Loading...
05-31-2001 Continued Meeting~~rl ~` CONTINUED MEETING OF THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HELD THE THIRTY-FIRST DAY OF MAY IN THE YEAR TWO THOUSAND AND ONE PRESENT: Henry H. Bradby, Chairman Robert C. Claud, Sr., Vice-Chairman Stan D. Clark (Arrived at 6:45 p.m.) Richard K. MacManus Phillip A. Bradshaw Also Attending: H. Woodrow Crook, Jr., County Attorney. W. Douglas Caskey, County Administrator Donald T. Robertson, Assistant County Administrator/Director of Human Resources Carey H. Mills, Recording Secretary Chairman Bradby called the continued meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. for the purpose of conducting a work session on the FY2001-2002 Operating Budget and other matters of importance. He shared with those in attendance a letter from Supervisor Clark advising that he would be arriving later in the meeting. ~i Chairman Bradby called for Old Business. Regarding the hazard mitigation grant program, Donald T. Robertson,. Assistant County Administrator/Director of Human Resources, referred to information contained in the Board package. He stated staff was asked to contact the State to request written correspondence as to funding, which has been received. He stated there is still the concern that total funding is not in place. He stated staff has also received information from the project manager with regard to separating out the elevation projects and doing them. individually. Supervisor Bradshaw stated there was a previous three to two (3-2) vote that the Board would not proceed with approving the matter. He noted there .are several other grants staff is working in relation to the flood recovery. County Administrator Caskey stated Beverly Walkup, Senior Planner with the Department of Planning and Zoning. has advised that other funds are for specific .activities and staff can not assure that there will be any funds remaining. Supervisor Bradshaw noted there is a total of $220,000 in grant funds and the County needs $135,000 in additional funds. He stated the Federal 1 Government will provide 75% of the funding and the State could come through with 20%, but the Board will not know until these other projects are closed out. He stated there .are funds in the current grant which could be applied to the elevation project. He stated the County also has another grant (demolition) that could be used. The money is there, but we have to properly apply for the grants, he stated. Mr. Robertson- stated he is uncertain there is $138,000 in those grant funds. He stated he does not know ifthe County has the flexibility to apply those other grant funds to the .elevation projects. Supervisor MacManus stated he is suggesting that the County designate a portion of two (2) other funds as administrative funds and use them on the elevation projects. Mr. Robertson stated the administrative funds would have been used to cover any cost over-runs. He stated he is not sure there are any funds to do what Supervisor Bradshaw is suggesting that the County do. Supervisor Bradshaw stated the $30,000 that the County spent locally is because staff messed up. He stated. the County made the mistake because it did not know what. it was doing and hopefully this will not happen again. He stated it is the County's responsibility to make the application and do it properly. He stated he wants to see the County move forward with it. He requested an update from Peter Andreu, the County's Project Manager. Mr. Andreu stated there are 116 days remaining to do this project. He .stated the project will be complete October 15t1i and one (Y) month has been. lost at this time. Supervisor Claud moved the Board direct staff to investigate the possibility of finding the revenue from those sources discussed. Staff is to get back with .the Board by next Thursday, June 7, 2001. If staff is able to identify other sources, look at those funds and determine what other alternatives there are available.. The motion was adopted with Supervisors MacManus, Bradby, Bradshaw and Claud voting in favor of the motion (4-0) and no Supervisors voting against the motion. (Supervisor Clark was not present for the vote.) Supervisor Bradshaw inquired what kind of response Senator Quayle had provided to the Thompsons. Mark Thompson, property owner of flood damaged property, stated he met with Senator Quayle's assistant who advised he would be contacting him o further discuss the matter. Margaret Whitley stated there was no follow-up for twelve (12) months. She stated she wanted to give credit where it is due, however, this 2 39~~,. yf:1 ..r243 1 was new, but it was messed up from day one (1). She stated the County did not request sufficient funds from the start. She stated a home can't be elevated .for $22,000. She stated -the application was filed, but nothing was done after that. She stated if she makes a mistake, she has to pay for it. She requested the Board look out for the residents of the County and do everything possible to help them. She noted there are a lot of other expenses that will be incurred by the homeowner. Mark Thompson stated every time the Board meets, fifteen (15) additional days go by that he can't move forward. He stated he has lost his volunteers, i.e., .Salvation Army .and church friends. He stated .after the mitigation process is complete, there are still things to be done to get us back in our homes. He noted people who participated in the buyouts have been taken care of, but we are still homeless. He stated every meeting we get more questions and less answers. // Regarding the issue of the School Board Appointments, Chairman Bradby stated that due to the absence of Supervisor Clark, he would. suggest it be moved further down the agenda or tabled. County Attorney Crook stated he needs to advertise the matter for June 3, 2001. We can move further down the agenda, but I have to meet the statutory requirements for the advertising .for public hearing which must proceed the appointment by seven (7) days. Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board take Item IB and move it until after the public hearing section. of the agenda. The motion was adopted with Supervisors MacManus, Bradby, Bradshaw and Claud voting in favor of the motion {4-0); no Supervisors voting against the motion; and, Supervisor Clark absent for the motion. U Debbie J. Sivertson, Administrative Analyst,. advised she has the signature for the application to apply for the Virginia Landmark status for the Josiah Parker cemetery. Supervisor MacManus inquired if the County moves forward. as the applicant, is the County intending to purchase the lot? Ms. Sivertson. replied "nd' that this application is limited. to the gravesite only. Supervisor MacManus moved the Board have the County be the applicant in light of the fact there is no commitment in doing so. The motion was adopted with Supervisors MacManus, Bradby, Bradshaw and Claud 3 ao,~ 2~ ;,..~~44 ..:.., voting in favor of the motion (4-0); no Supervisors voting against the motion; and, Supervisor Clark absent for the motion. /I County Administrator Casket' advised the Board of a request from Pat Clark fora citizens comment period. Supervisor Bradshaw suggested that the Board allow a citizens comment period at the end of the meeting for citizens interested in addressing the Board. // Regarding the General Operating Budget, Anne F. Seward, Director of Budget and Finance, noted the Finance Committee recommends. the following: Additional reduction of $150,000 to refuse line item. $150,000 reduction to expenditures. • VDOT Revenue .Sharing: Reduce to $300,000 .Supervisor Clark arrived at the meeting. . Utility Rate Restructuring be delayed until the next work session.. $78,902 reinstated to utility fund until the Board has time to adjust the rates. . $17,000 to reinstate the %2% for the County salary increase. . Reinstate the traditional $6,000 contribution to the Chamber of Commerce line item . Addition of Part-time salary funds for Pubic Works @$14,000 and Parks and Recreation. Incorporate into the budget for next year. Ms. Seward advised that with the above noted revisions, the proposed budget amount for FY2001-2001 would be $58,154,473. Ms. Seward noted two (2) adjustments recommended to revenues: $.OS increase in real estate tax and $.OS increase for mobile homes tax bringing total revenues to $57,849,013 and still reflecting a deficit of $305,460. [l ., r 4 ,•. ,~ Ms. Seward stated she needed a tax rate figure that could be advertised to give ample opportunity for public hearing on this and have the budget approved by June 30, 2001. Supervisor Claud stated the items we talked about were discussed in the Finance Committee meeting. He noted it has been a very difficult budget year and. he doesn't see how the County can get by without a tax increase. He stated the people who elected this Board expect it to be fiscally responsible. He stated he hated to go into the fund balance, but he could support a $.OS increase in the real estate tax rate. Supervisor Bradshaw stated he will not vote for the budget as presented with a tax increase. He stated there are funds in the General Fund that can be used. He noted the County will experience a tax increase next year anyway. He stated questions still remain unanswered and no Capital Budget has been presented to the Board.. He stated the County does not need to keep a 10% reserve. He stated other localities in the State are reducing their reserves and so should the County. He stated 15% to 20'Yo is usually generated from the reassessment and there is a lot of potential for revenue in the future with the. development of Eagle Harbor. Supervisor Clark stated he agreed in part with Supervisor Bradshaw in that he did not have a clear picture of the budget. He stated the Board needs a special work session just on this topic. He stated he would not feel- . comfortable voting on it now. County Attorney Crook advised that State statutes require publication for two (2) weeks of the tax levy ordinance.. The public hearing must be at least seven (7) days after the publication. We can meet the requirements by advertising on June 6th and June 13`h for public hearing on June 21S` Supervisor Claud stated tonight we are only looking at a figure to be advertised. He stated the Board is looking at $305,000 from the unappropriated fund .balance for the Operating Budget. He stated the Board has not adequately discussed the Capital Budget ($5 million) for this year. Supervisor Claud stated the Board is pulling $305,000 alone without the Capital Budget. He stated the Board tonight needs to authorize advertising for the public hearing. Chairman Bradby stated he concurred with Supervisor Bradshaw. He stated the County can do without a tax increase if the Board is conservative with its approach. He stated he represents people who don't have excess money to pay these taxes. He stated he would hope that this Board would be responsive to those concerns. of the people who struggle. Supervisor MacManus stated we need to take action tonight. He stated " as part of the Finance Committee, staff recommends $.06 increase because 5 a~or, 20 ;,..2~'~6 of fiscal .responsibility of retaining funds. He stated he would be willing to advertise something with $.05. He stated this does not make this the. final amount.. .Supervisor Claud moved that staff advertise the budget in the amount of $58,154,473 with a $.OS increase in the tax rate (real .estate and mobile home). The motion was adopted (4-1) with Supervisors MacManus, Bradby, Clark and Claud voting in favor of the motion and Supervisor Bradshaw voting against the motion. // At. 7:00 p.m., Chairman Bradby called for a public hearing on the proposed County's Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Bradby called for citizens to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed Comprehensive Plan. Pat Clark of Carrollton representing the IOW Citizens Associations stated he has followed the process for two (2) years. His greatest concern has been with Chapters 2 and 4. He noted he is in favor of reduced DSDs .with Benns Church and. Carrollton districts and a narrow connector. He noted he is opposed to the 1991 Plan that made Carrollton a sacrificial lamb of the County. He suggested reducing the districts to reduce burden on taxpayers and services. He stated the IOW Citizens Association Legislative Agenda has supported .many measures with no success in the General Assembly. He suggested adopting the Comprehensive Plan with small DSDs. He suggested adapting a Zoning Ordinance that downzones areas with no activity over the. last five (5) years. He concluded stating the debt load in the County is fifth in the State of Virginia. Francis Norsworthy of Williamsburg requested his property on Rt. 258/32 be added to the DSD and stated he is a long standing property owner with a long family history in the County. He stated he wants to develop his property at some time. in future. He stated there is a long. history of setting this corridor up for future development with roads, utilities (water & sewer) and these should be reflected by Plan. He stated he has worked with the County in developing a school and library. He suggested the area be designated as an Activity Center. He suggested that by putting this in the DSD, it would meet the objectives of County to encourage development where services already exist. He suggested leaving this property out would :.deny him of all beneficial use of the property. Robin Land stated she supports the service district proposed by Mr. Clark. She noted concern with added school children from the development and the potential impact on schools. She stated adding 1,000 children to schools with the largest impact on elementary education. She provided data on the costs of impact on operations and facilities. She stated classroom 6 ;~: ~?E~ .. ~?47 trailers (22) would cost $880,000 to place in the County, with a $3.6 million -cost overall for 1,000 students, excluding operating costs. She stated it would also impact the K-3 initiative and jeopardize outside funding sources. She stated owning land is like playing the stock .market, sometimes you gain and sometimes you lose. She stated the County needs to stem the tide of growth as it will overrun the County if the Board does not control it. Darren Stauffer of Windsor, President of the Southern IOW Civic League, stated the Alexander proposal is the best for the County. He stated land owners who wish to be added to the DSD are still in the path of progress, but. will. have to wait longer to sell their property. He stated the Windsor area is a good plan overall with industrial growth staying south of Route 460 and not north, which is best for residential. He suggested realignment of Rt. 258 and Rt. 460 bypass further west of the Windsor town limits to get out into more open space. He stated the Rt. 258/460 bypasses would reduce truck traffic and accommodate hurricane evacuation routes and suggested its location be to the. west and south of Windsor. He stated the relocation of Rt. 460!258 bypass would be a "win- win" situation. M Monica Wertz. of Suffolk thanked the Planning Commission for expanding the DSD to include property on Great Springs Road. She stated she has tried to sell her land for the last six (6) years .with difficulty. She expressed a need to sell her property to meet medical needs of her family now and in the future. She stated where there is no vision, people will perish and growth is inevitable. Pat Anderson of Carrollton expressed opposition to development as it stands stating it would allow too much too soon.. She stated the County should step back and prepare. She expressed a concern with change to the waterfront and the corridor. to Smithfield. She stated taxes can't continue to escalate. Maria Gardner of Carrollton expressed a concern with rapid growth. in the County and the possibility of the County going bankrupt due to debt. She stated the County needs to focus on providing additional services and make the developers pay additional .proffers. She asked how the County is going. to accommodate more school kids with the problems the County currently has. Grace Keen of Benns Church Boulevard stated the legislature keeps saying localities have the tools to manage growth and the Comprehensive Plan is a major tool. She stated future growth should be an asset not a liability. She stated the .County has been and should continue to be a leader in comprehensive planning. Tenesa Johnson spoke in favor of reducing the size of the DSD in an effort to control growth or the County will find itself in financial straits. She stated the Norsworthy property (Founders Pointe) will be a major impact. 7 BD~r ~~ ,.: ~7!~,8 She also expressed concern with riparian rights, Ragged Island Creek and other estuarine resources. Nicki Sabino of Smithfield spoke in favor of reduced DSDs due to concern with ability to provide services, i.e., schools, fire and rescue, etc, She stated developers should pay their fair share. Bennie Howard of Carrollton expressed support for the plan proposed by Mr. Clark. He stated the County needs to slaw growth.. He expressed a concern with .the impact on the water table and potential growth. He .noted the Founders Pointe subdivision has only one (1) point of access. He stated a proposed connector. road went through his property and, if proposed again, he hopes it would r,ot be through his property. Nancy Guill of Rescue expressed opposition to a strip mall on Route 17. She stated land left out of the DSD will not allow a fortune to be made at the expense of the County. She stated if developers have their way, they will rape the County, .make their money, increase taxes, destroy the environment and leave. She asked those in attendance who supported small districts to stand. Approximately two-thirds (2/3) of the audience rose in aupport. Herb DeGroft of Smithfield spoke in favor of keeping small districts which. are easier to manage. He stated the County should take a lesson from past history and not make the same mistakes in the future. He expressed concern with the impact of growth on schools and the cost of accommodating 2,000+ school children. Leslie Daggett of Carrollton thanked the Planning Commission for including his property in the DSD. He stated the land is currently farmed, although He does not know .how long he can continue to farm it and wants the option to sell. Marie Keesee of Carrollton spoke against an expanded DSD noting a concern with storm water runoff She spoke against lighting and the need to avoid bright lights and hours. of operation. She also stated the Chesapeake Bay needs protecting. ..Bishop N. C. Johnson of Carrollton stated the Plan was to make the James River Bridge to Benns Church a DSD. He stated the proposed. area between Benns Church and Bartlett should also be in the DSD. He stated the church has been here many years and requests that the land be included in the DSD. He stated there are public roads, sewer and water available and he wanted it left in the DSD. He stated the church was moved in 19?8 to widen the .road and the County should not tell people where they can live. Carol G. Rhodes of Quaker Road stated she served on the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CFAC) and spent months. 8 '~'f /~ /1'~~ J .' ~ K~ .k working on .a plan that balanced growth and. property rights. She stated infrastructure, sewer and water were reviewed. She stated the toll taken off of the James River Bridge in 1976 opened the County up. She stated she is not in favor of rampant growth, but understands landowners view of the need to maintain options. She stated for rural landowners, land is the only major asset and those who ask to locate their land in the DSD should so be allowed. She stated the CPAC deliberated on their Plan, often not agreeing with each other. She expressed a need to maintain opportunities for all residents of the County. Cecil Rhodes of Quaker Road, stated those who wish to be located in the DSD should be allowed to do so. He noted a need to relax regulations in rural areas to keep landowners. financially sound. He stated property ownership is almost a negative situation and should not be a loss. He stated many residents have donated right-of--ways for improved roads. He stated increasing the size of a district is in the best interest of the County. Sharon Hart of Newbill Lane praised the Board for reducing the DSD and stated she did not understand why the Planning Commission expanded the district in the first place. She encouraged the DSD to be reduced back to the Board's original plan. She. stated landowners can still develop their property,. just not with sewer and water. She stated this is a five year plan which will allow the County to better prepare for growth. She expressed concern with the fiscal impacts of growth, particularly without proffers.. She pointed out the Chesapeake Bay conditions and the need to consider soils and environmental resources in the northern area of the County. Sonny Hines stated his family owns property on Nike Park Road south of Jones Creek and his family has been in the County since 1650. He stated he is simply a land owner. He stated most land will not support family farms. He stated he found out his family's land was out of the DSD and went to the Planning Commission. He stated he wished to develop an upscale community with approximately .9 miles of waterfront near Nike Park.. He stated his family circumstances have changed and he needs to do something with the property. He stated he sympathizes with the concerns of the Carrollton people, but they need to remember that the land is owned by somebody. He stated there are other people .who want to live in the. County and land owners have limited options, unless they are located in DSDs. He stated he wanted to build. an upscale community, not high. density, for residents 50 years old & up, with little impact on schools. Dean G. Vincent, P.E., Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. presented a letter requesting the Board to keep the Planning Commission's recommended plan together. Branch Lawson stated he has been involved in the County since 1986 with the Gatling Pointe Subdivision which has contributed financially to the County and Town. He stated he resents comments calling developers as 9 a~~n 2(1 .. ?~0 carpetbaggers. ~ He expressed a concern with a Suburban Residential designation of Planned Development, residential areas as now zoned. He also expressed a concern with the Nike Park/Smith Neck connector shown on plan. He noted Founders Pointe should be in the DSD.. He stated the County. has made investments in services and the quality of development proposed will be in the $300,000 xange. He stated all utility extensions will be paid by the developer. He stated build-out is anticipated to be in the range of $100 million and will be a boom for economic development. He stated residential development can pay for itself as proven by Suffolk. He stated Founders Pointe was in the DSD in October, but taken out and he requested that it be included. He stated growth is not exactly explosive at 1.7% annually and the growth rate won't change with. smaller DSDs, but .will be scattered around the County. He noted a need for affordable housing with connection fees, proffers and smaller DSDs. He stated the County is heading toward exclusionary zoning. John V. Cogbill, III, requested the Board amend the DSD to include .Founders Pointe. He stated Mr. Hines' comments cited standards for :location of Suburban Residential in the Plan. He cited access to sewer and water and the need to extend services down Sugar Hill Road. The stated density of 1-2 units/acre is appropriate character. He stated the Plan should be emphasized .for efficient use of Iand to meet the needs of present and future residents. He stated growth by birth was equal to immigration. He stated Founders Pointe is zoned, under review, the zoning plat filed, with $.5 million spent over the past two (2) years,. and should be included in the DSD. Pamela Glover Wilkerson stated her family has owned .land in the County for 53 years, .but there is no one left in the family to farm it, particularly when a family needs change. She stated Cypress Creek is just north, near public water and sewer. Vincent LaBoff of Whippingham Parkway requested a smaller DSD than proposed by the Planning Commission. He stated the Plan is a great tool to control growth in the future. He stated the Planning Commission was out of touch and needs to focus on a Plan the majority of citizens in this area desire. Joe Ferguson requested that the DSDs remain small. He stated he owns land and didn't inherit it, but bought it. He stated he wants to preserve the character of the County to be able to pass on to the next generation. He stated .the County is one of few that have land use value, which allows farmers and rural landowners to pay lower taxes. He stated this Board didn't have control over the 1974 actions, but does have control over the Plan considered tonight. 10 Harriet Hines asked that their family's. land that was included by the Planning Commission be approved. She stated the County needs planned growth to provide a better tax base for the County. Thomas Finderson spoke regarding Mr. Hines' comments.. He stated the County can get twenty (20) units out of 100 acres, even in the RAC. He .stated this is a way to control growth now and it can be changed 10-20 years from now. He stated the County recently built a water tower.. He stated, regarding Founders Pointe, 33 acres was proposed for multi-family. He stated the County will .not have sprawl, but it will be contained in the Smithfield/Carrollton areas. He stated Sugar Hill Road is a backcountry road and is very hazardous given the present configuration and should not be included in the DSD. Cary Liggins requested that the Chapman property area be included in the DSD as proposed by the Planning Commission. Dave Bugin stated Founders Pointe .will have the same density as Carrollton Meadows. He expressed concern with the potential for multi- . family in Founders Pointe. He expressed concern with additional traffic and access to other properties. He stated other communities have learned after the fact and the County has the opportunity to change this. He noted this Plan is the Board's tool. Mike Alexander spoke in support the IOW Citizen Association and the Alexander Plan submitted. He stated he is very concerned with grammatical errors in the Plan. // At 9:45 p.m., Supervisor. Claud moved the Board adjourn. The motion was adopted unanimously (5-0). W. Henry H. B dby, Chairman ~i 11