1973-02-15411
A regular meeting of the Board of Count~ Supervisors of Albemarle C~nty,' Virginia,
was held on February 15, 1973 at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room, County Office Building,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
Present were: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J~T. Henley, Jr., William L. Thacker~ Jr.
Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
Absent.: Mr. Stuart F. Carwile.
Officers present: County Executive and County Attorney.
The meeting opened With The Lord's Prayer led by Mr. Wheeler.
Minutes of the meetings of December 21sand December 29, 1972, January 2, January 18
and January 25~ 1973 were approved with the following corrections and additiof~a:
1-December 21~ 1972, Page 377. Change to read: ':'At this'time, the Board ~ntinued
the discussion of the repeal of Sections 3-I and 3-2 of the Albemarle County Code.
Such sections reading:
Section 3-1. Sale of wine on S~nday prohibited.; exception. It shall be unlawful
to sell wine in the county between the hours of 12:00 Midnight Saturday and
6:00 A.M~ Monday; except, that wine mat be sold for consumption on the premises
by any person who holds a state license for sale of mixed alcoholic beverages
during the same hours that he is permitted by such state license to sell mixed
alcoholic beverages.
Section 3-2. CpnsumDtion of wine on licensed premises orohibited on Sunday~
exceotion. It shall be unlawful for any person holding a license to sell win~
to permit the consumption of wine upon the premises mentioned in such license
and located in the county between the hours of 12:00 Midnight Saturday and
6:00 AoM. Monday; except, that a person who holds a state license for the sale
of mixed alcoholic beverages may permit consumption of wine upon the premises
mentioned in such latter license during the same hours that he is permitted by
such latter license to sell mixed alcoholic beverages.
There being no further comments~" .................
2-January 18, 1973, Page 392.
Administration.
3/~ down the page, change FAA to Farmers Home
3-Janaury 1~ 1973, Page 393. Change Miller School Boar~to Miller School Road.
S-January 18, 1973, Page 395. Change name Drew to Frew.
5-January 18~ 1973~ Page 396. At bottom of page, change sentence to read:
"For example: if you have a 100 acre farm wo2hh $35.~000, exclude the house
and one acre, worth $20,000. This would leave a net worth of $15~000. If you
have the land and own nothing else, you would qualify."
6-January 25, 197~, Page ~t0. Change to: "County of Albemarle vs. Ib N. Eriksen."
Motion to approve these minutes, with corrections and additions as noted, was offered by
Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker~ ~neeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
At 9:1~ A.M. the Chairman called for a public hearing on the proposed improvement
of Route 729 in Albemarle County from the intersection of Route 2~0 to the intersection
of Route 732.
This designated as Project 0729-002-132~ C-501, B618.
Mr. R. W. Coates~
Assistant Resident Engineer and Mr. D. B. Hope, District Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Highways were present.
Mr. jamesE. Samsell from the East Riva~ua Fire Company spoke in favor ~E the project.
He stated tha~ members of the fire company had been concerned because they are not able
412
2-1~'-73
to use this bridge for heavy equipment and have to travel as many as 3¢ extra
miles in order to service the area along Rt. ~3 east of Charlottesville.
No one else from the public spoke.
Mr. Fisher questioned the possibility of incorporating means to put small
boats in the water at the foot of this brae. Mr. Hope stated that the highway
department does not maintainlanding rights-of-way and suggested that this be
checked with the Division of Game and Inland Fisheries.
There being no further discussion, the Board urged the highway department to
proceed as rapidly as possible with this project.
Mr. Lewis Brett, Assistant to Mr.Cecil Palmer, Secondary Roads Engineer for
the Virghia Department of Highways in Richmond, was present to discuss the Warren
and Hatton Ferries. He stated that the Highway Commission had held a public ~earin~~
on this matter in November and it was the general concensus of those present that
one or both of these ferries should be kept in operation~by the Highway Department
or some other authority, such as the park'authority, He said that Buckingham
County has advised the Highway Department that due entirely 'to economics they wished
to withdraw their support from the operation of these ferries. Mr. Brett ~tated
that the Highway Department would restore the ferries to operational condition using
Albemarle County secondary funds and would now like to have a decision f~om the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Wheeler questioAed funding of this project to which Mr.B~ett replied that
the Highway Department hoped bo recover restoration funds from PL 91-606 as~administered
by the Office of Emergency Preparedness.
Mr. Wheeler stated that since Buckingham County had withdrawn their support, he
did not feel this Board could make an immediate decision and asked that the Board be
given at least 30 days during which time Mr. Thacker would head a citizens committee
to make recommendations to the Board on this matter.
Mr. Hope stated that the Highway Commission has scheduled a pre-allocation
budget hearing at Culpeper on March 9, 1973, at 1:30 P.M. and all citizens are invited
to this hearing. Mr. Wheeler stated that he would ask two members of this Board and
the County Planner to attend.
Mr. Wood told Mr. Hope that he appreciated the Highway Department's efforts in
opening 1-65 across Afton Mountain. Mr. Hope stated that they have experienced a great
on this section of I-6k
deal of difficulty/due to fog and freezing weather and he felt that this could be
alleviated if drivers would drive in accordance with-prevailing weather conditions.
Mr. Wood replied that the local High~ay Safety Commission might help to eduCate
the people concerning driving conditions on the mountain during bad weather.
At the January 18 meeting of the Board, road viewers had been appointed to
view a section of Route. 826. Following is their report:
413
"Charlottesville ~ Virginia
February 6, 1973
Beard of County Supervisors
Albemarle ¢ounty~ Virginia
Gentlemen:
On February 6, 1973, we the undersigned ROad Viewers~ visited one road for
which application was received for acceptance into the Secondary Road System.
We were accompanied by R. G.Warner~ R~sident Highway Engineer.
After visiting this road~ we wish to make the following recommendation:
(1) Extension of Route 826 from end ~ State maintenance
approximately .25 mile - east - recommend acceptance
Respectfully submitted,
1 973 ROAD VI~ERS
Signed:
Edward Chapman
.John 0. Higginson
Edgar Paige~ Jro
W. L. Rennolds
Franklin W. Yancey"
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Wood to adopt the following
resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle
County~ Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways be and
is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways
the following sections of roads in Albemarle County:
(1) Extension of Route 826 from end of State maintenance
approximately .25 mile - east
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways
be and is hereby guaranteed a ~ ft. unobstructed ~ight of way along
these requested additions.
Motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher~ Henley~ Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Thaeker stated that the committee appointed to studF a request from Stromberg-
Carlson for industrial access funds had met but had further items to consider and asked
that this matter be continued until March 15.
A request was received from the Department of Highways for abandonment, addition
and discontinuance of portions of 01d Route 691 described as Project: 006~-002-102,
P$0t~ P~02. The Clerk was ordered to write the property owners effected by this
change, inviting them to the March 15 meeting for comments.
The following letter was received from the Department of Highways:
2-15'-73
"January 23, 1973
Route 637
Project 0637-002-1.38,C~01
Location Public Hearing
Albemarle County
Miss Lettie E. Neher, Clerk
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Miss. Neher:
Thank you for your letter of January ~, 1973 and attached
resolution adopted by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on
December 21, 1972, inquiring as to the anticipated time that a
decision would be made concerning the location _Bublic hearing which
was held on the proposed project on Route 637 between 1-65 and Route
250.
There were several lines presented at the location hearing, and
a considerable number of requests were received from the citizens
both at the hearing and ~hortly thereafter. These have necessitated
additional studies before the matter can be considered by the Highway
Commission. These studies are still in progress and it is antici-
pated that decisions will be made during the late spring of this
year.
There were indications at the hearing that Albemarle County, in
conjunction with the Soil Conservation Service, has incorporated in
its future plans a watershed storage reservoir in the area of this
project. Our engineers will be in contact with county officials in
the near future for further discussions as to the current status of
the county's plans relative to this proposed facility.
Sincerely~
(Signed) Douglas B. Fugate
Co,mis s i oner"
The following communication was received from the Highway Department:
"~anuary 11, 1 973
Secondary System Addition-
Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle Co-~uty
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Gentlemen:
As requested in resolution by your Board on Ju~e 17, 1971, the following
addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved,
effective January 11, 1973.
...ADDITION LENGTH
Myrtle Street (Route 120~) - from end of State
Maintenance to cul-de-sac
0.08 mi.
Hincerely,
(Signed) J. E. Harwood,
Deputy Commissioner"
A cody of the Operat~ml and Fiscal Summary for Albemarle County~ering
Fiscal Year 1971.-72 was received from the Department of Highways as information.
Mr. Coates requested that a date b'e set for the Annual Road Hearing. Motion
was offered by Mr. Fisher for the Clerk to advertise for a public hearing on this
matter on March 2!, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse. Motion
was seconded by Mr~~ Thacker. Mr. Wood asked that a sentence be included in the
advertisement to the effect the the Board of Supervisors would welcome suggestions
be
prior to the public hearing in order that they could/better informed of the citizens
requests and in order to hel~ facilitate the handling of the requests. Mr~ Wheeler
also asked that Mr. Warner have the new budget prepared for this hearing and be ready
to give a report on the work started or completed during the current budget year.
The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Er. Fisher stated that he had a request from citizens in Ivy concerning the south-
east corner of Route 676 where it enters onto Rt. 2~0 West. They feel that due to the
limited visibility and the increasing industrial traffic at this corner, there is
a safety hazard and Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Coates to have this problem checked by the
Highway Department°
Mr. Wood asked the HighwaY Department to check the corner at Route 631 (Rio Rd.)
and Agnese Street. He fe~ls there is a problem at this corner during peak hours because
there is no left-hand turn lane into AgRase Street.
Mrs. Elizabeth Rosenblum again asked about Route 29 and the exist of school buses
at Hollymead School. Mr. Wood stated that the Highway Department had checked this and
informed the Board that there is adequate site distance in both the north .and south
made
bound lanes of Route 29. Ne decision had been/as to the erection of flashing lights
on Route 29 North due to the distance Hollymead School is from Route 29.
An u~dentified man spoke concerning the traffic light at Route 29 North and
Airport Road. He stated that the warning light in the south-bound lane is too close
to the traffic light and asked if this could be remedied.
At this time, ~he Chairman requested that Mr. Batchelor have Mr. Goldsmith report
to the Board at 11:00 A.M. this morning.
Mr. Joseph M. Wood, II, appeared before the Board to request that Whitewood Road
be taken'~into the highway system. Mr. Thacker stated that the c~nmit~ee considering
Stromberg-Carlson's request had discussed Whitewood Road and it was his understanding
that the~2~ is one drainage structure required before this road meeta~ighway standards.
Mr. Wood replied that he was not aware of the problem~ but would be willing to remedy
the situation immediately. Mr. Wheeler asked that Mr. Thacker's committee include this
road in their report at the March 15 meeting.
At 10:00 A.M. the Chairman called for a public hearing on the License Tax Code
of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, as advertised in the ~ef2~rson Journal, a newspaper
of general circulation in Albemarle County, on December 28~ 1972~ January
and January ~8, 197~:
The County Attorney proposed the following changes be made in the License Tax
Code:
(~) Change title to read: An Ordinance to impose a License Tax on Certain
Businesses, Trade(s), Profession(s), Occupations, and Callings(~)
(2) tn the 7th line of the title insert a (;) after the word Amended~
(3) Under Article I, Section 1, sub-section (b) change Section 5% to
Section 53-
($) Under Article I, Section 1, sub-section (c) change first sentCnee to read:
~The term "gross receipts" shall mean the gross receipts, ex. cl~sive of sales and
use tax~es~.., from any business ......... "
(5) Under same section, at end of first paragraph, change to read:
" ..... that retail motor vehicle dealers and farm equi.oment dealers shall deduct
trade-in allowances credited on sales of both new and used motor vehicles and farm
equipment; provided further~ in computing the gross receipts of licenses under
Section ~ of this ordinance~ ........ "
(6) Under same section, in the last paragraph, change to read:
"The calculation of gross receipts for license'tax purposes shall be on either a
cash or acc~al basis for the ~recedinM calendar or fiscal, year; provided, however~
that the basis ~
(7) Under Article I~ Section I, sub-section (6) change Section 53 to Section
52.
(8) Under Article I, Section 1, sub-section (f) change Section 52 to
Section 51.
(9) Under Article I, Section 1, sub-section (g) change ~Section 55 to
Section 5~+.
(10) Under Article I, Section 1, sub-section (h) change Section 56 to
Section 55-
~11) Under Article I, Section l, sub-section (i) change Section 57 to
Section 56.
(12) '~nder Article I, Section 10, change to read:
"When the business, trade or occupation licensed is conducted by a corportion,
partnership or any individual and the license tax is imposed upon the gross receipts
or gross ~xpenditures thereof, the license tax shall be imposed upon the gross
receipts of the corporation~ ~artnership, ~r any indi~du~l~ and paid by ....... "
(13) Under Article I, Section 12, change in second paragraph~Section l(d)
to Section 1(c).
(1~) Under Article II, Section 29, ~he Clerk advised the Board that the
words "an annual" were left out of the advertisement of the second sentence of
this paragraph.
(15) Under Article III, Section 60, delete the second sentence of paragraph $.
Mr. Wheeler asked if with the changes given above, the Board was ready to
hold the public hearing to which Mr. Pickford replied yes.
Mr. Thomas Blue, Civil Engineer and Surveyor was the first to speak. He
supported an eocupational tax, however, felt that for the tax he had previously
paid to the CitM that he received more services and suggested that the professional
occupation tax be reduced from 75¢ per $100 on gross receipts to 50¢ per$~O0.
He suggested that the Board dontact their area legislators for help in inve~ng a local
income tax. He felt that this might solve conflicts between ra~al and urban taxpayers.
Mr. Wheeler stated that in the matter of a local option in¢-ome tax, the Virghia
Association of Counties, the Farm Bureau and this Board had tried for several years to
have this introduced in the General Assembly~ So far they have been unsuccessful and
if this is ever accomplished it will require citizen support to become law.
Mr. Haynes Dominick spoke. He stated that he did not like this license tax but
was not opposed to the tax. He recommended the following rates be used: On the first
$250,000 of sales, 20¢ per $100; on the next $250,000 of sales, 1~¢ per $100; on the
next $250,000 of sales, 10¢ per $100; over $750,000 of sales, ~¢ per $100. He felt
that this would still be a large tax to pay since the automobile dealers in the County
must provide their own water, sewer and trash collection. He asked consideration of a
reduced rate and allowance to deduct internal sales.
Mrs. Mary Jo Ayers, President of Citizens for Superior Albemarle Schools~ stated
that they appreciated the Board looking into alternate methods for raising revenue on
ether than property. They feel strongly that more money will be needed to finance
education.
Er. Bill Dettor stated that Dettor, Edwards and Morris has recently moved from the
City to Ivy and he agreed with Mr. Dom~nick that county 'businessmen do not receive the
same police and fire protection as that received in the City, however, he ~not object to
the tax if~he~ere provided with these services. He was concerned about the peddlers tax
stating that he had quite a lot of competition from out of town vendors and felt this would
be hard to enforce. He also felt that he would have to pay a peddlers tax to other
localities.
Mr. Wheeler replied that if he had to ~ay a tax in another locality~ this would
be deducted from the amount paid to Albemarle County. This will not be a duplicate tax.
Mr. Walter Young spoke against thi~ license tax. He stated that he does credit
selling and loses approEimately 1% of sales a year on bad credit and he ~id not feet
that with the new reassessment in western Albemarle County that the money is needed.
Mr. Wheeler replied that if Mr. Young keeps his books on a cash basis he does not
pay a tax on money he does not receive.
also
Mr. Dominick stated that the large automobile dealers/do a lot of wholesale business
and asked if he would have to purchase two licenses. Mr. Jones replied that if he kept
his books separately, he would.
A unidentified man inquired as to the number of extra people the county wouSd have
to employ to enforce this ordinance.
Mr. Jones replied that the bulk of work would come between March 1 and May ~! and
he would need at least two part-time people during this time.
Mr. ~ohn E. Laird, Laird. & Company~ Distillers, Stated that he had checked into the
tax and found that the fees were taken from the State ABC law. He questioned the local
fee being similar to the state license. In Albemarle County he is the only one effected
by Section 2~ of the License Tax Code. He stated that in ~elation to the volume
of this business, a rate of $1~00 per year would be more excessive than 20¢ per
$100 from other sources. He stated that the fees developed for the alcoholic beverage
industry for the distillery wine brewery and bottler wereleft the same as the
state but for the wholesale be~r~or wholesale wine the rates were substantially
reduced below the state and he asked consideration be given of a reduction in his
rate.
J.
Mr./Howard Smith of Ivy contended that the greatest increase in the school
population is from people who live in apartments. He asked that a way be found to
tax apartment dwellers directly and not put the tax on the apartment owner.
Mr. H. H. Tiffany speakin~ for the Western Albemarle Taxpayors Association
stated that it is their position that the user of facilities should be taxed for
these services. They feel that the apartment dweller should do mo~e than just pay
his way. They do not oppose this tax, but favor it only if it replaces a portion of
the real estate tax and not as just another method of obtaining more taxation.
They are against any tax that does not reduce another tax and are for more general
taxes. He also pointed out that the merchant will pay this tax, but it will
ultimately be passed on th the consumer. They are in favor of having a tax on
developers for capital costs.
M~. ~neeler asked if the apartment house is handled by an agent and not by
the owner if the tax applied.
Mr. Pickford replied that the owner would pay and the rental agent would pay
on his commission.
Mr. Wheeler stated that this might be duplication and asked the Board members
to consider this point.
Mr. Homer Bruce asked if the Board had considered an employee tax. He felt
that the County loses revenue from the employees of other counties who work g~r
Albemarle County i~l~atries.
Mr. Wheeler replied that there was no legislation for such a tax.
Mrs. Elizabeth Rosenblum spoke in favor of the tax stating that this is an
equitable way to distribute the tax load. SHe urged that the citizens press for a
local income tax and asked the Board to look into the matter of the capital gains
tax and she also supports the rental tax.
No one else from the public rising to speak~ the Chairman declared the public
hearing closed and asked for comments from the Board.
Mr. Fisher stated that he was concerned about several of Mr. Dominick's
remarks and was not ready to vote on the issue at this time.
Mr. Thacker stated that several people had commented about using this tax to
reduce the property tax, however, this was the reason for considering this license
tax. That reason 'being to keep the tax rate at the present level.
2-1 5-73
419
~. Wheeler stated that the Board would consider the comments made at this meeting
and he especially appreciated the businessmen who had spoken in favor of this license
tax. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood~ seconded by Mr. Thacker to carry this matter
ever to the March 15 meeting of this Board. Motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher~ Henley, Thacker~ Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Clarence McClure was present to ask the Board's approval of a special
appropriation for moving Scottsville School out of the flood plain. He stated that. the
School Board now has a contract and a deed drawn for 1~ acres of land within a mile
of the Scottsville area near the proposed shopping center. The sale price of the land
is $15~000 and. other expenses will be approximately $2,000. Mr. Wood offered motion
to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of
Virginia~
Albemarle County/that $17,000 be and is hereby appropriated
for purchase of land for moving Scottsville School to a new
site.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker.
Mr. H. H. Tiffany stated that at the January 30, 1973 meeting of the Western
Albemarle Taxpayers Association, with over 800 people in attendance, a resolution
to the effect that there be a moratorium on all capital expenditures of the schools
and that there be a moratorium on all purchase of school sites until such time as
further study of this appeal is handled~ was unanimously adopted. He continued by
saying that because of conflicting opinions about the 1970 census the Western Albemarle
Taxpayers Association are taking this point to the Circuit Court to show that the
School Board acted in abuse of discretion to request these capital expenditures and
he asked that no site be purchased until a determination is made by the Circuit Court.
Mr. Wheeler replied that this request is not a part of the proposed Capital
improvement program.
Mr. Walter Young felt this would be money well spent.
Mr. Thacker stated that the moving of Scottsville School had been inititated to
help prevent wasting taxpayers dollars in repairing Scbttsville School while it is still
within the flood plain.
The Chairman called for a vote at this time and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fishery Henley~ Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. NcClure stated that the School Board had instructed him to formally present to
the Board of Supervisors their recommendations for building programs for the next five
years. He then read the following resolution:
WHEREAS, ~he Albemarle CoUnty School Board has adopted an updated
building program to be completed between January 1973 and September
1977 which will require immediate action to accomplish, and
WHEREAS, four of the projects in the program need to be completed
by 1975 in order to provide space for the School Board's plan to re-
organize on a K-5-3-~ basis, and
WHEREAS, these projects, namely the Westside High School, the
North Elementary School and the additions to Meriwether Lewis and Crozet
Schools, will require considerable planning time for designing 'and
getting State Department of Education approval~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle County School
Board requests authorization from the Albemarle County Board of Super-
visors to encumber the funds necessary for securing architectural
services and proceeding immediately with developing plans for these
four projects.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Albemarle County School Board
requests that the Board of Supervisors authorize immediate applications
for loans from the State Literary Fund in the maximum amount allowed
for eabh project, and that it consider other methods of financing avail-
able for the remaining construction costs of the projects in the newly
adopted building program and advise the School Board how to proceed with
these projects.
Mr. Wheeler suggested that the Board receive this matter and have same added
to an agenda for discussion at an appropriate time.
Mr. Wood suggested that the appropriate time be the March 15 meeting or
soon thereafter as he felt that if this matter is delayed too long~ the Co~unty
will lose low interest money from the Literary Fund and the Virginia Supplemental
Retirement System.
Mr. Thacker asked that the School Board be ~repared to discuss types of
construction, standardization of design, architectural arrangement~ and any other
item pertinent to this building program at the time this matter is placed on an
agenda.
Mr. Fisher requeste~ that the School Board alsofr~ady to discuss going to a
year round school year and stated that the County might be able to save one-quarter
of these building costs if this went into effect.
Mr. Wheeler stated that the Board would not discuss the building program at
this time but would hold a public hearing on this matter at a later date.
Mr. McClure also advised the Board that at the School Board meeting on Monda~
February 12,they had passed.a 1973-75 budget of $9,500,000, this being an increase
of $1,250,000 over the 1972-73 budget.
Mr. Wheeler said that he had received numerous requests from organizati~nsthat
the School budget be made available immediately and asked that Mr. Batchelor have
copies made available for the public at once.
Mr. Tiffany stated that this would be a matter of ~ircuit Court determination
and asked that no action be taken until the Circuit Court makes a rul~ng~
Mr. Wheeler replied that this matter would be discussed with this Board's
attorney.
Mr. Tiffany stated that he had three resolutions passed by the Western Albemarle
Taxpayors Association, namely:
1) We, taxpayers of Albemarle County, demand that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors immediately adOpt an ordinance to provide that developers
pay off-site per capita capital improvements, including school buildings,
incremental water supply, incremental sewage disposal plant, and new fire
stations.
~) WHEREAS, we consider that present-day taxes are too high and too
nu~erous~ thereby taking too large a percentage of the income of the average
taxpayer;
AND WHEREAS~ we realize that such high and numerous taxes cause
financial distress, 'especially among those with fixed income, even to the point
of disrupting family life;
AND WHEREAS~ we believe that present-day taxes are rapidly approaching
the point of confiscation, thereby penalizing thrift, foresight and economy among
taxpayers;
~ND WHEREAS, we are confident that governmental b~e~s can reduce taxes
by cutting out unnecessary services, holding down salary increases of administrative
employees, and not yielding to the clamor of minority pressure groups;
THEREFORE WE~ the undersigned citizens and taxpayers of the SAMUEL
MILLER'and NHITE HALL DISTRICTS of Albemarle County, do hereby petition the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to reduce costs of operation and taxes~
~especially those taxes indicated by the most recent reassessment of property in
the two above districts, and to avoid the implementation of any new ~rograms that
cost money.
3) Mr. Tiffany then asked the amount of the County Executive's salary and
questioned the fact that this car does not bear public use tags. To this last question,
Mr. Wheeler replied that the County Executive's salary is a matter of public record.,
that being $25,000. Mr. Batchelor stated that his car is sometimes used by the Sheriff
for investigations and therefore does not bear public use tags. Mr. Wheeler replied
that this Board has stated on several occasions that there are four or five county
employees who are allowed to take county cars home at night because they are on call
2~ hours a day. One of these employees is the County Executive.
Due to the nature of the following discussion, the Clerk here sets this out in
transcript form:
Wheeler: Anyone else have something that is not on the agenda to take up, if n~t,
gentlemen, I~would like to impose on the Board~ There ~ something special I would like
to take up. It has caused me great concern and I would like to take it up at this time
and I would like to ask Mr. Joe Goldsmith to come forward.
Goldsmith: Mr. Chairman.
Wheeler: Have a seat please. Gentlemen, as you are aware, Mr. Goldsmith will be
leaving the County tomorrow. Is that correct?
Goldsmith: Yes~ sir.
Wheeler: One of the things that has always been jealously guarded by the Board members
of Albemarle County and that is that we conduct our business above board, that~everyone be
treated alike and when, especially, a County employee makes a public statement that people
are being given preferential treatment, it is of great concern to me. Now, Mr. Goldsmith~
I have asked you to come forward because I heard the last part of a radio interview,
radio comments yesterday, in which, unless I am mistaken, you stated that~ two developers
in this County were being given preferential treatment. Now, if those developers are
being given preferential treatment and you as a County employee were aware of it, I want
to know, did you make a report to your superior ar did you make a report to this Board
and let's have it ouh right now.
Goldsmith: Mr. Wheeler, I do think that there are two developers in this County who
do, who have been receiving preferential treatment.
Wheeler: O.K., let's have it.
~oldsmith: I can name those.
Wheele~: Yes sirs let's have it.
Goldsm%t~: Dr. Charles Hurt and Daley Craig. I know both the gentlemen. I
would have felt it my duty before hand, I have talked to Mr. Fisher about this, to
say something, I was in the employee of the County and I don't think at the particular
time if I had said something that I would have been around too long, I think I might
have been canned. It's my job or it has been my job in the past to administer the
zoning ordinance as zoning administrator and in that capacity to enforce the zoning
ordinance, however, there are ordinances which I have no control over, one of those
being the soil erosion and sedimentation ordinance. I am not the agent for the
County Board of Supervisors, the County Planner is. I think ~ere have been certain
occurrences that have happened within the past year, especiall~ with Virginia Land
Company within the past two weeks. Dr. Hurt is here. One of those in particular,
Ski Land, In~. on Pantops Mountain. I did an aerial survey, with photographs, of the
entire site. I determined from these photographs that there was a considerable area
that had been disrupted by heavy equipment that did not need to be disrupted, Work
being done that should not have been done. I made a report to the County Planner,J
Mr. John Humphrey,and I was told that a silt pond had been approved for this site by
~he Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to prevent soil erosion. Now,
that's fine. A silt pond is find. But, a silt pond of this nature did not have to
be constructed over 20 to 25 acres with additional grading work being done on roads
in this area. Now, it seems to me that with this evidence that I submitted to the
County staff that something should have been done. Now, I understand that Dr. Hurt
called Mr. Humphrey very shortly after he received the letter deadlined that he was
to cease and d~sist and told him that the work that was being done~ and-for some
reason or another nothing else was done on this. It was dropped. Now, I think that
Virginia Land Company and Charles Hurt are in violation of the soil erosion ordinance.
I think they are in violation at Hollymead. Nothing has been done at Hollymead. I
am not the agent for that ordinance and I cannot file violations on it. I can inform
my superiors, and I have done this. Why nothing ~as been done on it, I do not know.
But, gentlemen, I have said to the press and I will say here, I am going to be around
this County a long time after I lea~$, am nob working for the County, and I am going
to be watching things that go on. But I think that something has got to be done.
All developers have to be treated the same, what's good for the goose is good for
the gander. I do not think that they are being treated the same. They are not Being
treated the same. If we go out and force Jack Sims out in Camelot to clean up two
acres of mud that has washed down in the road ~d I sit here in my office and I did
this last week, I sat and told Jack, I said Jack, you have got until 4:00 o'clock ~this
Friday to clean that mess up. And this was on Tuesday afternoon, and I expect him
to comply with it, however, it rained the three days so we gave h~ an extension-'until
the next week, but he is working on it. We set a deadline for Virginia Land Company
for Dr. Charles Hurt to do thus and so and Dr. Hurt calls in and say, you know., yak,
yak, yak, I can't do it on account of this and you knoM, let's see if we can work~
together on this and work together on that. I know how to work with people. I have
been ~oing it for two years ~n the zoning ordinance. You can catch flies with sugar
and not salt. But, I think now gentlemen, rather than the County being on the o~ffense
here with the developer, we are on the defense. We are not carrying the ball now,
we are trying~to prevent Charlte Hurt from making a touchdown, you know, and it is
just as simple as that. The developer now is in the position of telling the County
what to do. We should be telling the developer what to do and we are not doing that.
Now, I don't know why it is, but, there is a problem, there is a problem that exists
and I think that it should be checked into. I talked to Mr. Fisher last week on'this
and we didn't even, we never even talked, we weren't talking about this and'the A
subject came up. Something has got to be done. ~-
Wheeler: A~e you, what, let me get this clear Mr. Gol~ith~ You are charging
that the Planner, County Planner, ~ giving preferential treatment to Mr., Daley-
Craig, Inc. and Virginia Land Company and Dr. Hurt.
Goldsmith: I'm not sure whether it is the County Planner, or whether it comes
from higher up, down. But, I don't think that the ordinance to do with soil erosion
and sedimentation control is being enforced like it~should. Gosh knows, John
Humphrey.has got enough to do, Gordon, without having to do this too.
Whee.l~r: Is this possible that it could be a difference of opinion Mr. Goldsmith
on how it should be enforced. I mean, you state that somebody is giving, being given
preferential treatment, you are making a serious charge and I want you to understand
that, because I, listen,
Goldsmith:
Wheeler:
Goldsmith:
I,
because I am disturbed about it and I want you to understand
Listen,
Wheeler: that when you make a statement like this now, let's be sure we are
serious about this.
Goldsmith: Gordon, I didn't make the statement to D~ve Miller that he was given,
being given preferential treatment.
423
Wheeler: What did~you say?
Goldsmith: I don't think that he is adhering to the ordinanc~ like he should~
you sees and I don't think that the people who are in charge of these ordinances are
making i~him ahere to them. I don't think that, you knows there is no preferential
treatment that they get money under the table, none of that, I don't think that is the
case, it couldn't possibl~ be.
Wheele~: Well, let's get it straight, are you saying that they, that other developers
are being made to adhere to-the regulations and those two are not?
Goldsmith: Yes, sir.
Wheeler: Or is everybody being treated, I mean, is everybody generally being treated
the same, that's what I want to know. ~'
Goldsmith: No, sirs they are not. 'Mr. Chairman, when I was actin~ as Zoning
Administrator~ on several occassionss several instances~ I was approac~by persons who
were higher than I because I was, and I am not speaking of the Supervisoms~ because
I was putting'too much pressure on certain people and they wanted to keep it a 'little
cool. This has happened to me.
WhgeZer: Who?
Goldsmith: Mr. Batchelor~
BatchelQr: Better name, mames and times and places.
~gldsmith: We'il maintains name, names~ times and places.
this has been~ has been one.
Ah, Daley Craig, and
B~tchelor: Name, time and place.
W~..eeler: Mr. Batchelor, I'm conducting this.
Goldsmith: Back after the incident with the University of Virginia,
Wheeler: Let's get back to Datey Craig.
Goldsmith: Alright I'll speak to, I'~ referring to this. Daley Craig had some
trouble out here. Don Woodsons who is my zoning inspector, wanted to pin him on a building.
I was requested by the County Executive to cool it, that there were enough irons in the
fire at the present time, and I cooled Mr. Woodson. That shouldn't be done. I~ I've said
all that I can say to the Board right now, and I will meet with you privately, or I
will meet with you publicly, I'll meet with you individually. But, I think serious
thought has got to be given to the administration of ordinances in this COunty. We don't
have the staff to administer them properly~ first off, second off, we have got'~developers
who are pushing the County around~ and they can't continue to do this.
Wheeler: O.K. Wait~ Mr. Goldsmith~ sit down please, we are not~ough now~ and let's.
Gentlemen of the Board, I think this is a serious situation. Serious statements have
been made here. Mr. Pickford, legally~ how are, I would like to have some recommendations
on how this should be handled. Is this a matter that should go to the Commonwealth's
Attorney for investiE~'on or should ~his board?
Pickfor~: Let me have a little time to think on it, Mr. Chairman, if you will.
Wheeler. O.K. Alright. Gentlemen of the Board~ do you have any questions or comments
you would like to make at this time? Or would you rather wait for report from our
attorney?
Thacker: I would rather hear what Mr. Pickford has to ~ay~ personally~ Mr. Chairman,
I think I akree with you that these charges are very serious~and if they ~re occurring
I think I want to see that they stop immediately.
Fisher: I would like to say that I have shared some similar concerns from time to
time from calls that citizens have made to me about what seemed to be violations of
various ordinances and I have not been able to find out from the Planning Department
e×ac~ly why these things were not enforced and I share the concern and would like to
find out why they are not being enforced.
Whee~e~: Mr.'Henley.
No. (Shook head no).
Wheeler: Mr. Pickfords we would like to discuss this wit'h you. We do need to set
a course of action and to look into this. It is, this is a serious situation and we will
have to set a course of action we will take. Dr. Hurt.
Dr. Hurt: May I comment on this?
~/~eeler: Ah
Hurt: May I tell you why I would like to comment on it?
Wheeler: Ah, go, alright, o.k.
Hurt: I think it is important that I comment on this, and this is what I wanted
to talk about before. I was here this morning because .I feel like I have been
harassed by the County, some of the authorities ~ the County. I don't think that
I am at cross purposes in any way with what you all want~ what the County Executive
wants, what the zoning administrator wants. This man is going in business with a
disgruntled employee of mine and I think that has something to do with some of th~
reckless statements that he has made. We h~ve new ordinances. We are operating
under regulations that I don't fully -~uderstand, there are areas that I think, that
I interpret one way, other people interpret another .way. I am not saying that Eo~
Goldsmith doesn't believe entirely what he says. He may be even correct. I don't
think ~hat he is correct. I think that he is not properly interpreting his regulations
that he operates under. I think that he has worked a hardship on me. Daley Craig
and I happen to be sort of the only sizable developers here and probably have encountered
some of the problem that other people haven~ encountered. Now, ~e built, I think if
he had been ~oing his job~ part of the problems wouldn't have excreted. We built a
large pond, a silt pond, on the ski slope. One objection that wgs brought up at the time
of the hearing that the Rivanna was going to be polluted, and so we went to considerable
extra expense to do, to build a big Pond, which I really think exceeds your all'a
requirements and maybe that's what they're objecting to because we really did a better
job than you expected. I wrote a letter. I objected to the cease and desist order
when I am trying to do a job and the publicity that comes across and everybody starts
to think that I am ~rying to defy the law or something like that and I am trying to
live up to the requirements and still do my job. So, I wrote a letter and I
explained, and I called John Humphrey and I called, I don't know if I bothered you
with it or not, I was so upset by this type of action and I thought I understood ~he
reason, the situation where a man is not using any judgement, in:Ey opinion, of trying
to bring about the objectives that you all have brought with ~lanning and zoning. -
Scattered over my property at Pantops were about 50 automobiles all over the place.
If these people had been doing their job, they wouldn't have been there. People
that abandoned them there, and there were many there, wouSd probably had them moved
away. Well, as we are getting ready to ~pen the ski slope up there, the only view
they had were acres of wrecked automobiles scattered over my property that pe~le
had done or tried to get them to remove. So I had the bulldozer come when they built
the silt basin and to bury all these cars and to take them in the slope. I really
think that what I have done there, really is what you all are trying to do. I feel
that I have been harassed by Joe Goldsmith and I think that he has done it out of
maliciousness. I think that he has done it because of his friendship with Frank
Burke, who left my employment mnder pressure because he wasn't doing a job and I
think that this is vindictiveness. I know they are serious charges and I don't like
it. I don't like being put in the poSition. I've never asked for any favoritism.-
I've never asked for anything from anybody. I've stood on my own feet, spoke my o~
mind and I never tried to influence anybody to do anything for me. I resent it. I
think that all I've gotten from this man is harassment.
Wheeler: Thank you. Well, gentlemen, we will set a course of action. I'd
like to say, comment to your remarks Dr. Hurt, when I asked Mr. Goldamith to come
up here, I had no idea who he would state that the preferential~ treatment that, ah,
would be given to. I had no idea who it would be. I hope you understand it is the
desire of this Board that everyone be treated the same. It is also the desire of
this Board that you or the developers not be harassed, and so we will look into that
part as well as the preferential treatment. But we will have to decide on a course
of action and this will, this we will continue as soon as we discuss it with out
attorney.
Hurt: This afternoon I would like further opportunity to state some of the
problems that I have run into in zonisg.~ I have confidence in our good government,
I have confidence in you all and I am' going to try to live up to my responsibility,
but, I wanted to go over some of the problems witkL~OUo I want your all's guidance
in telling me how to meet your requirements, within practical limits.
Wheeler: O.K.
Tiffany: Mr. Chairman, we have previously given a question to the Chairman of
this Board concerning this incident of Dr. Hurt and we have not yet had an answer,
and I hope it will be answered publicly today. We want to know why two members of
the Planning Co~mission, Planning Department were required to go out to do this job
at Dr. Hurt's ~lace at the silt basin. Why a female and a male member, or employees
both went out there to do the job that appeared to us to be the job for one person
and we feel that this is kind of example of things that we are trying to stop and we
hope that you will come up with an answer.
Wheeler: Oh, yes. Well, I
Humohrey: May t give an answer to that, Mr. Chairman?
425
Wheeler: Yes, the department has given a response to me and I will be glad to
have them give it to you right now~ Go right ahead, Mr. Humphrey.
Humphrey: Mr. Chairman, in cases where there is an alleged violation, a witness
must accompany a person who is investigating, that is the basis we have always advised
Mr. Goldsmith in his violation investigations, to take a witness, either a deputy or
another member of the stafff.
Tiffany:
Pickford:
Tiffany:
Pickford:
Wheeler:
of the County.
Mr. Pickford, is that your adv.iee to the County?
I haven't been involved in that.
You are not corroborate
I haven't been involved in that.
Well, let's just, that is the decision and we will look into the policy
Tiffany: I would appreciate if you would look into it because we are paying two
people to do the job of one so they can have,witness.
Humphrey: That's not true, sir.
Tiffany: Look's like it to me.
Wheeler: Oh, alright, weIll look. into.the policy. We do have problems with
enforcement and yes sir~ you have
Ma_~n: I am David from the Crozet area. I just hope that the Board
members realize that they are engaging possible a legal type of criminal
prosecution almost and I think it is disgraceful that any private citizen by, simply by
the inneundo of statements of a county employee, are even actually the victim, to come
forward to have to get on his k~ees before a court of star chamber. I had no idea that
this type of procedure took place in a County Board of Supervisors meeting.
Wheeler: Well,
Man: Certainly there is some other way for this man to bring his charges where rules
of evidence and everything are
Wheeler: Well sir, norma~y would not have been handled this way, but these state-
ments have been made in public and once the public part of i~, we will decide how we
will handle it from this, I had no idea what this man would say ~ ~
Man: Well, I ~st hope you can see what has taken place and
Whe~le~: Well
Ma~: reconsider through this type of procedure
Wheeler: Well,
Man: because it does constitute an harrassment, I am sure that all'of this now is
going to be put in the newspaper and you have asked this man to name, to accuse, to name
the people you are accusing and everything and now what's, the people who are named, how
are they going to protect themselves, this will be a matter of a public record, These
people now are, in the press, now are
Wheeler: Sir, our business is public.
Ma~: Is this meeting not public?
Wheeler: This meeting is public.
Man: What he said before was gossip, it was his own opinion but now, now
i't becomes a matter of the records of your, of this Board of this County.
~;.~eeler: Thank you, ~r.
At this point, the Chairman requested that the Board $o into executive session during
the lunch recess in order to discuss a legal matter. Motion to this effect was made by
Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
2-t ~-73
The Board reconvened at 1:~0 P,M.
The Chairman stated that he had one announcement to make before going to the
regular agenda. He stated ~hat he had consulted with the Board's attorney, but did
not consult with the other Board members before asking Mr. Goldsmith to appear
before the Board this morning. He felt the charges were serious enough to be
brought to the attention of the Board and the public at once.
Mr. Tiffany stated that he agreed that the charges are extremely serious and
accordingly, during the lunch hour, he had taken steps to contact, the Circuit Court
Judge and had asked the Clerk to impound a grand jury to investigate the charges.
Mr. Tiffany then inquired about a letter Judge Berry had written to the Chairman
of the Board concerning his capital needs. He asked if the Chairman would make this
letter public in order that it would be plain to the public where the requests lie,
if it is necessary to move the County Office Building and in order that the necessity
of the move not be placed on Judge Berry. Mr. Wheeler replied that he should direct
this request to ~udge Berry.
The Board had previously heard a request from Vaughan Stewart, Jr. and Paige
Lynch that a portion of Wakefield Court which l~es between their lots be abandoned to
public use and returned to them. This road was viewed by the Board and comments
were heard from adjoining property owners. The Planning Cammission reviewed this
request, however, they recommended that the ~0 foot right-of-way not be vacated at
this time. They felt it woUld not be in the best interest of the general public
welfare and mfety.
Mr. Wood stated that there had been a restriction put on the plat by the City
Planning Commission that thiE road will be permanently closed and since the character
of the neighborhood has been established, he offered motion to close that portion of
Wakefield Court and that 25 feet be returned to the property owner on either side.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley.
Mr. Fisher stated that even though the action of the City Planning Commission
precludes this road ever being opened in the foreseeable future, if Rio Road becomes
a major artery, the Country,may have to buy this land back at some future date.
Vote was taken at this point and was recorded as follows:
AYES: Messrs. Henley and Wood.
NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Thacker and Wheeler.
At the January 18, 1973 meeting of the Board, a public hearing was held on
an ordinance entitled "Real Estate Tax Exemption for Elderly PerEons." Mr. Wheeler
stated that since that public hearing, it had been recommended to him that the limit
on income be lowered to $5,000, however, it being the concensus of the Board that
this ordinance will probably be amendSd from time to time in the future, motion was
offered by Mr. Henley that the ordinance be adopted as presented. Motion was
seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
427
The complete text of the ordinance as adopted is set out below:
CHAPTER 9
ARTICLE VII
REAL ESTATE TAX EXEMPTION FOR EEDERLY PERSONS
WHEREAS~ Section 58-~60,1 of the Code of Virginia, I950, as
amended, authorizes the governing body of this County to enact an
ordinance providing exemption or deferral of taxes on real estate of
certain elderly persons; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of County Supervisors of
Albemarle County to provide such relief exempting duly qualified elderly
persons from such taxation~ and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the governing body of said County
that such relief be made available as soon as possible, the provisions of
this ordinance shall be in full force and effect for the calendar year
1973 and subsequent years,
THEREFORE~ BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors
of Albemarle County as follows:
SECTION 9-22. DEFINITIONS
The following ~rds and phrases when used in this Article shall,
for the purpose of this Article, have the following respective meanings,
except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
(a) Total Combined Income. Gross income from all sources, of
the owners of the dwelling residing therein and of the owners' relatives
living in the dwelling.
(b) Net Combined Financial Worth. All assets of the owners of
the dwelling who reside therein, and of the owner§' relatives living in
the dwelling, including equitable interests, but excluding the value of
the dwelling and the land, not exceeding one acre, upon which it is
situated.
(c) Taxable Year.
is claimed.
The calendar year for which the exemption
SECTION 9-23. THE EXEM.PTION.
Commending January 1, 1973, there is hereby provided for owners and
occupiers of real estate in the County of Albemarle, an exemption from
taxation of such real estate, or any portion thereof, which is owned by,
and occupied as the sole dwelling of a person or persons mot less than
65 years of age, subject to the restrictions and conditions prescribed
by this Article and the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
SECTION 9-24. ELIGIBILITY FOR EXEMPTION AND RESTRICTIONS AFFECTING SAME.
Exemption from real estate tax permitted hereunder shall be granted
subject ~ the following restrictions and c'onditio~s:
(a) The head of the household occupying the dwelling and owning
title or partial title~thereto shall have..reached the age of 65 years
prior to the taxable year for which the exemption is claimed.
(b) Title or partial title to the real estate for which the
exemption is claimed shall be owned on January I of the taxable year
by the person or persons claiming such exemption.
(c) The total combined income shall not exceed $7,500 for the
calendar year immediately preceding the taxable year.
(d) The net combined financial worth shall not exceed $20,000
as of December 31 of the calendar year immediately preceding the
taxable year.
(e) The person or persons claiming the exemption shall file the
affidavit required by this Article no earlier than February I, nor later
than May I of each taxable year.
SE, CTION 9-2~'., ADMINISTRATION OF THIS ARTICLE.
The exemption from real estate tax for elderly persons shall be
administered by the Director of Finance according to the provisions of
this Article. The Director of Finance is hereby authorized and empowered
to prescriber adopt, promulgate and enforce such rules and regulations
in conformance with the provisions of this Article, including the right
to require answers under oath, as may be reasonable necessary to determine
eligibility for exemption. The Director of Finance may also require the
production of certified tax returns and appraisal reports to establish
total combined income or net combined financial worth.
SECTION 9-26. PROCEDURE FOR FILING CLAIMS.
Annually and between February 1 and May 1 of each taxable year for
which the exemption is claimed, the person or persons claiming the exemptions
shall file with the Director of Finance, in such manner as he shall
prescribe, and on the forms to be supplied by the County, an affidavit
setting forth~the names of the related persons occupying the real estate
for which the exemption is claimed, their total combined income and their
net combined financial worth. If, after audit and investigation, the
Director of Finance determines the claimant to be eligible for the
exemption from real estate taxes, he shall certify the claimant's eligi-
bility to the County Tax Assessor who shall exonerate the amount of the
exemption from the real estate tax liability of those persons entitled to
the exemption.
SECTION 9-27- CALCULATION OF AMOUNT; LIMITATION.
For eligible claimants, the amount of exemption from real estate
tax for any taxable year shall be as follows:
AMOUNT OF,INCOME
PERCENTAGE OF REAL ESTATE
TAX TO BE PAID
$0 but less than $3,670 O~
at least $3,670 but less than $4,000 1~
at least $4,000 but less than $4,500 2~
at least $4,500 but less than $5,000 35%
at least $5,000 but less than $5,500 45%
at least $5,500 but less than $6,000 55%
at least $6,000 but less than $6,500 65~
at least $6,500 but less than $7,000 754
at least $7,000 'out less than $7,500 85%
SECTION 9-28. CHANGE IN STATUS.
Changes in respect to income, financial worth, ownership of property
or other factors occurring during the taxable year for which the affidavit
is filed, and having the effect of exceeding~or violating the limitations
and conditions provided herein, shall nulIiEF any exemption for the then
current taxable year and the taxable year immediately following.
SECTION 9.-29... PENALTY~ FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE.
Any person falsely claiming an exemption hereunder shall be guilty of
a misdemeanor.
Dr. George Moore~ Director of the Joint Health Department was present at the
request of the Board. Dr. Moore gave a lengthy report on the programs administered
by the Health Department. He ended by stating that the Health Department has out-
grown their present space and it may become necessary to request leasing of space
or a trailer. He further stated that there will be a request coming to the Board
for an addition to the Health Department building.~'This addition would add ~0,000
sq. ft., doubling the size of the present building and would require, from both
the City and the County, a capital outlay of approximately $100,000 each. They
hope to finance the major portion of this work through Hill-Burton funds.
Mr. Wheeler stated that he was concerned about the approval of septic tanks
in areas of the County where there are ineffective septic tanks already installed
and asked Dr. Moore if this Board needed to set a policy on this'matter.
2-1~"73 429
Dr. Moore replied that he would contact the Board about specifics at a later
date.
Mr. James Ritchie~ Director of Ehe Albemarle County Welfare Department was present
to give a report on the WIN Program. He stated that progress on this~gram had been
slower than he would like and after evaluating the program he would make a new report.
He also,stated that he would like to publicly thank all those people who had helped
the Welfare Department with theSr foster home recruitment program. They now have
approximately 60 applica~ionsv~o~Lfile and after scrutinizing these will have approximately
applicants for foster homes.
Mr. J. H. Bailey was present to give a new report on the sanitary landfills. He
stated that he had received the following correspondence from gorton's and the-University
of Virginia:
"February 12, 1973
Office of County Engineer
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
22901
ATTENTION: Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer
Dear Sir:
At the conclusion of our last meeting on January 30, 1973~ you requested that
we outline our position regarding the proposed changes in the operation of the
Ivy Sanitary Landfill.
As we understand the changes~ there would be no use of the landfill permitted
after ~:O0 P.M. and/or there would be no use permitted when an attendant was not
on duty. It is important to note that these changes were proposed because of an
interpretation of regulations issued by the Virginia Department of Health.~ They
were not caused by any improper use of the landfill under present, existing
conditions.
For many years, Morton has successfully used the Sanitary Landfill operations
in Ivy. As you probably know, our plant in Crozet is the world's largest producer
of frozen foods and operates on a continuous production schedule from 7:00 A.M.
until 2:00 A.-M. Between ~:00 and 7:00 A,M. the entire plant is totally clean'ed in
preparation ~or the next day's production operation.
We are presently using, on a round, the-clock basis, the landfill operation
for the disposal of our production waste, consisting primarily of empty cans
and cardboard. All other waste material generated through our production processes
is disposed of by other means~ including our own waste treatment facility. A key
has been provided'for our access to the landfill area during the "off hours" when
we are required to make disposal.
In discussion ~ith our plant sanitation and environmental control people, they
have advised that any restriction on our existing use of the landfill would present
an impossible situation. If we were to hold back on our delivery of waste to the
landfill, the resultant back up into our production areas could not be tolerated
due to the potential cross contamination problem. If this waste were to be temporarily
stored outside the plant, vector control would be impossible. As you are aware in
addition to our own strict quality, sanitation and environmental controls our plant
facilities and environment are also governed by both state public health regulations
and by continuous federal inspection.
The::~regutations governing disposal of solid waste as issued by the ~Virginia
Department of Health were effective on April 1~ 1971. We have operated ~mccessfully
under these regulations for almost two years and believe that continued use of the
landfill under present condtions complies fully with the regulations. This has
been confirmed in telephone ~onversation with Mr. William James and Mr. Rolan Dorer,
State Director of the Bureau of Solid Waste and Vector Control. Specifically, we
have been told by Mr. James, who is the Assistant Directory that under the existing
controlled conditions~ he believes that our continued use of the landfill is acceptab~
As a matter of interest we are currently initiating a $1.5 million modernization
43-0
and capital improvement project at the Crozet Plant. As a part of this proposal we
plan to install additional solid waste treatment facilities within the plant so that
continued use of the landfill operations will be considerably reduced. While final
approval and authorization of these proposals has not yet been obtained, it.does
provide a long range solution to our use of the landfill during "off hours"..
In conclusion we believe that proper and controlled usage of the Ivy Sanitary
Landfill is required and necessary for the continued successful operation of our
plant. We b~lieve that our use of this facility meets all existing regulatio~a
and we will continue to work with both the contract operator and the county to
insure that ~roper usage is maintained.
Very truly yours,
MORTON FROZEN FOODS DIVISION
ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY, INC.
(Signed) R. W. Lauffenburger
Plant Manager"
"30 January 1973
Mr. Thomas M. BatChelor
County Executive
County Office Building
Charlottesville 22901
Dear Mr. Batchelor:
In a meeting this date with Mr. Bailey and other interest~parties in the question of
operation of county landfills, Mr.Bailey requested a statement from those concerned.
Set forth below are the specific problems as they affect the University of Virginia.
These problems are set forth strictly from our standpoint and without reference as
to ?heir coordination with other commitments the contractor, Schneider's Disposal
Service, Inc., may have.
Our first requirement is that the ~O-yard compactor unit at the Hospital be picked
up, dumped and returned to position by about 6:30 a.m. in order to be ready to
receive the influx of garbage and trash starting with the morning meal and persists
throughout the day.
The rest of our requirements are necessitated by accessibility to the trash containers
or to avoid blocking of University Avenue, Rugby Road, Emmet Street, Brandon Avenue
and Jefferson Park Avenue during relatively heavy traffic periods. We have forty-
six (46) containers, representing a capacity of 200 bubic yards of uncompacte$
material, that must be picked up before 7:30 a.m. because otherwise they are ~n-
accessible as a result of parked cars or they interfere with the above named streets.
The latter category consists of only.si~ containers of 19 cubic yard capacity so
you aan readily see that the parking situation is the major problem in making later
pick ups. Locations of these containers have been periodically reviewed and adjusted
to provide the most convenient access and yet be effective for their primary function.
From information discussed this morning it appears that the Ivy sanitary landfill
can continue to operate as to present without any problem. The State Regulations
do not stipulate that an attendant or operator must be present. It calls for daily
cover at the end of each day of operation which does not preclude continuing as at
present. It calls for control of scavenging and this is currently done within reason
by the locked E~te with very limited access. I believe that written approval of the
operation of the Ivy sanitary landfill as presently practiced can be obtained.
If I may be of further assistance, please advise. You may reach me at 924-36~8.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) H. I. Taylor
Director"
Mr. Bailey also made reference to the following letter~
"February 6, 1973
Mr. J. Harvey Bailey
County Engineer, Albemarle County
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Mr. Bailey:
Reference is made to your letter of February 1, 1973, regarding the sanitary
landfill at Ivy.
2-I 5'-73
431
F
The regulations state that "Solid waste sh'all be covered at the end of
each day of operation with 6" of earth or approved material."
Allowing-the University of Virginia and Norton Frozen Foods to dump waste
at a marked spot during hours when the landfill is closed to She general
public and no attendant is present is considered not to be in violation
of the regulations. Such a variation would be allowable in order that
these two 'establishments could continue to operate efficiently.
The attendant should makk where they should dump when he leaves for the day.
If either fails to dump at the prescribed spat, it will be an easy matter
to determine who is in violation, and proper steps can be taken for them
to conform. It is felt that the spirit of the regulations will have been
met when operating under these conditions.
Sincerely,
(Signed) R. Eo Dorer~ Director
Bureau of Solid Waste &vector Control"
Mr. Bailey stated that since the State would continue to allow the varia~.ions
for Morton's and the University of Virginia, he would now like the Board to consider
the following three items:
1. That the off-hour use of the sanitary landfill be a~lowed to continue as long
as this site is in use and the Health Department sanctions the same. However~
if this site should be abandonedCthe off-hour use of another site should come
back to the Board as new business.
e
Although the Department of Health does not require it~ it is highly desirable
than an attendant be present during the off--hour use of the landfill. This
is as much a safety as a proper use factor.~ There is no light or telejhone
at the landfill. If a d~iver gets in trouble, he may be unable to get'~elpo
The cost of such an attendant should fall directly on the user.
Sanitary Landfill#2 Should be' closed after hours and on week-ends. The work
week should be extended to six ~ays. This would partially make up for closing
to 2~,hour use° The earlier opening and earlier daily closing could be done~
however~ the majority of the users should be agreeable to this policy°
Bailey was then 'instructed to have prepared for the March meeting:
Report on additional cost to keep Keene landfill open one extra
day per week.
Report on additional cost to have operator present 'during off-hour
use at Ivy landfill and recommendations as to who would pay for 'this
additional cost.
3o Report on recommended hours of operation at the Keene landfill.
$. Report on the possibility of clo~ing the Keene landfill one day
during the week instead of Sunday.
Er. James Bullock stated that he had talked with landowners adjacent to the Ivy
Landfill and almost all object to the la~e night usage of the landfill~o
Mrs. Victoria Craw read the following statement from the League of Women
Voters:
The League of Women Voters is pleaEed to see the formation of the
City-County committee concerned with solid waste disposal. The scope of
the problem calls for cooperative effort. We are, however, disappointed
in not seeing any citizen members. We ask you to consider expanding the
committee to include knowledgeable citizens. We hope this committee will,
within a specified time, present alternative methods for solid waste
disposal for your consideration.
While this committee deals with future alternatives, we urge the
Board to extend this cooperative spirite to the immediate concern of helping
the City locate a~;temporary landfill site. The League feels the situation
calls for more cooperation than has been demonstrated thus far. The delays
have been too num~rOuso We therefore urge you to act as quickly as possible
to h~p provide an i~terim solution.
2-1 5'-73
Mr. John Humphrey was present-at the request of the Board to give a new
§tatus report on Hollymead:
BUILDING 'PERMITS
As of February 12, 1973, 52 building permits have been issued with Phase I,
Hollymead~ Of this number, six permits have been voided because of septic tank
installation problems leaving a ~otal of $6 valid permits. These homes are
scattered throughout the development and have an average estimated value of
$38,000 for one developer and $27,000 for another, and are under construction at
present.
ETILITIES
The Albemarle Service Authority has installed an 8" water main from U.S. 29 along
Hollymead Drive to Hollymead School. Dr. Hurt has installed water lines in the
following approved roads, which were checked and accepted by the Engineering
Department. (Mardin Lane, Golden Tree Lane, Derby Lane, Redwing Lan~, Ravens Place,
Easy Lane, Sourwood Place.)
Water lines in Robin Lane, Allens Way, Poe's Lane, White Oak Lane, Lamkin Way and
Tinker's ~ove are~either under ~'onstruction or have not been tested.
With reference to sewer, the houses under construction will be served by individual
septic tank systems until a central sewage system is available. We have no plans
from Dr. Hurt on the proposed collection system. The Rivanna Service Authority
has begun a survey to locate the interceptor sewer which is to serve the area.
Design and construction are anticipated to take about nine months.
An agreement between the Albemarle County Service Authority and Dr. Charles W. Hurt
and North Corporation has been signed with reference to the conditions imposed,
relative to sewer service, in the original approval of Phase I, Hollymead.
All easements for water and sewer have been deeded to the Service Authority and
recorded, relative to Phase I.
~OADS
All road plans in Phase I, Hollymead have been reviewed and approved by the Virginia
Department of Highways. North Hollymead Drive will be accepted into the State System
as soon as the engineering firm involved in Hollymead can complete the required
drainage easements, have them recorded and sent to the Virginia Department of Highways.
All other roads stemming from North Hollymead Drive will have to wait for acceptance
into the State System L,pending sufficient occupancy of dwellings along the subject
roads and subject to completion according to State approvals. A bond of $$O,000
is being held at this time to insure compliance with State standards for the work
remaining to be accomplished on the secondary roads. An additional $~0,000 has
been released for work accomplished on the secondary roads as of this date, aEter
inspection by the County Engineer, who verified compliance of work to State standards.
GENERAL INF0~ATION
There has been additional grading activity outside the confines of the approved
Phase I, since the last report. A cease and desist order was issued by the Planning
Office and an investigation was made. It was ascertained that the grading involved
road networks, which plans have been received but no action taken in lieu of a
condition of approval for Hollymead that stated that no approval would be given for
additional ~hases of Hollymead until certain other conditions were met. One being
that the Highway Department stated thaththe dam on which Woodburn Road crosses
can meet State Highway standards. The grading is estimated to be 200~000 square
feet involving road alignment. Normally, the grading of a private road, as this has
been said to be, would be permitted provided the process of obtaining a grading
permit is accomplished. This pro~ess ~as not followed.
Mr. Humphrey also stated that on February 6, Mr. Harvey Bailey had noted that
a Pole barn was being built on Route 659. This was investi~e.d~by Mr. Goldsmith
and Mr. Woodson and they were told ~hat this pole bar~ was to be used to house heavy
equipment. Dr. Hurt was tken sent a letter stating that unless he could verify that
this barn would be used for strictly agricultural purposes, it would have to be re-
moved by February 13. Mr. Woodson is investigating this matter this date.
2-1 5-73
433
In addition, the Highway Department stated that a request had been made for a
permanent entrance way off of Route 29 in the vicinity of one of Dr. Hurt's private
roads outside of Phase I of Hollymead. This to be in lieu of a temporary permit which
has become invalid. Mr. uoa~es nad a±so s~a~ed tha~ ~/median strip had oeen requested
but since no further approvals have been made by the county for anything outside of
Phase I, the Planning Staff felt this requ~s~should be denied.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the Planning Office has plans and profiles for Phase II
of Hollymead which they have been holding for approximately W5 days in lieu of a
non-compliance. This being Woodburn Road as it traverses the dam. He understands that
there is a major problem with the dam and if this is so the Highway Department would
like to see the dam torn out and redone.
Nr. Fisher felt that with the continued cease and desist orders and the continued
grading that there is something wrong with the county's seil.'.erosion ordinance.
a
Mr. Humphrey stated that it is a combination of different items. Namely: 1)/bonding
requirement would be an inducement; 2) the number of square feet; 3) re-wording needed
on private roads. He stated that the League of?Women Voters has a report on several of
this items and there is a need to tie down several of these items in the zoning ordinance
itself.
he
Dr. Charles Hurt came forward to speak to the Board about several problems/has en-
countered at Hollymeado After a very lengthy discussion, Mr. Batchelor suggested that
the staff make a-full report and give particular attention to the:situation concerning
a dam that had been built without prior approval of the Highway Department.
Dr. Hurt also referred to The Urban Institute report stating that it had not been
based on facts. He stated that the report is based on imaginary figures and if it
were revised to use actual figures it would show that Hollymead would not only support
itself but would help support other schools in the County.
Two requests for restricted roads were reviewed by the Board. Motion was t~en
offered by Mr. Fisher to defer any action on these requests and to appoint a committee
to establish a policy for use of restricted roads in the counSy. Such committee report
due within 60 days. Motion was seconded by Mr. Thac~er and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The following communication was received from John L. Humphrey, Secretary,
Albemarle County Planning Commission:
"On January 30, 1973, the-Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a
public hearing to consider A& B Development Corporation's request for several variances
related to the location of their standard free-standing business sign. The request
for variances involved:
1) Permitting the erection of a free-standing sign 17 feet more than the
maximum permitted° The maximum permitted is 30 feet in height.
2) The erection of their HOliday Inn standard sign of $00 square feet in
aggregate area, which involved 300 square feet more than permitted by
the Zoning Ordinance.
434
The Board of Zoning Appeals approved the requested variance beyond the
maximum as stated above but did not permit any flashing, blinking, or
movement involving the.sign. The approval was by a $-1 vote.
Upon resolution of the Albemarle County Planning Commission during a
regular meeting held on February ~ 1973 hereby requests the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors to direct the proper officials of the County
to appeal to the Circuit Court the granting of this variance. The
Commission in requesting this action is of the opinion that no hardship
was demonstrated by the applicant since it was indicated at the hearing
by the applicant~ that e~en with these variances, the sign was not visible
from all roads, that they had smaller signs which could be utilized, and
that the granting has set a precedent which will not be in the best
interest of the County, Again, since no demonstrated hardship was
presented, the County also is of the opinion that the spirit and the
intent of the Zoning Ordinance has been violated without proper cause.
As I understand, if the Board of Supervisors is of a 'similar opinion
as the Commission, then the County Attorney with the assistance of the
Zoning Administrator should immediately commence action to cause the
appeal. Any appeal from the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals
should be accomplished within 30 days from the date of action by the
Board of Zoning Appeals. This would necessitate the appeal being filed
prior to March 1, 19732~
Mr. Thacker offered motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission
and authorized' the County Attorney to proceed with this appeal through the
Circuit Court. Motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Nenley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Thacker requested that the matter of an appointment ~o the Industrial
Commission be deferred until next month.
The following names were offered for appointment to the Equalization Board for
the year 1973: Warren B. O'Brien, John Schwab, Frank 0. Birdsall and R. D. Wade.
Motion to appoint these four persons was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by
Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. H. H. Tiffany stated that the Western Albemarle Taxpayers Association
would like the Board to consider the name of Charles Paige, Jr., Postmaster at
Batesville as the fifth member of the Equalization Board.
Resignation of Dr. George Moore as a member of the Mental Health Board was
considered next. At the February ~ meeting of City Council, the Council had
appointed a Mr. Robert P. Hodous to replace Dr. Moore on this Board. The Chairman
asked that no action be taken on this matter until he could contact the Mayor
concerning this appointment.
City Council has also appointed Mrs. Alicia B. Lugo to replace Mrs. Janice
Jordan as a member of the Mental Health Board. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker,
F ~ .
seconded by Mr. isher to concur in this appointment Motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
and
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker,/Wheeler .... ~
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood
The following r~solution was offered for adoption by Mr. Fisher:
WHEREAS The Urban Institute of WaEhington, District of Columbia,
has made a study of the fiscal impact of residential and commercial
development in Albemarle County, Virginia, and
WHEREAS the aforementioned study was funded in Part through the
beneficence of the Ford'Foundation~ and
WHEREAS the information contained in said study would not other-
wise have been made available to this Board nor to the citizens of
Albemarle County without considerable expense~and delay in time, and
WHEREAS said study is and will be of use in fiscal planning and
in the formulation of long-range policy decisions to the benefit of
the citizens of Albemarle County and the Commonwealth of Virginia,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Super-
visors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby express for itself
and for the citizens it represents, its gratitude and appreciation
for said study to Mr. William Gorham, President of the Urban Institute~
and through him to the Ford Foundation.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Henley. Mr. Wood stated that he felt The
Urban Institute should be thanked for their work on this report, however, he felt
the paragraph beginning with the Sth whereas should be struck~ since it was not known
at this time if the report would be used in long-range planning or if it would ever
be of any benefit in planning. Vote was taken at this point and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Motion to adopt the following rules of procedure for the Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: ~ None.
RLU~ES OF Pt~0CEDL~RE
FOR THE
ALHE~AR~E COU~IT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
~he Order of Business Before the Board. The agenda shall be that as established
by the Clerk to the Board in conjunction with requests from its members, and
unless otherwise seD~ forth, shall be as follows:
(a) Call to order.
(b) Recitation of The Lord's Prayer.
(c) Reading of the minutes of the previous meetings, and approval thereof.
(d) Unfini shed business.
(e) New business.
(f) Reports of committees.
(g) Ad~j ournment.
t
Official Action of Board. All matters requiring the vote of the Board must
first be preceded by the making of an appropriate motion by a member, the
seconding there of by another member, stating of the motion by the Chair and
thereafter discussion. Natters requiring public hearings shall not be subject
to motion for action by the Board until such public hearing has been held. Auy
amendments to the original motion, unless accepted by the member making the
43,6
original motion and the member seconding the same, shall be subject to
vo~e by the Board before any action is taken on the original motion. If
said amendment is adopted, ;then action shall be taken on the original
motion as amended. Any motion except as hereinafter otherwise noted,
must be seconded. Failing to receive a second, the motion shall die.
The, Prev. ious .Question. Discussi.o~ of any motion may be terminated by
any member moving the previous question, whereupon¢ and without the
necessity of a second to that motion, the Chair shall call For a vote.
IF carried by a majority of those voting, there shall be no further dis-
cussion and the Board shall proceed to vote upon the motion under con-
sideration.
~otion to Reconsider. After a vote is taken upon a matter before the
Board, a member may move its reconsideration. ~-aid motion to reconsider
must be made at the same meeting or an adjournment thereof at which the
matter was originally acted upon. The effect of the motion to reconsider,
if adopted by the Board, shall be to place the original question in the
exact position it occupied before it was voted upon.
..B...es. cind Prior A.c. tions. ,of the Board. Any vote previously taken by the
Board~ with the exception of zoning matters (which shall be subject of
reconsideration only as above stated) and ordinances, may be rescinded by
the Board.
Amendment..and Suspension of t~ules of Procedure. These rules of procedure
may be amended by majority vote of the Board at the next regular meeting
following the regular meeting at which the motion to amend is made. By
majority vote of those Board members voting, these rules may be suspended
on any matter pending before it.
B. AS I~P0 SED BY ST ATUTE
Incorporated by reference are the requisites of procedure imposed upon local
governing bodies by State law, these requisites being subject to change from
time to time as required by Statute.
1. Officers. (Virginia Code Section 1 ~. 1-~28)
(a)
Chairman. The Board shall elect one of its members Chairman, who
shall preside at all meetings of the Board, at which he is present,
during the terra for which he is elected.
(b)
(o)
Vice-Chairman.. The Vice-Chairman shall be elected from the membership
of the Board, and shall preside at all meetings in the absence of the
Chairman, and shall discharge any other duties of the Chairman during
the Chairman's absence or disability.
~.,¢2Z~..of.Offic~. While the State Code does not require annual election
of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County hereby establishes annual terms for such officers with the pro-
viso that they may be re-elected.
(e)
Clerk. The duties of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors as appointed
by the Board shall be as set forth by Virginia Code Section 1~. 1-532 and
resolution of this Board as adopted from time to time.
Tie Breaker. In accord with Virginia Code Section 15.1-~3¢, the Circuit
Court shall designate a tie breaker who shall serve for a period of four
years from the date of his appointment. 0nly a person who is qualified
to serve as a supervisor can be appointed. In the event of a tie vote,
upon any question before the Board, and all members are not present at
the meeting, the question shall then be passed until the next meeting
when it shall again be voted upon even though all members are not
present. If a tie vote again results, then the Clerk shall record the
vote and immediately notify the tie breaker, who shall cast the vote
breaking the tie at the current meeting of the Board, if practicable
(Virginia Code Section 15.1-540). If such attendance by the tie breaker
is not practicable, then the Board may adjourn to a day fixed in the
minutes of the Board, or in case of a failure to agree upon a date, to
a date fixed by the Clerk and entered by her in the minutes. The tie
breaker shall be entitled to be fully advised of the matter before the
Board upon which he is to vote, and if he is not prepared to cast his
vote at that time, he may require the Clerk to enter an order adjourning
the meeting to some future date &~ be set fOrth in the minutes, not to
exceed 30 days.
~eetin~s.
(a) Annual EeetinMs.
(Code Section 15.1-536)
The first meeting held after
(b)
(e)
437
the newly elected members of the governing body shall have qualified
and the first meeting held in the corresponding month of each succeed-
year shall be known as the annual meeting. At such annual meeting,
the Board shall establish the days, times and places for reg. ular
meetings of the Board during the ensuing 12 months.
t~e~ular ~eetin~s. If, following the annual meeting, the governing
body shall prescribe any other public place other than the Courthouse
and that established at the regular meet%ug, or the time-of meeting
other than that initially established, as a meeting place or time, the
governing bo!y shall.pass a resolution to that effect in accord with
Code Section 1 5.1-~36.
Quorum and ..A. dj ournme.nt. A majority of the member s of the governing
body present at the prescribed time and place to attend any meeting
shall constitute a quorum. Any meeting may be adjourned from time to
time and day to day, but not beyond the time fixed for the next regular
meeting.
Spe.0ial ~.e.e..t.ings. (Virginia Code Section t5.1-~38) A special meeting
of the Board of Supervisors shall be held when requested by two or more
members thereof, their request to be made in writing addressed to the
Clerk of the Board, specifying the time and place of the meeting and
the matters to be considered thereat. The Clerk shall immediately
notify each member of the Board, as well as the CommOnwealth's Attorney,
in writing. Said notice shall be sent by registered mail not less than
five days before the day of the special meeting, tn lieu of registered
mail, such notice may be served by the Sheriff of the County. The Clerk
shall also notify' all the general news media of such meeting. At such
special meeting, no matter may be considered which has not been speci-
fied in the notice unless all members of the Board are present.
Voting. (Virginia Code Section 1~.1-~40) All questions submitted to
the Board for decision shall be determined by a voice vote of a majority
of the supervisors voting on any question except in matters involving
the appropriation by resolution or ordinance of sums exceeding $~00.00,
wherein the affirmative vote of a majority of the membership of the
Board i s required. (Article III, Section 7 of the Virginia Constitution).
~embershio on any .~other Board or, Commis. si0n. (Article VII, Section 6
of the Virginia Constitution) No member of the Board of Supervisors
shall be a member of any other Board ok Commission except as provided
by general law'.
(g) Executive, .or, Closed' ~eetin. M. (Virginia Code Section 2.1-344)
meeting shall be held for the following purposes only:
(h)
Such
Discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, appointment,
promotion, demotion, salaries, disciplining or resignation of public
officers, appointees or employees of any public body.
Discussion or consideration of the condition, acquisition or use
of real property for public purpose, or of the disposition of
publicly held property.
(3) The protection of the privacy of individuals in personal matters
not related to public business.
Discussion concerning a prospective business or industry when no
previous announcement has been made of the business' or industry's
interest in locating in the community.
(6)
The investing of public funds when competition or bargaining are
involved; where if made public initially, the financial interest
of the governmental unit would be adversely affected.
Consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members,
consultants or attorneys, pertaining to pending litigation, or
legal matters, within the jurisdiction of the Board, including
legal documents.
(7)
Discussion of any matter which will be the topic of a public hearing
prior to final decision, provided that notice of every such hearing
shall be published generally in the cormmunity not less than 30 days
prior to such public hearing.
No meeting shall become an executive or closed meeting unless there
shall have been recorded an affirmative vote to that effect by the
Bo ard.
438
Upon motion by Mr. Thacker~ seconded by Mr. Wood, the Chairman was authorized
to appoint a committee to study certain suggested changes in the County's personnel
policy. Motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher~ He~ley~ Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Statements of expenses of the Department of Finance~ the Sheriff's Office
and the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney were s~bmitted for the month of
January, 197~. On Motion by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Henley, these statements
were approved by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley~ Thackery Wheeler and Wood.
.NAYS: None.
Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance of the County Jail was
submitted along with summary statement of prisoner days for the month of
of
197~ Claim of the Jail Physician was submitted for the month/Ja~Um~y~ 197~, in
the amount of $~00~ of which two-thirds is reimbursable by the State. On motion
by Mr. Woody seconded by Mr. Fisher~ these statements were approved for payment
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fishery Henley~ Thacke~$ Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Claim against the Dog Tax F~nd was received from Pearl G. Wood for five (~)
hens killed by dogs° Nn motion by Mr. Henley~ seconded by Mr. Wood, Mrs. Wood was
allowed $7o~0 for this claim. Moiion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher~ Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Claim against the Dog Tax F~nd was received from Virgil Grinstead foroone (1)
ewe and one (1) Buck killed by dogs. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Wood,
Mr. Grinstead was allowed $87.00 for this claim. Motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Report of the County Executive was submitted for the month of January~ 197~,
as information.
Reports of the Department of ~blic Welfare were submitted for the months of
November and December~ 1972, in accordance with Sections 6~-67.1 and 63-67.2 of the
Code of Virginia.
The following resolution was offered by Mr. Wood:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Beard of County Supervisors of the County
~n ~propriation of
of Albemmrle, Virginia, that/$~860.56 bey and the same hereby is
and transferred to the General'Operating Fund
made from the General Revenue Fund/for the purpose of paying o~erational
costs of the Piedmont Community Col~Eeo
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded
vote:
2-15-73
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The following resolution was offered by Mro Fisher:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the.County of
an appropriation of
Albemarle, Virginia, that/$50,O00 be, ard the same hereby is, made
from the General Revenue Fund,and transJ
for~the~purpoSe of.~extending a loan to t
Authority in accordance with agreement
as recorded in the minutes of such Supe
Page 269.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Wool
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheel
NAYS: None.
~hefotlowing resolution was offered by
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Su'
~erred to theGeneral Operating Fund,
he Rivanna Watertand:Sewer
.ated September 21, 1972'and
~visors in Minute Book 9,
439
Mr. Wood:
)ervisors of the County of
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Albemarle, Virginia, that an appropriation of $100o00 be, and the
same hereby is, made from the General Revenue Fund and transferred
te the General Operating Fund and expended only on order of the Board
of Supervisors as follows: 1AA~199. Road Viewers.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The following resolution was offered by Mr. Wood: -
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, that an appropriation of $2,201.87 be, and
the same hereby is, made from the General Revenue Fund and
transferred to the General Operating Fund and expended only on
order of the Board of Supervisors as follows: 6-A-~O~. Equipment,
Sheriff's Office.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded
Messrs. Fisher, Henley~ Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The following resolution was offered by Mr. Wood:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, that an appropriation of $700.00 be, and the
same hereby is, made from the General Revenue Fund and transferred
to the General Operating Fund and expended only on order of the Board
of Supervisors as follows: I-G-218. Postage-Planning Department°
Mr. Fisher asked MroBatcheldr to check the status of legislation requested by
this Board to impose an additional cost on building permits.
and carried by the following recorded vote:
er and Wood.
440
2-1 ~'-73
Upon motion by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Fisher, Mr. Herbert Pickford was
reappointed as County Attorney for a period of one year. Motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYs: '-None.
State
Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Batchelor to contact our representative in the/Senate
to support H.Bo 1~7~. This bill would prohibit VEPCO from entering onto private
property without prior consent of the owner.
Wednesday, February 21, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the Board Room was set as a
public work session on the proposed subdivision ordinance. The Clerk was ordered
to notify the news media of this meeting.
Mr. Batchelor informed the Board that he had received a request from the
Commonwealth~-s Attorney asking that the Board adopt a r~$olution authorizing him
to train Richard Carter as Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney. Mr. garter would
replace, after training, Stephen Helvin, who has resigned. Motion was offered
by Mr. Wood to authorize the Commonwealth's Attorney to proceed with the training
as Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney
of Mr. Carte~,/however, he stipulated that Mr. Carter would serve without pay
until such time as he replaces Mr. Helvin. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mess~so Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None. ~
Mr. Fisher requested that the County Attorney work with the staff toward
drafiing o~ background work on an ordinance that would require pre, payment of
pre-capital costs to the community.
Mr. Henley stated that he also felt so strong about this matter that he would
find it hard to vote for certain matters without this stipulation.
Mr. Wood requested that the staff look to localities other than Fairfax
or Loudoun Counties for their background information°
Mr. Fisher offered motion to adjourn into executive session for consultation
with the County Attorney. Motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacke~wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened at ~:1~ P.M.
Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher to adjourn this meeting until February 21,
197~, at 7:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building. Motion was
seconded by Mr. Tha~ker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: M~ssrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Chairman