Contact Sitemap Search
|Board Present:||Fitzgerald A. Barnes, Willie L. Gentry, Jr., Willie L. Harper, Richard A. Havasy, Allen B. Jennings, Eric F. Purcell, and Jack T. Wright|
|Others Present:||C. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Patrick Morgan, County Attorney; and Mary Jackson, Deputy Clerk|
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Barnes called the June 5, 2006 regular meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Jennings led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
There were no Constitutional Officers that wished to address the Board.
CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD
William Anthony, Jackson District, informed the Board that he was here this evening to speak with them about the proposed two cent tax reduction. Mr. Anthony stated that this amount is not enough to offset the exploding assessments for the past two consecutive years. Mr. Anthony said that they have seen a 167% increase in assessments over the past two years. He said that the residents of Louisa County are struggling to make ends meet and need relief. Mr. Anthony said that if they are going to help the School Board, then they should help the poor innocent citizens of the County. Mr. Anthony urged the Board to reduce the real estate tax rate by four cents.
William Shiflett, Jr., Glen Allen, Virginia Resident, informed the Board that he was here to speak with them about the proposed pull off for the Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation (TSBF). Mr. Shiflett said that he has spoke with the railroad concerning this issue and was informed that they did not want to support this. Mr. Shiflett said that when you have a pull off place, it remains open twenty-four hours and tends to have individuals who pull off and carry on with other activities. Mr. Shiflett stated that no tax monies should be used to support this deal in any way.
Garland Nuckols, Louisa District, informed the Board that he has presented a letter to them this evening that was written by Debra Bickley, President of EMSAL, and each agency involved in reference to the EMS budget. Mr. Nuckols said that he would like to speak on behalf of the career staff providing 24/7 coverage. Mr. Nuckols said that they would all like to have 24/7 coverage and believe this could be resolved without having to hire additional medics. Mr. Nuckols said that the documentation that was presented to the Board from the Emergency Services Department said that they would like to hire an additional five medics, one Training Officer, and two supervisors. Mr. Nuckols said that he recently found out that the two supervisors would be above and beyond the two crews that would be running day and night. He said that these two supervisors would be an extra person that would ride around in a vehicle to make sure that the medics on the trucks are doing their job. Mr. Nuckols said that he believes that there are a lot of expenditures that need to be justified before the Board decides to move forward with the additional staff. Mr. Nuckols said that he feels that there is a way that they could look at this and provide a lot of savings for the County. Mr. Nuckols stated that there are issues that need to be explored deeply. Mr. Nuckols said that the volunteers have said that they could do exactly what Mike Schlemmer, Emergency Services Coordinator, has presented to the Board about having three crews about the County, which is something that the volunteers could do as identified in the information that has been presented to them with the hours that they have identified in needing the additional assistance. Mr. Nuckols said that he is willing to speak with any of the Board of Supervisors regarding this topic and he is very concerned about this for the County as a whole, as well as the volunteer crews.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Lee Lintecum, County Administrator, informed the Board that update from the Virginia Department of Transportation needed to be rescheduled for their June 19, 2006 regular meeting.
Mr. Wright said that he would like to add the Three Oaks Subdivision as a topic to the agenda for them to reconsider the subdivision review they previously approved to be handled through an administrative process.
Mr. Gentry said that he would like to add a topic for discussion to the agenda to get the Board comments on an issue that pertain to DEQ.
Mr. Harper said that he would like to add the Hidden Farms Subdivision as a topic to the agenda for them to reconsider the subdivision review they previously approved to be handled through an administrative process.
Mr. Jennings said that he would like to add the eighteen lots allowed by right in A-2 zoning as a topic for discussion to their agenda. Chairman Barnes stated that this was currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission and is forthcoming to the Board. Chairman Barnes asked Darren Coffey, Director of Community Development, when the Board could expect to see this topic.
Mr. Coffey said that the Planning Commissions Consent Agenda scheduled for June 8, 2006 has this topic as going to public hearing at their July 13, 2006 meeting, which would bring it to the Board at their August 1, 2006 regular meeting.
Mr. Purcell said that he would recommend that the topic in general not be put on the agenda, but all comments made this evening pertaining to these two subdivisions that deal with the eighteen lots allowed by right be noted by staff that is in attendance to take back to the committee for the edifications.
On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the June 5, 2006 agenda was adopted as amended.
Discussion Updated E911 Ordinance
Pat Morgan, County Attorney, reminded the Board that when they discussed this issue at their last meeting, they had asked him to make some minor amendments to the proposed ordinance. Mr. Morgan said that this involved making sure that any of the signs were at a uniform place and height to help responders for emergency situations are able to locate a specific address. Mr. Morgan said that he has added the verbiage to the ordinance to say that if it were going to be a sign independent of the mailbox then it would be placed at the driveway entrance and would be at the same height that mailboxes ordinarily are.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Wright saying that he still did not see any clarity in the ordinance for who is responsible for getting the sign. Mr. Wright said that this currently reads that the individual themselves are responsible for getting the sign and installing it. Mr. Wright emphasized the importance of having consistency with the signs for the emergency services personnel and signs should be obtained through Emergency Services even if property owners were charged for the sign by adding the cost to the building permit. Chairman Barnes said that he agrees with Mr. Wright that they must have consistency. Chairman Barnes said that they have to look at incorporating the specifications into the ordinance and determine the fee that would be involved. Mr. Harper said that they should determine uniform specifications that identify the size, width, material, and location.
Mr. Morgan responded saying that he would research the information and make the necessary modifications and bring it back to the Board at their June 19, 2006 meeting.
Reconsideration of The Three Oaks Subdivision and Hidden Farms Subdivision
Mr. Wright said that since the Board approved the Three Oaks Subdivision to be handled administratively, he has had several conversations with constituents. Mr. Wright said that the only decision the Board made was to allow the Community Development Department to review the plans administratively. Mr. Wright said that he has since been informed that there were other options that the Board had. He said that he was told that the Board could have turned it down based on there being too many houses in this particular area and the dangers that would be presented on this road due to the amount of additional traffic that it would generate. Mr. Wright said that there is another subdivision that is coming to this same area that is adjacent to this site and another subdivision a little further down the road in the future. Mr. Wright said that he has been told that they are in violation according to DEQ since they did not obtain an E&S Permit to log the property. Mr. Wright said that the road that is being proposed for emergency services crosses over wetlands, which is another violation. Mr. Wright said that he would like to have this come back to the Board for further review to make a final decision since they were not provided all of their legal options at the time of review. Mr. Wright said that this is a serious situation that needs further review by the Board.
The Board discussed this topic further with Mr. Purcell saying that it is hard when you are discussing issues like this without discussing the eighteen lots allowed by right. Mr. Purcell said that he agrees with Mr. Wright about this situation. Mr. Purcell said that he is going to vote down the eighteen lots allowed by right because this is not what the Board intended to have developers stacking multiple parcels, but to allow eighteen lots on one specific parcel. Mr. Purcell said that this has either been interpreted incorrectly or written incorrectly. Mr. Purcell stated that they are wasting far too much mental capacity on this issue and he is tired of it. Mr. Purcell said that staff should not have to deal with this. Mr. Purcell said that this is not what the Board intended and there should only be eighteen cuts allowed on one tract of land. Mr. Purcell said that he would like to go on record saying that the reason they are getting more and more cuts stacked together is for individuals to come back later and dumb that number down by people that are no growth, which is a battle they will face when it comes up. Mr. Harper said that he would like to add the Hidden Farm Subdivision to this debate so they are not forgotten about. Mr. Harper said that he believes this needs to be discussed further. Mr. Harper said that this is not something that he anticipated, but it is not something that he precluded either. Mr. Wright said that another problem in this same category on the existing ones, there is a developer that is telling individuals that he was going to stop development since he had to go to three twenty acre lots because he maxed out the amount of parcels allowed on four tracts of land; therefore, he is going to wait until a new decision is made to allow him to further subdivide the three twenty acre tracts of land. Mr. Wright said that the amount of lots allowed by right is not the only issue with this subdivision, but more of a safety issue. Mr. Gentry said that if they were able to legally stop the stacking of separate tracts of land to create the eighteen lots allowed by right, then he would like to have a stop put to it. Chairman Barnes said that he does not want to set a precedence of violating individuals rights in which they have been consistent with, but this was not their intention. Chairman Barnes said that as an example, if they were to approve some of the proposed subdivisions and determined that they could continue, but then voted against another, he asked Mr. Morgan if there were a date that they could set to where they would not be allowed to continue from that day forward while still avoiding a liability situation. Mr. Jennings said that they are experiencing a large influx of these subdivisions and have to keep in mind that these developers are going to try to get their work through prior to any changes being made to the ordinance. Mr. Purcell said that he would like to add the caveat that he would like to have a letter sent to the individuals involved with these subdivisions informing them that the Board is discussing them so that no extra work and monies are spent in the interim.
Mr. Morgan responded that they could address these issues in a manner that they would not continue to be the issues that it has obviously become. Mr. Morgan said that they would still have to go through the Planning Commission and the full process, but he would work with Mr. Coffey to address the issue. Mr. Morgan said that he would provide a written report to the Board at their June 19, 2006 meeting for the two subdivisions that were discussed this evening to advise them of what legal actions could be taken.
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ)
Mr. Gentry said that VDEQ has initiated a public comment period from May 15, 2006 through June 16, 2006, for a federal consistency certification. Mr. Gentry said that VDEQ would prepare a single state comment on the third and fourth proposed reactors. Mr. Gentry said that several issues have been brought to his attention, which he wanted to share with the Board. Mr. Gentry identified the issues as being the need for road improvements, the need for schools, the cooling tower that has been proposed, and if they are ever considering using water from the lake for needs of the County, these factors would have to be considered. Mr. Gentry said that concerns have been expressed about the number of workers that Dominion would bring in, the amount of residents, and the two-lane road, Route 652 (Kentucky Springs Road) that would have to accommodate these additions. Mr. Gentry said that he would like to have Mr. Lintecum draft a letter to send these concerns to DEQ, not to take a position on them, but to bring them to their attention. Mr. Gentry said that he had received this information from Harry Ruth, Friends of Lake Anna, which is something they are submitting to DEQ along with several other concerns that he didnt feel was appropriate to bring to the Board.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Purcell saying that it seems to him that these are growth related concerns pertaining to the addition of the third and fourth reactors of the power plant and subsequent schools that might be needed. Mr. Purcell said that Dominion would not want to take a position on this from the Board level taking a position on these concerns, as Dominion has always been conscientious of their actions and the impact it has on the citizenry. Chairman Barnes asked Mr. Lintecum to share these concerns with staff from Dominion to get a feel for the situation.
Discussion Preliminary Subdivision Plat Review Bella Woods Estates Subdivision & Carters Grant Subdivision
Mr. Coffey proposed to the Board that these two reviews be rescheduled for their June 19, 2006 regular meeting to allow staff time to come back and provide further detail on what they feel would be the best legal options. Mr. Coffey said that in addition to this, they want to communicate with the applicants of what they are in the process of doing. Mr. Coffey said that he would like to provide more tools to the Board, so if they were in the favor of approving a subdivision, then they would have something that they could “have something to hang their hat on.”
The Board briefly discussed this topic with Mr. Purcell saying that if the Board decides whether this is allowed or not, then this really doesnt make it by right. Mr. Purcell said that by right means that these individuals would be able to do what is necessary if it were a by right issue.
Decision and Approval of Fiscal Year 2006 2007 Operating and Capital Budget
Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator, said that the overall budget is $82,232,080, with $13,719,010 of it being for capital and operational being at $68,513,070. Mr. McLeod said that he has a couple of issues that they need to further clarify before they approve the overall budget.
Teacher Salary Scale
Mr. McLeod said that the first one is the increase for the teacher salary scale, which would require a motion from the Board to confirm the amount.
Chairman Barnes and Mr. Purcell both disclosed that their wives are teachers in the Louisa County School system. Mr. Wright said that he would like to make the motion for them to put $1.5 million in the budget for teacher salaries, which would be contingent upon receiving a written assurance from the School Administration Office stating that these funds would be used for that purpose and for the pre-kindergarten class.
Mr. McLeod informed that Board that he has enclosed a letter from the School Administration Office for that purpose saying that the funds would be used towards the teacher salary scale and for the four-year old program.
Mr. Wright pointed out that this letter has a discrepancy in it due to the different amounts of monies that listed, which he would like to have further clarified. Mr. Wright said that he would like to have assurance that this is what the additional funds would be used for. Mr. Purcell seconded the motion. The Board discussed this topic further with Mr. Harper saying that from what he understands, they are going to receive a 4.0% increase effective December 1, 2006 for those positions that they fund, which means that the County funds fully for those that the state does not fund. Mr. Harper questioned who covered this increase from July 1, 2006 through December 1, 2006.
Mr. McLeod responded that from what he perceives, the state kicks in December 1, 2006, but is prorated prior to that, which brings in like 1.7% for the positions covered.
The Board further discussed this topic with Mr. Harper saying that he does not feel comfortable right now that he has a full picture. Mr. Harper said that he doesnt want to take away anything from the individuals who have prepared this information because he feels that they did a great job with the information that they had. Mr. Harper said that they possibly didnt dig deep enough, but he is also looking at the fact that when they put this thing together, they talked about the long-term, the debt payout, and what programs they would have in place. Mr. Harper said that determined that they were probably looking at $125 to $150 million over the next ten to fifteen years. Mr. Harper said that he recalls seeing a letter from the School Board Chairman saying that if the Board were to give them the $1.5 million, then that would allow them to give the teachers a 7% increase, which the Board had proposed that these increases be handled over a three year phase program; therefore, he asked if this amount covers all of the salaries or are they still facing two more with 7% increases. Mr. Harper questioned who would be paying the difference for those salaries that increase from the July 1, 2006 to December 1, 2006 date until the state funds are provided. Mr. Harper said that these are the kinds of things that he would like to feel comfortable about before he votes in favor of supporting this amount; therefore, he is going vote against this portion of the budget with that regard. Mr. Havasy said that both Mr. Lintecum and Mr. McLeod gave the Board recommendations on what they should approve for the school this year, which he feels that they are ignoring with this motion. Mr. Havasy said that he finds it to be not very smart when you turn down wise advice. Mr. Havasy said that being a tax payer himself and having spoke with many others, this $1.5 million is over the $2.4 million amount that the state and federal government are giving, plus the $800,000 that they didnt spend last year; making the overall increase about $4.4 million for next year. Mr. Havasy questioned if they would be able to maintain this sort of growth in the future or if this were a spiraling tax increase that is going to leave them behind shortly. Mr. Havasy said that the population in Louisa County has grown over the past nine by 6,000 new citizens, which is approximately 19% growth. Mr. Havasy said that the school population has grown by 455 students, which is a 10% growth and yet the school budget has gone from $21 million to about $42 million. Mr. Havasy said that the teacher wages is the big item that causes turmoil every year. Mr. Havasy said that the teachers are one of the biggest assets that the school district has and are very important. Mr. Havasy said that when you look over the past few years of the school district, he sees a new high school annex, a new sports facility, new middle school, a beautiful administration building, and it seems to him that the School Board has their focus on more things than just the teacher salaries. Mr. Havasy said that the trouble is, which the School Board Chairman reminded them of, is that the Board of Supervisors cannot dictate to them on how to spend their budget. Mr. Havasy said that once they provide the funds to them, they could spend the monies however they see fit. He said that they have done this in the past over and over again; yet the teacher salaries have never been resolved. Mr. Havasy said that another situation they are facing is the new elementary school, which Harry Ruth brought forward information for another school that was built in Prince William County, Virginia that was constructed with a $16 million budget and yet the School Board has proposed another design that is $21 million, which is a difference of $5 million. Mr. Havasy said that he believes that this is all about education and paying the teachers to retain the best that they possibly could and rewarding them for their hard work. Mr. Havasy said that the only thing that he is seeing is bigger wallets and from the majority of the individuals that he has spoke with, they are asking them not to waste their money. Mr. Havasy said that he would rather have the additional $5 million that is being requested to construct the new school placed into an additional tax refund for the citizens of the County. Mr. Gentry said he agrees with 90% of what Mr. Havasy has said and that he has been looking strictly at the numbers himself. Mr. Gentry said that at their joint meeting held on April 26, 2006, they were told that they had fixed increases of $1.6 million, which included the retirement of $860,000, a health care credit, group life insurance, and many other items. Mr. Gentry said that the state is giving $2.3 million more to the school, which equates to a 15.77% increase and the federal government is providing a little over $23,000 that brings the overall total to $2.4 million. Mr. Gentry said that if they were to take away the $1.6 million that they provided for the fixed increases that still leaves $800,000 to be spent by them. Mr. Gentry said that if they were to take the amount recommended by the administration of $745,000, that gives them over $1.5 million. Mr. Gentry said that he believes that this amount takes care of the $1.5 million; therefore, he has difficulty going beyond what the County Administrator has recommended. Chairman Barnes said that he is going to support the proposed amount because any society that does not invest in the future of their children is a doomed society. Chairman Barnes said that if the funds that they are providing equates to about $5.00 a month to give the teachers this raise. Chairman Barnes said that both Boards have to start today to take care of what needs to be done and not base it on what has occurred in the past with previous members. Chairman Barnes said that he believes that the new elementary school can be built today for less than $20 million, which is something that they are still looking in to. Chairman Barnes stated that he wants to approve a budget that is about people. He said that if the budget means that it is going to help four-year-old students read and write early, then he wants to support it. Chairman Barnes said that if this helps retain educators that continue to support them, then he wants to support it. Chairman Barnes said that he shares the same feelings for the amounts they are providing to public safety through the Sheriffs Department, fire and rescue. Chairman Barnes pointed out that this Board has continuously been supporting the tax relief program for the elderly and disabled throughout the past few years. Chairman Barnes requested a roll call to verify those that are in favor of supporting the additional $1.5 million for the school budget that would include the teacher salary scale and the four-year-old program.
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||No|
|Willie L. Harper||No|
|Allen B. Jennings||Yes|
|Richad A. Havasy||No|
|Eric F. Purcell||Yes|
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||No|
|Willie L. Harper||No|
|Allen B. Jennings||Yes|
|Richad A. Havasy||No|
|Eric F. Purcell||Yes|
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
With the votes reflecting 4-3, the motion passed to approve the additional $1.5 million in funding to allow the schools to issue contracts.
Mr. McLeod said that he now needed a motion from the Board to adopt the proposed budget of the County for FY-07 and asked if they had any further questions.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Wright saying that he would like to make the motion to approve the budget as it has been presented. Mr. Purcell seconded the motion. Mr. Harper said that he is pleased with much of this budget, but due to concerns that have been expressed this evening, he is not going to support the proposed budget. Mr. Gentry said that since he had previously voted against the paid medic portion on the basis that they do not know how many paid medics that they really need, he is going to vote against approving the overall budget. Mr. Purcell said that he would like to request that the County get a better phone system in the building because if they are going to approve a budget that is over $80 million, the he does not want to call into the building and receive a message that says they must call back again because it will not accept messages. Chairman Barnes requested a roll call to verify those that are in favor of adopting the budget and those that were not.
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||No|
|Willie L. Harper||No|
|Allen B. Jennings||Yes|
|Richad A. Havasy||No|
|Eric F. Purcell||Yes|
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 4-3, with Messrs Gentry, Harper and Havasy voting against, a resolution was adopted to adopt the Fiscal Year 2006 2007 Operating and Capital Budgets for the County and the School Board Budget by category in the amounts of $68,513,070 for operational and $13,719,010 for Capital for a total amount of $82,232,080 with the understanding that the Louisa County Department of Parks and Recreation shall continue to use school facilities as they have in the past, which authorizes the School Board to issue personnel contracts for the Fiscal Year 2006-07. Furthermore, since the stated has not approved an FY 07 budget, any project / department within this budget, where its funding is contingent on the State budget approval will not be supplemented without approval of the Board of Supervisors as it has been identified on resolution number RES06.083 that is on file in the County Administrators Office.
Mr. McLeod explained to the Board that this resolution is to set the tax levy, with the only change being to the real estate tax rate that would reduce it from .66 cents per $100.00 of value to .64 cents per every $100.00 of assessed value.
The Board discussed this topic briefly with Mr. Havasy asking if this reduction was the best that they could do.
Mr. Lintecum responded that under the approved budget that has been adopted, this was the best that they could do.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Harper said that they originally started with fourteen cents, then took two cents off, but they also pulled around three cents out of the contingency fund. Mr. Harper said that effectively, they are increasing their spending on this budget by fifteen cents. Mr. Harper said that during their public hearing, he recalls the Chairman mentioning the faces that he could see and wanted to help, but nothing was mentioned about the faces among these ones that would be the ones who have to pay out of their wallets to afford these increases. Mr. Harper said that these individuals are not the ones that come before the Board to complain, but often hard working individuals that perhaps make less than $25,000 a year. Mr. Harper said that this is a hard hit for folks that are trying to make a start in life. He said that the Board has spoke many times in trying to address affordable housing. Mr. Harper stated that House Bill 169 failed this year, which would have limited the amount an assessment could increase per year. Mr. Harper said that if they continue to have assessments of this nature across the state of Virginia, the he believes that there would be a bill passed that places limits on them. Mr. Harper said that he would personally prefer to show the discipline and good judgment to make these dictations himself rather than waiting for the General Assembly to pass a bill and dictate it. Mr. Harper said that he would have been able to support any part of this budget if they would have taken at least four cents off of the real estate tax; therefore, he is going to oppose the setting of these rates as they have been proposed. Mr. Gentry said that he thinks that they need to make a good effort to identify where the pennies are if they go this route because he is still receiving a lot of questions from constituents; therefore, after this meeting, he would like to see them generate some type of very simplistic information to let the public know how the monies are being spent. Chairman Barnes asked Mr. McLeod to provide a copy of last years tax relief program to the Board. Chairman Barnes said that he shares Mr. Harpers sympathy and Mr. Gentrys concerns, but he would like to remind individuals that one of the things that the Board has always tried to do it to maintain the tax rate. Chairman Barnes said that the market often drives assessments. Chairman Barnes said that the Board set a goal during their retreat to prioritize public safety, which includes, fire, rescue, and the police. Chairman Barnes said that this budget is about public safety as well as the welfare of the children.
On the motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 6-1, with Mr. Harper voting against, a resolution was adopted to set the tax levy for the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 for personal property, merchants capital, and machinery and tools per $100.00 assessed value as follows and is further identified on resolution number RES06.084 that is on file in the County Administrators office:
| Real Estate (Section 58.1-3200, Code of Virginia. 1950 as amended)|
(includes Mobile Homes)
| Tangible Personal Property (Section 58.1-3500, Code of Virginia. 1950 as amended)|
(Exclusive of household furnishings)
|Machinery and Tools (Section 58.1-3507, Code of Virginia. 1950 as amended)||$1.90|
|Merchants Capital (Section 58.1-3509, Code of Virginia. 1950 as amended)||$0.65|
|Aircraft (Section 58.1-3500, Code of Virginia. 1950 as amended)||$0.48|
Board of Supervisors Summer Meeting Schedule
Chairman Barnes said that the Board has typically established dates for their summer meetings that are held in the months of July and August.
Mr. Lintecum said that the Board previously discussed this and established the meeting dates as July 5, 2006 and August 1, 2006.
The Board did not report on any committees or commissions this evening.
Mr. Wright said that he would like to appoint Mark Monson to the Clean Community Commission.
On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board appointed Mark Monson to the Clean Community Commission.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
Mr. Lintecum presented his report highlighting the following items:
Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he needed a motion from them appointing him to represent them as the JAUNT annual meeting if necessary.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 70, a resolution was adopted to appoint C. Lee Lintecum as the proxy for Louisa County at the JAUNT Annual Stockholders Meeting that will be held on July 12, 2006.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt the Consent Agenda for four public hearings that will be held on July 5, 2006 and the following two resolutions:
Resolution Adoption of the Amendment 457 (b) Deferred Compensation Plan
On the motion of Mr. Wright seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to approving the amended 457 (b) Deferred Compensation Plan to reflect changes as required by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 as required by the Internal Revenue Service to be effective January 1st 2006 and that the plan document presented at this meeting is hereby adopted and approved.
Resolution Appropriation to the Sheriffs Department for Donated Funds for the K-9 Unit
On the motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the supplemental appropriation to the Sheriffs Department for funds donated by Kenny and Melody Bowers in the amount of $1,000 to the K-9 Unit.
The Board did not discuss any correspondence during this meeting.
Mr. Morgan did not discuss any legal correspondence with the Board.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the bills for the second half of May 2006 for the County of Louisa in the amount of $445,034.54.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the minutes of April 19, 2006, May 3, 2006, and May 15, 2006 as presented.
Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that the Deputy Clerk would be working with them for this meeting and the June 19, 2006 meeting. Mr. Lintecum said that she has accepted a position with the Assessment Office and began there on June 1, 2006. Mr. Lintecum said that they would be bringing in a permanent replacement for this position later in July, but they would have a temp to handle the first meeting of July. Mr. Lintecum extended his appreciation to the Deputy Clerk for her dedicated work.
The Board briefly discussed this topic with Chairman Barnes extending his appreciation to the Deputy Clerk for all of her hard work and dedication. Chairman Barnes stated that he believes the she has done an exceptional job in processing the minutes.
On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 6:29 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:
1. In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (7) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel for discussion of litigation in the Green Springs.
2. In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of discussing personnel under the County Administrator.
On motion of Mr. Harper, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 6:58 p.m.
RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Gentry, 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 the 5th day of June 2006, 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 the 5th day of June 2006, 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.
CUP02-06 Gregory Davenport
Mr. Coffey summarized the request for CUP 02-06 as being for the renewal of a CUP issued under rezoning REZ02-01. Mr. Coffey said that the property is located on the south side of Route 726 (Lightwood Road), approximately ˝ mile east of Route 636 (Dunkum Store Road) and is located in the Green Springs Magisterial and Voting Districts. Mr. Coffey said that the Neighborhood Meeting was held on March 8, 2006 at which no one was present to speak for or against the application other than the applicant himself. Mr. Coffey said that the Development Review Committee voted unanimously on March 22, 2006 for approval, deleting the first condition at the time, which required another five-year approval and adjusting the hours of operation to expand them. Mr. Coffey said that the Planning Commission held their public hearing on April 13, 2006 at which time they voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board to include the conditions recommended by the Development Review Committee.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Wright asking if they had received or heard of any complaints from individuals in the neighborhood. Mr. Wright said that as he recalls, when the Board approved this, there wasnt any opposition to this. Mr. Havasy asked if condition two had to be restricted to family members only. Mr. Havasy said that he had spoke with the applicant regarding this issue that specifies family members only, which he had asked for further consideration since he hires summer help. Mr. Havasy asked Mr. Coffey if this would have any affect on the CUP if they were to modify this.
Mr. Coffey said that they have not received any opposition verbally or in writing. Mr. Coffey said that if they were to modify the condition to reflect that the operation would be limited to the conditions under a Home Occupation B, for example, then that would allow for up to two non-family members.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Havasy said that he would like to have the verbiage modified to allow up to two additional employees that were non-family members.
Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. With no one wishing to address the Board, Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.
On motion of Mr. Havasy, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the request for renewal of a Conditional Use Permit CUP02-06 issued under REZ02-01 for the continued operation of a permanent sawmill with the five conditions as identified on resolution number RES06.087 that is on file in the County Administrators office.
Chairman Barnes announced that due to a previous obligation, he would be unable to attend their next meeting scheduled for June 19, 2006.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adjourn the June 5, 2006 regular meeting at 7:08 p.m.
BY ORDER OF
FITZGERALD A. BARNES, CHAIRMAN
LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA