Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-11-02 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) e 1) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle. County, Virginia, was held on November 2, 1988, at 7:30 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOA~ M~ PRESENT: Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr. (arrived at 7:34 P.M), Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Messrs. C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 7:38 P.M.), Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr;, County Rxecutive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. John T. P. Home, Director of Planning and Community Development. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 7:33 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke and seconded by Mr. Perkins to approve 4.1 and accept the remaining itmm~ on the Comment Agenda as information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, MesSrs. Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Item No. 4.1. Memorandum dated October 24, 1988, from Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, concerning Centel strobe light at East Rio Road. In reply to a request from Mr. Lindstrom at a recent meeting, the following memorandum was received: "As you are aware, a communications tower has recently been erected at the Centel Office on East Rio Road, adjacent to Fashion Square Mall. Centel officials indicate that the tower itself is unpainted, galvanized steel and that the Federal Aviation Administration requires that unpainted towers, under their purview, must maintain a strobe light atop the tower for aircraft and public safety. Had Centel been willing to paint the tower alternating colors, red and white, only a blinking red light would have been required atop the tower. Centel chose the galvanized ste~l tower, rather than the painted tower approach, in order to avoid future maintenance costs. The Planning staff indicates that Cent~l officials are looking into some type of shield which could prove beneficial for those residents living in the immediate vicinity of the tower. Those living a further distance away would probably nQg benefit from any type of shielding. I believe some resolution o~ request from the Board of Supervisors to Centel would be helpful in this matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free td~contact me." Item No. 4.2. Letter dated October 20,.i1988, from D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, addressed to Wim~on C. Gooding, concerning closing of Route 627 to hold parade, on either~ November 24 or November 26, 1988, between 9:00 A.M. and 11:00 A.M., was ~eceived as information. Item No. 4.3. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for October 18, 1988, was received as information. November 2, 1988 (RegUlar Night Meeting) (Page 2) Item No. 4.4. Monthly bond report for Arbor Crest Apartments for September, 1988, received as information. Item No. 4.5. Letter dated October 18, 1988, from David W. Roop, Dis- trict Manager, Virginia Power, concerning application filed with the State Corporation Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct a 16-mile lateral pipeline, was received as information. Item No. 4.6. Department of Planning and Community Development's Third Quarter Building Report for 1988, received as information. Item No. 4.7. Copy of the Comparative Report of Local Revenues and Expenditures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1987, pursuant to Section 15.1-166, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, as prepared by the Auditor of Public Accounts, was received as information. Item No. 4.8. Letter dated October 25, 1988, from J. S. Hodge, Chief Highway Engineer, concerning the Route 29 bypass/expressway study, was received as follows: "Commissioner Ray D. Pethtel has asked me to respond, to your letter of October 18 and the attached resolution concerning ~he Route 29 bypass/expressway study. I note the Board's resolution referenced Mr. R. L. Hundley's letter of October 3 to Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Executive. We appreciate the Board of Supervisors' concern that all components of the long range plan should be included in the traffic modeling work for the subject study. However, as was indicated earlier, we have decided that the site specific project, i.e. the Route 29 Corridor, which is the subject of our engineering/environmental studies, will not include proposed interchanges at H~Ydraulic and Rio Roads. ~ The traffic model does not recognize the difference ibetween an interchange or an intersection. The addition or de~tion of an interchange will not result in a significant difference in traffic volumes. However, we will calculate by hand the le~,~,ls of service with and without interchanges on Route 29 at Hydraulic and Rio Roads, utilizing criteria set forth in the Highway C~pacity Manual and the traffic volumes yielded by the traffic model. I trust the foregoing will allay any concerns the BOArd may have regarding the traffic modeling work on this study." ill Item No. 4.9. Memorandum dated October 25,1988, frSm John J. English, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction, addressed to N..iAndre~ Overstreet, Division Superintendent, re: Five Year Plan for Student ~omputer Instruction and the Governor's Technology Initiative, received as infSrmation. Agenda Item No. 5. To adopt an ordinance to amend and reenact Section 2.1-4 of the County Code by the addition of Subsection (n) entitled "Ivy Creek Agricultural and Forestal District". The district is located on State Routes 676, 654 and 657, adjacent to Ivy Creek and the So~th Fork Rivarma Reservoir. The proposed district contains 540.957 acres ~ 17 parcels. Applicants are proposing a seven year time period before ~nitial review. Jack Jouett District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress ~n October 18 and October 25, 1988.) Mr. Home gave the staff's report. He said the plan~.~'ing Commission, at its meeting on October 18, 1988, recommended approval as ~ubmitted, including the Kalergis parcel if it qualifies (Tax Map 60, parcel 7~). Tha Advisory Committee, at its meeting on September 27, 1988, recommended, approval as submitted, including the Kalergis parcel if it qualifies. ~ The Committee also recommended that adjacent lands owned by the City and Com~ty be added to the 673 November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) district. Mr. Home said staff agrees with the Advisory Committee that several parcels adjacent to this district owned by the City or'County would make logical additions. (Mr. Lindstrom arrived at 7:38 P.M.) The public hearing was opened at this time. Sherry Buttrick of the Piedmont Environmental Council came forward to speak. She said she had worked with several landowners to help put this district together and would be glad to answer any questions° There being no others present to speak, the public hearing was closed and the matter placed before the Board. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and seconded by Mr. Perkins to adopt the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND PERNACT SECTION 2.1-4 OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE ENTITLRD "AGRICL~TURAi AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS" BY THE ADDITION OF SUBSECTION (n) ENTITLED "IVY CREEK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTALDISTRICT" BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Section 2.1-4 is hereby amended and re- enacted by the addition of subsection (n) entitled "Ivy Creek Agricultural and Forestal District" to read as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (n) The district known as the "Ivy Creek Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax Map 44, Parcels 20, 20A, 20B, 20C, 20D, 20E, 20F, 20G, 21, 21D, 34C(part), 35 and 35A; Tax Map 45, Parcels 3C, 5F, 5F4 and 7A; and Tax Map 60, Parcel 77. There was no further discussion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Lindstrom, Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 6. To receive public comments on the Comprehensive Plan recommended for adoption by the Planning Com~ission. (Advertised on October 25 and November 2, 1988.) Mr. Way thanked all those present tonight for their interest in the Comprehensive Plan. He also thanked the staff and Planning Commission for their time spent in preparing this revised Comprehensive Plan. Over the next several weeks he said, the Board would begin.~itheir work sessions, but first they wanted to receive input from the citizens on the subject. He said before adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, t~ere would be a public hearing. Mr. Lynwood Coffmmn said he was disturbed over the fact that the quality of life over the past two decades has deteriorated in the area of density of population growth. He is a proponent of the !slowest growth possible, or no growth at all if that were possible. His hot~e is that Albemarle County will learn from the problems of the neighbors to ~he north. He said our slogan ,! ! ,! should be, Don t Fairfax Albemarle County. !~ He felt the University of Virginia is a key to growth in this area. Hq said a group called "Citizens Who Care" will be going to the General Assem~y to lobby for a freeze on 617 November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) University of Virginia expansion funds. He said developers, lawyers, surveyors, and the real estate sales people profit the most from the industrial growth. Their gain is the loss of others. Mr. James Edwards, an attorney in Charlottesville, said he had seen what rapid growth and overdevelopment could do in the Southern Florida area where he had lived. He said Charlottesville lies on the rim of the fastest growing area in Virginia. He hopes that careful steps will be taken to preserve open space, maintain a low population density, and keep Albemarle County a desir- able place to live. Mr. William Colony, President of Citizens for Albemarle, said that being a part of a larger society meant that we needed to work together toward a common goal of protecting our natural resources. He said his group commended the planning staff for their efforts in revising the Comprehensive Plan. They endorse the measures for strengthening rural area development controls, particularly increasing the maximum size of lots from twenty-one to forty acres, adopting the small lot option, and establishing the ten acre maximum lot size to reduce the amount of forest land lost to residential development. They also feel that stronger measures are needed to reduce rural development such as reducing the potential lots allowed per parcel in watershed areas, determining the base acres for subdivisions after subtracting out steep slopes, flood plains, etc., and requiring the clustering ~of lots away from the best agricultural and forestal soils for small lot development. Mr. Fred Westervelt, owner of Milton Farm, said his Perception of the current revision of the Comprehensive Plan which may recognize the new needs of the County, is that it is also a retreat in the face of forces causing the CoUnty to redevelop the previous plan. He asked the Board to be aware of various influences bringing pressure ~and asked that the B~ard adhere to the plan when it is adopted, rather than retreating 'from it as has been done in the past five or more years. ~ Mr. Scott Morrell, a farmer from the Scottsville District, said he favors the new Comprehensive Plan to help preserve open space for future generations. He said there was an economic reason for saving open space. For every dollar collected in residential property, the C~unty spends more than $1.20. For industrial and commercial development, there is about $30.00 spent for every dollar collected. For farms, it is about~$.05 spent for every dollar collected. He said this is according to a Loudoun County' study. Mr. Paul Coleman spoke for the Southern Albemarle Development Associa- tion. He said they enthusiastically support the proposed!revisions to the Comprehensive Plan as it affects their area. They feel the Scottsville area has been neglected in the past. They have long sought designation as a community growth area, and they support the plan with regard to the importance of securing utility service through the AlbemaCle County Service Authority. They hope the draft revision as it now stands will be adopted. Mayor Raymon Thacker said he was pleased with the reVision of the Comprehensive Plan and the designation of community given lto Scottsville. Mr. George Gilliam spoke concerning the Hollymead Conformity in the Comprehensive Plan. He said the land was already the subject of inquiries regarding commercial development. The Board has taken steps to try to alleviate the traffic on Route 29 North. They have triedito steer growth south of town and to other areas. He said if the specifi~ ar~a he spoke of is permitted to develop commercially, it would serve the Earl~sville area and points north. It would help take the pressure off some o2 the more highly congested areas of Route 29 North. Mr. T. Eugene Worrell spoke with reference to land o] Route 250 East, Pantops. He said his land was purchased at commercial raj es because of the Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time. However, in Mai ch, 1988, the proposed new plan shows a downzoning of the entire Pantop~ acreage. At that point he said he began working with Mr. Horne and his staJf, and they had made remarkable progress. However, several points of con~'ention remain which have serious economic consequences. He has asked Mr. Lucius Braceyto present a more formal request to resolve the remaining maC'ers in an equitable fashion. ] 675 Novamber 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) Mr. Lucius Bracey, with the law firm of McGuire Woods Battle and Boothe, said he is referring to a part of the County within the urban area. It had been planned to be zoned commercially to the year 2002, according to previous County Comprehensive Plans. The proposed Comprehensive Plan changes the zoning designations. He said it was not realistic that the land would be developed for office use within his lifetime, since it is over two hundred acres. He said it does not make sense to constrain retail development when it should be planned with retail and office as the marketable support, with other developed land to house the workers. As the plan is now designed, it is all office which makes the property unusable in the foreseeable future. He asked the Board to consider that planning for an impractical use is really unjust. Mrs. Jane Heyward, resident of Albemarle County for forty years, said she encourages the Board to facilitate development in the growth areas and to keep as many regulations as possible to discourage people from building far from the sewer and water lines. Ms. Tamara Vance, representative of Piedmont Environmental Council, pointed out that between 1976 and 1986, 23,000 acres of forest land were converted to other uses in Albemarle Gounty. Sixteen thousand acres of the rural areas were converted to residential us~s. Over the last several years, over fifty percent of the residential growth is going into the rural areas. By a show of hands, Ms. Vance pointed out that a majority of the people present and in the County, she felt, would Like to see more controls on growth in the rural areas. There is a combi~ation of reasons to conserve the rural area resources. PEC asked that the B~ard follow the proposed Compre- hensive Plan goals and adopt the Planning~C~mmissioh's recommendation of going to forty acres from twenty-one for allowable density for the rural areas. They urge reducing the development Sights from five to three in the water supply watersheds. This would create~an incentive to going outside th~ watershed for rural development. She said PEC strongly supports the proposed idea of small lot options where there is a ~ermanent set aside of agricul- tural land as part of the rural areas subdivision process. Mrs Rellen Perry of the Albemarle HouSing Coalition said she appreci- ates the specific goals and objections in t~e Housing sectmon of the Compr - hensive Plan. She said it was clear the ho~sing needs of low income constit- uents were held on a par with all other housing needs. Their only caveat is that the term, "low income" be clearly defi~ed. Mr. Herman Key, on beahm]f of the Independence Resource Center, .said he concurred with Mrs. Perry's remarks. He sa~d one of his main concerns is that there is affordable and accessible housing for people with disabilities. He would like to see any Comprehensive Plan?adopted~ take this part of the population into consideration regarding housing needs. Ms. Virginia Romanac, a resident of A15emarle County, said she hopes the Board will adopt a plan that preserves the rural character of the County. The plan as proposed goes a long way in doing that, but she feels the Board should go even further than the proposed p~n, .Sh~ ~en. dorse~the r~u~on~of the by-right development rights to three instead oI izve. ~ne wou±~ ±mx~fuo see included in the plan a policy of suppor~ for farming and forestry. city people want to live in the rural area, i!ithey must understand that farming is the main and favored activity in those areas. Mr. John Birdsong said he owns about 1~00 acres in the Jack Jouett and White Hall Districts. This acreage could b~ dev~l~ped.~nto ~?~t.125_[eSi-es dential units. At present there are 14 res~dentma£ unlss, UL1Alzlng DU act of the total. The balance is in agricultural and forestal use. Under the proposed Comprehensive Plan, the developmen~ potentia% would b~ reduce~ from 125 to about 90. However, he said he hnd his wife are not oppose~ an~ wholeheartedly endorse the Planning Commission's recommendation. They feel the proposed restrictions possibly do not g~ far enough. The good that comes from limiting residential development in th~s area far outweighs any personal gain that could be realized from residentia mended that the present development rights to three and that the balance of the parcel rather than the present twenty-one. If the future generations to farm, Mr. Birdsong sa be set aside. He felt the Board, as electe~ do that. deve!opm~nt. He further recom- ~e reduced from five two-acre lots Should be in 50-acre divisions :e is to be any land left for 2d it is imperative that the land officials, are in a position to 67~ November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) Mr. Phillip Blackmmn said he concurs with the remarks made by the Piedmont Environmental Council, particularly that rural area set-asides be a condition for development and for conditions in determining base acreage for subdivision development. He also endorses the notion of a policy statement supporting those choosing to live in rural areas. He asked the Board to give consideration to the possible use of their taxing power to create an incentive for development away from rural areas. Mr. Raymond ~as, Vice President for Administration at the University of Virginia, said he was present as a member of the Board of the University Real Estate Foundation. They propose to rezone 280 acres with a change in the Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of developing a university related research park. The proposal is important not only to the Foundation but also to the University which it serves. He said the proposal is consistent with the present and proposed Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Alex Cooper of Cooper and Robertson, made the presentation for the University Real Estate Foundation. He said they were seeking a classifi- cation of Office Services for the northern portion of the site. He said they had e×am~ned the existing Comprehensive Plan and the revisions and concluded they were consistent with the goals of growth managemen~i While this will take 15 to 25 years to develop, the decisions made now are crucial in preserving the quality of development. Ms. Jane Erlich, private citizen and social psychologist, spoke concern- ing one part of the Comprehensive Plan which is focnsingidevelopm~nt in the designated growth areas. She feels that specific plans are needed on how to provide a range of living and working alternatives in Albemarle County. She proposes in addition to the Comprehensive Plan, that the~oard enact a temporary moratorium on new develoPment during the revieW of the Comprehen- sive Plan and not accept any variances during that time.= Secondly, she suggests that growth be for the purpose of engendering cbmmunity. She also suggests that designated growth areas possibly include new towns, and the formation of the growth areas should become quite specifi~co In addition, in existing communities, the focal points should be redevelqped so that town centers with distinct characters emerge. The advantages of this kind of model are that it protects open space and farmland, leSsens reliance on cars, promotes a sense of dommunzty, and pro- vides a range of living and working alternatives. Mrs. Sally Thomas, President of the League of Women i~oters, said they strongly support growth directed into designated areas an~ discourage growth in rural areas. The League supports the Water and Resourke Protection Measures and the formation of a Water Resource Committee ~n the Plan. They also support the Plan's housing goal and objectives and the formation of a County Housing Committee. The League suggested that the~uiding principles of the plan be stated clearly in the Introduction and should include a commitment to justice and equity for all. She said the ~ague was pleased to note a greater emphasis on ~mmn services, and felt that !the County should have an advisory committee to address the h,~mmn service q~ncerns of citizens. Lastly, Mrs. ThOmas said they strongly recommend that an ~annual Fiscal Resources Plan be added to the action agenda as recommendAd in the Plan. Dr. Charles Hurt, land developer, said he felt a little like an illegit- imate son at a family reunion after listening to the remaCks tonight. He asked the Board for stability in the Comprehensive Plan, ~oting that some land he has owned has gone through several zoning changesi Ms. Hester W hitcher, a resident from White Hall, sai~ it is a fact that you can only put so mmny people on an acre of land and ge~ clean water out of it while putting sewage into it. She asked the Board to ~ake a look at the stress on Beaver Creek Reservoir. She felt it important to preserve one of Albemarle County's best resources--water. Mr. Scott, farm owner, said he wanted to conserve th~ resources of the County as well. However, he understands and appreciates ~he serious amount of work which goes into projects as described tonight sug~ as the University Real Estate Foundation and Mr. Gene Worrell's development~plans. He said he thinks those projects could significantly benefit this co~m~anityo He does wonder, however, if there is not some way to add incentiv~ by speeding up the 677 November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) approval processes for development by delegating some authority. It should be possible for staff approval to be given by a staff competent enough to write an impressive Comprehensive Plan. That would keep development costs and lot costs down and still be consistent with the goals of the County. He does not think developers are evil or that new people in the community are evil. They have added talent and intelligence to this area. There being no others present to speak concerning the Comprehensive Plan, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindstrom said he felt the Board could accomplish a]mnst everything that has been suggested here tonight. He believed the suggestions made could be incorporated and implemented to the satisfaction of mmny. He said one of the problems is the perception that requests for preserving rural character is a hidden statement meaning someone wants to exclude poor people. He thinks the Comprehensive Plan tries as much as possible to provide affordable housing for everyone. The goal of preserving farmland and the rural charac- ter is perfectly compatible with the goal of providing affordable housing for anybody in this County who wants it. Because of impending growth, he feels this Board has the last clear chance to accommodate the needs of all its citizens. He feels there is a reluctance to~'be serious about regulations, because there is a feeling that the Board does not have tbm right to interfere with private property, which is a ~dearly held value in this area. Yet, it is important to remember that the public subsidizes development to a large extent in the way of roads, police, fi~e, etc. Because of that, the public has a moral and legitimate right to p~rticipate in private property issues. Secondly, he feels it is true that land is held in trust by this generation for future generations. Thirdly, lthis is primarily a conservative County. That does not mean only financiall~ and morally. It is a deeply held belief that it means conservation of re, sources. This County has one of the most beautiful scare resources in the co,try which makes it so popular. He said this Board and County owe it to all the people to do the best job possible of conserving that land as this community is faced with unprece- dented growth pressures. Development is largely irreversible, but conserva- tion of land is always reversible. Mr. Bowie said he leans more to providing incentives than increasing regulations on land use. The operative word!in preserving the rural charac- ter is the word, "character". He certainly believes that can be done, even though there may be basic disagreements on how to do it. That's why the Board has work sessions coming up. Mr. Way said he was sympathetic on the one hand to preserving land. On the other hand he feels that totally restricting over 90 percent of the land in this County, which is the amount in the R~ district, will not accommodate growth unless people are forced to live in ~ urban ring around the City. He thinks there need to be areas in the rural sAttings for developmmnt. There has to be a way to distinguish the best fa~d and the watershed areas from developable areas because there is a great d~al of land that can be developed and developed well. It is obvious that the ~jority of the people who come to this County to live do not want to be in ~hat urban ring in a row house. That is the dilemma before this Board. Agenda Item No. 7. Approval of Minutes~ March 20 (A), 1985; June 11 and June 12, 1986; and October 3, 1988. M%dLg~%~r%~a~m~%i~nn~rfitn~d ~% h 20, 1985, f o Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstro~ to approve the minutes of March 20, 1985(A) from Page 7 to the end. The mot{on was seconded by Mr. Bowie. There was no further discussion. Roll was c~lled and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Lindst~om and Way. NAYS: None. ABSTAiNING: Messrs. Bain and Perkins Agenda Item No. 8. mont. 678 November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) Appointments. No names were offered for appoint- Agenda Item No. 9a. Presentation of County Attorney's Opinion: Refer- endum on Police Department. Mr. St. John said that in response to the presentation made to the Board at a recent meeting in which it was announced that petitions would be handed out at the up-coming election for citizens to sign requesting this Board to hold a referendum on abolition of the police department, he had done some research. He found there is no way the Board could be forced to hold such a referendum no matter how many signatures might be received. He would not cite statutes or the Attorney General's opinion at this time because of the lateness of the hour, but he would give that to anyone who is interested. Agenda Item No. 9b. Presentation of County Attorney's Opinion: Suit on Meals Tax Referendum. Mr. St. John reported on the status of the litigation pending on the Meals Tax Referendum. There was a hearing today in Richmond, he said, but Albemarle County was not mmHe a party to that hearing. Regardless of the outcome of that hearing, there is no way that the court in Richmond could enjoin the referendum on the meals tax from going forwar~i in Albemarle County. He said he has previously given that advice to the Board in public, ~nd nothing has happened to change that fact. Clearly, t.he referendum is going ahead in Albem~rle County. .- Agenda Item No. 10. Other Matters not Listed on thelAgenda from the Board and Public. Mr. John Carter spoke regarding the presentation of the Meals Tax Fact Sheet last week. He said the County had created a shortfall by using all the surpluses shown in the July CIP and by claiming it was required to do so by State law. Thus, they had turned what was a surplus into~an expense. He said he did not find that in the law. He said the Board .had voluntarily taken a surplus figure and made an expense out of it, matching it exactly to the income from the meals tax. ~- Mr. James Morris, representing the Concerned Citiz~ of Albemarle, said they were expressing a desire by their petition to abolition the police department. It is not their intention to make a judgemen~ on the police or sheriff's department. The intention is to express the fadt that the General Assembly passed a law that prohibited the people of Albeauirle from expressing their choice through vote, and they do not believe that a~.:fords equal protec- tion under the law. They were asking the Board~to join them in requesting every right that every other citizen in the State of Virg£hiahas. He did not think the Board who was elected by citizens need rear'the citizens; he thought they should join with them in demanding that the vote be returned. He said that a member of the Board had stated they did no~ want to fund anything they could not control. The citizens of Albemarle feel pretty much the same way. He did not think that voters' rights in this country should be considered "beating a dead horse", as the Board had termed it. This right is given to all other citizens of this State and taken from ~itizens of Albemarle. He felt that if that VOtLng rzght l_ taken, w~t will be the next voting right that the State decides next that Albemarle Cqunty should not have. It is a matter of such concern that the Concerned ~itizens will pursue it. Mr. St. John responded that he did not want to have ~ group of citizens who sincerely believed they could trigger a referendum go ~o all the trouble of getting names when the fact is no matter how many ' ' smgna~ures, it would not trigger a referendum. A petition to the Board of Supervisbrs to rethink the issue of the police force, however, is a different matter.I That is perfectly legitimate, and that petition can. be taken to the polls ifi the regulations governing that are met. The point is that under the presegt code, a refer- endum cannot be triggered by doing that. He said that citizens co,,ld ask the Board to rethink their position, but even if the Board wanted to do it, they could not hold an advisory referendum. 679 November 2, 1988 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) Mr. Agnor said the cannon at the Courthouse bmd to be removed for repair until approximately April, 1989. Mr. Agnor said staff had asked the City for a joint meeting with the Board concerning the solid waste disposal report. He asked the Board to consider November 29, 1988, at 12:00 noon for a possible meeting. Mr. Lindstrom said that at the next meeting he or Mr. Bowie would explain what the Metropolitan Planning Organization has done about issues relating to Route 29 North. He asked that it be placed on the agenda. Mr. Way said the Chairman of School Board had contaated him in terms of setting up a three hour block of time to meet jointly. November 15 or 17 was suggested for a possible afternoon meeting. The entire Board needs to be present at the meeting. The Board agreed toimeet jointly on.November 17, 1988, at 2:00 P.M. with the School Board. Mr. Lindstrom asked that the matter of the Centel strobe light be placed on next week's agenda for discussion. Agenda Item No. 11. Adjourn. At 10:51~P.M., with no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.