid Regulatory Model to Continue Rate Stability
  • Voluntary Groundwater Monitoring Program
  • Keeping the Nuclear Option Open
  • Security
  • Low-Level Radioactive Waste
  • Yucca Mountain Designation for Commercial Used Nuclear Fuel
  • Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
  • Employee Involvement in the Community
  • Mr. Stoddard stated safety is the highest priority at North Anna.  Mr. Stoddard explained that North Anna made and exceeded their safety goal for 2007 having a total incident rate of .09 percent.   Mr. Stoddard added North Anna continues to promote an effective Virginia Voluntary Protection Program Star Worksite. Mr. Stoddard stated North Anna continues to be among the top rated plants by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations.   Mr. Stoddard said during 2007, all North Anna Units maintained the NRC Performance Indicators within the Green performance band, which require only regulatory oversight.

    Mr. Stoddard said Dominion is working with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) in a voluntary industry-wide program to self-assess and enhance groundwater-monitoring programs for tritium at nuclear generating stations.  Mr. Stoddard added tritium is a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that is commonly found in water and is also a byproduct of nuclear reactor operations.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated in both areas, emergency preparedness and security, North Annas performance stays strong.  Mr. Stoddard explained in November 2007, North Anna successfully completed an emergency preparedness exercise.  Mr. Stoddard said in July 2008 North Anna would have a graded exercise with full participation by state and local parties.

    Mr. Stoddard explained in the area of security, North Anna continues to upgrade the facilities, training, and protective strategies. Mr. Stoddard said all aspects of security were tested during the year with s series of force on force exercises.

    Mr. Stoddard stated the commercial success of North Anna is important to both Dominion Virginia Power and Louisa County.  Mr. Stoddard stated the operating performance for North Anna in 2007 resulted in a combined capacity factor of 87%.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated in September 2007 North Anna was recognized as the most efficient power station in the United States for the three-year period ending in 2007.  Mr. Stoddard explained North Anna continues to be the largest employer and the largest taxpayer in Louisa County, having paid over $230 billion in taxes over the life of the station to date.

    Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion and North Anna want to keep the nuclear power option available for continual growth to support Virginias electrical needs.  Mr. Stoddard explained Virginia is now the second largest net import of electricity in the United Stated, with California being the largest importer.  Mr. Stoddard stated the Commonwealth was projected to need additional 4,000-mega watts of generation by 2015.

    Mr. Stoddard said Dominion Power has not made a decision to build another nuclear unit, however the NRC approved the early site permit in November 2007.  Mr. Stoddard explained this approval indicates the North Anna site is suitable for additional generation and that there were no sufficient environmental impacts and no emergency preparedness issues.  Mr. Stoddard stated also in November 2007, Dominion took the next step toward licensing a new reactor at Lake Anna by filing a Combined Operating License (COL) Application with the NRC.  Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion was the first investor owned utility to submit a COL with the NRC.  Mr. Stoddard said in January of this year, the NRC issued an acceptance notification for the Dominion COL application and has given a tentative date of 2010 for approval, if it is successful.  Mr. Stoddard explained the decision to build a new unit at North Anna would be based on the best needs of the customer, shareholders and community.

    Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion and North Anna continue to carefully monitor the developments and management of both used fuel and low-level radioactive waste.

    Mr. Stoddard said work continued on the second dry fuel storage pad to ensure that Dominion could safely store used nuclear fuel from the facility.

    Mr. Stoddard said Dominion is preparing for the potential closure of the low level waste facility in Barnwell, South Carolina.  Mr. Stoddard explained Dominion has an agreement that Barnwell will accept waste until June 2008.  Mr. Stoddard stated North Anna is developing a plan to reduce the amount of waste generated.  Mr. Stoddard said North Anna would store waste in the protected area until other disposal options become available and ship some waste to a facility in Utah.   Mr. Stoddard said Dominion was committed to making sure they manage the low level waste safely, without any adverse effect to their neighbors.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion became an Energy Star partner in 2007.  Mr. Stoddard said Dominion is working with Louisa County schools to help them reduce energy cost.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated Dominions employees were an outstanding group of professionals who care deeply about what they do at work and about the community they serve.  Mr. Stoddard said employees worked in the schools to mentor young people, built houses for Habitat for Humanity, improved the Communitys parks, collected toys for children, collected food for families in need and actively supported troops in Iraq through letters and care packages.  Mr. Stoddard added the employees make North Anna a top performer and a very special place to work.

    Mr. Gentry said congratulations on the safety record and efficient report.  Mr. Gentry asked what class of waste was stored on site.  Mr. Gentry said he would like to thank Dominions volunteers for the work they had done.  

    Mr. Stoddard explained A; B and C types are now shipped off to Barnwell.  Mr. Stoddard said in June 2008 the class A type waste would be shipped to Utah and classes B and C would be stored on site in a protected area.

    Mr. Gentry questioned if it was true the new unit would evaporate 20 million gallons of water per day.

    Mr. Stoddard said it would evaporate 20 million gallons per day.  Mr. Stoddard explained that the top one-inch of the lake contains 350 million gallons and its a small amount compared to the capacity of the lake.

    Mr. Gentry stated the County is conducting a study to see where the County can utilize water for infrastructure needs.   Mr. Gentry questioned if Dominion would work with the County with regards to taking water out of the lake

    Mr. Stoddard said Dominion would work with the County to meet the needs of the County.

    Mr. Havasy stated Yucca Mountain budget this year was $475 million.  Mr. Havasy question what Yucca Mountain was doing with that money every year and when would North Anna be utilizing Yucca Mountain.

    Mr. Stoddard said he would have to direct Mr. Havasy to the Department of Energy about Yucca Mountains budget and where the money was being spent.  Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion might be able to take waste in 2017, however that is contingent with licensing from the NRC.  

    Mr. Havasy questioned if Mr. Stoddard could let the Board know what Yucca Mountain looked like, how deep it was and how long the tunnels were.

    Mr. Stoddard explained Yucca Mountain is a large mountain rock formation in Nevada, near where the nuclear testing range was.  Mr. Stoddard said the tunnels are several hundred feet deep and long.  Mr. Stoddard stated in the first phase of construction, its capable of handling 70 thousand tons of waste.

    Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.

    Ms. Barbara Crawford, Cuckoo District, stated she was speaking for Friends of Lake Anna.  Ms. Crawford said that the Potassium Iodine pills expired last August.  Ms. Crawford stated at the meeting in November the NRC said they had mailed the Potassium Iodine pills to the Virginia Department of Health.  Mr. Crawford stated right now no one had received their pills.  Mr. Crawford asked for the Board to assist the citizens in getting their pills.  

    Ms. Crawford stated at the meeting in November 2007, the representatives from Dominion stated they would be willing to come to Louisa and have a public meeting to answer questions.  Ms. Crawford stated she hadnt heard anything about at a public meeting from Dominion and she wasnt sure how to facilitate one.  Ms. Crawford asked the Board to please meet with Dominion to set up a meeting.  Ms. Crawford said the meeting would alleviate a lot of concerns.

    Ms. Crawford stated she was concerned about the evacuation plans.  Ms. Crawford said she would like to know if all roads in Louisa would be one way, going away and how quickly could that be done.  Ms. Crawford asked if the neighboring counties were working with Louisa in a plan to move people away from this area as quickly as possible.  Ms. Crawford stated the best of computers and the best of plans does not prevent human error.  Ms. Crawford noted there could be a Three Mile Island type accident here.  Ms. Crawford said there could be a terrorist attack here in Louisa because of the power plant and its nearness to Washington D.C.  

    Ms. Crawford said the representative from Dominion made it sound like everything was great about the storage of nuclear waste, its not.   Ms. Crawford explained the whole surge about building more reactors was based on Yucca Mountain being open.  Ms. Crawford said whether Yucca Mountain ever opens remains a question. Ms. Crawford stated it was her understanding that if Yucca Mountain were to open today, it would be full tomorrow.  Ms. Crawford said Yucca Mountain was not a solution.  Ms. Crawford indicated that as long as North Anna has the spent rods in the cooling pool, it would be a target for terrorist because of the dramatic effect it could have.  

    Ms. Crawford said last fall, the Tidewater Area experimented with an evacuation plan in case of a hurricane.  Ms. Crawford questioned if Louisa should do some kind of citizen involved evacuation plan.   Ms. Crawford asked the Board to please address this issue with the citizens, even if it is in the newspaper.  

    Ms. Crawford stated that the drought is supposed to continue through the spring and summer.  Ms. Crawford said the Lake Anna Civic Association paid $10,000 to hire a biologist and tested for naegleria fowleri bacteria.  Ms. Crawford stated the bacteria killed six children in other states last summer.   Ms. Crawford said naegleria fowleri is present in Lake Anna in the hot spots.  Ms. Crawford explained 9 of the 16 places that were tested showed positive for naegleria fowleri. Ms. Crawford stated we have to take care of Louisa and have to take care of the Lake, which is one of the Countys most valuable resources.  

    Mr. Jerry Rosenthal, Patrick Henry District, stated he wanted to thank the Board and/or the Administration for taking time to properly advertise in the paper.  Mr. Rosenthal stated the advertisement noted why the public hearing was taking place.  Mr. Rosenthal said the advertisement stated the public hearing is part of the settlement from 1984, what Dominion was suppose to discuss at this public hearing, would included the storage of high and low level radioactive wastes, general operations, employments, economics of operation, NRC relations and events, federal, state relations and events, safety and evacuation plans and environmental and health issues.  

    Mr. Rosenthal said the Potassium Iodine was supposed to be available for anyone with a 10-mile radius of the plant.  Mr. Rosenthal said the NRC stated that this year, anyone living 10 to 25 miles from the plant does not get the free Potassium Iodine.  Mr. Rosenthal stated there are people in Bumpass, Zion Crossroads and Blue Ridge Shores that fit in that category.  Mr. Rosenthal said if something were to happen at the plant no one knows which way the wind would blow.  Mr. Rosenthal said Potassium Iodine is very cheap and very effective and it stops thyroid cancer in the event something was to happen.

    Mr. Rosenthal said North Anna has become a low-level dump and high-level dump.  Mr. Rosenthal explained Yucca Mountain is fissured because it was a test site for nuclear bombs.  Mr. Rosenthal stated Yucca Mountain is not going to be able to accept nuclear waste.  

    Mr. Rosenthal stated Robinson, Farmer and Cox has told the Board there needed to be $25 million in the Decommissioning Fund, in case North Anna were to go down.  Mr. Rosenthal said he has read in the newspaper that all the money is committed for new schools, new water, etc. and there is no money set aside for when North Anna goes down.  Mr. Rosenthal said the Board has been fiscally irresponsible. Mr. Rosenthal stated he thought the Board needed to be actively involved and ask hard questions.

    Elena Day, Albemarle County, representing Peoples Alliance For Clean Energy stated Yucca Mountain could only accept waste that would be generated until 2010, anything beyond that would go somewhere else.  Ms. Day said it is very unlikely that Yucca Mountain would ever open.  Ms. Day stated Dominion had been issued the 316A variance, which allows them to dump very hot water into the lake.  Ms. Day said if the drought continues, the hot water would only make it worse.   Ms. Day stated she had read that Dominions transmissions systems are one of the most inefficient in the country.  Ms. Day said we ought to be concerned about the naegleria fowleri, PCBs and E Coli in the lake.  Ms. Day said that she hopes the Board would be able to think through some of these things.

    John Cruickshank, Albemarle County, representing the Sierra Club stated
    on October 25, 2007 he attended the hearing of the Virginia State Water Control Board, at that time the Water Control Board was considering the renewal of the Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit.  Mr. Cruickshank stated he heard representatives from the Friends of Lake Anna and the Lake Anna Civic Association; give a comprehensive presentation on the deteriorating condition of the water in Lake Anna.  Mr. Cruickshank stated the representative focused on several issues that concerned lake residents:


    Mr. Cruickshank stated the Sierra Club disagrees with the decision of the Water Control Board in reissuing the permit.  Mr. Cruickshank said the Sierra Club supports the legal appeal that has been filed in State Court by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and the Peoples Alliance for Clean Energy.  Mr. Cruickshank stated the Club hopes the courts will overturn the decision of the Water Board.  

    Mr. Cruickshank stated Lake Anna was the smallest body of water in the eastern United Stated that provides water for cooling a nuclear power plant.  Mr. Cruickshank said the two operating reactors are putting a tremendous strain on the water resources of central Virginia, particularly during time of drought   Mr. Cruickshank noted Dominion and DEQ needed to address the concerns raised about all these water issues.  

    Mr. Cruickshank stated he hopes Dominion would take the advice of the governing bodies of the City of Charlottesville and Spotsylvania County when they passed resolutions calling for a moratorium on the construction of any new reactors.

    With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.

    Mr. Stoddard stated he appreciated the public comments and public participation.  Mr. Stoddard said part of the reason for the lakes level is the requirement for the discharge.  Mr. Stoddard said when the reservoir is at 248 feet of water or above, Dominion is required to discharge 40 cubic feet per second of water from the dam.  Mr. Stoddard stated when the reservoir gets below 248 feet Dominion was required to discharge 20 cubic feet of water per second.  Mr. Stoddard explained during drought conditions prior to North Anna the Lake would only discharge 5 cubic feet per second.   Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion is actually providing more flow downstream.  Mr. Stoddard explained the biggest heat load on the reservoir is the sun not North Anna.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated if there were to be a third reactor it would only raise the temperature in the Lake 0.3 degrees.  

    Mr. Stoddard said conservation is very important to our energy future and we need more than one source of energy.  

    Mr. Stoddard explained the power station does not have an adverse affect on the lake.   Mr. Stoddard said the clam die off was not attributed to any operations at the power station.  Mr. Stoddard stated the dead clams were a non-native species that had invaded the lake.  

    Mr. Stoddard explained the Potassium Iodine pills were not distributed by Dominion but by the State and if there was anything Dominion could do to assist, they would be happy to.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated their security forces and several security measures protected the high level waste.

    Mr. Spencer questioned if the hot side of the lake was called the Hot Water Waste Management Facility.  Mr. Stoddard stated it was called the Waste Heat Treatment Facility.  

    Mr. Spencer questioned if that part of the lake was owned by Dominion?

    Mr. Stoddard stated Dominion owns the lake above the water line and the Waste Heat Treatment facility is a special, private facility that was always intended to be the place the water-cools after it pass through the condensers.  

    Mr. Spencer questioned if Dominion built the lake for people to boat ride.  Mr. Stoddard explained the lake was built to provide cooling for the plant.  Mr. Stoddard explained the recreation was a great benefit.

    Mr. Spencer stated he has read about the dangers of the water getting too hot and asked if Dominion had a plan to put a fence around that area to protect the public.  Mr. Stoddard said Dominion would do what was needed to protect the public.

    Mr. Byers said he wanted to express his appreciation to Mr. Kemp for the tour he was given.  Mr. Byers stated he would like to request that Dominion continue to have a process in place that citizens can express their concerns and get involved. Mr. Byers stated it was not only important to look at the downstream study but upstream also because water had to get into the lake.  

    Mr. Byers said one thing that raised a lot of concern is if a dry system can be use for unit four why couldnt it be used for unit three.   Mr. Byers explained the County has an infrastructure to support and it would be beneficial to have a timeline of the different phases.  Mr. Byers said by knowing the timeline, the County could plan and hopefully identify the impact.  

    Mr. Stoddard stated as Dominion progresses with unit three they would work with the County and the schools, projecting potential impact on infrastructure well ahead of time.

    Mr. Stoddard explained the difference between the dry and the wet cooling tower is that the construction cost difference is in the hundred of millions of dollars; a dry tower would occupy a significantly larger amount of land and would result in a drastic reduction of the efficiency of the plant

    Mr. Wright stated he has attended every hearing held by the NRC since April 2003. Mr. Wright said when the renewal application was completed for the current units; it involved approximately three years of testing, studying, research and $25 million to complete the application.  

    Mr. Wright stated the application for unit three was 58,000 pages.  Mr. Wright said the process was not something done automatically or haphazardly.

    Mr. Havasy stated there was too much misinformation in the public.  Mr. Havasy thanked Dominion for the impact it has on the community.  Mr. Havasy said he would ask those who come to talk to the Board about scientific issues, come with scientific facts.

    Mr. Gentry question if the plant wasnt there, would the temperature in the Lake Anna water be less.  Mr. Stoddard said yes the water temperature would be less.

    Mr. Barnes said this was a very sensitive issue.  Mr. Barnes stated Yucca Mountain was not going to happen.  Mr. Barnes stated there are other pressing issues that would soon come up, like blackouts and explained the County was going to need energy.

    REZ19-07; LKANNA, LLC, Applicant/Owner; Mary Johnson, Bell Surveys, Inc., Agent; requests the rezoning of approximately 6.66 acres from Residential General (R-2) to General Commercial (C-2).  The property is located in the north corner of the intersection of Route 652 (Kentucky Springs Road) and Route 700 (Haley Drive).  The property is further identified as tax map parcel 30-50, in the Cuckoo Voting District.

    The 2006 Comprehensive Plan designates this area of Louisa County as both Industrial and Low Density Residential, within the Lake Anna Designated Growth Area.

    In December 2004, the Board of Supervisors approved a request, REZ11-04, to rezone this property from Industrial (IND) to Residential General (R-2).  The property owner planned on developing a residential subdivision, but later sold the property to the current owner.  The current application indicates the intent of this request is to construct a convenience store, gas station, retail commercial center, and drive through restaurant.

    The zoning pattern in the general vicinity is currently a mixture of Agricultural (A-2) and Residential (R-2), with the surrounding properties zoned predominately General Commercial (C-2).  The industrial zoning in this area was a result of the 1969 zoning, but the County recently rezoned much of this property to General Commercial.  The industrial zoning followed the railroad spur line that was constructed to provide access to the North Anna Power Station site, while it was under construction.

    Other than the North Anna Power Station, the area is primarily residential in nature.  There are relatively large residential subdivisions in this area of the County, such as The Waters, which consists of 400+ lots.

    Besides the applicant, there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting held on November 14, 2007.  

    The Development Review Committee met on November 28, 2007 to review this application. The Committee had no comments on this request and voted 4-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.  

    The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 13, 2007 at which only the applicants agent spoke regarding this rezoning request.

    It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this was a good zoning for the area and a motion was made to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors, which passed 7-0.

    Staff uses three criteria for assessing any rezoning request, to determine if it constitutes spot zoning.  Spot zoning is defined as the reclassifying of one or more tracts of land and the sole purpose is to serve the private interests of one or more land owners instead of furthering the welfare of the entire community as part of an overall zoning plan.

    There must be valid reasons for any zoning amendment, which is substantially related to the public welfare and necessity.  It is not sufficient that an applicant merely show that there is no neighborhood objection to the requested amendment.  

    (a)        Is the change contrary to the established land-use pattern? The surrounding area is mostly residential in nature.  With the existing zoning in this area, there is potential for commercial development of this type, allowed by right.  

    (b)        Is the change in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan? The 2006 Comprehensive Plan designates this area of Louisa County as Industrial and Low Density Residential, within the Lake Anna Designated Growth Area.  The General Commercial (C-2) zoning would be more consistent with the Industrial classification, as compared to the current residential zoning.  On the other hand, the proposed zoning would conflict with the residential designation.

    (c)        Would the change create an isolated district unrelated to similar districts (i.e., is this spot zoning?)? The County recently completed an industrial project that reclassified several industrially zoned properties.   The Board approved that zoning action, which rezoned many of the industrial properties in this area to General Commercial (C-2).  The LKANNA request would be consistent with this zoning in the surrounding area.

    The Board may wish to consider the possible impacts of this request, as well as any potential precedent that the rezoning might set.  The Board may also wish to consider the need for this type of use in the area, compared with what the current zoning allows.

    Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.

    Ms. Mary Johnson, Bell Surveys, Inc., Agent; stated previously the property was rezoned from IND to R-2 by the previous owner.  Ms. Johnson said the current owner is requesting a rezoning to C-2 at his own expense.  Ms. Johnson stated the rezoning would make this piece of land consistent with the rest the area.  Ms. Johnson noted information put in the Board Packet was a concept plan only.

    With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.

    Mr. Gentry said the rezoning does fit pretty well with the surrounding area.

    On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to approve the request for the rezoning of approximately 6.66 acres from Residential General (R-2) to General Commercial (C-2).

    CUP07-06; Community Wireless Structures III, LLC, c/o Thomas A. Murray, Applicant; The Ogg Farm, LLC c/o James D. Ogg, Owner; requests a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-1) parcel.  The property is located on the north side of Route 613 (Poindexter Road), approximately .25 mile west of Route 649 (Byrd Mill Road).  The property is further identified as tax map parcels 23-96 & 81, in the Patrick Henry Voting District.

    The Master Plan indicates there is a need for service in this area of the County.  The proposed tower would serve the Route 22 and 33 corridors, west of the Town of Louisa.  The proposal includes a monopole design that is less than 200 feet.  The tower would also allow for collocation.

    The County engaged in a contract with CityScape Consultants, to review Telecommunication related requests.  CityScape reviewed this request and had the following assessment:

    Conclusion: The proposed facility will facilitate new network deployment and will accelerate the ability for all wireless services to further expand into the County.  The Applicant followed all applicable aspects of the Louisa County Ordinance.  Currently, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not apply to this application, but Verizon has submitted a letter of interest.  If Verizon committed to this proposed tower, then it would fall under the act and the County would have limited authority.  

    Another tower, submitted by National Communications Towers, is proposed in this area.  That site is approximately 1.08 miles to the southeast, discussed under CUP11-07.  CityScape and the Master Plan indicate these towers would serve the same area.  It would be advisable to only select one of these tower applications.

    CityScape recommends preference for the CWS application, which provides a higher level of benefits to the citizens of Louisa County by allowing for a smoother transition, or handoff, with adjacent towers.

    Besides the applicant, there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting held on December 12, 2007.  

    The Development Review Committee met on December 27, 2007 to review this application.  The Committee indicated that they would like to get clarification on several general ordinance/master plan items and the reviews conducted by CityScape, as follows:

    1.        Does the review by CityScape include broadband?

    2.        Does broadband operate at the same level as wireless coverage (do they overlap, is it a larger or smaller coverage area)?

    The Committee requested that Staff contact CityScape and invite a representative to be present at the January 10, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, in order to answer technical questions regarding the review of telecommunications applications.  Staff has contacted CityScape regarding attendance at the Planning Commission meeting and the concerns that were raised.

    It was, however, the opinion of the Committee, that the County has a contract with CityScape to conduct the application reviews and the Committee should accept their recommendation.  Based on this, the Committee voted 6-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission on the requested conditional use permit.

    The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 10, 2008 at which three people spoke regarding this application other than the applicant.  The Commission briefly discussed the review by CityScape and asked the applicant about the coverage pattern of the proposed sites.  The applicant provided a diagram that answered the Commissions questions.

    A motion was made to forward a recommendation of approval to the Louisa County Board of Supervisors on the requested conditional use permit with the conditions as recommended by CityScape.  The motion passed 7-0.

    CityScape recommends approval of the proposed tower, under the following conditions:

    1.        The applicant secures all necessary permits required

    2.        The applicant submits structural design and certification by a Virginia Registered Professional Engineer prior to operation that the proposed facility, as built, complies with TIA/EIA 222-G for the wind zone of Louisa County, Virginia

    Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.

    Mr. Thomas “Tam” Murray, Community Wireless Structures, provided the Board a map of where the approved and proposed sites would be to improve wireless service.

    Mr. Murray stated there were four ground owners at tonights meeting and they have all agreed to host a site on their property.  Mr. Murray said the support, to date, from the County has been very good and at all the meetings there had been no objections.  Mr. Murray stated CityScape works in ten Counties and is a very good consultant.  Mr. Murray explained there were other organizations outside the County that weighed in on the sites as well like DHR, FAA, NEPA, Green Springs Historical District and Trevilians Battle Field Foundation and there hadnt been any complaints.  Mr. Murray said broadband would be enabled through these sited by CVA-Link.  Mr. Murray stated AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless have all expressed interest in mobile broadband.  Mr. Murray said Verizon Wireless has provided two letters of interest and two coverage plats.  Mr. Murray stated these applications were filed with the County before Cityscape came on board and the structures are in Cityscape guidelines.  Mr. Murray stated he hoped to have the support of the Board.

    Mr. Harper said since the information provided by Mr. Murray applies to the following three public hearings, that information would be noted for each.

    Brian Gilbreth, Louisa District, stated he was the President of CVA-Link.  Mr. Gilbreth said his company provides wireless broadband service for people within and outside the Town of Louisa.  Mr. Gilbreth stated the towers would offer much better coverage for the whole County of Louisa

    Jennifer Rosen, Richmond, Virginia, stated she was an attorney representing Verizon Wireless.  Ms. Rosen said Verizon Wireless supports the Trevilians site.

    With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.

    Mr. Havasy said he would like to thank Mr. Coffey and his staff for their wisdom and the work theyve done with CityScape.  Mr. Havasy stated with CityScape, the towers would be awarded on technical qualifications.

    Mr. Gentry stated the Planning Commission did an outstanding job; they spent a lot of time questioning the applicants and making sure it fit into the master plan.   Mr. Gentry said he was very comfortable with the reports because he knew how much work was put into them.

    Mr. Byers stated he lives in the eastern end of the County and he wishes there was some way to leverage groups that build these towers in the most profitable places, to provide service in areas that are less profitable.  Mr. Byers said he wished there would be some consideration given to the areas that are less profitable so that all the areas of the County would have service.

    Mr. Wright said he was involved in the Workforce Council.  Mr. Wright stated some of the advantages of getting broadband in the County is to lessen traffic on the highways, which would help people save money because of the increased in the price of gasoline.  Mr. Wright explained broadband would give new companies coming into Louisa more opportunities.

    Mr. Barnes asked Mr. Gilbreth if the tower would serve Ferncliff.  Mr. Gilbreth said yes it would serve Route 208.  Mr. Barnes questioned how long would it take for that to happen.  Mr. Gilbert said as soon as the tower was built.  Mr. Barnes questioned Mr. Murray what the timeline was for the towers to be built.  Mr. Murray stated the amount of time to get site plans and permits would probably put construction around Memorial Day.  Mr. Murray said it takes approximately six weeks to construct a tower.  Mr. Murray explained that before broadband service could be available, the tower would need a wireless carrier as the lead tenant first.  

            On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to approve the request for a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-1) parcel.

    CUP07-07; Community Wireless Structures III, LLC, c/o Thomas A. Murray, Applicant; Judy H. and Archie L. Proffit, Jr., Owner; requests a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-2) parcel.  The property is located on the south side of Route 640 (West Jack Jouett Road), approximately .38 mile east of Route 615 (Columbia Road).  The property is further identified as tax map parcel 20-1-A1, in the Green Springs Voting District.

    The 2007 Telecommunications Master Plan indicates there is a gap in service for this area of the County.

    The County engaged in a contract with CityScape Consultants, to review Telecommunication related requests.  CityScape reviewed this request and had the following assessment:

    Target of Proposed Facility: The coverage objective of this tower is Route 15, between Interstate 64 and Boswells Tavern, as well as the western portion of the Green Springs Historic District.  This area is currently devoid of towers or other antenna support structures.

    Number of Carriers: The tower could accommodate up to 6 wireless services.

    Services: The tower could be available to cellular and wireless broadband services.

    Conclusion: The proposed facility will facilitate new network deployment and will accelerate the ability for all wireless services to further expand into the County.  The Applicant has followed the guidelines of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and all applicable aspects of the Louisa County Ordinance.

    Besides the applicant, there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting held on November 14, 2007.  

    The Development Review Committee met on November 28, 2007 to review this application. The Committee had no comments on this request and voted 5-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.  

    The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 13, 2007 at which no one was present to speak for or against the application other than the applicant.  The Commission briefly discussed the review by CityScape and asked the applicant about the coverage pattern of the proposed sites.  The applicant provided a diagram that answered the Commissions questions.

    A motion was made to forward a recommendation of approval to the Louisa County Board of Supervisors on the requested conditional use permit with the conditions as recommended by CityScape.  The motion passed 7-0.

    CityScape recommends approval of the proposed tower, under the following conditions:

    1.        The applicant secures all necessary permits required

    2.        
    The applicant submits structural design and certification by a Virginia Registered Professional Engineer prior to operation that the proposed facility, as built, complies with TIA/EIA 222-G for the wind zone of Louisa County, Virginia

    With no one wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.  

            On motion of Mr. Havasy, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to approve the request for a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199-foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-2) parcel.

    CUP08-07; Community Wireless Structures III, LLC, c/o Thomas A. Murray, Applicant; Mary A. Hottinger and Stewart E. Hottinger, Jr., Owner; requests a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-1) parcel.  The property is located on the east side of Route 208 (Courthouse Road), approximately .9 mile north of Route 640 (West Old Mountain Road).  The property is further identified as tax map parcel 55-115, in the Patrick Henry Voting District.

    The 2007 Telecommunications Master Plan indicates there is a gap in service for this area of the County.

    The County engaged in a contract with CityScape Consultants, to review Telecommunication related requests.  CityScape reviewed this request and had the following assessment:

    Target of Proposed Facility: The coverage objective of this tower is Route 208, between Interstate 64 and the Town of Louisa, to provide continual service along this route.  

    Number of Carriers: The tower could accommodate up to 6 wireless services.

    Services: The tower could be available to cellular and wireless broadband services.

    Conclusion: The proposed facility will facilitate new network deployment and will accelerate the ability for all wireless services to further expand into the County.  The Applicant has followed the guidelines of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and all applicable aspects of the Louisa County Ordinance.

    Besides the applicant, there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting held on November 14, 2007.  

    The Development Review Committee met on November 28, 2007 to review this application. The Committee had no comments on this request and voted 5-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.  

    The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 13, 2007 at which there was no one present to speak for or against the application other than the applicant.  There was discussion by the Commission regarding the submission of another application in the same area as this tower and should this application be put on hold until a review of that location was completed by CityScape.  It was the consensus of the Commission not to hold up this application and there was a motion to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board with the recommended conditions by CityScape, which passed by a vote of 7-0.

    CityScape recommends approval of the proposed tower, under the following conditions:

    1.        The applicant secures all necessary permits required

    2.        The applicant submits structural design and certification by a Virginia Registered Professional Engineer prior to operation that the proposed facility, as built, complies with TIA/EIA 222-G for the wind zone of Louisa County, Virginia

    Mr. Cockrell stated an email was received from an adjacent property owner.  Mr. Cockrell said the adjacent property owner thought the tower would ruin that part of the Countys rural character.  

    Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.  

    Mr. Thomas “Tam” Murray, Community Wireless Structures, said he believes a house that doesnt have broadband service would sell at a lower price than a house that does.  Mr. Murray stated there has been a competitive application to this site, which would be a mile closer to town.  Mr. Murray gave the Board a letter of intent from Verizon Wireless and stated the letter showed their coverage with and without this tower.  Mr. Murray stated there has been conversation with AT&T Wireless about this site as well.

    Mr. Spencer questioned if the competitive site was the one that was 200 plus feet.  Mr. Murray said he understood it was 260 feet proposed.  Mr. Murray stated there were probably marginal differences depending on carrier.

    Mr. Brian Gilbreth, Louisa District, stated he was the President of CVA-Link stated the towers would offer much better coverage for the whole County of Louisa

    Ms. Jennifer Rosen, Richmond, Virginia, stated it was her understanding the other applicant had reduced their height request from 250 to 199 feet.  Ms. Rosen said Verizon does support the site if the other site is not approved.  Ms. Rosen said the other site fits better in their network, which means better coverage for their customers.  

    With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.

            
    On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to approve the request for a conditional use permit for the construction of a 199 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-1) parcel.

    CUP09-07; Community Wireless Structures III, LLC, c/o Thomas A. Murray, Agent; William A. Cooke, Inc., c/o Randall L. Tingler, Owner; requests a conditional use permit for the construction of a 175 foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-2) parcel.  The property is located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Route 15 (James Madison Highway) and Hound Dog Boulevard.  The property is further identified as tax map parcel 9-39A, in the Green Springs Voting District.

    The 2007 Telecommunications Master Plan indicates there is a gap in service for this area of the County.

    The County engaged in a contract with CityScape Consultants, to review Telecommunication related requests.  CityScape reviewed this request and had the following assessment:

    Target of Proposed Facility: The coverage objective of this tower is Route 15, between Route 22 and the Town of Gordonsville, to provide continual service along this route.  

    Number of Carriers: The tower could accommodate up to 6 wireless services.

    Services: The tower could be available to cellular and wireless broadband services.

    Conclusion: The proposed facility will facilitate new network deployment and will accelerate the ability for all wireless services to further expand into the County.  The Applicant has followed the guidelines of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and all applicable aspects of the Louisa County Ordinance.

    Besides the applicant, there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting held on November 14, 2007.  

    The Development Review Committee met on November 28, 2007 to review this application. The Committee had no comments on this request and voted 5-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.  

    The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 13, 2007 at which one person, other than the applicant, spoke in favor of the application.  The Planning Commission discussed the reduced height request of this tower. A motion was made to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors with the recommended conditions by CityScape, which passed 7-0.

    CityScape recommends approval of the proposed tower, under the following conditions:

    1.        The applicant secures all necessary permits required

    2.        The applicant submits structural design and certification by a Virginia Registered Professional Engineer prior to operation that the proposed facility, as built, complies with TIA/EIA 222-G for the wind zone of Louisa County, Virginia.

    Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.

    Mr. Gordon Songer, Green Springs District stated he was not opposed to the tower and he would look forward to having better service.

    Mr. Daniel Payne, Green Springs District stated he is anxious to see the tower coming in.  Mr. Payne said cable is not available in his area and they had dial up connection to the internet.  Mr. Payne said the tower was welcomed in the area.

    Mr. Don Danner, Green Springs stated the landowner that would be hosting the tower does not live on that piece of land.  Mr. Danner said he doesnt oppose the tower.  Mr. Danner explained he wasnt at the neighborhood meeting because he had spent 15 months of service in Iraq.  Mr. Danner stated his land belonged to his grandfather and he has a vested interest in that land.  Mr. Danner stated he would like to see what the site looked like from his hill.  Mr. Danner asked that if the tower could possibly be camouflaged.

    Mr. Havasy told Mr. Danner that his service was appreciated.  Mr. Havasy questioned if Community Wireless would make the information they had available to Mr. Danner and if they could work with him on the color scheme.  
    Mr. Rick Edwards of CityScape stated that the federal government would not allow them to paint the tower for safety reason.  Mr. Edwards said the Board could place a condition that the site be a concealed facility, which would cost more.

    Mr. Havasy said his only request would be to get Mr. Danner any information available.

    With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.

    On motion of Mr. Havasy, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to approve the request for a conditional use permit for the construction of a 175-foot telecommunications monopole on an Agricultural (A-2) parcel.

    Update - Revenue Recovery Program

    April Jacobs, Revenue Recovery Administrator stated in November 2007, the Board voted to enact a Revenue Recovery Ordinance and since then, the Revenue Recovery Committee has been meeting regularly to determine the next steps for implementing this program.

    Ms. Jacobs stated the Committee had to first determine which billing company they wanted to service the County.  Ms. Jacobs noted in order to save time and money, the Committee decided to piggyback on another Countys RFP instead of going out for a formal bid.  Ms. Jacobs said after talking with several localities, it was decided that Diversified Ambulance Billing (DAB) was best suited for the Countys needs.  Ms. Jacobs stated in December 2007, the Board voted to follow the Committees recommendation and DAB was, therefore, selected to perform the services.  Ms. Jacobs said DAB was the contractor for Fairfax County; however, the contract would be written based on Louisas needs.

    Ms. Jacobs stated after talking with DAB, it was determined that the Committees first priority was to complete a Medicare/Medicaid application.  Ms. Jacobs noted that it could take up to 150 days to receive a provider number, which was needed before the County could start billing for service; therefore, she was currently in the process of completing that application and would have it submitted by the end of the week.

    Ms. Jacobs indicated the next priority was for the Committee to select hardware and software to be utilized in this project.  Ms. Jacobs said the hardware and software had to be purchased soon in order for it to be configured and for the providers to start training.  Ms. Jacobs noted that a trial period had been tentatively set for the months of May and June.  Ms. Jacobs said after looking at various laptops, toughbooks, tablets and other hardware to determine the best option for the Program, the Committee selected the Panasonic Toughbooks and recommended them for use in the vehicles.  Ms. Jacobs said they could be ordered off the Commonwealths contract and would cost $2,950 each for 17 Toughbooks, which included one spare.

    Ms. Jacobs stated after thoroughly reviewing four different software packages, the Committee decided to select High Plains Information Systems.  Ms. Jacobs said the software would cost $65,748, of which $32,874 would be spent in FY 08.  Ms. Jacobs stated the Committee was currently in the process of applying for a grant, which required a 50 percent match for the software.  Ms. Jacobs stated High Plains Information Systems had been properly procured by the City of Alexandria, in which their contract included a cooperative procurement clause that allowed other localities to participate with the contract.  Ms. Jacobs noted the County had formally requested a copy of their contract; however, it had not yet been received.  Ms. Jacobs added that she would provide the Board with a copy of the contract once it was received.

    Ms. Jacobs requested the Boards approval to award a contract to High Plains Information Systems and the approval to expend the funds to buy the hardware and software.

    Mr. Gentry requested Mr. Lintecums recommendation for this request.  Mr. Lintecum said he recommended that the Board move forward as presented.

    Mr. Wright stated he believed the tentative start date was July 1, 2008.  Mr. Wright said he didnt see how the Committee was going to meet that date if it took 150 to receive a provider.  Mr. Wright questioned what the target date was now.  Ms. Jacobs stated after looking at the original project plan, the Committee was about two months behind.  Ms. Jacobs said from her perspective the new target date would be September 1, 2008, which was contingent on receiving the provider number.

    Mr. Byers said he would like to see the project plans for the whole project and the cost associated with them.  Mr. Byers stated the Board should know what the timeline and the cost were going to be, in order for the Board to budget and track what was taking place. Mr. Byers requested that the Board be updated regularly.

    Mr. Harper requested that as Ms. Jacobs went through the different processes that she keeps the Board informed whether it is at regular board meetings or through email.

    On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to award a contract and expend funds to High Plains Information Systems and CDWG for software and hardware to be utilized in the Revenue Recovery Program.

    Discussion/Decision - Establishing the operational rules, regulations and fees for the Aquatic Facility

    Ms. Shelhorse stated the following were recommendations from the Parks and Recreation Department Staff for the Aquatic Facility fees for 2008.  Ms. Shelhorse added that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee had approved the fees.  

    Mr. Harper questioned if the Aquatic Facility was intended to be self-supporting. Ms. Shelhorse said the Facility would generate revenue; however, it wouldnt be enough to be self-supporting.  

    Mr. Harper questioned if Ms. Shelhorse had an idea of what the operational costs were versus the amount of projected revenue.

    Ms. Shelhorse said if an average of 70 people came to the pool per day for 90 days at $2 per person, the revenue generated would be $12,500.  Ms. Shelhorse said they also figured that concessions would bring in $12,000 and swimming lessons would bring in $5,500, which totaled about $30,000, whereas, about $103,000 was proposed in the budget.  Ms. Shelhorse said she had to plan to be fully staffed because safety was the number one priority; however, if Parks and Recreation found that staffing could be reduced, she would certainly do so.  

    Mr. Byers said this was another program where the Board needed to know how much money was being spent versus how much money was being recovered.  Mr. Byers noted that this project was a prime example where the Board needed to really determine costs versus the return.  

    Mr. Gentry said at this point, there was a lot of unknowns as to how many people would use the Facility and he thought the County had to go through the cycle at least one year to determine what the expenses and the recovery would be.

    Mr. Byers questioned if the Board would receive monthly or quarterly reports that showed that information.  Mr. Harper indicated that it would be good to get feedback on a regular basis of how revenues were running versus the costs.  Ms. Shelhorse stated she anticipated doing a full monthly report for each.

    Mr. Wright stated that he voted against this project every step of the way and he was going to be consistent with that and vote against it tonight.  Mr. Wright said for the discount pass, there seemed to be discounts for everyone except the seniors and he would like to see them receive discounts as well.  Mr. Wright questioned if a season pass was considered.  

    Mr. Wright said the Board was told by the previous Parks and Recreation Director that the project would be self-supporting and that the annual cost, including maintenance, would be $80,000.

    Mr. Barnes indicated that the County could do some things to offset some of the costs, but the project would never be self-supporting.  Mr. Barnes stated he would like Parks and Recreation to consider the idea of offering a family pass.

    Mr. Havasy said he hoped that Ms. Shelhorse was successful in breaking down the pool costs so that funds wouldnt have to be drawn out of the major funding that the Board provided for Parks and Recreation.  Mr. Havasy said he hoped that qualified staff would be available to give swimming lessons because that was one thing that the public has been consistent in asking for.  Mr. Havasy indicated that a lot of seniors in his District were excited about using the pool and he agreed with Mr. Wright that a discount for seniors should be considered.  Mr. Havasy stated that the County now had a pool and he recommended that everyone support it.

    Mr. Harper questioned why Parks and Recreation were going to allow citizens to bring their own food and drinks in.  Ms. Shelhorse said she thought some members of the Board would be concerned that some citizens couldnt necessarily afford to buy from the concession stand.

    Mr. Spencer stated the project was originally supposed to be self-supporting and there was only supposed to be one pool built instead of three.  Mr. Spencer said for those reasons, he would not support this request.  

    Mr. Gentry stated he would like to make a motion to approve the fees as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Staff with the idea of considering a discount senior pass and a family pass.  Mr. Barnes seconded the motion.  Mr. Harper requested a roll call vote.  
    PRESENTVOTE
    Willie L. Harper Yes
    Richad A. Havasy Yes
    P.T. Spencer, Jr. No
    Jack T. Wright No
    Fitzgerald A. Barnes Yes
    Dan W. Byers No
    Willie L. Gentry, Jr. Yes

    With the votes reflecting 4-3, the motion passed to approve the fees as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Staff with the idea of considering a discount senior pass and a family pass.

    Ms. Shelhorse said included in the Board Packet were staff recommendations on the Aquatic Facility rules for 2008.  

    Mr. Spencer questioned why alcoholic beverages were allowed on County property.  Ms. Shelhorse indicated that the rules said glass bottles or alcoholic beverages were not permitted in or around the pool facility.  Mr. Spencer noted that the rule said “in or around the pool facility” and questioned what about the entire property.  Ms. Shelhorse stated that could be added.    

    Mr. Spencer said he shared Mr. Harpers concern about why people were allowed to bring in their own food and beverages.  Ms. Shelhorse said she would be more than happy not to allow that.

    Mr. Barnes said the County had to make money from the concession stand; therefore, he recommended that rule number 5 be eliminated, which would also make rule number 6 unnecessary.  

    On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Gentry, with Mr. Wright voting against, which carried by a vote of 6-1, the Board voted to approve the 2008 rules for the Aquatic Facility with the elimination of rule numbers 5 and 6.  

    Mr. Byers said he thought it was only fair to let the residents of Louisa County and the people who were paying to use the pool know what the costs were to operate it, what liabilities were associated with it and what the returns were.  Mr. Harper said Ms. Shelhorse stated that she would provide that information to the Board on a regular basis.

    Resolution - Award contract for printing and mailing of Parks and Recreation Leisure Times

    Mr. Byers said the contract stated “in the event that the agreed to standard was not met for any issue of the Leisure Times produced by the printer, the County reserved the right to cancel the remainder of the contract without further compensation.”  Mr. Byers questioned if that meant that the County would pay for the copies they didnt like.  Mr. Byers said if copies were produced and they didnt meet the standards, they shouldnt be paid for.  Mr. Harper questioned if the language could be clarified.  Mr. Lintecum said yes.      

    Mr. Spencer questioned if any of the bids received were from local vendors.  Ms. Faye Stewart, Procurement Officer, said out of 22 packets that were sent out, some went to local vendors.  Ms. Stewart indicated that the invitation for bid was advertised in the Richmond Time Dispatch, The Central Virginian, The County Website and the bulletin board in the Administration building.  

    On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Barnes which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution awarding a contact for printing and mailing of Parks and Recreation Leisure Times to McCain Printing Company for $4,969 per issuance/mailing in accordance with the requirements of IFB # PR-08-02, including Alternate 1.

    Resolution - Opposing House Budget 140, #5

    Mr. Lintecum stated every two years they benchmark salaries to see if the State is paying its fair share.  Mr. Lintecum said instead of counting what the State and the locality put into the benchmark, they are only counting what the State puts in.  Mr. Lintecum said which means in the current and years to come you would get less and less money from the State.  

    Mr. Havasy questioned if the County employees in the Administration Building had received a raise. Mr. Havasy also question if the school district and their raises should be any different than the County employees.  

    Mr. Barnes stated by the House re-benchmarking it will cause hardship on the localities.

    Mr. Harper stated it has been a tool used to manipulate salaries.  Mr. Harper said the resolution says “Whereas, the House formula change will result in a disproportionate large increase in local property taxes to make up the decrease in state funds.”  Mr. Harper said that line states that the County is going to make it up.

    Mr. Lintecum stated language could be added or the line removed from the resolution.  

    Mr. Byers questioned if there is a change, would the County be liable for the difference.  Mr. Harper stated the argument could be made that the County said in the resolution they would make it up.  

    Mr. Wright stated he was opposing the resolution as it was worded now.

    Mr. Gentry questioned when this budget item was going to Committee.  Mr. McLeod said it was either Friday or Monday that it would come up in Committee. Mr. Barnes stated Delegate Bill Janis is on the Committee.

    Mr. Barnes stated he would like to make a motion approving a resolution opposing House Budget 140, #5 as submitted by the School Board. Mr. Gentry seconded the motion.  Mr. Harper requested a roll call vote.
    PRESENTVOTE
    Richad A. Havasy No
    P.T. Spencer, Jr. No
    Jack T. Wright No
    Fitzgerald A. Barnes Yes
    Dan W. Byers No
    Willie L. Gentry, Jr. Yes
    Willie L. Harper No

    With the votes reflecting 2-5, the motion failed to approve resolution opposing House Budget 140, #5 as submitted by the School Board.

    Mr. Byers suggested amending the language, to support the non-passing of the bill.  Mr. Lintecum stated the language could be changed to say it would cause localities to raise Real Estate tax or prohibit teachers from getting raises in the future.

    Mr. Havasy stated when he looked at the school budget over the last 5 or 6 years it was consistent with the newspapers, where they stated school are taking up 50 to 60 percent of the Countys budget.  Mr. Havasy questioned why that was.

    Mr. Harper said that he agrees with Mr. Havasy, however he should take a look at Louisa Countys Administration and see what that has done in the last 7 years.  

    Mr. Gentry asked to hear the wording once more.

    Mr. Harper read, “Whereas, the house formula change will result in a disproportionate large increase in local property taxes to make up the decrease in State funds to maintain existing levels of programs and services for the children of Louisa County OR ELIMINATE FUTURE PAY INCREASES FOR TEACHERS.”

    Mr. Barnes stated he was going to vote against this revised resolution.  Mr. Barnes said the resolution that was presented by the school didnt make the Board liable and in the spirit of the two Boards working together he was going to support what they sent.  

    Mr. Wright stated he would like to make a motion to approve the resolution opposing House Budget 140, #5 as submitted by the School Board with the following changes: “Whereas, the house formula change will result in a disproportionate large increase in local property taxes to make up the decrease in State funds to maintain existing levels of programs and services for the children of Louisa County OR ELIMINATE FUTURE PAY INCREASES FOR TEACHERS.” Mr. Byers seconded the motion.  Mr. Harper requested a roll call vote.
    PRESENTVOTE
    Richad A. Havasy Yes
    P.T. Spencer, Jr. Yes
    Jack T. Wright Yes
    Fitzgerald A. Barnes No
    Dan W. Byers Yes
    Willie L. Gentry, Jr. No
    Willie L. Harper Yes
    Richad A. Havasy Yes

    With the votes reflecting 5-2, the motion approved the resolution opposing House Budget 140, #5 as submitted by the School Board as amended.

    Discuss ion - Request by the Electoral Board

    Mr. Harper said apparently when the Board moved the processes for a central absentee voter precinct; they moved it for general elections only and not primaries.  Mr. Harper indicated that the Electoral Board was requesting that the primary be moved as well, which would necessitate a public hearing.  Mr. Harper noted that the public hearing could be scheduled for March 17, 2008.

    On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to set a public hearing on March 17, 2008 to establish a central absentee voter precinct for primary elections.  

    COMMITTEE REPORTS

    Mr. Harper said he received a letter from Senator Houck that stated the Senate had voted to restore the exemption for regional jails, which affected the Central Regional Virginia Jail; however, the House has not followed that process, but Senator Houck would continue to try to push the issue at that level.  

    Mr. Gentry said VACos 7th District was having a Courthouse Meeting on March 28, 2008.  Mr. Gentry indicated that the agenda basically allowed each county to have discussions about the legislative program of this year and also leading into what might be on the legislative program for next year.  Mr. Gentry said he would appreciate comments that any Board member had about this years legislative action, as well as what they thought they should get into next year.  

    BOARD APPOINTMENTS

    Mr. Barnes stated he would like to reappoint William Poindexter to the Industrial Development Authority.  Mr. Barnes stated he would like to recommend that Doug Whitlock be appointed to the Board of Equalization.  Mr. Byers stated he would like to appoint B.J. Blount to the Lake Anna Advisory Committee.  

            On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board appointed Mr. Poindexter to the Industrial Development Authority and Mr. Blount to the Lake Anna Advisory Committee and recommended that Mr. Whitlock be appointed to the Board of Equalization.

    COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT

    Mr. Lintecum said the first budget workshop would be Tuesday March 18, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. at the Louisa County School Board Office as a joint meeting with the School Board.

    Mr. Lintecum noted that Amanda Lloyd provided an overview of the policy for mailing the County Messenger.

    Mr. Lintecum indicated that the Facilities Management Department monthly summary and the Board of Supervisors monthly summary of top projects was included in the Board Packet


    CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

    Resolution - Proclaiming the Big Read during March and April 2008

            On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution proclaiming the Big Read during March and April 2008.

    Resolution - To approve a supplemental appropriation for Four for Life funding

    On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution to approve a supplemental appropriation for Four for Life funding.

    CORRESPONDENCE

    Mr. Gentry noted that the Board received a letter from Quintin Elliot, Acting District Administrator for VDOT.  Mr. Gentry said originally the Board had requested that the speed limit on Rt. 208 at the school site be reduced to 45 MPH and VDOT said they would only reduce it to 50 MPH for now.  Mr. Gentry said VDOT found out that Delegate Janis had submitted a bill requesting that speed limits in front of schools be reduced to 35 MPH statewide and VDOT came back and approved the school site on Rt. 208 to 45 MPH.  Mr. Gentry said there was still a chance that the speed limit would be reduced to 35 MPH and the further it was reduced, the more money the County would save.  

    APPROVAL OF BILLS

    Mr. Byers said at the last meeting there was a fair amount of discussion about overspending the budget and it appeared to him that the same trend was continuing.  Mr. Byers said if the Board continued to approve these expenditures, at the end of the year the Board would find themselves in a position of exceeding the budget again; therefore, he could not continue voting to approve expenditures when Departments continued to exceed their budgets.  Mr. Harper explained that some Departments were over by line item; however, they werent over by Department.  Mr. Gentry agreed with Mr. Byers and said they were at the point where the Board needed to see an explanation from Departments that went over their budget.

    Mr. Havasy questioned why County staff had pagers.  Mr. McLeod said during the budget process, the Board could ask the Departments that had pagers why they were needed.  Mr. McLeod said he thought the issue was that the pagers worked throughout the County when cell phones didnt get reception.  

    Mr. Gentry said the Board might want to start determining some repercussions for Departments that exceeded their budgets.

    Sheriff Fortune indicated that the Sheriffs Department had been working on ways to eliminate overtime to try to stay within their budget.

            On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Havasy, with Mr. Byers voting against and with Mr. Barnes abstaining on bills pertaining to him, which carried by a vote of 6-1,the Board adopted a resolution approving the bills for the second half of February 2008 for the County of Louisa in the amount of $838,274.05.

    APPROVAL OF MINUTES

            On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, with Mr. Barnes abstaining due to his absence, which carried by a vote of 6-0-1, the Board adopted the minutes of the February 19, 2008 meeting.

    CLOSED SESSION

    On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 9:37 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:  

    1.        In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of discussing personnel reporting directly to the Administrator.

    2.        In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (7) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel.

    REGULAR SESSION

    On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 9:46 p.m.

    RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

    On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adopt the following resolution:

    WHEREAS, the Louisa County Board of Supervisors has convened a Closed Meeting this 3rd day of March 2008, pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and

    WHEREAS, §2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with the Virginia Law.

    NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED on this 3rd day of March 2008, that the Louisa County Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting was heard, discussed or considered by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.

    ADJOURNMENT

    On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adjourn the March 3, 2008 meeting at 9:46 p.m.


    BY ORDER OF



    ________________________________

    WILLIE L. HARPER, CHAIRMAN
    LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

    LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA