Board of Supervisors: February 13, 2007

February 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 4 members present to establish a quorum and Mr. Harvey being absent.

A.   Moment of Silence
B.   Pledge of Allegiance

II.   Consent Agenda

After brief discussion about minor changes to the January 9, 2007 minutes for approval and Ms. Brennan serving as Mr. Bruguiere’s designee to the Piedmont Workforce Network Board, a motion was made by Mr. Harris and seconded by Ms. Brennan to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. The motion passed unanimously (4-0) by roll call vote and the following Resolutions were approved:

A.   Resolution R2007-012 – Minutes for Approval

RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the minutes of said Board’s meeting conducted on January 9, 2007 and January 24, 2007 be and hereby are approved and authorized for entry into the official record of the Board of Supervisors meetings.

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

B.   Resolution R2007-013 – Budget Amendment


   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
       $      300.00   3-100-001899-0016   4-100-012130-5504
           60,000.00   3-100-002404-0039   4-100-032010-8212
       $ 60,300.00


    Adopted: February 13, 2007     Attest: _____________________________________
                                         Clerk, Nelson County Board of Supervisors

EXPLANATION OF BUDGET AMENDMENT

The General Fund Appropriation includes $300.00 for training requested by the Treasurer’s Office. This office instituted a $20 administration fee charged to delinquent taxpayer accounts when additional collection efforts are required.   Through December, $390 in fees were collected. The Treasurer is requesting these funds be appropriated for training classes. Also requested is $60,000.00 for a radio communications study. The county will receive Homeland Security funding for this project.

C.   Resolution R2007-014 – 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

$     264.57       Real Estate           Jacqueline Darnell
                           177 Smokey Rd.
                           Aylett, VA 23009

$     431.67       Real Estate           James C. Mack
                           P.O. Box 429
                           Olean, VA 20128
Approved: February 13, 2007   Attest: ________________________, Clerk
                       Nelson County Board of Supervisors

III.   Public Comments and Presentations

A.   Public Comments

Mr. Bruguiere opened the public comments session and the following citizens were recognized:

1.      Gary Scott – Nelson Citizens Against Toxic Sludge (NCATS)

Mr. Scott spoke in favor of the establishment of a Biosolids Advisory Committee, requested the Board consider an ordinance drawn up by NCATS, and requested that the Board request a 60 day extension from VDH in consideration of the pending Biosolids applications until a local ordinance and monitor are in place.

Board members noted to Mr. Scott that the Advisory Committee and draft ordinance would be discussed during the meeting.

Mr. Carter noted that VDH is awaiting current revisions to the applications by Synagro and that would start another 30 day comment period.

2.   Rod Gentry – Union Bank & Trust
Mr. Gentry spoke on behalf of Union Bank & Trust encouraging the Board to renovate the 571 Front Street property to house the Tourism and Economic Development Office.

3.   Mary Catherine Allen - Gladstone
Ms. Allen addressed the Board on the continued issues of the Gladstone EPIC Biosolids transfer site citing and distributing the Biosolids User Regulations (BUR). She expressed frustration with perceived inactivity by the Board concerning these issues. She distributed pictures from the site from a recent visit by her and Delegate W. Abbitt; and encouraged the Board to visit the site and lend more support regarding her concerns. She noted the upcoming meeting scheduled for 2/16/07 at the site with DEQ and EPIC. She also stated that the nuisance issues were not her main concern, but rather the environmental, storage and oversight issues. She also enquired as to Scott Haley’s report from a previous site visit.

Mr. Carter noted that Scott Haley’s (VDH) report was distribute to the Board and that County staff would be attending the 2/16/07 meeting and urged Ms. Allen to forward the pictures to the Health Department. Mr. Bruguiere noted that these issues were ongoing and may take time to resolve. Ms. Brennan noted her concerns about getting a good picture of what’s going on in Gladstone, noting the lack of oversight and a good paper trail for permitting etc. and noted that Mr. Boger is putting together a report on this. Mr. Harris noted efforts have been made to address Gladstone citizens’ issues and reiterated that at the time the agreement was made (approximately 10 years ago) between the Senior/Community Center and EPIC, there was some monetary benefit to the Center. The citizens at that time were mostly concerned with keeping the trucks out of the village. He stated that the Board is not ignoring the issues, but recognized that things may not be moving along as fast as Ms. Allen would like.

4.   Jennifer Burks - Gladstone
Ms. Burks addressed the Board regarding her dislike for the order of the Agenda regarding the scheduling of Biosolids public comments in the afternoon session; stating that it’s unfair to the public when the topic is so controversial. She also stated that an attorney has advised her that the County has the authority, through its policing powers, to order EPIC to cease and desist their operations in Gladstone. She also noted her frustration with perceived inactivity by the Board and lack of support.

Mr. Hale noted that the Board is listening to all parties on this subject, and the Board is struggling with what it is that it can do, but they are working on it. Mr. Harris noted that before any official action is taken on a subject, the public hearings are scheduled for the evening session to be able to receive more public input on a specific subject and the public comments sessions are for any issue the public wants to speak about. He noted that through the public hearing process, the public is given every opportunity to give input. Ms. Brennan noted that the agenda item referring to the Biosolids Ordinance is simply there because the Board has to formally adopt a resolution to put it to public hearing. Mr. Bruguiere noted the large turnout by the public at the previous Board meeting’s evening session to participate in public comments.

5.   Rick Larkin – Arrington and NCATS
Mr. Larkin stated that the Board can delay the application of Biosolids, and encouraged them to do so.

There being no others wishing to speak, public comments were closed.

B.   Region 2000 Solid Waste Initiative – Bob White

Mr. Carter introduced Bob White from Region 2000 and overviewed the process and premises behind the Regional initiative.

Mr. White gave a PowerPoint presentation which included the following:

Background information on the project, which includes the localities of Amherst County, Campbell County, Nelson County, Bedford City, and Lynchburg City. The consultants involved include Draper Aden Associates, R.W. Beck, Inc., Hefty & Wiley PC, and Davenport & Co. LLC. Efforts to date include the Solid Waste Management Study, summary report from September 2004, regional solid waste management analysis from April 2005, and regional solid waste management financial, operational, and regulatory analysis completed in April 2006.

The current status of the project includes proof of the concept of regional landfill operations with DEQ who supported the concept, analysis of an alternative landfill scenario where Amherst County’s landfill would operate concurrently with Lynchburg City’s, which was shown not to be cost prohibitive, and an implementation schedule and budget.

The anticipated benefits includes: participation in the regional initiative yields a present value benefit of combined excess revenue and disposal cost savings to Nelson County of: $770,971 for years 2008-2012, $704,994 for 2013-2017, $634,211 for 2018-2022, and $235,116 for 2023-2024 for a total of $2,345,292.

The projected cost per ton comparison in 5 year increments yielded savings for Nelson County of $12.30 per ton in 2008, $14.25 per ton in 2013, $16.24 per ton in 2018, and $18.83 per ton in 2024.

Next steps and costs for fiscal year 2007 include legal activities related to Authority formation by May of 2007, engineering and implementation activities, staffing–related activities, and costs of financial advisor totaling $181,400 of which $19,954 (11%) is allocated to Nelson County. Next steps and costs for fiscal year 2008 include legal activities, additional engineering and implementation, DEQ permitting fees, authority staffing expenses, and financial advisor costs totaling $549,500 of which $60,445 (11%) is allocated to Nelson County.

Mr. White then noted that the working group is requesting a commitment for funding for both FY 2007 and FY 2008 from participant localities.

Following the presentation, Mr. Carter noted to the Board that there had been discussion amongst the work group of the Authority being a separate entity or being formed within the Region 2000 PDC, which would be staffed by the existing Local Government Council where the Director of the Authority would report to the LGC for policy and budget items and would have administrative oversight; which was confirmed by Mr. White. He also noted that approval in favor of the initiative would be in the County’s interest with next steps being a regional agreement to join the Authority. He also noted that to date, other jurisdictions are all in support of the project.

In response to the Board’s questions, Mr. White responded that the costs of start-up were included in the numbers presented, waste energy alternatives were still an area of interest, but the regional landfill capacity would go through 2024 and once stabilized, the Authority Director will look at next phases and a waste energy alternative could be re-considered. Additionally he noted that Amherst County was bearing the costs of a surcharge related to the concurrent operation of its landfill at their request, with additional service costs related to the inefficiency of operating two landfills as opposed to one. Mr. White also noted that engineering costs are incurred in both 2007 and 2008 and are being driven by DEQ permitting and included storm water management. He also said that some of the engineering costs will be re-curring and have been factored into the pro-forma numbers presented. Mr. Hale noted that the County’s annual tonnage of approximately 14,000 Tons, roughly 5% of the total tonnage was disproportionate to the 11% share of the costs. Mr. White noted there are differences in operational aspects related to size, with Mr. Carter adding that a formula was agreed upon by the working group that utilized a 1/3 equal share, 1/3 based on tonnage, and 1/3 based on population to arrive at the cost allocation. The difference in tipping fees between the localities was attributed to the fact that smaller operations cost more and Nelson County’s transfer operations affect this as well. Mr. White concluded by saying that the Authority would begin operations July 1, 2008.

There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Hale and seconded by Mr. Harris to approve Resolution R2007-017. The motion passed by unanimous roll call vote (4-0) and the following Resolution was adopted:

APPROVAL OF FUNDING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION
IN REGION 2000 SOLID WASTE INITIATIVE

WHEREAS, Nelson County has been a participant locality in the Region 2000 Local Government Council’s Region 2000 Solid Waste Management Initiative since the project’s inception; and,

WHEREAS, the objective of the Region 2000 Solid Waste Management Initiative is to evaluate the ability of a regional solid waste management operation comprised of local government entities to provide more effective and cost efficient public services; and,

WHEREAS, the outcomes and recommendations resulting from an ongoing analysis of the feasibility of a regional solid waste management operation, as conducted by a work group of the local governments participating in the project, point to the validity of establishing such regional program; and,

WHEREAS, the ensuing phase of the Region 2000 Solid Waste Management Initiative encompasses the consent of each local government to continue its participation and to provide monetary for the implementation of the regional solid program; and,

WHEREAS, a cost distribution formula has been established to allocate to each participating local government the expenses of proceeding with the measures necessary to institute the proposed regional program; and,

WHEREAS, the cost distribution formula allocates to Nelson County contributions to the program of $19,954.00 in Fiscal Year 2006-2007 and $60,445.00 in Fiscal Year 2007-2008 with the FY 2006-2007 expense being an incumbent responsibility to provide for the County’s ongoing and future inclusion in the regional program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the amount of $19,954.00 be and hereby is approved for payment from the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Budget to the Region 2000 Local Government Council with the expense being the current cost to Nelson County for its continued participation in and efforts to implement the Region 2000 Solid Waste Management Initiative.

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

C.   VDOT Report – Kevin Wright

1.   Arrington Bridge – Work has begun on the Arrington bridge replacement project. C.H. White is the contractor and traffic on the bridge is anticipated this summer.

2.   Secondary Six Year Plan – No funding amounts received yet this year; last year’s numbers will be used and then adjusted when the budget comes in around April, May or June. A workshop with the Board and VDOT needs to be set-up within the next 1-2 months to set the SSYP priorities. Other funding options will also be discussed.

3.   Route 617 in Schuyler – Design work has begun on Route 617 in Schuyler. The route is currently designated as a bike route in the current comprehensive plan. Adding 5 ft bike lanes are estimated to add an additional cost of $213,398 for that ¾ mile stretch of road. Planning for additional width must be done unless the Board feels other accommodations can be made. Mr. Wright noted that a “share the road” concept could be utilized and noted that traffic on the route was in the 150 vehicle/day range and the speed limit is 25mph or 35mph.

   The Board’s discussion included noting that trees and drainage were a factor on that route and that trees would have to go no matter what the Board’s decision on the bike lanes. Mr. Wright explained the process for widening roads is as follows: trees are taken down, the road designed, rights of way are purchased, and there is a public hearing process. Mr. Wright also noted that a road design without curb and gutter disturbs more land than one with curb and guttering due to the shoulder requirement when curb and guttering is not utilized. Mr. Hale noted that he would like to get more input from the Schuyler citizens before a decision is made, but that opportunity could be at the public hearing. Mr. Wright stated that the lanes could be added if public opinion dictated it during the hearing process. He also stated that the project was at least 2-3 years away from the public hearing process with construction beginning in 2011 as a best case scenario and that it may never be built with the three million dollar price tag. Mr. Wright noted needing a determination by the Board as to whether or not to keep the planned bike lanes or go with the “share the road” concept and without any consensus by the Board they would have to continue the design with bicycle lanes.

Supervisors agreed by consensus that they did not want the bicycle lanes and they should be removed from the road plan.

4.   Brookside Lane Alley – Mr. Hale inquired as to whether the curb, sidewalk and guttering on US 29 Business and Brookside Lane in Lovingston were VDOT’s responsibility. With it being VDOT per Mr. Wright, Mr. Hale asked Mr. Wright to look into having the drainage grate and large hole in the pavement repaired.

5.   Guardrail at Rt. 29 South Before Crossing Muddy Creek – Mr. Hale noted that the guardrail should be extended on Southbound Rt. 29 before crossing Muddy Creek; which has been the site of many accidents. He noted more signage was needed prior to the bridge noting a sharp turn (chevrons).

6.   Political Signs in VDOT Rights of Way – Mr. Wright noted that VDOT did not mess with political signs unless there is a hazard to public safety. The one in question on Rt. 29 has a variable width right of way which would actually require surveying to note how much of the sign is in the VDOT right of way. He noted that VDOT resources were better served in maintaining the County’s roads.

7.   Drainage at NCHS – It was noted that drainage issues have been solved per Dr. Collins and the back parking lot paving is being advertised for bids.

8.   Route 616 – Mr. Harris indicated that he would like this route added back to the six year plan when the priorities are re-established and wants to use any savings from the Arrington Bridge project to add this back in.

9.   Roseland Park & Ride Signage – In response to Mr. Bruguiere’s question, Mr. Wright noted that VDOT would put up signs once the park & ride site became permanent, and he would check to see if private parties could donate and put up signage there.

10.   VDOT/BOS Work Session – A date would be set in the near future for a meeting lasting 1-2 hours to include SSYP priorities and funding sources.

IV.   Unfinished Business

A.   Proposed Amendments to Zoning & Subdivision Ordinances – Planning Commission Recommendations.

The Board agreed by consensus to consider this item at an upcoming work session.

B.   Bio-Solids Draft Local Ordinance O2007-002

Mr. Phil Payne, County Attorney, distributed the draft ordinance that he had prepared. He noted that the previously distributed VACO model ordinance was drafted prior to the outcome of several lawsuits, which he has incorporated in this new draft. He noted difficulty in bringing the model ordinance up to date with current State Code, specifically related to testing and monitoring; rules can’t be set for local Monitors. He noted that the testing and monitoring will be in accordance with training provided by State Agencies. The inspection ability is to ensure that the use of Biosolids is in accordance with State regulations. He noted that the draft ordinance outlines what the County can do in terms of monitoring in Section 10-33 (b) & (c) which is straight from the State Code. Section 10-40 (a) & (b) are also taken straight from the State Code related to enforcement activities of the local Monitor. The local Monitor can order the abatement of any violations, specifying the violation and the code section being violated and order the violating activity to cease. Mr. Payne explained that the County monitor and VDH work together, however VDH has the final say in any difference of opinion related to violations and their determination is binding unless reversed upon judicial appeal. The County would have to sue the VDH to settle the violation dispute. Meanwhile, the County Monitor could file an injunction with the Circuit Court until the dispute is settled, but such action is usually an extraordinary remedy. He noted that the State Code language prescribes only civil penalties, no criminal, for violations and the only entity with the authority to stop and correct the violation is VDH and only if there is an imminent threat to public health and safety. Mr. Payne surmised that the General Assembly has created a shadow system, but giving the County no real authority to do anything. Mr. Carter noted that the County is not able to establish stronger Ordinances or provisions within the Ordinances than the State Code allows, which is known as the Dillon Rule.

Mr. Carter then gave a legislative update on the related pending legislation still being considered by the General Assembly. There was some discussion by the Board as to whether or not the local ordinance could address the storage of Biosolids; after which Mr. Payne stated that he may want to polish section 10-37 pertaining to the storage of Biosolids, in the draft ordinance. It was discussed that separate storage regulations (BUR) are in the State Administrative Code. Mr. Payne stated that he would clarify this and the authority of the local Monitor pertaining to storage, and the reimbursement of storage related monitoring from the State’s reimbursement fund.

The Board then discussed the Biosolids storage issues in Gladstone. Mr. Boger noted that in relation to zoning regulations for the EPIC site, he met with the State flood plains officer and some things that could be done were identified, which he needs to confer with Mr. Payne on. In question is who regulates the rail yard. Mr. Boger confirmed that Synagro, who has done some clean up in Gladstone, is to his knowledge, permitted by the State to operate a storage facility. He noted that they may be required to have a flood management plan that would facilitate the securing or removal of cars etc. within 24 hours. Mr. Boger also noted having seen the leakage previously described by Ms. Allen during public comments, and noted it is a VDH and DEQ issue with the necessity of waste discharge permits to be discussed.

Mr. Carter noted to the Board that Campbell County’s Administrator has written a letter to VDH requesting that approval of their pending permits be deferred until the conclusion of the General Assembly session or until any relevant legislation goes into effect and that Nelson could do the same. Mr. Payne noted a willingness by VDH to delay upon request.

Mr. Hale made a motion to pursue delay pending further study of the proposed draft ordinance and results of the actions taken by the General Assembly, to delay as long as possible; which was seconded by Ms. Brennan. Discussion included apprehension about requesting extensions beyond what is permitted; with Mr. Hale declaring his motion is intended to pursue legal & allowable extensions.   There being no further discussion, the motion passed (3-1) with Mr. Bruguiere voting No, noting that they were going beyond what VDH requires and the Board was treading on thin ice.

Ms. Brennan distributed a description of the proposed Biosolids Advisory Committee, which described the Committee’s mission as: to review Nelson County’s proposed Biosolids Ordinance; to review such ordinances of other rural counties in Virginia; to review legislation that comes out of the current Virginia General Assembly legislative session; and to advise the Board of Supervisors of its findings and its comments. The Board was proposed to include the following members: 3 Citizens of Nelson County, a Local VDH representative, a Nelson Water and Sewer representative, a Member of the BOS or Planning Commission, a Farm Bureau representative, the County Attorney, and the County Administrator.

Ms. Brennan made a motion that the Board establish the Biosolids Advisory Committee.

Discussion by the Board included reviewing the current draft ordinance from the County Attorney, having the public hearing and allowing comments by the Advisory Committee at that time.

Mr. Hale seconded the original motion.

Further discussion by the Board included wanting a good cross section of the County represented by the 3 citizen representatives, which are to be appointed by the Board. Mr. Carter noted that the citizen slots can be advertised and the representatives appointed at the proposed upcoming work session on March 5th. It was also clarified that the Advisory Committee would be in existence until the local ordinance was acted upon by the Board.

There being no further discussion, Chairman Bruguiere called for the vote and Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (4-0) to establish the Biosolids Advisory Committee as discussed.

Next steps discussed were to have the work session and then get the revised draft ordinance from Mr. Payne, in order to facilitate having the public hearing on the draft Biosolids Ordinance at the April 2007 meeting.

V.   New Business

A.   Resolution – R2007-015 Solid Waste Collection Site(s) Project (Expense
Reimbursement)

Mr. Carter introduced the Resolution drafted by Paul Jacobsen of Sands Anderson and noted that the intention is for the County to be able to reimburse itself with future proceeds from a bond issuance for expenditures incurred 60 days prior to its adoption up to the date of bond issuance. Mr. Carter noted it is a useful tool and that the reimbursement resolution would apply to these funds only if expenses were incurred and existing County funds used. The resolution allows for the expected issuance of a bond anticipation note of up to $2.5 million dollars. He noted the use of a similar Resolution for the Courthouse project a couple of years ago. He noted the potential to utilize some of the $156,000 set-aside in the debt-service fund for engineering costs which could be reimbursed with the financing funds. He noted that the $156,000 in the FY07 budget for debt service not expended would be carried forward in the FY08 budget for future debt service payments. There was some discussion of the necessity of passing the resolution, with Mr. Carter clarifying that the resolution would allow the County to reimburse itself for any expenses related to the solid waste collection site project incurred in the 60 days prior to the passing of the resolution, which would be anything after December 15, 2006.

There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Hale to approve R2007-15 with the correction of removing the word “Courthouse” from the second paragraph, and was seconded by Ms. Brennan.

Mr. Harris asked for further clarification on the use of the currently budgeted $156,000 and its being carried over to next fiscal year if not used for the project in this fiscal year. He noted agreement as long as the funds were used for the intended purpose and not something else; which would require further discussion by the Board.

The motion was approved unanimously by roll call vote (4-0) and the following Resolution was approved:

   WHEREAS, the County of Nelson (the “Issuer”) is a political subdivision organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and

   WHEREAS, the Issuer has paid beginning no earlier than December 15, 2006 (60 days prior to the date of adoption of this resolution), and will pay, on and after the date hereof, certain expenditures (“Expenditures”) for the acquisition, construction, expansion and equipping of Nelson County solid waste disposal facilities, including convenience centers for collection of solid waste (the “Project”); and

   WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the Issuer (the “Board”) has determined that those moneys previously advanced no earlier than December 15, 2006 (60 days prior to the date of adoption of this resolution) and to be advanced on and after the date hereof to pay the Expenditures are available only for a temporary period and it is necessary to reimburse the Issuer for the Expenditures from the proceeds of one or more issues of tax-exempt bonds (the “Bonds”).

   NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD AS FOLLOWS:

   Section 1.      The Board hereby declares the Issuer’s intent to reimburse the Issuer with the proceeds of the Bonds for the Expenditures with respect to the Project made on and after the dates referenced above. The Issuer reasonably expects on the date hereof that it will reimburse the Expenditures with the proceeds of the Bonds.

   Section 2.      Each Expenditure was and will be either (a) of a type properly chargeable to capital account under general federal income tax principles (determined in each case as of the date of the Expenditures), (b) a cost of issuance with respect to the Bonds, (c) a nonrecurring item that is not customarily payable from current revenues, or (d) a grant to a party that is not related to or an agent of the Issuer so long as such grant does not impose any obligation or condition (directly or indirectly) to repay any amount to or for the benefit of the Issuer.

   Section 3. The maximum principal amount of the Bonds expected to be issued for the Project is $2,500,000.

   Section 4. The Issuer will make a reimbursement allocation, which is a written allocation by the Issuer that evidences the Issuer’s use of proceeds of the Bonds to reimburse an Expenditure, no later than 18 months after the later of the date on which the Expenditure is paid or the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the date on which the Expenditure is paid. The Issuer recognizes that exceptions are available for certain “preliminary expenditures,” costs of issuance, certain de minimis amounts, expenditures by “small issuers” (based on the year of issuance and not the year of expenditure) and expenditures for construction projects of at least 5 years.

   Section 5.      This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.


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

Mr. Carter noted to the Board that staff would be fine tuning equipment costs and would present the construction and equipment purchase all together once Wiley & Wilson provided estimates on site construction. Mr. Bruguiere suggested using a private hauler from within the County for operations which would give a local business work and generate tax revenue from the machinery. Mr. Carter noted private hauling is proposed to continue from the Transfer Station to Amherst, Lynchburg or even Amelia depending on how it works out for at least a year. Internal collection can be bid out to see what the results are, but its probable that the County can do this more cost effectively. Mr. Carter noted concern about obligating the County to a 5-10 year contract unless the cost savings were very persuasive. Mr. Carter also noted that the analysis shows it to be more cost effective to still bring the waste to the Transfer Station rather than haul it directly to Amherst. He noted that the proposed operations would continue to be evaluated for increased efficiencies.

Mr. Ray Uttaro, Emergency Services Coordinator, gave the Board an update on current weather conditions and the Board agreed by consensus to continue with the meeting as scheduled.

VI.   Reports, Appointments, Correspondence, and Directives

A.   Reports

1.   County Administrator’s Report

Mr. Carter Presented the County Administrator’s Report as follows:

1. FY 07-08 Budget and 5 Year CIP – Initial drafts of the FY 07-08 Budget and FY08-FY12 Capital Improvements Plan have been completed with additional work required to balance the ensuing fiscal year budget and to complete an update of the modeling tool presented to the Board in 2006. The modeling tool incorporates the Five Year CIP and provides analysis on a timeline basis (six years) of the County’s financial capacity to undertake capital improvements in relation to projected operational requirements over the timeline. The 2-13 agenda includes a proposed adjourned meeting the week of February 26 to provide for the introduction to and initial review by the Board of the FY 07-08 Budget and 5 Year CIP.

Mr. Carter noted to the Board that it could be a difficult year in terms of revenues and the staff’s goal is to present a balanced budget at an ensuing work session. He noted that the Financial Advisor is working to update his modeling tools to be presented in the near future.

2. 2008 General Reassessment –   Work to complete the general reassessment of real estate, effective in 2008, is in full process. Wingate Appraisal staff has advised that the value (sales) analysis completed to date indicates strong growth in real estate values throughout the County. Wingate personnel are currently in the process of field verifications of each property in the County with structures located thereon. The general reassessment is presently on schedule.

3. Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Audit – The FY 05-06 Audit report has been completed and submitted by Robinson Farmer Cox, Associates, the County’s certified public accountant firm, and is being distributed to the Board. A report on the audit by RFC is planned for the March 2007 regular session. Mr. Carter noted that the County’s condition at June 30th 2006 was good.

4. Courthouse/Government Center Project – It is anticipated that work on the pre-design and schematic phase of the project will commence the week of 2-12. The schedule anticipates completion of this phase by Wiley and Wilson, the project architect, by June 15, 2007.

5. Solid Waste Project: A. Convenience Centers Project: Negotiations with Wiley and Wilson have been completed with design work projected to commence the week of 2-12. Work on acquiring a third site in the Faber-Schuyler area is continuing. Staff plans to incorporate the equipment purchase and operation program into the convenience centers project, both capital and operational (as presented to the Board on 1-24).

B. Region 2000 Solid Waste Management Initiative: Mr. Bob White, Deputy Director, of the Region 2000 Local Government Council and project manager of the regional solid waste project will present a status report on the project, including proposed implementation plans, at the regular session on 2-13.

6. Paid EMS Project – Medicaid/Medicare licensing for initiation of the revenue recovery program is pending approval and is anticipated in the ensuing sixty days (approximate). The County is, however, currently able to implement the revenue recovery program, and, as such, staff has advised Diversified Ambulance Billing to utilize January 1, 2007 as the start date for the program. This will enable current billing of insured and uninsured parties to proceed with Medicaid and Medicare billings to be held until licensure is obtained and then billed retroactively to the 1-1-07 start up date (individuals covered by Medicaid or Medicare will not be invoiced but will receive a notice of the provision of coverage).   Also in process are: a) completion of a compassionate billing policy and related form work, b) HIPPA training and associated form work scheduled for EMS providers on March 6 and 13, c) draft mutual aid agreement for inter-governmental services (the agreement is being developed with Amherst County staff) and, d) review of possible incentives for EMS volunteers, including no fee transports, which requires amendment of the local EMS ordinance. Lastly, staff is coordinating with DAB the method of submitting intake information for the revenue recovery program.

There was some discussion on the retroactive billing component of the current Ordinance, and the billing date to be used. The Board agreed by consensus to set March 1, 2007 as the billing date to be advertised. Mr. Carter noted that a notice would be sent to the NC Times, EMS personnel and posted on the County website regarding the implementation of the revenue recovery program and the March 1, 2007 billing date.

As a side note, Mr. Bruguiere noted issues with mutual aide calls and the rotational use of the volunteer squads’ ambulances citing differences in age limitations of insurance coverages across the squads and recommended the County consider purchasing 2 rescue squad units for use by the paid EMS staff. Mr. Carter noted that this had been a part of the original proposal by staff when the paid EMS program was being developed, and could be revisited during the FY08 budget process.

Mr. Carter noted that DAB is retooling their software programs and County staff would be centrally collecting the EMS data and submitting it to DAB for billing as they have recommended; with the goal being to work towards having the squads submit the data directly. Mr. Carter noted that the input received from Curtis Sheets regarding operations for 7 days/week at 13 hrs/day could be considered during upcoming budget work sessions.

6. Piney River 3 Project: The design of the realignment of a section of the project (within the Route 56 west corridor) is nearing completion. Comments on the initial design have now been received from VA-DEQ and are being addressed by the project engineer, Draper Aden Associates. County staff are working to complete the loan and grant responsibilities associated with the County’s receipt of funding for the project from of USDA-Rural Development and U.S. - EPA (i.e. State And Tribal Assistance Grants), which are requisite to the project being approved for construction bidding. DAA has advised that they anticipate the project being approved for bidding by April to May 2007.

8. Other Projects/Subjects

A. Visitors Center Project & Lovingston Revitalization: Staff has received the requested response from the initial party proposing to purchase from the County the property located at 571 Front Street. A copy is attached hereto. Also, a second party has also proposed to purchase this property and has toured the building with County staff. Copies of communications with this individual are also attached hereto. With regard to the County’s renovation of the property, procurement of architectural services has been completed with initiation of these services pending, per the Board’s previous direction.

Mr. Carter noted that a decision was needed as to whether to sell the property or proceed with the renovations and if the Board so desired to sell the building, a public hearing would be necessary.

On the Lovingston Revitalization program, staff is endeavoring to determine the viability of submission of a 2007 CDBG application to VA-DHCD. The deadline for these applications is mid-March 07.

Discussion by the Board on this item included further examination of how renovations could be accomplished at lesser expense, having the property re-evaluated by anther party, looking at phasing the project and exploring other grant/loan opportunities. Ms. Brennan and Mr. Harris expressed interest in keeping the building noting agreement with the comments by Mr. Gentry during public comments. Ms. Brennan suggested that UB&T may be a willing partner in renovating the building. The Board agreed that original estimates of renovating the building were hard to justify. Mr. Carter noted that County staff would be canvassing downtown building owners to gauge interest in a façade improvement program which would determine the viability of another CDBG application; however this program does not offer substantial if any funds to renovate the building. He also noted VDOT’s Transportation Enhancement program to be a viable option with the grant application period ending in November 2007 with awards being sometime in May 2008. Historic tax credits may be an option as well, but it is unsure if the County can directly participate in this program. As a matter of fairness, advertising the building for sealed bids to purchase with retaining rights of refusal was also discussed. Mr. Carter noted to the Board that both offers to purchase the building were unsolicited. Mr. Hale noted other options such as the old (current) Farm Bureau building which could be a turn-key operation, with a price of under $200,000. Issues with the bad condition of the road were noted and briefly discussed. Mr. Hale also noted the Front Street Garage at the corner of Rt. 29 business and Rt. 56 East as being another option and stated he is in favor of selling the front street building to the highest bidder. He noted his predecessor’s suggestion of demolishing the current building and building a new one. After discussion, the Board agreed by consensus to allow more time to explore the options discussed before making a decision on renovating the building or selling it.

B. Nellysford Planning Project: Comments have been received on the draft plan from the public. Staff will review these comments the week of 2-12 and discuss them with staff of TJPDC. Consideration of final plan approval, inclusive of any proposed revisions will be presented at the regular session in March 07. In the interim, proposed revisions will be forwarded to the Board for review and comment.

Ms. Brennan expressed concern that the January 9th minutes noted a desire by the Board for more public meetings on the plan during the comment period. Mr. Carter noted that the report had been circulated to 20 or more people and posted on the website as well, but that no additional public meetings had been held. Further discussion ensued pertaining to more public meetings not being necessary; however Ms. McGarry later confirmed that more public meetings were agreed upon by consensus of the Board, as was recorded.

C. Water Service Project with NCSA: The three party agreement has been fully executed and this status communicated to the Executive Director of NCSA. Pending is receipt from NCSA of project specific information (i.e. design, construction schedule, cost estimate, etc.)

Mr. Costillo noted that VDH and VDOT had granted their approvals; they want to combine this project with the Gladstone water project and are in the process of completing the DHCD CDBG funding application for Gladstone. Once permitting and funding commitments are made they will be ready to go out to bid. He noted anticipating a favorable response from DHCD on the application but couldn’t say when that project would begin. Mr. Costillo later noted that DEQ had requested that the old middle school project be slowed due to budgetary constraints.

D. Blue Ridge Tunnel and Blue Ride Railway Trail Projects: Applications, as approved on 1-24, were submitted to VA-DCR for funding related to property acquisitions on the BR Tunnel Project. The project consultant is working on a Phase II contract for approval by the County. The work to be proposed/provided encompasses additional structural testing of the tunnel and receipt of construction access to the tunnel’s western portal.   The BRRT project is currently on hold, due to litigation filed in Amherst County and per VDOT direction that the project related environmental review be updated.

E. Broadband: VA-DHCD has awarded the County a $25,000 CDGB planning grant to continue work on broadband implementation. The next facet of the project is procurement of consultant services, which is in process. Mr. Carter also noted that the County had been awarded another $50,000 from DHCD for the Broadband project since writing his report.

Mr. Harris inquired if the EDA was involved and Mr. Carter noted that to his recollection, they had given this back to the Board. Ms. Brennan noted someone in the County setting up a new internet system using radio transmission. Mr. Carter then noted that RCC, the consultants doing the radio communications study would report to the Board in March and a full report would be distributed.

F. Biosolids: (This subject is included for consideration on the 2-13-07 agenda.)   A draft local ordinance is being prepared for the Board’s consideration. A report (attached) has also been received from the VA Department of Health (Scott Haley) regarding an inspection of Epic’s operations in the Gladstone area of the County. And, County staff has also met with staff from VA-DCR to discuss flood plain responsibilities that may be incumbent upon Epic’s operation in the County at Gladstone. Another meeting with state agency personnel, representatives from Epic/Synagro and County staff is scheduled at the site in Gladstone on 2-16-07.

G. Board Retreat - Staff is proceeding to work towards completion of each of the objectives established by Board at the retreat. He noted the assessment of the Community Centers has been started.

9. Department Reports: The monthly reports from County departments and offices were forwarded electronically to the Board on 2-9-07.

       2. Board Reports

Mr. Hale:   Noted no sellers in Faber for a potential solid waste convenience center site. He noted that he will talk to the landowner on the opposite side of the road from the Rescue Squad building, but does not feel optimistic. Ms Brennan noted she will speak to the owner(s) of the land behind the Rescue Squad as well.

Ms. Brennan:   Reported attending the Dental Planning meeting where the discussion was about what to do in terms of having a dental clinic or rehabbing the current dental trailers. Reported that VACO is holding a Regional Courthouse Meeting on 4/19/07. Reported having lunch with Curt Smith of WPOA, who is still interested in the hotel project and working on financing. Attended a TJPDC meeting on sustainable forestry and establishing a site for a trim-wood industry. Attended Community Criminal Justice Board meeting discussing crisis intervention and the mentally ill, with the goal of keeping them out of the justice system to reduce costs. The PWN is reorganizing to re-define districts with a one-stop building in Charlottesville. Attended an RVCC Board meeting, VACO legislative day on 2/1/07, and a small farmers meeting (state group). Ms. Brennan and Mr. Hale attended a 2x2 breakfast with School Board members who noted asking the VASCB Association for model budgets and will report back. They noted concern with the Board of Supervisors controlling expenditures and expressed the need for a base figure to work from at budget time; suggesting a percentage growth in revenue.

Mr. Carter noted the Davenport modeling tool and that Mr. Kooch had been asked to dust off the school funding formula and come up with scenarios incorporating it. Mr. Carter noted that it’s very imperative to use the tool more for looking down the road operationally rather than as a means to capture larger capital improvements noting concerns about funding operations and revenues potentially not outpacing expenditures.

Mr. Harris:   Noted the Senior Issues Committee meeting had been cancelled.

Mr. Bruguiere:   None, but noted that the remaining Appointments and Board Directives could be taken up during the evening session.

VII.   Recess and Reconvene for Evening Session

At 6:05 P.M., on a motion by Mr. Harris, and seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously (4-0) 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 4 Supervisors present to establish a quorum and Mr. Harvey being absent.

II.   Public Comments

A. Nelson County Quilt Presentation – The presentation was postponed by the Quilters Guild until the March meeting due to inclement weather.

III.      Public Hearings

A.   Final Subdivision – Nelson County Service Authority (Tax Map #66-A-36)

Mr. Boger reported that a final subdivision plat has been submitted dividing 2 acres from the Central Virginia Electric Cooperative property in the Colleen Industrial Park (Tax Map #66-A-36) for the proposed Nelson County Service Authority Operation Center. The Planning Commission recommends approval by the Board.

There were no questions for Mr. Boger. The public hearing was opened, there were no comments, and the public hearing was closed.

On a motion made by Mr. Harris and seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (4-0), to grant approval of the final subdivision plat for the Nelson County Service Authority as presented (Tax Map #66-A-36)

B.   Final Subdivision – ( David Hall, Tax Map #83-8-91)

Mr. Boger reported that a final subdivision plat has been submitted dividing 10.06 acres identified as Tax Map 83-8, Parcel 91 into two lots. The subject property is located in the Highland on the James Subdivision, Cabell Road (Rt. 626). Soil work has been completed and forwarded to the Health Department on 12/29/06. The Planning Commission recommends approval by the Board. Mr. Boger noted no opposition from other property owners there.

Mr. Hale inquired as to whether or not this lot was included in the original subdivision, to which Mr. Boger replied that it was. Mr. Hale asked for an explanation of the rules of re-subdivision and Mr. Boger stated that in a re-subdivision, the previous lot is superseded and a deed for 2 lots is created. He noted that each adjoining property owners were notified and they are subject to road maintenance agreements.

There being no further questions, the public hearing was opened, there were no comments, and the public hearing was closed.

On a motion made by Mr. Harris and seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (4-0), to grant approval of the final subdivision plat for David Hall, 399 Abby Lane, Howardsville as presented, Tax Map #83-8-91.

Mr. Hale added that the issue of re-subdivision needed to be addressed in future subdivisions, as the layout of lots is anticipated by the buyers when the lots are purchased. He noted to consider this during future review of the draft zoning/subdivision ordinance.

C.   Amendment to the Nelson County Code, - Solid Waste Ordinance, Article 1
      Ch. 10– O2007-001

Mr. Payne gave an overview of the proposed amendment to the Board. Stating that the first part of the amendment gives the Administrator discretion in various facets of the solid waste operations and allows for some flexibility, getting around the mandatory language in the current ordinance, which states the County Administrator “shall” perform various duties related to solid waste operations. The second part repeals superseded sections of the Ordinance that were not repealed at the time when the superseding sections were adopted.

Mr. Carter noted that he would not propose to make significant changes in solid waste operations without the Board’s consent.

The Board’s discussion revolved around the necessity for the amendment and the language giving the Administrator the discretion in the administration of solid waste operations. The adding of language that would require the Board’s approval or replacing the word Administrator with the Board of Supervisors was also discussed. Mr. Carter noted that he was not in favor of replacing the word Administrator with the Board of Supervisors in this context as the Board should not be charged with handling calls from citizens regarding what can or can’t be placed in collection containers. Mr. Carter noted that this is a daily occurrence that is presently handled by County staff, and the convenience center attendants.

Mr. Payne clarified that the current ordinance language is too stringent; not allowing any wiggle room and the amendment would enable the Administrator to have some maneuverability for day to day operations. Mr. Payne noted that rather than re-write the entire ordinance to read “may” instead of “shall”, this amendment would remedy the problem. He also noted that he felt that the amendment was necessary in addressing certain items of recent litigation stemming from the mandatory language of the current ordinance.

Further discussion involved clarification of the Administrator entering into agreements with other jurisdictions with the example of the County having to temporarily re-route the waste stream to Amherst County for 45 days during the tipping floor replacement. Mr. Carter and Mr. Payne noted to the Board that such agreements etc. would certainly be brought to the Board. The Board agreed by consensus to remove the phrase “in his discretion” from the first sentence and add the phrase “subject to the approval of the Board of Supervisors” to the end of the proposed Amendment, Section 10-15.1 Administration.

There being no further discussion or questions; Mr. Payne noted that it was unfair that the Board had to listen to the nit-picking that goes on when he knows that the Board goes out of its way to do things properly, but that it has become necessary to mind all of these P’s and Q’s and to fill in holes where possible.

The public hearing was then opened and there being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

On a motion made by Mr. Harris to approve O2007-001 as revised; and seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (4-0) to adopt O2007-001 as follows:

BE IT ORDAINED pursuant to Virginia State Code §15.2-1426, §15.2-1427 and applicable provisions of Chapter 9, Article 2, Sections 15.2-927 through 15.2-939 of the Code of Virginia 1950, the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby adopt an amendment to the Code of Nelson County, effective upon adoption as follows:

Section 10-15.1. Administration
   Any provision of this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the Administrator may determine the capacity and ability of Collection Facilities to accept Solid Waste and may implement policies and procedures from time to time specifying the forms of acceptable Solid Waste which can be deposited at Collection Facilities and, when necessary, alternative methods or sites for disposal including, but not limited to, agreements with other jurisdictions for the use and maintenance of such facilities, subject to the approval of the Board of Supervisors.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED pursuant to Virginia State Code §15.2-1426, §15.2-1427 and applicable provisions of Chapter 9, Article 2, Sections 15.2-927 through 15.2-939 of the Code of Virginia 1950, the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby repeal Sec. 10-26, Sec. 10-27, and Sec. 10-41 through Sec. 10-104 of Chapter 10 of the Code of Nelson County, pertaining to Solid Waste effective upon adoption as follows:

a)   Sec. 10-26. Solid waste collection.
b)   Sec. 10-27. Disposal sites.
c)   Sec. 10-41. Containers and compactor sites for county residents only.
d)   Sec. 10-42. Commercial waste.
e)   Sec. 10-43. Certain materials not to be placed in containers.
f)   Sec. 10-44. Residents transporting waste directly to landfill or special containers.
g)   Sec. 10-45. Liquids.
h)   Sec. 10-46. Littering container sites.
i)   Sec. 10-47. Transporting waste in open vehicles.
j)   Sec. 10-48. Appliances.
k)   Sec. 10-66. Licensing of collectors.
l)   Sec. 10-67. License fee.
m)   Sec. 10-68. Collection and disposal methods.
n)   Sec. 10-69. Conformance with Chapter.
o)   Sec. 10-70. Landfill use fee.
p)   Sec. 10-71. Collection vehicles.
q)   Sec. 10-72. Disposal at county-approved sites.
r)   Sec. 10-74. Unlawful accumulations.
s)   Sec. 10-75. Scavenging.
t)   Sec. 10-76. Loitering at dumpster sites.
u)   Sec. 10-96. Tipping Fees.
v)   Sec. 10-97. Unacceptable refuse.
w)   Sec. 10-98. Exemption from fees.
x)   Sec. 10-99. Collection of fees.
y)   Sec. 10-100. Disposition of funds.
z)   Sec. 10-101. Permit required for hauling into county; penalty.
aa)   Sec. 10-102. Deposits in dump pit only.
bb)   Sec. 10-103. Closed at night and on Sunday.
cc)   Sec. 10-104. Applicable landfills designated.

Adopted:   February 13, 2007   Attest:   _____________________________, Clerk                           Nelson County Board of Supervisors

IV.   Other Business - None

V.   Reports, Appointments, Correspondence, and Directives

A.   Appointments

The Board reviewed a memorandum prepared by Ms. McGarry noting the existing and advertised vacancies for Board and Commission appointments.

Mr. Hale moved to reappoint Ms. Mary Lee Embrey to the JABA Council on Aging, and Ms. Brennan seconded the motion. Mr. Hale noted that he recommended her reappointment after having spoken to her about continuing to serve on the Board. Ms. McGarry clarified that the wording used in the Memo was only intended to prompt the Board to consider the reappointment and was not a recommendation by staff of the appointment. There being no further discussion, the Chairman called for the vote and the motion passed with Supervisors voting unanimously (4-0) by roll call vote to re-appoint Ms. Mary Lee Embrey to the JABA Council on Aging.

B.   Correspondence – None

C.   Directives - None

VI.   Adjournment

At 8:15 P. M., on a motion by Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote, (4-0), to approve the following resolution to adjourn and continue the meeting until 1:30 pm on March 5, 2007 at the Nelson County Courthouse, Lovingston, Virginia for purposes of the conduct of a work session on the draft zoning and subdivision ordinance recommendations, budget and such other business as said Board of Supervisors may consider.

A.   Resolution R2007-016–Continuation of February 13, 2007 Regular Meeting

RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors, pursuant to §15.2-1416 (Regular meetings) of the Code of Virginia, that the regular meeting of the Board on February 13, 2007 be and hereby is adjourned and shall be continued on March 5, 2007 at 1:30 P.M. at the Nelson County Courthouse, Lovingston Virginia for the purposes of the conduct of a work session on the draft zoning and subdivision ordinance recommendations, budget and such other business as said Board of Supervisors may consider.

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