1973-06-206-20-73
An adjourned meeting of the Board of S~pervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia was held
on June 20, 1973, at 4:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J.T. Henley, Jr., William C.
Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT' County Executive and County Attorney.
At this time the Board held a public work session on the proposed subdivision
ordinance. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Carwile to advertise a
public hearing on the subdivision ordinance for August 15, 1973, at 7:30 P.M. in the
Albemarle County Courthouse. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwite, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Wood to adjourn until 7:30 P.M.
this night, in the Albemarle County Courthouse. Motion carried by the following recorded
vo~e'
AYES'
NAYS'
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The Board reconvened at 7:30 P.M. in the Courthouse. At this time the Chairman called
for a public hearing on the Land Use Tax Committee's report. Notice of this public
hearing was advertised in the Daily Progress on June 6 and June 13, 1973.
Members of the Land Use Tax Committee present were: Rober~ Coles, Howard A. Collins,
John Dezio, Peter Easter, Robert B. Hogue, William D. Maupin III, Robert M; M~sselman,
Fred W. Scott, Jr., John A. Smart, Dominick W. Stillfried , M. Graham Tull, Jr., Frederick
S. whiteside, Kenneth Youel, and Magruder Dent, Jr. Mr. John Smart, Chairman of the Land
Use Tax Committee, gave a short report and then turned the meeting over to Mr. Fred Sc0~t.
Mr. Scott stated that the purpose of the enabling law for the ~and use ~ax was misunder-
stood. It was an environmental issue and the law was not designed for tax subsidies for
farmers, but to preserve lands that qualify. A landowner ~ust annually ask--: the tax
assessor to assess according to the use, and this must meet certain standards, real estate
improvements do not qualify. He said that the committee had analyzed the County Tax
base, calculated ~and ~se values on the total county and applied a percentage. The value
per acre is based on use. The cormmittee had calculated a real estate reduction of
approximately 10.3%. They did not estimate a roll back tax, and they had assumed 100%
participation. He stated that the committee did recommend adoption of a t~d Use tax
Ordinance.
At this time the Chairman called for comments from the public.
Mr. Edgar Garnett spoke stating that this matter had been before this Board of
Supervisors for some time. As it had been pointed out, the ~and ~se tax was not for
farmers but for the community as a whole and he felt that adoption of this ordinance would
be a tool to use with the master plan.
6-20-73
Mr. George Palmer stated that adoption of a ~and use tax ordinance would benefit
the community as a whole.
Mrs. Francis Martin, speaking for Citize~for Albemarle, stated that they support a
land use tax ordinance.
Mr. Vernon Maupin said he felt that this land use tax would not be a solution to
any problem but only a disruption and cause a great loss to county taxpayers.
Dr. E.D.V. Nicoll said he felt that if taxes continued to go higher it would force
the farmers ou~ of business and give land to real estate developers and this would be
a disadvantage to the County. He supports the adoption of a land use tax.
Mr. Henley stated that he was in favor of adoption of a land use tax ordinance.
Mr. Fisher said he was concerned about the tax loss that might occur from adoption
of This ordinance, and he said that this would not solve all the problems concerned with
property taxes.
Mr. Thacker said that all were concerned with the problem of property taxes, however,
this was the only basic method the Board had for raising tax funds. He said he was con-
cerned about the legitimate farmer, not the speculator, and he hoped this would help to a
certain degree.
Mr. Carwile said he did not feel this would be a benefit ~o the true farmer as there
were misconceptions about The law. However, he felt it was in the best interest of the
County that the Board adopt such an ordinance. This would be an overall benefit to the
County and may slow down development.
Mr. Wood said he had served on the Board of Supervisors with Mr. Garnett and after
Mr. Palmer and he knew they had fought this battle for the last sixteen years.
Mr. Wheeler said this item would be placed on the agenda in the near future. He
felt it was the Board's duty to try to preserve open green spaces in the County, however,
he was not sure what impact this would have on tax dollars. If this eliminated a great
deal of tax reve.nue it would have to be replaced through other methods. He said that the
Board could only function and carry on the affairs of the community through people such
as those working on this commi.ttee.
Upon proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
Chairman