Contact Sitemap Search
|
|
|
Contact Sitemap Search |
| 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
supports 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