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

Menu
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
JULY 21, 2008
2:00 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

*P.T. Spencer, Jr arrived at 2:25 p.m.
*Fitzgerald A. Barnes arrived at 2:26 p.m.
Others Present: C. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Will Cockrell, Senior Planner; Jason Pauley, County Engineer; Kevin Linhares, Director of Facilities Management; Bob Hardy, Director of Information Technology; Robert Dube, Fire Chief; Jane Shelhorse, Director of Parks and Recreation; Sherry Vena, Director of Human Resources; April Jacobs, Revenue Recovery Administrator, Amanda Reidelbach, Office Manager, Administration; Zuwana Morgan, Deputy Clerk and Brittany Spaur, Records Clerk

CALL TO ORDER

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 5-0, with Mr. Barnes and Mr. Spencer absent, the Board voted to reconvene the meeting.

Chairman Harper called the July 21, 2008 meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 2:00 p.m.

CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Mr. Byers, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 5-0, with Mr. Barnes and Mr. Spencer absent, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 2:01 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:  

1.        In accordance with 2.23711 (A) (1) VA Code Ann., for the purpose of discussing personnel reporting directly to the Board of Supervisors.

2.        In accordance with 2.23711 (A) (7) VA Code Ann., for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel on actual litigation of the Board of Supervisors vs. the Board of Equalization.

REGULAR SESSION

On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 4:49 p.m.

RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Mr. Gentry, 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 21st day of July 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 21st day of July 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.

Discussion Board of Supervisor/School Board Committee

Mr. Gentry said the four person committee that was supposed to be set up with the School Board was to open up communication between the two Boards.  Mr. Gentry said the plan was to have a meeting at the end of July to discuss what the Board had given Mr. Byers and himself.  Mr. Gentry stated the top things on that list were a staffing formula, the status of Thomas Jefferson Elementary School and some other things.  

Mr. Gentry said he received a phone call from Mr. Hal Schaffer, Chairman of the School Board, recommending to do away with the committee for various reasons. Mr. Gentry said the School Board would be starting their work sessions the 19th of August and Mr. Schaffer had invited him to come.  Mr. Gentry said that was not the way the committee was intended to go and he and Mr. Byers needed direction from the Board. Mr. Gentry asked should he and Mr. Byers go to the meeting and express their concerns.  

Mr. Gentry said he received an email from Mr. Schaffer disagreeing with the Boards idea of the committee and
Mr. Schaffer said he felt that having the whole School Board would work out fine.  Mr. Gentry said in the past with too many people on a committee made it difficult to make a decision.  

Mr. Harper said
unless the other Board member had an objection, the Board would continue with the committee as planned and the committee would report back to the Board.  Mr. Harper said the Board would invite the School Board to participate; however, that would be their choice.  

Mr. Barnes said the Board could only
continue to offer and if the School Board did not accept then that would be their decision.

Mr. Barnes said
one of the most important things that should have been on the list was the opening of a new Elementary School in the middle of the year and the cost.

Mr. Wright said he strongly support
s the continuing of the two person committee.  Mr. Wright said since he had been on the Board he could not recall a joint meeting with the School Board when anything was accomplished.  Mr. Wright said he could not remember a large committee working for either Board.

Mr. Gentry said
he tried to sway Mr. Schaffer on the four person committee.  Mr. Gentry said he explained to Mr. Schaffer that with four people on the committee having different views it allowed the items that came up to be attacked at all angles.  Mr. Gentry said Mr. Schaffer decided he did not want the committee.  

Mr. Gentry asked who would
he and Mr. Byers make comments to about what was on the list.  

Mr. Harper said they would report back to the Board of Supervisors and if the School Board decided to participate they could do so.  Mr. Harper said the Board of Supervisors are looking at the items on the list from a funding perspective.  Mr. Harper said the running of the Schools was for the School Board.

Mr. Havasy said the extra cost of the new school would be a shock to everyone.  Mr. Havasy said Mr. Schaffer
made the political decision and took it upon himself to eliminate his half of the committee because he was afraid of the answers he was going to get.  Mr. Havasy said with the opening of the new school the Board really needed this time with the School Board to know what their funding responsibilities and needs would be in the future.  

Mr. Harper said he did not
know if Mr. Schaffer made the decision or if the School Board endorsed his decision. Mr. Gentry said Mr. Schaffer brought the subject up of not having the committee at a School Board meeting and there was not a vote, they just concluded on what he said.

Mr. Spencer
questioned if there was a vote to appoint Billy Seay and Brian Huffman to the committee.  Mr. Gentry said it was brought up at a School Board meeting but he didnt remember an official vote being taken.

Mr. Byers asked if the Board of  Supervisors offered a meeting to the two people on the committee and the whole School Board showed up, would that become a public meeting.

Ms. Pandak said if the
Board of Supervisors and the School Board had already designated two people from each the meeting, that would have to be public.  Ms. Pandak said if other members showed up it would have already been advertised to the public.

Mr. Harper asked did a committee of two have to be advertised.  Ms. Pandak said yes, if the two were designated to a committee.  

Mr. Harper asked could the Board ask two people to look into a matter.  Ms. Pandak said they certainly could then the question would be if the Board wanted it to be a public meeting or not.  Ms. Pandak said if the Board asked two members to go and meet with another group then the meeting had to be publicized.

Mr. Harper asked if it was just two Board of Supervisor members meeting would that meeting have to be publicized.  Ms. Pandak said no.

Mr. Gentry said the School Board was required to advertise, would the Board of Supervisor have to advertise as well.  Ms. Pandak said as long as it gets done it didnt matter who did it.

Mr. Byers asked if the School Board would only meet with their full Board was it the desire of the Board of Supervisors for he and Mr. Gentry not to participate.

Mr. Harper said the Board would leave it to them to see if any valuable information came out of that type of meeting.  Mr. Harper said maybe the Board needed to dissolve the committee and reappoint one with a different function.

Mr. Gentry stated if he and Mr. Byers went to the School Board meeting they would suck them in to being apart of the committee with just two Board of Supervisors and the whole School Board.

Mr. Barnes asked could the Board send one more letter to the School Board to strongly express that there be a committee.  Mr. Barnes said the last time there was movement between the two Boards was when the Superintendent and the County Administrator were both on the committee and they may need to be included.  

Mr. Gentry said he did not have a problem going to the School Board meeting and stating how the Board felt.

Mr. Harper asked
Mr. Gentry and Mr. Byers to write down their purpose for the committee, so the Board would all have the same purpose.

Mr. Gentry said the Board had already established a goal which was to establish a committee comprised of two Board of Supervisors members and two School Board members to develop a proposal outlining long term planning strategies, funding, structure and a staffing formula for LCPS.

Mr. Harper said he wanted the committee to go to the School Board and ask for the information they needed to make their recommendation back to the Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Havasy said if the School Board chose not to work with the committee that needed to be made public.

Mr. Gentry asked could he and Mr. Byers discuss everything on the list that the Board had given them.  It was a consensus of the Board that they could discuss the entire list.

Mr. Byers said he plans to express his dissatisfaction to the School Board.

Discussion Cutalong  Community Development Authority

Mr. Gentry said the Cutalong CDA met for the first time.  Mr. Gentry said the reason for the CDA bonds were to handle the infrastructure of water, sewer and roads.  Mr. Gentry said some time back the Board received information from Mr. Delk on concerns about the water becoming a public entity.  Mr. Gentry said he needed to get the Boards thoughts on that particular issue because the developer believed they would be able to get bonds for water, sewer and roads.  Mr. Gentry said from the emails the Board had received they were advised not to get involved in the water system issue.  Mr. Gentry said if the Board was not going to get involved in the water and sewer systems then he would need to report that to the CDA Board.

Mr. Harper said
he would say no.

Mr. Havasy said he would say no also.  Mr. Havasy asked would the Board of Supervisors have say if the water in Lake Anna was turned over to a private group or would that just be up to DEQ.

Mr. Harper said the Board would have the say that any citizen would have and it may carry a little more weight.

Mr. Havasy asked
did that mean any developer could withdraw water out of any stream in Louisa County without the Boards permission.  Mr. Harper said the Board would have the opportunity to present their case.

Mr. Byers said he was under the impression that in order for DEQ to move forward the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors would have an opportunity to look at the total plan and make some determinations.  

Mr. Harper said maybe Ms. Pandak could do some research on that.  Mr. Harper said the Board could make their case but they did not have a vote either way.

Mr. Byers asked if they gave proffers before and now the proffer had changed sufficiently, wouldnt the Board have to be notified.

Mr. Gentry said the developer did make a comment as far as water was concerned
because the wells were expected to furnish 90 percent of the water.  Mr. Gentry said he just wanted direction from the Board of what to tell the CDA Board.

Ms. Pandak said she would have to do some research.

Mr. Spencer asked who changed the proffers.

Mr. Harper asked all the Board members where they stood on taking over the water
. Mr. Byers, Mr. Gentry, Mr. Havasy, Mr. Spencer, Mr. Wright and Mr. Harper said no they did not want the county to take over the water.  Mr. Barnes abstained.  Mr. Barnes said he thought the Board should look at the proposal prior to making a decision and the county could benefit from having water and sewer at the lake.

* Mr. Spencer left meeting at 5:15 p.m.

Mr. Gentry said if he goes to the CDA and says the Board said no, they are going to ask why.  

Mr. Harper said they have made no effort to run infrastructure out there and wells are not predictable.  Mr. Harper said even if the Board says no and they do it and it fails it would not be the Boards responsibility.  Mr. Harper said they should be providing 140 to 150 percent of the water because they proffer to provide water to adjoining subdivisions if the county took over the system.  

Mr. Barnes said the Board owes it to the public to see the plan.  Mr. Barnes said to say no without out allowing them to present a plan, he thought the Board would be cheating themselves.

Mr. Harper said they are welcome to bring any information to the Board; however, with the information they have now the Board was not willing to proceed.

Mr. Gentry said the Board had already agreed to the CDA Board and that was his concern.

Mr. Lintecum said he thought it was offered in the proffers but there was not an acceptance especially by the authority.  Mr. Lintecum said when the subject was discussed was when Mr. Delk suggested against it.

Mr. Harper said he thought one of the proffers was if the county took it over they would provide more water to take into the other subdivisions.  Mr. Harper asked Mr. Lintecum to look into it.

Mr. Gentry said in December 2005 the Board passed a resolution and one of the WHEREAS stated the Board proposes to create the CDA in order to provide all or a portion of various public improvements, consisting of sewer system improvements, road improvements, landscaping, water system improvements, traffic signalization and such other improvements as may be permitted by the Act. Mr. Gentry said his biggest question was should he take the water and sewer out of the resolution that was already passed in 2005.  Mr. Gentry said to him it was a pretty strong commitment that was made in 2005.  

ADJOURNMENT

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy which carried by a vote of 6-0, the Board voted to adjourn the July 21, 2008 meeting at 5:24 p.m.


BY ORDER OF


________________________________

WILLIE L. HARPER, CHAIRMAN
LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA