Board of Supervisors: March 13, 2007

March 13, 2007

Virginia:

AT A REGULAR MEETING of the Nelson County Board of Supervisors at 2:00 P. M. in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room located in the Nelson County Courthouse.

Present:     Thomas H. Bruguiere, Chair
        Harry S. Harris, South District Supervisor
        Allen M. Hale, East District Supervisor
        Constance Brennan, Central District Supervisor
        Stephen A. Carter, County Administrator
        Candice W. McGarry, Administrative Assistant/Deputy Clerk
        Fred M. Boger, Planning Director
        Phillip D. Payne, IV, County Attorney

I.    Call to Order

Mr. Bruguiere, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:05 P. M. with 5 members present to establish a quorum.

A.    Moment of Silence
B.    Pledge of Allegiance

Mr. Carter noted that new employees were in attendance and the following introductions were made:
    Garrett Butler – Animal Control Officer
    Billy J. Hart – Maintenance
    Donald Wells - Maintenance

II.    Consent Agenda

Mr. Carter gave an over-view of the Budget Amendment using the summary explanation and noted that the $25,000 approved for the Nellysford Plan would not be exceeded and would more likely cost $20,000 in total.

Mr. Carter and Ms. McCann explained that the appropriation of funds for Piney River sewer represents funds that are paid to the County for collection and installation costs which the County then pays the Service Authority for the installation of new connections. He noted more new customers than anticipated and that the Piney River Sewer Fund is separate from the General Fund.

After brief discussion about minor changes to the February 13, 2007 minutes for approval, Mr. Harvey asked that the minutes be removed from the consent agenda and approved separately.

Mr. Hale made a motion to approve the February 13, 2007 Minutes as amended and Ms. Brennan seconded the motion. Supervisors voted (4-0-1) to approve the motion, with Mr. Harvey abstaining due to his absence from that meeting. The following Resolution R2007-018 was approved:

APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES

(February 13, 2007)

RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the minutes of said Board’s meeting conducted on February 13, 2007 be and hereby are approved and authorized for entry into the official record of the Board of Supervisors meetings.

Approved: March 13, 2007    Attest: _____________________________, Clerk, Nelson County Board of Supervisors

There was brief discussion about the indoor track team’s recognition as unofficial champions, and a motion was made by Ms. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Hale to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. The motion passed unanimously (5-0) by roll call vote and the following Resolutions were approved:

A.    Resolution – R2007-019 Budget Amendment

RESOLUTION (R2007-019)
AMENDMENT OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 BUDGET
NELSON COUNTY, VA
March 13, 2007

BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Nelson County that the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Budget be hereby amended as follows:

I.    Appropriation of Funds (General Fund)

Amount    Revenue Account    Expenditure Account
$ 15,000.00    3-100-009999-0001    4-100-021050-3022

II.    Appropriation of Funds (Piney River Sewer Fund)

Amount    Revenue Account    Expenditure Account
$13,037.00    3-501-001608-0002    4-501-042040-3004

    III.    Transfer of Funds (General Fund)

    General Fund (Employee Benefits)

Amount    Credit Account (-)    Debit Account (+)
$    1,276.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012180-1001
         183.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012180-2002
         465.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012180-2005
$    1,924.00

$       857.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032010-1001
                   10.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032010-2001
        $       867.00

$ 11,096.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032030-1001
         423.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032030-2001
      1,596.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032030-2002
              1,719.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-032030-2005
        $ 14,834.00

        $    7,912.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-034010-1001
                   87.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-034010-2001
              1,136.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-034010-2002
              1,643.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-034010-2005
        $ 10,778.00

$        89.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-035010-    1001
             4,053.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-035010-    2005
    $   4,142.00

General Fund (Employee Benefits) Continued

Amount    Credit Account (-)    Debit Account (+)
    $    3,309.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-071020-1001
                 253.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-071020-2001
                 475.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-071020-2002
         627.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-071020-2005
$   4,664.00

                 $   6,141.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081010-    1001
                                 469.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081010-    2001
                 468.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081010-    2002
                         628.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081010-    2005
        $ 7,706.00

                     $   3,327.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081020-    1001
                                   70.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081020-    2001
                 478.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081020-    2002
                         706.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-081020-    2005
        $ 4,581.00

SUBTOTAL:    $49,496.00   County Employees

        Amount    Credit Account (-)    Debit Account (+)
              $    5,224.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012090-1001
         740.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012090-2002
      1,583.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-012090-2005
$    7,547.00

$    1,603.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-013020-1001
         353.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-013020-1003
           60.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-013020-2001
         230.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-013020-2002
         363.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-013020-2005
$    2,609.00

$    7,194.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-021060-1001
         779.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-021060-2001
         985.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-021060-2002
      3,045.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-021060-2005
              $ 12,003.00

        $    6,528.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-022010-1001
                 732.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-022010-1006
                 937.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-022010-2002
              1,056.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-022010-2005
        $    9,253.00

General Fund (Employee Benefits) Continued

        Amount    Credit Account (-)    Debit Account (+)

        $   17,206.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-031020-1001
                  739.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-031020-2001
               2,540.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-031020-2002
             20,774.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-031020-2005
               1,512.00    4-100-091030-5616    4-100-031020-7015
        $ 42,771.00

SUBTOTAL: $ 74,183.00   State Compensation Board Employees

TOTAL:       $123,679.00 Employee Benefits Transfer

Adopted: March 13, 2007        Attest: ______________________________Clerk,
Nelson County Board of Supervisors

EXPLANATION OF BUDGET AMENDMENT

I.    The General Fund Appropriation includes $15,000 to be appropriated from the fund balance for additional anticipated detention home expense. Request letter is attached.

II.    The Piney River Sewer Fund Appropriation includes $13,037 reflecting additional receipts and expenses related to more than anticipated new customer installations.

III.    The Transfer of Funds (General Fund) represents the allocation of FY07 salary and benefit adjustments from the Employee Benefits line item (4-100-091030-5616) to the appropriate departmental salary/benefit line items. Adjustments reflect the approved 4% salary increase for County and Compensation Board employees.

The total amount appropriated in the Employee Benefits line item is $135,159.   The total transfer amount from this line item is $123,679, leaving an unexpended balance of $11,480. This balance remains due to partial year full-time vacancies in several departments and Anthem enrollment fluctuations, resulting in a lower required transfer amount than originally anticipated.

B.    Resolution – R2007-020 Refunds

RESOLUTION-R2007-020

NELSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

APPROVAL OF PROPERTY TAX REFUNDS

RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the following refunds, as certified by the Nelson County Commissioner of Revenue and County Attorney pursuant to §58.1-3981 of the Code of Virginia, be and hereby are approved for payment.

Amount        Tax Category            Payee

$     159.85        Personal Property        William Joseph Fortune
                            P.O. Box 571
                            Lovingston, VA 22949

$     135.56        Personal Property        Tye River Farms, Inc.
                            Gerri B. Stewart, CFO
                            1073 S. Powells Island Rd.
                            Arrington, VA 22922
Approved: March 13, 2007    Attest: ________________________, Clerk
           Nelson County Board of Supervisors

C.    Resolution – R2007-021 Jacket Request

RESOLUTION-R2007-021

NELSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

FUNDING OF JACKETS FOR CHAMPISONSHIP TEAMS

NELSON COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL

RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the amount of $2,655.00 be and hereby is approved for disbursement from Nelson County’s Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Budget to provide for the purchase of jackets in recognition of championship teams at Nelson County High School as follows:

Allocation                Purpose

$ 2,655.00    Nelson High School – Boys and Girls Indoor Track; unofficial State Champions (2006)

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that said Board herewith recognizes and commends championship teams for their exceptional accomplishments and outstanding representation of Nelson County.

Approved: March 13, 2007            Attest: ________________________, Clerk
                               Nelson County Board of Supervisors

D.    Resolution – R2007-022 OAR /Jefferson Area Community Corrections

RESOLUTION-R2007-022

NELSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

JOINT RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS ACT FOR LOCAL RESPONSIBLE OFFENDERS, THE PRETRIAL SERVICES ACT AND THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE THOMAS JEFFERSON AREA COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD [TJACCJB]


WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly has adopted legislation entitled the Comprehensive Community Corrections Act for Local Responsible Offenders, Article 9 (§ 9.1-173 et. seq.) of the Code of Virginia and the Pretrial Services Act, Article 5 (§ 19.2-152.2 et seq.) of the Code of Virginia, both of which were effective July 1, 1995; and

WHEREAS, §§ 9.1-174 and 19.2-152.2 of the Code of Virginia require Albemarle and Nelson Counties and the City of Charlottesville that pursuant to § 53.1-82.1 were approved for a jail project to participate and establish services and in accordance with both Acts; and

WHEREAS, the Counties of Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Orange and Madison have elected to participate and establish services in accordance with both Acts; and

WHEREAS, §§ 9.1-178 and 19.2-152.5 of the Code of Virginia require that each county and city establishing and operating community-based probation and pretrial services establish a Community Criminal Justice Board, and in the case of multi-jurisdictional efforts, that each jurisdiction mutually agree upon the number of appointments to said board.

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that Nelson County jointly agrees with the City of Charlottesville and the Counties of Greene, Fluvanna, Madison, Louisa, Albemarle, Orange, and Goochland to implement the services and programs required by the Comprehensive Community Corrections Act for Local Responsible Offenders and the Pretrial Services Act, pursuant to §§ 9.1-178 and 19.2-152.5 of the Code of Virginia, with Albemarle County acting as the administrator and fiscal agent on behalf of the participating localities pursuant to § 9.1-183 of the Code of Virginia.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Nelson County jointly establishes the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board [TJACCJB], and that said board shall fulfill its responsibilities pursuant to § 9.1-180, and shall be composed of the following members pursuant to § 9.1-178 of the Code of Virginia.
•    One representative of the governing bodies of each participating jurisdiction
•    A circuit court judge of any one of the participating jurisdictions as agreed upon by the judges to represent all circuit court judges.
•    A judge of general district court of any one of the participating jurisdictions as agreed upon by the judges to represent all general district court judges.
•    A judge of the juvenile and domestic relations district court of any one of the participating jurisdictions as agreed upon by the judges to represent all juveniles and domestic relations district court judges.
•    A chief magistrate.
•    A Commonwealth’s Attorney to represent all of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys of the participating jurisdictions.
•    An attorney experienced in the defense of criminal matters who is a current member of the Virginia State Bar, and a public defender, where applicable, each representing the participating localities.
•    The administrator of the Albemarle/Charlottesville Regional Jail or the Central Virginia Regional Jail.
•    A Sheriff of any county or city not served by a police department and a chief of police to represent all law enforcement agencies of the participating jurisdictions.
•    A Community Services Board Administrator representing all agencies providing such services to participating jurisdictions.
•    A representative of a local adult education representing all agencies providing such services to participating jurisdictions.
•    A director of a Department of Corrections Probation and Parole District Office serving and representing all of the participating jurisdictions.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution supersedes and replaces all prior resolutions approved by the locality relating to the establishment of required services and the formation of the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board.

Approved: March 13, 2007    Attest: _____________________________, Clerk,
Nelson County Board of Supervisors

E.    Resolution – R2007-023 2007-2008 Local Government Challenge Grant

RESOLUTION-R2007-023

NELSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

2007-2008 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHALLENGE GRANT

BE IT RESOLVED, By the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute and submit an application for 2007-2008 Local Government Challenge Grant funding to the Virginia Commission of the Arts.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, said application is to include a local match of $5,000.00 to be confirmed upon formal adoption of Nelson County’s Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Budget by the Board of Supervisors.

Adopted:    March 13, 2007        Attest:    ________________________, Clerk
                            Nelson County Board of Supervisors
III.    Public Comments and Presentations

A.    Public Comments – None

B.    VDOT Report- None

C.    PVCC – President Frank Friedman

Mr. Frank Friedman, President of Piedmont Virginia Community College gave the Board an update on PVCC activities, enrollment and programs. He noted the following during his presentation:

- Fall enrollment is up with 198 Nelson County students enrolled representing 4.5% of the total
enrollment.
-There are currently two dual enrollment classes with thirty-six students at the High School.
-42 Nelson County Residents out of more than 700 take internet based classes.
-There has been decline in the number of NCHS graduates attending PVCC with 9 in the fall.
- $5 million in renovations to the main building have been completed with the library to be done
   in summer.
- A new 35,000 sq ft. $9-10 million dollar science building will be constructed in the fall to
accommodate the growth in the Health Sciences area. It will take 18-24 months to build.
- PVCC is partnering with the Charlottesville YMCA to build on campus.
- PVCC has made Guaranteed Admission agreements with four year institutions which are
controlled by GPA requirements; the State is also granting $1,000-$2,000 guaranteed
scholarships if a student attends a state school and enrolls to study in an area of demand.
- The Piedmont VA. Business Alliance utilizes contacts with business to get retired business
   people involved in education.
- The new LPN program is addressing the demand by Long Term Care facilities for LPNs with
   the $195,000 cost being allocated by thirds to PVCC, LTC Facilities, and Jurisdictions. Nelson
   County’s share of this cost would be $2,800. The program would hold 20 per class and would
   take 1 year to complete.

In response to the Board’s questions, President Friedman noted that 44 different courses, those not having a lab associated with it, are offered to distance learners. The College currently does not offer airline industry related courses and he was not sure whether or not NC total college bound students were decreasing or those just attending PVCC; noting this would be something to ask Dr. Collins.

D.    RCC Presentation – Radio Communications Study

Mr. Carter briefly introduced the presentation to be made by RCC. Susan Rorrer, project manager, then introduced the RCC staff, Jerry Smith and Jeff Pegram, who made the PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Rorrer noted that the study started with an interoperability grant and was undertaken to facilitate the County’s compliance with impending FCC standards and mandates. Major objectives, findings and recommendations are as follows:

The project objectives were noted to be: to identify relevant data and stakeholder information, conduct stakeholder interviews, evaluate radio frequency sites, prepare and deliver a needs analysis document and develop and deliver an Acceptance Test Plan (ATP).

Stakeholder survey responses noted current radio frequency coverage to be the number 1 complaint at 40% with spectrum and channel congestion the number 2 complaint at 20%. The County’s current single site system utilizes Devil’s Knob Mountain or Sugar Loaf and has an inactive tower site at High Top. There is no combined coverage.

FCC standards and mandates noted by RCC include a 1) a narrowband mandate which requires anyone on a wideband frequency of less than 512 MHz to change bandwidth by splitting bands to double the width by January 1, 2013. The cost to Nelson County associated with the full narrow band conversion is $650,000 for hardware replacement costs, programming, installation and cut-over; 2) P25 digital standard, which the Dept. of Homeland Security has established as the recommended standard for future Public Safety two-way voice and data communications systems; 3) 700 MHz Spectrum Allocation which is a proposal by the FCC that 12 MHz of the 700MHz band be reconfigured to support a nationwide broadband interoperability solution managed and operated by commercial enterprise.

Major Recommendations include: 1) Replace present fixed network with P25 capable four site simulcast system, 2) Identify new radio frequencies for the Sheriff’s primary radio channels, 3) Maintain operations in the VHF Band, 4) Sheriff’s system should utilize P-25 standard for interoperability, 5) Operate all Public Safety systems utilizing simulcast technology, 6) Install a microwave redundant backbone connecting all LMR transmitters, 7) Fire/EMS and government operations should utilize an analog mode, 8) The County should identify additional frequencies for intracounty interoperability and “fireground” operations, 9) The County should take steps to promote First Responder interoperability, and 10) Consider an integrated voice and data approach. The total system implementation costs were estimated to be $4,662,450, with $10,000 in maintenance costs the second year and $12,000 the third year. RCC recommends a target of January 1, 2011 for full conversion to narrowband to give some time for extension if needed.

RCC noted that the options to consider were 1) Do nothing and remain in the present configuration, but comply with mandatory narrow banding at a cost of $650,000, and having no enhanced coverage 2) Phased or partial implementation approach, or 3) turn-key installation. The pros and cons of each option were discussed.

It was noted during the presentation that the recommended 4-site simulcast system included re-activating the tower at High Top and leasing a tower site at Rocky Mountain in Rockbridge County, which has been discussed as an option.

In response to the Board’s questions, RCC noted that simulcast can be done with existing equipment, but new equipment will be necessary at base sites. This could be implemented as wideband and then converted or re-programmed to go to narrowband at the same time that the narrowband radios are implemented or cut-over. RCC confirmed that simulcast cures the current coverage problems with the additional towers.

Mr. Carter noted that the financing of a new radio system has been included in the CIP plan and incorporated into the financing model being prepared by Davenport to be presented in the near future. He noted Ms. Rorrer’s commitment to the project and her tenacity in following up on funding sources.

IV.    Unfinished Business

A.    Piney River III (Easements)

Mr. Payne and Mr. Boggs reported on the status of easement acquisitions for the Piney River III Water and Sewer project. They noted that the relocation of part of the system for the Martin and Saunders families has met with their approval, but no formal agreement has been signed. Mr. Payne reported that he sent a draft agreement to Sam Eggelston, (their attorney), asking the families to agree to sign the easement agreements if the system realignment met with their approval, with no response to date. He noted that they have verbal confirmation that the re-alignment is approved by the Martins and Saunders, but would be more comfortable having it in writing considering the expense of moving the lines. He noted that the surveys were needed in order to execute the easement agreements & deeds themselves.

Mr. Payne then reported that there are four parcels that are in need of condemnation action. He noted that two are legatee property, one is a non-resident unwilling to sign, and the other is a resident with cold feet who remains uncertain after many attempts to explain the project etc. Mr. Payne noted the condemnation process is quicker than going through a tax sale process on the legatee property. He noted that the lines have been placed in the rights-of –way in every place possible.

Mr. Carter noted that the re-alignment of the system has been sent to Agencies for approval and the County is moving to a June/July bid date. He noted staff is currently focusing on USDA Rural Development requirements that have to be met prior to bidding the project out.

Mr. Boggs explained the process for condemning property. He noted that the County has a quick-take option for the legatee property where the County makes a deposit, which is an estimate of the fair market value of the land to be taken, held by the Circuit Court. The County can proceed with construction without having to wait for the condemnation process to complete. The County must conduct a public hearing on the intent to take the property noting the purpose for doing so and construction can begin 30 days from the public hearing. Notices must be sent by certified mail to the known landowners giving them 30 days to challenge the right of the County to condemn the property. Unknown owners are considered notified by the published public hearing notices. Some procedural requirements noted by Mr. Boggs include the stipulation that a bonafide offer must have been made to the property owners. In these cases the owners have been offered free connections valued at $4,000, which is higher than the estimated value of the easement, which satisfies this requirement. Mr. Boggs noted that if the County comes to an agreement with a landowner, the condemnation process can be stopped at any point in the process.

The timeline for the process was discussed, and it was noted that two notices for public hearing were thought to be required to be published by the State Code. The Board’s consensus was to set the public hearing date for the regular April Board meeting.

Mr. Payne noted that the resolution submitted by his office authorizes the public hearing process and starts the paper trail.

Mr. Harris made a motion to adopt the resolution presented to authorize the public hearing process pertaining to the condemnation of certain properties for the Piney River III project. Mr. Harvey seconded the motion, and there being no further discussion, Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the following Resolution R2007-23a:

R2007-023a

RESOLUTION

NELSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

AUTHORIZATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CONDEMNATION OF PROPERTIES PERTAINING TO PINEY RIVER III

    WHEREAS, the County is undertaking construction of Phase III of the Piney River water and sewer system;
    WHEREAS, in order to complete the system, the County requires permanent utility easements and temporary construction easements across four parcels of land;
WHEREAS, the owners of two parcels are unknown or cannot with reasonable diligence be found in the Commonwealth, and the owners of the remaining two parcels and the County cannot agree on the terms of purchase or settlement;
    WHEREAS, the property taken will consist of four permanent utility easements and four temporary construction easements, to be used for the public purpose of water supply and sewage disposal, including the construction, operation, and maintenance of pipes and lines; and
    WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare require the completion of the project, and therefore the acquisition of the easements;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, That the County hold a public hearing where it may adopt a resolution or ordinance establishing compensation and directing that notice be sent to the owners informing them that the County intends to acquire these easements by condemnation, provided no agreement can be reached with the owners in the interim.

Adopted:   March 13, 2007        Attest: _______________________, Clerk
                          Nelson County Board of Supervisors
Supervisors noted they did not like going the condemnation route, but felt that every reasonable effort had been made to avoid it and it was necessary for the project to move forward.

B.    Draft Subdivision Ordinance, PC Recommendations

This item was deferred until the conclusion of New Business.

The Board began its review of the recommendations of the Planning Commission on the draft amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance.

Mr. Hale provided a definition of the word parcel as follows:

Parcel: a tract or plot of land for which a plat or description of record can be found.

The Board’s consensus was to use this definition in both the zoning and subdivision ordinance to ensure uniformity. Mr. Boger recommended that the States definition of subdivision not be used; it throws out the divisions rights concept.

Mr. Payne reported that he has written up some effective date language and noted he has revamped the introduction to division rights to add “Such division rights are subject to, and if applicable, limited by (i) prior divisions pursuant to the Subdivision Ordinance of this County in effect at the time of such prior division, and (ii) the current Subdivision Ordinance as amended from time to time.” It was the consensus of the Board to use this language.

Mr. Payne noted that an effective date needed to be set giving an amount of time that the old Ordinance will remain in effect. Using the date the preliminary application is made and the time necessary to gather information for the final determination was discussed. It was noted that this could be done after the public hearing when input from engineers and surveyors has been received.

Ms. Brennan asked for clarification of page 5 second paragraph item (1) that refers to “the acting authority” that approves or disapproves the preliminary plat. The acting authority was clarified to mean the Planning Director or the Planning Commission depending on the type of plat. It was the Board’s consensus to remove the language “the acting authority” and replace it with the “Planning Director or Planning Commission”.

Page 6, 3-11 Appeals. The Board’s consensus was to remove the Board of Supervisors from the appeal process in items A-E as it is not part of the political process.

The Board discussed removing the Board of Supervisors public hearing process for subdivision plats from the subdivision requirements and noted this could be done after the public hearing on the amendments.

Mr. Harris made a motion to authorize the public hearing process on the proposed amendments to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (as amended) to be held at the May 8, 2007 regular meeting of the Board. Ms. Brennan seconded the motion and Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the motion.

V.    New Business

A.    Resolution – R2007-024 Wintergreen-VHDA Mixed Use Mixed Income Project

Mr. Carter overviewed the sequence of events surrounding this request from Wintergreen for a determination by the Board that would secure VHDA financing of Wintergreen’s associate housing project that has been completed. VHDA is requiring Wintergreen to have an area encompassing the associate housing project declared a revitalization area by the Board of Supervisors in order to close on the loan. Mr. Carter noted that staff has gone back and forth with VHDA staff regarding this request and has included this correspondence as part of the Board’s package. Mr. Carter noted that this is a pilot financing program by VHDA and the employee housing can be rented out up to 80% of the time in periods when employees aren’t using it, and by State Code Section 36-55.30:2 the area around the project must be declared a revitalization area to comply with VHDA program requirements. Reservations by staff include the requirement to designate an area at Wintergreen a revitalization area because it implies that low-to-moderate income people will be served and will create housing opportunities for LMI people within the designated area. Mr. Carter noted that looking at this from an economic development perspective and the way VHDA is looking at it, that it may be viable and appropriate, but if looking at it as an enhancement for low-to-moderate income individuals to live in this area, it’s unsure how this is applicable. He noted the attachment of a map showing the census tract area that represents the proposed revitalization area.

Mr. Brent Douglass, Vice President of Development & Facilities at Wintergreen was recognized by the chair and spoke to the Board regarding their request. He noted that the employee housing houses approximately 100 people, there are 16 apartments with 3 bedrooms, double occupancy and a 17th apartment for a resident manager. Wintergreen previously leased condominiums and rented them back to the seasonal employees; as real estate values and the market for rentals increases; the opportunity to provide the seasonal employees with temporary affordable housing was decreasing. In order to make the business plan successful, Wintergreen would need to be able to rent the employee housing at higher rates during the off season to have the cash flow to provide lower rents during the season and meet the debt service requirements. VHDA approached Wintergreen about financing the project through their pilot program. He noted that there was a market within the area for short term renters to provide the revenue to make the project successful. He noted that the VHDA seed financing program, the non-traditional program, does allow for mixed use if the local governing body provides a resolution designating the area as a revitalization area. He noted that the Board is being asked to help Wintergreen comply with VHDA requirements in order to get the loan closed so that they can move ahead with the permanent financing of the project. He noted that the seasonal employees would be leaving on March 15, 2007 and occupancy would go from 100% to 0%. He noted that all of the seasonal employee residents were international students hired for the ski season; but that they were not intending to limit the use of the facility to those students. He acknowledged that the letter of the State Code does not speak to this particular program, but the letter of the loan program does speak to the mixed use concept and becomes a matter of interpretation. He noted not wanting the Board to do anything that they weren’t comfortable with and said that VHDA has written the resolution and said that if the Board passes the resolution it will meet their criteria. He noted no negative implications anticipated from the Board’s passing the resolution. He said that they have the chance for favorable permanent financing rates from VHDA but if it didn’t work out, they would have to pull funds from someplace else to make it work, but would prefer not to have to do that. He noted that designating the revitalization area would not have any affect on current property owners or the ability of the County to designate other revitalization areas in the future.

The Board noted that while they wanted to be helpful to Wintergreen, they needed more time to review the material presented before making a decision at this meeting. There was some concern about the wording of the resolution provided by VHDA. Discussion centered on the appropriateness of designating an area around Wintergreen as a revitalization area that does not generally serve persons of low-to-moderate income and it is unlikely that doing so would induce more persons of LMI to move into the area. Disapproval was also expressed about VHDA loaning money for non low-to-moderate income purposes and potentially using monies for private enterprise that could be allocated to localities for the public good.

The Board took no action on the proposed resolution with the consensus to possibly consider it at an upcoming workshop.

VI.    Reports, Appointments, Correspondence, and Directives

A.    Reports

1.    County Administrator’s Report

Mr. Carter presented his report as follows:

1. FY 07-08 Budget and 5 Year CIP – Scheduling of an ensuing series of work sessions on the FY 07-08 Budget is proposed for consideration at the regular session on 3-13. Related thereto, staff is working with Davenport and Co. on an updated financial forecast of operations and capital improvements to FY 2012 and is planning to include presentation of this information at one of the initial work sessions proposed to be scheduled. And, staff has received, per its request, a summary explanation of the School Division’s request for FY 07-08, which has increased to $986,092 since the draft budget was presented to the Board on 3-5. This information will be distributed to the Board at the meeting on 3-13.

2. Courthouse/Government Center Project – The project’s schematic phase is in process. All local offices are scheduled to meet (March 15, 16 or 19) with Wiley and Wilson (R. Vaughan) to re-review the space needs assessment. Wiley and Wilson staff are also currently completing physical measurements of each of the structures located on the Courthouse commons. As noted above, staff is developing financial projections, which include the Courthouse Project (with the amount utilized being W&W’s preliminary cost estimate). A correspondence has been received from the state Department of Historic Resources and provides DHR’s input based upon the outcomes of the conceptual phase of the project. The letter has been distributed (via email) to each Board member. The schedule anticipates completion of this phase by Wiley and Wilson, the project architect, by June 15, 2007.

The Board noted that the Historical Society wanted to be brought up to date on the project.

3. Solid Waste Project: A. Convenience Centers Project: Wiley and Wilson (inclusive of Saunders Surveys) has begun work on the convenience centers project. A project “kick off” meeting was conducted with County staff on 2-28. Staff is also completing an application for funding to the Virginia Resources Authority, as approved by the Board on 3-5, for $2.5 million in funding for the convenience centers and site equipment, inclusive of transportation equipment.

B. Transfer Station Operations (Inclusive of Closed Landfill Areas): As previously reported, the repair of the concrete floor at the transfer station was completed and normal operations resumed in late January 2007. This project required the use of Amherst County’s landfill, which was negotiated by the respective staff’s of each jurisdiction and included an amendment to Amherst County’s local ordinance and operational provisions to enable Nelson County’s temporary use of Amherst’s landfill. Waste Management also provided its assistance and cooperation by agreeing to transport Nelson County’s entire solid waste stream during the repair project to Amherst County’s landfill rather than to the company’s private facility in Amelia County. This encompassed direct hauling waste containers from each of the County’s (Nelson) residential collection (convenience) centers and from a temporary location established at the transfer station (consisting of open top containers) directly to the Amherst landfill.

Additionally, staff has discussed with Department of Maintenance and Solid Waste personnel the feasibility of accepting vegetative waste (other than stumps) at the transfer station through the re-establishment of a area where this material could be burned and/or through the construction of an area for the deposit of vegetative waste, which would then be periodically chipped or ground and either recycled or disposed of through the transfer station. Due to the necessity of installing separate sanitary sewer drain fields (related to the County’s animal control and solid waste services/operations), consideration of reestablishing a burn area for vegetative waste, which DEQ had previously instructed be discontinued but, as of July 1, 2006, has advised could be resumed on a limited basis (undefined), the previous area utilized to burn vegetative waste is no longer available, as this area has been identified as optimum for use with the drain field installations. As such, there has been no resumption of burning vegetative waste at the transfer station property (inclusive of the closed landfill sections). With respect to the installation of an area for deposit and subsequent recycling or disposal of vegetative waste, additional evaluation is necessary to determine whether or not there is sufficient area (space) within the County’s property, outside of the closed landfill areas, to allow for this type of operation, which would require the purchase (or periodic leasing) of a commercial grade chipper and/or tub grinder. Due to concerns with the physical constraints of the property, the expense of establishing this type operation, staffing limitations, the volume of the waste stream that may be deposited, potential licensing requirements, the inability of the transfer station operation to efficiently handle this type of waste, including probable damage to County and or Waste Management equipment, etc. staff had previously directed that this material not be accepted and this directive is still being maintained. Inquiries related to use of the County’s facility for disposal of vegetative waste have been referred to Waste Management and/or local government operations (Amherst County, Augusta County, Rivanna Solid Waste Authority, Louisa County, etc.). More recently, such inquiries have also been referred to the private operations approved by the County. Staff’s recommendation pertinent to the acceptance of vegetative waste is to maintain the current moratorium on accepting such waste streams with the prospect for local government acceptance of this material to be determined in conjunction with the County’s planned participation in the Region 2000 Solid Waste Initiative, through Waste Management or, as directed by the Board, through an in depth analysis of the feasibility of establishing this service within the County’s transfer station operations.

4. Piney River 3 Project: County staff and the project engineer (Draper Aden Associates) are focused on the administrative responsibilities necessary to enable the project to go to bid following approval of the final design by state regulatory agencies (VDH, DEQ and VDOT).

5. Paid EMS Project – Per Board direction, the implementation of the revenue recovery program was established as March 1, 2007 with public notices of this decision placed in the Nelson County Times. County staff is currently working with Diversified Ambulance Billing (DAB) to complete HIPPA and other training related to the ongoing operation and administration of the revenue recovery program.

6. Visitors Center Project: The AE firm selected to work with the County on the project has been requested to provide input on the expense of completing a preliminary architectural report that would substantiate a cost basis for the project, inclusive of phasing the project, possible grant opportunities, etc. As an alternative, the firm has also been asked to provide a brief summary pertinent to an estimated cost of renovating the property for reuse as a visitor’s center and office. There has also been continued and expanded interest expressed from private parties regarding acquiring the property from the County.

The Board discussed the possibility of a mixed use scenario where the Tourism Department/Visitor Center shared the building with another enterprise. Mr. Carter noted the interested parties thus far were interested in using the whole building. There was some discussion regarding the restoration of the façade and the intentions of potential buyers. Mr. Carter noted that the same set of questions that had been sent to the previous interested parties would be forwarded to the third party expressing interest.

7. Nellysford Planning Project: Public comment is continuing to be solicited with input to the Board anticipated to be presented at the April 07 regular session.

8. Broadband: Consultant proposals in response to the County’s request for proposal solicitation are due on 3-15-07.

9. Biosolids: Appointment of the steering committee to assist with development of a local ordinance is scheduled for consideration on 3-13. Staff has submitted a correspondence to VDH requesting the applications for local properties be deferred until such time as the responsibility for permit approval is transferred to DEQ.

10. Staff Reports: To be forwarded to the Board by 3-16-07.

The Board inquired as to the status of the RVCC lease extension request. Mr. Carter noted that as the Board directed at the retreat, he has begun the process of the evaluation of all of the Community Centers. He noted that there are two issues regarding RVCC that could come back up. The first being that they’ve requested that the modular building be demolished and the County was ready to do that, the utilities had been disconnected, however the required asbestos inspection showed asbestos present that would cost $3,000 plus to remove it; so it is at a halt as of now. The second thing being the Health Department has to conduct a potable water pressure vessel inspection or the facility will be shut down. The County has called the insurance company’s personnel to do the inspection but the age of the identification plate on the vessel is illegible and unless he can determine something specific about that vessel he can’t certify it. Staff is looking into having an engineer look at it with the other option being to replace it at a cost of $5,000 to $10,000 dollars. The Board briefly discussed RVCC’s ability to sustain itself and the building, with Mr. Carter noting that the Board’s direction had been to do nothing with the lease extension request or sale of the building until the analysis of all of the Centers has been done.

The Board set the next budget workshop date for Monday March 19, 2007 at 5:30 PM and deferred the remaining afternoon session items until the evening session.

VII.    Recess and Reconvene for Evening Session

At 6:10 P.M., on a motion by Mr. Harvey, and seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) to recess and reconvene for the evening session, moving remaining Appointments, Correspondence and Directives to the end of the evening session.

EVENING SESSION
7:30 p.m. – Nelson County Courthouse

I.    Call to Order

Chairman Bruguiere called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. with 5 Supervisors present to establish a quorum and Mr. Carter being absent.

II.    Presentations

A.    Nelson County Quilt Presentation

The Nelson County Quilters Guild represented by Sandy Bruguiere, Joanne Cuoghi, Mary Anne Stevens, and Karen Filak presented a quilt honoring Nelson County’s Bicentennial to the Board of Supervisors. The quilt will be hung in the Board of Supervisors Room and will rotate to various locations in the County throughout the year for display.
III.    Public Hearings

A.    Final Subdivision – (G. Goldstein, Tax Map #19-1-5)

Mr. Boger noted that Mr. Goldstein’s submission would divide parcel 5 into 3 lots. The majority of the property is located in Augusta County, with a small section of the parcel located in Nelson County. He noted that the proposed lot will be served by public water and sewer provided by the Nelson County Service Authority, but noted that the use of an alternative sewage system was being explored and would require Health Dept. approval. The Planning Commission unanimously agreed to recommend approval of the request.

The Board briefly discussed the possibility of the use of an alternative sewage system and
Mr. Stuart Saddler, representing the applicant, spoke to the circumstances requiring the use of an alternative sewage system versus a traditional sewage line after examination of the lots by a soil scientist. Mr. Sadler noted that one of the lots falls within the Wintergreen master plan and covenants with no subdivision allowed per the rules, which state that lots must be 90% of the size of the smallest lot in the subdivision.

The Chairman opened the public hearing for comment, there being none, the public hearing was closed.

Discussion by the Board included questioning the expectations of lot owners and subsequent divisions in a development. Mr. Boger clarified the process, noting that the surrounding property owners can sign off on the subdivision or a public hearing process can be done. The letters of opposition were noted, however the application meets the subdivision requirements and cannot be denied based on the current process.

There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Harris to approve the final subdivision 10b as presented. Mr. Harvey seconded the motion and Supervisors voted (4-1) with Mr. Hale voting No, to approve the motion and final subdivision plat for G. Goldstein, Tax Map #19-1-5.

B.    Final Subdivision – Wolf Run Subdivision- Habitat for Humanity/NCCDF (Tax Map #77-A-204 and 206)

Mr. Boger gave an over-view of the application noting that 39.5 acres on Lobo Lane would be subdivided into 14 lots ranging from 2 acres to 4.8 acres in size. He noted that the soils work has been completed and submitted to the Health Department, the E&S plan was being reviewed, the odd shaped lots meet the requirements of section 4-7(B) of the Subdivision Ordinance, and VDOT has approved the entrance of the subdivision. He noted the Planning Commission recommended approval contingent upon final approval of the E&S plan and soils work by the Health Department.

Mr. Boger noted that the road frontage of the lots would meet the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance requirements of 125 ft and the pipe-stems worked with the grade of the lots on the preliminary drawings.

There being no further questions from the Board, the Chairman opened the public hearing for comment. There being none, the public hearing was closed.

There being no further discussion, Ms. Brennan made a motion to approve the final subdivision plat for Wolf Run as presented. Mr. Harris seconded the motion and Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the motion and the final subdivision plat for Wolf Run subdivision, Tax Map #77-A-204 and 206.

C.    Rezoning #2007-002 –( J. Chambers, Tax Map #77-A-4)

Mr. Boger over-viewed the application noting that the purpose of rezoning 6.8 acres from M-1 to Agricultural A-1 is to permit Mr. Chambers to construct a residential building on the site for his mother, the property owner. Mr. Boger noted that the Health Department must approve the septic drain field and well location, AEP must be contacted for electric service, and noise from the active railroad track should be accounted for in determining the location of the dwelling. The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the rezoning application.

Mr. Hale stated his intention to abstain from voting on the request, due to a potential conflict of interest since he did the boundary survey work on the property. The boundary survey and surrounding properties were briefly discussed.

There being no further questions from the Board, the Chairman opened the public hearing for comment. Mr. Chambers, the applicant, spoke briefly noting that the land has been in his family and not utilized, however it is now in his mother’s ownership, who would like to use the land for a vacation/retirement residence. There being no other comments, the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Harvey made a motion to approve rezoning application #2007-002 for Jerome Chambers rezoning 6.88 acres from Industrial, M-1 to Agricultural A-1, Tax map #77-A, parcel 4. Mr. Harris seconded the motion and Supervisors voted (4-0-1) with Mr. Hale abstaining, to approve the motion and rezoning request #2007-002.

D.    Conditional Use Permit #2007-001 – (T. Lacey, Tax Map #80-A-32)

Mr. Boger over-viewed the application stating that the applicant wants to construct a 30 foot by 1,400 foot private landing strip with a future hanger/barn on his property located at 4303 James River Road, Wingina; Tax Map #80-A-32. He noted the E&S plan has been approved, and that the applicant has been working with the Lovingston Fire Department to provide an area adjacent to the fire station for a helipad. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the application with no conditions.

Mr. Lacey, the applicant spoke regarding his request noting on a map that the landing strip is to be situated on a ridge in the center of the property, such that it won’t be visible from adjoining properties due to higher ridges around the site. He noted the landing strip would follow an existing road and not many trees would be disturbed. The strip itself would be 30 ft wide, with the total open area around and including the strip would be 100ft.
The Board was complimentary of Mr. Lacey’s preparation and their being no further questions; the Chairman opened the public hearing for comment.

Mr. Morris Barrett spoke in favor of approving the request, noting the potential benefits to emergency services and farmers of having a landing strip in the area.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Harris made a motion to approve conditional use permit #2007-001 for Mr. Tim Lacey and the motion was seconded by Ms. Brennan.

Discussion by the Board included inquiring about the access to Rt. 56 from the proposed landing strip. Mr. Lacey noted on the aerial photo that there is access to Rt. 56 from the strip.

There being no further discussion, Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the motion and the conditional use permit #2007-001 for Mr. Tim Lacey to construct a landing strip on a parcel described on Tax Map #80-A-32.

IV.    Other Business - None

V.    Public Comments

A.    Nelson Citizens Against Toxic Sludge, LLC

Mr. Gary Scott, Chairman of NCATS spoke on behalf of the group presenting a draft ordinance for the Board’s review. Mr. Scott noted that the group had taken exception to the language on the County’s website pertaining to the term of the Biosolids Advisory Committee as being “until such time that the local ordinance is adopted or defeated.” He reiterated the group’s opposition to any sludge being land applied in Nelson County and read the first paragraph of the draft ordinance for the Board.

The Board noted that the Advisory committee is being formed to draw up an ordinance and model ordinances have been presented; the committee is not meant to just pass the ordinances that they have been given. The clarification was made that the Committee’s job was to recommend an Ordinance to the Board for consideration/action. The Committee’s mission statement was read aloud and the term language noted on the website was noted to refer to how long the committee would be active.

1.    Mary Kathryn Allen – Gladstone

Spoke in support of NCATS and Gary Scott’s comments. Noted that the EPIC site in Gladstone was formerly considered a storage site and governed by the BUR, but now was considered a transfer site and not subject to the BUR. She noted having unsatisfactory correspondence with the State Department of Health regarding questions about documents provided by the County in response to her FOIA request. She noted getting confirmation that the EPIC site is subject to 100 year flood plain requirements and should be made to comply with evacuation plans and anchoring requirements. She spoke favorably of Mr. Fred Boger’s help in researching this issue.

2.    Jennifer Burkes – Gladstone

Spoke in favor of the adoption of the NCATS draft Biosolids ordinance and thanked Mr. Boger and Ms. Brennan for their concern in the matter. Spoke against the agreement made 9 years ago between the senior citizens of Gladstone and EPIC to allow the transfer site. Urged the Board to stand up for the citizens of Gladstone.

3.    Patrick Mooney – Lovingston

Urged the Biosolids Advisory Committee members to visit an area that has land applied sludge to gain personal experience.

4.    Rick Larkin – Arrington

Spoke in favor of using the NCATS proposed ordinance, noting using sludge is not free and will have costs in the long run.

5.    Sam Saunders – Lovingston

Spoke against use of Biosolids expressing concern about the intangible environmental impacts that can’t be smelled, touched or seen. Expressed concern for the farmers who have to turn to a less expensive fertilizer alternative to survive. Noted concern about the source (NJ) of the sludge for land application and the future ramifications of its use.

6.    Morris Barrett – Wingina

Urged the Board to do everything in its power to stop the spreading of toxic sludge.

7.    Matt Bushee – Arrington

Represents NCATS, distributed information concerning Biosolids and health risks for the Board to review.

There being no others wishing to comment, the public comment session was closed.

The Chairman noted that they are working hard on the Biosolids issues and intend to establish the advisory committee to work on an Ordinance that hopefully the Board of Supervisors will accept.

VI.    Reports, Appointments, Correspondence, and Directives

A.    Reports
1.    County Administrator’s Report – Given in the afternoon session

2.    Board Reports

Mr. Hale, Ms. Brennan and Mr. Harris had no reports.

Mr. Bruguiere noted having attended a meeting on location in Gladstone with the Health Dept., DEQ and Synagro and said they were checking into the exact location of the flood plain in the transfer site area; noting that certain steps would have to be taken to comply. Mr. Boger noted having received a letter that day that outlined what steps would have to be taken by Synagro/EPIC to comply with flood plain requirements.

Mr. Harvey noted enjoying serving on the Planning Commission again.

B.    Appointments

1.          Biosolids Advisory Committee

Mr. Bruguiere noted that the following people were willing to serve on the committee as established: Tom Eick, local Health Dept., Tim Costillo, Nelson County Service Authority, Hughes Swain, Nelson County Farm Bureau, Tommy Bruguiere, BOS, Phil Payne, County Attorney, and Steve Carter, County Administrator. He noted 3 citizens were needed and noted 4 citizens have applied for the committee: Mr. Peter Agelasto, III, Ms. Mary Kathryn Allen, Mr. Gary Scott, and Mr. Thomas (Tim) Burnette.

The Board discussed appointing all four applicants versus the three as stated; and the consensus was to appoint 3 citizens.

Mr. Harris made a motion to appoint Mr. Gary Scott, Chairman of NCATS, as a citizen representative to the Biosolids Advisory Committee. Ms. Brennan seconded the motion and Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) by roll call vote to approve the motion and the appointment of Gary Scott.

Ms. Brennan made a motion to appoint Mr. Peter Agelasto as a citizen representative to the Biosolids Advisory Committee, considering his personal experience with the land application of biosolids.

Mr. Hale amended the motion to include the appointment of Mr. Tim Burnette as a citizen representative to the committee.

The Board discussed the merits of doing each appointment one at a time and Mr. Hale rescinded his amendment to the original motion on the floor and seconded the original motion as made by Ms. Brennan.

There was some discussion about the comparability of land applying sludge from Wintergreen with that of New Jersey as being relevant experience. Mr. Hale noted that this appointment would provide some diversity to the committee.
There being no further discussion, Supervisors voted (4-1) by roll call vote with Mr. Harvey voting No, to appoint Mr. Peter Agelasto, III to the Committee.

Mr. Harris made a motion to nominate Mr. Thomas Burnette as the third citizen Committee member. Mr. Hale seconded the motion and there being no further discussion, Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) by roll call vote to approve the motion and appoint Mr. Thomas Burnette to the Biosolids Advisory Committee.

Mr. Bruguiere directed that letters be drafted to the committee members after Mr. Payne and Mr. Carter establish a mutually agreeable date to meet and charge the committee to act within 60 days. The Board noted that these meetings would be open to the public but not for public comment.

Mr. Harris announced that he is not planning to run for another term on the Board after having served for 10 years. He noted that his current schedule did not allow for his regular attendance at workshops etc. The Board noted that he will certainly be missed.

2.          Planning Commission – No action taken

C.    Correspondence - None

D.    Directives - None

VI.    Adjournment

At 9:00 P. M., on a motion by Mr. Harris and seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote, (5-0), to adjourn and continue the meeting until 5:30 PM on March 19, 2007 at the Nelson County Courthouse, Lovingston, Virginia for purposes of the conduct of a work session on the FY08 budget and such other business as said Board of Supervisors may consider.

Approved:    March 13, 2007        Attest:    ________________________, Clerk
                            Nelson County Board of Supervisors