1974-09-05 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
was held on September 5, 1974, at 9:30 A.M. in the Board Room of the County Office
Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, said meeting being adjourned from August 28, 1974.
Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, William C. Thacker, Jr.,
Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. (Mr. Wood arriving at 9:40 A.M.)
Absent: Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr.
Officers present: County Executive, T. Mo Batchelor, Jr. and County Attorney,
George R. St. John.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Mr. Batchelor said at a meeting held last week with George St. John, County
Attorney; Fletcher Simms, Director of Real Estate Assessments; Harold Wingate,
physical
Wingate Appraisers; and himself, it was decided that the/reappraisal of the County
must be completed by'December 1, 1974. This will leave the month of December for
review of the reappraisal. There are about 6,000 parcels of land t~o be appraised,
as of this date. This work can be accomplished with the present number of persons
working on the reappraisal. The staff now requests authorization from the Board
to let a contract to Wingate Appraisers for appraisal of business and commercial
properties. This will cost approximately $20,000, but is included in that amount
already budgeted for this project.
Mr. Wheeler asked when the reappraisal notices will be mailed. Mr. Batchelor
said they can be mailed anytime after the end of 1974. The staff needs to know if
the Board wants these notices mailed immediately after the end of 1974 or after
preparation of the 1975-76 budget. It was the concensus of the Board members present
that the notices should be mailed as soon as possible after the first of January, 1975.
Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile to extend the contract with Wingate Appraisers
in order to complete the assessment of busi~ness, commercial and industrial properties
by December 1, 1974. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the
following recorded vote:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Mr. John Humphrey, County Planner, was present.
He said the Virginia State
Department of Highways has requested the Board to appoint two committees to help
update the 1965 Transportation Plan. Two members are needed for a Policy Committee.
This committee will establish policy for the base-year study and for the continuing
comprehensive, coop~erative transportation planning process. They will review the
results of the transportation plan, determine when a reevaluation of the transportation
plan is necessary and also review the results of any reevaluation, recommend appropriate
action by the department and local governing bodies, review requests for urban boundary
changes and review system and project proposals introduced by Federal and State agencies
1'g8.
9-5~74
or local governing bodies. These two members will represent the County and should
be vested with the authority to speak for and.on behalf of the County.
The technical committee is to cooperate in the development of the procedures
to be used in collecting the socio-economic data and the traffic ~data, work with
the Highway-Department staff, the City staff and the County staff, make recommendations
to the policy committee, review, comment, recommend, and assist the Highway Department,
the City, and the County on any proposal, ~lt~rnate lines, and work performed on the
location and design of facilities in the transportation plan. The Technical Committee
needs two voting members to represent the County. These members should be trained and
knowledgable in transportation planning and who, by their position, have an interest
and responsibility in the local transpor~tion planning process.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to appoint Lloyd Wood and Stuart Carwile to
the Policy Committee of the Virginia Department of Highways-Charlottesville
Transpoz~tion Study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwite, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS~ None-.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to appoint, John Humphrey, County Planner and
J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, to the Technical Committee of the Virginia Department
of Highways-Charlottesville Transportation Study. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Mr. Humphrey said the Board of Supervisors imposed a building permit moratorium
on CorPill Farms Subdivision on June 20, 1974. It has now come to the attention of
the staff that all lots within this subdivision have been sold and there is a builder
who has been denied building permits because the roads are not in the State system.
There remains only one item to be completed; that is a drainage structure. When the
moratorium was imposed, a letter was sent to the subdivider stating that~if the
work was not completed by August 15, his bond would be cashed and the money placed
in escrow, and the County will proceed with the repairs. The bond has now been
cashed,~hut--the building permit moratorium does not now directly effect the person
responsible for t~e original development.
Mr. Carwile suggested that the moratorium be lifted and that the Board proceed
otherwise. He asked if the bond is sufficient to do the ~ork required. Mr. Humphrey
said the bond of $7,500 should be sufficient to do the work. The developer did try
to comply with~the Board's order, but got a little sloppy and ~here~are some rinor
corrections still to be made. Mr. Batchelor asked if the money will cover a
maintenance bond until July 1, 1975. Mr. Humphrey said he was not sure; normally
9-5-74
T39
the maintenance bond is between the Highway Department and the developer. Mr. Wheeler
said even if the roads are brought up to State standards, ~i£ a maintenance bond is
not posted, and if it takes ~.six months of court action to get that bond posted, the
roads will deteriorate and the County needs to know more about the bond before they
proceed with the repairs. Motion was then offered by Mr. Wodd to defer any further
action on this matter until the staff has had time to prepare the proper resolutions
to exercise the bond and to proceed with work to bring the roads to State standard.
The motion was 'seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley
Mr. Wheeler said in reference to the moratorium, he is hesitant to lift it
because this will only encourage the developer of the lots to sell the lots. He
prefez~d to wait until September 19 before taking action on the building permit
moratorium.
A Mr. Moore was present. He said he recently bought the only two lots which are
still vacant. Ail other lots were sold and built on before the moratorium was imposed.
When he purchased these lots his lawyer did not know there was a building permit
moratorium. Commitments have been made and plans for building have proceeded. He is
the fourth person to purchase these lots. He obtained septic tank permits before
signing for purchase of the lots, however, when he went to get his building permits
he was told that a moratorium was in effect..
Mr. Carwile said he feels that if the Board does not left the moratorium on
Corvill Farms Subdivision they will be injuring an innocent party. There is no way
the existing owner could have been put on notice that a moratorium was in effect.
,the original developer of the lots,
The Board thought Mr. Hank Tiffany/was still the owner of the lots. Mr. Carwile then
offered motion to lift the moratorium on the two lots owned by Mr. Moore. Th~ motion
was_seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwil&, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Mr. Wheeler asked the County Attorney, who had just arrived, when the notices
on reappraisal of County property must be mailed. Mr. St. John said this has been
checked with Mr. Harry Frazier, the State tax people, and others. The Code of
Virginia only requires that the notices be sent fifteen days before any hearing on
the reassessment. The notices do ~not have to be senn before the end of the ~year.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Thacker to advertise for a public hearing on
September 25, 1974, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse an amendment
to the Albemarle County Code entitled, Chapter 12, "Motor Vehicles and Traffic", by
amending and reenacting Section 12-1 entitled "Adoption of State Law" and enacting
a new Section 12-1.1, entitled "Application of Chapter to Roadways not part of
9-5-74
State Highway Syst~em".
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Mr. Henley.
Mr. Robert Sampson, Parks 'Director, was present on behalf of the Chmirman of
the Parks Committee to request that the Board of Supervisors reply tO a request funds
from the Berkeley Community Association that general revenue sharing/be allocated
to provide Cecreational facilities in the Ber~ley-Westfield area.
Mr. Whe&ler said the Parks Committee, in a letter dated July 1, endor.ses the
need for neighborhood recreational facilities in this high density communi, ty.
They feel that if these facilities were properly developed they could serve a
large portion of the citizens. This park was requested to be put on lmnd owed by
the Albemarle County School Board on Whitewood Road. The Board has received an
appraisal of that property and it is valued between $550,000 and $600,000.
Mr. Fisher said he feels there is a need for some type of park in that area
because of the density of development, however, he cannot see retaining twenty-three
acres of land at this value. He said the Parks Committee might consider in their
future plans one or two acres as a compromise since there will be a need for a walking
park in the area. The staff is now working on a revised Master Plan for the County.
When that is finished, the Board will be able to provide a bett~r answer, but for the
time being the Parks Committee should do more planning.
Mr. Wood said a two-acre park in that area would be useless unless a~suitable
program could be adapted to the area. The Board needs more information on what type
of park would be suitable for an area of such density. Ha~..did not think the Board
should retain only a small portion of the property and have something that is not
workable.
Mr. Sampson said the Berkeley Community Association has also r~equested a ball
field and tennis courts. Mr. Carwile said these are available at Albemarle High
School. These are used extensively by the residents of the area.
Mr. Fisher said when he talked about a small area, he was thinking about small
children who cannot go across the street without supervision and would not enjoy
ball fields and tennis courts.
Mr. Thacker_ said the Board has been working on recreational areas that service
the entire County. He is not ready to commit to the neighborhood park concept. H~
feels this is a precedent that would mushroom.
Mr. Wheeler said the County owns land in the School complex across the road
from the property in question that is not as valuable as this land. Recreational use
would be better than certain other uses that would create additional traffic. The
value of this land prohibits its use now or at any time in the future as a park.
925-74
14:[
It was suggested that the Chairman respond to the Berkeley Community Association
stating that the Parks Committee is working on a long-range plan for the County; the
County does not own the property in question; and it would be premature to make any
commitment for that property.
Mr. James Bowling, County Attorney's Office, brought to the Board's attention
several changes which have been made in the enabling legislation for issuance of
lottery permits:
1) The Board must act on an application within 30 days or it is
automatically granted.
2) There is a presumption in the legislation that the games are for
charitable purposes.
3) There has been a change made concerning signs advertising games~
4) No regulations can be attached to lottery permits issued during
1974 by the local governing body.
5) The permits are to be issued on an annual, calendar year basis.
6) The applicant must file an annual report of receipts and
disbursements with the Commissioner of Accounts. The Code does
net specify who will pay the fee for this filing.
Mr. Wheeler suggested that the Board ask their local legislators to have the
Code of Virginia include a statement as to who will pay the filing fee required.
As recommended by the County Attorney's Office, motion was offered by Mr. Fisher,
seconded by Mr. Wood, to change the Board's Rules of Procedure as followS:
Section 2~'(d). Special Meetings. The second sentence shall read as follows:
The Clerk shall immediately notify each member of the Board, as well as the
County Attorney, in writing.
The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: ~None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
At 10:26 A.M., the Chairman requested an! executive session to discuss personnel and
legal.matters and land acquisition. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Carwile,
seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Mr. Henley.
The Board reconvened at 4:10 P.M.
The following resolution was offered for adoption:
In light of the recent proceedings precipitated by the Petition
of Charles R. Haugh for removal of T. M. Batchelor, Jr. from office,
the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County has reflected upon and
given careful consideration to the entire matter of the fitness and
qualification of Mr. Batchelor to continue as the Chief Executive of
Albemarle County. Board members carefully observed the entire trial,
and the evidence adduced was carefully noted. The subsequent opinion
of the trial judge has also been carefully studied and considered.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
925-74
While there were~oversights and errors in administering the license
tax ordinance, and any such errors are of concern to the Board, we feel
these matters should be viewed in their proper perspective. The amount
lost to the County by uncollected Contractor's License Taxes, based
upon evidence presented by the Commonwealth's Attorney during the recent
proceedings, amounted to approximately $1600, which represents one
one-hundredth of one percent (0.01%) of the County budget for the years
in question.
Upon consideration of all of these matters, this Board reiterates
that in our opinion there is no justification for removal of Mr. Batchelor
by this Board. If the acts and omissions brought out in these proceedings
constitute malfeasance, then any official in any county in Virginia has
been guilty of malfeasance at one time or another. The total effect of
all the evidence at this trial, including Mr. Batchelor's entire record
of performance, has in fact brought home to this Board that he has been an
effective County Executive of Albemarle County. His performance has not
been perfect; he is subject to human error as any other person; but his
overall performance in our opinion reflects credit 6n him and on the
County's employees as well.
It is noteworthy that during the past year, Mr. Batchelor and his
entire staff have had to work under ~.-pressure, tension and harassment
of an investigation by persons not impartial, but in our opinion clearly
prejudiced against Mr. Batchelor and the County Executive form of governmenn.
That they have continued to perform their work in an effective manner under
these circumstances is to their very high credit.
We feel further that the actions of Charles R. Haugh, who instituted
the grand jury proceedings and who filed and prosecuted the petition for
Mr. Batchelor's removal should be commented upon.
In the spring of 1972 he was furnished by the County Finance Depart-
ment the very facts, figures and information concerning contractor
license taxes, specifically with regard to Daley Craig, which he used
against Mr. Batchelor zn the recent proceedings. He was furnished these
facts and information As the Commonwealth's Attorney after being
specifically requested by that department to assist it in the collection
of these taxes and after agreeing to act in that department's behalf, in
.... . .ihandling the matter ~-~ these ~ same ~ei~nquent taxes. This Board
feels strongly that Mr. Haugh had a positive duty at that time, if he
were aware that the proper procedures were not being followed, to so
advise the Finance Department, and the County Executive and the Board
of Supervisors as well, and to point out to them the proper procedures.
He was acting as their attorney and our attorney. But he took absolutely
no action in behalf of the Finance Department and gave not one word of
advice, or criticism, to either the staff of the department, Mr. Batchelor,
or the Board of Supervisors. Instead he kept the facts and figures
furnished him at that time, and later fed them to the grand jury in
order that when they later appeared in the report of the grand jury,
it would appear the¢~grand jury had independently ferreted out th6se
facts; and he then used them against the very persons who had furnished
them to him in the first place in reliance on him as their attorney to
assist in collecting the taxes. This i~ all documented as a matter
of public record in the Finance Office at the County Office Building.
We feel that Albemarle County has an excellent administration, and
an excellent record of effeciencg. Any unbiased and impartial study
will show this and in fact the examinations which have been conducted,
by the State Auditor, the County's au'ditor, and others such as are
required periodically, do show this.
In summary, we have no intention of removing Mr. Batchelor from
office because of the recent proceedings instituted by a Commonwealth's
Attorney who has devoted his time and his office to the purpose of
embarrassing the County government instead of advising and assisting it.
Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Thacker to adopt the foregoing
resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
9-5-74
Mr. Carwile asked that an amendment to S~Ction 3.5 of the newly adopted Land
Subdivision and Development Ordinance of Albemarle County be referred to the Planning
Commission; that change is to strike out the word "certified" before the word "cash",
in both sub-section 3-5-1 and 3-5-2.
Items on the agenda listed as ~ontract for clea~-np and operation of the Ivy
Landfill were not discussed.
At 4:20 P.M. motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Thacker, to
adjourn this meeting until 11:30 A.M. on September 11, 1974, in the Board Room of
of the County Office Building. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood..
None.
Mr. Henley.
Chairman