[00:00:04]
>> GOOD EVENING. TODAY IS MAY 27.
[A. Call to Order (6:00 pm)]
IT IS NOW 6:00 PM.IT IS NOW TIME FOR OUR REGULAR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING, AND WE'LL START WITH MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> NEXT, WE HAVE THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.
AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA.
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. PUGH AND SECOND BY MR. COX THAT WE WOULD ADOPT THE AGENDA AS SO STATED.
YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> MOTION CARRIED. NEXT, WE'LL MOVE INTO THE BUSINESS PART OF THE MEETING.
[B. Business Meeting]
MRS. WAYMACK, WILL DO THE BOARD'S INVOCATION, AND THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MR. COX, WHO WILL DO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.>> OUR MOST GRACIOUS HEAVENLY FATHER.
WE THANK YOU FOR OUR MANY BLESSINGS YOU HAVE PROVIDED.
YOU HAVE PROTECTED US FROM MANY CALAMITOUS EVENTS, AND WE ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE TO PROTECT US.
FATHER, WE ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE TO GUIDE THIS BOARD AS WE STRIVE TO PROVIDE FOR THE NEEDS OF OUR CITIZENS.
FATHER, PLEASE KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THIS BOARD.
GUIDE US TO DO THE RIGHT THING, IN YOUR HOLY NAME, WE PRAY AMEN.
>> THANK YOU TO MRS. WAYMACK FOR THE BOARD'S INVOCATION, AND THANK YOU TO MR. COX FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT'S NOW TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU'LL HAVE 3 MINUTES.
YOU WOULD APPROACH THE DAIS THERE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
AGAIN, THE RULES AROUND IT IS YOU EITHER HAVE TO BE A RESIDENT OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY OR YOU OWN PROPERTY HERE IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
YOU SHOULD NOT SPEAK ON ANYTHING THAT'S PART OF A PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION.
MRS. KNOTT, IS THERE ANYONE WHO HAS SIGNED UP FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE ROOM THAT HAS A MATTER THEY'D LIKE TO BRING TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION OTHER THAN THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE?
>> JAMES KELLER, 1357 BUTLER BRANCH ROAD.
I'LL OFFER THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ABOUT THE INFORMATION PRESENTED BY VISION FROM THE BOARD'S MEETING ON MAY 6TH, THEIR BUDGET WORK SESSION.
MR. CUNNINGHAM TOLD THE BOARD THERE WERE ISSUES WITH WORKING PAPERS, BUT HE DID NOT THINK THEY COULD MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ON THAT, AND VISION PROVIDED THE WORKING PAPERS AND COMPLETE SALES FILE TO ANY CITIZEN WHO REQUESTED THE INFORMATION.
WELL, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WOULD MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY.
WE WOULD MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY IF VISION WERE TO DEFINE THE VARIABLES USED IN THEIR CALCULATIONS ALONG WITH AN EXPLANATION THEY USED AND WHERE THEY CAME FROM.
THE COMPLETE SALES FILE THAT WAS SENT TO ME WITHOUT A SHRED OF DOCUMENTATION OR EXPLANATION HOW THESE DATA WERE USED TO DETERMINE VARIOUS MODEL PARAMETERS.
MY INFORMAL REVIEW BRIEFER TOLD ME THE SALES FILE CONTAINED ONLY DATA ABOUT LAND AND NOTHING ABOUT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LAND.
PROPERTY OWNERS APPEALING THEIR ASSESSMENTS BEFORE THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ARE REQUIRED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE OF MISTAKES OR MISCALCULATIONS.
HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY MAKE OUR CASE IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE VARIABLES ARE, HOW THEY WERE DERIVED, AND HOW THEY WERE USED? THE MATERIALS PROVIDED BY VISION DID NOT SATISFY THE LAW'S EXPLICIT REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN EXPLANATION FOR THE INCREASE IN THE PROPERTY'S ASSESSED VALUE.
HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY MAKE OUR CASE IF WE DON'T HAVE A WRITTEN EXPLANATION TO EVALUATE? MR. ATKINSON TOLD THE BOARD, VISION TRIES TO MAKE THIS A TRANSPARENT PROCESS, AND THEY DO NOT KNOW HOW TO INCLUDE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
YET PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IS RECOMMENDED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ASSESSING OFFICERS OF WHICH VISION IS A MEMBER AND CLAIM TO ADHERE TO THEIR STANDARDS.
[00:05:01]
IN MY OPINION, THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR NOT ENGAGING THE PUBLIC, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE REPLACEMENT COST MODEL METHOD, WHICH, BY THE WAY, IAAO RECOMMENDS THAT MODEL FOR ASSESSING NEW CONSTRUCTION.SHOULD THE COUNTY DECIDE TO STAY WITH A THIRD PARTY VENDOR FOR FUTURE ASSESSMENTS, THEN THEY SHOULD LOOK FOR ONE WHO DOES KNOW HOW TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC.
MR. CUNNINGHAM, RESPONDING TO SUPERVISOR'S WEB QUESTION ABOUT WHAT CONSTITUTES WORKING PAPERS, HE TOLD THE BOARD THEY INCLUDED PROPERTY RECORD CARDS, FORMULAS, COMPLETE LIST OF SALES AND PROCEDURES GUIDES, WHICH INCLUDE ALL THE TABLES USED IN THE MATHEMATICAL FORMULAS.
YET I'VE WORKED WITH THESE DATA FROM THE COMPLETE LIST OF SALES AND HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO BACK OUT VALUES FOR VARIOUS BUILDING STYLES.
THE 60 PAGE PROCEDURES GUIDE DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY DEFINITIONS OF THE COST MODEL PARAMETERS, SUCH AS EFFECTIVE AREA, SIZE ADJUSTMENT, PERCENT GOOD, AND DEPRECIATION USED TO CALCULATE ASSESSMENTS OR ANY INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THEY WERE DERIVED.
MR. CUNNINGHAM, RESPONDING TO CHAIRMAN BROWN'S OBSERVATION ABOUT THE LACK OF A SPECIFIC EXPLANATION ABOUT HOW ASSESSMENTS WERE DETERMINED, VISION HAS TRIED MULTIPLE APPROACHES BECAUSE THEY HAVE RECEIVED COMPLAINTS FROM BOTH ENDS.
SOME CLAIM IT'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION, WHILE OTHERS COMPLAIN IT'S TOO MUCH.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT IF COUNTY TAXPAYERS DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.
CUNNINGHAM, ABOUT HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT EXPLAINING TO 15,000 PROPERTY OWNERS HOW THE RE APPRAISALS WAS NOT PART OF THE SCOPE, BESIDES THE HYPERBOLE ABOUT THE 15,000 PROPERTY OWNERS.
I'M ALMOST DONE. THE VISION AS A DE FACTO ASSESSOR FOR PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY IS ANSWERABLE TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS THE SAME WAY THE COUNTY EMPLOYEE IN THE ROLE OF COUNTY ASSESSOR WOULD BE.
MAYBE IF VISION HAD DONE A BETTER JOB EXPLAINING THE PROCESS UPFRONT AND PRODUCING MATERIALS CLEARLY EXPLAINING WHAT THEY WERE DOING UP FRONT, EXPLAINING HOW TO FOLLOW ALONG AND FIGURE OUT ONE'S ASSESSMENT UP FRONT, WE WOULDN'T BE IN THE MESS WE ARE TODAY.
>> MR. LUDLOW WAS GIVEN A SIGN ON THE INTERNET.
HE CAN'T HEAR. IF YOU COULD CHECK ON THAT BECAUSE ONE OF OUR CAN'T HEAR IT, SO I'M GOING TO BRING THAT UP.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'LL GET AN EXTRA MINUTE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT PAL CREEK AGAIN.
THAT SPECIAL ACCESSION WAS APPROVED BY THIS BOARD JULY 12TH, 2022.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO START CONSTRUCTION IN QUARTER 1 OF 2024, LASTING SIX MONTHS AND BE COMPLETE BY Q3 OF 2024.
THE CURRENT APPLICANT KNEW THE TIME LIMITS.
2022 WAS TWO YEARS, 10 MONTHS, 15 DAYS AGO.
THEY STILL DON'T HAVE AN APPROVED PLAN OF ACTION TO MOVE FORWARD.
OVER A YEAR AFTER THAT SPECIAL APPROVAL, A SITE PLAN WAS SUBMITTED ON 9/30.
A MONTH LATER, THEY PUBLICLY REPORTED IN THE PRESS PURCHASING FOUR OTHER SOLAR FACILITIES, ALL OF WHICH WERE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE IN 2024.
STILL NO APPROVAL, STILL NO CONSTRUCTION TO DATE.
YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE ON IT LATER TONIGHT.
COUNTY STAFF CORRECTLY NOTES IN TONIGHT'S ISSUE ANALYSIS THAT THE CODE OF VIRGINIA STATES A DEADLINE MAY BE EXTENDED.
IT DOESN'T SAY IT'S MANDATORY.
YOU KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS.
IF AFTER 1,000 SOME DAYS SUMMIT IS NOT SERIOUS ENOUGH TO FOLLOW THE REQUIREMENTS THEY AGREED TO, MEANING THE TIME LIMITS THEY SIGNED UP FOR, THEY ARE SIMPLY NOT A GOOD PARTNER FOR THIS COUNTY.
THEY'RE NOT BELIEVABLE. THEY'RE NOT CREDIBLE. THEY DON'T BELONG HERE.
I'M GOING TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT EXTEND THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO. APRIL 22ND, THIS BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY, I MIGHT ADD, ALL FIVE OF YOU TO LIMIT SOLAR, SORRY, I LOSE THEM A PLACE HERE.
APRIL 22ND, YOU PASSED A RESOLUTION TO LIMIT SOLAR TO THE APPROVED SITES.
THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION TO FILE AN APPROVED PLAN.
THEY DON'T HAVE ONE. YOU DON'T NEED TO EXTEND THIS.
MAY 1ST, JUST A WEEK AFTER YOU MADE YOUR VOTE IS WHEN THEY PUT IN THEIR REQUESTS FOR THIS EXTENSION.
IF THEY WANTED THIS EXTENSION, THEY HAD 150 DAYS TO ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.
[00:10:02]
THIS AIN'T OUR MONKEYS AND THIS AIN'T OUR CIRCUS.WE DON'T HAVE TO PLAY THIS GAME WITH THESE PEOPLE.
IN CONCLUSION, WHAT I'M ASKING, THIS BOARD BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR VOTE ON APRIL 22ND.
JUST 35 DAYS AGO, YOU VOTED AND CARED UNANIMOUSLY TO LIMIT SOLAR TO EXISTING PLAN AND APPROVED SITES.
KILL THIS PIG. KILL IT, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> JUSTIN NOBLIN, 8724 CENTENNIAL.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COUNTY FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS ON HELPING WITH THESE ASSESSMENTS AND GIVEN A CITIZEN PERSPECTIVE ON IT.
I HAVE FOUND NUMEROUS ERRORS THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO ENTERTAIN AND LOOK AT AND ON LAST REPORT WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, BASED ON THE INFORMATION I GAVE THEM, THEY'VE CORRECTED 2,200 PARCELS THAT WERE INCORRECT.
AS OF TODAY, LOOKING AT THE GIS SYSTEM, THEY HAVE CORRECTED SEVERAL THOUSAND THAT WE POINTED OUT TWO WEEKS AGO THAT WERE BEING DEFAULTED 0-1.
THEY NOW HAVE THE CORRECT ACREAGE LABELED ON EACH PROPERTY, AND I CHECKED OVER 200 TODAY.
I SPOT CHECKED ALL THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY ON ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I SAW THAT USED TO HAVE A ZERO ON THEIR ACREAGE AND DEFAULTED TO ONE, WHICH WAS CAUSING AN OVERTAX OF 30-50,000 PER PROPERTY.
I DO APPLAUD THE COUNTY IN GETTING WITH VISION AND GETTING THOSE CORRECTED.
THE OTHER MAJOR ISSUE THAT WE HAD THAT I REPORTED THAT IS STILL A MAJOR ISSUE THAT HAS NOT BEEN CORRECTED IS THE FOUNDATIONAL VALUES ON THESE NEIGHBORHOODS OR DISTRICTS.
WE HAVE 49 RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND MOST OF THEM ARE WRONG.
SOME ARE LOW, SOME ARE HIGH, BUT WE'VE GOT ISSUES WITH THEM NOT BEING CORRECT.
THEY SAY THAT THEY BASE THESE OFF OF COMPARISON PRICE AND SO I TOOK THE LIBERTY TO PULL COMPARISON PRICING FROM THE COUNTY FOR THE LAST TWO OR THREE YEARS.
IF YOU LOOK AT NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH AS RIVERS EDGE, THE SALES COMPS ARE ANYWHERE 218-325 WITH BEACHWOOD MANOR NEXT TO IT BEING 180-354.
YET RIVERS EDGE HAS LOT PRICES AT 84,000, AND BEACHWOOD MANORS AT 60,000, NOT EVEN CLOSE.
CEDAR CREEK, PRICES AT 350-460, STRATFORD WOODS, 145-288, YET STRATFORD WOODS LAND IS VALUED HIGHER THAN CEDAR CREEK.
IT'S AN ABSOLUTE JOKE THAT THEY THINK THOSE ARE VALUED THAT WAY.
AT THE SAME TIME, WHILE CEDAR CREEK IS 350-460, JORDAN ON THE JAMES IS 368-540, SLIGHTLY HIGHER, BUT COMPARABLE, AND JORDAN ON THE JAMES IS BEING VALUED AT 144,000 PER ACRE.
MORE THAN DOUBLE CEDAR CREEK, YET THEY HAVE SOMEWHAT COMPARABLE PRICING.
THIS IS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COUNTY.
WE HAVE 12,000 RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THIS COUNTY AND A TON OF THOSE HAVE MASSIVE ISSUES WITH THEIR FOUNDATIONAL VALUES.
THIS IS YOUR BEST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK.
THIS IS WHAT YOU CAN FIX TO ADJUST THE MAJORITY OF THE ASSESSMENTS AND GET THE MAJORITY OF THEM A LOT CLOSER TO WHERE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE ALREADY POINTED OUT THAT HOPEFULLY IS GETTING REMEDIED VERY SOON BEFORE YOU ALL ACCEPT THE ASSESSMENT. THANK YOU.
>> LEYLA MYERS 8711 2ND COURT DISPUTANA 23842.
BY NOW, YOU KNOW THAT PEOPLE HAD HIGH HOPES FOR THE THINGS TO GET BETTER IN THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, BUT THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS, WHICH SHOULD HAVE GIVEN US CONFIDENCE TURNED OUT TO BE A COMPLETE DISAPPOINTMENT.
WE ARE PAYING TO BE ROBBED BY THE CONTRACTOR YOU CHOSE, AND YOU ALLOWED TO FUNCTION FOR A YEAR WITHOUT ANY CHECKS OF THEIR WORK.
IF VISION IS A DE FACTO ASSESSOR IN A COUNTY, THEN MR. STOKES SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE ATTENTIVE TO THEIR WORK PERFORMANCE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
THE CONTRACT WAS AWARDED BACK IN MARCH 2024.
NOT TO BE CALLING PEOPLE OUT, STAFF OR ANYBODY BY NAME, YOUR STATEMENT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO ME, PLEASE.
IF YOU WANT TO SAY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THAT'S ONE THING. THANK YOU.
>> VISION CONTRACT WAS AWARDED IN MARCH 2024.
[00:15:03]
IT WAS DECIDED BASED ON A TWO PAGE LETTER PROMISES.VISION PROMISED YOU TO CONDUCT ON SITE INSPECTION OF UP TO 1,200 PROPERTIES.
THEY TOLD YOU LAST MONTH THEY ONLY VISITED ABOUT 100 PROPERTIES.
THE BOARD WAITED UNTIL THE 11TH HOUR TO EXPRESS DISSATISFACTION WITH THE VISION SERVICES.
>> THE RESIDENTS ARE PAYING TWICE OR THRICE FOR THIS BAD SERVICE? NO REFUNDS WILL EVER BE GIVEN TO THE RESIDENTS FOR HIGH TAXES COLLECTED BY THIS BOARD, USING INCORRECT ASSESSMENTS AND HIGH TAX RATE THAT THIS BOARD IS ABOUT TO SET? MR. HORN MIGHT NOT BE THE ASSESSOR, BUT ONE WOULD EXPECT, THAT HE HAS ENOUGH SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE TO INTERPRET VISION'S MASTERPIECE CREATION.
HE CANNOT ANSWER ANY QUESTION WITHOUT VISION'S HELP.
HE SIMPLY QUOTES THE ANSWERS, BACK TO THE RESIDENTS IN THE EMAIL WHEN HE HAS THE TIME TO RESPOND TO IT.
IF HE CANNOT INTERPRET AND DEFEND VISION'S NUMBERS, HOW CAN AN AVERAGE RESIDENT ACCEPT THEM AS ACCURATE OR TRUSTWORTHY? VISION REFUSED TO PROVIDE COMPARABLE PROPERTIES TO ALL RESIDENTS WHO REQUESTED IT.
VISION SAYS THAT IT IS NOT USING COM PROPERTY MODEL IN ITS VALUATION, BUT BOTH OF THE APPEAL FORMS THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT FOR THE APPEAL PROCESS EXPLICITLY EXPECT US TO PROVIDE COMPARABLE PROPERTIES TO PROVE OUR POINT.
THIS ADMINISTRATION IS SIMPLY CARELESS ABOUT ALLOWING THIS PROCESS TO CONTINUE AND TO USE THE RESULTS OF IT TO TAX THE RESIDENTS.
THERE'S NO DOUBT WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.
THIS BOARD CREATED THE SITUATION.
THIS BOARD OWES THE RESIDENTS TO GIVE US A TAX RELIEF FROM THE EXCESSIVE TAX LIABILITY.
THIS BOARD NEEDS TO START ASKING TOUGH QUESTIONS TO ITS ADMINISTRATOR.
THE BOX STOPS WITH YOU AND WITH THE ADMINISTRATOR, FOR ALLOWING THE ASSESSOR TO OPERATE WITHOUT ANY CHECKS ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR WORK, AND IT'S ALL DONE AT THE RESIDENT'S EXPENSE THAT WE CANNOT AFFORD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AS PART OF OUR BOARD, BYLAWS, WHEN YOU COME TO SPEAK AND IT IS STATED, IT IS ON THE WEBSITE.
YOU CAN SPEAK YOUR COMMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO ME TOWARDS ME.
BUT IN THE BYLAWS, IT DOES STATE YOU'RE NOT TO CALL OUT ANY BOARD MEMBER BY NAME, NOR ANY OF STAFF.
YOU CAN REFER TO THEM, THEIR OFFICE, OR THEIR TITLE OR WHATEVER.
I'M JUST ENFORCING OUR BY LAWS, PLEASE. YES, MA'AM.
>> GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS.
[OVERLAPPING] TOM AIN AT 13620 TAYLOR DRIVE.
SANTA. JUST A QUICK STATEMENT ABOUT THE POWELL CREEK SOLAR.
AS OF JULY 12TH, THEY WILL HAVE HAD THREE YEARS TO START THIS PROJECT.
THIS PROJECT WILL STILL BE VALID IN THROUGH JULY, OF THIS YEAR IF THEY CAN GET IT GOING.
I FEEL THREE YEARS HAS BEEN LONG ENOUGH.
I ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO GRANT AN EXTENSION TO THIS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL SOLAR SITE, AND IT IS NOT GOING TO BE FITTING INTO OUR COMP PLAN IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK?
>> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
IT'S WILLIAM STEELE, A COUNTY LINE ROAD, J MICONA.
MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST REAL QUICK.
I HAVE TO ECHO EXACTLY WHAT MR. NOBLIN SAID, I HAVE TO ECHO WHAT MS. MYERS SAID AND ECHO WITH WHAT MS. DAWN JUST SAID.
VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET RID OF THIS ISSUE WITH THE, SOLAR PLANT.
THESE ASSESSMENTS ARE JUST ATROCIOUS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, AT LEAST FOR BOARD MEMBERS TO START THINKING ABOUT.
WE GET A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION FROM CITIZENS.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF KNOWLEDGABLE CITIZENS OUT THERE.
LEAST, OF ALL THIS KNOWLEDGE IS ME, OF COURSE, I KNOW VERY LITTLE, DON'T WANT TO KNOW VERY MUCH.
BUT LISTENING TO THESE PEOPLE, I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE CANNOT HAVE, LIKE WE DID WITH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AGAIN RIGHT NOW.
>> NO. WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
>> REMEMBER HOW WE HAD CITIZEN INPUT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
WE HAD THAT FOR MONTHS. THAT WORKED OUT SO WELL.
WHY CAN'T WE DO THAT WITH THE BUDGET? WHY CAN'T WE DO THAT WITH THE SOLAR? WHY CAN'T WE USE THE VALUE IN THIS COUNTY OF THE CITIZENS TO HELP YOU, NO DISRESPECT TO OUR ADMINISTRATOR.
HE HAS ONE VIEW, AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO OUR ADMINISTRATOR, HE HAS ONE VIEW, AND THAT IS STRICTLY ON, I GOT TO TAKE CARE OF MY PEOPLE FIRST. THAT'S A FACT.
ALL COMMANDERS DO THAT. AS A COMMANDER.
I ALWAYS TOOK CARE OF MY PEOPLE FIRST.
BUT YOU AS A BOARD, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE.
YOU HAVE CITIZENS OUT HERE WHO ARE EXTREMELY KNOWLEDGEABLE.
LOOK WHAT THIS MR. NOLAN KOBLIN HAS DONE.
LOOK WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS DONE FOR THIS BOARD.
BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT LOOKS LIKE WE IGNORE THEM.
YOU KNOW WHAT? WHY CAN'T WE PUT THEM TOGETHER AND DO LIKE WE DID WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN? TELL THE COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY, WE'VE GOT THIS ISSUE COMING OUT.
[00:20:01]
WE WANT TO FORM A TASK FORCE OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS, SO WE, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD CAN GET YOUR IDEAS AND YOUR INPUT.JUST THOUGHT, MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT GOING FORWARD.
I'M SAVING MY COMMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, I WON'T GO ANY FURTHER THAN THAT.
BUT BOTTOM LINE, UNDERSTAND, KNOW THAT WE APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING OUT THERE, IT IS NOT DIFFICULT.
IF I FELT I COULD DO BETTER THAN YOU GUYS DO, I WOULD RUN, I CAN'T DO BETTER THAN YOU, BUT I DO ASK THAT YOU START CONSIDERING WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY.
WE TRY TO RECOMMEND COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AS YOU KNOW.
BUT I BELIEVE IF WE DO SOMETHING MORE WE DO WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN, HAVING GROUPS COME IN, SIT DOWN, WORKSHOP IT.
IT CAN HELP THE BOARD AND HOPEFULLY HELP GET US OUT OF THIS SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN.
THIS COUNTY IS REALLY, WE HAVE BAD OPTICS, GUYS.
YOU ALL HAVE TO AGREE WITH THAT.
WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT THESE OTHER COUNTIES ARE DOING AND SEE HOW THEY'RE PROGRESSING, DOING SO MUCH MORE, WITH SO MUCH LESS THAN WHAT WE'RE BLESSED WITH HERE IN THIS COUNTY.
LET'S WORK TOGETHER AND SEE IF WE CAN PULL THESE PEOPLE TOGETHER.
APPRECIATE IT. MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU SIR.
>> MS. PUDLOW I'LL COME TO YOU IN A MINUTE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ONLINE.
ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF MONTHS SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE.
I CAME ORIGINALLY TO, DUANE IS MY NAME.
I'M SAVANNAH. SLAWSON, FROM FLORIDA RESIDENT.
I AM VISITING BECAUSE MY MOM PASSED AWAY HERE IN VIRGINIA, PRINCE GEORGE.
I WAS HERE A FEW MONTHS AGO TO ADDRESS WHO AM I SUPPOSED TO REACH OUT TO FOR SUPPORT AND UNDERSTANDING HOW TO PROCESS THE LAND AT PINE RIDGE IN THE TRANSFERENCE OF THE HOME AT THE TIME.
I HAVE NOT HAD SUCCESS IN FINDING A LEGAL SUPPORT ATTORNEY FOR CIVIL.
I HAD A TRIAL THIS MORNING THAT I WAS UNAWARE, THAT I WAS STEPPING INTO A COURTROOM ON A TRIAL.
I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE.
IN A MOMENT A DISTRESS WITH THE MALINTENT, I BELIEVE, TO SEVER THE PIECE THROUGH ACCURATE AND FAIR COMMUNICATION IN ORDER FOR ME TO DO WHAT I NEED TO PROPERLY TO ADDRESS THE SCENARIO IN BETWEEN THE HOME.
I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SUPPORT IN CIVIL LAW.
I'VE BEEN TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HERE.
I'VE BEEN IN AND OUT OF THE COURT ROOM.
I'VE BEEN FROM HERE TO RICHMOND TO PETERSBURG FOR SUPPORT, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS WHAT IS BEING ADDRESSED TO ME LEGALLY.
THEN WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO EVICT THE HOME FROM THE LAND, POTENTIALLY MOVE THE TRAILER OFF THE HOME OR OFF THE LAND.
BUT THERE'S, A FINANCIAL THING WITH THAT THAT I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I'M NOT FROM HERE.
IT'S BEEN, LIKE A HARD YEAR OF THAT.
I'M JUST IN REQUEST FOR SUPPORT TO A PLAN OF ACTION SO I CAN HAVE THE RIGHT TIME AND CLARITY TO ADDRESS IT PROPERLY.
>> MA'AM, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO LEAVE A WAY TO GET IN CONTACT WITH YOU WITH OUR CLERK, PLEASE.
I WILL ASK SOME QUESTIONS AROUND BETWEEN STAFF AND OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY.
WE CAN'T, OF COURSE, DEFEND YOU OR ANYTHING.
BUT I WILL ASK TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WE CAN REFER YOU TO.
>> LEAVE A NUMBER. I WILL PERSONALLY REACH BACK OUT TO YOU.
IF YOU JUST WANT TO GET WITH HER. OKAY. LEAVE YOUR INFORMATION.
>. THANK YOU, MA'AM. COME ON, MR. TETTERTON.
I WAS ABOUT TO GET GO TO THE VIRTUAL GROUP.
>> BODY AGAIN. RICK TETTERTON 9750 BLACKWATER FARM LANE.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK ON A COUPLE OF THINGS BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE.
WHAT I WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK ABOUT LATER.
ON THE TAXES, I'M GOING TO ECHO, WHATEVER JUSTIN NOBLIN HAS SAID, BECAUSE I'VE FOLLOWED IT.
I'VE HELPED HIM WITH A LOT OF THAT STUFF ON THE TAXES, BUT THE THING I WILL SAY, AND WE HAD A CONVERSATION AMONGST SOME OF US THE OTHER DAY IS, SOME OF THE MISTAKES ARE OBVIOUS.
IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, SOME OF THE MISTAKES JUMP OUT AT YOU REAL FAST, AND I STILL SAY VISION IS TRYING TO USE AN ALGORITHM INSTEAD OF PUTTING THEMSELVES ON THE GROUND, THERE'S NO FEET ON THE GROUND.
THERE'S NO APPARENTLY NO LOOK AT AERIAL STUFF BECAUSE THERE'S SOME PROPERTIES THAT, YOU'D BE BETTER OFF FLOATING A HOUSE IN AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO BUILD IT, AND THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY IT'S WORTH THE SAME THING.
IT'S SOMETHING ON REALLY HIGH GROUND.
SOME OF IT'S COMMON SENSE, AND SOME OF IT'S JUST KNOWLEDGE.
I'M GOING TO ECHO WHAT MR. STEELE SAID.
I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO VOLUNTEER.
I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO REACH OUT TO OTHER REALTORS, APPRAISERS, PEOPLE OF THAT NATURE TO TRY AND HELP YOU WITH THIS,
[00:25:01]
BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF THIS COULD BE DONE IN BULK.ANY PERSON WHO KNOWS BRANCHESTER LAKES VERSUS CEDAR CREEK REALIZES THAT IF THEY'RE SAYING CEDAR CREEK AND IS WORTH LESS THAN BRANCHESTER LAKE, WHEN ONE ACRES IS IN CEDAR CREEK AND YOU'VE GOT LESS, AND THEY BOTH HAVE WATER AND SEWER, DOESN'T TAKE A WHOLE LOT TO FIGURE OUT THAT THAT'S NOT ACCURATE.
YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM THAT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ADDRESS.
I KNOW YOU'VE TRIED, AND I'M THANKFUL THAT YOU HAVE, BUT THERE ARE SOME GLARING PROBLEMS WITH THAT.
THE SECOND THING I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO REAL QUICK.
IN FULL DISCLOSURE AT ONE TIME, I HAD THEM LOOKING AT SOME PROPERTY OF MINE FOR SOLAR, AND I INVESTIGATED IT, AND IT DIDN'T WORK OUT.
IT LOOKED GOOD. THE NUMBERS LOOK GREAT.
EVERYTHING SEEMED LIKE IT WOULD WORK OUT REAL WELL FOR RICK TETTERTON TO PUT SOME OF HIS LAND IN THE SOLAR.
BUT I COULDN'T TELL YOU HOW THANKFUL I AM.
IT DIDN'T GO THAT DIRECTION BECAUSE AFTER DOING THE RESEARCH THAT I'VE DONE, I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY'RE TELLING YOU THE BOND IS, I DON'T CARE HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE PUTTING UP, I DON'T CARE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT'S TELLING YOU OR WHAT DIRECTION THEY'RE GOING.
THESE THINGS ARE NOT GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.
THEY DO CAUSE PROBLEMS. WORST OF ALL, NO MATTER HOW MUCH WE'RE BONDING, WE STILL DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO DISPOSE OF THESE THINGS DOWN THE ROAD.
GUESS WHO'S GOING TO GET THAT BURDEN? IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE THE LAND OWNER IF HE'S TRYING HE OR SHE ARE GOING TO TRY AND HOLD ONTO THEIR LAND, OR IT'S GOING TO BE US.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SAY NO.
JUST SAY NO, GO BACK TO THE 80S AND MOVE ON FROM THIS THING BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD FOR PRINCE GEORGE, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD FOR ANYWHERE.
THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS THAT ARE STARTING TO BE EXPLORED.
ROOFTOPS ARE A MUCH BETTER WAY TO GO AND LET THE INDIVIDUALS CHOOSE THAT INSTEAD OF EATING UP OUR FARM LAND.
OUR FARMLANDS IN VALUE, AND YOU CAN'T GET MORE OF IT.
I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT, SO HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE A PART OF SOMETHING I CAN SPEAK ON LATER.
BUT ALL OF THAT SAID, THANK YOU ALL FOR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN MAKE SOME THINGS HAPPEN, AND GOD BLESS YOU ON THESE TAXES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. TETTERTON. IN FULL TRANSPARENCY, YES, YOU DID.
YOU AND ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL MET WITH STAFF, AND YOU PROPOSED, THE IDEA OF PUTTING TOGETHER A TEAM, AND I KNOW THAT WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THAT.
MR. STOKE JUST HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PULL THE TRIGGER YET, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING, SIR, THAT WAS TAKEN TO HEART.
>> I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS WHENEVER, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY I'M ALWAYS RIGHT.
THAT'S WHY I SAY, LET'S GET A GROUP OF, LOCAL EXPERTS.
WE KNOW WHO SELLS THE MOST AROUND HERE.
WE KNOW WHO KNOWS THE LAND, THE BEST.
WOULDN'T TAKE LONG TO PUT THAT GROUP TOGETHER.
I'M SURE SOUTHSIDE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION REALTORS WOULD SUPPORT SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
AGAIN, I THINK WE CAN DO SOMETHING TO HELP YOU GUYS AT LEAST, HAVE ANOTHER SET OF EYES ON VISION.
>> MS. PUDLOW, IS THERE ANYONE THAT VIRTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> MR. BROWN, THE TWO PARTICIPANTS WE HAVE ONLINE HAVE BEEN VERIFIED AS TENDING FOR FUTURE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE. ALL RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LAST CALL, IF ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE COME TO THE MIC.
I SEE NO ONE MOVING THIS WAY, SO I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, AND BOARD MEMBERS, WE WILL NOW GO TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[C. Consent Agenda]
>> SO MOVED. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB, AND IT'S BEEN SECOND BY MR. WAS IT MR. COX? MR. PUGH, I'M SORRY.
THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO STATED.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MS. NOT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> NEXT, WE HAVE SUPERVISOR COMMENTS,
[D. Comments]
AND I WILL START TO MY FAR LEFT WITH MR. COX.THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING TONIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
SOMETIMES Y'ALL THINK THEY DO, BUT THEY DON'T. I'M STEADILY WRITING.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND REACHING OUT TO US.
HOPEFULLY, WE'LL SEE DAYLIGHT.
I THINK WE'RE STARTING TO SEE A LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.
I JUST HOPE IT'S NOT ANOTHER TRAIN COMING.
WE'LL KEEP OUR FINGERS CROSS, AND EVERYBODY PLEASE BE SAFE, GOING HOME WITH THIS RAINY WEATHER. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT.
>> I'M GOING TO ECHO WHAT MR. COX SAYS.
WE'RE IN A MESS. WE'VE ADMITTED THAT MORE THAN ONE TIME. WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH IT.
WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN.
WE ROLLED THE ASSESSMENTS BACK LAST YEAR, WHICH SET EVERYTHING BACK.
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT AND REAL ESTATE GROWTH DIDN'T STOP.
[00:30:03]
IT KEPT RIGHT ON ROLLING.ECONOMY DIDN'T TAKE A DOWNTURN, ALL THE ECONOMISTS BECAUSE THEY LIKE TO WEATHER PEOPLE.
THEY DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GET IT STRAIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU.
I'M BEING STRAIGHT UP WITH YOU, BUT WE ARE STRUGGLING WITH IT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOME ANSWERS AND GET THE STUFF UNTIL WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE GOT. THAT'S ALL I GOT.
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT.
>> REACH OUT, CALL. I AGREE WITH A LOT OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS TONIGHT, AND IN THE FUTURE, TONIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THE WAY I VOTE.
I'LL ALSO SAY THAT I AM IN FAVOR, AND I HOPE THE BOARD WILL SUPPORT, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY WILL THAT IN THE FUTURE, WE START USING SOME OF THE CITIZENS FOR THEIR EXPERTISE ON THESE ISSUES, AND WHEN IT COMES TO BUDGETARY OR EVEN VISION, THE ASSESSMENTS, THINGS LIKE THAT, I'M 100% FOR THAT.
THAT'S ALL I GOT AT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. MS. WAYMACK?
>> YES, I WANT ALL OF YOU TO KNOW THAT WE'RE GRATEFUL THAT YOU CAME OUT TONIGHT TO EITHER SUPPORT OR OPPOSE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE ALL ARE VERY MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THESE EVENTS.
I KNOW I LOSE SLEEP OVER IT, AND I KNOW SOME OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS DO TOO.
WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MS. WAYMACK. I WOULD AGREE WITH ALL THE COMMENTS OUR BOARD MEMBERS HAVE MADE.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT PROBABLY FOR THE LAST FIVE OR SIX NIGHTS, I HAVE NOT SLEPT.
I HAVE BEEN UP AT TWO O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR TIMES THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT, WAKING UP OUT OF A DEAD SLEEP, THINKING ABOUT THIS STUFF.
ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY AND I DIDN'T DO IT AT THE TIME OF OUR BOARD'S INVOCATION, BUT THERE WAS A VERY CLOSE FRIEND OF MINE.
REALLY, HE WAS MY NEIGHBOR WHO LIVED NEXT DOOR TO ME, AND HE MOVED TO VIRGINIA BEACH.
I GOT THE VERY SHOCKING NEWS THE OTHER DAY THAT CHRISTOPHER SEXTON HAD PASSED AWAY.
ANYBODY THAT KNOWS MELINDA SEXTON, IT'S HER SON, AND HE PASSED AWAY AT 39-YEARS-OLD.
HE WENT TO SCHOOL WITH MY SON.
CHRIS WAS AN EXCELLENT NEIGHBOR.
ANYBODY THAT KNEW CHRIS, EVER MET CHRIS, HE WOULD JUST BRING JOY TO YOU JUST BY THAT BIG SMILE HE HAD.
I'M GOING TO MISS HIM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CALL OUT.
ALSO, WE'VE ALL BEEN RECEIVING A LOT OF EMAILS FROM PEOPLE, AND THE EMAILS ARE COMING TO US ADDRESSED TO ALL FIVE BOARD MEMBERS.
I WANT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, IF SHE DON'T MIND TO CHIME IN, JUST TO EXPLAIN HOW WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH THAT FROM VIOLATING FOIA RULES BECAUSE OF ALL FIVE OF US BEING INCLUDED. MS. ERARD.
THE VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT SAYS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO OBSERVE THE WORKINGS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THERE IS NO STATUTE OR CASE AT THIS MOMENT, WHICH SAYS THAT IT IS AN ILLEGAL MEETING IF THE ENTIRE BOARD EMAILS BACK AND FORTH.
HOWEVER, BEST PRACTICE IS NOT TO REPLY ALL.
BEST PRACTICE IS TO EMAIL A STAFF MEMBER, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, AND THEN BLIND COPY THE REST OF THE BOARD SO THAT PEOPLE CAN'T ACCIDENTALLY HIT REPLY ALL.
IF YOU GET AN EMAIL FROM A CITIZEN THAT'S BEEN SENT TO THE HOLD BOARD, WHICH IS PROPER, I WOULD ASK YOU NOT TO REPLY ALL ABOUT EVEN TO SAY THAT YOU RECEIVED IT.
THE REASON I SAY THAT IS HABIT IS OFTEN STRONGER THAN THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE RULES.
I THINK THAT ANYTIME AN EMAIL COMES TO THE ENTIRE BOARD, IT IS BEST PRACTICE TO ONLY REPLY TO THE PERSON AND NOT TO HIT REPLY ALL.
>> I JUST WANTED THAT CLEARLY STATED SO THAT IF YOU DON'T SEE US DOING A REPLY ALL BACK TO AN EMAIL, WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THE WAY THE FOIA LAWS ARE THAT WE'RE NOT VIOLATING THEM AT ALL.
[00:35:02]
THAT'S ALL FOR MY COMMENTS.MR. STOKE, FOR COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS.
AT THIS TIME, ON FRIDAY, MAY 30TH, IS THE PRINCE GEORGE HIGH SCHOOL COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY FROM 9:00 AM TO NOON.
TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON LAUREL SPRING ROAD AND COURTHOUSE ROAD WILL BE HIGH DURING THIS TIME.
ON SATURDAY, MAY 31, IS THE PRINCE GEORGE FARMERS MARKET, AT SCOTT PARK FROM 9:00-1:00.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,
[E. Public Hearings]
WE NOW MOVE TO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA IS A REZONING RZ25 0001, WHICH IS A REQUEST TO REZONE 4.25 ACRES FROM RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURE, WHICH IS RA, AND LIMITED RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS R2 TO LIMITED RESIDENTIAL.
>> GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN BROWN, VICE CHAIR WAYMACK, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
>> I'M JACK GREENSTEIN. I'M THE PLANNER 1, AND TONIGHT, I'LL BE PRESENTING THIS REZONING CASE.
I'LL JUST LET IT LOAD UP IN A SECOND HERE..
THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REZONING CASE, WHICH IS CASE NUMBER RZ-25-0001, IS DAVE LUDLOW, AND HE'S ALSO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE A 4.25 ACRE PARCEL FROM RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, RA AND LIMITED RESIDENTIAL R2, TO BE JUST R2 LIMITED RESIDENTIAL.
CURRENTLY IT'S A SPLIT ZONE PARCEL, BOTH RA AND R2.
THE INTENT BEHIND THE REZONING IS TO ALLOW SUBDIVISION OF ONE PARCEL INTO TWO, AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 6010 COURTHOUSE ROAD, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INDICATES A FUTURE LAND USE A VILLAGE CENTER.
HERE WE CAN SEE THE LOCATION MAP.
IT'S VERY CLOSE TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW WHERE I295 INTERSECTS WITH COURTHOUSE ROAD.
THIS IS A CLOSER IN SATELLITE VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY.
IN THE ZONING MAP, WHICH SHOWS THAT SPLIT ZONING THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IS THAT ORANGE, R2 COLOR, AND THE REAR PART IS RA RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
SURROUNDING ZONING IS R2, RA, R1, B1.
THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH INDICATES THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE A FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIZATION OF VILLAGE CENTER AND SURROUNDING OUR RESIDENTIAL AND PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC, AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL.
AGAIN, TO SUMMARIZE THE REQUEST, IT IS TO REZONE A 4.25 ACRE PROPERTY FROM RA AND R2 TO JUST BE R2, IN ORDER TO ALLOW SUBDIVISION OF ONE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO SUBDIVIDE THE LOT AND CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE NEW LOT.
NO VOLUNTARY PROFFERS WERE SUBMITTED.
THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT THAT WAS SUBMITTED, A ROUGH VERSION OF A PLAT WHICH SHOWS THE BLUE OUTLINE BEING THE CURRENT PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND THAT YELLOW OUTLINE REPRESENTING THE PROPOSED NEW LOT.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD A 6-1 VOTE
[00:40:01]
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 24TH, AND THE REASONS PROVIDED WERE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SURROUNDING LAND USES IN ZONING DISTRICTS.THIS PUBLIC HEARING WAS ADVERTISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE CODE, YET NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED PRIOR.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT WAS UNABLE TO MAKE IT TONIGHT, BUT HE IS PARTICIPATING ELECTRONICALLY.
>> DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME?
>> WHY R2? IS THAT THE ONLY ZONING THAT CAN BE SPLIT OFF IN A FAMILY SUBDIVISION?
>> THE REASON IT MAKES SENSE TO THE APPLICANT TO DO R2 IS BECAUSE HALF THE PROPERTY ALREADY IS R2 AND THE REASON THAT THEY HAVE TO DO A REZONING IN ORDER TO SUBDIVIDE IS BECAUSE R2 ALLOWS FOR SMALLER LOT SIZES.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. BUG. ANY OTHER? LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING UP FOR PUBLIC INPUT.
AT THIS TIME, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS REZONING CASE, YOU WOULD PLEASE COME TO THE DIAS THERE.
STATE YOUR NAME, STATE YOUR ADDRESS, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS REZONING CASE.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO'S SIGNED UP TO SPEAK?
>> A COUPLE QUICK QUIZ TETHERED TO 9750 BLACKWATER FARM LANE AGAIN.
I'M CURIOUS AND JACK, WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO ANSWER THIS.
WHAT ARE THE LOT SIZE MINIMUMS IN R2 ON THIS PROPERTY? I'M ASSUMING THIS PERSON'S ATTEMPTING TO DO SOMETHING FOR FAMILY BASED ON WHAT'S THERE.
SO I WANT TO SPEAK AND SAY THAT I'M COMPLETELY IN FAVOR OF IT.
I SIMPLY ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD HELP THE PUBLIC TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE SIZES MUCH LIKE WAS BEING ASKED EARLIER.
JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHAT THE DIMENSIONS WERE REQUIRED AND HOW BIG THEY CAN GO ON ORDER.
>> WE'LL HAVE HIM TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IT'S WILLIAM STEELE, COUNTY LANE ROAD.
I TOO HAVE NO [INAUDIBLE], WHAT I AM CONCERNED, NOT CONCERNED ABOUT.
WHAT I'D BE INTERESTED IN IS THE GENTLEMAN REFERRED TO THE REASONS WHY THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED FOR IT, 6-1, 5-1, WHATEVER IT WAS.
TO BE FULL DISCLOSURE, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT ONE BOARD MEMBER VOTED AGAINST IT, SO WE HAVE A FULL PICTURE.
WE GOT TO GET THE ADMINISTRATION TO START UNDERSTANDING THAT PERHAPS WE DON'T NEED TO BE ONE SIDED ALL THE TIME.
TELL US WHY THAT ONE VOTE HAPPENED.
JUST FOR INFORMATION SO YOU CAN MAKE A PROPER DECISION.
OBVIOUSLY, I AGREE IT'S PROBABLY A FAMILY THING.
BUT AGAIN, I'M ONE, AS YOU WELL KNOW, IS I WANT THE FULL PICTURE.
GIVE ME THE FULL STORY BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS REZONING CASE? I SEE IS THERE ANYONE VIRTUALLY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? I'LL COME BACK IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO OR IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, MS. PUDLOW?
>> AT RACE, I HAVE TO VERIFY ONE MORE TIME, MR. BROWN. IT'S JUST THE APPLICANT.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AT THIS TIME, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND RETURN THE MATTER BACK TO THE BOARD.
I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT FIRST IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO SAY OR IF THEY WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS, OR IF NOT, WE'LL GET OUR PLANNING OFFICE TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> MR. LUDLOW, THIS IS KRISTIN PUDLOW.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE YOUR MICROPHONE OFF, YOU'RE WELCOME TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD.
[BACKGROUND] MR. LUDLOW, DID YOU WANT TO SHARE ANYTHING THIS EVENING?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME. I'M OKAY.
>> WOULD HE LIKE TO ADDRESS ANY OF THE QUESTIONS? DID HE HEAR THE QUESTIONS OR THE ONE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE?
[00:45:05]
HE CAN'T ADDRESS THAT, BUT AS FAR AS IF HE'S AWARE WITH THE LOT SIZE, IF NOT, I CAN GET THAT FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.>> I THINK JACK HAS THE LOT SIZE INFORMATION. NO PROBLEM.
>> WE'LL GET HIM TO ADDRESS THAT.
THANK YOU, SIR. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME BACK UP, SIR?
>> THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT MR. TETTERTON HAD HAD ASKED, ONE WAS A LOT SIZE IN THE INTENDED USE?
>> THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN R2 IS 12,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT IS 80 FEET AT THE FRONT SETBACK LINE.
THOSE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS WHEN WE LOOK AT THE SUBDIVISION PLAT, THE PLAT THAT'S PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THE NEW LOT IS ABOUT 1.2 ACRES IN SIZE.
THE INTENDED USE NOTED BY THE APPLICANT IS TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING.
FOR THE QUESTION ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN VOTE A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PROVIDING A REASONING, SO NO REASON WAS PROVIDED.
BUT ANYONE'S WELCOME TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES AND WATCH THE VIDEOS.
>> YES, SIR. I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THERE.
EVEN THE SAME WHEN WE TAKE OUR VOTES UP HERE AND SOMEONE MAY VOTE EITHER IN FAVOR OR AGAINST, WE DON'T STATE THE REASON WHY WE'RE VOTING NO, BUT YOU CAN WATCH THE MINUTES.
YOU CAN GO BACK AND WATCH THE STREAMING OF THAT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND THEY MAY HAVE STATED DURING THE MEETING OR THEY MAY HAVE JUST SAID NO.
>> I SEE YOU STANDING, SIR, BUT I'VE ACTUALLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION.
>> WITH THE ADDED INFORMATION THAT WASN'T GIVEN INITIALLY, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN ADD ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS BASED ON THAT INFORMATION?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO ASK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY CLOSED A PUBLIC INPUT PORTION.
>> IF IT IS IN THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD TO DO SO, YOU MAY.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION.
NOW, MR. NOBLIN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME FORWARD, SIR? I'M NOT TRYING TO DENY PEOPLE A CHANCE TO SPEAK.
>> JUSTIN NOBLIN, 8724 CENTENNIAL.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAID, IT'S AN 80-FOOT ROAD FRONTAGE, AND 12,000 SQUARE FOOT, WHICH I BELIEVE COMES OUT TO JUST OVER A QUARTER ACRE.
THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAVE, AND I AM A CLASS A LICENSED BUILDER AND I DEFINITELY PROMOTE GROWTH IN THE COUNTY, IS, HE'S GOT 325 FEET OF ROAD FRONTAGE HERE AND IF IT'S ZONED R2 WITHOUT ANY PROFFERS, THERE IS THE ABILITY TO DIVIDE IT QUITE A BIT MORE THAN JUST WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE, AND WITHOUT WRITTEN PROFFERS, ONCE YOU ALL GRANT IT, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
I THINK WE FOUND THAT OUT WITH PUDDLEDOCK APARTMENTS, THAT ONCE IT'S GRANTED AND IT DOESN'T HAVE PARAMETERS DEFINED VERY CLEARLY, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
I'M NOT SAYING IT WOULD, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST.
IF ITS INTENDED USE IS GOING TO BE JUST TWO LOTS, THEN I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BE, SPELLED OUT IN A PROFFER AND WRITTEN AND AGREED UPON.
AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO ADVOCATE FOR SMART GROWTH, AND RESPONSIBLE ACTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
WITH THE ADDED INFORMATION, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO GIVE UP AND GIVE MY PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU ALL.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION?
>> HANG ON, LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC INPUT FIRST, AND THEN I CAN COME BACK TO THE BOARD, MEMBER.
>> I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU WANT THEM TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
>> I WILL GET THEM TO ANSWER IT IN JUST A MINUTE, SIR.
AT THIS TIME, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS REZONING CASE.
MR. BALDWIN OR ANYONE FROM YOUR GROUP, DOES ANYONE OF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THIS, OR I CAN EITHER ASK THE APPLICANT TO.
I KNOW WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHERE THE BOARD CANNOT, AND I THINK I'M RIGHT.
WE CAN'T DICTATE PROFFERS, RIGHT?
>> NO, SIR. MAY I OFFER SOME OF MY LEGAL ADVICE.
[00:50:02]
>> A PROFFER HAS TO BE SIGNED AND SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> YES, SIR. GO AHEAD, MR. GRAVES.
>> JUST TO TAG ONTO WHAT SHE SAID.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO POSTPONE IT OR ANYTHING IF YOU WISH OR APPROVE IT, AND THAT THE OWNER COULD CHOOSE TO SUBMIT A PROFFER IF YOU WERE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IT BEING APPROVED WITHOUT PROFFERS.
>> BUT ALSO, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY DON'T HAVE TO AGREE TO THOSE PROFFERS.
>> NO, SO THE PROFFERS ARE ONLY VOLUNTARY.
IT MUST BE PRODUCED BY THE OWNER.
IF HE WISHES TO SUBMIT THAT PROFFER, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THE CASE WITH THAT PROFFER.
BUT IF HE DOES NOT WANT TO SUBMIT THAT PROFFER, HE DOESN'T.
THE CASE WILL HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AS IT STANDS.
>> LET ME BE CLEAR TOO TO ASK YOU, IF WE DO POSTPONE IT AND HE WANTS TO DO THAT, WE WOULD THEN NEED TO RE-ADVERTISE AND HOLD ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE OF THE PROFFER CONDITION BEING ADDED, CORRECT MA'AM?
>> YES. WELL, NOT BECAUSE OF THE PROFFER.
>> WELL, BECAUSE THERE'S A CHANGE IN ON IT.
YES, IT CHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THANK YOU, MR. GRAVES. BOARD MEMBERS, YOU'VE HEARD THE DISCUSSION HERE.
I'M OPEN TO HEAR YOUR INPUT OR COMMENTS.
>> I HAD A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, IN THIS, IT STATES THAT THIS IS A FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
BUT ON THE APPLICATION, IT SAYS THIS IS A BUILDER.
IS HE PULLING THE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY TO BUILD HIM A HOME, OR IS THIS A [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR SOMEONE FROM PLANNING.
>> IS IT A FAMILY SUBDIVISION, CAN THAT HAVE DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS? BECAUSE THE WAY IT'S INTENDED TO ME IS IT'S FOR A FAMILY MEMBER.
>> MR. PUGH, WHAT WAS THE PART ABOUT THE FAMILY THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO?
>> IT STATES THAT IT'S A FAMILY SUBDIVIDED LOT.
>> IN WHICH PART OF THE PACKET?
>> HOLD ON, LET ME GET BACK TO IT HERE.
I BELIEVE I THINK SOMEBODY IN THE AUDIENCE DURING PUBLIC COMMENT SAID IT WAS A FAMILY SUBDIVIDED LOT IS WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE.
>> I THINK THE FAMILY WORD COMING IN HERE IS FROM SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IS JUST THAT'S JUST HOW WE SAY HOUSE.
THAT'S WHAT HIS INTENDED USE IS JUST A HOUSE FOR ONE FAMILY.
THERE HASN'T BEEN ANYTHING IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS PERTAINING TO A FAMILY SUBDIVISION, AND THAT WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE HERE BECAUSE THIS LOT IS NOT ZONED TO ALLOW FAMILY DIVISION.
HE'S TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CALL A BY RIGHT DIVISION, WHERE ONCE IT'S REZONED, HE HAS THE RIGHT TO DIVIDE IT.
>> WHAT ARE RIGHTS THAT COME WITH R2?
>> LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, FOR ANY AMOUNT OF DIVIDED LAND, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF LOT SIZE, AND IT'D HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF 80 FEET OF ROAD FRONTAGE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LOT.
FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC ROAD, MEANING, OR IN THAT CASE, COURTHOUSE ROAD.
>> THEN JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, THE PROPOSED NEW HOME SITE, HOW CLOSE WOULD IT SIT IN LINE WITH THE REST OF THE HOMES THAT ARE ON COURTHOUSE ROAD, OR IS IT GOING TO SIT OUT IN FRONT OF THEM?
>> THE R2 ZONING DISTRICT DOESN'T SPECIFY.
WHAT IT DOES SPECIFY IS A MINIMUM DISTANCE, IT MUST BE FROM THE ROAD.
RIGHT NOW THE HOUSE THAT'S ON THAT PROPERTY AND ON THE ADJACENT PREMISES IS MUCH FARTHER THAN THAT.
A LOT OF TIMES, THE BUILDER OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WILL WANT TO POST BUILD THE HOUSE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER HOUSES, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE ZONE'S ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES IT.
A PROFFER COULD REQUIRE IT, BUT NOTHING. THERE YOU GO.
>> THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTION.
>> ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? YES, MR. COX.
>> MY CONCERN WITH IT IS, ONE WE DON'T HAVE PROFFERS, BUT BY GOING R2, BY RIGHT, WE OPEN UP PANDORA'S BOX.
HE COULD COME IN, AS MR. NOBLIN STATED, SUBDIVIDE, HE COULD PUT DUPLEXES IN THERE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT COULD BE PUT IN THERE BECAUSE WE'RE BASICALLY GIVING HIM CARTE BLANCHE TO DO BY GIVING HIM AN R2.
[00:55:01]
THE LISTING HERE OF THINGS THAT ARE, BY RIGHT, JUST A FEW OF THEM, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS, SCHOOLS, CHURCH, PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, HOME OCCUPATIONS, MAINTAINING HORSES, MULES, DONKEYS, AND PONIES AS DESIGNED IN 90-1035.I DON'T FEEL GOOD NOT KNOWING EXACTLY OTHER THAN HIM SAYING HE'S GOING TO DO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THERE.
THINGS CHANGE. THAT'S MY FEELINGS, AND I'LL GIVE YOU A MOTION IF YOU'RE READY.
>> I WANT TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE. MR. WEBB.
>> THE SECOND PART BOTHERS ME, OR AS ONCE WE APPROVE IT BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROFFERS ASSIGNED.
I KNOW LEGALLY, WE CAN'T REQUIRE IT.
I ALREADY LOOKED UP THE WATER AND SEWER.
HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONNECT TO OUR PUBLIC SYSTEM, SO THAT'S COVERED.
BUT I'D FEEL BETTER IF IT WAS IN THERE THAT WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS EXACTLY WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO.
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF YOU WERE OPEN TO THIS WITH PROFFERS, THEN YOU COULD CHOOSE TO POSTPONE IT AND GIVE HIM AN ESPECIALLY YOU COULD ASK HIM NOW IF HE'S INTERESTED IN OFFERING SOME PROFFERS, BUT YOU'D NEED TO POSTPONE IT TO GIVE TIME FOR HIM TO DRAFT THEM AND SIGN THEM.
>> IT'S ILLEGAL FOR US TO TRY TO IMPOSE PROFFERS.
IS THERE A LEGAL WAY TO COMMIT TO THESE TWO LOTS ARE JUST GOING TO BE FOR THE TWO HOMES AS SPECIFIED?
>> NOT FOR THE BOARD TO DO THAT.
>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE THROUGH PROFFERS.
IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN THAT, THE BOARD COULD, DEFER ACTION TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH STAFF TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OF PROFFERS.
>> I'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE IF YOU RETHOUGHT IT, AND CAME BACK AND MET WITH YOU, HEARING THE COMMENTS.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
IT SAYS THERE'S A 16-FOOT PRIVATE SEWER EASEMENT.
HOW DOES THAT AFFECT WHERE THE HOME WOULD GO IN THE LOT?
>> YOU JUST CANNOT BUILD A HOME IN A UTILITY EASEMENT.
ALL NEW LOTS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN EASEMENT AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE NEW LOT.
>> BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE DEFER ACTION.
>> TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE MOVING.
>> I'LL NEED A POSTPONING DATE. I NEED TO HAVE A DATE THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE DEFER TO JULY 8TH.
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. COX, AND SECOND BY MR. WEBB, THAT THE BOARD WOULD POSTPONE THIS REZONING CASE 25-0001 TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD ON OUR JULY 8TH MEETING AND ALLOW STAFF TIME TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER 2 IS A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH THE FISCAL YEAR 2026 TAX LEVIES FOR REAL PROPERTY, AND 2026 LEVIES FOR MANUFACTURER HOMES. MRS. JURY.
>> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, MR. STOKE, MR. RARD, AND ALL ASSEMBLED.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE ADVERTISED REAL PROPERTY AND MANUFACTURED HOME TAX RATES.
THE INTRODUCED BUDGET, WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC ON MARCH 11TH, AND IT WAS DEVELOPED FROM BOARD CONSENSUS ON RECOMMENDED SPENDING PRIORITIES.
IT CONTAINED NO CHANGE IN THE RATES FOR REAL PROPERTY, PERSONAL PROPERTY, MANUFACTURED HOMES, AND MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX.
THERE IS AN EFFECTIVE TAX INCREASE FOR FY2026 FROM HIGHER ASSESSED REAL PROPERTY VALUES, AND THOSE PROPERTY VALUES WERE INITIALLY PRESENTED IN FEBRUARY AND UPDATED, AND I BELIEVE THAT UPDATES REMAIN ONGOING.
THE BOARD DID PROVIDE CONSENSUS TO MAKE REDUCTIONS TO THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION LAST WEEK ON MAY 21ST BASED ON LOWER THAN INITIALLY ESTIMATED REAL PROPERTY AND PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUES.
THE INTRODUCED BUDGET, AS PRESENTED ON MARCH 11TH, WAS $80,143,093.
THAT REPRESENTED AN 8.27% INCREASE OVER THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
THE BOARD DID HOLD AN INITIAL PUBLIC HEARING ON ALL, FY 2026 AND CALENDAR YEAR 2025 TAX RATES ON APRIL 22ND.
[01:00:07]
THE PERSONAL PROPERTY AND MACHINERY, AND TOOLS TAX RATES WERE APPROVED ON THAT EVENING, BUT THE BOARD POSTPONED ACTION, ON REAL ESTATE AND MANUFACTURED HOME RATES, TO AWAIT UPDATES ON THOSE REAL PROPERTY ESTIMATES.A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD AT YOUR LAST MEETING ON MAY 13TH, AND AGAIN, TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, AND WEIGH IN ON THE RATES, AND THE BOARD AGAIN POSTPONED ACTION TWO WEEKS AGO.
A THIRD PUBLIC HEARING WAS ADVERTISED FOR THIS EVENING TO ALLOW ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY.
THE BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON MAY 13TH, AND THERE WERE ITEMS POSTED TO BOARDDOCS THAT RECAPPED THE INTRODUCED BUDGET INITIATIVES, AND ALSO INFORMATION FROM YOUR WORK SESSION LAST WEEK WAS POSTED TO BOARDDOCS TO SHOW THE REDUCTIONS THAT WERE APPROVED BY CONSENSUS.
THE FY2026 BUDGET FOR ADOPTION AND CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING WILL BE $79,469,891, IF THE REAL PROPERTY AND MANUFACTURED HOME TAX RATE REMAINS AT 82 CENTS, AND THIS IS 673,000 LESS, THAN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET.
>> THE IMPACT OF LOWERING THE TAX RATE BY A PENNY IS $448,340 FOR EACH $0.01 THE RATE IS LOWERED.
THE PROPOSED FY 2026 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TOTALED 80 MILLION, AND THAT THE SIGNIFICANT INITIATIVES THAT WERE INITIALLY PROPOSED WAS AN INCREASE TO THE SCHOOL DIVISION OF 1.2.
THAT AMOUNT DID GET LOWERED BY A LITTLE OVER 167,000 LAST WEEK BY CONSENSUS, STEP INCREASES, MARKET AND COST OF LIVING INCREASES FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS MEETING THE MANDATED INCREASES FOR STATE-SUPPORTED LOCAL EMPLOYEES.
DEPARTMENT HEAD AND MARKET RECLASSIFICATION REQUESTS.
INITIALLY, THERE WERE 16.5 POSITIONS PROPOSED.
WE RECEIVED AN INCREASE IN STATE FUNDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL POSITION, AND THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT, A DEPUTY COURT CLERK, TOO.
THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY ALSO REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF ANOTHER PART-TIME REGULAR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT POSITION THAT IS SUPPORTED BY HIGHER GRANT AND COMPENSATION BOARD REVENUE IN HER OFFICE.
THE BOARD DID BY CONSENSUS, ELECT TO ELIMINATE FOUR POSITIONS THAT WERE INITIALLY PROPOSED.
ONE OF THOSE WAS A DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, ANOTHER WAS ONE FIREFIGHTER MEDIC, ANOTHER WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT PERSON WITHIN FIRE AND EMS, AND ONE WAS A ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM SPECIALIST WITHIN CDCC.
PHASE 3 OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ORDINANCE UPDATES WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET, PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, AND INFLATIONARY AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION INCREASES.
THE BOARD DID MAKE REDUCTIONS TO THE BUDGET AS IT WAS INTRODUCED.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS EVENING WAS ADVERTISED IN THE PROGRESS INDEX, AND IT APPEARED IN THE MAY 20TH EDITION.
THE ADVERTISED TAX RATES ARE $0.82 FOR BOTH REAL PROPERTY AND MANUFACTURED HOMES, WHICH IS, AGAIN, THE CURRENT RATE.
HOWEVER, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE IS AN EFFECTIVE TAX INCREASE IN REAL PROPERTY FROM HIGHER REASSESSED VALUES.
INITIALLY, THE ESTIMATES PROVIDED BY VISION INDICATED THAT THE EQUALIZED TAX RATE WAS $0.73 OR $0.09.
THE UPDATED ESTIMATES PROVIDED ON MAY 5 SHOWED THAT THE EQUALIZATION RATE IS $0.74 OR $0.08.
THERE IS A 10.8% INCREASE IN ESTIMATED REAL ESTATE TAXES DUE TO HIGHER ASSESSED VALUES.
THE GROWTH IN OUR REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE, AS ADVERTISED, WAS 4.2 MILLION, THAT FIGURE IS NOW $3,615,000.
THE VALUE OF A PENNY IS NOW 416,000, WHERE IT WAS INITIALLY ESTIMATED AT 4:20, AND AGAIN, THE EQUALIZATION RATE IS $0.74.
THIS SLIDE DEPICTS THE IMPACT ON REAL PROPERTY TAX OWNERS OR REAL PROPERTY OWNERS.
IF IN FACT, THEIR INCREASE IN ASSESSED VALUE IS THE AVERAGE 10.8 PERCENT.
[01:05:01]
THOSE FIGURES ARE SHOWN TO THE FAR RIGHT AT 300,000.THE ESTIMATED INCREASE IS ABOUT $266 ANNUALLY, OR 22.14 PER MONTH FOR A REAL PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE VALUE WAS 400, THAT VALUE INCREASING BY 10.8% WOULD MEAN ANNUAL TAXES OF $354 MORE OR $29.52 PER MONTH, ETC.
THESE ARE INTENDED TO BE EXAMPLES ONLY.
OF COURSE, PERCENTAGES AND PERCENTAGE INCREASES VARIED BY INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS.
JUST TO LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT THE REDUCTION OF A PENNY FOR A PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE VALUE IS $332,400 WOULD BE ABOUT $33.24 A YEAR, FOR A PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE VALUE IS 554,000, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $55.40 PER YEAR.
THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES COMPARING CURRENT YEAR TO WHAT WAS INITIALLY INTRODUCED IS TO THE LEFT, TO THE FAR RIGHT, AND THE GREEN SHADING SHOWS OUR UPDATED REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE ESTIMATES.
OUR PUBLIC SERVICE IS ACTUALLY DECREASING BASED ON SCC VALUATIONS, AND MANUFACTURED HOME REMAINS UNCHANGED.
AGAIN, FOLLOWING THIS EVENING'S PUBLIC HEARING, ACTION IS REQUESTED TO SET THE TAX RATES FOR FY 2026 FOR REAL PROPERTY AND MANUFACTURED HOMES AT $0.82 AS ADVERTISED.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
>> DOES ANY BOARD MEMBER HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS DREY BEFORE WE OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC INPUT?
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS IS OUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING.
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC INPUT PORTION OF OUR PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK, YOU WOULD APPROACH TODAY US AND YOU'D HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AGAIN WITH THE SAME RULES AS BEFORE.
MS. KNOTT, IS THERE ANYONE THAT HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING?
>> JUST ONE, MR. CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM STEELE.
[LAUGHTER] GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM STEELE, 9921 COUNTY LINE ROAD.
MR. CHAIRMAN, AS A COMMITTED RESIDENT, PROPERTY OWNER, AND VOTER IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, I AM COMPELLED TO VOICE MY DEEP CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND THE REAL ESTATE TAX OF $0.82 PER 100 OF ASSESSED VALUE.
THESE MEASURES, IF APPROVED, WILL FURTHER STRAIN THE ALREADY OVERTAXED COMMUNITY AND PERPETUATE THIS CURRENT CYCLE OF FISCAL SUCCESS AND ADVERSELY IN FACT ALL TAXPAYERS HERE IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, AS THAT ONE SLIDE SURELY SHOWS.
FOR THE 10TH CONSECUTIVE YEAR, THIS BOARD IS OPPOSED TO INCREASE A PROPERTY OWNER'S TAX BILL, AN ACTION THAT DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTS INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING UNDER THE HEAVY WEIGHT OF EXCESSIVE TAXATION THAT WE HAVE HERE IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY.
WE ARE THE SIXTH HIGHEST TAX COUNTY IN THE 26 COUNTIES IN THE RICHMOND REGION.
WE ARE THE FOURTH HIGHEST REAL ESTATE TAX COUNTY OF THE 26 COUNTIES IN THE RICHMOND REGION.
DURING PAST PUBLIC HEARINGS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, INCLUDING MYSELF, HAVE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST THE TRAJECTORY OF THIS INCREASED TAXATION.
WE HAVE REPEATEDLY HIGHLIGHTED TO YOU THE BLOATED BUREAUCRACY THAT IS WITHIN THIS COUNTY ADMINISTRATION, WHICH CONTINUES TO DRIVE THE ANNUAL TAX RATE INCREASE TO UNNEEDED AND EXCESSIVE SPENDING.
LEGITIMATE USE FOR TAX RELIEF, AS EXPRESSED BY YOUR CONSTITUENTS, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND TAXPAYERS, YOU SEEM TO IGNORE.
THESE VOICES, YOUR CONSTITUENTS, ARE URGING THIS BOARD TO ACT RESPONSIBLY AND PRIORITIZE EFFICIENCY, TRIMMING EXCESS, AND DELIVERING MUCH-NEEDED TAX RELIEF TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF THIS COUNTY.
KNOWLEDGEABLE CITIZENS HAVE PROVIDED PRACTICAL AND DATA-DRIVEN SUGGESTIONS TO HELP YOU, OUR ELECTED BOARD, ACHIEVE THIS FINANCIAL BALANCE WITHOUT RAISING THE EQUALIZATION TAX RATE AND BY DECREASING THE TAX RATE.
THESE PROPOSALS THAT WE DEMONSTRATE THAT TAX RELIEF IS NOT ONLY WARRANTED, BUT ENTIRELY FEASIBLE.
REDUCING ADMINISTRATIVE BLOAT AND CURBING EXPENDITURE GROWTH ARE VARIABLE PATHS THAT ARE FINANCIALLY SUITABLE AND ATTAINABLE.
FAILURE TO ADDRESS THESE REASONABLE SOLUTIONS DISREGARDS
[01:10:01]
THE EARNEST EFFORTS OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO COLLABORATE CONSTRUCTIVELY WITH THIS BOARD.I URGE THIS BOARD TO RECONSIDER THE APPROACH.
THE PROPOSED 26 BUDGET AND REAL ESTATE TAX SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED IN THE CURRENT FORM.
INSTEAD, I CALL UPON THIS BOARD TO, FLIP THE PAGE, ENGAGE IN TRANSPARENT AND SUBTESIVE DISCUSSION AND REDUCING ADMINISTRATIVE EXCESS AND CURB SPENDING.
HONOR THE OVERWHELMING COMMUNITY DEMAND FOR TAX RELIEF AFTER A DECADE OF INCREASES, DEMONSTRATE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY BY PRIORITIZING EFFICIENCY AND SUITABILITY WITHIN COUNTY OPERATIONS.
AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, IT IS YOUR DUTY TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTERESTS OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS BY DELIVERING TAX RELIEF AND ADDRESSING THE ROOT CAUSES OF FINANCIAL INEFFICIENCY THAT PLAGUES THIS COUNTY.
THE BOARD CAN RESTORE FAITH IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
ANYTHING LESS, MR. CHAIRMAN, ONLY FURTHER PROVES THAT ONCE AGAIN, THIS BOARD DOES WHAT IT DOES BEST.
THAT IS NOT HAVING A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION AND DEBATE ON BUDGET LINES AS ISSUED BY THE LAST WORKSHOP, AND TO RAISE A PROPERTY TAX VALUE, WHICH ALLOWS THE BOS TO RAKE IN MILLIONS MORE DOLLARS, SO YOU CAN FURTHER INCREASE AND FEATHER THE BEDS OR BUREAUCRATS WHILE COSTING THE TAXPAYERS ENORMOUS PAIN BECAUSE OF INCREASED TAXES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK THIS BOARD TO NOT APPROVE THIS TAX INCREASE, NOT APPROVE THIS BUDGET. THANK YOU.
>> WHAT BILL SAID. JAMES KELLER, 1357 BUTLER BRANCH ROAD.
I'LL OPEN BY SAYING, I WAS DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THE CHAIRMAN AT THE LAST BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING USE ABOUT MAYBE COMING DOWN A PENNY FROM THE $0.82 RATE TO $0.81.
THE FISCALLY PRUDENT APPROACH, IN MY OPINION, WOULD BE TO START AT THE EQUALIZATION RATE OF $0.74, AND IF WARRANTED, WORK YOUR WAY UP FROM THERE, AND THEN COME BEFORE THE PUBLIC TO DEFEND ANY PROPOSED INCREASE IN THE TAX BURDEN TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, OUR NEIGHBORING COUNTY TO THE WEST REDUCED THEIR REAL ESTATE TAX RATE FROM $0.82 TO $0.64 THIS YEAR.
I WAS PARTICULARLY DISTURBED TO SEE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BUILD THE FY26 BUDGET FROM A STANDPOINT OF AN EXPECTED $4.2 MILLION WINDFALL IN NEW REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE.
HE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THIS.
A VENDOR WITH A COMPUTER PROGRAM, WHOSE APPLICATION IN RURAL SETTINGS LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED, CONCLUDES OUR HOMES ARE WORTH MORE THAN THEIR IDEA OF WHAT CONSTITUTES FAIR MARKET VALUE.
DOESN'T MEAN PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE MORE MONEY TO SPEND.
THIS JULY 4, OUR COUNTRY WILL CELEBRATE ITS 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF ITS DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE FROM ENGLAND, WHERE ORDINARY FOLKS, SUCH AS FARMERS, SHOPKEEPERS, CRAFTSMEN, ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND OTHERS, FROM THE 13 COLONIES REBELLED AGAINST THE KING GEORGE OVER THE TYRANNY OF HIS TAXATION.
BACK THEN, THE RALLYING CRY WAS NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.
TODAY, WE TOO RALLY AGAINST THE TYRANNY OF TAXATION, AND OUR CRY, NO TAXATION WITHOUT EXPLANATION.
I DON'T SEE HOW THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAN VOTE ON A TAX RATE WHEN THE VALIDITY OF THE REASSESSMENTS IS STILL DUBIOUS.
IF YOU DO VOTE, THEN 74 AND NOT $0.01 MORE.
TONIGHT, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SHOULD DIRECT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO MAKE THE BUDGET WORK WITH A RATE OF $0.74 PER 100.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS ROY BUFORD PUGH THE FOURTH.
STANDING BEHIND ME IS RILEY PUGH.
WE BOTH LIVE AT 13305 COLLEGE ROAD.
YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN E-MAILS FROM ME THIS WEEK.
I DON'T NEED TO BEAT YOU OVER THE HEAD WITH IT.
WE DON'T SUPPORT AN INCREASE IN TAXES.
WE DON'T SUPPORT THE INCREASE IN THE BUDGET.
SHE'S BEEN GOING THROUGH VIRGINIA STUDIES AT SOUTH ELEMENTARY.
SHE'S GOT A SIGN SHE WANTS TO HOLD UP.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OUTLINED IN MY E-MAIL THIS WEEK IS THAT WHEN YOU PASS THE SPENDING INCREASE, YOU'RE NOT JUST PASSING IT FOR US, YOU'RE PASSING IT ON TO OUR NEXT GENERATION AS WELL. HOLD IT UP.
LIKE MR. KELLER SAID, NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, RILEY DOESN'T WANT MY TAXES TO GO UP BECAUSE SHE KNOWS AT SOME POINT THEY'RE GONNA KEEP GOING UP UNTIL SHE'S A TAXPAYER.
DO SOMETHING NOW. TRY TO GET SOME REDUCTION IN YOUR SPENDING, REDUCE THE TAX RATE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE INPUT TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING?
[01:15:12]
>> RICK TETTERTON, AGAIN, 9750 BLACKWATER FARM LANE.
A COUPLE OF THINGS IS I'M PROBABLY GOING TO SHOCK MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM AND PROBABLY STOP ANYONE FROM EVER ASKING ME TO RUN AGAIN HERE IN A SECOND, BECAUSE I CONSIDER MYSELF AN ULTRA CONSERVATIVE, AND AT ONE POINT IN TIME, I EVEN BROKE TO THE POINT WHERE I WOULDN'T EVEN CALL MYSELF A REPUBLICAN.
I WOULD CALL MYSELF A REAGANITE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK A LOT OF CONSERVATIVES UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES TO PREVENT PAYING MORE IN THE FUTURE, YOU HAVE TO PAY IT NOW.
A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE SPEAKING TODAY DON'T SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS COUNTY.
THERE'S A SIX-INCH SEWER LINE THAT WE WILL REPLACE BECAUSE FORMER MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD DIDN'T WANT TO SEE GROWTH.
NOT BECAUSE IT WAS INTELLIGENT TO PUT IN A SIX-INCH LINE, BUT BECAUSE THEY REALIZED THAT UNDER-SIZING THE LINE PREVENTED ANYONE ELSE FROM HOOKING ONTO THAT LINE. THAT'S IGNORANCE.
THAT AIN'T IGNORANCE. THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT AN INCREASE WOULD BE OF $0.02 THAT THEY WERE SHOWING EARLIER, 60 BUCKS A YEAR, FIVE DOLLARS A MONTH ON SOME OF THIS STUFF.
LET ME RESTATE. I DESPISE PAYING TAXES.
>> I DON'T MIND IN MY LOCALITY PAYING FOR THINGS IF I KNOW WHAT I'M PAYING FOR.
I HEARD SOME OF THE POSITIONS THAT ARE BEING CUT.
I HAVE A REAL PROBLEM WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES BECAUSE WE'RE SO FAR BEHIND ON EMERGENCY SERVICES, IN MY OPINION, THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO CUT OUT THOSE FUTURE POSITIONS.
PEOPLE ARE DYING BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET TO THEM, AND I KNOW THE VOLUNTEERS IN THIS COUNTY ARE WONDERFUL PEOPLE.
I LOVE A LOT OF THEM, THANK THE WORLD I EVEN GREW UP WITH SOME OF THEM.
BUT WE ARE TOO LARGE NOW TO BE JUST A VOLUNTEER FORCE, AND THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY CAN STILL DO THESE THINGS, BUT THERE'S A TIME WHEN WE HAVE TO BRING IN OTHERS TO DO IT.
CUTS TO OUR BUDGET IN THAT WAY HURT US.
IF WE DID SOMETHING WHERE WE EARMARKED AND PUT IT OUT WHERE THAT MONEY'S GOING TO GO, I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
BUT POLICE FORCE, EMERGENCY SERVICES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
GROWTH, IT'S HERE, WHETHER YOU WANT IT TO BE HERE OR NOT, WHETHER IT'S MY FAULT, WHETHER IT'S SOMEBODY ELSE'S FAULT, WHETHER IT'S ALL THESE NEW BUILDERS COMING IN, DOESN'T MATTER IT EXISTS.
UNTIL YOU STOP HAVING BABIES, I'M GOING TO KEEP MAKING THE STATEMENT.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE GROWTH. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO LIVE HERE.
POOR PRIOR PLANNING HAS PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE WILL NOW PAY MORE THAN DOUBLE WHAT WE WOULD HAVE PAID IF THEY HAD DONE THE RIGHT THING 20 YEARS AGO, AND THAT INCLUDES SCHOOLS.
WE ALWAYS PLAN FOR WHAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW.
WELL, WE JUST GOT NUMBERS, 500 HOUSES, 25 STUDENTS IN FIVE YEARS, I THINK, ROUGHLY IS WHAT THE NUMBERS CAME OUT FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD.
IF WE CAN'T PLAN FOR AN INCREASE OF 25 STUDENTS IN FIVE YEARS, WELL, WE'RE ALL STILL STUPID.
NO OFFENSE, NOTHING INTENDED TOWARD Y'ALL.
BUT THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR, FOLKS.
WE NEED TO CONTROL. ASSESSMENTS CAN GO UP.
THEY SHOULD GO UP, BUT THEY GOT TO BE FAIR. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CAROL DRISCOLL.
I LIVE AT 13415 QUEEN STREET IN DISPUTANTA.
I'M AGAINST THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
I AGREE WITH THE LAST SPEAKER.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE CUTTING FIRE, EMS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
THE THINGS I THINK WE SHOULD BE CUTTING ARE ADMINISTRATIVE-TYPE THINGS.
I'M ALSO AGAINST THE TAX RATE, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T DECREASE IT.
AT ONE OF THE MEETINGS, WE TALKED ABOUT THE WHOLE ISSUE OF TAX AND CLUTTER, AND Y'ALL DECIDED THAT YOU WOULD POSTPONE IT.
WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT TRASH.
I KNOW THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE SENT YOU EMAILS, HAVE CALLED YOU, HAVE TALKED AT THE MEETINGS.
THEN I HEAR THAT THERE HAVE BEEN MEETINGS THAT Y'ALL HAVE JUST RUBBER-STAMPED THINGS.
I REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN TO WHAT WE'RE ALL SAYING.
I KNOW, FOR ME, PERSONALLY, I CAN'T AFFORD FOR MY TAXES TO GO UP.
I'M 66. I WORK A FULL-TIME JOB.
I COMMUTE 80 MILES A DAY TO RICHMOND.
NOW I'M LOOKING AT A THIRD JOB.
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO CAN'T DO THAT? THE OLDER ADULTS, PEOPLE WHO ARE DISABLED, THAT TYPE OF THING.
[01:20:01]
AS I'VE SAID AT THE LAST SEVERAL MEETINGS, THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO BE INCREASING ANYTHING.THIS IS THE TIME TO BE MAKING CUTS.
PEOPLE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOSING THEIR JOBS.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S ON THE HORIZON.
THIS, I THINK, IS THE TIME THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT DECREASING, NOT INCREASING.
>> JUSTIN NOBLIN, 8724, CENTENNIAL, AGAIN.
I JUST WANTED TO FOR ONE, THANK Y'ALL FOR THE EFFORT THAT Y'ALL ARE MAKING.
WHILE I GET ALONG WITH SOME AND DON'T GET ALONG WITH SOME AND AGREE WITH SOME AND DISAGREE WITH SOME, I TRULY FEEL THAT Y'ALL ARE ALL TRYING TO GET THIS RIGHT AND IT'S IN Y'ALL'S HEART AND BEST INTEREST TO GET THIS CORRECT, AND Y'ALL WANT TO SEE IT RIGHT.
WE ARE IN A TERRIBLE SPOT WITH IT.
I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ONE OF Y'ALL THIS MORNING AND SAID IF I WAS IN Y'ALL'S POSITION, I WOULD REJECT THE ASSESSMENTS AGAIN.
THAT IS A TERRIBLE POSITION TO BE IN, AND I DON'T ENVY Y'ALL FOR WHAT Y'ALL ARE FACED WITH HERE.
IT'S A DIFFICULT SPOT TO BE IN.
I KNOW WE HAVE THE LEGAL ABILITY TO REJECT THEM AGAIN AND REJECT THEM AGAIN NEXT YEAR IF WE HAVE TO.
WE CAN GO UP TO SIX YEARS AND REJECT THEM UNTIL WE TAKE IT ON.
BUT IT'S JUST A DIFFICULT SPOT TO BE IN.
I GOT TO CALL MY 88-YEAR-OLD AUNT THIS MORNING AND TELL HER THAT HER TAXES GOT REDUCED $337 AFTER THEY WERE CORRECTED FROM THESE NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES THAT WE HAD.
HER HUSBAND PASSED AWAY MORE THAN 20 YEARS AGO.
SHE MAKES $1,600 IN SOCIAL SECURITY A MONTH.
SHE'S GOT A TIGHT BUDGET AND CAN'T AFFORD THESE ERRORS THAT WE'RE HAVING.
BUT WE ARE MAKING PROGRESS, AND I DO SEE THE BOARD AS A WHOLE GIVING TREMENDOUS EFFORT TO GET THIS RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT Y'ALL CAN CUT.
I'VE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE THINGS ON THE BUDGET.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT DEPARTMENTS Y'ALL COULD CUT TO GET DOWN TO 74.
I DON'T ENVY YOU IN THAT DECISION EITHER, BECAUSE EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE MAD AT 80 - 82.
BUT I DON'T SEE A SPOT WHERE Y'ALL COULD GET DOWN TO 74, AND WITH THE STATE MANDATE, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE 76.
I DON'T SEE WHERE Y'ALL COULD GET TO 76 AND NOT CUT THINGS THAT WOULD TRULY HURT THIS COUNTY.
AS MR. TETTERTON SAID, WE ARE SO BEHIND ON WHAT WE NEED, WE'RE PLAYING CATCH UP, AND IT'S COSTING US FOR PREVIOUS BOARD'S MISTAKES AND ERRORS THAT THEY MADE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE Y'ALL POSTPONE THE VOTE TONIGHT UNTIL JUNE.
I THINK Y'ALL HAVE THAT AUTHORITY TO POSTPONE IT, AND IT GIVES MORE TIME TO ENSURE THAT THE ASSESSMENTS ARE GETTING CORRECTED.
I THINK WE'RE CLOSE TO GETTING THEM.
IF VISION IS WILLING TO ACTUALLY STEP UP AND FIX A COUPLE MORE THINGS THAT HAVE MAJOR IMPLICATIONS, I THINK WE WOULD BE VERY CLOSE TO ACCURATE AND IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT BETWEEN NOW AND DECEMBER BEFORE THESE TAX BILLS ARE DUE, WE COULD GET THE MAJORITY OF IT CORRECT, AND I THINK THE CITIZENS WOULD APPLAUD THAT.
I AM ASKING IF Y'ALL WOULD CONSIDER PLEASE POSTPONING THIS VOTE ONE MORE TIME TO GET THE ENSUREMENT THAT THE ASSESSMENTS ARE GETTING FIXED THE WAY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO, BECAUSE ONCE YOU APPROVE IT, THEY CAN IGNORE YOU AT THAT POINT, AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT. THANK Y'ALL.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M REALLY GOING TO ASK, AND I'VE TRIED TO ASK THIS FOR SEVERAL MEETINGS.
FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WOULD YOU PLEASE LINE UP AGAINST THE WALL? IT HELPS ME OUT UNLESS YOU CAN'T PHYSICALLY STAND, I GET THAT.
BUT IT JUST HELPS ME OUT TO GAUGE HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE.
BUT I SEE I GET DOWN TO NONE, THEN I SEE SOMEBODY POP UP THAT'S BEEN SITTING FOR A WHILE.
THAT'S JUST ME ASKING NICELY, PLEASE FOR ANY TIME WE HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF DO I HAVE ONE OR DO I HAVE 50. YES, MA'AM.
>> DONNA COYNE,13620 TAYLOR DRIVE.
>> YOU PULL THE MIC DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT, IT MAKES IT EASIER.
>> ON APRIL 22ND, YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOWER THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX, AND YOU DID NOT.
TODAY, I'M ASKING YOU TO EQUALIZE THE REAL PROPERTY TAX AND MOBILE HOME TAX.
OUR LOW-POPULATION COUNTY PAYS A HIGH AMOUNT OF TAXES YEAR AFTER YEAR.
I CAN TELL YOU PERSONALLY, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST FIVE YEARS,
[01:25:01]
AND MY HOUSE PAYMENT HAS INCREASED ALMOST TO A LIMIT THAT I DON'T WANT IT TO SURPASS, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO.IT SEEMS THAT IT'S NEVER ENOUGH.
SURELY, IT IS TIME FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO COME UP WITH WAYS TO SAVE MONEY. THANK YOU.
>> JUST A REQUEST, I NEED A SEVEN-COUNTY LINE ROOM.
I GOT A STATEMENT AND A QUESTION.
JUST LIKE JUSTIN SAID, I DON'T ENVY YOU.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME.
THERE'S UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES TO WHAT'S GOING ON, AND Y'ALL VERY WELL KNOW THIS.
WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS LET'S SAY I JUST PICK NUMBERS.
LET'S SUPPOSE YOU BUDGET 90 MILLION AND THE REAL NUMBER, AS I SAID LAST TIME, COMES IN AT 80 IN TERMS OF REVENUE.
WHAT DO YOU DO? YOU CAN'T DEFICIT SPEND? YOU CAN'T SPEND MONEY YOU DIDN'T BRING IN.
YOU JUST DON'T ALLOCATE IT? YOU DON'T VOTE FOR THINGS IN BOARD MEETINGS? I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS TO THAT.
I ALSO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT IS TO THIS LEGO WAREHOUSE.
I'M BEING TOLD I CAN'T ASK THAT QUESTION AND GET AN ANSWER.
THE STATE IS PUTTING IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO "HELP PRINCE GEORGE BRING THAT INTO THIS COUNTY." WHAT'S OUR CONTRIBUTION AND WHERE IS THAT IN THIS BUDGET? IS IT A SECRET LINE ITEM THAT'S HIDDEN? IS IT BLACKED OUT? IS IT WHITED OUT? CAN WE NOT SEE IT? WHAT'S THE IMPACT? SURELY THIS ISN'T FREE FOR PRINCE GEORGE.
SURELY, THE STATE DIDN'T SAY, WE'RE GOING TO HELP YOU GET THIS FACILITY, EXPECTING US TO PUT NOTHING ON THE TABLE.
WHAT'S THE IMPACT TO TAXPAYERS? WHAT'S THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT TO TAXPAYERS? THAT ROI STATEMENT IS VERY LACKING IN WHAT I'M SEEING IN THIS COUNTY.
I SEE IT AT THE EDA, I SEE IT IN PROPOSALS.
NOBODY ASKED, WHAT IS THIS GOING TO COST US? WE TALK ABOUT ORDERS, GOING TO BE 400 JOBS, 390 OF THEM COMING FROM NORTH CAROLINA OR A CAMPGROUND IN A DINWIDDIE.
THEY'RE NOT COMING FROM THIS COUNTY.
HOW'S THAT ADDRESSED? WHAT'S THE ROI? WHAT ARE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES? I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW YOU HANDLE THIS.
IF YOU BUDGET X AND YOU GET 0.7X, WHICH WE'RE PROJECTING, MR. NOBLIN COVERED IT PRETTY CLEARLY, YOU'RE NOT GETTING WHAT VISION TOLD YOU YOU'RE GOING TO GET.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO HANDLE THAT IS THE REAL QUESTION.
PUBLIC SAFETY IS PROBABLY THE FIRST JOB OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
NATIONAL SAFETY IS THE FED'S JOB.
CUTTING FIRE AND EMS IS NOT THE ANSWER FOR SURE. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD MEMBERS.
I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO SAY, OTHER THAN I PRETTY MUCH AGREE WITH EVERYBODY.
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM, I GUESS I HAVE WITH THE WHOLE RATE AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS I LOOKED UP MY TAXES FOR MY HOUSE.
SINCE 2019, MY PROPERTY, OR WHAT I PAY TO THE TREASURER'S OFFICE HAS GONE UP 57% SINCE 2019.
NOW, MY QUESTION, AS FOR ALL OF YOU BOARD MEMBERS WOULD BE, IF MY TAX BURDEN TO THE COUNTY HAS INCREASED 57%, WHAT IN THE COUNTY SINCE 2019 HAS GOTTEN BETTER BY 57%? THAT'S JUST A BASIC QUESTION.
IF I'M PAYING MORE, I WANT TO KNOW WHAT I'M GOING TO GET IN RETURN.
RIGHT NOW, I JUST DON'T SEE IT.
I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT ALL DAY, AND I CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF THINGS I CAN POINT TO THAT I THINK IS GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION, BUT NOT MANY I CAN POINT TO THAT I THINK IS GOING IN THE RIGHT.
IF MY TAXES KEEP INCREASING, I'M JUST A SIMPLE QUESTION, SIMPLE PERSON, WHAT'S GETTING BETTER CAUSE I'M NOT SEEING IT? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> GOOD EVENING, BOARD. SCOTT HAMEL, 3963, DOE RUN ROAD.
I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF.
JUST CAME FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL WE WERE GIVEN A COUPLE SCHOLARSHIPS SO I'M STILL IN OUTFIT FOR THAT.
BUT I WAS GOING TO ASK THE BOARD, REALLY, IF THERE'S CONSIDERATION TO POSSIBLY POSTPONE THE VOTE ON THIS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BECOME PRETTY OBVIOUS THROUGH THE SEVERAL PRESENTATIONS
[01:30:02]
THAT I'VE SEEN ON THE BUDGET IS THAT THROUGH THIS ENTIRE TIME, WE SEEM TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE 8 CENTS THAT WE WANT TO ADD ON TOP OF THE 74.IN EVERY CONVERSATION, I'VE REALLY NOT HEARD MUCH ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE 74 CENTS.
WHAT EFFICIENCIES COULD WE FIND IN THAT 74 CENTS? EVERYTHING'S BEEN A LOT OF HORSE TRADING AROUND WHAT'S IN THAT 8 CENTS.
WHEN I WAS LOOKING THE OTHER DAY AT THE ASSESSMENTS, WHICH I KNOW IS ANOTHER COMPONENT OF THIS, JUST LOOKING AT ONE SECTION OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE AS FAR AS HOW THE VALUES ARE LINING UP.
THE PARTICULAR BLOCK IN BRANCHESTER PARKWAY, PROPERTIES THAT ARE ROUGHLY THE SAME SIZE, THE LAND VALUES VARY BY 17.5%.
JUST IN LAND VALUES, THESE ARE EXACT SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, THE SAME BLOCK, 4400 BLOCK OF BRANCHESTER PARKWAY, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, THE LAND VALUES CHANGE 17.5% ACROSS 22 PARCELS.
WE'VE GOT 14.5 THOUSAND PARCELS IN THE COUNTY.
I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN OTHER PLACES.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU NOTICE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, AND I KNOW WE'VE GOT SOME OTHER FOLKS THAT HAVE REALLY BEEN HOUNDING THIS FOR A GOOD WHILE NOW IS THAT WHEN YOU COMPARE BRANCHESTER TO WHERE I LIVE IN FOUNTAIN RIDGE, HOW THE VALUES ARE CALCULATED SEEMS TO BE DIFFERENT.
NOW, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT A BUILDABLE LOT VERSUS A PER-ACRE VALUE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS TO ME ARE EVALUATED DIFFERENTLY.
I REALLY THINK A COMBINATION OF BOTH THESE THINGS.
THE UNDERLYING VALUE OF OUR REAL ESTATE IS SOMETHING I KNOW WE'RE STILL WORKING ON.
YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN DILIGENT IN TAKING QUESTIONS, REALLY DIGGING IN, AND FIGURING OUT HOW WE CAN IMPROVE THAT PROCESS.
BUT ALSO JUST HAVING MORE OPEN DISCUSSION IN THE PUBLIC EYE ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE EXISTING 74 CENTS THAT WE CAN IMPROVE WOULD REALLY BE APPRECIATED.
I JUST ASK THAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER POSTPONING UNTIL WE HAVE BETTER NUMBERS.
I'D LOVE TO SEE MORE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE UNDERLYING NUMBERS BEFORE WE EVEN BEGIN TO DISCUSS THE ADDITIONAL 8 CENTS. THANK YOU.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE INPUT TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING? I SEE NO ONE ELSE MOVING FORWARD.
MRS. PUDLOW, IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT I WILL ASK.
>> THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AT THIS TIME, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS ASKED.
I'LL RETURN THIS MATTER BACK OVER TO THE BOARD.
I WILL MAKE A GENERAL STATEMENT ABOUT THE COMMENT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT LEGO.
WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE DETAILS OF LEGO YET, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THIS HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED BY THE GOVERNOR, THIS BOARD HAS NOT OFFICIALLY RECEIVED THE PAPERWORK AND THE AGREEMENTS FOR US TO LOOK OVER AND APPROVE AND VOTE ON THAT IN A PUBLIC MEETING.
AT THAT TIME, THAT INFORMATION WILL BECOME PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.
MR. STOKE, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M SPEAKING OUT OF TURN.
>> THAT IS THE REASON WHY THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE IT IS NOT PUBLIC INFORMATION YET IS WHY IT IS NOT BEING SHARED WHEN PEOPLE ARE ASKING.
IT WILL BE SHARED AT THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY THAT WE GET A CHANCE TO DO THAT.
ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED ABOUT, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE APPROVE A BUDGET AND WE CHECK UP SHORT.
FOR EVERY ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN REVENUE, WHEN YOU DIVIDE THAT BY 100 AND THEN MULTIPLY IT, I'M JUST USING THE $0.82, THAT WOULD BE $8,200 IN THE REVENUE OF WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO CUT FROM THE BUDGET.
ONE MILLION DOLLARS EQUATES TO 8,200.
AM I CORRECT WITH THAT, MISS JURY?
>> ONE MILLION OF ASSESSED VALUE.
>> OF ASSESSED VALUES. YES, MA'AM.
THANK YOU FOR CORRECTING THAT.
ONE MILLION OF ASSESSED VALUES WOULD TRANSLATE TO $8,200 IN REVENUE THAT WE WOULD NEED TO ADDRESS TO CUT FROM THE BUDGET.
WE WOULD HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS.
WE COULD FIND WHERE WE CAN CUT THAT FROM.
OR THIS BOARD CAN MAKE DECISIONS, WE DON'T USUALLY LIKE TO DO IT, BUT IF WE CHOSE TO DO IT, WE COULD VOTE FOR ONE YEAR, PULL THAT SHORTAGE OR SHORTFALL FROM OUR FUND BALANCE TO ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO STILL GENERATE AND FULFILL THE NEEDS OF THESE POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED,
[01:35:06]
ESPECIALLY ON THE FIRE MEDIC SIDE.THOSE ARE TWO OPTIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE, EITHER BE COMING BACK.
EVEN IF THE BUDGET IS APPROVED, WE CAN COME BACK AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, AND AT THAT POINT, IT WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC EYE.
WE WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE AN AMENDED BUDGET, AND THEN THAT IS SENT FORWARD TO BE REFLECTED.
THOSE ARE THE WAYS THAT WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.
SOMETHING TELLS ME MY GUT FEELING, ME SPEAKING ONLY AS FLOYD BROWN, I'M THINKING THAT THERE WILL PROBABLY BE SOME ADJUSTMENTS OR SOME WAY WE MAY EITHER HAVE TO COVER A SHORTFALL OR HAVE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE WE DO KNOW THAT NUMBERS ARE STILL BEING ADJUSTED BY VISION, AND WE KNOW THAT THAT WILL PROBABLY CONTINUE TO BE ADJUSTMENTS BEING MADE BY WORKING WITH MR. HORN'S OFFICE AS OUR LOCAL ASSESSOR.
THAT'S TO ANSWER THOSE TWO QUESTIONS.
DID ANY OF YOU GUYS THINK OF ANOTHER QUESTION THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ASKED THAT I HAVEN'T ADDRESSED?
>> ALL RIGHT. I'M TURNING THIS MATTER BACK OVER TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR INPUT FIRST.
IF ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO SAY AT THIS POINT.
>> I'M SPEAKING FOR TJ, AND I'M SAYING THIS UP FRONT, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME PEOPLE SAY I'M A LITTLE BIT TOO DIRECT.
BUT I DON'T KNOW ANY OTHER WAY TO BE.
THE STATEMENT, AND THIS IS NOT INTENDED.
IT IS NOT INTENDED TO COME ACROSS AS A THREAT.
PEOPLE REALLY NEED TO TAKE HEED TO THE STATEMENT WAS MADE ABOUT BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASKED FOR WITHOUT KNOWING ALL THE PARTICULARS AND ALL THE TENTACLES.
WE INCREASED A SENIOR CITIZEN, AND DON'T QUOTE ME ON 48-58 SOMETHING.
WE GOT AN EXTRA FREE TRASH DATE THAT WE ADDED IN, THAT WE DID THAT UP FRONT.
THAT'S 35,830, I THINK IT IS, THAT'S NOT COVERED BY GRANT.
THE SENIOR CITIZENS, WHEN WE RAISE THE LEVEL, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO APPLY.
I THINK I'VE MENTIONED IT A COUPLE OF MEETINGS, IF YOU DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE I'VE HAD A LADY CALL ME JUST AFTER WE PASSED THE BUDGET.
GO IN AND CHECK. SHE SAID SHE MISSED A CUT OFF BY $300.
WELL, SHE OUGHT TO BE WELL WITHIN THAT CUTOFF ON HER PRIMARY HOUSE THIS TIME AROUND.
WE STILL GOT TO 1.9 MILLION, WHICH WAS LAST YEAR'S NUMBERS FOR DISABLED VETERANS.
NO OFFENSE, FOLKS, I'M A VETERAN.
I WILL DEFEND THAT UNTIL THE COWS COME HOME FOR DISABLED VETERANS.
THE CUTS THAT ARE DANGEROUS, WE CAN'T KEEP GOING TO THE GENERAL FUND EVERY TIME WE TURN AROUND.
I'M NOT SAYING I HAVEN'T DONE IT.
WE WENT TO IT TO SECURE TWO FIRE TRUCKS AND THREE AMBULANCES, I THINK WE CHECKED UP ABOUT $3.1 MILLION SHORT, AND I COULD BE A COUPLE $1,000 THAT WENT AWAY BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY NEEDED.
WE'VE GOT REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS, THE TWO CENT AND THE ONE CENT WE PUT IN, IT'S NOT KEEPING UP WITH TODAY'S PRICING ON WHAT A FIRE TRUCK IS LIKE A MILLION DOLLARS FOR STANDARD FIRE TRUCK.
THE $543,000 FOR THE SCHOOL BUSES. THAT'S UP FRONT.
THAT'S ALL BESIDES WHAT THE SCHOOLS GET, BUT TO DO ANYTHING, WE'RE SAYING EQUALIZING.
I KNOW PEOPLE ARE PROMOTING JUST EQUALIZE AND SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
THAT COULD HAVE SOME DIRE CONSEQUENCES.
IT'S GOING TO HIT THE SCHOOLS.
IT'S GOING TO HIT EVERY CITIZEN OUT HERE ON SERVICES AND ALL EQUIPMENT IF YOU DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'VE GOT GOING ON.
YES, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME POOR DECISIONS AND NOT PLANNING FAR ENOUGH AHEAD.
THE SEWER ONE I LIKE, BECAUSE I'VE ARGUED ABOUT THAT EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, THE SIX INCH LINE VERSUS WHERE WE'RE AT NOW, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE IT, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
BUT THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO SEE GROWTH, WHETHER WE WANT IT OR NOT.
IT'S CONTROLLED GROWTH IS WHAT WE WANT TO TRY TO GET WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALL.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS A TOUGH NUT TO CRACK BECAUSE AND I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE GROWTH JUST STOP.
WELL, THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK EITHER, BECAUSE THINGS ARE STILL GOING UP.
I'M STILL PAYING MORE THIS YEAR, WHATEVER.
SOME OF IT'S DICTATED BY THE STATE, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND YOU NAME IT.
SOME OF IT'S MY CHOICE, SOME OF IT'S NOT.
SOME OF IT IF IT IS IF I NEED IT, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PAY IT.
BUT THE FIRE AND EMS, THE POSITIONS WE LOOKED AT, SOME OF THE ECC, THEY WERE HARD CUTS.
WE DID NOT TAKE ANY OF THOSE CUTS LIGHTLY AND I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT UPFRONT.
[01:40:02]
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO POSTPONING.I DON'T KNOW WHAT NUMBERS WE'LL HAVE BETTER, BUT LIKE MR. BROWN'S ALREADY EXPLAINED, WE CAN COME BACK AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, AND WE MAY BE FORCED TO HAVE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE NOTE OF THIS.
EVERYBODY THINKS ONCE WE APPROVE A BUDGET BECAUSE WE GOT TO APPROVE IT AND GET IT TO THE STATE, OR WE CAN BE SUBJECT TO PENALTIES, WE DON'T GET THE STATE NUMBERS MOST OF THE TIME UNTIL THE END OF JULY.
MOST TIME TAX SEASON'S DONE, PEOPLE FORGET EVERYTHING TO GO ON TO MARY WAY, NOT EVERYBODY, FOR SOME PEOPLE.
WE'RE SITTING THERE MAKING AMENDMENTS TWO, THREE TIMES AS WE GO DOWN, EITHER FOR US OR THE SCHOOLS, BECAUSE NOW WE'VE GOT THE STATE NUMBERS THAT THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN US UP FRONT.
IT'S ALWAYS A SHELL GAME OR A PUZZLE TO FIGURE WHAT THE ESTIMATE IS, WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET, AND THEN NOT KNOWING WHAT THOSE YAHOOS MAY DO IF THEY DECIDE TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION WRENCHING THINGS, BECAUSE YOU PLANNED FOR X, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE GETTING. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
>> THANK YOU, SIR, MR. PUGH, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK.
>> IT'S REALLY A THOUGHT. IT WOULD BE MILLION, SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN OUT OF THE CONTINGENCY FILE OF THE GENERAL FUND IF WE LEVEL FUNDED, WHICH I KNOW THAT'S FROWNED UPON.
WE DON'T LIKE GOING IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I'VE SPOKE WITH STAFF, AND I REALLY CAN'T SEE PUNTING THE BUDGET BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE TIME TO DO THEIR WORK, IE, WHETHER IT'S PAY RAISES, WHERE THERE'S JOB DESCRIPTIONS, EVERYTHING FROM JULY 1.
FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT TAKES 30 DAYS SO IF WE PUNTED IT TO JUNE.
>> IT'S NOT GO TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.
>> YEAH. I'M CONCERNED WITH THE ASSESSMENTS.
GRANTED, THERE'S GOT TO BE A LOT OF VALUE CHANGE TO EQUAL A PENNY.
I WANT TO LOWER IT. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO LOWER IT.
WE HAD A PUBLIC SPEAKER TONIGHT TALK ABOUT 74 CENT.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T LOOK AT OR DISCUSS.
>> 75 IS MANDATED BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATE.
>> I THINK I WROTE DOWN HERE IF SOMEBODY'S HOUSE WAS THE AVERAGE OF $22, X AMOUNT OF HOMES, I DON'T KNOW IF WE TAKE SOMETHING OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND TO LESSEN THE LOAD TO THE CITIZEN.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT, BUT LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.
>> YES, MA'AM. GO AHEAD, MS. WAYMACK.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE WE'VE BEEN TOLD WE'RE ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING COUNTIES IN VIRGINIA AND WITH GROWTH COMES A LOT OF PROBLEMS, THERE IS NOT AN EASY THING.
I HAD A CITIZEN TELL ME, WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED SO MUCH MONEY.
WE HAVE VOLUNTEER FIREMEN, AND VOLUNTEER EMS. MY GOODNESS, THAT PERSON IS WAY BEHIND THE TIMES OF THE DAYS OF TOTAL VOLUNTEERS HAVE GONE.
THEY CAN'T KEEP WORKING FOREVER AND WHEN WE'RE A FAST GROWING COUNTY, WE HAVE TO HAVE THOSE FIRST RESPONDERS, THE POLICE, TOO, THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT.
WE CAN'T LET THOSE THINGS GO BY. THANK YOU.
>> AGAIN, THANKS TO EVERYBODY THAT CAME UP AND TALKED AND SPOKE.
I WILL SHARE WITH Y'ALL THIS IS MY SECOND YEAR.
LAST YEAR, WE DID NOT HAVE ASSESSMENTS.
I'M VERY NERVOUS THIS YEAR BECAUSE THE NUMBERS ARE CHANGING DAILY, AND THEY'RE GOING DOWN, NOT GOING UP. THEY'RE GOING DOWN.
THEN WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION IS GOING TO BRING TO US, HOW MUCH CHANGE IS GOING TO BE THERE.
I THINK WE'VE MISSED A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY, BUT WE'LL TAKE IT AND SEE WHERE IT GOES. THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO.
>> A COUPLE OF THINGS I'D LIKE TO SAY.
FIRST, IN RESPONSE TO AN ITEM, MR. COX JUST MENTIONED, I THINK MISS JURY CAN CHIME IN ON THIS, BUT WHEN THESE ESTIMATES ARE GIVEN TO US FOR REVENUE, THEY'RE TYPICALLY FAIRLY CONSERVATIVE NUMBERS, FOR THE MOST PART.
MISS JURY WITH HER EXPERTISE IN BEING OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR, SHE FACTORS IN A ROUGH AMOUNT THAT COULD BE AFFECTED BY THE BOE.
THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT PREDICTED FOR NEW GROWTH
[01:45:02]
AND THEN THERE'S AN AMOUNT THAT'S GIVEN TO HER FROM THE ASSESSOR, WHICH WOULD BE VISION ON THE EXISTING PARCELS.PLEASE, MISS JURY CHIME IN, YOU NEVER FACTOR EVERYTHING AT 100% WHEN YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS STUFF FOR YEARS.
>> NO, SIR. WE HAVE TO ALLOW FOR TAX RELIEF FOR BOTH DISABLED VETERANS AND THE ELDERLY.
WE HAVE TO ALLOW FOR SOME ALLOWANCE FOR UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS.
WE DO NOT BUDGET AT 100% OF ASSESSED VALUES.
THAT WOULD NOT BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.
>> THIS LADY'S BEEN DOING IT FOR THE EIGHT YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, AND I THINK EVERY ONE OF THESE BOARD MEMBERS WOULD SAY, IF SHE WASN'T HERE, WE'D BE HURTING BECAUSE SHE KNOWS THIS STUFF.
SHE KNOWS THE SCHOOL DIVISION BECAUSE SHE USED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL DIVISION AS THEIR FINANCE PERSON SO SHE'S A WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE.
BUT I'M NOT A BELIEVER IN GOING TO THE FUND BALANCE TO PULL MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
HERE'S THE REASON WHY, IF WE WERE TO GO AND PULL THAT THREE MILLION FROM OUT OF FUND BALANCE, THAT NOW SETS A NEW STANDARD FOR WHAT OUR BASELINE IS FOR THE BUDGET FOR THE NEXT CYCLE, BECAUSE THAT THREE MILLION BECOMES PART OF THE BASE BECAUSE OF SALARIES AND WHATEVER.
THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT NEXT YEAR'S ASSESSMENTS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COVER THAT NEW BASE OR HOW WE'RE GOING TO SOURCE THAT.
YOU HEAR US CONSTANTLY SAY, WE TRY TO USE FUND BALANCE FOR A KNOWN ONE TIME EXPENDITURE AND IT GETS A LITTLE DICY WHEN YOU START MAKING THOSE COMMITMENTS TO THINGS THAT ARE WHAT WE CALL REOCCURRING, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT COST IS GOING TO BE.
EVERY TIME IF I SAY THAT TO MISS JURY, SHE'LL FROWN AT ME, AND SHE'LL BE LIKE, MR. BROWN, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE A HARD TIME TRYING TO BALANCE.
WE KNEW WE WERE BEHIND ON FIRE EQUIPMENT, AND WE KNEW AT THE CURRENT PACE WE WERE GOING WITH HAVING THE $0.02 THAT'S DEDICATED.
SO $0.02 OF THAT TAX RATE IS DEDICATED FOR, PLEASE HELP ME, APPARATUS.
THEN $0.01 OF THAT TAX RATE IS DEDICATED TO EQUIPMENT FOR FIRE AND EMS. $0.03 RIGHT OFF THE TOP IS DEDICATED.
THAT MONEY GETS PUT ASIDE TO BUY THINGS LIKE NEW FIRE TRUCKS, AMBULANCES.
WE KNEW AT THE RATE THAT WE WERE GOING, THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO KEEP UP.
WE CHOSE TO INVEST $3.5 MILLION ALMOST OUT OF FUND BALANCE TO TRY TO GET CAUGHT UP.
I DEFINITELY WOULD AGREE WITH MR. TETTERTON STATEMENT TONIGHT.
WE ARE PAYING, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE HERE AND BAD MOUTH ANY PRIOR BOARD, BUT WE'RE PAYING FOR SOME THINGS THAT WERE DONE 30, 20, YEARS AGO.
WE'RE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL STILL.
WE'VE MADE SOME STRIDES, BUT A LOT OF THAT HAS BEEN BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING FEDERAL MONIES THAT SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS WHERE WE COULD INVEST THAT TOTALLY INTO INFRASTRUCTURE.
THINK ABOUT IF WE DIDN'T GET THAT.
WHERE WOULD WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING TO FUND THOSE THINGS? I'M REALLY TRYING TO BE CAREFUL HOW I SAY SOMETHING BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE SOMETIMES I'M MAKING SOME VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD STATEMENTS, AND THEN I'LL GET TEXTS AND EMAILS ABOUT, WELL, YOU WERE TALKING DOWN TO PEOPLE.
THAT IS JUST NOT FLOYD. I DON'T DO THAT.
BUT IF I EVER COME ACROSS TO ANYBODY THAT'S IF I'M SPEAKING DOWN TO YOU, PLEASE LET ME KNOW, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT IN MY HEART, BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN PEOPLE TALK DOWN TO US.
I WOULD NEVER DO THAT ON PURPOSE.
BUT WE HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED TO US BECAUSE WE LIVE THIS EVERY DAY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD GET THERE AT $0.74.
I DON'T KNOW HOW ANY OF US CAN SIT IN THIS ROOM AND IN A COMFORTABLE POSITION, SAY, WE COULD BE AT $0.84 AND STILL GIVE FIRE AND EMS WHAT THEY NEED.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW WE WOULD EVEN BEGIN TO GET THERE.
WE ARE NOT IN A MODE TO WHERE WE WANT TO HIRE PEOPLE AND THEN FIRE PEOPLE.
YEAH, COULD WE DO THAT? ABSOLUTELY.
>> IF WE DON'T KEEP UP WITH SALARIES, WE KNOW PETERSBURG IS COMING WITH THE CASINO.
THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR BASE RATES FOR PEOPLE JOINING THEIR FIRE DEPARTMENT, THEIR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
A LOT OF THE LOCALITIES ARE GOING TO GET ROBBED, PER SE, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO MOVE.
[01:50:02]
EVERY LOCALITY, AS SOON AS WE MAKE A LITTLE TWEAK, THEY MAKE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER TWEAK.IT'S A CAT AND MOUSE GAME, WELL, WHICH CAME FIRST THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG? IT'S ALMOST LIKE I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS PLAYING CATCH UP.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET AHEAD OF THIS, BUT I WILL AGREE WITH MR. WEBB'S STATEMENT.
IF WE SIT HERE AND DO NOTHING, THIS COUNTY IS STILL GOING TO GROW, WHETHER WE WANT IT TO OR NOT.
WE CAN EITHER DECIDE TO TRY TO SOMEWHAT PREPARE FOR IT OR WE JUST SIT BACK AND LET IT DEVELOP ON ITS OWN, AND WE'RE EVEN FURTHER BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL.
AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO PREACH TO ANYBODY.
I'M REALLY JUST TRYING TO STATE THIS HAS BEEN TOUGH.
I'M NOT A PROPONENT OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN DONE TOO LONG BEFORE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
I'M JUST NOT A BIG PROPONENT OF LET'S JUST KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND SEE WHERE WE END UP YEARS FROM NOW.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A DISSERVICE THAT WE WOULD BE PROVIDING TO YOU ALL AS RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT.
BOARD MEMBERS? YES, SIR, MR. PUGH.
>> THE COMMENT WAS MADE THAT WE DON'T BUDGET AT 100% FOR SEVERAL REASONS.
THAT IS SMART ON OUR FINANCIAL DEPARTMENT.
>> TAX RATE CAN BE CHANGED UP UNTIL THE LAND BOOK IS TURNED IN.
>> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LEAN ON EITHER MS. DRURY.
>> BECAUSE WE ADVERTISED 82, SO IT CAN NEVER GO ABOVE THAT.
>> IT CAN BE CHANGED EITHER WAY.
>> THE LAND BOOK IS DUE SEPTEMBER 1ST.
THAT'S THE HARD AND FAST STATE LAW DEADLINE.
>> MY QUESTION THAT I PROPOSED TO THE BOARD IS, IF WE UNDER-BUDGETED OUR BUDGET AND WE POSSIBLY HAVE MORE REVENUE COMING IN FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION, WOULD THIS BOARD BE WILLING TO LOOK AT IT BEFORE THAT SEPTEMBER 1ST BECAUSE THAT'LL BE AFTER THE BOE AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS TO MAYBE GIVE THAT TAX RELIEF IF WE'RE OVER?
>> I CAN'T ANSWER FOR THE ENTIRE BOARD.
I KNOW THAT I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU NO, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO DOT THE I'S AND CROSS THE T'S.
IF THAT COMES ABOUT, WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISION TO ALLOW STAFF ENOUGH TIME TO GENERATE THE TAX BILLS.
LET ME JUST ALSO SAY REAL QUICK, THE NOTICES THAT YOU'RE GETTING FROM VISION, THOSE ARE JUST THE FINAL NOTICES OF WHAT THEY'RE ASSESSING YOUR PROPERTY.
THAT NUMBER COULD STILL CHANGE.
ALL THE WAY UP TO WHAT WE SAY, THE LICENSED ASSESSOR SIGNS OFF ON THE LAND BOOK THAT GOES TO THE STATE FOR THEM TO REVIEW.
AT THAT POINT, THAT'S WHEN WE'RE LOCKED IN.
BUT UNTIL THEN, YOU WILL GET A TAX BILL FROM THE COUNTY SOMETIME AFTER MID TO LATE MAYBE SEPTEMBER, IS THAT CORRECT, MS. DRURY?
>> NO, SIR. IT'S TYPICALLY LATE OCTOBER EARLY NOVEMBER FOR THAT FIRST BILL.
>> YOU'LL GET A TRUE TAX BILL THAT WOULD BE DUE FOR DECEMBER 5TH.
THAT TAX BILL, ANY ADJUSTMENTS THAT'S BEEN MADE TO WHAT YOUR ASSESSED VALUE IS WOULD BE REFLECTED IN THAT TAX BILL.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLARITY.
I'LL PUT THAT OUT TO THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ON MR. PUGH'S QUESTION.
>> I'M FINE WITH THAT AS LONG AS THERE'S SOME CONSISTENT METHOD TO HOW WE GO ABOUT IT, BUT YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS.
I DO NOT LIKE MAKING DECISIONS WITHOUT THE NUMBERS TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE.
>> DON'T GET ME WRONG. IT'S WISHFUL THINKING THAT WE'RE GOING TO COME IN SIX, SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS OVER.
I THINK IT'S WISHFUL THINKING THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO LOWER TAX RATE.
>> MY GUT TELLS ME THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
>> THAT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE FOUNDATION AND THE INFORMATION WE'RE RECEIVING, AND I THINK IT WAS JUST SAID PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT THAT THE THOUSANDS OF PROPERTIES THAT THEY'VE ALREADY CHANGED.
I DON'T THINK THEY'RE CHANGING THEM GO HIGHER.
I THINK THEY'RE CHANGING THEM GO LOWER.
>> WE STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN ALL THE NUMBERS FROM THOSE CHANGES.
THAT'S WHY I SAID, YOU HEARD SOMEONE SAY, THIS IS A DAY-TO-DAY MOVING TARGET.
ANYBODY ELSE WITH INPUT? BOARD MEMBERS, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE.
[01:55:11]
I'M LOOKING FOR SOME TYPE OF MOTION.>> HEARING NONE AND KNOWING EVERYTHING WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED, AND I HEARD THE CITIZENS, I DON'T THINK THREE WEEKS IS GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING AS FAR AS WHERE THE TAX RATE NET IS GOING TO BE SET AT TO BE ABLE TO SET THIS.
I'M GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE SET IT AT 82 AS PREVIOUSLY AND THE BUDGET THAT WE PREVIOUSLY GOT SET UP.
THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING THAT, FOLKS IS TWO WEEKS, I WOULDN'T GO TO VEGAS WITH THAT AND THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOLID NUMBERS BEFORE WE EVEN GET TO THE BOE, SO I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE MAKING CHANGES.
WE'RE JUST BELABORING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN ANYWAY. THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND BY MRS. WAYMACK THAT AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD SET THE TAX RATE AT 82 CENTS.
AGAIN, YOU'VE HEARD ALL THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT ON OTHER OPTIONS WE HAVE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> MOTION CARRY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,
[F. Reports]
WHAT WE HAVE NEXT IS A REPORT FROM MR. GABRIEL OWNER WALTON PROPERTY.>> FOLKS, WE'RE GOING TO PAUSE FOR JUST A MINUTE FOR THOSE THAT ARE MOVING OUT OF THE ROOM BECAUSE THERE'S A MOTION BEING CREATED, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO KEEP MOVING HERE.
SORRY. YOU CAN GO AHEAD, MR. GABRIEL
>> GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN BROWN, VICE CHAIR WAYMACK, BOARD MEMBERS, MR. STOKE AND MS. ERARD.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME PRESENT TONIGHT.
TONIGHT, WE WILL DISCUSS THE WALTON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY THAT WE RECEIVED, DEMOLITION AND ABATEMENT COSTS, RFP PROCESS FOR THE PROPERTY, POTENTIAL PROJECTS THAT WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE BOARD, AND NEXT STEPS.
ON JULY 17TH, THE COUNTY WAS AWARDED $50,000 GRANT FROM THE VIRGINIA BROWNFIELD ASSISTANCE FUNDS FROM THE VIRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TO GO TOWARDS THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.
ON APRIL 24TH, 2025, THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY WAS COMPLETED BY DEWBERRY.
THE STUDY DID FIND ASBESTOS AND LEAD MATERIALS ACROSS THE COMPLEX, INCLUDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO DOORS, WINDOWS, THERMAL SYSTEM, INSTALLATIONS, CEILING PANELS, AND FLOORING.
ON MAY 22ND, 2025, WE HAVE SUBMITTED THE FINAL REPORT TO THE STATE.
HERE ARE SOME CURRENT CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
AS WE ALL KNOW, IT IS A VACANT PROPERTY, FORMER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
THE COUNTY HAS EXPERIENCED VANDALISM, TRESPASSERS, MOLD IS PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY.
WE DID FIND THAT IF WE DO, IN FACT, KEEP THE BUILDING UP, WE WILL HAVE TO BOARD THE ENTRANCES DUE TO STATE AND FEDERAL CODE.
IN A PRELIMINARY QUOTE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED ESTIMATES FOR ASBESTOS AND LEAD ABATEMENT THAT WOULD COST AROUND $15,700.
ALSO IN A PRELIMINARY QUOTE, IT IS ESTIMATED THAT DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL GRADING AND PROPER NOTIFICATIONS FROM THIS PROPOSAL WOULD COST AROUND 353,324.
STAFF PROPOSES THAT COSTS BE COVERED THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND.
[02:00:08]
STAFF SUGGESTS THAT THE COUNTY COMMIT TO A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS.THIS PROCESS IS USED BY MANY OTHER LOCALITIES FOR PROPERTIES SUCH AS THESE.
THIS WOULD INCLUDE HAVING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, TO PAINT THE VISION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE FOR THIS TO BE.
WE'D ALSO GET EDA AND PLANNING COMMISSION INPUT.
THEN FROM THAT, WE WOULD CREATE THAT CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN TO MARKET.
STAFF WOULD WORK WITH THE PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO CREATE THE REQUEST FOR A PROPOSAL TO BRING BACK FORWARD TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR APPROVAL.
STAFF WOULD SUGGEST BEGIN MARKETING WITH A WELL KNOWN BROKERAGE FIRM, MARKING THE RFP AND ASSISTANCE WITH ACCEPTING THE PROPOSALS.
STAFF SUGGESTS A COMMITTEE TO BE FORMED TO REVIEW PROPOSALS.
THIS COULD BE TWO EDA DIRECTORS, TWO PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, AND STAFF TO GO THROUGH THOSE PROPOSALS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, SELECT THE TOP THREE AND BRING THAT BACK FORWARD TO THE BOARD FOR A FINAL APPROVAL.
THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL OUTLINE WOULD CONSIST OF THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION, BASICALLY GIVING THE VISION THAT OUR COUNTY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT THE SITE, SCOPE OF WORK THAT WILL PROVIDE SPECIFICS, DELIVERABLES, AND TIMELINES THROUGHOUT THE RFP DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
DO WE WANT TO SEE A STANDARD OF DEVELOPMENT? IS THERE A PARTICULAR LOOK THAT WE WOULD LOOK FOR WITHIN THE PROJECT? THESE ARE ALL QUESTIONS THAT WE HOPE TO ANSWER THROUGH OUR PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS.
THEN THE SALE PROCEDURE WILL BE EXPLAINED WITHIN THE RFP AS WELL.
SOME FACTS ABOUT THE WALTON SITE ON JULY OF 2023.
THIS PROPERTY WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD TO THE COUNTY.
IT IS A FORMER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE.
IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED R2 AND R/A, BUT IS SURROUNDED BY A COMMERCIAL ZONING.
THERE IS WATER, SEWER, ELECTRIC GAS, AND BROADBAND ALL AVAILABLE ON SITE.
MINIMAL WETLANDS ARE ON THE SITE AS WELL.
YOU'RE ABOUT 1.6 MILES FROM INTERSTATE 95, 0.7 MILES TO INTERSTATE 295, AND 2.4 MILES FROM THE FUTURE PETERSBURG LIVE CASINO.
WE WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE THOUGHTS FROM THE BOARD ON THEIR VISION AND WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT THE SITE.
WE HAVE CONDUCTED SOME STUDIES ON THE SITE, WHICH SHOWS YOU THE MEDIUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME, MEDIUM AGE, TOTAL POPULATION WITHIN THE MARKET AREA OF THE SITE.
WE'VE ALSO CONDUCTED A VOID ANALYSIS THAT GIVES YOU INDUSTRIES THAT FIT SIMILAR DEMOGRAPHICS TO SITES SUCH AS THESE THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.
AS YOU CAN SEE, HEALTHCARE, USES HAVE SCORED HIGH, HOTEL USES HAVE SCORED HIGH, HOME IMPROVEMENT STORIES HAVE SCORED HIGH, GROCERY STORES HAVE A MODERATE RATING.
THIS SITE LACKS THE HOUSEHOLD AND MEDIUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME NUMBERS WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS THAT GROCERY USERS ARE LOOKING FOR.
WE HAVE BEEN DECLINED ACTUALLY BY MULTIPLE GROCERY USERS ON THE SITE.
WE WOULD LIKE TO GET SOME INPUT ON THE VISION THAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT THE SITE.
ALSO, I WANT TO MAKE NOTE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH WAS CALLED DIAMOND PARK, HAS HAD DEVELOPERS INTERESTED, BUT THEY DID COME INTO SOME INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES ON THE SITE, THE WATER AND SEWER CAPACITIES.
>> IS THERE ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY INPUT FOR MR. JOBBER? YES, MR. WEBB.
>> A PIECE OF GETTING INPUT FROM THE CITIZENS, IS THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH A SURVEY OR IS THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH TOWN HALLS?
WE WERE INITIALLY THINKING A SURVEY TO GET THE BROADER REACH,
[02:05:03]
BUT WE CAN DO BOTH.>> I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. SOMETIMES IT SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T GET A LOT OF RESPONSE ON SURVEYS VERSUS THE TOTAL NUMBER YOU SEND IT TO.
>> MY TWO CENTS IS, IT'S RIGHT THERE ON 460, IT'S NEXT TO THE INTERSTATE.
I THINK YOU CAN CAPITALIZE ON SOMETHING WHETHER HOTELS WITH THE CASINO COMING AND OR SOMETHING TO DO WITH PRE-HOSPITAL, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A PHARMACY IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY THAT I KNOW OF.
>> YES, SIR. YOU GET SOMETHING, MR GRAVES.
>> THROW IT RIGHT THERE. I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE A STRIP SHOPPING CENTER THERE, MAYBE LIKE A DRUG STORE, SOME DIFFERENT THINGS IN THERE, SOME TENANTS THAT COULD REACH TO SOME OF OUR COUNTY RESIDENTS NEEDS.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A HARD SELL RIGHT THERE WHERE IT'S AT.
>> I KNOW ALL OF US, WELL, NOT ALL OF US, BUT MOST OF THE CITIZENS WANT TO SEE MORE GROCERY STORES, SO THAT'S [NOISE] SOMETHING THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED.
>> IT'S HARD TO GIVE YOU A VISION RIGHT THIS MINUTE, AND HERE'S WHY I'M SAYING THAT.
ALL THAT PROPERTY BEHIND THE SCHOOL IS ALL COMMERCIAL.
WE KNOW THAT THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN LANDLOCKED FOR THE LONGEST TIME BECAUSE VDOT WOULD NEVER APPROVE INTERESTS FROM OVER WHERE TRACTOR SUPPLY RIGHT THERE BEHIND MCDONALD'S, BECAUSE THE DRIVE WOULD NOT MEET VDOT STANDARDS.
I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT BACK THERE COULD BE AND TO TIE SOMETHING IN THERE.
IT COULD BE THE STRIP MALL OR SOMETHING.
I DON'T SEE US PUTTING A HOTEL ON THAT PROPERTY, BUT, YES, A HOTEL WOULD FIT.
BUT I STILL THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE ARE GOING TO DO FITS WITH HOW THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
BECAUSE A LOT OF FOLKS THAT NEED ACCESS TO THAT PROPERTY BEHIND THE SCHOOL NEED TO COME THROUGH THAT LOT. [LAUGHTER]
>> WE HAVE SPOKEN TO THE DIAMOND PARK OWNERS.
>> THEY'RE WILLING TO JOIN IN ON THAT MASTER PLAN CONCEPT TO REALLY HAVE A NICE BUYER FOR BOTH SITES.
>> THEY ARE WILLING TO SPOKE TO THE OWNER AND THE BROKER ACTUALLY ON THIS PAST WEEK.
>> I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT COLLABORATION.
LET'S HEAR WHAT THEIR VISION IS OF THE AREA BACK THERE, AND THEN BETWEEN WHAT THE BOARD MAY BE THINKING AND WHAT THEY COULD BE OFFERING TO US TO SAY, HERE'S WHAT WOULD ACCENT OR BE AT A POINT WHERE IT WOULD HELP IMPROVE THAT AREA.
BUT RIGHT NOW FOR ME, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO SAY, "OH, IT SHOULD BE HOUSING. IT SHOULD BE THIS." WE KNOW THERE'S HOUSING COMING UP ACROSS THE ROAD FROM THE SCHOOL BECAUSE THERE'S PEOPLE IN THERE NOW WORKING.
AGAIN, I'M AT A LOSS RIGHT NOW TO SAY, I THINK IT SHOULD BE A, B, OR C. I THINK IF I HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT A POTENTIAL VISION IS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, AND THEN WE COULD TALK ABOUT WHAT WOULD FIT AS FAR AS TO HELP ACCENT THAT AREA.
>> WHEN WE SAY WHAT THE COST OF DEMOLITION IS, THIS IS CATCH 22, BECAUSE WE COULD SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO DEMO IT.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY WHOEVER BUYS IT HAS TO DEMO IT.
BUT THEN WE'RE STILL GOING TO BE HAVING TO POLICE IT TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM STAYING AT IT, AND WE DON'T WANT THAT BUILDING TO BE UP FOR ANOTHER YEAR AFTER WE SELL IT.
BUT ALSO, IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY TO DEMO IT, EVEN IF IT'S COMING OUT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND, WE WANT TO HAVE A CLEAR VISION OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO RECOUP THAT MONEY EITHER BACK THROUGH THE SALE OR SOMETHING, I WOULD THINK.
>> YOU HAVE TO MENTION THE HEALTH HAZARD.
>> THAT'S DEFINITELY WITH ASBESTOS BEING IN THAT BUILDING.
WE NEED TO GET IT DOWN QUICKLY.
BUT THOSE ARE ALL MY THINGS THAT I THINK ABOUT WHEN I HEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
>> WITH THAT, THE DEPARTMENT IS REQUESTING ACTION FROM THE BOARD ON TWO ITEMS, CONSENSUS ON WHETHER OR NOT TO BRING BACK AN AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION
[02:10:01]
AND LED IN ASBESTOS ABATEMENT AND CONSENSUS ON WHETHER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RFP PROCESS.WITH THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS, WE'LL GET A BETTER KNOWLEDGE OF THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT FOR THAT SITE, WORKING ON THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN AND DETERMINING THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS FOR THOSE TYPE OF USES THERE.
>> FOR ME, I'M OKAY BECAUSE THERE SHOULDN'T BE COSTING US ANYTHING TO DO THE RFP.
IT SHOULDN'T COST US ANYTHING FOR THEM TO GIVE US A QUOTE ON THE DEMO, CORRECT?
>> YES. WE'VE ACTUALLY RECEIVED THE QUOTE WHICH WAS PROVIDED.
>> WELL, I THOUGHT I JUST HEARD YOU SAY, IF YOU ALL WANTED TWO DECISIONS FROM US ABOUT MOVING FORWARD?
>> THE FIRST WAS A CONSENSUS ON WHETHER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION AND LEAD AN ASBESTOS.
WE'D BRING BACK TO THE BOARD AT A LATER DATE FOR APPROVAL FOR THAT CONTRACT.
THE SECOND WOULD BE THE CONSENSUS ON WHETHER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RFP PROCESS.
>> QUICK QUESTION. HOW MANY PEOPLE BIDDED ON THE CONTRACT?
>> WE'VE ONLY RECEIVED ONE ESTIMATE FROM A CONTRACTOR THAT WE HAVE.
>> THERE IS A COOPERATIVE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF PETERSBURG.
PRYOR HAULING, THE SAME COMPANY THAT DEMOLISHED THE CONTINENTAL HOTEL.
THAT WOULD EXPEDITE THE ABILITY TO DO DEMOLITION AND AN ABATEMENT, IF WE COULD USE THAT COOPERATIVE CONTRACT.
>> YES, MS. WAYMACK HAS A QUESTION.
>> DOES THE LEAD ASBESTOS ABATEMENT HAVE TO BE DONE BEFORE DEMOLITION, OR DOES THAT MATTER?
>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE BEFORE, YES, MA'AM.
>> IT'S GOT TO BE DONE AND CONTAINED BEFORE.
>> WELL, TECHNICALLY, I DON'T HAVE TO, SOMEBODY GET IN BIG TROUBLE.
>> UNLESS YOU WANT TO GET LOCKED UP.
>> WE DON'T LOOK GOOD ANY. [LAUGHTER] NO, SIR.
>> I'M NOT STEPPING OUT THERE WITH THAT.
>> YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A CONSENSUS FROM THE BOARD TONIGHT?
>> SURE. I WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH GETTING THE DEMOLITION DONE, AND ALSO NUMBER 2 TO CONSENSUS.
>> NO. IT'S IT'S JUST A CONSENSUS. ARE YOU OKAY?
>> I'D LIKE TO SEE WE GET A BETTER PRICE ON THE DEMO, BUT IF BOARD CONSENSUS WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD, THE MAJORITY'S GOT IT. [NOISE]
>> I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MOVING FORWARD.
>> I THINK WITH THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET A BETTER PRICE JUST BECAUSE AND SOMEBODY THAT CAN GET TO IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THINK YOU HAVE IT.
>> NEXT, WE HAVE OUR POSTPONED ITEM,
[G. Postponed Items]
WHICH IS THE POWER POWELL CREEK SOLAR FACILITY REQUEST.>> GOOD EVENING, BOARD, ONCE AGAIN.
THIS IS THE REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TIME TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION.
THIS REQUEST WAS RECEIVED SENT TO THE COUNTY FROM THE DEVELOPER OF THE PALL CREEK SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY PROJECT.
THEIR NEED FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE TIME TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION IS BECAUSE IN THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT THE BOARD APPROVED FOR THIS PROJECT, IT INCLUDED A DEADLINE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS TO BEGIN WITHIN 36 MONTHS OF APPROVAL.
OTHERWISE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD EXPIRE.
THAT EFFECTIVE DEADLINE TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION IS JULY 12, 2025.
THE BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE OR DENY THAT REQUEST, AND IT IS JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT CONSTRUCTION PROCESS TO BEGIN.
AGAIN, OTHERWISE, IF THE BOARD DENIES IT, THEN THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD REMAIN VALID UNTIL JULY 12.
AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT OR RATHER THE SOLAR FACILITY DEVELOPER, THE NEXT TWO STEPS TO GET TO THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS BEGINNING IS JUST TO HAVE A SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
THEN AFTER THAT, THEY COULD GET A LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT.
IN ORDER TO GET THE SITE PLAN APPROVED, THEY'RE WAITING ON THE LAND OWNER TO SIGN THE PLANS THAT ARE OTHERWISE READY TO BE APPROVED.
[02:15:02]
THEY'LL ALSO HAVE TO PAY ROLLBACK TAXES, AND THEY'RE ACTIVELY WORKING ON THAT.I THINK THEY'LL BE READY TO PAY THAT ONCE THE LANDOWNER SIGNS THE PLAN.
AGAIN, THE DECISION FOR THE BOARD IS WHETHER TO GRANT THIS REQUEST TO EXTEND THE TIME PERIOD THAT THEY HAVE TO BEGIN THAT CONSTRUCTION.
I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY UNEXPECTED DELAYS IN GETTING THE LAND OWNER SIGNATURE IS ESSENTIALLY THE BARRIER TO THEM CONTINUING AT THIS POINT.
A PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT REQUIRED, SINCE THIS IS NOT RECONSIDERING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
IT'S JUST THE BOARD CONSIDERING [NOISE] A SPECIFIC REQUEST ABOUT THE TIMELINE.
STAFF HAS PROVIDED THE RESOLUTIONS FOR THE BOARD TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY IT.
THE APPLICANT, I SEE HE IS ON THE TEAMS MEETING, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SOLAR PROJECT DEVELOPER.
>> AT THIS TIME, I LIKE TO SEE IF HE HAS ANYTHING, HE'D LIKE TO SAY TO THE BOARD AT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU, MR. GRAVES. MY NAME IS JOEL MALEFYT.
I'M WITH SOLAR RIDGE ENERGY HERE AT THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF THE POWELL CREEK SOLAR PROJECT.
WE ARE REQUESTING AN EXTENSION FOR THE PERMIT FOR THE VERY REASONS THAT MR. GRAVES HAS DESCRIBED.
WE'RE WAITING ON FINAL SIGNATURE FROM THE LAND OWNER TO GET SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING IN EARNEST WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY THROUGH THE STORM WATER AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL APPROVAL PROCESS.
WE'D LIKE TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION AS SOON AS WE GAIN SITE PLAN APPROVAL, AND THE LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT IS ISSUED.
THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION IS IN CASE THERE ARE ANY DELAYS IN THAT PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF THE DECOMMISSIONING BOND, PAYING THE ROLLBACK TAXES, OR THINGS THAT WE CANNOT PREDICT BETWEEN NOW AND JULY 12.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER MR. GRAVES.
>> IF I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, THIS ALL IS PREDICATED ON WAITING ON THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO SIGN THE PAPER WORK AND PAY THE ROLLBACK TAXES TWO FOLD? IS THAT CORRECTLY?
>> ESSENTIALLY, MR. MALEFYT JUST NAMED A FEW REASONS THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE THIS EXTENSION JUST IN CASE SOME SCENARIOS PLAY OUT, NOT LIMITED TO JUST THE LANDOWNERS SIGNATURE.
IT'S NOT JUST THE LANDOWNER SIGNATURE.
HE'S STATED A COUPLE OF OTHER REASONS.
BUT THE COUNTY WOULD BE READY TO APPROVE IT IF THE LANDOWNER SIGNS IT, AND IF THEY PAY ROLLBACK TAXES, THEN THE SITE PLAN WOULD BE APPROVED AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OTHERWISE.
>> THIS EXEMPTION IS ONLY GOOD UNTIL JULY.
>> RIGHT NOW, FROM MAY 27 UNTIL JULY 12TH, THAT'S THE TIME PERIOD THAT THEY HAVE TO NOT ONLY GET THE LAND OWNER TO SIGN THE PLAN, BUT THEN ALSO TO GET A LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT.
>> I'LL ADD, THE BOARD CAN CHOOSE WHATEVER DEADLINE IT WANTS.
THE STATE CODE SAYS THAT IN THIS SCENARIO WHERE THEY'RE ASKING FOR THIS EXTENSION, YOU CAN GRANT IT UNTIL JULY 1ST, 2026 OR SUCH LONGER PERIOD AS YOU MAY AGREE TO.
THE DRAFT RESOLUTION, IF YOU CHOOSE TO APPROVE THIS, THAT'S WRITTEN SO THAT IT WOULD GO OUT TO JULY 1ST, 2026, BUT THAT'S ONLY JUST BASED ON WHAT THE STATE CODE SAYS.
YOU CAN SET WHATEVER DEADLINE YOU WANT.
>> THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2022, WHEN THIS STARTED.
>> THE BOARD APPROVED THE REQUEST IN 2022.
THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN IN SEPTEMBER 2023.
>> IT IS TAKING THREE YEARS, AND HE STILL AIN'T GOT A SIGNATURE? SUMS IT UP FOR ME. YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING?
>> I DON'T KNOW. I'M ON THE FENCE A LITTLE BIT HERE.
BUT SO LET ME JUST ASK YOU, ONCE THE SITE PLAN IS SIGNED OFF BY THE COUNTY, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FOR THE DEQ LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT?
>> THE LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT, I WAS REFERRING TO IS THE COUNTY'S LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT.
>> I WILL LEAVE IT UP TO MR. MALEFYT,
[02:20:03]
IF HE'S GOT ANYTHING HE WANTS TO ADD TO THAT.BUT AS FAR AS THE COUNTY'S LAND DISURBANCE PERMIT PROCESS, IF THEY HAVE EVERYTHING ON ORDER AND THEY SUBMIT IT, IT SHOULD JUST TAKE A FEW BUSINESS DAYS TO GET THAT DONE IF EVERYTHING'S IN ORDER WHEN THEY SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION.
>> THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND LOCAL COUNTY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL APPROVAL PROCESS TAKES APPROXIMATELY ONE YEAR FROM INITIAL SUBMITTAL THROUGH VARIOUS ROUNDS OF COMMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPER TO ADDRESS THOSE COMMENTS, ADDITIONAL REVIEW, AND BACK AND FORTH, SO THAT'S BEEN GOING ON.
>> CHANGED, WHICH CREATED THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SURVEY, ADDITIONAL REVISIONS TO THE PLAN, AND ADDITIONAL COMMENTS DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS.
THAT'S THE EXPLANATION FOR THE LENGTH OF TIME.
>> I'M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
YOU STILL HAVE ROUGHLY ABOUT 45 DAYS FROM NOW.
>> IT'S VARIABLE, AND IT'S CLOSE, AND THUS THE REQUEST FOR THE EXTENSION.
THE STATE DEPARTMENT PERMIT THAT HE'S REFERRING, I THINK IT'S THE CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT.
THAT'S BASICALLY DEQ REVIEWING THEIR PLAN.
HE WAS EXPLAINING THE REASON THAT THE SITE PLAN HAS TAKEN SO LONG TO GET THE COUNTY AND DEQ APPROVAL.
>> BUT WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS, THEY'RE WANTING AN EXTENSION TO START THE CONSTRUCTION.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE I CLEARLY UNDERSTAND WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION CAN BEGIN.
I UNDERSTAND THE 12TH IS WHEN IT EXPIRES.
BUT LET'S JUST SAY IF THE SITE PLANS ARE READY AND I'M GOING TO BE GENEROUS, TWO WEEKS.
IF THE OWNER SIGNS OFF AND IT COMES BACK TO THE COUNTY FOR APPROVAL.
IS IT GOING TO TAKE THEM SIX MONTHS TO GET EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO START CONSTRUCTION? THAT'S WHERE I'M CONFUSED AT.
>> THE QUESTION REALLY BOILS DOWN TO, WHEN DOES CONSTRUCTION BEGIN? WHAT'S THAT MOMENT?
>> THE PLANING DEPARTMENT STAFF'S OPINION BASED ON THE INTENT OF THIS CONDITION, IT WOULD BE THAT THE LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT, ONCE THEY GET A LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT FROM THE COUNTY, THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS HAVING BEGUN.
BECAUSE ONCE THEY GET THAT PERMIT, THEY CAN START DIGGING THE GROUND.
WHICH IS NECESSARY TO THIS PART OF CONSTRUCTION.
>> I'M REALLY NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY THIS CAN'T ALL HAPPEN BY JULY 12.
I WOULD THINK THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SHOULD BE IN A MODE AFTER SEVERAL YEARS NOW TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD APPROVE THE SITE PLAN BY NOW, JUST ME, SPEAKING.
I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE EXTENDING THIS TO A YEAR.
NOW, I JUST THINK IF I DID IT, I'D BE THINKING 30 MORE DAYS, HONESTLY, BUT I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT'S PRACTICAL.
BUT I SEE TWO PEOPLE TO MY LEFT.
I'M GOING TO COME TO YOU FIRST BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T SPOKEN YET, SIR.
>> I'M READY TO GIVE YOU A MOTION IF YOU'RE READY FOR IT.
>> WELL, NO, I THINK YOU HAD SOME INPUT TOO AS WELL.
>> LOOK, I'LL BE THE FIRST ONE TO TELL YOU, I'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO STAND BEHIND SOMEBODY WHO OWNS PROPERTY, JUST LIKE ANOTHER GENTLEMAN OWED IN HIS SENIOR YEARS AND FIND A WAY TO GENERATE SOME RESIDUAL INCOME AND STILL KEEP PROPERTY THAT HE'S PAID TAXES ON IN HIS OWNERSHIP.
BUT THAT WAS WITH THE INTENT OF DOING SOMETHING.
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THIS BECAUSE IT'S TAKING SO LONG.
IN ALL HONESTY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE OWNER, BECAUSE HE'S NOT HERE, SO I DON'T KNOW HIM PERSONALLY.
I WOULDN'T KNOW IF I RAN INTO HIM.
IF IT WAS IMPORTANT ENOUGH, IT SHOULDN'T HAVE TOOK ABOUT, 22 MONTHS.
YOU STILL HAD TO DEAL WITH THE ROLL BACK TAXES, AND EVERYTHING ELSE? I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS.
>> ALRIGHT SIR. I THINK I CAN COME TO YOU FOR YOUR MOTION.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST.
>> HE HAS A HARD TIME WAITING [INAUDIBLE]
>> [LAUGHTER] IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. COX AND SECOND BY MR. PUGH THAT WE WOULD DENY THIS EXTENSION OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THIS PROJECT.
YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOW UNDER THE ORDER OF BUSINESS,
[H. Order of Business]
[02:25:01]
AND THE FIRST IS AN AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR AN ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.THIS WILL BE PRESENTED BY MR. FRANK HOLTON OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.
>> WELL, THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS ON HERE.
>> ECONOMIC DEVELOPER AND DIRECTOR AND MR. HOLTON.
>> WELL, I CAN GIVE IT ALL. GOOD EVENING AGAIN, CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIR WAYMACK, BOARD MEMBERS, MR. STOKE, AND MR. RARD.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME PRESENT TONIGHT.
TONIGHT, WE'LL REVIEW THE VIRGINIA BUSINESS READY SITES PROGRAM GRANT BACKGROUND AND UPDATE.
MR. HOLTON WILL GIVE YOU A UTILITIES UPDATE ON THE PROJECT, AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS THE ECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL IMPACT REPORT.
THE VIRGINIA BUSINESS READY SITES PROGRAM IS A DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM TO PROMOTE AND DEVELOP SITES, TO ENHANCE THE COMMONWEALTH'S INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROMOTE ITS COMPETITIVE BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT.
AS WE MAY KNOW, THE COMMONWEALTH IS LACKING IN SHOVEL READY SITES FOR PROJECTS THAT THE STATE GETS.
THE PROGRAM'S GOAL IS TO IDENTIFY AND ASSESS THE READINESS FOR POTENTIAL INDUSTRIAL SITES OF OVER 100 ACRES.
I'M ALIGNING WITH THE GOVERNOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THE PROGRAM WAS DEVELOPED BY A TEAM OF STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS, AND GRANTS ARE CONSIDERED ON A COMPETITIVE BASIS AND MADE AT THE DISCRETION OF VDP AND THE GOVERNOR.
SOME BACKGROUND ON THE VBRSP PROGRAM ON SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2022, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVED THE 2022 STRATEGIC PLAN THAT IDENTIFIED A NEW SEWAGE PUMP STATION AND FORCE MAIN PROJECT TO SERVE INDUSTRIAL SITES AND INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY.
ON DECEMBER 12TH, 2023, THE BOARD APPROVED THE VIRGINIA BUSINESS READY SITES PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A SEWAGE PUMP STATION AND FORCE MAIN PROJECT THAT WILL SERVE THE FUTURE WASTEWATER NEEDS OF THE CROSSPOINTE BUSINESS SITE CENTER.
THE ORIGINAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION WAS A THREE MILLION GALLON PER DAY SEWAGE PUMP STATION IN FORCE MAIN THAT WOULD SERVE FUTURE WASTEWATER NEEDS FOR INDUSTRIAL GROWTH IN THE COUNTY.
THE PROJECT PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED WAS FOR DEBT ISSUANCE WITH AN ESTIMATE OF $30 MILLION.
THIS PROGRAM REQUIRES A THREE TO ONE MATCH BY THE COUNTY AND THE SILVERMAN GROUP, WHO ARE THE OWNERS, AGREED IN CONTRIBUTING AROUND $5 MILLION FOR RESERVATION AND WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY AT THE SITE.
I JUST WANTED TO GO OVER THE BUSINESS CASE IN WHY THE BOARD AND STAFF PRESENTED THIS PROPOSAL.
THE GOAL WAS TO SUPPLY ADEQUATE SEWER CAPACITY TO THE CROSSPOINTE BUSINESS SITE TO CONTINUE DEVELOPMENT AT THAT SITE.
THIS BASICALLY WOULD MAKE IT A SHOVEL SITE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS.
OUR DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED AN INCREASED IN PROJECTS SUCH AS PHARMACEUTICALS, ADVANCED MANUFACTURING, AND NOW DATA CENTERS.
FOR THIS SITE AND SITES THAT ARE LOCATED AROUND THIS AREA.
FROM A REPORT THAT WAS GIVEN TO STAFF FROM THE VIRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP, 03,400 JOBS WOULD BE CREATED DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE WITH AROUND 147 MILLION LOCAL IMPACT AND AROUND $7.3 MILLION IN SALES TAX REVENUE.
THIS GRAPH DEPICTS THE 2022 BUSINESS PATTERNS FOR SALES VALUES.
THIS IS FROM THE UNITED STATES CENSUS BUREAU.
AS YOU CAN SEE, MANUFACTURING, WHOLESALE TRADE, AND OTHER INDUSTRIES LEAD THE WAY IN THAT ECONOMIC IMPACT.
I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THIS DOES INCLUDE HOPE BALL CITY AS WELL, BUT WE CAN SEE THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS THAT WE GET FROM THOSE INDUSTRIES.
ON THIS SLIDE, THIS PROVIDES SOME DATA FROM OUR DEPARTMENT.
THIS DATA IS FROM PROJECTS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE STATE,
[02:30:04]
AND WE KNOW THAT THE STATUS OF THESE PROJECTS WERE LOST DUE TO WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE.WITH THAT, WE'VE LOST MANY OF THOSE LARGER PROJECTS DUE TO THAT LACK OF CAPACITY AT THE SITE AND SURROUNDING SITES.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE SMALL BUSINESS PROJECTS THAT WE'VE ALSO LOST DUE TO WATER AND SEWER CAPACITIES.
THIS GRAPH SHOWS DATA FROM THE STATE OF THE AVERAGE OF WATER AND SEWER DEMANDS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT THEY'VE WORKED ON.
THIS IS BROKEN INTO PROJECTS BY ACREAGE AND INDUSTRY NEEDS FOR WATER AND SEWER DEMANDS.
AS YOU CAN SEE, ADVANCED MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, BIOPHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES, DATA CENTERS REQUIRE HIGH WATER AND SEWER DEMANDS WHILE TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS DO NOT.
JUST A QUICK UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE NOW WITH VBRSP.
ON AUGUST 8, THE GOVERNOR ANNOUNCED THE AWARD OF A $10 MILLION GRANT TO PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
WE WERE THE THIRD HIGHEST IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA.
ON MARCH 25TH, MR. HOLTON PRESENTED WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS, OPTIONS WITH UPDATED COSTS.
APRIL 1, 2025, A FEASIBLE STUDY WAS COMPLETED FOR THE SUSSEX SERVICE AUTHORITY.
ON MAY 1ST, 2025, THE STATE HAD AGREED AN EIGHT WEEK EXTENSION TO COMPLETE A STUDY IF THE BOARD WISHES AND TO HAVE BOARD ACTION ON AN ACTUAL PROJECT.
WITH THAT, I'LL ALLOW MR. HOLTON TO GO OVER THE NEXT SLIDE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH WASTEWATER PROJECTS.
>> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS THE BOARD.
>> JUST A QUICK BRIEF HISTORY ON HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE TO SEE THIS CHART.
AS YOU KNOW AND AS HE'S PROVIDED SOME OF THESE UPDATES ON THE TIME SCHEDULE, THE BOARD DID APPROVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FORCE MAIN PROJECT TO HOPEWELL.
AT SOME TIME DURING THE DESIGN PROJECT, AND WE ARE ABOUT 90% DONE WITH THE INTERCEPTOR MAIN, AND WE'RE ABOUT 50% DONE WITH THE PUMP STATION ITSELF.
AS WE WERE WORKING WITH THE CITY OF HOPEWELL, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE ACTUAL CAPACITY TO MEET OUR FUTURE DEMANDS.
THAT'S WHAT THOROUGH WRENCHENS IN THIS WHOLE PROJECT.
THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY, AND WE START LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS.
IN DOING SO, WE DID IDENTIFY WORKING WITH THE CITY, WHAT THE CAPACITY THEY DO HAVE AVAILABLE.
THAT'S WHAT BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU IN THE PAST.
BUT VERY BRIEFLY, WE KNOW THEY DO HAVE TWO MGD AVAILABLE TODAY WITH SOME STILL IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE DONE.
ALL OF THAT WAS PRESENTED WHEN WE PRESENTED THESE OPTIONS BACK IN MARCH.
TODAY, THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGES TO THAT PRESENTATION.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY UPDATED INFORMATION.
ALL WE DO KNOW IS THAT PROJECT COSTS DUE TO INFLATION AND SCOPE CHANGE HAS INCREASED THESE PROJECT COSTS.
THE SCOPE HAS CHANGED TO INCLUDE EITHER IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PLANT AT THE CITY OF HOPEWELL OR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SUSSEX SERVICE AUTHORITY PLANT.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT COST FROM YEARS AGO THAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU IS IN THE 30 MILLIONS, NOW WE'RE IN A HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY REQUESTING THIS IMPACT STUDY.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THE COMPONENTS OR THE CAPACITY OF THE PROJECT.
THERE REALLY ARE NO CHANGES SINCE THE LAST TIME THIS HAS BEEN PRESENTED.
BUT WE WOULD COME BACK TO YOU AT A LATER DATE TO ASK THE BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHICH SOLUTION THEY WOULD PREFER.
BECAUSE WE WILL NEED TO START HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH ONE OF THESE ENTITIES ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN AGREEMENT.
THAT AGREEMENT WILL HAVE TO BE DONE RELATIVELY QUICKLY TO SATISFY VEDP IN AN EFFORT TO SECURE THE GRANT.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS [INAUDIBLE].
>> ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR DID YOU HAVE MORE?
>> YOU'RE FINE. I AM HERE AGAIN TONIGHT.
WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS, THE BOARD PURSUING A ECONOMIC AND FISCAL IMPACT STUDY, BASICALLY A RETURN ON INVESTMENT OVER AN ASSUMED DEVELOPMENT PERIOD, NORMALLY, THAT WOULD BE OVER 30 YEARS DUE TO BOND TERM LIMITS.
[02:35:05]
FISCAL IMPACT STUDY WOULD DETERMINE, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH A COUNTY'S BUDGET SHOWING FINANCIAL NEED FOR REVENUE TO FUND LOCAL SERVICES AS WELL.THE SITES THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED WOULD BE THE CROSSPOINTE INDUSTRIAL SITE, SOUTHPOINT, REMAINING SITES.
WE DO HAVE A COUNTY-OWNED SITE WITHIN SOUTHPOINT AND THE NORFOLK SOUTHERN SITE.
WITH THAT, THERE'S A RESOLUTION IN YOUR PACKETS TONIGHT FOR AN AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MANGUM ECONOMICS FOR AN ECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL STUDY FOR WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE CROSSPOINTE CENTER AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL SITES FOR $42,000.
I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
>> DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I GUESS MY CURIOSITY QUESTION IS, OUR NEIGHBOR, WHICH THOUGHT THEY HAD IT AND THEY DON'T HAVE IT, CAN ONLY GIVE US A CERTAIN AMOUNT WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT, AND OR THEY DON'T HAVE ROOM OR THE MONEY TO EXPAND THE PLAN.
UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN NO BOND READING ANYTHING, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HELP US WITH GETTING IT TO THEM, EVEN THOUGH THEY'LL BE THE RECIPIENT OF IT ONCE IT'S IN.
IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT UP TO NOW?
>> WHEN YOU SAY HELP US GET IT TO THEM, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO THERE.
WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BUILDING THE FORCE MAIN TO THEIR PLANT.
>> ONCE IT'S TO THEIR PLANT, IF THERE ARE ANY NECESSARY UPGRADES BEYOND THEIR CAPACITY, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THEY WOULD ASK US TO PAY FOR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS CHART.
THOSE WILL BE COSTS TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.
>> THEY'VE GOTTEN A GOOD HANDLE ON WHAT THEY'VE GOT COMING FROM ALL THE PLANTS.
>> FROM ALL THE OTHER INDUSTRIES?
>> WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN ALLOTTED?
>> I'M NOT 100% CERTAIN THAT THAT'S AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. I'M NOT SURE.
>> I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO AFFIRM.
THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING, BUT ANYWAY, AND GOING TO SUSSEX, THEY'RE WILLING TO PARTNER.
THEY'VE GOT ROOM TO GROW, IF NEED BE.
>> THEY DEFINITELY HAVE THE LAND AREA TO BUILD A WHOLE NEW PLANT THAT WILL MEET OUR FUTURE NEEDS.
>> WHEN SOMEBODY SAID THE PARTNERING THAT THEY TOUTED AROUND FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS ABOUT IF YOU CAN PARTNER WITH OTHER LOCALITIES AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO GET GRANT MONIES TO HELP. IS THAT A POTENTIAL?
>> THE POTENTIAL FOR GRANTS IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE, CAN YOU REDUCE THE POLLUTION LOAD ONTO THE CHESAPEAKE BAY? THAT'S OUR BEST OPPORTUNITY FOR GRANTS.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REGIONALIZATION, WE'LL BE TAKING FLOW INSTEAD OF PUTTING INTO HOPEWELL, WHICH IS IN CHESAPEAKE BABE.
WE'LL BE TAKING IT TO SUSSEX, WHICH IS IN THE BLACKWATER SWAMP AREA, CHUAN BASIN.
>> WHAT SHOULD HELP WITH IF WE WERE TO GO TO THE STATE OR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO REQUEST FUNDS, AND OTHER ENTITIES HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN ASKING FOR FUNDS TO HELP WITH THOSE PARTICULAR PROJECTS.
>> THANK YOU FOR IT. I JUST ASKED FOR THAT FOR CLARITY BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE I DIDN'T MISUNDERSTAND.
>> WHEN IS THE GRANT? WHEN DOES SOMETHING HAVE TO BE SIGNED IN A CONTRACT FOR US TO GET THE 10-15 MILLION FOR THE GRANT?
>> THE STATE HAS GIVEN US AN EIGHT WEEK PERIOD FROM TODAY, BASICALLY.
THEY ARE LENIENT IN WORKING WITH US, BUT LIKE EVERY OTHER BUDGET OR GRANT, TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.
>> WHAT QUALIFIES US TO RECEIVE THE GRANT? THE TWO MILLION GALLONS A DAY THAT HOPEWELL CAN SAY WE CAN GET TOMORROW?
>> THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION WAS FOR A THREE MILLION GALLON, A DAY GRANT, BUT THE ALLOCATION THAT THE STATE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS TWO MILLION GALLONS, BOTH ON THE WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY SIDE TO INDUSTRIAL SITES.
>> COULD HOPEWELL CURRENTLY MEET THAT TO GET THIS 15 MILLION, SO WE CAN GET INDUSTRY IN HERE AND GET A RATE OF RETURN ON TAX MONEY TO THEN BUILD A PLANT TO GO TO SUSSEX?
>> THAT IS HOPEWELL STATEMENT.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE DEPUTY MANAGER'S STATEMENT SAYING THEY CAN.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING, PROVING THEY CAN.
THERE IS SOME DOUBT THAT THEY HAVE THAT ALLOCATION TO GIVE AWAY.
THE PLANT HAS SOME AVAILABLE CAPACITY, BUT THAT CAPACITY HAS BEEN ALLOCATED TO OTHER INDIVIDUALS.
THAT IS MY BELIEF BASED ON DOCUMENTS THAT ARE STILL LEGAL TODAY THAT WE ARE FOLLOWING.
[02:40:01]
>> KEEP IN MIND. THEY JUST HAD ANOTHER HUGE TURNOVER.
THE PEOPLE WE WERE TALKING WITH AREN'T EVEN THERE ANYMORE.
>> I'M NOT ADVOCATING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
I'M JUST POINTING OUT THE OBVIOUS AS FAR AS WHERE THE 10 MILLION MIGHT BE BEST SPENT BECAUSE 10 MILLION IS NOT GOING TO COVER AT ALL TO GO TO EITHER WAY.
WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO FIND OTHER MONIES TO GET THERE.
>> YEAH, I THINK IF WE GO TO ONE AND THEN GO TO THE OTHER FOR ANOTHER PHASE OF IT, WE'RE DOUBLING OUR EFFORT.
>> MY REQUEST TO THE CITY WOULD BE WE NEED A LEGAL DETERMINATION OF WHAT THE EXISTING DOCUMENTS STATE.
I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS, BUT I DON'T THINK WE EVER HAD ANYTHING FINALIZED FROM THE CITY STATING THAT THEY DO HAVE THAT ALLOCATION THAT THEY CAN GIVE AWAY.
>> OKAY. THEY CLAIM THEY HAVE HOW MUCH?
>>THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO FIND OUT IS HOW MUCH.
>> THE AMOUNT INDICATED IN THE REPORT.
>> I GOT TO GO BACK AND CHECK.
THEY CLAIM THAT THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONVEY IT.
>> OKAY. WELL, WE'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU.
>> THE MANAGER IS THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN SIGN OFF.
>> YEAH. WE'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU TO TELL US.
WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT IS AN AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY, CORRECT?
>> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO KEEP US ON POINT.
ALL RIGHT, BOARD MEMBERS YOU'VE HEARD THE REQUEST. WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND BY MRS. WAYMACK, FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FEASIBILITY IMPACT STUDY FOR THE WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH THE AWARD OF CONTRACT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> THE NEXT BUSINESS ITEM THAT WE HAVE UNDER ORDER OF BUSINESS IS OUR DCIP GRANT AND REPI GRANT.
I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE YOU, MS. PUDLOW.
>> GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
THIS EVENING I'M GOING TO BE ASKING BOARD'S APPROVAL OR CONSIDERATION TO SUBMIT TWO GRANTS.
THESE ARE THE SAME GRANTS WE REQUESTED PERMISSION LAST YEAR TO SUBMIT.
WE HAVE LEARNED SOME VALUABLE LESSONS, AND THESE ARE VALUABLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY TO GET AVAILABLE FUNDING FROM FEDERAL LEVEL FOR PROJECTS THAT BENEFIT BOTH MILITARY INSTALLATION FORT GREGG-ADAMS AND PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
YOU'LL SEE LATER THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR MAYBE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT THIS EVENINGS ARE FOR FUTURE APPLICATIONS AS WELL.
THESE WERE WORK PROJECTS THAT CAME OUT OF THE CAPITAL REGION MILITARY ALLIANCE.
THIS IS A NEWER ALLIANCE IN THE AREA.
IT WAS FOUNDED IN 2024, BUT WE ARE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE CAPITAL REGION MILITARY ALLIANCE AND PARTICIPATING IN MOVING FORWARD FOR THESE GRANT OPPORTUNITIES.
I WON'T GO OVER THIS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CAPITAL REGION MILITARY ALLIANCE? OKAY. THE DEFENSE COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM IS THERE TO ADDRESS DEFICIENCIES IN COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND OTHER COMMUNITY SUPPORT FACILITIES, SUPPORTIVE OF MILITARY INSTALLATION.
ESSENTIALLY THIS IS SPECIFIC TO COMMUNITIES THAT LIE OUTSIDE OF MILITARY INSTALLATION.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, FOLKS ON THE MILITARY INSTALLATION DO NOT PAY PROPERTY TAXES TO THE COUNTY.
THIS IS ONE OPPORTUNITY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS PROVIDED FOR THESE LOCALITIES TO TRY TO OFFSET OR BRING BALANCE TO THOSE TAXES THAT ARE NOT PAID.
THE APPLICATION, IT WAS JUST FUNDED TODAY, THE ANNOUNCEMENT AND THEY EXTENDED THE INITIAL SUBMISSION DATE TO 3, JULY.
I'M ASSUMING THAT THE APPROVAL SELECTION DATE IS PROBABLY ALSO ADJUSTED SLIGHTLY HERE, BUT THE CAP FOR INDIVIDUAL PRODUCTS, OUR PROJECTS IS 20 MILLION.
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS ARE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, NON-PROFITS.
MEMBER OWNED UTILITIES CAN SUBMIT.
THIS GRANT WOULD COVER THINGS LIKE TRANSPORTATION, SCHOOLS, HOSPITAL, POLICE, FIRE, UTILITY PROJECTS, WATER,
[02:45:01]
AND WASTEWATER, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, NATURAL GAS, OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.THIS IS FOR THINGS THAT ARE NOT LOCATED ON A MILITARY INSTALLATION.
THIS IS FOR OUTSIDE THE INSTALLATION.
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE GRANT, IT ONLY COVERS HARD CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
THIS IS FOR BASICALLY BUILDING PROJECTS.
WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST WITH THE BOARD'S APPROVAL THIS EVENING UNLESS IT'S NOT YOUR WILL, BUT TO REQUEST FOR A FIRE TRAINING CENTER.
THE ESTIMATED COST LAST YEAR WAS 7.9 MILLION.
WE ARE WORKING TO GET AN UPDATED COST ESTIMATE, BUT TO BE SAFE, 8.5 MILLION.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ESTIMATING THE HARD CONSTRUCTION COSTS WITH 1.2 MILLION IN EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES.
FORT GREGG-ADAMS HAS ALLOWED OR SAID THAT THEY HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THE COUNTY COULD USE.
THEY WOULD LEASE IT TO THE COUNTY, A LONG TERM LEASE IF THIS GRANT WAS APPROVED FOR 25, EXCUSE ME.
I THINK THEY SAID A 25 YEAR LAND LEASE FOR $15,000 IS THE ESTIMATED COST.
WE WANT TO BE UPFRONT ABOUT THOSE COSTS THAT AREN'T COVERED BY THE GRANT.
FORT GREGG-ADAMS HAS BEEN WORKING TO COMPLETE THE DESIGN.
THEY'VE ALREADY PAID FOR THE DESIGNS OF A FIRE TRAINING CENTER.
IT INCLUDES A BURN BUILDING, LOOKS A LOT LIKE THE ONES IN THE PICTURE THERE.
THEY BRING THOSE IN, BUT THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, THE MAJORITY WOULD BE FOR A CLASSROOM.
I BELIEVE THERE'S SHOWERS IN THERE, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, ALL THE CONCRETE SITE AND EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND THERE.
THE LEASE AGREEMENT IF APPROVED WOULD TAKE 12 TO 18 MONTHS.
WE WOULD GET A LETTER FOR THE GRANT FROM THE INSTALLATION SAYING THAT THEY APPROVE AND SUPPORT THAT TYPE OF A COMMITMENT WITH THE COUNTY.
OBVIOUSLY, A LOT OF MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DISCUSSIONS WOULD HAVE TO TAKE PLACE, BUT PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY WOULD BE THE OWNER OF THE SITE AND THE OPERATOR.
THEN WE'D WORK THROUGH MOA USE, CHARGES FOR OTHER LOCALITIES.
I DO WANT TO STATE SOME OF THE OBVIOUS HERE.
WE ARE REQUESTING THIS BECAUSE CURRENTLY PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS AND OTHER RURAL COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS ARE GOING TO BLACKSTONE.
THAT'S A DISTANCE AWAY, SO IT'S ABOUT AN HOUR, MAYBE A LITTLE OVER AN HOUR FOR PEOPLE TO GO GET TRAINED.
THAT TAKES A LOT OF TRAINING TIME, STAFF, AND IT ALSO TAKES OUR EQUIPMENT OUT OF SERVICE FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME.
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, THEY DO HAVE A FIRE TRAINING CENTER, BUT IT'S VERY BUSY.
THEY CHARGE FOR USE, AND IT'S HARD FOR US TO GET TIME THERE.
THE ESTIMATED THING FROM LAST YEAR'S GRANT WAS ABOUT 50% LESS TRAINING BECAUSE OF THE DISTANCE AND TIME.
THAT'S VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AND FULL TIME THAT MISS OUT ON TRAINING OPPORTUNITY TIMES.
FORT GREGG-ADAMS HAS THE SAME ISSUE WITH THEIR FIREFIGHTERS LOCATED ON BASE, SO THAT WOULD BE THE REASON WE WOULD SUBMIT.
THESE ARE THE BASICS FOR THE GRANT.
I WON'T GO OVER THEM TOO MUCH, BUT IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE STUFF.
AGAIN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE LEASE.
THAT'S ONE THING WE WOULD GET A LETTER FROM.
WE WERE TOLD LAST YEAR THAT SHOULD COVER US.
THIS IS ONE OF THE PICTURES, SO YOU CAN SEE THE TOP BUILDING THERE IS THE CLASSROOM PORTION, AND THEN THE BOTTOM SQUARE SHAPE ON THAT DIAGRAM WOULD BE WHERE THE BURN BUILDING WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE FORT GREGG-ADAMS PROPERTY THAT THEY WOULD LEASE TO THE COUNTY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DCIP GRANT?
>> IS THERE ANY STIPULATION THAT IT HAS TO BE ON FORT LEE? CAN IT BE ON ALREADY COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY?
>> NO, SIR, THERE'S NO STIPULATIONS.
THE PLANS ARE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON FORT LEE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO, EXCUSE ME, FORT GREGG-ADAMS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD IT.
I DON'T KNOW THE IMPLICATIONS AS FAR AS PLANNING AND CHANGES TO PLANS.
IF WE CHANGE THE LOCATION I IMAGINE THAT WOULD CHANGE SOME OF THOSE.
IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE CONSTRUCTION READY.
THE GRANT DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT IT HAS TO BE THERE, THAT'S SOMETHING THE COUNTY COULD LOOK AT CHANGING.
>> MY ONLY THOUGHT IS MAYBE CHECK WITH STAFF.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE DILEMMAS OF GETTING ON AND OFF POST ANYMORE WITH IDS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
THEN IT'S GOING TO BE ALL THE WAY TO OUR NORTH END OF THE COUNTY WHEN IT COMES TO TRAINING IF WE'VE GOT THAT PROPERTY AT WELLS STATION ROAD, MIGHT BE GOOD TO PUT IT THERE POSSIBLY, AND IT'D BE CENTRALLY LOCATED.
>> I DO WANT TO SAY IT'S LOCATED ON RIVER ROAD, SO IT'S OFF OF THE MAIN INSTALLATION, SO I THINK ACCESS WOULD BE.
OBVIOUSLY, THE COUNTY WOULD ACTUALLY BE CONTROLLING THE ACCESS TO THE GATES AND THE BUILDING.
BECAUSE IT WOULD BE COUNTY OWNED.
IT WOULD JUST BE ON FEDERAL LAND.
>> WE WENT OUT THERE SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO GET THIS THING KICKED OFF.
THERE'S DIRECT ACCESS TO IT RIGHT OFF THE ROAD.
THEY'VE ALREADY GOT THE WHOLE SITE CLEARED, SO IT'S BASICALLY CONSTRUCTION READY.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? GO AHEAD.
[02:50:02]
>> OKAY. THE NEXT GRANT WE REQUEST PERMISSION FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER SUBMITTING THE REPI CHALLENGE.
THAT'S THE READINESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INTEGRATION CHALLENGE GRANT.
TO BE HONEST, SOME OF THE WORDS IN THIS GRANT PROBABLY HAVE CHANGED WITH THE NEW ADMINISTRATION, BUT I APOLOGIZE IF THAT'S DIFFERENT.
BUT THIS INITIAL SUBMISSION WOULD BE DUE JULY 3, AND THIS IS AGAIN, INDIVIDUAL PROJECT CAP OF 20 MILLION.
I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T MENTION THE LAST GRANT DOES NOT HAVE A COST SHARE BECAUSE WE'RE A RURAL LOCALITY.
THIS ONE DOES HAVE A COST HERE.
AGAIN, THE SAME TYPE OF APPLICANTS ARE ELIGIBLE, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
THIS IS THE APPOMATTOX RIVER TRAIL FROM THE FOLAR MASTER PLAN.
YOU CAN SEE PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY IS THE LAST MISSING PIECE BETWEEN PETERSBURG AND HOPEWELL, AND THEY'VE GOT PORTIONS, AND THEY'RE GOING FORWARD ON THEIR TRAIL, SO THIS WOULD BE THE CONNECTOR BETWEEN THE TWO.
WE DO HAVE THE MOST COMPLICATED SECTION OF THE TRAIL.
THERE'S ABOUT 60 PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN A FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMUNITY COORDINATION, AND ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS, WHICH IS WHAT THIS GRANT WOULD BE ASKING FOR.
IT'S PHASE 1 PLANNING, AND THAT WOULD BE A LONG PROCESS TO SEE FEASIBILITY AS FAR AS WHICH WAY WOULD THE TRAIL GO, WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS ARE IN SUPPORT, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
THE COST OF THIS PHASE 1 PLANNING GRANT WOULD BE $240,000.
WE WOULD PAY IF THE BOARD APPROVED $120,000 THAT WOULD COME FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM.
WE WOULD BE WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP ON THIS ONE WITH THE FRIENDS OF THE LOWER APPOMATTOX RIVER FOLAR.
THEY HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN RUNNING THESE TYPE OF PLANNING AND PROJECTS.
WE WOULD BE THE GRANT APPLICANT, BUT THEY WOULD BE THE PROJECT OWNER.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> ANYONE HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. COX AND SECOND BY MR. WEBB, THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE REQUEST TO APPLY FOR BOTH OF THESE GRANTS TO BE DONE BY STAFF.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE LAST ITEM THAT WE HAVE HERE ON OUR AGENDA WOULD BE THE ADOPTION AND APPROPRIATION OF OUR FISCAL 2026 BUDGET, AND THAT WILL BE FROM MRS. DRURY.
>> YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND BOARD MEMBERS.
I'LL MOVE THROUGH THESE SLIDES FAIRLY QUICKLY.
AS THE BOARD IS AWARE, YOU HAVE PROVIDED CONSENSUS AT LAST WEEK'S WORK SESSION ON THE BUDGET THAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR ADOPTION.
THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE CHANGES FROM THE INTRODUCED BUDGET RESULTED IN A GENERAL FUND REDUCTION OF $673,202.
OF COURSE, DUE TO LOWER THAN INITIALLY ESTIMATED REAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUES AND PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUES, AND AN INCREASE IN MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX ESTIMATES.
ADDITIONALLY, WE DID RECEIVE AN INCREASE FROM THE STATE IN THE VIRGINIA COMPENSATION BOARD REVENUES, MOSTLY WHICH IS RELATED TO AN INCREASE IN COMP BOARD FUNDED POSITIONS.
ONE IN THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE AND A HALF IN THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY.
ADDITIONALLY, WE DID RECEIVE AN INCREASE IN OUR VICTIM WITNESS GRANT REVENUES.
SOME OF THOSE REVENUES DID COME WITH REQUIRED EXPENDITURES, SUCH AS AN ADDITIONAL POSITION WITHIN THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, A PORTION OF WHICH IS LOCALLY FUNDED, AND THEN A REQUEST FROM THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD TO PERHAPS RECONSIDER FUNDING A HALF OR PART TIME REGULAR POSITION TO BE SHARED WITH THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY AND THE VICTIM WITNESS UNIT.
THAT IS COVERED BY THE INCREASE IN STATE AND GRANT FUNDING.
THERE WAS ALSO SOME TURNOVER IN THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, WHICH DID RESULT IN HIGHER THAN INITIALLY ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES FOR PERSONNEL, A DECREASE IN CRATER YOUTH CARE COMMISSION COSTS, A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THE CRATER CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRAINING ACADEMY, AND THEN REDUCTIONS IN THE VALUE OF THE PENNY, WHICH RESULTED IN A $12,000 REDUCTION TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR BOTH FIRE APPARATUS AND FIRE EQUIPMENT.
THIS LED THE BOARD TO PROVIDING CONSENSUS OF OVER $736,000 IN REDUCTIONS.
THE CONSENSUS WE DID RECEIVE LAST WEEK WAS TO KEEP THE TAX RATE AT $0.82 AND THEN MAKE REDUCTIONS TO SCHOOL FUNDING OF 167,135,
[02:55:09]
WHICH WAS BASED ON A CALCULATION OF HOW MUCH DID THE REAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE DECREASE IN RELATIONSHIP TO HOW MUCH OF THE INCREASE THE SCHOOL BOARD WAS RECEIVING INITIALLY? THEN THE BOARD REDUCED BY 50,000 THE AMOUNT REQUESTED FOR COUNTY VEHICLE PURCHASES.THERE WERE FOUR POSITIONS THAT WERE ELIMINATED, ONE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE, THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, ONE OF THE EIGHT INITIALLY APPROVED FIREFIGHTER MEDICS, ONE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SPECIALIST WITHIN FIRE AND EMS. THEN THE CONTINGENCY WAS REDUCED BY $53,656.
>> THE PAY INCREASE FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES, BOTH THE MARKET INCREASES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, THE COST OF LIVING FOR NON-PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THE RECLASSIFICATIONS REMAIN IN THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION.
THIS IS A FINANCIAL SUMMARY OF WHAT THOSE CHANGES LOOK LIKE WITH NUMBERS INSTEAD OF WORDS.
I WON'T REHASH ALL OF THIS, BUT IT JUST MENTIONS ALL OF THE THINGS THAT I SAID WITH WORDS IN THE PRIOR SLIDE.
AGAIN, THE BOARD DID REDUCE THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET BELOW WHAT WAS INTRODUCED BY $673,000.
THERE STILL IS AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR ADOPTION OVERALL.
THE TOTAL BUDGET AS INTRODUCED WAS $170,749,694.
THE BUDGET THAT WAS ADVERTISED DID GROW BECAUSE THE SCHOOL DIVISION INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF STATE REVENUES, AND THE BOARD PROVIDED CONSENSUS TO ADVERTISE A HIGHER BUDGET THAN WHAT WAS INTRODUCED BECAUSE OF THOSE STATE REVENUE INCREASES FOR THE SCHOOL DIVISION.
THAT IS INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION.
THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION ALL FUNDS IS $172,048,035, WHICH IS 9.4 MILLION MORE THAN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET OR 5.78%.
THIS JUST DEPICTS AT THE BOTTOM, THE CHANGES.
THE TOTAL AS INTRODUCED WAS 170.75 MILLION, GENERAL FUND REDUCTIONS OF 673,000 WERE MADE, SCHOOL CHANGES WITH THE STATE INCREASE, AND $167,000 DECREASE FROM THE COUNTY WERE ABOUT 1.8 MILLION ABOVE WHAT WAS INTRODUCED.
CAPITAL FUND CHANGES WERE 62,000 LOWER, AND THEN THAT QUANTIFIES TO 1.29 MILLION.
THE SCHOOL FUNDS, AS THEY WERE INTRODUCED, WERE 97.3 MILLION ALL FUNDS, ALL FOUR OF THEIR FUNDS, THEIR OPERATING FUND, THEIR TEXTBOOK FUND, THEIR SCHOOL NUTRITION FUND, AND THEIR GRANT FUND.
THE STATE REVENUES WERE PROJECTED TO INCREASE, COUPLED WITH THE REDUCTION FROM THE COUNTY.
THE ALL SCHOOL FUNDS FOR ADOPTION ARE $99,111,569.
CAPITAL FUND WILL BE REDUCED FROM 1.5 MILLION TO 1,456,000.
THIS IS A VISUAL OF ALL OF THE FUNDS OR A SUMMARY OF THE FUNDS GOING FROM THE SCHOOL FUND, COMPARED TO THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET TO THE BUDGET THAT IS BEING REQUESTED FOR ADOPTION THIS EVENING.
SCHOOL FUNDS, AGAIN, IT'S A FIVE-MILLION-DOLLAR INCREASE OR 5.4, THE MAJORITY OF WHICH ARE STATE FUNDING.
THE GENERAL FUND THAT IS REQUESTED FOR ADOPTION THIS EVENING IS $79,469,891, WHICH IS 5.4 MILLION MORE THAN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET OR 7.36%.
THE DEBT FUND IS FALLING COUPLED BY CONTRIBUTING NOTHING TO DEBT RESERVES FOR FY26 AND THE ELIMINATION OF THE STORMWATER FUND, WHICH WAS MAKING A TRANSFER TO THE DEBT FUND.
THERE IS NO OPEN DEBT FOR THE STORMWATER FUND OR PROJECTS.
THE CAPITAL FUND WILL FALL BY 93,000 COMMUNITY CORRECTION FUND, THE SLIGHT INCREASE OF 34,000, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS UP BY 283,000.
[03:00:04]
THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE TOURISM, THE VOLUNTEER ANNUITY SAP FUND, OR THE SPECIAL WELFARE FUND.AGAIN, THE STORMWATER FUND IS RECOMMENDED FOR ELIMINATION.
THE ADULT EDUCATION FUNDS, WHICH WE ARE THE FISCAL AGENT, IS JUST A SLIGHT INCREASE OF 3,000, AND THEN INTERFUND TRANSFERS WILL DROP BY $181,000.
TAX RATES, WHICH THE BOARD JUST HELD THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING ON REAL PROPERTY AND MANUFACTURED HOMES, AND APPROVED 82 CENTS.
THOSE TAX RATES WILL REMAIN AS THEY ARE THIS YEAR.
HOWEVER, THERE IS AN EFFECTIVE TAX INCREASE FOR HIGHER REAL PROPERTY VALUES.
THIS SHOWS YOU HOW THE FINAL REAL PROPERTY FOR ADOPTION, REAL ESTATE REVENUES WILL GROW BY 3.6 MILLION INSTEAD OF 4.2 WHAT THE VALUE OF THE PENNY IS, WHICH WE MENTIONED IN YOUR TAX RATE PUBLIC HEARING, AND WHAT REAL ESTATE REVENUES LOOK LIKE.
PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUES WILL BE THE SAME AS THEY ARE THIS YEAR.
THERE WAS AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX BOOK BETWEEN LAST SPRING AND THIS SPRING, SO THOSE TAX REVENUES WILL REMAIN IDENTICAL TO WHAT THEY ARE THIS YEAR.
MOTOR VEHICLE VALUES ESSENTIALLY REMAIN FLAT AS TO WHERE THEY ARE THIS YEAR, WITH ONLY ABOUT 3,800 MORE IN TAX REVENUE PROJECTED.
DELINQUENT TAX REVENUES FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY WILL INCREASE.
THIS IS A SLIDE THAT JUST SHOWS OTHER REVENUE CHANGES THAT ARE MORE THAN $10,000, MACHINERY, AND TOOLS.
TAX REVENUE IS PROJECTED TO INCREASE.
NEW FOR THIS YEAR IS INTEREST ON OUR MAIN BANK ACCOUNT DUE TO A BANKING CHANGE.
COMPENSATION BOARD REVENUE INCREASES.
SOCIAL SERVICES REVENUES WILL INCREASE.
WE ARE PROJECTING AN INCREASE IN PENALTIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE COST RECOVERIES FOR DELINQUENT TAXES.
WE DO HAVE A NEW OPERATION CEASEFIRE GRANT THAT IS BEING INCLUDED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET FOR BOTH THE PD AND THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY.
SOME ADDITIONAL BIG LEAGUE REVENUE FOR A REGIONAL POSITION, AND THEN REDUCTIONS IN OUR SRO GRANTS FOR THREE SROS, WHOSE GRANTS ARE EXPIRING, AND A REDUCTION IN PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUE.
JUST TO REMIND THE BOARD WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION OR TO PROVIDE A STEP INCREASE AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT INCREASES FOR QUALIFYING POLICE OFFICERS, A MARKET INCREASE FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREFIGHTERS AND A COST OF LIVING FOR NON-PUBLIC SAFETY, ADJUSTMENTS TO OVERTIME AND PART TIME WAGES, AND THEN AN INCREASE IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE 14 NEW POSITIONS IN THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION, A TRAINING CAPTAIN FOR FIRE AND EMS, SEVEN FIREFIGHTER MEDICS, A SENIOR PLANNER, ONE KENNEL ATTENDANT, A MANAGER SIX WITHIN SOCIAL SERVICES, CONVERSION OF A PART TIME, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FULL TIME, AND A REGIONAL POSITION, WHICH IS LARGELY BILLABLE TO OTHER SIX CIRCUIT LOCALITIES.
THE ITEMS IN BLUE AT THE BOTTOM ARE BEING ADDED AS A RESULT OF INCREASED STATE FUNDING.
EVEN THOUGH THE BOARD ELIMINATED FOUR POSITIONS, 1.5 WERE ADDED OVER WHAT WAS INTRODUCED DUE TO INCREASED STATE AND GRANT FUNDING.
THE PERSONNEL RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET REMAIN IN YOUR BUDGET FOR ADOPTION WITHIN BUDGET MANAGER, RECOVERY COORDINATOR, FLEET GARAGE MANAGER, THREE POSITIONS WITHIN THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY, TWO WITHIN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CONVERTING THE MANAGER AT THE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION CENTER TO A DIRECTOR, CONVERTING A FIRE AND EMS LOGISTICS OFFICER TO A CAPTAIN FOR SUPPORT SERVICES AND ONE POSITION WITHIN THE REGISTRAR'S OFFICE.
THE PUBLIC SCHOOL DIVISION, AND WHAT WAS PROVIDED BY BOARD CONSENSUS, WOULD RECEIVE A LOCAL TRANSFER OF $19,103,793, WHICH IS $1,032,865 MORE THAN THE CURRENT YEAR CONTRIBUTION.
[03:05:03]
WE WOULD ALSO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAPITAL FUND FOR SCHOOL BUSES, 543,000, AND PAY DEBT SERVICE FOR THE SCHOOL DIVISION, TOTALING OVER 2.7 MILLION.THOSE THREE AMOUNTS ADDED TOGETHER REPRESENT 28% OF THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR ADOPTION FOR FY26.
AGAIN, THEIR BUDGET, AS I MENTIONED ON A PRIOR SLIDE, ALL FUNDS IS 99.1 MILLION.
THERE WERE ALSO SOME INFLATIONARY AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION, INCREASES TO ECON DEV FOR REBATE, INCREASES TO OTHER AGENCIES AND REGIONAL PARTNERS, SUCH AS THE JAIL, THE LIBRARY SYSTEM, OUR COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD, CJA, AND OTHERS.
WE ALSO SAW INCREASES IN SERVICES AND SUPPLIES, AND PUBLIC SERVICE ASSISTANCE WITHIN SOCIAL SERVICES, WHICH IS LARGELY STATE-FUNDED, WILL ALSO BE INCREASING.
WE HAVE INCLUDED THE COMPLETION OF ONE DEPARTMENT'S STRATEGIC PLAN FOR SOCIAL SERVICES FOR NEXT YEAR, AND THE BULK OF THAT IS COVERED BY STATE FUNDING.
TRAINING AND TRAVEL SERVICES WILL ALSO INCREASE ALONG WITH PHYSICAL COSTS.
AGAIN, WE ARE ADDING A SECOND CLEAN COMMUNITY DAY FOR FY26.
THESE LAST TWO SLIDES WERE DEPICTED ON ONE OF THE EARLIER SLIDES, BUT IT JUST PROVIDES MORE INFORMATION ON WHICH FUNDS ARE FUNDED BY WHAT SOURCE.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS FUNDED BY YOUR MEALS TAX, TOURISM FUND IS FUNDED BY LODGING TAX, COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RECEIVES A LARGE STATE DCJS GRANT, AND CONTRIBUTIONS FROM NOT ONLY PRINCE GEORGE, BUT ALSO FROM HOPEWELL AND SURREY.
THE LENGTH OF SERVICE PROGRAM IS FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTION.
IT IS A VOLUNTEER ANNUITY PROGRAM.
THE SPECIAL WELFARE FUND IS FOR FUNDS TAKEN INTO THE SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT THAT ARE NOT ALLOCATED FROM THE STATE, AND THEN, OF COURSE, UTILITIES FUND IS A SELF-SUPPORTING ENTERPRISE FUND THAT IS SUPPORTED BY WATER AND SEWER FEES AND CONNECTION CHARGES.
>> SORRY, I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU. COULD YOU REPEAT THAT?
>> THE STORMWATER FUND. I DON'T THINK ANYONE WANTS ME TO.
THE STORMWATER FUND IS TARGETED FOR ELIMINATION.
THE DEBT SERVICE FUND AGAIN WILL FALL BECAUSE OF DECREASES, AND THE CONTRIBUTION FOR DEBT RESERVES FOR OUR DEBT PAYMENTS BEING SLIGHTLY LESS, AND THE ELIMINATION OF THE STORMWATER FUND.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AGAIN IS SLIGHTLY DOWN, AND THAT IS FUNDED ALL BY A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND. ADULT ED.
WE ARE THE FISCAL AGENT, AND THEY RECEIVE THEIR FUNDING FROM STATE AND FEDERAL SOURCES, AND SOME LOCAL FUNDING FROM SCHOOL DIVISIONS.
THEN I HAVE SHOWN THE SCHOOL OPERATING FUNDS BELOW THE OPERATING, THE GRANT FUND, THE TEXTBOOK FUND, AND THE NUTRITION FUND.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD TWO WEEKS AGO.
THAT PUBLIC HEARING WAS APPROPRIATELY ADVERTISED IN THE PROGRESS INDEX, AND BY CODE, THE BOARD MAY NOT ADOPT THE BUDGET ON THE SAME NIGHT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IN YOUR PACKET IS A COMBINED DRAFT RESOLUTION THAT BOTH ADOPTS AND APPROPRIATES THE BUDGET FOR FY 2026.
THE BUDGET AGAIN TOTALS ALL FUNDS, $172,048,035.
THE RESOLUTION DOES APPROPRIATE OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT AND THE SCHOOL OPERATING EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY AS ESTABLISHED IN THE CODE OF VIRGINIA.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
BUT AGAIN, THERE IS A RESOLUTION IN YOUR PACKET THAT OUTLINES THE DETAILS OF THE BUDGET FOR ADOPTION.
>> DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'LL PROBABLY BE MAKING TWEAKS AS WE MOVE THROUGH, AS WE START GETTING SOME BETTER NUMBERS COMING IN FROM VISION AND OTHER SOURCES.
DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY COMMENTS? I'M LOOKING TO MY LEFT FIRST.
>> I'LL LOOK TO MY RIGHT. WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?
>> MR. CHAIR, I MOVE WE APPROVE.
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND BY MRS. WAYMACK THAT WE WOULD ADOPT AND APPROPRIATE THIS FISCAL YEAR 2026 BUDGET AS PRESENTED.
[03:10:06]
YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS DOT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I BELIEVE THAT IS ALL OF THE BUSINESS THAT WE HAVE FOR TONIGHT.
I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
>> IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND BY MRS. WAYMACK THAT WE WOULD ADJOURN AT THIS TIME.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. DOT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> WE DON'T WANT TO FORGET THAT.
I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU DIDN'T BRING ANY.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.