[WORK SESSION]
[00:00:08]
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE, MRS. KNOTT? MRS. WAYMACK.
I NEED A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.
DO WE HAVE IT? IT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.
DO WE HAVE IT? YES, MA'AM, IT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.
[INAUDIBLE] GIVE THAT TO [INAUDIBLE], OH, I'M COMING OUT, I THOUGHT I WAS DOING.
EITHER WAY, I DON'T MIND, I'LL DO IT.
MAYBE I'M WRONG, MADAM CHAIR, YOU'RE RIGHT.
I THINK MR. CARMICHAEL WAS SUPPOSED TO DO IT BUT I GOT IT, MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE AT THE BOARD GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2.2-3711 OF THE VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSE.
IT'S A DISCUSSION OR CONSIDERATION OF THE ASSIGNMENT APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, PERFORMANCE, DEMOTION, SALARIES, DISCIPLINING OR RESIGNATION OF A SPECIFIC PUBLIC OFFICER, APPOINTEES OR EMPLOYEE OF THE PUBLIC BODY.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT SUCH DISCUSSION SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE EXPENSE REPORT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND TO SECTION 2.2-3711.A.3 DISCUSSION OR CONSIDERATION OF THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE OR OF THE DISPOSITION OF PUBLICLY HELD REAL PROPERTY, WHERE DISCUSSION IN AN OPEN MEETING WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT A BARGAINING POSITION OR NEGOTIATING STRATEGY OF THE PUBLIC BODY.
SUCH DISCUSSIONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO PROPERTY LOCATED ON SOUTH CRATER ROAD AND NUMBER THREE SECTION 2.2-3711.A.5 DISCUSSION CONCERNING A PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS OR INDUSTRY OR THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING BUSINESS OR INDUSTRY WHERE NO PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT HAS BEEN MADE OF THE BUSINESS OR INDUSTRY'S INTERESTS IN LOCATING OR EXPANDING ITS FACILITIES IN THE COMMUNITY.
SUCH DISCUSSIONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO A BUSINESS IN THE SOUTH POINT INDUSTRIAL PARK.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECOND IT.
WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE, MRS. KNOTT.
WHAT DO WE NEED TO CARRY BACK? GOOD EVENING.
THE BOARD HAS BEEN OUT OF CLOSED SESSION AND IN RECESS, AND NOW I CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER FOR OUR WORK SESSION.
I TURN, OUR WORK SESSION OVER TO THE INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, MR. STOKE.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. WHITTEN FIRST TONIGHT IS CHANGES TO THE FIRE ORDINANCE WITH CHIEF PAUL BEAMON.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR [INAUDIBLE] MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, PAUL BEAMON, CHIEF OF FIRE, MS., I WAS ASKED AWHILE BACK TO GO BACK THROUGH AND LOOK THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, AND WE NEEDED TO UPDATE SOME OF THE THINGS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CREW.
AND AT THE TIME, I WAS ASKED TO GO THROUGH AND STRENGTHEN SOME OF THE LANGUAGE UP IN THERE.
[00:05:01]
SO THE PRESENTATION THAT IS TO FOLLOW BASICALLY IS A OUTLINE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE CHANGED IN THERE.MOST OF IT IS SOME STRIKE THROUGHS AND THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT HAS BEEN ADDED TO IT THAT I'LL GO THROUGH AND BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
SO WHAT I TRIED TO DO ON THESE IS I KIND OF PUT THEM IN THE SECTIONS OF WHAT THEY ARE.
SO IF THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGES, THEN IT'LL SKIP FROM A TO C OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
SO RIGHT HERE YOU'LL SEE THAT IT'S JUST CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
AND WE STRUCK OUT THE FIRE RESCUE SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE ORDINANCE, AND WE BASICALLY COPIED SOME REFERENCES THROUGH THE VIRGINIA CODE CHAPTER TWENTY SEVEN THROUGHOUT THE ORDINANCE.
SAME 42.1.1 ESTABLISH THE PRINCE GEORGE AGAIN, THIS IS JUST SIMPLY JUST THE FIRE EMS SYSTEM.
AND IT'S THOSE FIRE COMPANIES, VOLUNTEERS AND RESCUE SQUAD WAS IT WAS JUST MARKED OUT.
JUST TO CLEAN THE LANGUAGE UP.
AND THEN WE GOT TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING DEPARTMENTS.
ALL OF THIS WAS BASICALLY THE SAME.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF I THINK IN THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE, SUBSTATION THREE WASN'T EXACTLY LISTED.
SO PRINCE GEORGE FIRE EMS COMPANY 6 IS IN THERE COMPANY SEVEN COMPANY EIGHT, THE PRINCE GEORGE EMERGENCY CREW HAS BEEN STRUCK AND CURRENTLY THERE IS NO PLACE FOR THE SYSTEM VOLUNTEERS.
THEY ARE LISTED HERE AS NUMBER NINE, BUT THEY WILL BE ASSIGNED TO STATION SEVEN AND STATION EIGHT.
FOUR TWO, ONE ONE CONTINUE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PRINCE GEORGE COORDINATED FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES SYSTEM.
AGAIN, IT'S JUST STRIKING OUT THE LANGUAGE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
INSTEAD OF SAYING JUST VOLUNTEERS, IT'S ALL VOLUNTEERS AND COUNTY EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
THE HEAD HERE, IT JUST SAYS THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM, AND SO THE COORDINATED FIRE SYSTEM.
AND AGAIN, THE FIRE EMS SYSTEM HERE, SO THE COORDINATED SYSTEM.
42-1-3 THERE IS ACTUALLY NO CHANGE IN ONE OR 1A.
IT WAS JUST MOVED IN THE ORDER, BASICALLY BECAUSE JUST FOR FLOW DEVELOPING POLICY.
SO THIS IS RED, BUT IT IS NOT STRUCK OUT.
IT JUST SHOWS UP AS 1E IN THE NEW ORDINANCE.
THE FIRE EMS CHIEF SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO OVERSEE THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE OPERATION OF ANY AGENCY WITHIN THE RELATED TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE FIRE EMS SERVICE OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICIES ESTABLISHED BY THE FIRE EMS CHIEF AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO INCLUDE.
AND THEN IT FOLLOWS INTO THE NUMBERS.
EVEN THOUGH A LOT OF THESE ARE BOLD, ALL THEY WERE WAS JUST MOVED AROUND IN HERE.
SO SYSTEM FLEET SIZE, DEVELOPMENT, DEPLOYMENT AND FUNCTION MINIMUM STANDARDS REGARDING APPARATUS EQUIPMENT SYSTEM FUNDING BY THE COUNTY TO INCLUDE VOLUNTEER COMPANIES AND MONITORING AND CONTROLLING SYSTEM VOLUNTEERS AND COUNTY BUDGETS AND EXPENDITURES.
THAT LANGUAGE IS ALREADY IN THE EXISTING BUDGET.
IT WAS JUST KIND OF VAGUE IN THERE.
MUTUAL AID AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS IS ALSO IN THERE.
THAT'S WHY IT'S BOLD IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN NUMBER FOUR BEFORE.
SAME WAY, WITH FIVE, SIX, SEVEN AND EIGHT MINIMUM STANDARDS REQUIREMENTS OF FIRE EMS SYSTEM PERSONNEL TRAINING LICENSURE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGH QUALITY FIRE EMERGENCY SERVICES.
NUMBER SIX THE FIRE EMS CHIEF SHALL REPRESENT THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT AND THE FIRE EMS SYSTEM AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY AND OTHER GROUPS, JURISDICTIONS OR LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.
NUMBER SEVEN, THE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS SUCH AS MINIMUM STAFFING IN RESPONSE GOALS.
NUMBER EIGHT, THE PROCESS FOR SETTING AND MAINTAINING FIRST TWO RESPONSE DISTRICTS AND APPARATUS RESPONSE ORDERS.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT MOST OF THESE ARE ALREADY AN THE SYSTEM [INAUDIBLE] OR IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT THEY'RE JUST MOVED.
42 1-3 FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL HIRE AND TERMINATE OFFICERS AND STAFFING, UTILIZING GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES OF THE PRINCE GEORGE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT AND REVIEW AND ACCEPT VOLUNTEERS, OF THE FIRE EMS DEPARTMENT.
THIS ACTUALLY IS ALREADY BEING DONE.
IT JUST WASN'T IN THE ORDINANCE.
ALL VOLUNTEERS COME THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT.
WE DO THE APPLICATION IF THEY AND THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS.
ONCE THAT'S DONE, WE FORWARD THOSE ON TO THE RESPECTIVE STATIONS OF WHICH THEY WANT TO RESPOND VOLUNTEER WITH.
FIRE EMS CHIEF MAY APPOINT SUCH PRINCIPAL DEPUTIES OR ASSISTANTS AN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MAY APPROVE.
DEPUTIES AND ASSISTANTS MAY PERFORM ANY OF THE DUTIES OF THE FIRE EMS CHIEF WHEN AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY THE FIRE EMS CHIEF.
WHAT THIS IS DOING IS CURRENTLY THERE IS NOTHING IN THE ORDINANCE AS I CAN DELEGATE ANY AUTHORITY DOWN THERE IS IN VIRGINIA LAW THAT SAYS I HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, BUT WE JUST PUT THAT IN THE ORDINANCE.
THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION TO THE STAFF AND VOLUNTEER APPLICANTS AND INCUMBENTS, INCLUDING REVIEW CRIMINAL AND DRIVING RECORDS BEFORE RECOMMENDING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE OFFERED THE POSITION.
THIS IS CURRENTLY ALREADY DONE.
[00:10:01]
THIS IS LISTED IN ANOTHER SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE IT'S JUST LISTED HERE AS WELL.FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL LEAD THE PLANNING FOR TRAINING AND PREPARATION FOR THE RESPONSE OF ANY DISASTER THAT OCCURS IN THE COUNTY THAT REQUIRES IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COUNTY EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN, WITH THE DUTIES ALREADY ASSIGNED BETWEEN MYSELF AND THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS.
THIS IS ALREADY IN THERE, BUT IT WAS KIND OF VAGUE AS TO WHAT MY ROLE WAS.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HEREBY DESIGNATE THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF, AND THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL SO SERVE AS THE COORDINATOR OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR ALL PURPOSES RELATED TO RESPONSE TO DISASTERS PURSUANT TO TITLE 44 OF VIRGINIA CODE.
AND THIS IS IN THE CODE JUST IT BASICALLY SAYS WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO BE DOING ANYWAY.
MY APOLOGIES FOR THE SMALL FONT HERE.
THIS WAS JUST MOVED IN THE ORDINANCE.
THE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND SUCH MINIMUMS, SUCH AS MINIMUM STAFFING STANDARDS AND GOALS.
ALL THESE ITEMS WERE JUST MOVED TO ANOTHER SECTION THAT WE JUST WENT OVER.
SEAMLESS COMMAND STRUCTURE AND INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM THAT COMPLIES WITH FEDERAL AND STATE INCIDENT MANAGEMENT STANDARDS.
NUMBER FOUR WAS STRUCK OUT BUT IS NOT STRUCK OUT.
WE JUST WENT OVER THOSE IN THE PRIOR SYSTEM.
FLEET SIZE DEPLOYMENT WAS JUST MOVED.
THEY ARE NOT STRICKEN FROM THE ORDINANCE.
DID YOU READ THE TOP LINE OF THAT JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT E.
IT'S DEVELOP POLICIES IN CONSULTATION WITH THE PRINCE GEORGE FIRE AND EMS ADVISORY BOARD? THAT IS AN EXISTING THAT HAS NOT CHANGED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF IT USED TO ONLY SAY BOARD.
NOW IT SAYS ADVISORY BOARD BUT THE WORDING ON THAT DID NOT CHANGE.
ADVISORY BOARD FOR SYSTEM WIDE POLICIES THAT ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE EFFECTIVE AND FAIR PROVISION OF HIGH QUALITY COUNTY FIRE EMERGENCY SERVICES TO INCLUDE THAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE ORDINANCE.
AS IT STANDS, WE JUST ADDED THE WORD ADVISORY SO THAT WE KNEW WHICH BOARD WE WERE REFERRING TO.
AS YOU SEE HERE, THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGED IN THIS IT'S JUST GOT FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL.
IT'S GOT ADVISORY BOARD, ADVISORY BOARD AND ADVISORY BOARD.
AND WHAT THIS IS DOING IS MAKING DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS.
THAT WAS ALL THAT'S CHANGES INSTEAD OF IN PLACES WHERE IT SAID BOARD, WE ADDED THE ADVISORY SO THAT IT WAS CLEAR ON WHICH BOARD IT WAS REFERRING TO.
SAME THING, SERVE AS A CHAIR OF THE ADVISORY BOARD AND PARTICIPATE IN PRINCE GEORGE ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS, AS YOU CAN SEE EVERYWHERE THERE IS BOARD IT JUST SAYS ADVISORY.
SO WE KNOW WHICH BOARD IT'S REFERRING TO.
THE ADVISORY BOARD IS CONSIST OF THE FIRE CHIEFS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY.
IF CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT PERMIT SUCH PRIOR CONSULTATION WITH THE PGFEMS ADVISORY BOARD THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL ADVISE THEM.
CAN YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT.
IF I END UP MAKING, EXCUSE ME, I'VE GOT BRONCHITIS A LITTLE BIT.
THAT IS THE EXISTING LANGUAGE IN IT.
THAT IS, IF A DECISION NEEDED TO BE MADE WHERE WE DID SOMETHING AT THE EARLIEST CONVENIENCE, PER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, I'M TO ADVISE IT.
THAT'S AN EXISTING THAT'S CORRECT.
NUMBERS FOUR AND FIVE HAD NO CHANGE.
THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL ESTABLISH PUBLISH AND ENFORCE THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATION OF THE FIRE EMS DEPARTMENT.
THE FIRE EMS CHIEF MAY ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL AND MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE RIGHT THERE.
WHILE IT'S BOLD, IT IS STILL IN THE EXISTING FOR THE INTERNAL OPERATION OF THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT.
NO FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS OR DIRECTIVE CAN WAIVE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY, FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL LAWS OR REGULATION, INCLUDING THOSE RELATED TO LICENSING.
ALSO ADDED REWORDED TO STRENGTHEN THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF MAY EXERCISE ALL POWERS AUTHORIZED BY THE STATE NECESSARY FOR THE PROVISION OF COORDINATED FIRE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND EXERCISE COMMAND AUTHORITY AND EMERGENCY OPERATIONS WHEN DEEMED NECESSARY.
ALL OF THIS COMES STRAIGHT FROM THE CODE OF VIRGINIA 27.23-9, AS AMENDED IN 1950.
THIS WAS JUST ADDED IN THERE SO THAT IT REFERENCES 27 TITLE TWENTY SEVEN.
THE FIRE EMS CHIEF MAY DELEGATE HIS OR HER OPERATIONAL AUTHORITY TO
[00:15:01]
OTHER OFFICIALS AND STAFF, OF THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT.THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SHALL HAVE AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AND TAKE ACTION NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT AND CARRY OUT THE TERMS OF AGREEMENTS FOR MUTUAL AID, DISASTER PREPAREDNESS, PROVISIONS OF SERVICES RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESCUE, FIRE SUPPRESSION INVESTIGATION, MEDICAL SERVICES OR OTHER EMERGENCY RESPONSES DEEMED NECESSARY IN THE JUDGMENT OF THE FIRE AND EMS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND EVENTS EXCEEDING THE CAPACITIES OF INDIVIDUAL LOCALITIES OR GOVERNMENT AGENCY.
ALL THIS IS IS STRENGTHENING UP TO WHERE IF I WANT TO PUT IT INTO A MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT, I KNOW IT.
STILL, IT SAYS IN HERE IT HAS TO COME STILL TO THE APPROVAL OF YOU, BUT WE ARE ABLE TO ENTER INTO THOSE AGREEMENTS IN TIMES OF EMERGENCY, BUT STILL AT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
BUT IN THE MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT, IT REALLY DIDN'T SPELL OUT WHAT WE COULD DO AND WHEN WE COULD DO IT.
THIS ACTUALLY HELPS BOTH THE FIRE SIDE AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, SO WHEN THINGS ARE ACTUALLY IN TIMES OF DISASTER, IT ALLOWS US TO MOVE ON THE FLY WITH YOUR PERMISSION.
AND IT SAYS FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY AND TO EXPEND FUNDS AFTER OFFICIAL DISASTERS FOR EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS TO PROVIDE THE PUBLIC SAFETY DURING SUCH EVENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY.
SO YOU SEE, WE ARE HAVING TO FOLLOW THE COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY.
SO ANYTHING IN THE COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY THAT TELLS ME I GOT TO DO X Y Z.
THIS DOES NOT NEGATE THAT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.
WHAT THIS LANGUAGE IS IN HERE IS TAKING FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN TIME OF EMERGENCIES SO THAT WE CAN USE THE ICS FORMS TO TRACK PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT THAT IS USED SO WE CAN BE REIMBURSED.
I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION OR COMMENT ON NUMBER NINE.
WERE YOU IN THE VERY BEGINNING WHERE IT SAYS ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS? THAT'S CORRECT.
TO ME, THAT'S REALLY NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO GET THE OK OR APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD.
IT'S BASICALLY TO ME, I INTERPRET THAT AS IF YOU WOULD BE REPRESENTING YOU WOULD BE SIGNING SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD.
THAT WE ALREADY PRE-APPROVED IT.
BUT IT DOESN'T STATE THAT IN THERE.
TO ME, I THINK IT NEEDS TO REALLY BE CLEAR THAT THAT.
UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY, IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR THAT THE BOARD HAS TO APPROVE THAT.
AND AT THAT POINT UPON APPROVAL, YOU WOULD BE SIGNING SOMETHING ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
I JUST THINK A LITTLE CLEARER WORDING THERE.
THE MAJORITY OF THAT OF NINE IS FOR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS NOT DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS, BUT TIMES OF DISASTER.
THAT'S AFTER A DISASTER HAS BEEN DECLARED.
IT COULD BE BEFORE BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE MAY BE IN DISASTER MODE IN AN EMERGENCY DECLARATION THAT HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED, BUT WE WILL BE ABLE TO BACKTRACK AND STILL DO SOME OF THOSE THINGS BECAUSE WE MAY ACTUALLY THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS MAY ACTUALLY GO INTO A STATE OF EMERGENCY, AND AN EMERGENCY DECLARATION HAS NOT YET BEEN DECLARED.
WE WILL BE ABLE TO GO BACK AND RECOUP ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS DURING THAT TIME.
I WOULD JUST THINK IT'D BE IMPORTANT, THOUGH, FOR THE BOARD TO BE AWARE THAT YOU'RE GOING INTO THAT MODE.
SO THEN THAT WE REALIZED DECISIONS THAT COME AS A RESULT OF THAT IS BECAUSE YOU ARE OPERATING.
THESE WOULD BE THINGS WHERE THE GOVERNOR OR THE COUNTY HAS NOT TRULY DECLARED A STATE OF EMERGENCY, BUT AT LEAST WE WOULD KNOW THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT WOULD BE OPERATING IN THAT MODE.
NOT A PROBLEM I CAN STRENGTHEN THAT UP.
AND PART OF THAT ALSO IS IF YOU SEE RIGHT THERE THAT NEXT TO THE LAST SENTENCE, ALMOST WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT WHERE I HAVE TO FOLLOW THE COUNTY PURCHASING POLICIES.
SO ANYTHING THAT GOES BEYOND WHAT I NORMALLY WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES.
THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF AUTHORITY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO OBTAIN FUNDING AND ASSISTANCE IN OTHER LOCALITIES IN THE STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCIES FOR THOSE PURPOSES.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON 42 ONE THREE NINE? I'M GOOD.
FORTY ONE THREE NUMBER 10 PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL RELATED SYSTEMWIDE SERVICES AND ESSENTIAL FOR PROVISION OF HIGH QUALITY FIRE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND NUMBER 11 WAS ALREADY THERE AS NUMBER SIX, IT WAS JUST MOVED DOWN.
IN THIS SECTION, WE DID DEFINE VOLUNTEER BASED ON OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, THERE IS NOTHING THAT ACTUALLY DEFINES VOLUNTEER, SO WHAT THIS DOES IS DEFINES IT AS PER THE TITLE TWENTY SEVEN OF VIRGINIA CODE, AN ACTIVE MEMBER HERE IS WHO PROVIDES 24 HOURS OF STATION DUTY SERVICE TO A COUNTY A MONTH.
NOW THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE IS NOT IN TITLE TWENTY SEVEN.
[00:20:04]
NUMBER ONE IS TWO IS NOT.WE BASE THAT ON A SIMILAR COUNTIES THAT SURROUND US STANDARD AND BASED ON THE AVERAGE AMOUNT OF HOURS THAT WE WERE NOTICING THAT WAS ALREADY BEING DONE.
I BELIEVE IT'S PROBABLY OUR VOLUNTEERS ARE PROBABLY PULLING MORE THAN 24 HOURS CURRENTLY.
VOLUNTEER COMPANIES AND VOLUNTEER CHIEFS SHALL OPERATE IN CONFORMITY WITH STATE LAW, COUNTY ORDINANCE AND THE DULY ADOPTED POLICIES AND DIRECTIVES OF THE COUNTY FIRE AND EMS CHIEF AND THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM, EVERY MEMBER OF THE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY SHALL UPON ALARM OR FIRE, OR CALL FOR MEDICAL SERVICES, ATTEND AND ENDEAVOR TO EXTINGUISH SUCH FIRE OR ASSIST IN MEDICAL EMERGENCIES AS PER VIRGINIA CODE 27-11.
C, IT STRUCK OUT, RESCUE SQUAD ADDED RESPONSIBILITIES WHILE ACTING IN CONFORMITY WITH CHAINS OF COMMAND THAT WAS ADDED AND POLICIES OF THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM WAS WAS ADDED, NUMBER ONE SQUAD WAS JUST STRICKEN OUT.
IT'S NOT BOLD, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT, SO NUMBER TWO, NUMBER THREE, HAD NO CHANGES TO IT.
NUMBER FOUR JUST HAD VOLUNTEER OFFICERS AND VOLUNTEER PERSONNEL SELECTED IN PROMOTING VOLUNTEER OFFICERS.
THIS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES.
AND THEN NUMBER SIX, MANAGING VOLUNTEER OFFICERS PERSONNEL.
WE JUST ADDED THE WORD VOLUNTEERS.
AS BEFORE IT SAID MANAGING OFFICERS AND PERSONNEL, INCLUDING SO IT WAS VAGUE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT MEANT THAT IT, THE VOLUNTEER CHIEFS OR OFFICERS ALSO REGULATED THE PAID STAFF.
NUMBER SEVEN, PREPARING AND SUBMITTING ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST, THIS IS ALREADY SOMETHING THAT'S BEING DONE.
IT JUST SAID PREPARING ANNUAL BUDGET IT DIDN'T SAY SUBMITTING, SO WE JUST ADDED THAT LANGUAGE FUNDRAISING, MANAGING ALL THE FUNDS ASSET DERIVED BY PRIVATE NONPROFIT, THIS IS STILL IN THE LANGUAGE.
THIS IS FOR SOMETHING FOR THEM TO CONTROL.
THE VOLUNTEER ORGANIZATIONS CONTROL ALL OF THAT.
I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
COLLECTING AND FORWARDING THE EMS CHIEF ANY REQUESTED DATA.
ALL WE DID WAS STRUCK COORDINATED FIRE RESCUE SYSTEMS AND JUST PUT FIRE EMS SYSTEMS. NUMBER 10 AND 11 WERE ALREADY IN THERE, SO THERE WAS NO CHANGES TO THAT.
NOW, I'LL PAUSE JUST FOR A SECOND AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS THUS FAR.
[INAUDIBLE] CONTINUATION, 42-1.4 THIS WAS ADDED THE CHIEFS OF EACH VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY SHALL SUBMIT TO THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF A LIST OF ACTIVE MEMBERS THERE OF ON SEPTEMBER 1ST OF EACH YEAR.
THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A REQUIREMENT IN TITLE TWENTY SEVEN.
ALL IT IS IS THE DATE WAS JUST PUT IN THERE TO HELP.
THE DATE WAS JUST LISTED IN THERE AS A DATE THAT WOULD HELP US BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SECURE THE MEMBERSHIP.
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT SHALL CONSIST OF ALL DOCUMENTATION ILLUSTRATING THE NUMBER OF DUTY HOURS PER MONTH FOR EACH MEMBER AND THE NUMBER OF CALLS ANSWERED PER MEMBER.
ON THE 1ST OF EACH MONTH THE CHIEF OF EACH VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY SHALL SUBMIT TO THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP OF THE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES.
ALL THIS WILL DO THIS WILL HELP US HELP THEM MAINTAIN AND SO THAT WE KNOW WHO IS AN ACTIVE MEMBER AND WHO IS SHOWING UP ON THE ROSTER.
WE RECENTLY HAD A TASK THAT NEED TO BE DONE AND WE NEEDED TO SUBMIT WHO WE HAD ON THEIR ROSTER SO THAT WE COULD COMPARE IT WITH THEIRS.
AND THIS WOULD HELP ELIMINATE SOME OF THAT.
ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES BEYOND THOSE NAMED ABOVE NECESSARY TO ENSURE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SYSTEM.
THIS IS KIND OF JUST ONE OF THOSE CATCH ALL'S LIKE EVERYTHING IN THERE.
ADDITIONAL DUTIES AS ASSIGNED.
IT WAS AS VOLUNTEER STATIONS AND WE JUST ADDED THAT HAVE APPROVED BY THE FIRE CHIEF.
SO IT JUST BASICALLY STATES BY LAWS IN THEIR ORGANIZATION APPROVED.
THEY JUST SUBMIT THE BYLAWS SO THAT WE HAVE ON FILE WITH THE CURRENT BYLAWS ARE YEARLY.
WE STRUCK OUT AND SQUADS AND THEN THE GOVERNANCE OF THE MEMBERS.
WE JUST PUT IT THAT INSTEAD OF THE STATIONS AND THEN CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAWS, COUNTY AND JUST ADDED FIRE AND EMS SYSTEMS IN THERE.
SO I BELIEVE THAT IS C, ALL OF THAT LANGUAGE IS STILL THE SAME.
THE ONLY THING THAT WAS ADDED WAS WE STRUCK OUT RESCUE SQUAD OUT OF THE TERM MEMBERS AND FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
THERE'S SOME VOLUNTEER COMPANIES TOOK OUT RESCUE SQUAD THIS IS ALREADY IN THERE, MAY BE FORMED WITH STATE LAW AND FIRE CHIEF RECOMMENDATION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL.
G WAS ADDED VOLUNTEER COMPANY SHALL FILE A COPY OF THEIR BYLAWS AND RESOLUTIONS AND MINUTES OF THE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND ASSOCIATE ANNUAL REPORTS
[00:25:04]
WITH THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF.THE ADVISORY BOARD SECTION, IT SAID PRINCE GEORGE FIRE EMS SYSTEM BOARD, WE WERE OUT OF THE WORD ADVISORY.
WE STRUCK OUT SQUAD ADDED COMBINED COMPANIES.
AND AGAIN, THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS LISTED THROUGH THERE AND THE WORD ADVISORY IS BEFORE BOARD.
THESE ARE THE PRINCE GEORGE FIRE EMS ADVISORY BOARD.
ALL OF THIS IS STILL THE SAME CONSULT WITH THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF WAS STRUCK OUT BYLAWS OF OPERATION CONSISTENT WITH THE ARTICLES AND CHANGED IT TO CONSULT WITH THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF TO ENSURE THE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT OPERATION PROCESSES SHALL NOT SUPERSEDE MEANING I CANNOT OVERSTEP MY AUTHORITY.
THE FIRE EMS CHIEF'S AUTHORITY TO GOVERN THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM OR AMEND THE COUNTY AUTHORITY CONCEDED BY THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF UNDER CODE OF VIRGINIA 27.23-9 AND IT'S GOT CONFLICTING OPERATIONAL PROCESSES SHALL BE INTERPRETED AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF.
REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED POLICIES, NOTHING WAS CHANGED OTHER THAN COORDINATED FIRE WAS STRUCK AND ADDED FIRE SORRY DID NOT MEAN TO DO THAT.
I WENT BACKWARDS AND ADDED FIRE AND STRUCK OUT SQUADS.
WE MEET REGULARLY, THIS IS ALREADY IN THERE TO CONSIDER ITEMS THAT ARE AFFECTING THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
AND THEN AS IS ASSURANCE OF THE QUALITY OF DELIVERY OF FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.
SO ALL OF THAT LANGUAGE IS STILL THE SAME.
WE JUST ADDED THE TERMINOLOGY TO STRENGTHEN THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE.
AGAIN, NOTHING IN HERE IS BOLD, SO ALL WE DID IS REVIEW.
WE JUST ADDED THE WORD FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM WHEN IT'S REFERRING TO PROVIDING INPUT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DEVELOPING COLLABORATION.
ALL WE DID WAS STRUCK COORDINATED FIRE AND EMS EMERGENCY SERVICES AND ADDED THE WORDS FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
NUMBER SIX OF THAT SECTION HAD NO CHANGE.
FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL PREPARE, NONE OF THIS IS NONE OF THIS HAS CHANGED, WE JUST ADDED THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM.
NUMBER TWO IS SOMEWHAT REWORDED AND NEW.
THE PRINCE GEORGE FIRE AND EMS [INAUDIBLE] SHALL PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH AND ADVISE THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF ANY DEPARTMENTAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS.
FOLLOWING CONSULTATION, THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF AND HIS OR HER SOLE DISCRETION MAY ISSUE THE DEPARTMENT POLICIES OR REGULATIONS THAT HE OR SHE DEEMED NECESSARY.
THIS WAS WORDED IN THE ADDITION ON THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
SOMEWHAT ALREADY, YOU ALREADY SAW A PORTION OF THIS AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY I PUT NEW KENT THERE.
THIS WAS ACTUALLY TAKEN FROM CURRENT POLICIES FROM NEW KENT.
EVERYTHING IN HERE IS NOT THE BRAINCHILD OF MYSELF OR MR. WHITTEN, EVERYTHING IN HERE WAS WAS TAKEN FROM SURROUNDING FIRE DEPARTMENT ORDINANCES.
THOSE ADVISORY BOARD CAN COME TO.
HE OR SHE THE CHIEF, AS IN YOU RIGHT? CORRECT.
THEY CAN TELL YOU OF SOME DEPARTMENTAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS THEY WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE.
AND THEY CAN CONSULT WITH YOU AND SEE WHAT YOUR OPINION IS.
AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT, YOU'LL TELL THEM WHAT THE POLICY IS GOING TO BE.
WELL, WE STILL TAKE A VOTING FOR THE CURRENT POLICY.
IF THEY ALL VOTE AGAINST IT, I CAN STILL PUSH IT THROUGH AND IT GOES TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THAT'S IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE NOW.
THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF CONSIDER ANY COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS, WHAT WAS DONE HERE IS THE ADVISORY BOARD.
THE ADVISORY WAS ADDED AND HIS OR HER JUDGMENT, AND IT WAS STRUCK OUT SHOULD THE CHIEF DECLINE TO ACCEPT ANY MATERIALS.
WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE IS A WRITTEN EXPLANATION.
WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE IS IN THE PAST, THE NUMBER FIVE BY MAJORITY VOTE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MR. CARMICHAEL IS IT TALKS ABOUT HERE THAT THE APPROVAL OF POLICY IS FIRE AND EMS CHIEF ANY DECISION TO DECLINE A POLICY WITHIN SEVEN DAYS? THE FIRE CHIEFS CURRENTLY CAN PUT IN WRITING TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THE REASONS WHY THEY DO NOT WANT A CERTAIN POLICY TO GO INTO EFFECT IF I HAVE PUSHED IT THROUGH ANYWAY.
AND THEN IT GOES TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO REVIEW AND THEN THEY WILL GET WITH ME WITHIN 10 DAYS AND WE'LL MAKE THE DECISION ON WHAT CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE AND
[00:30:02]
MOVE FROM THERE.THIS IS WHERE IT IS RECOMMENDED FROM THE POLICY IS REMAINING TO THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF FOR REVIEW CONCERNS OF PRINCE GEORGE FIRE AND EMS BOARD, THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF, SHALL CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ON THE CHANGE OF THE POLICY AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SHALL WORK WITH FIRE AND EMS CHIEF TO MAKE THE FINAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY.
SO IF WE'RE AT AN IMPASSE AND NOBODY AGREES ON THE CHANGES AND I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT WANTS TO DO IT, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR STEPS IN AND DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, AND THEN WE'LL PROVIDE US DIRECTION ON HOW THEY WANT THAT TO GO.
THE ONLY PART, IF YOU DON'T MIND, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THE BOARD WANTS TO BE INVOLVED IN AT LEAST UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE DIFFERENCES ARE.
AND THIS IS JUST THIS IS MY THOUGHT, IF WE HIRE A DIRECTOR TO COME IN AND RUN THE FIRE AND EMS FOR PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, WE WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL THE TOOLS TO DO YOUR JOB AND BE EFFECTIVE.
AND STAY OUT OF YOUR BACK POCKET.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING AS WELL WITH THE HISTORY OF THE VOLUNTEERS IN PRINCE GEORGE.
WE'RE SO INDEBTED TO THEM FOR THEIR SERVICE OVER THE YEARS AND HOW MUCH THEY'VE DONE FOR THIS COUNTY.
AND I'M NOT NAïVE TO KNOW THAT DEPENDING ON WHICH COMMUNITY OR WHAT COUNTY OR WHAT CITY, IF A NEW DIRECTOR IS HIRED AND YOU HAVE TO RELY ON STRICTLY A VOTE OF JUST A FIRE CHIEFS AND WHETHER IT'S THREE DEPARTMENTS OR 15 DEPARTMENTS, THEY CAN COME IN WITH THE MAJORITY AND JUST OUT RULE YOU EVERY TIME.
SO ANY TIME THAT WOULD HAPPEN, I WOULD AT LEAST LIKE TO KNOW OF THE DISCREPANCIES IF THE VOTE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF SOME OF THE CHANGES YOU WANTED TO MAKE, OR WHETHER IT BE EQUIPMENT OR POLICIES OR WHATEVER THE CASE IS.
IF THE BOARD WOULD EVEN WANT TO KNOW ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, THROUGH ALL THE CITIZENS AND DEPENDING ON WHAT DISTRICT WE SERVE IN.
THIS IS A WORK SESSION ANYWAY.
WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE ACTIONS TONIGHT ON IT.
BUT IF THEY WANTED TO BE INVOLVED ALONG WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THAT THIS IS WHAT WE BROUGHT UP, THIS IS WHAT THE ADVISORY BOARD HAS SHOT DOWN.
THEY DON'T WANT TO DO AND THIS IS THE REASON WE THINK WE SHOULD DO IT.
SO WE WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON BEFORE WE JUST GET BOMBARDED WITH PHONE CALLS OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
BUT THAT'S TO BE DISCUSSED LATER.
I JUST WANTED TO THROW IT OUT.
MADAM CHAIR, CAN I MAKE A COMMENT, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
BECAUSE I'VE GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE STATE CODE IN RELATIVE TO FIRE AND EMS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I REMEMBER READING IN AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE SECTION, BUT HONESTLY, THE BOARD REALLY DOES NOT HAVE A SAY IN DEPARTMENTAL POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES.
WE HAVE A SAY IN ORDINANCES, BUT FROM WHAT I REMEMBER READING IN THE STATE CODE, IT DOES NOT GIVE THE BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE DEPARTMENTAL.
THEY MAKE CHANGES, JUST BE AWARE OF.
YEAH, BEING AWARE AND MAKING DECISION, I WAS JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT BECAUSE I REMEMBER READING THAT SO.
YOU KNOW, BEING AWARE IS ONE THING, BUT THE BOARD WOULD NOT BE IN A POSITION TO.
MAKE A DECISION ON A DEPARTMENT THAT SHOULD FLOW BETWEEN THE ADVISORY BOARD CHIEF AND IF THEY CAN'T AGREE, THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS PER WHAT THIS UPDATE WOULD MAKE.
BUT BEING AWARE BEING AWARE YEAH, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.
YEAH, BEING AWARE OF BEING ABREAST OF IT.
THEN WE'RE [INAUDIBLE] GET CALLS ABOUT IT.
BUT THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I QUESTION THAT.
IT'S KIND OF REDUNDANT, DIDN'T REALLY NEED TO BE IN HERE.
IT JUST SHOWS THAT THE CAREER AND VOLUNTEER SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS DIRECTIVES AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT OR VOLUNTEER SERVICE OF THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT AND UPON ALLEGATIONS.
IT'S JUST REWORDED A LITTLE BIT UPON ALLEGATIONS WE'VE REACHED OF THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS OR DIRECTIVES.
THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND ACCUSED PERSONS OR DEPARTMENT ENTITY FROM DUTY PENDING AN INVESTIGATION.
IF THE INVESTIGATION SUBSTANTIATES THE ALLEGATIONS, FIRE AND EMS CHIEF MAY SUPERSEDE MAY SUSPEND, EXCUSE ME FROM DUTY, TERMINATE THE EMPLOYEE VOLUNTEER SERVICE OF ANY INDIVIDUAL OR REVOKE THE AUTHORITY OF THE VOLUNTEER ENTITY TO OPERATE.
AND THIS IS WITH ONLY THE APPROVAL OF THE BOARD, SAYS OPERATES WITH THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND PROVIDE FIRE EMS SERVICES.
THIS ONE IS FOR LET ME BACK UP.
VOLUNTEER SERVICE FOR ANY INDIVIDUAL OR REVOKE THE AUTHORITY OF THE VOLUNTEER ENTITY TO OPERATE AS AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PROVIDER OR AS A FIRE SERVICE PROVIDER IN THE COUNTY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC SAFETY.
[00:35:01]
DID YOU SAY SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT THE PERMISSION OR.I GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF, THERE'S A SECTION IN THERE WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT REVOKE [INAUDIBLE] OF THE.
IT COMES FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THAT'S WHY I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIND IT.
THE TWO SOUNDS SIMILAR, BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY.
ON NUMBER THREE, THE FIRE AND EMS EMPLOYEE, SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS OF VIRGINIA PUBLIC PROCUREMENT ACT AND THE COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY, THIS IS ALL NEW.
SHOULD A MEMBER OF THE FIRE EMS DEPARTMENT BREACH THE REGULATION OR DIRECTIVE AND THEREBY EXPEND PUBLIC FUNDS OR WASTE COUNTY ASSETS WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY, AND THAT PERSON SHALL BE CIVILLY LIABLE FOR THOSE FUNDS OR THAT WASTE.
IT'S GOT WRITTEN REPORT SUMMARIZING, IN ESSENCE, THIS PARAGRAPH TALKS ABOUT IF THERE WAS A BREACH OF A POLICY.
IT INITIALLY SAID THAT THE BOARD OF THE ADVISORY BOARD WOULD INVESTIGATE AND PRODUCE A DOCUMENT.
WE JUST REWORDED THAT TO WHERE IT SAYS THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEFS SHALL PERFORM OR MAY PERFORM THE INVESTIGATION OR DELEGATE THE INVESTIGATION OF THE PRINCE GEORGE FIRE AND EMS ADVISORY BOARD OR OTHER PARTIES THAT THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF HAS APPOINTED TO CONDUCT THE INVESTIGATION.
IF THE INVESTIGATION IS NOT PERFORMED BY THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF A WRITTEN REPORT SUMMARIZING THE INVESTIGATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF NO LATER THAN 10 CALENDAR DAYS FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION.
EVERYTHING IN HERE THAT IS NOT BOLD IS ALREADY THERE.
ALL IT DID WAS TOOK SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ADVISORY BOARD HAVING TO CONDUCT ALL INVESTIGATIONS TO WHERE WE CAN SPREAD THAT OUT.
I HAVE A QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR, BACK ON NUMBER THREE, AND IT'S PROBABLY TARGETED MY QUESTION MORE TO MR. WHITTEN IN THAT VERY LAST PART OF THAT PARAGRAPH.
DO WE, AS THE BOARD, HAVE THE RIGHT OR AUTHORITY TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE WHERE WE ARE HOLDING SOMEONE'S CIVILLY LIABLE FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF NON-APPROVED PUBLIC FUNDS OR WASTE OF A COUNTY ASSET? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT BECAUSE FROM THE WAY I READ, THERE'S NO REPRIMAND, THERE'S NO WARNING THE FIRST TIME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT ALMOST SAYS, IF I TAKE IT LITERALLY FOR WHAT HOW IT READS, IT WOULD SAY THAT IF THEY DID THIS, THEY COULD JUST AUTOMATICALLY BE HELD LIABLE, CIVILLY LIABLE FOR THAT EXPENDITURE.
AND I'M JUST QUESTIONING THAT, SIR.
OK, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE IF WE'RE PUTTING IT IN ORDINANCE, THAT MEANS THE BOARD IS CONDONING THAT POLICY AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT OVERSTEPPING SOMETHING LEGALLY THAT WE CAN'T DO OR IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR.
THINK IT'S DIFFERENT, IF IT WAS THAT SOMEONE WAS EMBEZZLING VERSUS SOMEONE MADE AN UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASE WITHOUT CLEARING IT THROUGH CHIEF WITH THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.
WE COULD TURN AROUND AND HOLD THAT PERSON CIVILLY LIABLE FOR AN EXPENDITURE THAT YOU KNOW.
YEAH, THAT'S NOT THE INTENT FOR ACCIDENTAL OR.
AND SO I JUST WANT IT TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S CLEAR THE WAY IT'S WORDED, SIR.
42-1-8 NONCOMPLIANCE WITH POLICIES CONTINUED.
THIS JUST TALKS ABOUT CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND HIS HER RECOMMENDATION TO EXPECT WHEN IMMEDIATE ACTION IS REQUIRED, IN WHICH CASE SHALL CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE ON SUCH ACTIONS.
THIS IS TALKING ABOUT WHEN SOMETHING THAT'S NOT WHEN THEY HAVE NOT FOLLOWED, ALONG WITH THE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
AND INDEED, IF THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF DETERMINES THAT THE NATURE OF THE NONCOMPLIANCE IS SO SERIOUS TO MEET CONSIDERATION IS THE PART I WAS TALKING ABOUT BEFORE CONSIDERATION OF THE ORGANIZATION.
THIS IS ALREADY IN THERE, BUT THIS PART WAS STRUCK OR REDUCTION OF THE FUNDING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE REPOSSESSION OF EQUIPMENT.
HE OR SHE SHALL PROVIDE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WHO SHALL REFER THE MATTER TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
[00:40:01]
THIS IS ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCE.WE JUST ADDED HE OR SHE AND WE ACTUALLY ADDED THE CODE OF VIRGINIA THAT DETERMINES WHAT IT IS.
SO IF SOMETHING WAS DONE IN SUCH MALICE THAT IT WAS DEEMED SOMETHING NEED TO BE TAKEN, ALL WE DID WAS PUT THE CODE THAT WAS ACTUALLY IN THERE SO THAT WE KNEW WHAT IT WAS, BUT IT PLAINLY STATES, I HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO DO ANY OF THAT.
IT'S AT THE BOARD'S DISCRETION.
THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE THIS SECTION 42-1-9.
WE JUST ADDED PRINCE GEORGE COMPANY SIX, SEVEN AND EIGHT, WE STRUCK OUT EMERGENCY CREW.
SYSTEM VOLUNTEERS WITHIN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HERE IS LISTED AS NINE, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAD DISCUSSED THIS.
RIGHT NOW THE COUNTY ORDINANCE DOESN'T REALLY RECOGNIZE THE SYSTEM VOLUNTEERS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, SO THE SYSTEM VOLUNTEERS WILL ACTUALLY FALL UNDERNEATH STATION SEVEN OR STATION EIGHT.
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION FOR FIREFIGHTERS, THE ONLY THING THAT WAS ADDED HERE IS ALL FIREFIGHTERS, ALL VOLUNTEER AND PAID FIREFIGHTERS HAVE TO GO THROUGH PHYSICALS.
THIS IS JUST ADDED AS REQUESTED BY THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF.
SO IF WE SEE SOMEBODY THAT MAY BE STRUGGLING WALKING UP A FLIGHT OF STEPS BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD COVID OR SOMETHING, WE MAY ASK THEM TO GO GET ANOTHER PHYSICAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE FIT FOR DUTY.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VIRGINIA 32.1 THIS IS ALL ADDED IN THERE.
THAT'S ALL THE SAME, EXCEPT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FIRE AND EMS SYSTEM, AND WE JUST STRUCK OUT PRINCE GEORGE COORDINATED FIRE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SYSTEM.
NUMBER TWO OF THIS SECTION, THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF, SHALL REVIEW THE CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD IF ANY EXIST AND APPLICANTS OF THE EMPLOYMENT AND VOLUNTEER SERVICE FOR THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE ALREADY.
EVERYBODY WHO COMES IN GETS A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK AND IF THERE'S ANY ISSUE THEN I AM CONTACTED AND WE WILL REVIEW THAT.
SO THAT'S NOT REALLY A CHANGE.
EVEN THOUGH THAT'S BOLD AND THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL PERIODICALLY REVIEW THE CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS, IF ANY EXIST OR INCUMBENTS.
RIGHT NOW WE DO A BACKGROUND CHECK ON SOMEBODY WHEN THEY COME IN.
THEY CAN BE HERE 30 YEARS AND WE NEVER DO ANOTHER BACKGROUND CHECK ON THEM.
PART OF THIS, SECTION IN THIS ORDINANCE IS KIND OF GOING TO BE MOOT WITH THE FACT THAT THE STATE OF VIRGINIA HAS ENACTED SOMETHING WITH FINGERPRINTING AND THEY GOT TO DO BACKGROUND CHECKS WITH THE STATE OF VIRGINIA AND BE AFFILIATED WITH THE DEPARTMENT.
SO IF ANYTHING WERE TO HAPPEN, WE WOULD BE NOTIFIED ANYWAY.
BUT THIS IS IN HERE TO ADD CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUNDS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
JUST AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES.
OVER MY YEARS, I'VE ACTUALLY RUN CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS AND FOUND SOME PEOPLE THAT I PREFER NOT TO DISCUSS IN OPEN MEETING THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN IN THE DEPARTMENT, SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE NEVER KNOWN WITHOUT RUNNING THE BACKGROUND.
THESE REVIEWS WILL DETERMINE IF THE PAST CONDUCT TO ANY PERSON WOULD BAR THE EMPLOYMENT OF SERVICES FROM THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT WHEN, IN THE SOLE JUDGMENT OF FIRE AND EMS CHIEF A CRIMINAL HISTORY REPORT CONTAIN SUCH INFORMATION THAT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT OR VOLUNTEER SERVICE SHOULD BE DENIED.
THAT PERSON WILL NOT BE HIRED OR ACCEPTED INTO THE VOLUNTEER SERVICE.
THIS IS TECHNICALLY ALREADY IN PROGRESS NOW.
AS I SAID BEFORE, EVERYBODY GETS A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK AND IF THEY HAVE A CRIMINAL HISTORY, THERE'S A CHANCE THEY WON'T BE HIRED OR VOLUNTEERING.
I HAVE A QUESTION IF YOU DON'T MIND MADAM CHAIR.
AND AGAIN, MR. WHITTEN, THIS MAY INVOLVE YOU A LITTLE BIT ON THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK PERIODICALLY.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE VOLUNTEERS NEED TO HAVE A SIGNED DOCUMENT ON FILE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE AWARE OF THIS, AND AGAIN, THE SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION IS WHAT WOULD WARRANT WHAT TYPE OF ACTION OR WHATEVER THAT WOULD WARRANT THE PERIODIC CHECK? I MEAN, THE LAST THING YOU WANT IS ANYBODY TO COME BACK AND SAY, OH, WELL, THEY'RE PICKING ON ME.
SO THEY'RE CONSTANTLY RUNNING A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ME.
IS THERE ANY CRITERIA THAT WOULD ESTABLISH THAT OR IF IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE AS PART OF A NORMAL COURSE THAT THAT'S DONE ONCE A YEAR? SHOULDN'T THEY ALL HAVE SOMETHING ON FILE SAYING THAT THEY'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THAT? YES, SIR.
[00:45:03]
MIC] AND I UNDERSTAND THE FINGERPRINTING ASPECT OF IT, BUT A BACKGROUND CHECK AND FINGERPRINTING IS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.SO IF I'M SIGNING SOMETHING THAT I'M BEING MADE AWARE, THAT I NEED TO DO THE FINGERPRINT FOR EMPLOYMENT.
THAT DOESN'T ALSO, TO ME, IMPLY THAT BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE DONE ON ME EVERY SO OFTEN.
SO AGAIN, I'M JUST ASKING JUST TO CLOSE THE LOOP.
SHOULDN'T THAT BE SOMETHING THAT THEY ARE SIGNING OFF ON TO SAY? THEY ARE AWARE THAT THE COUNTY IS ALSO DOING THE SAME TYPE OF THING AS WE DID WITH THE SCREENING FOR DRUGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
OUR INTENT ON THIS IS THAT EVERYBODY IS FINGERPRINTED WHEN THE BACKGROUND CHECK IS DONE UPON ENTERING INTO THE SYSTEM.
YES, SIR, I HAVE NOT REVIEWED PRINCE GEORGE CURRENT FORM THAT THEY FILL OUT.
BUT IN THE PAST, MINE HAVE ALWAYS STATED THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO PERIODIC BACKGROUND CHECKS.
WE DID THIS ANNUALLY ANYWAY, AND WE DO THIS.
WHAT WOULD CAUSE SOMETHING OUT OF THE NORM? WE MAY DO A BACKGROUND CHECK ON DEPARTMENTAL WIDE EVERY TWO YEARS, BUT WE DO A LICENSE CHECK ANNUALLY, CHECK EVERYBODY'S DRIVER'S LICENSE BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW.
WE JUST WE HAD A PAID PERSON WHO DIDN'T KNOW THEIR LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED FOR NOT HAVING INSURANCE ON A DISABLED VEHICLE.
AND IT'S BECAUSE WE RUN THESE BACKGROUNDS AND TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THEM.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST PERSONALLY RECOMMEND THAT IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THEY'RE SIGNING OFF ON AND NOT HAVE TO BE DEPENDENT THAT THEY KNOW THIS IS IN AN ORDINANCE SOMEWHERE.
I MEAN, I'M JUST ONE OF FIVE UP HERE.
AND THIS IS NOT JUST FOR VOLUNTEERS, THIS IS FOR PAID AND VOLUNTEERS.
THIS IS DEPARTMENTAL WIDE AND IT COULD BE JUST SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS WHEN WE DO THE INITIAL INTAKE FORM IS THAT IT HAS A SENTENCE IN THERE STATING THAT THEY ARE AWARE THAT THEY'LL BE SO, WE'LL CHECK THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THERE.
FORTY SEVEN YEARS OF HAVING A CDL WITH HAZMAT, EVERY TWO YEARS I GET FINGERPRINTED AND IT'S KNOWN THAT YOU'RE BEING BACKGROUND CHECKED FOR ANYTHING THAT'S COME UP ON YOUR RECORD IN TWO YEARS IN BETWEEN THE TIME YOU GET RECERTIFIED.
I MEAN, I'VE NEVER KNOWN ANYBODY TO BE FINGERPRINTED THAT THEY WEREN'T GOING TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT.
WE WILL ONLY FINGERPRINT ONCE THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY THING WE NEED.
CDL, THEY REQUIRED IT EVERY TIME YOU GET YOUR LICENSE.
WELL, I THINK EVERY TIME SOMEONE'S FINGERPRINTED AND SENT IT TO THE STATE POLICE, WHICH WE DO, THEY RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK.
THAT WOULD COVER THE INITIAL AT HIRING, BUT THAT DOESN'T COVER THE YEARLY OR PERIODIC.
DOCUMENTED SOMEWHERE THAT WHEN THEY COME IN, THEY SIGN SAYING THEY ARE AWARE OF THAT VERSUS THEY MAY NOT SEE THIS ORDINANCE.
I THINK MR. CARMICHAEL, YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY SOMETHING.
IF YOU HAVE A CDL LIKE MR. WEBB, SAID, ONCE YOU GO RENEW, THEY AUTOMATICALLY DO ONE.
BUT THEN I'VE SEEN IT WHERE PEOPLE GET HIRED, THEY GO AND THEY TAKE THEIR INITIAL BACKGROUND CHECK.
SOME GET FINGERPRINTED, SOME DON'T.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY BACKGROUND CHECK THEY'LL SEE.
AND IT'S UP TO THE EMPLOYEE OR VOLUNTEER THAT IF THEY RUN INTO ANY SITUATION WITH THE LAW WHERE THEY GET ARRESTED, THEY HAVE TO REPORT THAT WITHIN SO MANY HOURS TO THAT DEPARTMENT, FAILURE TO REPORT IT COULD BE TERMINATION OFF OF IT INSTEAD OF DOING ALL THESE BACKGROUND CHECKS.
YEAH I'M NOT SAYING IT HAS TO BE.
IF EVERYBODY'S COMFORTABLE WITH HOW IT'S WORDED AND WHATEVER.
SO OUR INTENT IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, CHIEF BEAMON HERE FIVE YEARS AND I GOT A FELONY ON MY RECORD THAT I GOT LAST WEEK AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK AGAIN, THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF IT.
THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND SAFETY FIRE AND EMS CHIEF SHALL REVIEW THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLE RECORDS.
APPLICANTS FOR EMPLOYMENT AND VOLUNTEER SERVICES FOR THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT.
THE EMS CHIEF SHALL PERIODICALLY REVIEW THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLE RECORDS OF INCUMBENTS.
THIS REVIEW SHALL DETERMINE OF THE PAST CONDUCT.
THE PERSON WOULD BAR EMPLOYMENT FROM SERVICE THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT, WHEN, AT THE SOLE JUDGMENT OF THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF A DRIVING HISTORY REPORT CONTAINED SUCH INFORMATION THAT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT OR SERVICE SHOULD BE DENIED.
SO THIS WHOLE THING IS BASICALLY GOING THROUGH IF WE FIND SOMETHING ON YOUR BACKGROUND.
WE HAD A VOLUNTEER THAT WAS AT A STATION WHO WANTED TO SWITCH TO SYSTEM VOLUNTEER
[00:50:07]
AND HAD ELUDING THE POLICE RUNNING FROM THE POLICE RAN THROUGH A BUILDING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.SO THIS IS JUST THE WAY TO DOUBLE CHECK WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND THEN IT GOES THROUGH THE DISMISSAL OF THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT, SUBJECT TO NOTICE THE MATERIAL OF CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE FIRE AND EMS CHIEF AND THE ADVISORY BOARD.
SO IF THERE'S ANY ISSUE, THEY CAN COME TO ME, IF THEY DON'T LIKE MY INTERPRETATION OF IT, THEN THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPROACH THE ADVISORY BOARD AND THE ADVISORY BOARD CAN HEAR THEIR CASE.
SO ALL THIS IS NEW, ADDING SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE REFERENCES WHICH I PULLED FROM.
NOTHING IN THIS DOCUMENT IS JUST PULLED OUT OF MY BRAIN.
IT WAS ACTUALLY A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT FROM NEW KENT AND OTHER SURROUNDING AREAS WITH THEIR FIRE ORDINANCE SO THAT WE COULD KIND OF STAY IN LINE WITH WHAT WAS ALREADY OUT THERE AND STRENGTHEN WHAT WE HAD SO THAT IT BENEFITED ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, I KNOW THAT WAS KIND OF LENGTHY.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? NO, MA'AM, I'M GOOD.
IT JUST GET'S A COPY AFTER YEAH, YEAH.
MADAM CHAIR, NEXT UP FOR THE WORK SESSION IS THE COUNTY ROOM RESERVATION POLICIES MR. DAN WHITTEN.
YES, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. STOKE.
I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME.
SO BASICALLY, THE BOARD HAD ASKED THAT I LOOK INTO THE RENTALS OF COUNTY ROOMS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, SO I'VE CREATED A SPREADSHEET WHICH SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKET, WHICH SHOWS ALL THE ROOM RENTALS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE COUNTY.
AND IT SHOWS WHO MANAGES THAT ROOM, WHETHER THERE'S A FEE FOR THAT ROOM AND IF THERE'S ANY RESTRICTIONS ON USING THAT ROOM AND THE PROCESS FOR RESERVING THE ROOM.
SO I'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THOSE DIFFERENT FACILITIES.
SO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, PARKS AND REC STAFF, FIRE AND EMS STAFF ALL APPROVE ROOM RENTALS AND FOR ANNUAL LEASES, THOSE REQUIRE BOARD SUPERVISORS APPROVAL BECAUSE A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED FOR THE ANNUAL LEASE.
SO THE RENTALS FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION, THAT'S THE COMMUNITY ROOM AND THE HUMAN SERVICES BUILDING, THE SS BUILDING, THE BOARDROOM HERE AND THE KINES BREAK ROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
AND YOU JUST CALL ADMINISTRATION TO RESERVE THE ROOM, THE BOARDROOM AND KINES BREAK ROOM ARE ONLY RENTED DURING OFFICE HOURS UNLESS IT'S A GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION OR COMMITTEE THAT NEEDS TO RENT THE ROOM.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS WE'RE GOING ALONG, JUST STOP ME.
PARKS AND REC? I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
THIS IS WHAT YOU CAME UP WITH OR DID YOU GATHER THIS INFORMATION WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT ALREADY EXIST TODAY? SO THIS WAS INFORMATION FROM I CONTACTED PARKS AND REC FIRE AND EMS AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF.
AND THEN I CAME UP WITH THIS INFORMATION.
THAT'S ALREADY IN EXISTENCE TODAY.
THIS DOESN'T INVOLVE ANY CHANGES.
THIS IS ALL EXISTING INFORMATION.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE INFORMATION I SENT YOU FROM THE SCHOOLS ON HOW THEY HANDLE IT.
WELL I DO I DON'T HAVE I MEAN, I HAVE THAT INFORMATION, I HAVE THE DINWIDDIE INFORMATION, I DON'T HAVE ANY CHANGES AT THIS POINT.
JUST, TONIGHT I WANT TO PRESENT WHAT OUR CURRENT POLICIES ARE.
TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE SCHOOLS HAVE ALREADY DONE.
AND I SHARED WITH DINWIDDIE COUNTY POLICY.
AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER LOCALITIES THAT HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THEIR POLICIES.
BUT TONIGHT, I JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH LIKE WHAT OUR CURRENT POLICIES ARE AND HAVE A DISCUSSION.
SEE THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD IF FEES SHOULD BE CHARGED FOR CERTAIN ROOMS. OK.
SO, PARKS AND REC, THEY HANDLE THE DISPUTANTA COMMUNITY BUILDING THAT'S
[00:55:03]
FOR OUR COUNTY RESIDENTS, IT'S RENTED OUT FOR $25 PER HOUR AND REQUIRES $100 SECURITY DEPOSIT.THEY ALSO RENT OUT THE OLD NORTH ELEMENTARY, WHICH IS FREE FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS.
I BELIEVE PRIOR TO COVID GIRL SCOUTS WERE USING THAT ROOM.
THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION OFFICE WAS USING IT AND OTHER COUNTY GROUPS WERE USING IT.
BUT THEY'RE NOT USING AS MUCH SINCE COVID OCCURRED.
THEY ALSO RENT OUT THE SCOTT PARK AN TEMPLE PARK PAVILIONS, WHICH ARE FREE FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS, AND 80 DOLLARS FOR NONRESIDENTS, AND YOU CAN RENT IT DURING THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON HOURS.
AND THE RENTALS THROUGH THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT WOULD BE THE CENTRAL WELLNESS TRAINING ROOMS ARE AVAILABLE FOR RENT AND THOSE ARE CURRENTLY RENTED TO THE FIRE AND EMS AND POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR TRAINING PURPOSES.
THE LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE AND CPR AND FIRST AID CLASSES OCCUR THERE.
I KNOW I TOOK FIRE EXTINGUISHER TRAINING AND I TOOK CPR CLASS IN THE TRAINING ROOM THERE.
AND THE RENTALS THAT CURRENTLY REQUIRE BOARD APPROVAL, BASICALLY YOU WOULD CONTACT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION FOR RENTAL INFORMATION, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ACTUALLY DRAFTS THE LEASE AND THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE HAVE A STANDARD LEASE THAT WAS USED PRIOR TO ME COMING HERE.
ALL LEASES REQUIRE BOARD APPROVAL AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING.
SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE A LEASE WITH BURROWSVILLE SCHOOL, WHICH IS A FIVE YEAR LEASE TO THE FRIENDS OF BURROWSVILLE SCHOOL FOR A FEE OF $1 DOLLAR.
AND IT RENEWS EVERY FIVE YEARS AND THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS ARE RENTING A ROOM IN THE CENTRAL WELLNESS CENTER, AND THAT'S THE AMERICAN LEGION, THE PRINCE GEORGE ROTARY.
THE WRESTLING ORGANIZATION USES THE CAFETERIA AREA, THE FOOD BANK, THE WOMEN'S CLUB OF PRINCE GEORGE, THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, THE EASTERN STAR AND MASONIC LODGE AND CERT ALL RENT ROOMS. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE CHART, I HIGHLIGHTED THE ROOMS IN THE CENTRAL WELLNESS CENTER.
ON THE FIRST FLOOR THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING RENTED AND HAVE ANNUAL LEASES, AND IT SHOWS YOU.
AND THEN THE ROOMS THAT AREN'T HIGHLIGHTED IT SHOWS YOU THE ONE TRAINING ROOM.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF TRAINING ROOMS AND THEN THERE'S ONE VACANT ROOM THERE ON THE CORNER.
AND THEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS A ROOM.
I KNOW WHEN WE'VE MET ON WITH [INAUDIBLE] ON DIFFERENT ISSUES, ON THE COMMUNICATION TOWER PROJECT, WE MEET IN THAT ROOM.
WERE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CHART THERE OR THE RENTAL OF THE ROOMS, SO BASICALLY RIGHT NOW THE SECOND FLOOR IS NOT BEING RENTED.
SO AS FAR AS DISCUSSION PURPOSES, THE BOARD COULD LOOK AT WHETHER THE COUNTY SHOULD CHARGE A FEE TO NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.
I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE SURROUNDING COUNTIES DO CHARGE AN HOURLY OR DAILY RATE FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NON GOVERNMENTAL.
YOU COULD ALSO HAVE A SET ANNUAL RATE FOR THE ORGANIZATIONS, AT LEAST ON ANNUAL BASIS, THEIR NON-GOVERNMENTAL.
ANOTHER OPTION IS YOU COULD HAVE A DISCOUNTED RATE FOR NONPROFIT 501 C 3 ORGANIZATIONS THAT OFFER PROGRAMS TO THE RESIDENTS OF PRINCE GEORGE AND SOME OF THE ADJACENT LOCALITIES DO THAT WHERE THEY GIVE LIKE A 50 PERCENT DISCOUNT FOR ORGANIZATIONS 501C3 ORGANIZATIONS.
NOW, ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AN INSURANCE CERTIFICATE NAMING THE COUNTY AS ADDITIONAL INSURED, AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MILLION DOLLAR GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY.
SO I GUESS THE NEXT STEPS IN OUR SHORT TIME WE HAVE REMAINING IS IF THERE WAS ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD.
IF YOU WANTED ME TO DRAFT A POLICY OR IF YOU WANTED TO LOOK MORE AT THE SCHOOL POLICY THE WAY THEY DO.
I CAN PRESENT THAT WE CAN DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT THE SCHOOLS DO, WHICH THEY DO CHARGE A FEE FOR THEIR ROOMS. SO I GUESS I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK WHICH DIRECTION THE BOARD WANTED TO GO INTO.
I BROUGHT THIS UP FOR TWO REASONS.
ONE, BECAUSE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE 501C'S THAT GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
BUT AS WE GROW, WE SPENT A TON OF MONEY UPGRADING THAT BUILDING AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND A TON MORE TO UPGRADE THE SECOND FLOOR.
MY OTHER CONCERN AS WE GROW IS NOT EVERY CITIZEN TAKES ADVANTAGE OF EVERYTHING.
IT'S GREAT TO HAVE SOME, BUT THE CITIZENS THAT DON'T, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE CITIZENS DON'T HAVE KIDS IN SCHOOL, THEY DON'T LIKE PAYING TAXES FOR SCHOOLS BECAUSE THEIR KIDS ARE GROWN AND GONE OR DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THIS COUNTY.
AS WE GROW, YOU STILL HAVE THE BASIC FOUNDATION OF UTILITIES, HEAT, AC, ELECTRIC, WATER AND SEWER, SO THAT'S STILL YOU CAN CALL IT A HIDDEN COST IF YOU WANT TO.
[01:00:02]
SO WHEN YOU SAY FREE, FREE INCLUDES ALL THOSE UTILITIES, SO THERE'S NOT EVEN A NOMINAL FEE TO HELP OFFSET, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT AN ANNUAL LEASE WHERE [INAUDIBLE] MIGHT BE USED MULTIPLE DAYS, NOT JUST ONE DAY A WEEK OR A COUPLE OF DAYS A MONTH, OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.THAT'S SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I'VE BEEN ASKED.
WHY ARE WE JUST GIVING EVERYTHING AWAY? AND WE HEAR IT, AND WE'RE GETTING READY TO HEAR IT AGAIN, TAX SEASON COMING UP, WE'LL HEAR IT, I'M SURE, BUT THAT'S WHY I RAISED SOME OF THAT QUESTION.
THEIR PRICES AREN'T GOING DOWN.
AND SO, I MEAN, ONE OPTION, I COULD COME BACK TO A FUTURE WORK SESSION AND BRING A POLICY WHERE A FEE IS CHARGE A NOMINAL FEE TO COVER THE UTILITY COST FOR NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.
THE ORGANIZATIONS YOU JUST NAME, MOST OF THEM ALL GIVE SOMETHING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK WE NEED JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL.
MY CONCERN? WE JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL GOING FORWARD.
AND HOW MUCH DO WE EVEN KNOW WHAT IT COSTS TO OPERATE THAT BUILDING? SO WE KNOW WHAT THE CUT OFF POINT IS GOING TO BE.
BUT AFTER WE GET TO THIS POINT, WE MIGHT WANT TO START LOOKING AT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I CAN TALK TO GENERAL SERVICES AND GET A GENERAL IDEA OF THE UTILITY BILL.
AND THEN YOU WOULD JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THEN DIVIDE IT BY THE EACH ROOM AND YOU COULD KIND OF GET A PRO-RATA COST.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A COMPLEX ROOM BY ROOM BECAUSE ALL THE ROOMS ARE GOING TO VARY.
I MEAN, THE CAFETERIA OBVIOUSLY IS A LOT LARGER THAN THE ROOM THAT THE ROTARY USES.
I THINK WE AT LEAST OUGHT TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
MADAM CHAIRMAN, CAN WE HAVE SOME TIME TO LOOK OVER WHAT HE'S PRESENTED TONIGHT AND THEN FORWARD HIM OUR QUESTIONS AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE BOARD, IF WE SHOULD HAVE ANY? CERTAINLY.
IS THAT ALL RIGHT WITH YOU MR. WHITTEN? SURE THAT WOULD BE FINE.
WELL, YOU CAN COMPILE ALL OF THEM.
AND THEN WE CAN JUST DISCUSS IT, DISCUSS AT A FUTURE WORK SESSION.
THERE'S REALLY NOT A TIMELINE ON THIS ISSUE.
SO IF YOU WANT TO PRESENT YOUR QUESTIONS AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT AGAIN, AND.
YEAH, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY WHO JUST WANTED TO USE A ROOM HERE AT THIS BUILDING.
WHOEVER IT MAY BE AT WHATEVER TIME IT MAY BE, I GUESS DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS COULD JUST CALL THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND SAY I WANT TO USE THE KINES BREAK ROOM.
WE DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO RENT THE BUILDING OR WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTING DURING THEIR MEETING AND IF IT'S GOING TO.
WE JUST DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY STIPULATIONS ON WHOSE IT MIGHT BE SOME GUN CONTROL DEAL COMING IN HERE.
I KNOW WE DO HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT USE THAT ROOM AS WELL FOR LUNCH ON THEIR LUNCH BREAKS, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN 12 AND TWO YOU JUST SEE A FAIR AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES USING THE KITCHEN IN THERE FOR COOKING LUNCH.
SO I MEAN, WE COULD HAVE SET HOURS THAT'S AVAILABLE OUTSIDE THE LUNCH HOUR SO THAT DON'T AFFECT THE EMPLOYEES.
WE'LL SEND OUR QUESTIONS TO THE REST.
WE'LL INCLUDE THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS IF I HAD ANY, AS WELL AS YOU AND THEN FORWARD TO HIM.
WE NOW GO INTO OUR BUSINESS MEETING AND WE WILL BEGIN WITH OUR BOARD'S INVOCATION
[CALL TO ORDER]
BY MR. HUNTER.DEAR HEAVENLY FATHER, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO YOUR WORK AND DO THE WORK OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
THANK YOU FOR THE CONFIDENCE THAT THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY HAVE IN US AND THAT WE MAY MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS FOR THE BEST OF PRINCE GEORGE.
HELP US TO BE COGNIZANT, BE WITH THOSE WHO HAVE LOST LOVED ONES OR THOSE WHO ARE SICK.
HELP THEM TO GET WELL AND BE WITH ALL OF US AS WE DO YOUR WORK.
WE ASK THIS IN YOUR PRECIOUS NAME.
NOW WE WILL HAVE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
MR. CARMICHAEL PLEASE LEAD US.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
NOW'S THE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD, YOU MAY DO SO AT THIS TIME, YOU MUST GIVE YOUR
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
NAME, YOUR ADDRESS AND YOU MUST HAVE A CERTAIN LENGTH OF TIME, FOUR MINUTES TO SPEAK.[01:05:08]
YOU MAY NOT SPEAK ON ANYTHING RELATED TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING.I LIVE AT 7112 BULL HILL ROAD.
I JUST GOT IN LATE, SO I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL TALKED AGAIN ABOUT THE BURN ISSUE THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT.
I DON'T KNOW LIKE TWO WEEKS AGO LAST WEEK.
OK, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE OUT OF LINE.
I BROUGHT SOME PICTURES THIS TIME.
AND I'M HEARING JUST KIND OF MAYBE WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SAID LAST TIME.
WE'RE GETTING BURNED CONSTANTLY.
THEY'RE BURNING 80 FOOT PINE TREES THAT I CAN'T GET MY ARM AROUND.
A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY DO NOT KNOW HOW TO BURN.
I HEARD A SUPERVISOR FLOYD'S COMMENT LAST WEEK AND I DID THE SAME THING.
WE USED TO CUT LIMBS AND STUFF.
WE DRIED THEM OUT AND THEN WE LIT A MATCH TO THEM AND THEY BURNED.
PEOPLE NOW THEY BURN GREEN STUFF, IT SMOKES.
IF I COULD LET Y'ALL LOOK AT THESE PICTURES, IT'S JUST.
JUST REAL QUICK, CAN I HAND THEM TO YOU? YES, SIR.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT ONE, SO MR. BROWN AND MR. CARMICHAEL ARE MY SUPERVISORS? IT'S THREE PAGES, THIS IS SHOWING PICTURES OF THE SMOKE.
I'VE GOT A PICKUP TRUCK WITHIN 30 FEET OF ONE OF THE BURN PILES.
I GET ASHES AND EMBERS ON TOP OF THIS PICKUP TRUCK.
AND I KNOW PEOPLE WANT TO BURN IN THE COUNTY AND I BURN USED TO BURN.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BURN IN A R-2 NEIGHBORHOOD ON HALF ACRE LOTS NOT FROM THE SMOKE YOU SEE IN THOSE PICTURES.
BUT THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT, I HOPE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SOLVE THIS THING AND EVERYBODY'S HAPPY.
PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MY ADDRESS 13701 GOOSE HAVEN LANE PRINCE GEORGE.
HOW HAVE YOU BEEN? GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MR. CARMICHAEL.
I HAVE A QUESTION ACTUALLY FOR MR. CARMICHAEL.
11216 WILLOW LANE DISPUTANTA VIRGINIA.
COME BY AND SEE ME TONIGHT, IF YOU LIKE.
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T WAKE MY MOM.
BILL ROBERTSON 2851 FOUNTAIN RIDGE ROAD, PRINCE GEORGE, VIRGINIA, NORTH PRINCE GEORGE, VIRGINIA.
MADAM CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO THANK THE BOARD FOR AUTHORIZING THE PART OF THE FEDERAL MONEY THAT USED FOR A REBATE ON THE 2021 PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, DARLENE ROWSEY AND THE TREASURER SUSAN VARGO, FOR THE EFFORT THEY HAVE PUT INTO THE PROCESS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT CRITERIA WAS USED, BUT I HAVE HEARD FROM MANY PEOPLE THAT THE REBATES ON SOME OF THEIR VEHICLES AND NOT OTHERS.
THEY APPRECIATE ANY REBATE IS BETTER THAN NONE.
I JUST HOPE YOU WILL REMEMBER THE COUNTY CITIZENS ON ESTABLISHING THE BUDGET FOR THIS COMING YEAR AND REDUCE THE REAL ESTATE TAXES LIKE CHESTERFIELD AND HENRICO HAS INDICATED THEY WILL.
WE ALL MUST REMEMBER ASSESSMENTS ARE GOING UP.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON VIRTUAL TO SPEAK? FOR ALL ZOOM PARTICIPANTS, WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE
[01:10:01]
PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.PLEASE RAISE YOUR ELECTRONIC HAND IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER NOW TO BE RECOGNIZED.
PHONE USERS MAY PRESS STAR NINE TO RAISE THEIR HAND.
MADAM CHAIRMAN, I DO NOT SEE ANYONE RAISING THEIR ELECTRONIC HAND.
I NOW CLOSE THE SESSION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS.
WE NOW GO FORWARD TO THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
DO I HAVE A MOTION.MADAM CHAIR? I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE AGENDA WITH THE FOLLOWING TWO ADDITIONS UNDER REPORTS WE WOULD ADD AN UPDATE ON THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY ARPA FUNDING AND UNDER OUR REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS, WE WOULD ADD ITEM A 8, WHICH IS A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT TO COMPLETE AND SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION TO FEMA FOR SAFER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD AND SECONDED.
WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL MRS. KNOTT.
NOW WE MOVE ON TO THE ORDER OF CONSENSUS.
[ORDER OF CONSENSUS]
DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE ORDER OF CONSENSUS? SO MOVE.WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND CALL, THE ROLL MRS. KNOTT.
NEXT ON OUR AGENDA, ARE THE PRESENTATIONS.
[PRESENTATIONS]
WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR SHERIFF ALLIN.IS HE HERE? I THINK THEY'RE ALL OUTSIDE.
HE'S RETIRED [INAUDIBLE] NO HE'S NOT THERE HE IS.
HOW ARE Y'ALL? OH, JUST FINE, THANK YOU.
DON'T ACT LIKE YOU DON'T KNOW TO COME ON UP HERE NOW.
YOU LOOK LIKE YOU SLEPT A LITTLE BIT.
AND I'M PROUD TO KNOW THAT HE FOLLOWED ME MIC] TOGETHER WITH ME.
FOR MANY YEARS, BUT ANYWAY, THIS IS FOR COMMENDATION FOR SHERIFF HAROLD E.
ALLIN, BUCKY BEGAN HIS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, JULY 15, 1986.
YOU WERE RIGHT AS A PART TIME TEMPORARY BUILDING MAINTENANCE.
1987, BUCKY BECAME A PART TIME TEMPORARY ESTABLISHED HIS CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AS A FULL TIME PATROL OFFICER IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON AUGUST THE 16TH 1987, WHERE HE ALSO SERVED AS AN INVESTIGATOR IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON JULY 1ST 1994.
HIS TITLE SWITCH FROM PATROL OFFICER TO POLICE OFFICER.
AND WHEREAS DEPARTMENT TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AS A DEPUTY SHERIFF.
[01:15:07]
RETIREMENT DECEMBER THE 31ST 2021 AND WHEREAS SHERIFF ALLIN CONTINUED TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONAL LEADERSHIP TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND ITS OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO THE COUNTY CITIZENS AS SHERIFF FOR 17 YEARS.AND WHEREAS SHERIFF ALLIN HAS SERVED THIS COMMUNITY WELL, BEING ACTIVE IN THE RIVERSIDE REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY BOARD COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE, BOARD PRINCE GEORGE TRIAD AND AS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE OAKLAND BAPTIST CHURCH.
AND WHEREAS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF SHERIFF BUCKY ALLIN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, MAINTAINED ONE OF THE LOWEST CRIME RATES IN THE REGION, AND THE STATE MAINTAINED A COMMUNITY POLICING PROGRAM THAT INVOLVED ALL OF THE ASPECTS OF NEIGHBORHOODS, BUSINESS AND CHURCHES, AND AS ONE OF THE LARGEST NATIONAL NIGHT OUT CELEBRATIONS HELD ANYWHERE IN THE COMMONWEALTH.
AND WHEREAS SHERIFF ALLIN'S SUCCESS COMES THROUGH HIS RELATIONSHIP AND PROFESSIONALISM, BUT OTHER LOCALITIES AND JURISDICTIONS.
WHEREAS SHERIFF ALLIN IS A DEDICATED, CONSCIENTIOUS, HARDWORKING LEADER WHO ALWAYS PUTS HIS FAMILY, THE CITIES OF THE PRINCE GEORGE AND HIS FAITH, FIRST.
SETTING AN EXAMPLE OF EXCELLENCE AND HONESTY THAT EMULATES IN HIS EVERYDAY APPROACH TO LIFE.
AND WHEREAS THROUGHOUT HIS REMARKABLE CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, SPANNING MORE THAN 34 YEARS, SHERIFF BUCKY ALLIN HAS SERVED THE CITIZENS OF THE COUNTY AND THE COMMONWEALTH TO THE UTMOST OF HIS ABILITY, DEMONSTRATING PATRIOTISM, INTEGRITY AND DEVOTION TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICE IN A MANNER OF SPEAKING THE DEDICATION OF A TRUE PUBLIC SPIRIT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD SUPERVISORS OF COUNTY OF PRINCE GEORGE THIS TWENTY FIFTH.
FOUR YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE COUNTRY AND ITS CITIZENS.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD WISHES TO EXTEND SHERIFF BUCKY ALLIN MUCH HAPPINESS AND CONTINUED SUCCESS AS HE ENTERS THIS NEXT PHASE OF LIFE, MIC] CHAIRMAN MARLENE WAYMACK AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR JEFFERY STOKE.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY THAT THROUGH THE YEARS HAVE HELPED ME WHEN I FIRST GOTSTARTED IN HAD A LOT OF HELP FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE.
THANK YOU ALL FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE FOR ME, WORKING WITH ME.
[LAUGHTER] SUPPORT I HAD IN THE COMMUNITY.
BOARD, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, THAT IS A COMBINATION OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS AND OUR TASK IS TO IMPROVE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
[01:20:01]
AND WE AND BUCKY SERVED AS CHAIR, AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THAT ORGANIZATION.WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP YOUR GUIDANCE.
[APPLAUSE] WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER SPEECH, RIGHT? GOOD JOB.
NOW, IT'S TIME FOR THE SUPERVISOR'S COMMENTS, AND I'LL START TO MY RIGHT WITH
[SUPERVISORS' COMMENTS]
MR. BROWN.I HAVE NO COMMENTS FOR THE NIGHT AND SAKE OF TIME.
MADAM CHAIR, I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS TONIGHT, THANK YOU.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT AN HONOR IT WAS TO GIVE THAT PLAQUE TO SHERIFF ALLIN RETIRED AND JUST TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT UNITY BAPTIST IS A REAL PARTNER TO THE COUNTY ON MT.
SINAI ROAD AND NEXT MONDAY AND THE FOLLOWING MONDAY, THERE'LL BE A SHOT CLINIC, A VACCINATION CLINIC THERE FROM ONE TO THREE O'CLOCK.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY HOW THANKFUL I AM THAT WE HAD NO TERRIBLE THINGS HAPPEN DURING THESE PAST SNOWY WEEKENDS WE'VE HAD.
WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE COMING UP.
SO MAYBE WE DON'T KNOW, BUT WE CAN BE VERY THANKFUL THAT WE'VE BEEN SPARED THE WORST OF THE WEATHER SO FAR.
NEXT, WE HAVE OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS FOR MR.
[COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS]
STOKE.MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, YOU HAVE THE REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU, THERE ARE SOME DATES THERE, I WILL NOTE.
MONDAY, JANUARY 31ST IS OUR NEXT COVID 19 VACCINATION CLINIC THROUGH CRATER HEALTH DISTRICT THAT WILL BE HELD AT UNITY BAPTIST FROM 1:00 P.M.
ALSO, PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY IS HOSTING THE CIVILIAN MILITARY COUNCIL MEETING OF FORT LEE ON FEBRUARY 10TH.
ARRANGEMENTS ARE BEING MADE NOW.
THE FORT LEE OFFICIALS HAVE INDICATED THAT THIS EVENT WILL BE VIRTUAL.
IT WILL BE A ZOOM, AND SO WE'LL BE GETTING THAT INFORMATION OUT TO YOU SOON.
ALSO WAIT WAITING FOR JULIE WALTON TO RETURN, BUT I'D ASK THAT YOU SORT OF HOLD THE DATES FOR MARCH 4TH AND 5TH TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION WITH OUR CONSULTANT REGARDING THE COUNTY STRATEGIC PLAN.
WELL, SINCE WE HAVE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND THE PUBLIC HEARING, LET'S GO TO.
MS. DREWRY FOR OUR QUARTERLY FINANCIAL.
[REPORTS (Part 1 of 2)]
THOSE ARE PAGE SEVEN IN YOUR BINDERS.THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS MR. STOKE AND MR. WHITTEN.
IT IS MY PLEASURE TO PRESENT THE QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31ST.
THIS WASN'T PROVIDED TO THE BOARD IN ADVANCE ON YOUR PACKET, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE THROUGH IT RATHER QUICKLY AND PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STOP ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
THE FIRST IS A REVIEW OF OUR GENERAL FUND REVENUES.
WE ARE ON TARGET AND VERY SIMILARLY POSITIONED TO WHERE WE WERE THIS SAME TIME
[01:25:02]
LAST YEAR AND NET OF OUR FUND BALANCE USE, WE'RE AT 43 PERCENT, COMPARED TO 42.58 PERCENT LAST DECEMBER.JUST TO REMIND THE BOARD TO DATE, THESE ARE THE ITEMS FOR WHICH YOU HAVE CARRIED OVER A GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCE PURCHASE ORDERS, A SMALL INSURANCE RE-APPROPRIATION OR GRANTS AND DONATIONS, AND THEN AN ITEM WAS RE-APPROPRIATED OR APPROPRIATED FROM FUND BALANCE TO REPLACE A CHILLER WITHIN THIS BUILDING.
AND THEN THE SCHOOL CARRYOVER REQUESTS, A PORTION OF WHICH WAS DEVOTED TO THE NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECT AND THEN TO THE CIP AGAIN FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECT AND RESTROOM RENOVATIONS.
SO JUST SOME NOTEWORTHY REVENUE ITEMS, OUR REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES WE ARE A GOOD INDICATOR THAT WE WILL MEET OUR TARGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.
WE'RE AT FIFTY THREE PERCENT ON DECEMBER 31ST AND OF COURSE, THE FIRST HALF OF OUR REAL ESTATE TAX WAS DUE ON DECEMBER 5TH.
PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES, OF COURSE, THAT IS KIND OF AN UNKNOWN AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THOSE WON'T BE DUE UNTIL JUNE 5TH.
WE ARE HIGHER THIS DECEMBER THAN WE WERE LAST DECEMBER, AND OUR COLLECTIONS IN FY21 WERE 10.3 MILLION AND OUR BUDGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR IS 9.5.
SALES TAX REVENUES, AGAIN, WE HAVE EARLY INDICATORS THAT WE WILL EXCEED OUR BUDGETED TARGET OF 3.8 MILLION.
SO THERE ARE NO ALARM BELLS GOING OFF AS FAR AS REVENUES GO WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND.
A SIMILAR STORY WE ARE AT LESS THAN THE 50 PERCENT MARK, WHICH IS WHERE WE NEED TO BE AT THE MIDPOINT OF OUR FISCAL YEAR.
ONE AREA THAT IS A LITTLE HIGHER IS TRANSFER AND OTHER, AND THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY BECAUSE WE REAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE A LITTLE EARLIER THAN WE NORMALLY DO.
WE ARE REAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TO THE SCHOOLS THERE, CARRYOVER IN DECEMBER RATHER THAN IN JANUARY.
SO, THAT IS THE ONE AREA THAT'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.
AGAIN, NO RED FLAGS, UTILITIES WE ARE AT AN OPERATING INCOME AT THE MIDPOINT, A LITTLE BIT SMALLER THAN WHERE WE WERE LAST YEAR, BUT THAT'S PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY THE NUMBER OF CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING FUNDED BY AN OPERATING TRANSFER.
THE NON-OPERATING INCOME AGAIN IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT THAT IS BUDGETED FOR CAPITAL.
SO AGAIN, WE'RE IN A VERY FAVORABLE POSITION WITHIN THE UTILITY FUND.
AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO DWELL ON A LOT OF THESE, BUT THE LARGEST PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY ARE OUR PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO PROJECT AND OUR REPURPOSING OF THE BOND PROCEEDS FOR OUR JEFFERSON PARK NEW STATION THAT WILL NOT BE BUILT.
RATHER, WE'LL DO A RENOVATION.
THOSE PROJECTS ARE CURRENTLY IN DESIGN AND WE AWAIT FURTHER INFORMATION FROM CHIEF BEAMON, BUT WE DO HOPE THOSE PROJECTS BEGIN TO MOVE FORWARD FAIRLY QUICKLY.
AGAIN, OTHER PROJECTS AND DESIGN ARE OUR CIRCUIT COURTROOM RENOVATION AND OUR THESE TWO FIRE AND EMS PROJECTS.
AGAIN, THE LARGEST PROJECT IS OUR NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PURCHASE ORDERS AND EXPENDITURES TO DATE AT JANUARY 14TH.
WE'RE JUST OVER 12 MILLION OF THAT $35 MILLION PROJECT.
AGAIN, THE BOARD DID APPROPRIATE SOME CARRYOVER FUNDS FOR RESTROOM RENOVATION, AND THE GENERATOR AND VOICE ACTUALLY CROSSED MY DESK SOON AFTER THIS REPORT WAS RUN.
SO, AGAIN, MOST OF THEIR PROJECTS ARE ON TASK AND ESSENTIALLY COMPLETE.
SOME OF THESE WILL BE COMING OFF OF YOUR NEXT QUARTERLY REPORT AS THEY ARE COMPLETE.
TOURISM FUND COLLECTIONS ARE HEALTHY.
WE ARE ACTUALLY AT FOUR HUNDRED AND FOUR THOUSAND IN LODGING TAX COMPARED TO TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY THREE THOUSAND.
THIS SAME TIME LAST YEAR, AND THAT IS 70 PERCENT OF OUR BUDGET.
SO WE ARE ON TARGET TO TO COLLECT MORE THAN THAN WHAT WE BUDGETED, WHICH IS FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND.
OUR EXPENDITURES ARE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN WHERE WE WERE THE SAME TIME LAST YEAR.
BUT AGAIN, A PORTION OF OUR TOURISM BUDGET IS NOW BEING DEVOTED TO SOME PARKS AND REC PERSONNEL WHO ARE DOING SPORTS TOURISM INITIATIVES.
BUT WE ARE FAVORABLE WHEN WE COMPARE OUR REVENUES TO OUR EXPENDITURES.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, A SIMILAR STORY, OUR COLLECTIONS ARE HEALTHY WITH OUR MEALS TAX, WE'RE AT FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY SEVEN THOUSAND IN REVENUES COMPARED TO FOUR HUNDRED AND FOUR THOUSAND THIS SAME TIME LAST YEAR, OUR EXPENDITURES ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THEY WERE LAST YEAR, SO WE ARE IN A GOOD POSITION WITH OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND.
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS, MOST OF THIS IS REPEAT FROM YOUR LAST QUARTERLY REPORT, JUST TO SAY THAT RCJA I RECENTLY RECEIVED ONE RESIGNATION.
[01:30:04]
BUT EVEN WITH THAT RESIGNATION AND PRIOR TO THAT ONE RESIGNATION, WE ARE ON TARGET TO USE FUND BALANCE AT THE PLANNED AMOUNT.WE ARE PLANNING OUR FY 23 BUDGET AND WORKING WITH THE DIRECTOR OF OUR RCJA DENISE WAFF ON THAT BUDGET.
BUT BECAUSE WE BALANCED ON FUND BALANCE THIS YEAR, WE HAD AMASSED QUITE A BALANCE IN OUR RCJA FUND FUND BALANCE.
OUR SERVE LOCALITIES, WHICH INCLUDE PRINCE GEORGE, SURRY AND HOPEWELL, SHOULD PROBABLY BRACE FOR A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE CONTRIBUTION BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE LESS FUND BALANCE TO USE FOR OPERATING EXPENDITURES.
PROFFERS, WE DID COLLECT TWENTY THOUSAND THIS PAST QUARTER, THIS IS THE FIRST PROFFER REVENUE COLLECTION SINCE FY 17, AND THAT WAS FOR OUR BRICKHOUSE LANDING SOME NEW, CONSTRUCTION GOING ON THERE.
AGAIN, THE BOARD DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO USE PROFFERS FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES TYPICALLY, BUT THE AMOUNT IS NOT VERY SIZABLE IN THIS BUT IT'S AVAILABLE.
THE REDFLEX PROGRAM, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, OUR SCHOOL BUS CAMERA INITIATIVE.
COLLECTIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN THEY WERE THIS SAME TIME LAST YEAR, AND CERTAINLY WE'RE ON TARGET TO COLLECT ABOUT THE SAME OR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WE DID LAST FISCAL YEAR.
THAT'S NOT A REVENUE GENERATOR, BUT MORE A SAFETY INITIATIVE.
THESE FUNDS ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE SCHOOL CAPITAL SCHOOL BUS ACCOUNT EACH QUARTER.
HEALTH INSURANCE, OUR HEALTH INSURANCE FUND BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31ST WAS 1.87 MILLION.
THIS IS A DROP OF OVER A MILLION DOLLARS SINCE JUNE.
AND WE ARE CERTAINLY AT LESS OF A FUND RESERVE THAN WHERE WE WERE LAST DECEMBER.
WE ACTUALLY COLLECTED LESS IN PREMIUM LAST FISCAL YEAR THAN THAN WE PAID OUT IN CLAIMS. THE SCHOOL DIVISION RAN A DEFICIT OF OVER 400,000 AND THE COUNTY REALIZED A SURPLUS OF ABOUT TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND.
AND TO DATE THIS FISCAL YEAR, CLAIMS HAVE EXCEEDED PREMIUMS BY OVER A MILLION.
THE COUNTY SIDE IS RUNNING A SURPLUS OF OVER ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY SEVEN AN THE SCHOOL HAS A NEGATIVE POSITION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR OF OVER 1.2 MILLION.
THIS IS A TOPIC THAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSING AGAIN AT THE CHAIR VICE CHAIR MEETING IN FEBRUARY.
THAT IS ONE TOPIC THAT MR. STOKE ASKED DR.
[INAUDIBLE] TO ADD, BUT THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE FUND BALANCE BREAKDOWN.
THE COUNTY, WHICH REPRESENTS ABOUT 25 PERCENT OF THE MEMBERSHIP, ACTUALLY HAS ABOUT 80 PERCENT OF THE FUND BALANCE, SO IT IS A BIT CONCERNING.
THE SCHOOL PREMIUMS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT THIS YEAR TO PAY THEIR CLAIMS. SO LOOKING AHEAD, OUR AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS WERE ISSUED AND COMPLETED ON TIME.
[INAUDIBLE] TO YOU, IN DECEMBER, WE ENDED THE YEAR WITH A VERY FAVORABLE POSITION, OUR BUDGET DEVELOPMENT IS IN PROGRESS FOR FY TWENTY THREE AND OF COURSE, AS ALWAYS, WE WILL CONTINUE TO CAREFULLY MONITOR OUR REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, AND WE'RE PAYING PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO OUR CHILDREN'S SERVICES ACT AND OUR REGIONAL JAIL EXPENDITURES.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
IT'S NOW TIME FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING.
[PUBLIC HEARINGS]
OUR FIRST ORDINANCE IS TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF VIRGINIA TO DEFINE THE TERM TOWNHOUSE AND WHAT ELSE THAT ENTAILS.ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR WAYMACK MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. STOKE AND MR. WHITTEN.
THIS IS AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND, AS YOU HEARD THE CODE OF THE COUNTY TO DEFINE THE TERM TOWNHOUSE TO ESTABLISH A ZONING DISTRICT KNOWN AS RTH RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE, WHERE TOWNHOUSES ARE PERMITTED, AND TO DISTINGUISH THE INTENT OF THIS NEW DISTRICT FROM THAT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AND TO DEFINE THE INTENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW RTH ZONING DISTRICT.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS TO PERMIT ATTACHED TOWNHOUSES WITH EACH UNIT ON ITS OWN LOT, SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND REVIEWS BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD DURING REZONING PROCESSES.
[01:35:02]
THE INITIAL START OF THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WAS WITH AN APPLICANT, A PROPERTY OWNER IN THE COUNTER, DANA LUNSFORD, WHO'S OFFICIALLY THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REQUEST.HORTON, A NATIONAL HOMEBUILDER, ON A POTENTIAL TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT ON A PROPERTY ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE.
THEIR PRIMARY GOAL FROM THE BEGINNING HAS BEEN TO DEVELOP TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUALLY OWNED LOTS.
TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUALLY OWNED LOTS ARE NOT CURRENTLY PERMITTED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
SO THERE ARE OPTIONS TO PROCEED AT THAT TIME WITH THEIR INTENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR TO THEIR OPTIONS INCLUDED REVISING THEIR PLANS TO DO WHAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE EXISTING ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH SOME OF THOSE OPTIONS WOULD BE TO HAVE MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURES, BASICALLY APARTMENT BUILDINGS OR CONDO BUILDINGS.
IN THOSE IN THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, YOU HAVE A SINGLE BUILDING WITH MULTIPLE UNITS INSIDE OF THAT, AND SOME OF THOSE THEY MAY BE RENTED OUT OR SOLD INDIVIDUALLY.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT LOT THAT THAT BUILDING SITS ON IS OWNED BY A SINGLE ENTITY.
THEY ANOTHER OPTION FOR THEM, IN THEORY, WOULD HAVE BEEN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS BASICALLY LIKE A CUSTOM ZONING DISTRICT.
HOWEVER, THE COUNTY CODE REQUIRES THAT A PROPERTY BE AT LEAST 25 ACRES IN SIZE SO THAT OPTION WOULD NOT HAVE WORKED FOR THEIR PROPERTY.
AND THEN THE FINAL OPTION WAS TO REQUEST A CHANGE TO THE COUNTY CODE.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SOMEHOW ENABLE TOWNHOUSES TO BE BUILT ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AS THEY PLANNED.
SO THEY ENDED UP GOING WITH THAT OPTION.
THEY REQUESTED AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND THEY PROVIDED A DRAFT ORDINANCE.
AT THAT TIME, IT WOULD HAVE ADDED TOWNHOUSES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE IN R2 ZONING DISTRICTS.
SO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN ONE OF THE EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS THEY WOULD HAVE ENABLED.
THAT WOULD HAVE ENABLED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST TO COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD.
STAFF LOOKED AT THAT DRAFT CLOSELY AND WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO MODIFY THE DRAFT AND PREPARE IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
HOWEVER, BEFORE THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS PROCEEDED, THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT WERE DISCUSSING A BIT OF DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THE PROPOSED LOWERED SETBACKS THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THAT.
SO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE WOULD HAVE LOWERED SETBACKS FOR TOWNHOUSE STRUCTURES FROM WHAT THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS ARE.
STAFF DIDN'T THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO HAVE ONE TYPE OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT HAVE A MORE ADVANTAGEOUS, MORE DENSITY ON A LOT BY BEING ABLE TO HAVE A LOWER SETBACK THAN OTHER TYPES OF HOUSING.
SO THAT WAS ONE POINT OF DISAGREEMENT.
STAFF DID ALSO ADD, YOU KNOW, TO ALLOW THE TOWNHOUSES IN AN ADDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT.
BUT IN THE END, STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AGREED.
AFTER DISCUSSIONS TO UPDATE THIS AND BRING IT FORWARD AS A NEW ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD ENABLE THEM TO HAVE THE SETBACKS THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR WITHOUT AFFECTING THOSE EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS.
SO THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAPPENED DURING A TIME PERIOD IN WHICH THERE WAS A MEETING CANCELATION DUE TO THE WATER MAIN BREAK IN THE BUILDING AND THEN THE STAFF THERE.
I'M SORRY THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THE ITEM AT ANOTHER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHILE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WERE OCCURRING.
SO ULTIMATELY, THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT US HERE TODAY.
STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON A DRAFT OR THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS IN ITS CURRENT FORM.
JUST TO LOOK AT THE TYPE OF PRODUCT THAT WE WILL END UP WITH, IF YOU DO DECIDE TO ADOPT THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT'S EXISTING IN THE COUNTY.
THESE ARE MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES THAT LOOK LIKE TOWNHOUSES.
BUT IN THIS CASE, THESE BUILDINGS ARE OWNED BY A ONE LOT OWNER, AND THEY JUST RENT IT.
SO THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR IN SCALE AND APPEARANCE TO THIS.
AND YOU CAN SEE A RENDERING ON THE TOP HERE AS AN EXAMPLE OF SOME TOWNHOUSE BUILDINGS THAT D.R.
HORTON HAS DEVELOPED ELSEWHERE AND ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A TYPE OF TOWNHOUSE PRODUCT THAT YOU CAN GET WITH THIS TYPE OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WOULD BE THE BOTTOM EXAMPLE WHERE THAT PARTICULAR EXAMPLE IS A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE ROAD,
[01:40:03]
THE YOU KNOW, THE FRONT YARDS ARE SHORTER.THERE'S NO DRIVEWAYS IN THAT EXAMPLE.
SO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PREPARED BY THE STAFF IS IS MEANT TO ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT COULD LOOK LIKE THESE, OR SOME SOME VARIATION OF THESE.
THIS IS JUST A LOOK AT A SAMPLE FLOOR PLAN WHERE THE LEFT SIDE IS THE FIRST FLOOR, RIGHT SIDE IS THE SECOND FLOOR, SO THESE ARE OFTEN MULTI-STORY.
THIS IS THE LOT OWNED BY THE APPLICANT THAT THEY HAVE A SEPARATE REQUEST FOR A REZONING.
IF THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DOES PROCEED, THEN THEY WOULD THEY ARE COMING FORWARD WITH A REZONING REQUEST FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE PROPERTY THAT COULD HAVE TOWNHOUSES ON IT DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOMES OF THEIR CURRENT REQUESTS.
THIS IS THE SAMPLE LAYOUT FOR THAT SAME PROPERTY WITH WITH TOWNHOUSE UNITS ON THERE.
YOU CAN SEE HOW THERE'S AN ENTRANCE ROAD AND INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS ALONG THAT ROAD, AND EACH BUILDING IN THIS EXAMPLE ARE CUT INTO FOUR TO FIVE EVEN IN ONE CASE, I THINK SIX UNITS.
SO AND YOU CAN SEE EACH OF THOSE UNITS WITHIN THE BUILDING ITS ON ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL LOT WITH A FRONT AND BACK YARD.
SO EACH OF THOSE LOTS WOULD BE INDIVIDUALLY SOLD AND OWNED.
AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE IN THIS EXAMPLE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WALKING TRAIL PLANNED A COMMON AREA.
SO WE'LL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE.
DURING THIS PROCESS, STAFF LOOKED AT SIMILAR USES THAT ARE IN THE ORDINANCE, WE JUST PROVIDED THOSE FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S ALREADY AVAILABLE.
DEVELOPERS CAN BUILD A TWO FAMILY DWELLING, WHICH IS BASICALLY A DUPLEX, YOU KNOW, TWO UNITS IN ONE STRUCTURE.
DEVELOPERS CAN BUILD MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS OR BASICALLY APARTMENT BUILDINGS OR CONDO BUILDINGS.
THEY CAN BUILD ATTACHED DWELLINGS.
HOWEVER, THOSE ARE ONLY ALLOWED.
IN THIS COUNTY THEY'RE ALLOWED IN AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITIES ONLY.
AND OR DEVELOPERS CAN ASK FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS AGAIN A CUSTOM, YOU KNOW, BUILD WHAT THEY ARE INTENDING AND THEY DESIGN BASICALLY A ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THAT.
STAFF LOOKED AT OTHER COUNTIES.
YOU KNOW, HOW DO OTHER COUNTIES ALLOW OR NOT ALLOW TOWNHOUSES AS THEY'RE PROPOSING? CHESTERFIELD COUNTY HAS A DEDICATED ZONING DISTRICT FOR TOWNHOUSES, AND HENRICO COUNTY DOES ALSO.
IT'S RELATIVELY COMMON TO HAVE A ZONING DISTRICT FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR TOWNHOUSES.
NEW KENT, THEY DON'T HAVE A DEDICATED DISTRICT, BUT THEY DO ALLOW THEM SIMILAR TO PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
THEY COULD BE DONE IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
HANOVER COUNTY IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE WE LOOKED AT, AND THEY JUST CLASSIFY THEM AS A TYPE OF ATTACHED HOUSING.
SO DIFFERENT COUNTIES HANDLE THEM IN DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT IT IS RELATIVELY COMMON TO HAVE A DEDICATED ZONING DISTRICT.
IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY'S ZONING ORDINANCE IN THE PAST HAS HAD A TOWNHOUSE.
TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS THEY'VE BEEN PERMITTED BEFORE.
BUT THAT PARTICULAR ZONING ORDINANCE, THERE WERE SOME THAT WAS REPEALED FOR COMPLETELY UNRELATED REASONS.
CASH PROFFERS JUST OF NOTE, CASH PROFFERS ARE REQUESTED FOR REZONING'S, SO THAT WOULD BASICALLY MAKE ANY TOWNHOUSE, ANY POTENTIAL TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE CASH PROFFER POLICY SO DEVELOPERS WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR VOLUNTARY PROFFERS ON THEIR DEVELOPMENTS.
ADDITIONALLY, TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS WILL REQUIRE SUBDIVISION PLAT REVIEW AND SITE PLAN REVIEW, BASICALLY, THIS IS WHEN THOSE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE REVIEWED BY STAFF.
MAKE SURE THAT THESE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ARE UP TO CODE.
FINALLY, THIS REQUEST IS, IN STAFF'S OPINION, COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PRIMARILY BECAUSE TOWNHOUSES ARE SPECIFIED AS A TYPE OF HOUSING WHICH SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE AND SPECIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THIS TYPE OF HOUSING CAN FIT INTO THE EXISTING LAND USE MAP CATEGORIES ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
STAFF, JUST FOR SUMMARY PURPOSES IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THAT ORDINANCE THAT WOULD APPLY TO ALL
[01:45:03]
TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS INCLUDE LOWER SETBACKS IN OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS, WHICH ALLOW FOR A MORE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL LIKE WE SAW IN THE COUPLE OF RENDERINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT ALL.ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS MUST BE SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER.
THEY SHALL FRONT ON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.
SO BASICALLY THEY'RE ON STATE MAINTAINED ROADS.
THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT SIZE AGAIN THIS IS AS STAFF HAS PROPOSED THIS ORDINANCE, THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT SIZE THAT NEEDS TO BE 10 ACRES AND AT LEAST 24 UNITS.
SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE ONE BUILDING HERE AND HAVE COME THROUGH A WHOLE PROCESS FOR FIVE UNIT BUILDING.
THEY NEED TO BE AT LEAST 24 UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMON AREAS TO BE PROVIDED AND RECREATION SPACE AND FACILITIES WITHIN THOSE COMMON AREAS.
AND A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SHALL OWN AND OPERATE ALL THE COMMON ELEMENTS.
THAT'S ONE OF THE KEY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
AND, OF COURSE, ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENTS CAN BE DETERMINED AND ADDED AT THE TIME THAT INDIVIDUALS ZONING CASES ARE REVIEWED.
BECAUSE EACH OF THEM WILL REQUIRE REZONING.
THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
THEY DIDN'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH THE ORDINANCE AS PROPOSED.
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AT THE DECEMBER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
ALL RIGHT, SO I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, ORDINANCE, I'LL MENTION THAT THE APPLICANT, DANA LUNSFORD AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE PLANNING DESIGN FIRM THAT IS ADVISING HIM BALZER AND ASSOCIATES, THEY'RE ALSO HERE, AND THEY'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH STAFF TO WORK ON THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE.
BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR STAFF.
MR. GRAVES, CAN I ASSUME FROM YOUR STATEMENT AND AS SERVED BY PUBLIC UTILITIES, WE HAVE THE UTILITIES FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.
ALL DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE REVIEWED ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS.
THIS ONE THAT THEY ARE PLANNING HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND THERE IS AVAILABLE WATER AND SEWER FOR THAT.
ARE YOU SAYING SIR, WE HAVE IT.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.
DID YOU SHOW A MAP WHERE THIS WOULD BE BUILT ON? [INAUDIBLE] YOU WANT TO SEE THIS ONE OR THE AREA.
ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE? IS THAT WHAT I READ? YES, SIR.
WHERE'S THAT? ACROSS FROM, I THINK THERE ARE BRANCHESTER APARTMENTS.
THOSE ARE THE SAME ONES THAT I WAS SHOWING RIGHT HERE ON NORTH OF THE FOOD LION.
I'LL ASK THE QUESTION I'VE ASKED BEFORE IN THE PAST YEARS.
WHAT ELSE COULD THEY COME BACK AND BUILD OTHER THAN WHAT THEY REPRESENTED TO YOU THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD? COULD APARTMENTS BE BUILT THERE.
NO, SO THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY JUST ALLOWS TOWNHOUSES AND OTHER THINGS, NOT INCLUDING APARTMENT BUILDINGS SUCH AS SCHOOLS, THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN ANY [INAUDIBLE] CHURCHES, THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED.
GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL THING THAT STARTED THIS, THE PUDDLEDOCK PLACE THAT WE HAVE EXISTING TODAY.
WE REZONED THAT PROPERTY, BUT THAT WAS NOT.
WHAT WE WERE TOLD WAS GOING TO BE BUILT.
WE WERE TOLD IT'S GOING TO BE SINGLE AND DOUBLE OCCUPANCY FOR THE MILITARY SOLDIERS THAT WOULD BE COMING IN ONE OR TWO ROOM APARTMENTS JUST FOR MILITARY ONLY NO 24 HOUR SERVICE.
THEY FLIPPED AROUND, CHANGED THEIR PLANS AND WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.
SO WHAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN IF WE REZONE IT AND WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING IS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD GOES AWAY AND THEN COULD THEY BUILD SOMETHING LIKE A PUDDLEDOCK PLACE OR APARTMENT COMPLEXES BECAUSE WE REZONED WITHOUT HOLDING THEM TO THIS PRETTY DESIGN? SO FOR EACH EACH ZONING CASE, YOU GET TO LOOK AT THE INDIVIDUAL, THE CONDITIONS FOR THAT.
THAT AGAIN, THAT'S A SEPARATE REZONING REQUEST THAT IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARDS IT TO YOU, IT WILL COME TO YOU.
YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY PROFFERED.
AND IF YOU, YOU KNOW, EVEN IN THE MEANTIME, WE CAN LOOK AT SOMETHING TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS.
BUT THIS REQUEST IS JUST TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE TO MAKE TOWNHOUSES POSSIBLE.
SO THIS WOULD JUST ADD A ZONING DISTRICT FOR TOWNHOUSES.
AND THEN IF IT IS PASSED, THEN DEVELOPERS LIKE THIS ONE COULD REQUEST THEIR DEVELOPMENT ON A PROPERTY.
[01:50:01]
AND SO AND THEN DURING THE INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY CONDITIONS TO THAT ZONING TO PREVENT, YOU KNOW, ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE CONCERNS WITH.I DIDN'T SEE VERY MUCH PARKING.
THERE WOULD BE PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS OR POTENTIALLY IN THE ROAD IF THEY PLAN IT THAT WAY.
I CAN SEE DRIVEWAYS, BUT IF YOU START PARKING ON THE ROAD VERY MUCH, IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY DOWN THERE, IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO GET FIRE AND EMS EQUIPMENT THROUGH THERE IF YOU GOT A CAR PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD.
[INAUDIBLE] HOW WIDE ARE THOSE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE.
I'M NOT SURE, I THINK IN THIS EXAMPLE, 50 FEET, AT LEAST AGAIN, THOSE ARE INDIVIDUALLY DESIGNED AND ZONING CONDITIONS CAN ESTABLISH WHETHER THERE WILL OR WILL NOT BE STREET PARKING.
GENERALLY, THAT WOULD BE UP TO THAT WOULD APPLY AT THE TIME OF A SITE PLAN WHERE THEY WOULD PRESENT A VERY SPECIFIC VERSION OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
AND IF IT DOESN'T MEET, YOU KNOW, THE CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT RELATE TO WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEN IT WOULDN'T GET APPROVED.
BUT UNLESS YOU APPLY CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF A REZONING, THEY HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY OF WHETHER THEY HAVE STREET PARKING OR NO STREET PARKING.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT AVENUE.
SO THERE'S ONLY ONE ENTRANCE TO 156.
EVERYTHING, ALL OF THOSE, DWELLINGS WOULD HAVE TO EXIT ONTO 156 AT ONE POINT.
AND I MEAN, WE'LL GET TO THE DETAILS ABOUT THAT, IF THAT REZONING REQUEST COMES FORWARD.
VDOT IN THAT EXAMPLE IS REVIEWING THAT REQUEST AND HAS MADE COMMENTS ON THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS.
AND SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT.
THE SPECIFICS OF WHAT'S BEING ASKED ARE ALL THINGS THAT WOULD COME UP DURING THE INDIVIDUAL RESPECTIVE ZONING CASES.
SO WE HAVE 50 INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS, BASICALLY IN THAT TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ABOUT.
CORRECT WITH INDIVIDUALLY OWNED PROPERTIES.
AND THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE, SO ANYTHING COMING BEFORE YOU IS GOING TO HAVE AT LEAST 24 RESIDENTS WITHIN THERE.
AND THERE ARE AGAIN, THERE'S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT THEY PROVIDE A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF COMMON AREA SO THAT THAT WILL MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT TOO DENSE, THAT'S TO LIMIT HOW DENSE IT CAN GET.
I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ACCESS EGRESS AND, YOU KNOW, GOING IN THERE SCHOOL BUSSES AND ALL THAT.
AND ALL OF THAT IS REVIEWED DURING DURING A SITE PLAN.
AND AT THE TIME OF THE SUBDIVISION, [INAUDIBLE] IS A FEW OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ARE ALL LOOKING AT THOSE PLANS.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO, MA'AM.
I NOW OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE PUBLIC, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ORDINANCE? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT WE KNEW ABOUT MRS. KNOTT NO ONE SIGNED UP.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON ZOOM THAT WISHES TO SPEAK.
MADAM CHAIR I'LL CHECK NOW FOR ALL ZOOM PARTICIPANTS WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
PLEASE RAISE YOUR ELECTRONIC HAND IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER TO BE RECOGNIZED.
PHONE USERS MAY PRESS STAR NINE TO RAISE THEIR HANDS.
MADAM CHAIR, NO ONE HAS RAISED THEIR ELECTRONIC HAND.
THERE BEING NO ONE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ORDINANCE I'LL NOW CLOSE THE
[01:55:01]
PUBLIC HEARING AND TURN IT BACK TO THE BOARD.WHAT IS THE BOARD'S PLEASURE? MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSIONS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS.
I WOULD SO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS TOWNHOUSE ORDINANCE AS SO PRESENTED BY MR. GRAVES.
A MOTION'S BEEN PUT FORWARD BY MR. BROWN AND SECONDED BY MR. WEBB.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
OUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING IS AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF VIRGINIA BY REQUIRING NAMES FOR ROADS.
YES, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. STOKE, THE CURRENT COUNTY CODE CURRENTLY STATES THAT ONLY PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAYS ACCESSING FIVE OR MORE PROPERTIES OR ADDRESSABLE STRUCTURES SHALL HAVE A SEPARATE ROAD NAME.
THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD AMEND SECTION 63-72H AND STATE THAT THE FOLLOWING TRAVEL WAYS WILL BE NAMED.
ALL ROADS PROPOSED FOR ACCEPTANCE IN THE STATE ROAD SYSTEM.
ALL RIGHT AWAY OR ACCESS EASEMENTS INTENDING TO SERVE THREE OR MORE ADDRESSABLE STRUCTURES.
THAT'S A CHANGE FROM FIVE TO THREE AND ANY OTHER TRAVEL WAY WHICH THE GIS COORDINATOR DETERMINES SHOULD BE NAMED TO PROMOTE SAFETY AND WELFARE TO THE PUBLIC.
THE DRAFT ORDINANCE IS ATTACHED AND ENCLOSED IN YOUR PACKET.
THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN PROPERLY ADVERTISED.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DRAFT LANGUAGE.
NO, MA'AM, I'M FINE, THANK YOU.
I NOW OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS THERE ANYONE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ORDINANCE? DID ANYONE REGISTER TO SPEAK MRS. KNOTT.
SEEING, NO ONE COME FOURTH, WOULD YOU PLEASE CHECK WITH ZOOM TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANYBODY TO SPEAK? YES, MA'AM.
FOR ALL ZOOM PARTICIPANTS, WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING THIS PUBLIC HEARING MATTER.
PLEASE RAISE YOUR ELECTRONIC HAND IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER NOW TO BE RECOGNIZED.
PHONE USERS MAY PRESS STAR NINE TO RAISE THEIR HANDS.
NO ONE IS RAISING THEIR HAND, MADAM CHAIR, THANK YOU.
BEING NO ONE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TURN THE MATTER BACK OVER TO THE BOARD, WHAT'S THE BOARD'S PLEASURE? I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AS PRESENTED.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN PUT FORTH AND SECONDED.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL MRS. KNOTT.
NOW WE GO BACK TO OUR ORDER OF BUSINESS.
[REPORTS (Part 2 of 2)]
TWO MORE.THANK YOU AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR BOARD MEMBERS MR. STOKE AND MR. WHITTEN.
THIS IS A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON OUR UPCOMING WINTER SPRING BORROWING.
AS THE BOARD IS AWARE, BORROWING HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED FOR PROJECTS THAT WERE COMPLETED DURING FY 21 THAT YOU APPROVED DURING TWENTY ONE.
WE WERE WAITING FOR ACTUAL NUMBERS FOR OUR GARAGE EXPANSION RENOVATION PROJECT PRIOR TO DOING THIS BORROWING, SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE CLOSE TO ACCURATE NUMBERS FOR THIS BORROWING.
THE ONE EXCEPTION WAS THAT THE NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WAS COMPLETED LAST SPRING WITH A VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL, WITH THERE AUTHORITY BORROWING.
THIS IS A LISTING OF THE PROJECTS THAT WERE IN YOUR FY 21 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
THE LEFT COLUMN SHOWS THE INITIAL COST THAT WE ESTIMATED, AND THE RIGHT
[02:00:04]
COLUMN ACTUALLY SHOWS AN UPDATED COST.WE DID AGAIN COMPLETE A VPSA BORROWING TO COMPLETE THE NEW SCHOOL.
SO EXCLUDING THE SCHOOL AND WITH THE ACTUAL NUMBERS.
THIS IS THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT THAT WE LOOK TO BORROW IN OUR WINTER SPRING BORROWING.
IT'LL BE CLOSER TO THE SPRING WHEN WE CLOSE, PROBABLY AT THE END OF MARCH.
DAVENPORT IS FINE TUNING THIS ESTIMATE FOR OUR COST OF ISSUANCE OR CLOSING COSTS, IF YOU WILL, BUT THAT NUMBER IS TARGETED TO BE JUST OVER 5.76 MILLION.
THIS FIGURE AGAIN IS BASED ON A MORE ACCURATE BUDGET FOR THAT EXPANSION PROJECT OF OUR FLEET GARAGE.
YOU WILL HEAR FROM MR. SIMMONS LATER ON THIS EVENING RELATED TO THE REQUESTED AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THAT PROJECT.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE AMOUNT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT BORROWING UNLESS THE BOARD WISHES TO CASH FUND A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT.
CERTAINLY, YOU HAVE FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY SHORTAGE OF PROJECTS WITH THE UTILITIES EXPANSIONS THAT ARE ON THE HORIZON THAT THE BOARD MIGHT CONTRIBUTE TO FROM FUND BALANCE, IF YOU WILL.
SO AT YOUR DIRECTION, DAVENPORT IS READY TO ISSUE AN RFP.
BUT JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO STEAL ANY OF MR. SIMMONS THUNDER, BUT AGAIN, THAT GARAGE EXPANSION PROJECT, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE WERE WAITING FOR.
WE DID RECEIVE THE BIDS ON JANUARY 18TH.
AND THAT BUDGET WAS UPDATED TO BE JUST OVER $3 MILLION DOLLARS.
THE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH AGAIN WILL BE DISCUSSED AND POSSIBLY AWARDED DURING YOUR ORDER OF BUSINESS PORTION OF THIS MEETING.
THE BUDGET ALSO INCLUDES LAND AND SITE ANALYSIS, SITE DEVELOPMENT, SOME IT FURNITURE FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT, SOME LIFT EQUIPMENT.
FOR ONE HUNDRED AND TEN THOUSAND, ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING AND TESTING SERVICES OF ABOUT TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY NINE THOUSAND.
OF THAT, ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND HAS ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND IN CHANGE HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROPRIATED AND APPROVED WITH A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION IN PLACE.
OTHER FEES INCLUDE SOFT COSTS, ELECTRICAL PERMITS, ET CETERA, FOR FIFTY TWO THOUSAND.
AND THEN THERE IS A CONTINGENCY FOR ANY UNFORESEEN EVENTS THAT MIGHT HAPPEN DURING CONSTRUCTION.
OF COURSE, WITH ANY RENOVATION, I THINK THAT IS A VERY MODEST CONTINGENCY FOR WHAT WE COULD POSSIBLY ENCOUNTER.
BUT I WILL MENTION TO YOU THAT THIS IS A NEARLY $400,000 LESS THAN THE ESTIMATE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU IN THE MIDDLE OF DECEMBER AT YOUR WORK SESSION.
THE BIDS CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN WHAT WE HAD ESTIMATED, WHICH IS GREAT NEWS.
IT'S STILL A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS INITIALLY PUT IN THE CIP.
BUT AGAIN, IT IS LESS THAN THAT ESTIMATE THAT YOU WERE PROVIDED IN DECEMBER.
JUST AGAIN, TO RECAP WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT LATER ON THIS EVENING.
TWO AWARDS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT TOTAL JUST OVER TWO POINT FIVE MILLION AGAIN, THE FIRST IS CONSTRUCTION.
WRAPPED INTO THAT SAME AGENDA ITEM IS A&E CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FROM OUR ARCHITECT OF 58 THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
WE ARE NOT REQUESTING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THESE AWARDS TONIGHT, BUT THERE IS A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.
IT WILL JUST BE THE AWARD ONE RESOLUTION AND A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION.
THE APPROPRIATION DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT IS OVER ONE PERCENT OF YOUR ADOPTED CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
SO WE WILL DO THE APPROPRIATION WHEN THE DEBT ISSUANCE IS APPROVED, LIKELY ON MARCH 8TH, WHEN THAT BORROWING IS APPROVED.
OUR ACTION TONIGHT IS TO AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC HEARING.
NO, SIR, I'M JUST GIVING YOU AN UPDATE.
I WILL BRING THE AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO YOU AT YOUR FIRST FEBRUARY MEETING.
WE ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO AWARD THAT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TONIGHT AND THAT MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
JUST KIND OF WANTED TO GIVE YOU A PRELIMINARY OF WHAT YOU'LL BE LOOKING AT OVER YOUR NEXT COUPLE OF MEETINGS.
SO, AGAIN, WE'LL REQUEST THE APPROPRIATION FOR THESE TWO AWARDS WHEN WE DO THE BORROWING FOLLOWING A PUBLIC HEARING.
SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE, THE BORROWING IS ESTIMATED TO BE JUST OVER 5.7 MILLION UNLESS
[02:05:05]
YOU CHOOSE TO CASH FUND PART OF THAT GARAGE PROJECT.A MILLION DOLLARS AT 15 YEARS HAS AN ANNUAL DEBT PAYMENT OF ABOUT 89,000.
SO IF YOU WERE TO TAKE A MILLION DOLLARS FROM FUND BALANCE, SO TO SPEAK, YOU COULD SAVE ABOUT NINETY THOUSAND A YEAR IN DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT ON THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT.
SO THE BORROWING WILL BE ONE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN THE APPROPRIATION WILL BE A SEPARATE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE IT IS OVER ONE PERCENT OF THE BUDGET.
YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED APPROPRIATIONS OF 2.7 MILLION.
I SOMETIMES GET THE QUESTION WHY IS THE BORROWING DIFFERENT THAN THE APPROPRIATION? YOU'VE ALREADY APPROPRIATED THESE PROJECTS WITH REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS.
SO AGAIN, WE WILL BRING A REQUEST TO YOU TO ADVERTISE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE FOR THE BORROWING AND ONE FOR THE APPROPRIATION ON FEBRUARY THE 8TH.
THE TIMELINE DAVENPORT ACTUALLY HAS A DRAFT OF THE RFP FOR THE BORROWING READY TO HIT THE STREET WHEN YOU AUTHORIZE THE AWARDS OF CONTRACT THIS EVENING.
SO I WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH THEM EITHER TONIGHT OR FIRST THING IN THE MORNING TO TELL THEM THEY COULD PUT THE RFP ON THE STREET AT YOUR FEBRUARY 8TH MEETING.
I'LL BE REQUESTING AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS AGAIN, ONE FOR THE BORROWING, THE BIG NUMBER AND THEN ONE FOR THE ESTIMATED APPROPRIATION, THE SLIGHTLY SMALLER NUMBER.
IF WE AUTHORIZE TONIGHT AND DAVENPORT GOES FORTH WITH THE BORROWING.
WHAT HAVE YOU? AND WE FOUND LATER THAT MAYBE WE DO WANT TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF OUR RESERVE ON THAT CAN WE DO THAT OR NO, WE CAN ADVERTISE UP TO FIVE POINT SEVEN.
I CAN ASK DAVENPORT IF THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE INTEREST RATES.
I WOULD PROBABLY NEED DIRECTION SOONER THAN LATER.
AS TO WHETHER YOU'D LIKE TO TO CASH FUND A PORTION OF THIS, PROBABLY PRIOR TO THAT FEBRUARY MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WERE EVEN THINKING ABOUT THAT.
AND TO BE QUITE FRANK WITH YOU, I'M NOT REALLY THINKING ABOUT IT BECAUSE I HATE TO GO INTO OUR RESERVE AND THEN NEED IT LATER.
CORRECT? BUT JUST A QUESTION THAT'S ALL.
WELL, I WAS GOING TO GO THERE ANYWAY.
[LAUGHTER] I KNOW I'VE SEEN SO MANY NUMBERS THROWN AROUND.
BASED ON THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE WHEN WE PUT THE MONIES THAT WE THOUGHT IN THE CIP FOR THAT PROJECT, IT WAS TWO POINT SIX.
SO IT'S ABOUT A MILLION HIGHER, JUST UNDER A MILLION HIGHER.
YES, SIR, RIGHT? SO YEAH, I MEAN.
I PERSONALLY WOULD RATHER STICK WITH THE AMOUNT THAT WE HAD PLANNED TO BORROW AND USE THE MILLION FROM FUND BALANCE, THAT'S JUST ME.
I KNOW 90,000 MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A LOT, BUT THAT COULD PAY FOR SOMETHING ELSE DOWN THE ROAD IF WE WEREN'T PUTTING THAT OUT AS PART OF DEBT SERVICES.
SO TO TIE THAT ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLARS UP AND PAYING IT OUT OVER THE LIFE OF THE LOAN TO ME IS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
MY GUT TELLS ME WE NEED TO USE THE FUND BALANCE.
MY CONCERNS ARE THIS IS COMING SO EARLY, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE IS OUT THERE.
I'M CONCERNED WITH UTILITIES FOR NUMBER ONE.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY SHORTAGE OF CAPITAL NEEDS.
WITH RESPECT TO UTILITIES, YOU KNOW, FOR POTENTIALLY USING SOME OF YOUR YOUR FUND BALANCE AND EVEN UTILITY CASH RESERVES.
YOU KNOW, MR. HALTOM IS WORKING ON HIS FY 23 BUDGET.
AND YOU KNOW, IT DOES DOES CALL FROM SOME FAIRLY SIZABLE CAPITAL INITIATIVES.
WE'VE DAMN NEAR DEPLETED HIM FOR THE MOST PART, COMPARED TO WHAT HE DID HAVE.
AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD SAY.
I'M SORRY, DREWRY? WELL, YOU KNOW, DAVENPORT IS KIND OF READY TO TO PULL THE TRIGGER.
WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO THE RFP WITH TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS.
WE COULD ASK LENDERS TO DO THE 5.76 AND 4.76.
I COULD SPEAK WITH DAVENPORT ABOUT THAT IN THE MORNING AND SEE IF IT MAKES AN APPRECIABLE
[02:10:01]
DIFFERENCE.BUT WHEN WE ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY THE 8TH, WE WOULD NEED SPECIFIC DIRECTION ON WHAT AMOUNT WE WERE INTERESTED IN BORROWING.
HOW COULD THAT POSSIBLY IMPACT THE INTEREST RATE? OR WOULD IT? I CAN'T ANSWER.
I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT MR. WEBB, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO POTENTIAL INTEREST RATES FROM LENDERS.
WOULD IT BE WORTHWHILE FOR US TO ASK DAVENPORT TO DO THE FOUR POINT SEVEN AND THE FIVE POINT SEVEN? YES, SIR.
WOULD THAT BE COST EFFECTIVE BECAUSE I KNOW HE'S.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THAT'S REALLY JUST CHANGING THE FORMAT OF THE RFP.
IT WOULD BE UP TO THE LENDER TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, INTEREST RATES ON BOTH OPTIONS.
I'M HAPPY TO COMMUNICATE THAT.
BECAUSE LIKE, WELL, LIKE FLOYD DID THE NINETY THOUSAND WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE.
NOW I WILL TELL YOU, WE WILL NOT HAVE THE ANSWER ON FEBRUARY THE 9TH WHEN I'M ASKING FOR PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE.
WE CAN ADVERTISE BORROWING ESTIMATED AT UP TO 5.7.
SO I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY DOABLE.
BECAUSE I'M ALSO WITH MR. WEBB IN THE CONCERN ABOUT THE UTILITIES THAT VERY WELL MAY BUST US IN THE JOB.
SO IF DAVENPORT ISSUES THAT RFP TOMORROW OR THE NEXT DAY, THE LENDER PROPOSALS WOULD BE DUE ON FEBRUARY THE 22ND.
WE WOULD REVIEW THOSE PROPOSALS AND HAVE THOSE READY TO PRESENT TO YOU ON MARCH 8TH TO HOLD THAT PUBLIC HEARING.
WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MEET THAT AGENDA DEADLINE FOR MRS. KNOTT ON FEBRUARY THE 28TH WITH THOSE PARTICULAR DATES.
SO THAT'S THE DIRECTION I WILL ASK DAVENPORT TO ISSUE THAT RFP WITH BOTH NUMBERS.
THE FIVE POINT SEVEN SIX AND FOUR POINT SEVEN SIX.
WE ALREADY SAW WHERE THE INSURANCE IS GOING.
ANY UPDATE ON THE SCHOOLS AS FAR AS SUPPLY DELIVERY PROBLEMS FALLBACKS.
NO, SIR, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN AN UPDATE FROM DR.
THERE IS A CHAIR VICE CHAIR MEETING THAT IS CERTAINLY A TOPIC THAT MR. STOKE AND I COULD COMMUNICATE TO DR.
PENNYCUFF AND UPDATE ON CONSTRUCTION.
AND CERTAINLY, IF THE BOARD WOULD REQUEST HER TO COME BACK.
THAT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT MR. STOKES HAS.
YOU ALREADY GOT THAT MR. STOKES.
THAT AND IS WHERE THE SCHOOL IS AT.
WE CAN ADD AN UPDATE ON THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
YOU CAN CERTAINLY ALWAYS REQUEST FOR DR.
PENNYCUFF TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN UPDATE ON THAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECT.
I JUST IF THEY'RE WILLING, I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT.
OK, AGAIN, THIS WILL NOT NECESSITATE THE NEED TO INCREASE TAXES, THE DEBT REPAYMENT WOULD BEGIN IN YOUR NEXT FISCAL YEAR FY 23, WITH AN INTEREST PAYMENT BEING DUE ON AUGUST ONE.
PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST DUE ON FEBRUARY ONE OF 23.
AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND I WILL BE IN COMMUNICATION WITH DAVENPORT.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO DO? THERE'S NO RESOLUTION OR ANYTHING.
NO MA'AM NOT TONIGHT THAT WILL BE AT YOUR NEXT MEETING AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
I THINK I HAVE THE NEXT REPORT AS WELL, MADAM CHAIR.
THE UPDATE ON MUNICIPAL UTILITY ARPA FUNDING.
MR. HALTOM HAS RECEIVED COMMUNICATIONS FROM DHCD, THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING SOME ARPA FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL UTILITIES, WHICH WAS SIMILAR TO THE CARES MONEY THAT THE UTILITY RECEIVED LAST FISCAL YEAR.
THAT CARES AMOUNT WAS ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHT THOUSAND.
THIS ARPA OPPORTUNITY IS SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY TWO DOLLARS AND FIFTY TWO CENTS.
[LAUGHTER] VERY SPECIFIC AMOUNT.
THERE IS NO LOCAL MATCH FOR THIS MONEY.
WE ACTUALLY ALREADY PUSHED THE APPLICATION THROUGH, AND THE FUNDS WILL BE USED TO OFFSET AND COVER RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE ARREARAGES OR DELINQUENCY DELINQUENT BALANCES OVER 60 DAYS DELINQUENT ON AUGUST 31ST.
[02:15:04]
WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO USE THOSE FUNDS BY MARCH 31ST, SO THERE WAS A PRETTY QUICK TURNAROUND ON THESE MONIES.I HOPE THE BILLING DEPARTMENT AND UTILITIES AND MRS. ROBERTSON AND MY OFFICE HAVE BEEN WORKING PRETTY CLOSELY TO ESTIMATE THE ELIGIBILITY THAT WE HAD FOR THIS, WE ARE ELIGIBLE AND WE DO HAVE ARREARAGES THAT QUALIFY THAT ARE VERY CLOSE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THE NUMBER OF ARPA.
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO HEAR YES, SIR.
AND THERE ARE NO CUSTOMER APPLICATIONS OR ATTESTATIONS REQUIRED FOR THIS MONEY AS COMPARED TO CARES.
THE CUSTOMER ACTUALLY HAD TO GO THROUGH AN APPLICATION AND A TEST THEY HAD A COVID HARDSHIP.
THAT IS NOT THE CASE WITH THIS, SO WE WILL REQUEST THE APPROPRIATION FROM YOU WHEN WE ACTUALLY GET THE MONEY IN THE DOOR.
BUT WE ARE READY TO APPLY THAT ARPA MONEY TO CUSTOMER DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS.
IF YOU'RE NOT REVIEWING ANY TYPE OF APPLICATION, HOW ARE YOU DECIDING WHO GETS THE MONEY? WE WOULD APPLY IT TO THE CUSTOMERS.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO WORK OUT WITH MR. HALTOM AND HIS STAFF.
MY CONCERN IS IF YOU RUN OUT OF MONEY AND SOMEBODY DOESN'T GET IT, AND REALLY NEEDS IT AND OR FEELS LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE IT.
WELL, THERE ARE SPECIFIC GUIDELINES ON WHO'S ELIGIBLE.
OK? THE TIME FRAMES OF WHEN THOSE ARREARAGES OCCURRED DICTATE WHO IS ELIGIBLE.
AND ESSENTIALLY, THERE'S THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE AS MS. DREWRY, WAS STATING WE WERE JUST A LITTLE BIT OVER.
SO ESSENTIALLY, EVERYBODY THAT WAS ELIGIBLE IS GOING TO GET THE FUNDS NEEDED TO TO PAY OFF THOSE THREE ARREARAGES.
SO WE WILL HAVE AN APPROPRIATION ON YOUR AGENDA WHEN THAT MONEY ACTUALLY COMES IN.
AND IN THE MEANTIME, WE'LL BE WORKING TO IDENTIFY THE ACCOUNTS AND HOW MUCH TO APPLY TO WHICH ACCOUNT.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE NOW GO TO OUR POSTPONED ITEM THE RESOLUTION AND ADOPTION OF THE 2022 BOARD
[POSTPONED ITEMS]
OF SUPERVISORS, BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE.YES, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. STOKE.
AT OUR ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING, THERE WAS A MOTION TO POSTPONE DISCUSSION OF THE BYLAWS TO THIS MEETING.
MR. WEBB AND MR. BROWN HAD EMAILED ME A FEW CHANGES WHICH ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.
FIRST CHANGE IS SECTION 1A, THE TERM FOR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR, WOULD END AT MIDNIGHT ON DECEMBER 31ST.
CURRENTLY, THE LANGUAGE STATES THAT'S ONLY IN ELECTION YEARS AND THIS WOULD BE FOR ALL YEARS.
THE TERM WOULD END AT MIDNIGHT ON DECEMBER 31ST.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS WE'RE GOING ALONG, JUST INTERRUPT ME.
SECOND CHANGE IS IT STATES THE BOARD WOULD MAKE EVERY EFFORT FOR REPRESENTATION FROM BOTH DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT TWO FOR THE POSITIONS OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIRMAN.
THE POSITIONS OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN WOULD ROTATE ANNUALLY BASED ON SENIORITY.
IF TWO MEMBERS HAVE THE SAME SENIORITY, THEY WOULD DRAW LOTS FOR THEIR POSITION.
WHY DOESN'T IT GO ALPHABETICAL? OH, IT'S UP TO YOU ALL.
HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT, IT CAN BE SENIORITY.
AS LONG AS I HAVE DEALT WITH UNION CONTRACTS IT COMES DOWN TO SENIORITY AND ALPHABETICAL ORDER.
IF YOU'RE HIRED ON THE SAME DATE IF I GOT A W AND HE'S GOT A B, HE'S AHEAD OF ME AUTOMATICALLY.
IT JUST MAKES IT SIMPLER AND CLEANER.
I ALWAYS GOT MY REPORT CARD LAST BECAUSE I WAS A W.
I MEAN, WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE.
I'VE GOT IT ALL MY LIFE, I'M USED TO IT.
[LAUGHTER] SO I MEAN, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO POSTPONE THAT ITEM.
YOU CAN MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MISSION IF YOU DID WANT IT.
SEE, IF A BOARD MEMBER IS NEXT, THAT'S NEXT IN LINE DECLINES THE POSITION, THE POSITION OF CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR WOULD ROTATE TO THE NEXT BOARD MEMBER, WHICH WOULD BE BASED ON ALPHABETICAL ORDER.
IT STATES IF ANY BOARD MEMBER MEETS OF STAFF, THE SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT OF SUCH MEETING WOULD BE COMMUNICATED TO THE ENTIRE BOARD IN A TIMELY MANNER BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
[02:20:01]
OR HIS DESIGNEE.OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU CAN ONLY HAVE TWO BOARD MEMBERS MEET.
IF THREE BOARD MEMBERS MEET WITH STAFF, THAT BECOMES A MEETING YOU HAVE TO ADVERTISE.
SO THIS WOULD BE IF ONE OR TWO BOARD MEMBERS MEET WITH STAFF, THEN THE CONTENT OF THE MEETING WOULD BE COMMUNICATED BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO THE ENTIRE BOARD, MOST LIKELY BY EMAIL.
IT STATES THIS IS THE SECTION ABOUT PARTICIPATING BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION MEANS THAT STATES A MEMBER CAN MISS TWENTY FIVE OR CAN CALL IN TO 25 PERCENT OF THE MEETINGS DUE TO A PERSONAL MATTER.
AND IT STATES FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, WHETHER A GATHERING OF THE BOARD CONSTITUTES A MEETING WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE NOTICE THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
SO BASICALLY, WHEN THE NOTICE THAT THE CLERK POSTS AT THE DOOR, IF SHE POSTED, WE'RE HAVING A SIX O'CLOCK WORK SESSION AND A SEVEN O'CLOCK REGULAR MEETING, SHE POSTED TWO SEPARATE MEETINGS THEN THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TWO SEPARATE MEETINGS, SUBJECT TO THE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT.
SO IF I CALL IN THAT NIGHT AND MISS THAT WHOLE NIGHT, I'VE MISSED TWO MEETINGS.
AND THAT WOULD THEN ALLOW FOR IF A MEMBER CAN'T MAKE THE CLOSED SESSION OR WORK SESSION BUT CALLS INTO THE REGULAR SESSION, THEY WOULD STILL BE COUNTED PRESENT FOR THAT ONE MEETING, THEY WOULD HAVE MISSED THE WORK SESSION.
AND THE CLOSED SESSION I DON'T SEE THE CLOSED SESSION AS A SEPARATE MEETING OF THE BOARD.
BUT I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS IF THE BOARD WANTS TO CONSIDER CLOSED SESSION, A SEPARATE MEETING SEPARATE FROM THE WORK SESSION AND THE REGULAR SESSION.
BUT I SEE THE CLOSED SESSION AS PART OF THE REGULAR MEETING, BUT THAT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IF THE BOARD WANTS TO CONSIDER, LIKE TONIGHT, IF THEY WANT TO CONSIDER IT THREE SEPARATE MEETINGS [INAUDIBLE] THE NOTICE THAT THE CLERK POSTED WAS THE WORK SESSION AND THE REGULAR MEETING IS WHAT WAS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE AND ON THE DOOR.
IT'S THE SIX O'CLOCK AN THE SEVEN O'CLOCK MEETING.
THE FIVE O'CLOCK MEETING WASN'T POSTED.
FOR US THAT DON'T GET OFF WORK UNTIL LATE.
NOW, IF SHE DID, AND MADAM CLERK CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT WHEN I LOOKED ON THE WEBSITE EARLIER, I DIDN'T LOOK DOWNSTAIRS, BUT AT LEAST ON THE WEBSITE, IT ONLY SHOWED THE SIX O'CLOCK AND THE SEVEN O'CLOCK MEETING.
IT DIDN'T SHOW THE FIVE O'CLOCK CLOSED SESSION.
IT SHOWED ON THE SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS FOR THE WHOLE YEAR, BUT IT DIDN'T SHOW IT ON THE ACTUAL NOTICE.
SECTION 5A STATES IF A BOARD MEMBER ABSTAINS FROM VOTING THE BOARD MEMBER WOULD PROVIDE A REASON FOR ABSTAINING FROM VOTING.
SECTION 6A DEALS WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE AGENDA.
IT STATES THAT ANY ITEM WOULD BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA IF THERE IS AN INFORMAL CONSENSUS OF THREE BOARD MEMBERS, THEY WANT TO PUT THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, PROVIDED THAT EVERY BOARD MEMBER IS INFORMALLY POLLED BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
AND THAT COULD BE BY EMAIL OR BY PHONE, ALSO, ANY ITEM CAN BE REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA BY AN INFORMAL CONSENSUS OF THREE OR MORE BOARD MEMBERS PROVIDED THAT EVERY BOARD MEMBER IS INFORMALLY POLLED BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT AS A LITTLE COMPLEX WORDING OK.
YOU LOOK AT SECTION 13 A THAT DEALS WITH THE SUSPENSION OR AMENDMENT OF THE BYLAWS, IT STATES THAT THE BYLAWS WOULD BE APPROVED ANNUALLY AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING BY A MAJORITY OF THE FULL BOARD, WHICH WOULD BE THREE MEMBERS AND MAY BE AMENDED AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBER BY A MAJORITY OF THE FULL BOARD.
IF CONSIDERATION OF THE BYLAWS IS POSTPONED TO A REGULAR MEETING, WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENED TONIGHT.
THE BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE WOULD BE AMENDED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE FULL BOARD AND THAT WAS MY INTERPRETATION IT WOULD TAKE A MAJORITY TO AMEND THEM.
BUT IT JUST MAKES IT CLEAR IN OUR BYLAWS THAT IF IT IS POSTPONED IT WOULD TAKE A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD TO AMEND THEM.
SECTION 13 B AFTER THE BYLAWS ARE ADOPTED ANNUALLY, THEY MAY BE SUSPENDED FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEM BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE FULL BOARD.
SO BASICALLY, THAT WOULD BE A MOTION BY THE FULL BOARD TO SUSPEND THE BYLAWS ON IT FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEM.
SUPPOSE YOU HAVE SOMEONE ABSENT THAT NIGHT.
THEN, ACCORDING TO THESE BYLAWS, THAT WON'T BE ALLOWED, SO I COULD CHANGE THAT LANGUAGE TO A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE BOARD PRESENT FOR THE MEETING, IF THAT'S PREFERABLE.
AS LONG AS YOU GET THREE? THIS SAYS FULL BOARD, SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE FIVE VOTES TO SUSPEND THE BYLAWS.
[02:25:04]
CONCERN I HAVE WITH THAT IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IF ONE BOARD MEMBER IS ABSENT, THAT ONE BOARD MEMBER IS NOT GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER VOICE HIS CONCERNS OR HIS OBJECTIONS.THE OTHER PART OF THAT, BYLAW, IS THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS IF WE DON'T HAVE THE FULL BOARD, IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY GO TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
IS THAT NOT STILL IN THERE? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT TIE VOTES? YEAH.
IF IT'S A TWO TO TWO VOTE AND ONE MEMBER IS ABSENT FROM THE MEETING IT AUTOMATICALLY GOES TO THE NEXT MEETING.
AND IF ONE MEMBER IS ABSENT NOW FOR IF YOU GO BACK TO PLANNING ISSUES, THAT'S HANDLED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
AND MY OBJECTIVE WAS TO TRY TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT AND KEEP IT SOMEWHAT IN LINE WITH ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
MY CONCERN ON THIS ONE IS, THOUGH THE BYLAWS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE NORMALLY TAKE LIGHTLY AND IT'S USUALLY SOME DISCUSSION AROUND IT.
IN THE PAST, WE'VE ALWAYS AGREED UNANIMOUSLY.
TAKE ONE PERSON OUT OF THE MIX, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO SUSTAIN OR NOT.
SO CURRENTLY THE BYLAWS STATE A TIE VOTE WOULD DEFEAT THE MOTION, PROVIDED ZONING CASES MUST BE DISPOSED OF BY A MAJORITY OF THOSE VOTING.
SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE FOR ZONING CASES YOU CAN'T HAVE A TIE VOTE.
BUT THEN IT SAYS IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE WHERE ONE MEMBER IS ABSENT, THAT'S WHEN THE MATTER IS AUTOMATICALLY ADDED TO THE BOARD'S NEXT AGENDA.
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS OUR QUESTION, THOUGH, IF I MAY.
THE QUESTION WAS WITH WHERE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUSPENDING THE BYLAWS TO HEAR SOMETHING SPECIFIC AN THE ONE PERSON IS ABSENT, THEN WE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE FULL BOARD.
YOU'RE SAYING IF IT WAS A TWO TO TWO VOTE AND YOU WANTED TO.
AND IF THE FOUR OF US, THE OTHER FOUR I'M NOT HERE, THE OTHER FOUR PEOPLE HERE AND WANT TO SUSPEND THE BYLAWS, BUT I'M NOT HERE.
NOW IF SOMEONE'S CALLING IN BY PHONE, THEY'RE CONSIDERED PRESENT.
IF YOU'RE NOT HERE, THEN NO, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CONSIDER SUSPENDING THE BYLAWS.
IT ALSO STATES THE BYLAWS AND RULES AND PROCEDURES MAY BE AMENDED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE CALENDAR YEAR BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
SO ANY ITEMS THAT AREN'T VOTED ON TONIGHT BY THE MAJORITY VOTE, LET'S SAY THE NEXT MEETING, THERE'S ANOTHER ITEM THAT YOU WANT TO CHANGE IN THE BYLAWS, THEN THAT WOULD REQUIRE A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE FULL BOARD.
SO TO AMEND THE VOTE, TO AMEND THE BYLAWS AFTER A NIGHT OR TO WAIVE THE BYLAWS REQUIRES THE WHOLE BOARD'S UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ME PERSONALLY, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE THE WHOLE BOARD IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ANY ONE TIME EXCEPTIONS.
YEAH, YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
SO I KNOW THE ONE CHANGE THAT WAS SUGGESTED WAS THE ALPHABETICAL ORDER INSTEAD OF SENIORITY.
I THOUGHT, I HEARD YOU SAY THOUGH ALPHABETICALLY.
WITH DRAWING STRAWS JUST RIGHT.
YEAH, IT WAS SENIORITY AND ALPHABETICAL.
RIGHT? WERE THERE ANY OTHER SUGGESTED CHANGES? WELL, THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAVE.
WOULD IT EVER PROPOSE A PROBLEM IF THE CHAIRPERSON IT GOES OUT OF OFFICE DECEMBER 31ST , AND I KNOW WE'D NORMALLY HAVE REORGANIZATION MEETING SOON AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR.
DO YOU THERE WOULD EVER BE A SITUATION WHERE THE CHAIRMAN OR CHAIRPERSON WOULD HAVE TO SIGN SOMETHING ON THE FIRST OR SECOND OR.
SO IT STATES THAT THE LONGEST SERVING BOARD MEMBER SERVES AS CHAIR IN THAT CASE.
YEAH, THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THERE.
IF YOU HAVE, YOU'RE CANCELING A MEETING BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER ISSUE CHAIR NEEDS TO SIGN SOME KIND OF CONTRACT OR REAL ESTATE DEED, THEN IT WOULD BE THE LONGEST.
WOULD BE THE LONGEST SERVING BOARD MEMBER.
ALL RIGHT THAT'S COVERED THEN.
I'M GOOD WITH LIKE THEY ARE WITH THAT ONE CHANGE THAT.
I KNOW THE QUESTION CAME UP ABOUT WHEN THERE WAS A TIE VOTE, AND IT GOES TO THE NEXT BOARD MEETING THAT YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
WAS THERE ANY DESIRE TO BE ABLE TO AMEND THE MOTION OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST HAVE IT WHERE YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION THAT WAS ON THE BOARD THAT LED TO THE TIE VOTE? I THINK IT SHOULD BE ON THE ORIGINAL.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE THE ORIGINAL MOTION AS WELL.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ONLY CHANGE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS CHANGING IT TO IT WOULD BE BASED ON BOTH SENIORITY AND ALPHABETICAL ORDER.
[02:30:01]
AND OTHER THAN THAT CORRECT? MM HMM.I BROUGHT A WHOLE BOX TONIGHT, TOO SO.
[LAUGHTER] WELL, THAT'S ALL I HAD.
SO WE JUST REQUIRE A MOTION, OK, BECAUSE AMENDED.
ACTUALLY THERE'S A RESOLUTION HERE.
AND YOU WOULD JUST NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ACCEPT THE RESOLUTION WITH THE CHANGES PRESENTED.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. BROWN? YES.
NOW WE HAVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A ONE
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
TIME WAIVER OF SECTION SO-AND-SO OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF PRINCE GEORGE, VIRGINIA MR. HALTOM.GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR. STOKE AND MR. WHITTEN.
AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A REQUEST TO ADVERTISE A PUBLIC HEARING TO AUTHORIZE THE WAIVING OF THE UTILITY CODE TO ALLOW A PRIVATE WELL AND SEPTIC ON A PARCEL ALONG CHUDOBA PARKWAY.
LANDMARK INDUSTRIAL INTENDS TO BUILD A THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT FACILITY IN THE BUSINESS PARK, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF BEING ABLE TO SERVE THEM WHILE WE ARE OUT OF CAPACITY FOR BOTH WATER AND WASTEWATER TO SERVE THIS PARCEL.
THE LANDMARK HAS REQUESTED AND OBVIOUSLY THEY CAN'T MOVE FORWARD UNTIL THEY IDENTIFY RELIABLE SOURCES OF WATER AND THE COLLECTION SYSTEM.
SO UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY IN OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS, THEY HAVE REQUESTED THAT WE ISSUE A WAIVER TO ALLOW THEM TO INSTALL A WELL, A PRIVATE WELL AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES TO BE ABLE TO SERVE THEIR FACILITIES.
AND ONCE WE CAN PROVIDE THEM WATER, WOULD THEY ABANDON THAT? CORRECT.
AFTER THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE TO THE COUNTY SYSTEM, THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONNECT.
THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT AS PART OF THIS REQUEST, BUT ALLOWING THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PRIVATE FACILITIES ALLOWS THE COUNTY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE NEW BUSINESS.
SHOULD WE NOT BE ABLE TO SERVE THEM IN TIME WHEN IF [INAUDIBLE] THEIR SYSTEM IS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO US, ALLOWING OUR IMPROVEMENTS TO BE COMPLETED? SO WE ARE REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FEBRUARY 22ND MEETING, AND THAT'S TO WAIVE THE COUNTY CODE SECTION 82-311 A.
AND AGAIN, BOTH OF THOSE SECTIONS PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF A PRIVATE WELL OR SEWER FACILITIES FOR DISPOSAL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RESOLUTION.
I HAVE A QUESTION IF YOU DON'T MIND.
JUST REAL QUICK, MR. HALTOM, ONCE WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AVAILABLE, AND YOU SAID THEY WOULD CONNECT.
IS THERE A CONNECTION [INAUDIBLE]? THAT FEE BE WAIVED.
THAT IS NOT WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED AT THIS TIME.
IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO COME BACK AND ASK A WAIVER OF THE CONNECTION FEES.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD.
AND I'M SURE THEY WILL AFTER THEY PUT THE MONEY SPEAKERS] SINCE THEY'VE INVESTED MONEY IN THEIR OWN.
YEAH, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING.
MR. HUNTER, YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH YOUR MOTION? I WILL.
I MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED.
MOTIONS BEEN PUT FORWARD AND SECONDED.
MR. HUNTER, YES, MRS. WAYMACK.
OUR NEXT RESOLUTION IS AWARD OF CONTRACT.
GOOD EVENING, MRS. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MR., STOKE MR., WHITTEN.
MS. DREWRY HAS DONE ALL MY HARD WORK TONIGHT ALREADY, SO ANYHOW.
[LAUGHTER] STOLE YOUR THUNDER.
WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS THE BOARD TAKE ACTION AND GIVE THE INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR PERMISSION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH LOCKRIDGE COMPANY FOR TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED AND NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE EXPANSION AND RENOVATION, AND ALSO AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE THE
[02:35:06]
BUILDING CONTRACT WITH [INAUDIBLE] TANGO NOT TO EXCEED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR THE ARCHITECT AND CONSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE FLEET GARAGE EXTENSION.THAT'S THERE'S TWO RESOLUTIONS IN HERE.
ONE IS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND ONE IS FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THE ENGINEERING AND SERVICES THAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT.
NOT FROM ME? IT ISN'T LIKE IS LOCKRIDGE, THE SAME COMPANY THAT'S DOING THE SCHOOL.
OK, I THOUGHT I'D HEARD THAT NAME BEFORE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NO DISCUSSION I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT.
OK? WOULD YOU MAKE A MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD AND SECONDED.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL MRS. KNOTT.
AND MADAM CHAIR, WE ACTUALLY NEED TWO MOTIONS, ONE FOR THE AWARD, WHICH I THINK YOU JUST DID, AND THEN A SEPARATE MOTION FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION.
THE RESOLUTION HAS BEEN APPROVED AND SECONDED.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FOR THAT RESOLUTION.
THE NEXT RESOLUTION IS APPROPRIATION FOR CORONAVIRUS EMERGENCY RELIEF TECHNOLOGY GRANT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY.
YES, MA'AM, GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MADAM CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS.
OUR COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY, SUSAN FIERO, APPLIED THROUGH DCJS FOR A TECHNOLOGY GRANT FOR SOME SPECIAL FUNDING THAT THEY WERE OFFERING UP FOR PANDEMIC RESPONSE.
SHE WROTE A GRANT AND WAS AWARDED FIVE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS FROM DCJS TO PURCHASE VARIOUS TECHNOLOGY ITEMS TO ALLOW CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS AND WITHIN HER OFFICE AS THEY STILL NAVIGATE PANDEMIC RESPONSE.
SO WE ARE ASKING THIS EVENING FOR YOU TO APPROVE THE APPROPRIATION OF FIVE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I HAVE A STATEMENT, AND THAT IS TO BE CONSISTENT, THOUGH, WITH ANY OTHER PERSON THAT DOES A GRANT.
THEY NORMALLY COME TO THE BOARD FIRST AND DESCRIBE THAT GRANT STATE WHETHER THERE'S MATCHING OR NON MATCHING FUNDS.
SHOULDN'T WE BE DOING THE SAME THING? YES, SIR.
WE HAD THAT VERY CONVERSATION AT OUR MOST RECENT DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETING LAST WEEK.
AND WE WILL BE TIGHTENING UP THE PROCESS.
THERE IS NO LOCAL MATCH FOR THIS FUNDING.
WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE NEED TO.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY FOLLOWS THE SAME PATH.
ALL RIGHT DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION.
THE NEXT RESOLUTION IS AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF VIRGINIA BY AMENDING TO REMOVE THE TERM BRUSH FROM THE DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE.
YES, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I HAVE A SHORT POWERPOINT JUST BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE A SIMPLEISH CHANGE.
BUT IN CONTEXT, POWERPOINT MAKES IT A LITTLE EASIER TO UNDERSTAND.
SO BASICALLY, AT OUR LAST WORK SESSION, WE DISCUSSED THE ISSUE THAT CURRENTLY IN THE COUNTY, IF YOU'RE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BURN BRUSH ACCORDING TO OUR CODE.
SO THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, LIMBS SOME LEAVES.
SO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WAS TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE TO BASICALLY REMOVE THE TERM BRUSH FROM THE DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE.
WE'D BE AMENDING SECTION 66-1 OF THE COUNTY CODE, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT 66-81 OF THE CODE, IT STATES THAT IT'S UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON TO BURN SOLID WASTE.
[02:40:03]
SO THAT'S WHY IF WE ELIMINATE BRUSH FROM THAT DEFINITION, THEN YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BURN BRUSH IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY LEGAL TO BURN BRUSH IN THE A1 AND RA ZONING DISTRICTS.AND ACTUALLY, THE PENALTY IS A CLASS TWO MISDEMEANOR, SO IT IS A PRETTY HEFTY PENALTY IF YOU DO.
NOW, IF WE DO IF THE BOARD DOES APPROVE WHEN WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE BOARD DOES APPROVE THE CHANGE, OTHER COUNTY REGULATIONS STILL HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED AND SECTION 44-72 STATES.
AND WHEN YOU SET FIRE TO BRUSH, YOU STILL HAVE TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE CARE AND PRECAUTION, INCLUDING CUTTING AND PILING THE MATERIAL AND CLEARING AROUND THE MATERIAL TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF FIRE.
SO NOW THE QUESTION THAT HAS ARISEN IS UNDER THE IN THE A1 AND RA ZONING DISTRICTS 66-81 CURRENTLY REQUIRES A 50 FOOT SETBACK FROM AN OCCUPIED BUILDING ON A ABUTTING PROPERTY WHEN YOU BURN RUBBISH.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF RUBBISH, RUBBISH, IT INCLUDES PLANT GROWTH, WHICH WOULD BE BRUSH.
SO A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT TO 66-81, WHICH WE COULD ADVERTISE TONIGHT AS WELL, IF THE BOARD DESIRES WOULD BE TO STRIKE ZONE A1 AND RA AND BASICALLY IT WOULD APPLY TO EVERY ZONING DISTRICT THAT WHEN YOU BURN RUBBISH, IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 50 FEET AWAY FROM AN OCCUPIED BUILDING.
AND SO THAT MAY HELP ADDRESS THE PERSON'S CONCERN FROM PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THE PERSON WAS BURNING CLOSE TO HIS PROPERTY.
SO IT'S UP TO THE BOARD IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THAT CHANGE AS WELL.
THE SETBACK CHANGE, BUT WE COULD ADVERTISE BOTH TONIGHT OR WE COULD JUST ADVERTISE THE DEFINITION CHANGE.
WERE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE ONE, MADAM CHAIR.
BASED ON THE INPUT I HEARD TONIGHT, I'M NOT EVEN SURE THAT A 50 FOOT FROM AN R2 ZONE.
YOU STILL CAN'T CONTROL THE SMOKE OR THE ASH OR STUFF THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S TRAVELING THROUGH THE AIR, SETTLING ON PROPERTY NEXT DOOR.
I MEAN, BASED ON WHAT I HEARD TONIGHT, I REALLY PROBABLY NEED TO THINK SOME MORE ON IT BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY BE LOOKING AT BASED ON THE ZONE, HOW CLOSE OUR HOUSE IS TO ONE ANOTHER IN LIKE AN R2 IF THEY'RE THAT CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER.
I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU 50 FEET IS APPROPRIATE VERSUS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE IN A DIFFERENT ZONE WHERE YOU'RE ON THE FIVE ACRES OF PROPERTY OR AN ACRE OF PROPERTY, IT MAY BE DIFFERENT.
BUT THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST MY CONCERN THAT I DON'T FEEL THIS ADEQUATELY ADDRESSES THE CONCERN THAT I HEARD TONIGHT.
THE OTHER OPTION YOU COULD HAVE MINIMUM ACREAGE FOR BURNING, SO YOU COULD SAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ACRE IN ORDER TO BURN BRUSH.
I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH SETTING A MINIMUM ACREAGE BECAUSE FROM WHAT I HEARD OF THE SIZE OF THE BRUSH THAT THIS PERSON IS BURNING, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE CUTTING A BRANCH OUT OF AN APPLE TREE, RIGHT? [LAUGHTER] YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT 80 FOOT PINE TREES AND STUFF IN, THAT TIGHT, CONFINED SPACE.
I JUST AGAIN FROM WHAT I HEARD TONIGHT, WHAT I'VE SEEN SO FAR DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT.
I MEAN, IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD I COULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND PRESENT SOME CHANGES TO THAT EFFECT.
I DEALT WITH SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS A WHILE BACK OFF OF OLD SAGE ROAD WITH A GENTLEMAN AND THE PERSON IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE WAS ACTUALLY HAULING WOOD INTO BURN IT.
AND THERE IS AN ORDINANCE THAT PREVENTS PEOPLE FROM DOING THAT, IF IN CASE THESE ARE SOME PRETTY LARGE TREES, SO IS IT COMING OFF OF HIS PROPERTY OR IS HE BRINGING THEM IN.
IF YOU'RE BRINGING THEM IN TO SPLIT THEM, TO USE IT IN A WOOD STOVE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, EVERYBODY DOES THAT IN THE COUNTY, EVERYBODY HAS GOT A WOOD STOVE IN THE GARAGE OR HEATS THEIR HOUSE WITH IT.
BUT AND MS. WALTON HAD SHARED WITH ME, I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S AN ORDINANCE OUT THERE ON THE CODE COMPLIANCE THAT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAUL BRUSH IN FROM ANOTHER SITE AND BURN IT ON YOUR SITE.
OK, I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, ALSO YOU COULD END UP NEEDING A PERMIT IF IT'S LIKE A FIREWOOD TYPE LIKE IF YOU'RE CHOPPING UP WOOD I KNOW THERE'S SOME.
I'M SAYING TO SELL FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES.
BUT WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THE TREES IN THAT PICTURE, THEY'RE AT LEAST 18 TO 20 INCHES TALL.
IT LOOKS LIKE PINE, WHICH THAT WOULD PUT OUT A LOT OF SMOKE, AND IT DOESN'T GIVE A LOT OF BTU'S ANYWAY.
SO ARE THEY MY FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE, ARE THEY COMING FROM ANOTHER
[02:45:03]
LOCALITY? AND THEY'RE BRINGING IT INTO HIS PROPERTY AND BURNING? DOES HE OWN A TREE SERVICE OR WHAT? WHERE ARE THEY COMING FROM? THE COMPLAINT I RECEIVED FROM THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE EARLIER WAS THAT THEY WERE BEING BROUGHT FROM ANOTHER COUNTY.IF YOU WOULD, COULD YOU CHECK WITH MS. WALTON? BECAUSE I'M PRETTY SURE WE GOT A CODE COMPLIANCE THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE AT THAT GAS CLEARLY ABUSING.
BROWN'S POINT, IF WE'VE GOT SOMEBODY THAT'S BURNING A LOT OF BRUSH OR SOMETHING, AND YOU'RE IN A SUBDIVISION ON A HALF ACRE, WHATEVER, WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THAT, BUT I JUST THINK WE OUGHT TO BE CAREFUL.
HELL, YOU GO IN THE CITY, YOU SEE PEOPLE BURN LEAVES IN A DITCH.
THESE ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY BY ONE SEVENTY FIVE LOTS AIN'T CUTTING IT.
I COULD SEE WHERE THERE COULD PROBABLY BE A PROBLEM.
AND WOULDN'T IT BE A CIVIL SUIT IF YOU BURNT WOOD ON YOUR PROPERTY AND THE ASHES FLOATED AND LANDED ON MY VEHICLE AND DAMAGED IT.
IT'D BE A NUISANCE TYPE ACTION.
BUT IT WOULD IT BE A CIVIL RIGHT? OK, SO THERE'S ANOTHER AVENUE NOT TRYING TO DISCOUNT WHAT THE GENTLEMAN'S CONCERNS ARE, BECAUSE I'D BE MADDER THAN A HORNET, IF IT WAS HAPPENING TO MINE.
BUT I DO KNOW OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT WENT OUT THIS WEEK TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION TO LOOK AT IT AND TALK TO THE OWNER.
SO WE ARE THE COUNTY IS ADDRESSING THE ISSUE.
IF I'M WRONG, I'LL STAND CORRECTED.
BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT'S HOW WE DEALT WITH IT ON OLD SAGE.
I JUST THINK IT'S A LITTLE PREMATURE TO TRY TO PUSH FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A CHANGE THAT WE AREN'T REALLY SURE YET ON.
THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING, I THINK.
LET'S HEAR SOME MORE ABOUT IT.
OR I CAN COME UP WITH SOME OPTIONS.
I MEAN, I THINK ANOTHER VIABLE YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE AN EXEMPTION FOR FIRE PITS IF SOMEONE JUST HAS A SMALL THREE FOOT FOUR FOOT FIRE PIT.
THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED EVEN IF YOU HAVE I MEAN, I HAVE A THIRD OF AN ACRE.
I HAVE A FIRE PIT SO I CAN COME UP WITH SOME DIFFERENT LANGUAGE THAT I CAN PRESENT AT THE NEXT MEETING.
SO WOULD WE JUST POSTPONE THIS ONE THEN.
WE CAN POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING.
IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD, AND I CAN COME UP WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS.
OK WOULD BE READY THE NEXT MEETING? WELL, I WOULD JUST ASK IF WE POSTPONE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
CAN WE TAKE THIS BACK AS A WORK SESSION ITEM? WELL, YOU COULD JUST TAKE NO ACTION ON THAT ITEM TONIGHT.
I THINK IF WE START TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S IN PLACE AND THEN WE START TALKING ABOUT OFFSETS OF MINIMUM ACREAGE, THAT COULD BE A WHOLE MEETING IN ITSELF.
I THINK IT'S BETTER THAT WOULD COME BACK TO A WORK SESSION.
SO WE WANT TO BRING IT BACK AS A WORK SESSION ITEM.
HE'S SAYING TAKE NO ACTION TONIGHT.
OR, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE A MOTION IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK AS A WORK SESSION ITEM, THAT'D BE EFFECTIVE AS WELL.
SO WOULD YOU WANT SOMEBODY TO DO THAT.
IS THAT OUR WORK SESSION FEBRUARY 8TH.
YEAH, WE WOULD HAVE A WORK SESSION.
NOW OUR NEXT RESOLUTION CONFIRMS AN AGREEMENT FOR MUTUAL AID, RADIO PATCH AND RADIO PROGRAMING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CITY OF PETERSBURG AND THE COUNTY OF PRINCE GEORGE.
YES, THIS IS AN AGREEMENT THAT CAPTAIN TAYLOR AND MR. HUNTER BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.
THIS WOULD HELP BETWEEN THE COMMUNICATION CENTER AND PRINCE GEORGE, AND THE COMMUNICATION CENTER IN PETERSBURG IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE AGREEMENT WE HAVE IN HOPEWELL.
AND IT JUST ALLOWS THE DIFFERENT CENTERS TO TALK TO EACH OTHER.
SO THIS JUST HAS AN AGREEMENT TO DETAIL ALL THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF PETERSBURG AND THE COUNTY OF PRINCE GEORGE.
IT'S PRETTY STANDARD LANGUAGE.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AGREEMENT, I CAN ANSWER THOSE.
NO, I'M FINE, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD.
AND THE SECOND SO CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
THE NEXT ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF ABC LICENSE APPLICATION FOR DISPUTANTA SHELL.
YES, WE RECEIVED AN ABC LICENSE APPLICATION FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED ON COUNTY DRIVE IN DISPUTANTA.
AND PER THE CODE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS UP TO 30 DAYS TO STATE IF THEY
[02:50:06]
APPROVE THE APPLICATION, THEY SUGGEST DENYING THE APPLICATION OR THEY WOULD APPROVE THE CONDITIONS, OR THEY COULD TAKE NO ACTION.USUALLY IN THE PAST WE HAVE NOT TAKEN ANY ACTION.
I DID TALK TO MAJOR YOUNG WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THIS APPLICATION.
THIS IS FOR A WINE AND BEER OFF PREMISE.
I BELIEVE IT'S AN EXISTING FACILITY.
BUT I BELIEVE IT'S A NEW OWNER IS WHY THEY REQUIRED IT.
I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE THAT TOO.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE COMPANY NAME WHO OWNS A FUEL BOUGHT OUT THE PREVIOUS OWNERS IS WHY AND ABC PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
OH WELL, WHAT WE CAN GENERALLY DO IS TAKE NO ACTION.
THE NEXT ITEM IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS.
AND 7A IS RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT OF TWO BOARD MEMBERS FOR EXPENSE REPORT REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND COUNTY CLERK.
MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT MR. BROWN, MR. WEBB CONTINUED IN THAT APPOINTMENT.
AND I'LL SECOND THAT ALL RIGHT.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD AND SECONDED.
COULD I HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? MR. WEBB.
THE RESOLUTION IS PASSED, THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.
THE VERY LAST RESOLUTION IS TO AUTHORIZE THE FIRE AND EMS DEPARTMENT TO COMPLETE AND SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION TO FEMA FOR SAFER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION.
SAVING THE BEST FOR LAST, I APPRECIATE THAT.
YES, WE'RE LOOKING TO APPLY FOR THE SAFER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION GRANT AND FIRST LET ME HUMBLE MYSELF BEFORE YOU ON THE DELAYED AMOUNT OF TIME THAT I'VE BEEN GIVEN TO DO THIS SO FOR THAT, I CANNOT APOLOGIZE ENOUGH.
THE GRANT CAME OUT ON JANUARY 4TH.
I FOUND OUT ABOUT IT SHORTLY THEREAFTER AND WE HAVE UNTIL FEBRUARY 4TH, WHICH IS WHY THE RUSH SO I CANNOT APOLOGIZE ENOUGH FOR HAVING THIS SHORT TIME.
BUT THE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION GRANT THAT WE'RE SEEKING, YOU GUYS MAY BE FAMILIAR.
WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD A RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION GRANT IN PROGRESS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS THAT IS SET TO EXPIRE IN MAY.
IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, ALL THE MONEYS HAVE TO BE EXPENDED.
AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE A FIREFIGHTER PROGRAM THAT WE WILL BE STARTING IN JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS, AND THAT SHOULD LINE THAT UP FOR THE VOLUNTEER.
SO THE ONE THAT WE'RE SEEKING THIS TIME, IT IS IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,000 DOLLARS AND THERE IS NO MATCH FROM THE COUNTY.
WE ALREADY HAVE POSITIONS IN PLACE ALREADY, SO THERE IS ABSOLUTELY PLEASE CORRECT ME, MS .
BETSY IF I'M WRONG, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE COUNTY IF WE GET AWARDED THIS.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A POSITION.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR A CONTINUATION OF IT AND WHAT THIS WILL END UP DOING IF AWARDED THIS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION GRANT, DEVELOP AND GROW OUR VOLUNTEERS, AND WE'RE GOING TO ADD ON THE TRAINING.
SO IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD THIS GRANT GOING AND WE'VE DONE VERY WELL IN THE RECRUITMENT.
OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS SINCE 2017, EXCUSE ME, SINCE 2017 TO 20 WE WERE AVERAGING 30 NEW VOLUNTEERS PER YEAR.
I AM HAPPY TO SAY THAT WITH SOME OF THE MEASURES WE PUT IN PLACE AN THE DILIGENT EFFORT THAT LIEUTENANT KORN HAS DONE IN MY TIME HERE, WE HAVE INCREASED THAT NUMBER BY 20 PERCENT IN JUST SIX MONTHS.
YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THE COMMERCIAL ON THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY FUNDED DUE TO THE SAFER GRANT THAT WE HAD FOR RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION.
SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO WITH THIS GRANT IS FOCUS ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OR RECRUITMENT, BUT MORE ON RETENTION.
WE HAVE NOT DONE MUCH FOR THE RETENTION SIDE OF THE VOLUNTEERS.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON RECRUITMENT.
BUT WHAT I WANT TO FOCUS ON ON THIS GRANT IS TO GET BACK TO SOME OF THE BASICS AND WORK MORE ON THE RETENTION ASPECT AND PROVIDING TRAINING FOR OUR MEMBERS IN BOTH FIRE GROUND TACTICS, OPERATIONS, INCIDENT COMMAND AND SPECIALIZED COURSES THAT ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO GET CERTIFICATION PROCESSES THAT CAN BE SOMEWHAT DIFFICULT TO GET AND HOUSE THOSE PROGRAMS HERE IN THE COUNTY.
THIS GRANT, THE RECRUITMENT EFFORTS BE MADE.
I BELIEVE IT IS A THREE YEAR GRANT EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND.
[02:55:05]
AND THE REASON WHY WE CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER IS I'M LOOKING FOR LEADERSHIP CLASSES, FIRE OFFICERS ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR.AND I'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY SPOKEN WITH VARIOUS INSTRUCTORS THAT ARE PRO BOARD CERTIFIED THAT CAN ACTUALLY TEACH THESE PROGRAMS FOR US, AND IT WILL COST US ROUGHLY ABOUT 800 TO $1000 PER STUDENT.
SO THAT'S WHY THIS GRANT IS IN THE AMOUNT OF BASICALLY WHAT IT WAS LAST TIME, ONLY WE'RE JUST NOT ASKING FOR ANY POSITIONS.
IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS I WOULD SO MOVE THAT WE AUTHORIZE FIRE AND EMS TO APPLY FOR THIS GRANT.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? MR. WEBB.
I BELIEVE THAT THIS COVERS ALL THE BUSINESS UNLESS THERE'S OTHER BUSINESS TO BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I DON'T KNOW WHO JUMPED IN IT, BUT WHOEVER QUIT.
[LAUGHTER] PLEASE CALL THE ROLL MRS. IS KNOTT.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.