Board of Supervisors: July 12, 2005

July 12, 2005

July 12, 2005

Virginia:

At a Continued Meeting of the Nelson County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2005, 10:00 a.m., at the Courthouse in Lovingston, Virginia, thereof:

Present:   Gary E. Wood, Chair
       Harry S. Harris, Vice Chair
       Constance Brennan, Central District Supervisor
       Thomas H. Bruguiere, Jr., West District Supervisor
       Thomas D. Harvey, North District Supervisor
       Stephen A. Carter, County Administrator
       Fred M. Boger, Planning Director
       Virgie A. Carter, Deputy Clerk
       Betty M. Fortune, Planning Secretary

Agenda Item Number I. Call Meeting to Order

Chair Wood called the Meeting to order at 10:15 a.m.

Agenda Item Number II. Review of Zoning Ordinance

The Board of Supervisors continued review of the proposed Zoning Ordinance as follows:

CHAPTER 6 - SPECIAL USE PERMITS (SPECIAL CONDITIONS)

Deleted the list of requirements and added Section 12-3-5 from the existing ordinance as follows:

"The governing body may grant or deny the application either in part or
in full and may impose such modifications, regulations, or restrictions, including a limitation of the time for which the permit shall be valid, which the governing body in its discretion may determine necessary or requisite in order that the general objectives and purposes of this ordinance shall be complied with."

CHAPTER 7 - NONCONFORMING USES

A. Purpose and Intent

A.1. Land Use Objectives: Changed Second Sentence as follows:

"Certain nonconforming uses may continue, but the provisions of this chapter are intended to encourage the eventual improvement to a conforming status."

CHAPTER 8 - PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENT

B. General Parking, Loading and Stacking Provisions:

Discussion on Requirements for Parking Space and Parking Bay Paving Improvements was deferred.

Deleted B.6.13 "No off-street loading space shall be located within a front yard."

Deleted the same requirement for multifamily housing units or other
tenant housing facility.

Added language to allow for vehicular access aisles in parking lots of less than 24 feet (2-12' lanes for two-way traffic) for one-way traffic with directional signage.

Deferred a requirement for a minimum of 100' sight distance in
parking lots for internal intersections of access aisles.

C.   Parking and Loading Space Design Criteria

1. Parking Space Design Criteria: Changed j. to require bumper blocks in parking lots when the parking area has no permanent parking space markings, when safety issues require bumper blocks and where there exists the potential for vehicular overhang to exist where pedestrian facilities are contiguous to the edge of the pavement.

2. Off-Street Loading Space Design Criteria:

Deleted "No loading space shall be located in a front yard, except for industrial uses."

Concluding discussion, the Board scheduled August 3rd, 6:00 p.m. to continued review of the Zoning Ordinance.

Agenda Item Number III. Other Matters

No other matters were discussed.

Agenda Item Number IV. Adjournment

Re: Adjournment

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Mr. Harris, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby adjourn the July 12, 2005 Meeting until August 3, 2005, at 6:00 p.m.

______________________________, Chair

July 12, 2005

Virginia:

At a Regular Meeting of the Nelson County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2005, 2:00 p.m., at the Courthouse in Lovingston, Virginia, thereof:

Present:   Gary E. Wood, Chair
       Harry S. Harris, Vice Chair
       Constance Brennan, Central District Supervisor
       Thomas H. Bruguiere, Jr., West District Supervisor
       Thomas D. Harvey, North District Supervisor
       Stephen A. Carter, County Administrator
       Fred M. Boger, Planning Director
       Virgie A. Carter, Deputy Clerk

Agenda Item Number 1. Call Meeting to Order

Supervisor Wood called the meeting to order.

A.   Moment of Silence
B.   Pledge of Allegiance: Supervisor Harvey

Agenda Item Number II. Consent Agenda

A.   Minutes
B.   Jackets: Boys Outdoor Track Team
C.   Refunds

Ms. Carter reported that the Minutes will be available at the August Meeting.

Additionally, the Board of Supervisors passed a Resolution approving the Consent Agenda as follows, exclusive of the minutes.

Re: Approval of Consent Agenda

On a motion by Ms. Brennan, seconded by Mr. Harris, with Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the Consent Agenda as follows:

A.   Jackets: Boys Outdoor Track Team

Re: Approval to Purchase Jackets for the Boys Outdoor Track Team

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the purchase of jackets for the Boys Outdoor Track Team winning the Single “A” State Championship in the amount of $1,215.00.

B.   Refunds

Re: Approval of Refunds

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve a refund to BB&T Leasing Corporation in the amount of $160.77.

Agenda Item Number III. Public Comments and Presentations

A.   Public Service Recognition

The Board of Supervisors recognized Constance M. Bradshaw for thirty years of service to the Nelson County Department of Social Services as follows:

Re: Recognition of Constance M. Bradshaw for Thirty Years of Employment with the Nelson County Department of Social Services

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Mr. Harris, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the Board of Supervisors passed a Resolution recognizing Constance M. Bradshaw for thirty years of service to the Department of Social Services as follows:

                          Constance M. Bradshaw

Connie Bradshaw has been a trustworthy and dedicated friend to the elderly and disadvantaged of Nelson County for 30 years.

Connie’s career with the Nelson County Department of Social Services began on July 1, 1975 as an Eligibility Worker for the Medicaid program.

Connie has proven to be innovative and creative; always making the clients needs her first priority.

Sensitive to her client’s needs, anxiety and despair were minimized due to her hard work and caring nature.

For selfless dedication to her work, her co-workers, and the Community, the
Nelson County Board of Supervisors is proud to recognize Constance M. Bradshaw for her years of service.

B.   Public Comments

Gordon Koerner, Brownings Cove, spoke regarding the cost of living for individuals living in Nelson County; recommended the Board fund the $9,000 the Economic Development Authority requested during the budget process; and questioned if it is ethical (although it is legal) for the Board of Supervisors to conduct other business at the Continued Meetings scheduled for the review of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and referenced the Noise Control Ordinance adopted on June 30, 2005.

Mike McCarthy, Treasurer of the Roseland Rescue Squad, requested the Board of Supervisors to approve the submittal of a grant for an oxygen generation system. Mr. McCarthy stated that the cost to the County is approximately $2,400 to $2,500 annually. Mr. McCarthy stated that the filling of the portable tanks is dangerous and the replacing of the large tanks in the units can be difficult if not impossible for some crew members.

Mr. Carter stated that Staff is checking to determine if Home Land Security funds could be utilized for the oxygen generation system.

The Board of Supervisors discussed the request and directed that the request be presented to the EMS Council. The Board further stated that they would like for the Grant to be completed first and to determine the needs of all of the emergency service departments.

Frank Jumper, Community Resource Coordinator, reported on the educational and local community activities program offered at the National College of Business & Technology. Mr. Jumper noted that the Program offers a refresher course free for life. Mr. Jumper stated that he has scheduled a meeting with Debbie McCann to discuss the programs offered at the National
College.

Roger Collins, Superintendent of Schools, provided a brief update on activities associated with the School System, and noted that all schools will be accredited this year. Dr. Collins also reported on activities that will be offered next school year.

Ronnie Wood requested B&W Lane, Route 698, be added to the Rural Rustic Roads Program for paving.

C.   VDOT Report

M.C. McCormack, Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation, stated that Kevin Wright, Assistant Resident Engineer, is attending a meeting in Richmond and could not attend today’s meeting.

Mr. McCormack discussed the increased speed limit issue and noted that Senate Bill 1223 approved the increased speed limit; stated that Level Green (Dark Hollow Road) is being funded under the Rural Rustic Project; discussed the Lovingston Revitalization Project; scheduling a public hearing on the Six Year Plan (the Six Year Plan has been updated and is now
available on line); and the by-pass around Amherst will be opening in December.

Concluding comments from Mr. McCormack, Supervisor Harris noted that the survey work on the Arrington Bridge has started; questioned when the start date will begin on the Turn Lane at the High School and improvements to the Parking Lot (Mr. McCormack stated that he will check on the start date, but noted that the Project should begin before school starts).

Supervisor Brennan stated that she is looking forward to having a round table discussion with VDOT on the increased speed limit in Nelson, and noted that she has received a lot of questions from citizens wanting to know why it was increased.

D.   Lovingston Revitalization Program

Harrison Rue of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, along with Bill Mechnick, Land Planning and Design Associates, presented a power point presentation on the Lovingston Revitalization Program. Bill Wanner of the Commission and Tom Flink with Wiley & Wilson were also in attendance.

Mr. Rue stated that the Lovingston Revitalization Project was developed in conjunction with the Lovingston Safety Study.

During two public involvement workshops, a series of priority issues for the Lovingston area were identified under Transportation, Town Character and Livable Streets, and Parks and Recreation as follows:

Transportation

Transportation concerns included general and specific safety problems for the area immediate to Route 29 as well as the need for more defined pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Town Character and Livable Streets

The need to establish, promote and maintain the town/village character of Lovingston; and fostering street life in order to maintain the historic assets that make Lovingston a unique and enjoyable area.

Parks and Recreation

The importance of establishing parks and recreation amenities and protecting the rural character of the countryside surrounding the Lovingston area was conveyed.

Mr. Rue noted that the framework for the top initiatives has been established to accomplish the goals and suggested developing a Corridor Overlay District to guide future development in Lovingston. Mr. Rue stated that now they need to look at how the project will be funded.

Concluding the presentation, Supervisor Wood thanked Mr. Rue and Staff and the citizens for compiling the Plan, and noted that there are good ideas in the Transportation Plan.

Supervisor Bruguiere stated that nothing will happen until there is a commitment from VDOT.

Supervisor Brennan stated she would like to know what the funding sources are.

Supervisor Harris stated that the Project can happen and noted that Mr. Rue is making projects like the Lovingston Revitalization Project happen in other places.

Mr. Boger, Planning Director, stated that the Plan should be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan once it is completed.

Supervisor Harvey stated that the best way to get funding is to have a plan in place.

Agenda Item Number IV. Unfinished Business

A.   Code of the County of Nelson, Virginia
(1)   Consumer Utility Tax
(2)   Electricity Consumer Tax
(3)   Transient Occupancy Tax

Mr. Carter stated that the proposed changes to the Code of the County of Nelson, VA, would increase the rate of taxes for the local Consumer Utility, Electricity Consumer and Transient Occupancy Taxes. Mr. Carter also stated that the proposed change in tax rates for the Consumer Utility Tax also provides for the inclusion of mobile/cellular phones at a rate of twenty percent of the first $15 of service charge or $3 per month per phone. The combined increase in projected revenues from the Consumer Utility and Electricity Consumer Taxes is $354,024. The increase in projected revenues for the Transient Occupancy Tax is $58,217. The proposed change from two percent to five percent in the tax rate does not pertain to condominiums located in the Wintergreen Community, per a prohibition in state law contained in the 1994 Acts of Assembly.

Mr. Carter further stated that the Board of Supervisors (during the preparation of the FY 2005-2006 Budget) increased revenues from the change in the tax rates for the utility and electricity taxes to be utilized to support the local EMS programs, inclusive of the planned paid EMS initiative with the increase in revenues from the lodging tax being utilized (Pursuant to State Law 58.1-3819 through 58.1-3825) for the County’s tourism or travel in the locality.

Concluding comments from Mr. Carter, the Board of Supervisors offered comments as follows:

Supervisor Bruguiere stated that the proposed telephone tax will be a considerable increase to businesses.

Supervisor Brennan stated that she does not have a problem with the Consumer Utility Tax being increased for residential and/or mobile cellular, and noted that she is very much interested in paid EMS Personnel.

Supervisor Harvey concurred with Supervisor Bruguiere and stated that the telephone tax will have a big impact on his business. Mr. Harvey stated that he will support the whole package, but if the proposed fees are reduced, he will want to see the tax on businesses reduced also.

Supervisor Wood stated that Supervisors Brennan and Staff met with Wintergreen and they have requested the Board to consider a three percent increase as opposed to the five percent increase proposed for the Transient Occupancy Tax.

Supervisor Brennan reiterated Mr. Wood’s comments regarding Wintergreen’s request and stated that Wintergreen has requested to have a partnership with the County.

Supervisor Bruguiere stated that he does not think it is fair for Wintergreen not to pay taxes and other citizens are paying taxes.

Supervisor Harris stated that he supported the proposed increases if it is spread across the Board. Mr. Harris also stated that he has not seen any concrete information from Wintergreen, and noted that everything proposed is speculation and nothing concrete.

Supervisor Harvey stated that he does not have a problem with the recommendations by Supervisors Wood and Brennan.

Concluding additional discussion, the Board of Supervisors adopted the following Resolutions:

Re: Adoption of Resolution to Repeal Sections 11-101 Through 11-108 of Article IV, Chapter 11 of the Code of Nelson County and Enact New Provisions in Place Thereof

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

A RESOLUTION TO REPEAL SECTIONS 11-101 through 11-108 OF ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 11 OF THE CODE OF NELSON COUNTY and to ENACT NEW PROVISIONS IN PLACE THEREOF

BE IT RESOLVED that Article IV, Chapter 11 (Sections 11-101 through 11-108) is repealed, and in its place, the following enacted:

CHAPTER 11
ARTICLE IV. TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE TAX
Sec. 11-101.   Levy of Tax.
In accordance with Section 58.1-3812 of the Code of Virginia, there is hereby imposed a tax, at the rates set forth below, on each taxable purchase by a consumer of local telecommunication service if the consumer’s service address is located in Nelson County.

(a)       On each taxable purchase by a residential consumer of local telecommunication service, a tax equal to twenty (20) per cent of the monthly gross charge to the consumer, the total of which shall not exceed $3.00 per month.
(b)       On each taxable purchase by either a commercial or industrial consumer of local telecommunications service, a tax equal to twenty (20) per cent of the monthly gross charge to the consumer, the total of which shall not exceed $10.00 per month.
(c)   On each taxable purchase by a consumer of a local mobile
telecommunications service, a tax equal to ten (10) per cent of the monthly gross charge to the consumer, the total of which shall not exceed $3.00 per month.

Sec. 11-102.   Collection.
A service provider of local telecommunication services shall collect the tax from the consumer by adding the tax to the monthly gross charge for such services. The tax shall, when collected, be stated as a distinct item separate and apart from the monthly gross charge. Until the consumer pays the tax to the service provider, the tax shall constitute a debt of the consumer to Nelson County. If any consumer should refuse to pay the tax, the service provider shall notify the county. After the consumer pays the tax to the service provider, the taxes collected shall be deemed to be held in trust by the service provider until remitted to the Treasurer of Nelson County.

Sec. 11-103.   Remittance.
A service provider shall remit monthly to the Treasurer of Nelson County the amount of tax billed during the preceding month to consumers with a service address in the county.

Sec. 11-104.   Miscellaneous.
The tax imposed in this Article shall be subject to the provisions and limitations set forth in Virginia Code Section 58.1-3812.

Sec. 11-108.   Violations, penalties.
It shall be a Class 1 misdemeanor for any consumer to fail or refuse to pay the tax hereby levied, and for any officer, agent or employee of a service provider to violate any provision of this chapter. Each failure, refusal, or violation, and each day’s continuance thereof, shall constitute a separate offense hereunder.

This Enactment shall be effective with first statement of account rendered to the consumer after December 1, 2005.

Re: Adoption of Resolution to Amend and Re-Enact Section 11-173 of the Code of the Nelson County

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

A RESOLUTION TO AMEND AND RE-ENACT SECTION 11-173 OF THE CODE OF NELSON COUNTY

BE IT RESOLVED that Section 11-173 of the Code of Nelson County is amended and re-enacted as follows:

1.   In paragraph (a)(1) of Section 11-173, delete “two dollars ($2.00)” and substitute therefor “three dollars ($3.00).”

2.   In paragraph (a)(2) of Section 11-173, delete “two dollars ($2.00)” and substitute therefor “ten dollars ($10.00).”

3. In paragraph (a)(3) of Section 11-173, delete “two dollars ($2.00)” and
substitute therefor “ten dollars ($10.00).”

This amendment shall be effective with the first meter reading after September 1, 2005.

Re: Adoption of Resolution to Amend and Re-Enact Section 11-131 of the Code of Nelson County

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

A RESOLUTION TO AMEND and RE-ENACT SECTION 11-131 of the CODE OF NELSON COUNTY

BE IT RESOLVED that Section 11-131 of the Code of Nelson County is amended and re-enacted as follows:

Section 11-131.   Levy of tax.

(a) There is hereby imposed upon every transient occupying hotels, motels,
boarding houses, travel campgrounds, and other similar facilities offering guest rooms rented for occupancy for fewer than thirty consecutive days a tax equivalent to three (3) per cent of the amount charged for such lodging.

(Ref.: Va. Code §58.1-3819)

(b) There is hereby imposed on every transient occupying condominiums,
apartments, townhouse or like buildings when rooms or units in such buildings are rented for occupancy for fewer than thirty consecutive days a tax equivalent to two (2) per cent of the amount charged for such lodging.

(Ref.: Va. Code §58.1-3821)

This amendment shall be effective September 1, 2005.

Re: Authorization to County Administrator Stephen A. Carter to Adjust the Effective Dates of the Foregoing Resolutions to Allow for Proper Notification

On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Harvey voting yes,Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby authorize County Administrator Stephen A. Carter to adjust the effective dates of the foregoing Resolutions to allow for proper notification.

B.   GIS Program (Staff)

Susan Rorrer, E911 Coordinator, presented a power point presentation on Nelson County’s proposed GIS Project. Ms. Rorrer stated that the County will issue an RFP for services that will include:
•   Parcel conversion;
•   GIS setup and maintenance services;
•   Development of a web based GIS application that will be accessible to staff and citizens; and
•   Hosting services for web application.

Ms. Rorrer provided a copy of Albemarle County’s RFP to provide information on the general scope of the parcel conversion and GIS setup portion of the project. A vendor will be selected based on responses to the RFP.

Additionally, Ms. Rorrer showed how to access information from the system set up in Bedford County. MSAG established the website for Bedford.

Supervisor Wood stated that he has concerns in listing certain information, and noted it is a safety concern because of terrorists. Mr. Wood stated that internally it is good, but he is concerned about people accessing information outside of the office.

Concluding Ms. Rorrer’s presentation, Mr. Carter stated that Staff will present a proposed job description at the August 9th Meeting.

Agenda Item Number V. New Business

A.   VPSA Bond Refinance

Mr. Carter reported that the Virginia Public Service Authority has refunded certain bonds and the County will have a net savings of $286,255.34. Mr. Carter recommended designating the funds to the School Capital Project.

Concluding discussion, on a motion by Ms. Brennan, seconded by Mr. Bruguiere, with Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the Board of Supervisors passed the following Resolution:

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE BY THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY OF ITS SCHOOL FINANCING BONDS (1997 RESOLUTION) REFUNDING
SERIES 2003 D, A PORTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF WHICH REFUNDED THE COUNTY OF NELSON GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS, 1992 SERIES A, 1993 SERIES A AND REFUNDING SERIES 1994 A; AND AUTHORIZING ANY OTHER ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES CONTEMPLATED HEREBY

WHEREAS, the Virginia Public School Authority (the “Authority”) pursuant to bond resolution adopted on August 13, 1987, as amended and supplemented (the “1987 Resolution”) and (ii) a bond resolution adopted on October 23, 1997, as amended, restated and supplemented (the “1997 Resolution”) issued bonds (respectively, the “1987 Resolution Bonds” and the “1997 Resolution Bonds”) for the purpose of purchasing general obligation school bonds of certain cities and counties within the Commonwealth of Virginia;

WHEREAS, the Authority used a portion of the proceeds of certain 1987 Resolution Bonds to purchase certain duly authorized and issued general obligation school bonds of the County of Nelson, Virginia (the “County”) designated the County of Nelson General Obligation School Bond, Series 1990A (“Prior Local School Bonds”);

WHEREAS, the Authority has issued under the 1987 Resolution several series of 1987 Resolution Bonds designated as “School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1992 Series B” (the “Series 1992 B Bonds”), “School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1993 Series A” (the “Series 1993 A Bonds”) and “School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1993 Refunding Series B” (the “Series 1993 B Bonds”);

WHEREAS, the Authority refunded certain 1987 Resolution Bonds with a portion of the proceeds of its Series 1993 B Bonds and, in connection therewith, the County exchanged its Prior Local School Bonds with a duly authorized and issued general obligation school bond designated the County of Nelson General Obligation School Bond, Refunding Series 1994 A (the “1994 A Local School Bond”);

WHEREAS, the Authority used a portion of the proceeds of the Series 1992 B Bonds and Series 1993 A Bonds to purchase certain duly authorized and issued general obligation school bonds of the County designated the County of Nelson General Obligation School Bonds, 1992 Series A and 1993 Series A (together with the 1994 A Local School Bond, the “Local School Bonds”);
WHEREAS, the Authority refunded its Series 1992 B Bonds, Series 1993 A Bonds and Series 1993 B Bonds (“Refunded Bonds”) with a portion of the proceeds of its Virginia Public School Authority School Financing Bonds (1997 Resolution) Refunding Series 2003 D (the “Refunding Bonds”) issued pursuant to the 1997 Resolution;

WHEREAS, the Authority in refunding the Refunded Bonds has pledged the Local School Bonds for the benefit of the holders of bonds issued under its 1997 Resolution;

WHEREAS, the Authority is required to assist the underwriters (the “Underwriters”) of the Refunding Bonds with their duty to comply with Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 15c2-12 (the “Rule”);
WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the County to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement in order for the Authority to assist the Underwriters in complying with the Rule, and;

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Nelson, Virginia considers it to be advisable for the County to fulfill the request of the Authority to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF NELSON, VIRGINIA:

Continuing Disclosure Agreement.
The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator and such officer or officers as they may designate are hereby authorized to enter into a Continuing Disclosure Agreement in the form attached as Appendix A hereto, containing such covenants as may be necessary in order for compliance with the provisions of the Rule, and any other documents the Authority deems necessary to comply with the SEC rules and any Internal Revenue Service rules and regulations regarding maintaining the tax-exempt status of the bonds.

Use of Proceeds Certificate.
The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator and such officer or officers as they may designate are hereby authorized to enter into a Use of Proceeds Certificate in the form attached as Appendix B hereto, containing such covenants as may be necessary in order for compliance with any Internal Revenue Service rules and regulations regarding maintaining the tax-exempt status of the bonds.

Further Actions.
The members of the Board and all officers, employees and agents of the County are hereby authorized to take such action as they or any one of them may consider necessary or desirable in connection with the execution and delivery of the Continuing Disclosure Agreement and the Use of Proceeds Certificate and maintaining the tax-exempt status of the bonds, and any such action previously taken is hereby ratified and confirmed.
Effective Date.

This resolution shall take effect immediately.
                                *   *   *   *

Series 2003 D Local Issuer: County of Nelson

CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

[This Continuing Disclosure Agreement will impose obligations on the
Local Issuer if and only if the Local Issuer is or has become and
remains a “Material Obligated Person”, as defined below]

This Continuing Disclosure Agreement (the “Disclosure Agreement”) is executed and delivered by the undersigned local issuer (the “Local Issuer”) in connection with the issuance by the Virginia Public School Authority (the “Authority”) of $286,670,000 aggregate principal amount of its School Financing Bonds (1997 Resolution) Refunding Series 2003 D (the “Series 2003 D Bonds”) pursuant to the provisions of a bond resolution (the “1997 Resolution”) adopted on October 23, 1997, as amended and restated. The Series 2003 D Bonds and all other parity bonds heretofore or hereafter issued under the 1997 Resolution are collectively called the “Bonds”. A portion of the proceeds of the Series 2003 D Bonds are being used by the Authority to provide funds to refund in advance of their maturity certain bonds of the Authority. The proceeds of the refunded bonds were used to purchase general obligation school bonds (the “Transferred Local School Bonds”) issued by certain Virginia counties and cities (the “Transferred Local School Bond Issuers”) that have used the proceeds thereof for capital projects for public schools.

   SECTION 1. Purpose of the Disclosure Agreement. This Disclosure Agreement is being executed and delivered by the Local Issuer for the benefit of the holders of the Series 2003 D Bonds and in order to assist the Participating Underwriters (defined below) in complying with the Rule (defined below). The Local Issuer acknowledges that it is undertaking primary responsibility for any reports, notices or disclosures that may be required under this Agreement.

   SECTION 2. Definitions.   In addition to the definitions set forth in the 1997 Resolution, which apply to any capitalized term used in this Disclosure Agreement unless otherwise defined in this Section, the following capitalized terms shall have the following meanings:

   “Annual Report” shall mean any Annual Report provided by the Local Issuer pursuant to, and as described in, Sections 3 and 4 of this Disclosure Agreement.

   “Dissemination Agent” shall mean the Local Issuer, acting in its capacity as Dissemination Agent hereunder, or any successor Dissemination Agent designated in writing by such Local Issuer and which has filed with such Local Issuer a written acceptance of such designation.

   “Filing Date” shall have the meaning given to such term in Section 3(a) hereof.

   “Fiscal Year” shall mean the twelve-month period at the end of which financial position and results of operations are determined. Currently, the Local Issuer’s Fiscal Year begins July 1 and continues through June 30 of the next calendar year.
July 12, 2005

   “holder” shall mean, for purposes of this Disclosure Agreement, any person who is a record owner or beneficial owner of a Series 2003 D Bond.

   “Listed Events” shall mean any of the events listed in subsection 5(b)(5)(i)(C) of the Rule.

   “local school bonds” shall mean any of the Local School Bonds and any other bonds of the Local Issuer pledged as security for Bonds issued under the Authority’s 1997 Resolution.

   “Material Obligated Person” (or “MOP”) shall mean the Local Issuer if it has local school bonds outstanding in an aggregate principal amount that exceeds 10% of the aggregate principal amount of all outstanding Bonds of the Authority.

   “National Repository” shall mean any Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information Repository for purposes of the Rule.

   “Participating Underwriter” shall mean any of the original underwriters of the Authority’s Series 2003 D Bonds required to comply with the Rule in connection with the offering of such Bonds.

   “Repository” shall mean each National Repository and each State Repository.

   “Rule” shall mean Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time.

   “State Repository” shall mean any public or private depository or entity designated by the State as a state depository for the purpose of the Rule. As of the date of this Agreement, there is no State Repository.

SECTION 3. Provision of Annual Reports.

(a)   The Local Issuer shall, or shall cause the Dissemination Agent to, provide to each Repository an Annual Report which is consistent with the requirements of Section 4 of this Disclosure Agreement. Such Annual Report shall be filed on a date (the “Filing Date”) that is not later than 12 months after the end of any Fiscal Year (commencing with its Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2005) as of the end of which such Local Issuer was a MOP, unless as of the Filing Date the Local Issuer is no longer a MOP. Not later than ten (10) days prior to the Filing Date, the Local Issuer shall provide the Annual Report to the Dissemination Agent (if applicable) and shall provide copies to the Authority. In each case, the Annual Report (i) may be submitted as a single document or as separate documents comprising a package, (ii) may cross-reference other information as provided in Section 4 of this Disclosure Agreement and (iii) shall include the Local Issuer’s audited financial statements prepared in accordance with applicable State law or, if audited financial statements are not available, such unaudited financial statements as may be required by the Rule. In any event, audited financial statements of such Local Issuer must be submitted, if and when available, together with or separately from the Annual Report.

(b)   If the Local Issuer is unable to provide an Annual Report to the Repositories by the date required in subsection (a), the Local Issuer shall send a notice to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and any State Repository in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

SECTION 4. Content of Annual Reports. Except as otherwise agreed, any Annual Report required to be filed hereunder shall contain or incorporate by reference, at a minimum, annual financial information relating to the Local Issuer, including operating data,

(i)   updating such information relating to the Local Issuer as shall have been included or cross-referenced in the Official Statement of the Authority describing the Authority’s Series 2003 D Bonds or

(ii) if there is no such information described in clause (i), updating such information relating to the Local Issuer as shall have been included or cross-referenced in any comparable disclosure document of the Local Issuer relating to its tax-supported obligations or
(iii) if there is no such information described in clause (i) or (ii) above, initially setting forth and then updating the information referred to in Exhibit B as it relates to the Local Issuer, all with a view toward assisting Participating Underwriters in complying with the Rule.

Any or all of such information may be incorporated by reference from other documents, including official statements of securities issues with respect to which the Local Issuer is an “obligated person” (within the meaning of the Rule), which have been filed with each of the Repositories or the Securities and Exchange Commission. If the
document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.   The Local Issuer shall clearly identify each such other document so incorporated by reference.

SECTION 5. Reporting of Listed Events. Whenever the Local Issuer is a Material Obligated Person required to file Annual Reports pursuant to Section 3(a) hereof and obtains knowledge of the occurrence of a Listed Event, and if such Local Issuer has determined that knowledge of the occurrence of a Listed Event with respect to its local school bonds would be material, such Local Issuer shall promptly file a notice of such occurrence with each National Repository or the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and each State Repository, if any, with a copy to the Authority.

SECTION 6. Alternative Filing. The Local Issuer may, in lieu of filing with the Repositories and each State Repository the Annual Reports and other notices referred to in Sections 3(a), 3(b) and 5, make such filings with Disclosure USA, the central post office of the Municipal Advisory Council of Texas.

SECTION 7. Termination of Reporting Obligation.  The Local Issuer’s obligations under this Disclosure Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier to occur of the legal defeasance or final retirement of all the Transferred Local School Bonds.

SECTION 8. Dissemination Agent. The Local Issuer may, from time to time, appoint or engage a Dissemination Agent to assist it in carrying out its obligations under this Disclosure Agreement and may discharge any such Agent, with or without appointing a successor Dissemination Agent. The Local Issuer shall advise the Authority of any such appointment or discharge. If at any time there is not any other designated Dissemination Agent, the Local Issuer shall be the Dissemination Agent.
July 12, 2005

SECTION 9. Amendment. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Disclosure Agreement, the Local Issuer may amend this Disclosure Agreement, if such amendment has been approved in writing by the Authority and is supported by an opinion of independent counsel, acceptable to the Authority, with expertise in federal securities laws, to the effect that such amendment is permitted or required by the Rule.

SECTION 10. Additional Information. Nothing in this Disclosure Agreement shall be deemed to prevent the Local Issuer from disseminating any other information, using the means of dissemination set forth in this Disclosure Agreement or any other means of communication, or including any other information in any Annual Report or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event, in addition to that which is required by this Disclosure Agreement. If the Local Issuer chooses to include any information in any Annual Report or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event, in addition to that which is specifically required by this Disclosure Agreement, such Local Issuer shall have no obligation under this Agreement to update such information or include it in any future Annual Report or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event.

SECTION 11. Default. Any person referred to in Section 12 (other than the Local Issuer) may take such action as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the Local Issuer to file its Annual Report or to give notice of a Listed Event. The Authority may, and the holders of not less than a majority in aggregate principal amount of Bonds outstanding may, take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to challenge the adequacy of any information provided pursuant to this Disclosure Agreement, or to enforce any other obligation of the Local Issuer hereunder. A default under this Disclosure Agreement shall not be deemed an event of default under the applicable resolution or bonds of the Local Issuer, and the sole remedy under this Disclosure Agreement in the event of any failure of the Local Issuer to comply herewith shall be an action to compel performance. Nothing in this provision shall be deemed to restrict the rights or remedies of any holder pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, or other applicable laws.

SECTION 12. Beneficiaries. This Disclosure Agreement shall inure solely to the benefit of the Authority, the Local Issuer, the Participating Underwriters, and holders from time to time of the Authority’s Bonds, and shall create no rights in any other person or entity.

SECTION 13. Counterparts. This Disclosure Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.

EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF FAILURE TO FILE ANNUAL REPORT [AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS]

Re: VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY SCHOOL FINANCING BONDS (1997 Resolution)
Refunding Series 2003 D
CUSIP Numbers: 92817F R57 -92817F V52
Dated: December 11, 2003
Name of Local Issuer: County of Nelson

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the County of Nelson has not provided an Annual Report as required by Section 3(a) of the Continuing Disclosure Agreement, which was entered into in connection with the above-named bonds issued pursuant to that certain Series Resolution adopted on November 13, 2003, by the Board of Commissioners of the Virginia Public School Authority, the proceeds of which were used to refund certain School Bonds of the County of Nelson. [The County of Nelson anticipates that the Annual Report will be filed by _____________.] The County of Nelson is a material “obligated person” within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, with respect to the above-named bonds of the Authority.

Dated: _______________

COUNTY OF NELSON
By_____________________________
                                                                                                                                          EXHIBIT B
CONTENT OF ANNUAL REPORT

Description of the Local Issuer. A description of the Local Issuer including a summary of its form of government, budgetary processes and its management and officers.

Debt. A description of the terms of the Local Issuer’s outstanding tax-supported and other debt including a historical summary of outstanding tax-supported debt; a summary of authorized but unissued tax-supported debt; a summary of legal debt margin; a summary of overlapping debt; and a summary of annual debt service on outstanding tax-supported debt as of the end of the preceding fiscal year. The Annual Report should also include (to the extent not shown in the latest audited financial statements) a description of contingent obligations as well as pension plans administered by the Local Issuer and any unfunded pension liabilities.

Financial Data. Financial information respecting the Local Issuer including a description of revenues and expenditures for its major funds and a summary of its tax policy, structure and collections as of the end of the preceding fiscal year.

Capital Improvement Plan. A summary of the Local Issuer’s capital improvement plan.

Demographic, Economic and Supplemental Information. A summary of the Local Issuer’s demographic and economic characteristics such as population, income, employment, and public school enrollment and infrastructure data as of the end of the preceding fiscal year. The Annual Report should also include a description of material litigation pending against the Local Issuer.

USE OF PROCEEDS CERTIFICATE
This certificate is provided by the County of Nelson (the “County”) to the Virginia Public School Authority (the “Issuer”) in connection with the distribution by the Issuer to the County of an allocable share of the net savings realized by the Issuer (the “Distribution”) through the issuance of its $286,670,000 School Financing Bonds (1997 Resolution) Refunding Series 2003 D (the “Bonds”).

We understand that the proceeds of the Bonds were used to refund portions of the Issuer’s (i) $293,160,000 School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1993 Refunding Series B, dated May 1, 1993 (the “VPSA Refunding Bonds”) and (ii) (a) $60,460,000 School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1992 Series B, dated December 1, 1992 (the “1987 Resolution 1992 B Bonds”) and (b) $45,710,000 School Financing Bonds (1987 Resolution) 1993 Series A, dated April 1, 1993 (the “1987 Resolution 1993 A Bonds” and, together with the 1987 Resolution 1992 B Bonds, the “VPSA New Money Bonds”).
A portion of the proceeds of the VPSA Refunding Bonds was used to refinance the purchase of certain of the County’s Bonds (the “Prior County Bonds”).

A portion of the proceeds of the VPSA New Money Bonds was used to purchase the County’s bonds respectively issued on December 17, 1992 (the “1992 A County Bonds”) and April 29, 1993 (the “1993 A County Bonds” and, together with the 1992 A County Bonds, the “County New Money Bonds”).
In connection with issuance of the VPSA Refunding Bonds, the County received a Lump Sum Cash Payment, representing its allocable share of the net savings realized by the Issuer, and the Prior County Bonds. In exchange therefor, the County issued a duly authorized County bond dated December 15, 2003 (the “1993 County Bond” and, together with the Prior County Bonds and County New Money Bonds, the “County Bonds”). Concurrently with the issuance of the 1993 County Bond, the County executed a General Certificate (the “General Certificate”) that recognized that the 1993 County Bond was issued to refund the Prior County Bonds, the proceeds of which were used to finance certain capital school projects of the County (“Prior School Projects”), that the Lump Sum Cash Payment would be used to finance certain capital school projects of the County (the “1993 School Projects”) and that the exclusion from gross income of interest on the VPSA Bonds was based in part on the use of proceeds of the County Bonds and the Prior School Projects and 1993 School Projects financed or refinanced by such proceeds by the County. Consequently, the General Certificate contained certain representations and covenants of the County regarding the use of the proceeds of the County Bonds and the Projects.

In connection with the issuance of the VPSA New Money Bonds and each series of County New Money Bonds purchased therewith, the County executed a Use of Proceeds Certificate (the “Use of Proceeds Certificate”) that recognized that the 1992 A County Bonds were purchased by the Issuer with the proceeds of the 1987 Resolution 1992 B bonds, that the 1993 A County Bonds were purchased by the Issuer with the proceeds of the 1987 Resolution 1993 A Bonds and that the exclusion from gross income of interest on the respective VPSA New Money Bonds was based in part on the use of proceeds of the respective series of County New Money Bonds and the school projects financed by such proceeds (the “New Money School Projects” and, together with the Prior School Projects and 1993 School Projects, the “Projects”) by the County. Consequently, each Use of Proceeds Certificate contained certain representations and covenants of the County regarding the use of the proceeds of each series of the County New Money Bonds and the New Money School Projects.

The County recognizes that the exclusion from gross income of interest on the Bonds is based in part on the representations contained in the General Certificate and the respective Use of Proceeds Certificate and contingent on the continuing compliance by the County with the covenants contained in the General Certificate and respective Use of Proceeds Certificate.

Accordingly, the County certifies that it has reviewed the representations set forth in the General Certificate and respective Use of Proceeds Certificate with respect to the School Projects (the “UPC Representations”) and the use of the School Projects and that it has discussed with the School Board of the County (the “School Board”) their use of the Projects. Based on such review and discussions, the County hereby certifies that the UPC Representations continue to be true and correct. Such provisions are hereby incorporated by reference into this certificate and shall be treated as representations made by the County as if set forth herein. Furthermore, the County has discussed the UPC Representations with the School Board and neither the County nor the School Board will take any action that is inconsistent with such UPC Representations.

The County further covenants that:
it shall use the Distribution to pay for the cost of public school capital purposes within six months of the date hereof and that such public school capital purposes shall be used in a manner consistent with the UPC Representations (references to school projects shall hereinafter include the public school capital purposes acquired with the Distribution);
it shall not sell or otherwise dispose of the Projects prior to the final maturity date of the Bonds of August 1, 2019 except as shall be permitted in the opinion of an attorney or firm of attorneys, acceptable to the Issuer, nationally recognized as experienced with respect to matters pertaining to the exclusion from gross income for federal income tax purposes of interest on obligations of States and political subdivisions;
it shall not knowingly take any action which will, or fail to take any action which failure will, cause the interest on the Bonds to become includable in the gross income of the owners of the Bonds for federal income tax purposes pursuant to the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the regulations promulgated thereunder in effect on the date of original issuance of the Bonds; and in furtherance of its obligations under its County Bonds, it shall obtain the same covenants contained in subparagraph (a), (b) and (c) above from the School Board with respect to the Projects.

Agenda Item Number VI. Reports, Appointments, Directives, and Correspondences
A. Board of Supervisors Committee Reports

(1) Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
Supervisor Brennan stated that she did not attend the last Planning District Commission Meeting, and noted that Planning Director, Fred Boger, will provide the report. Mr. Boger stated that election of officers for the Chair and Vice Chair were held; a Plan on the Homeless Task Force was presented; discussion on Lake Monticello; discussion on Bylaws for Commission; the relocation of the Planning District Commission’s Office on August 1st; and a review of the proposed site for the new Gladstone Post Office.

(2)   Report by Supervisor Brennan
Supervisor Brennan reported on the joint School Board/Board of Supervisors’ Breakfast meeting and noted that only she and Cindy Lachance met. Ms. Brennan noted that discussion included personnel issues; the War Memorial; reviewing new software to track graduation rates; and the Department of Defense will ask for names of students for recruitment (parents can opt not to participate).

(3)   Report by County Administrator Carter
A. Solid Waste Site
Mr. Carter reported on the status of the Solid Waste Site proposed for Shipman and Arrington, and noted that
Massie Saunders has met with VDOT and is negotiating with property owners.

B.   Courthouse Project
Mr. Carter reported that the Courthouse Renovation Committee will be meeting Friday and Architect Randy Vaughan of Wiley & Wilson will introduce Scheme Number 6. Mr. Carter also reported that he has met with Ms. Jane Lingo who owns property on the East side of the Courthouse and she is considering selling/conveying property to the County.

C.   Ryan School Project
Mr. Carter reported that the Project is moving full speed ahead and should be completed by the end of the year.

D.   Piney River Project III
Mr. Carter reported that surveys have been completed in Piney River and noted that 85 out of 142 households have responded.

E.   Nellysford Project
Mr. Carter reported that letters have been sent out regarding the Board’s approval of the Nellysford Project, but no responses have been received.

F.   Lovingston Historical Project
Mr. Carter reported that the Lovingston Historical Project is proceeding.

G.   Schuyler Historical Project
Mr. Carter reported that the Schuyler Historical Project is proceeding.

H.   Region 2000
Mr. Carter reported that Region 2000 has scheduled a meeting for August.

I. Rockfish Valley Community Center
Mr. Carter reported that the Center is requesting a lease extension, and noted that the work on the roof repair has started.

J.   Nelson County Service Authority
Mr. Carter reported that a Meeting will be scheduled with County Attorney, Phil Payne, and Service Authority Attorney, Tom Berry, regarding a grant the County has received to replace two wells near the Tye River Truck Stop; and the Authority’s request to take over the well at the old Middle School.

K.   Animal Control
Mr. Carter reported that one Animal Control Officer is no longer with the County.

L.   911 Dispatchers
Mr. Carter reported that Jamie Oliver and John Atkins have been promoted to the senior dispatchers.

M.   GIS
Mr. Carter noted as stated by Susan Rorrer in her presentation, the County is preparing an RFP for the GIS Program.

N.   War Memorial
Mr. Carter stated that he met with the Consultant and Messrs. Shade and Simpson regarding the War Memorial at the High School, and discussed possibly moving the Memorial to the front of the School.
Supervisor Brennan stated she would like to have the Memorial moved to the Courthouse. Supervisor Bruguiere stated that he would like the Memorial to stay at the War Memorial Field.

O.   Gladstone Senior Center
Mr. Carter stated that Staff will follow up on the roof repairs at the Gladstone Senior Center.

P.   Nelson Heritage Center
Mr. Carter stated that Maintenance Supervisor, Paul Truslow, recently visited the Center and noted the doors were locked. Mr. Carter also stated that the boiler inspection is scheduled sometime in December, but noted Mr. Truslow is checking to see if the inspection can be done sooner.

B. Appointments
Ms. Carter presented vacancies on Boards, etc., and the following action was taken:
Re: Appointment of Edward L. Rothgeb to the Nelson County Service Authority
On a motion by Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Bruguiere, with Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby appoint Edward L. Rothgeb to an unexpired term on the Nelson County Service Authority, effective immediately to expire June 30, 2008.
Re: Appointment of James E. Hall to the Thomas Jefferson Area Community

Criminal Justice Board
On a motion by Mr. Bruguiere, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby appoint James E. Hall to the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board to a four year term, effective July 1, 2005 to expire June 30, 2008.

Additionally, Ms. Carter reported that Alphonso Taylor has spoken with Supervisor Harris and has called the County Administrator’s Office expressing an interest in the vacancy created by Mr. Spencer on the Economic Development Authority. Mr. Carter stated that he has sent a letter to Mr. Spencer regarding the Board’s Procedure for absentees.
The Board directed that the position be advertised.

C. Board Directives
Supervisor Wood stated that the Millenium Group is interested in a long term lease with the County; reported that the Building Association is planning to have a report back to the Board by next month regarding the Building Inspector’s Office; and discussed concerns expressed if the County approved a leash law . Mr. Carter stated that County Attorney Payne is looking at available options.

Supervisor Bruguiere expressed concern regarding what level of noise is acceptable for barking dogs.

D. Correspondences
Mr. Carter provided copies of correspondences from VDOT regarding the Variety Mills Road; and from Rockingham County regarding the Local Real Property Taxing Authority.

Agenda Item Number VII. Closed Meeting
A Closed Meeting was not needed.

Agenda Item Number VIII. Recess and Reconvene for Evening Session
The Board of Supervisors recessed the Afternoon Session at 5:45 p.m., and reconvened the Evening Session at 7:30 p.m.

Agenda Item Number IX. Public Hearings
A.   Final Subdivision: Whitehurst Property
Fred Boger, Planning Director, provided an overview of the Final Subdivision for the William Whitehurst Subdivision (for the division of his 195 acre tract into seven lots). The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the final subdivision plat as submitted. Mr. Boger read a letter from VDOT stating that the Entrance Permit was approved.
Applicant William Whitehurst was present.

Supervisor Wood opened the Public Hearing.
There being no comments from the audience, Supervisor Wood closed the Public Hearing.

Re: Approval of Final Subdivision: William Whitehurst Property
On a motion by Ms. Brennan, seconded by Mr. Harris, with Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the Final Subdivision Plat dated March 29, 2005, revised June 8, 2005 for the William Whitehurst Property (for the division of his 195 acre tract into seven lots.)

B.   Special Use Permit #2005-002: Clayton Dale Evans
Mr. Boger reported that Clayton Dale Evans has submitted a petition for a Special Use Permit to place a double wide manufactured dwelling on a 1.29 acre parcel of land located on Lonesome Pine Road, Shipman (Route 649), Tax Map Number 69-A, Parcel 48. Mr. Boger stated that Special Use Permits have been issued for four manufactured homes in the immediate vicinity.
The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit as submitted.

Supervisor Wood opened the Public Hearing. There being no comments from the audience, Mr. Wood closed the Public Hearing.

The Board passed the following Resolution approving the Special Use Permit:
Re: Approval of Special Use Permit Number 2005-002 for Clayton Dale Evans
On a motion by Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Bruguiere, with Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve Special Use Permit Number 2005-002 for Clayton Dale Evans in order to locate a Manufactured Home on property identified as Tax Map Number 69-A, Parcel 48.

C.   Special Use Permit Number 2005-001: High Country Associates, L.L.C.
Supervisor Harvey provided a letter from Attorney General Judith Williams Jagdmann stating that “It is my opinion that you may vote on the High Country Associates’ conditional rezoning application even though your wife maintains her real estate license through Wintergreen because she does not have any financial interest in Wintergreen.” Therefore, Mr. Harvey stated that he will vote on the High Country Associates’ Special Use Rezoning Application.

Mr. Boger reported that High Country Associates, L.L.C., represented by Attorney, Stuart Sadler, is requesting a Special Use Permit to move development rights from Single Family to Mixed Use in the Valley Village area designated on the Wintergreen Master Plan. HCA is asking to transfer 72 development rights from MR, multifamily, and 78 development rights from SR, single family to Village Center-Mixed Use. The number of units requested to be moved is 150. The property is identified on the application as Tax Map 22-A, Parcel 9.

On December 14, 2004, the Master Plan was amended as part of a rezoning petition to assign 175 residential units to the subject property exclusively for the development of a senior residential care facility. The applicant further proffered that the 175 units assigned to the development of senior housing shall be added on the basis of one additional unit added to the Master Plan for each additional senior units developed, up to a total addition to the Master Plan of 175 units for the senior area. The total number of residential units that would be available for this area would be 325.

Mr. Boger stated that at the present time, Staff is aware of only one developer who is interested in developing a senior housing project and that is Virginia Taboub. Ms. Taboub has indicated she would need only 128 units. The remaining units could be used by another developer for senior housing and some high density housing.

The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the Permit based on the following:
•   Lack of a clear enough schematic for Planning Commission to make a conscientious decision;
•   The difference in the number of development units, 150 or 175;
•   The potential for abandoning the original approval which includes plans for assisted living; and
•   Lack of a schematic or preliminary plan with the application, as required by Article 14 of the Zoning Ordinance.

Concluding Mr. Boger’s report, Mr. Sadler, representing HCA, L.L.C., showed a drawing of the proposed area and stated that the area consists of approximately thirty-five acres near the Stoney Creek Golf Course. The area has no residential development rights except the 175 dedicated to senior housing. The original application was for 240, but Mr. Sadler noted that only 120 are needed for senior housing and no residential development rights are on the 18 acre parcel. Mr. Sadler stated that HCA is planning to do smaller, clustered homes on the 18 acre parcel, pending the outcome of the litigation.

Supervisor Brennan questioned who will be responsible for architectural review of the proposed plan? Mr. Sadler stated that the development of the resort is governed under the General Covenants as opposed to WPOA Covenants

Supervisor Bruguiere questioned if there would be any benefits to the property owners living in Stoney Creek? Mr. Sadler stated that each property developed contributes a one-time and annual fee to WPOA.
Supervisor Wood stated that the schematic plan submitted is the same as presented previously, but noted that the plans have changed. Mr. Sadler stated that the plan has changed and that the developer will not have a definite plan, but a concept of what they are proposing.

Supervisor Wood opened the Public Hearing.
Jan Burland, Nellysford, stated that the 150 units is a net increase to the Master Plan. Ms. Burland stated that the drawing presented was created by Virginia Taboub and her architect for 240 units for senior housing, and noted that Ms. Tabout has completely redone her drawing and the drawing presented initially is no longer valid. Ms. Burland recommended the Board allow the lawsuit to be completed before voting on the request. Ms. Burland stated that the proposal presented by HCA is far too speculative.
Stuart Harvey, Wintergreen, recommended the Board allow WPOA to make its own decision as to who owns the remaining development rights before the county approves something that the developer does not own.
Virginia Taboub stated that she cannot develop the senior housing without 120 residential development rights.
Craig Cooper, Stoney Creek, spoke in opposition to the request and stated that the public needs to be told what is being proposed. Mr. Cooper stated that the Board and public deserve to have a sketch and plan for the project. Mr. Cooper recommended the Board accept the Planning Commission’s vote of denial.
Ron Hudleston, Stoney Creek, stated he would like to see where the development rights are coming from. Mr. Hudleston stated that High Country is proposing to take his development rights without compensation.
Steve Raynor, Attorney representing WPOA, stated that HCA no longer has the authority to seek an amendment to the Master Plan, and can not extend the development rights. Mr. Raynor stated that HCA is only one of three powers (WPOA, WPI, and HCA), and noted that there is no developer. Mr. Raynor stated that WPOA supports the development of senior housing, but opposes the additional dwelling units on 18 acres if HCA is successful in current litigation. Mr. Rayner stated that WPOA is asking that HCA draw up reasonable plans and bring back to the Board for its consideration.
Don Burland, Nellysford, stated that the proposal will change the character of Stoney Creek, and recommended the Board request HCA to come back with a Plan outlining what they are proposing.
David Juergens, Nellysford, recommended that the Board deny HCA’s request pending completion of the Study on the future of Nellysford and the 151 corridor.
Joe Steel, Stoney Creek, Chair of the Ad Hoc Senior Issues Group, spoke in support of the request and stated that Mr. Boger has indicated that a concept plan is all that is needed at this time and noted that a final plan will be submitted for the County’s approval. Mr. Steel stated that Ms. Taboub is developing the senior housing units not HCA.
Concluding comments from the public, Mr. Wood closed the Public Hearing.

Stuart Sadler responded to some of the comments offered and stated that the Zoning Ordinance does not require a final plan at this time, and noted that property rights are a function of zoning. Mr. Sadler stated that the original covenants for Wintergreen were written in 1974 and noted that the Master Plan has been amended. Mr. Sadler stated that WPOA does not have any authority regarding the Master Plan. Mr. Sadler further stated that HCA is not proposing to make changes to the Master Plan, but doing what is allowed in the Plan.
Concluding additional discussion, Mr. Wood recommended that the proposal be deferred in order to give County Attorney Payne and Staff to further review the proposal. Mr. Payne stated he would need a preliminary schematic plan from the applicant for further review.
Supervisor Harvey questioned if the request needed to go back through the whole process? Mr. Payne stated that he does not feel it has to go back unless the Board voted no and the application started over.
Supervisor Brennan stated that she is in support of senior housing and supported deferral of the request. Ms. Brennan recommended Staff provide a summary of unanswered questions at the next regular Meeting on August 9th.
Mr. Payne recommended HCA provide a preliminary schematic plan for review prior to the August 9th Meeting.

The Board of Supervisors deferred the request until the August 9th Meeting.

D.   Rezoning #2005-002: Curtis Bruguiere
Supervisor Bruguiere stated that (whether he has a conflict or not) it is perceived he has a conflict and therefore he will abstain from discussing or voting on the request by Curtis Bruguiere. Mr. Bruguiere noted that Curtis Bruguiere is his brother.

Fred Boger, Planning Director, stated that Curtis Bruguiere is requesting to rezone approximately 1.88 acres of land located at 1897 and 1889, Avon Road, from R-1 Residential, R-1, to Business, B-1 (Conditional), to permit use of a small area for his real estate office. Mr. Boger stated that the site is approximately 1.88 acres in size and is located at a major cross road intersection on Route 151. The uses that could be developed on this site could have a significant impact on traffic using it, especially if gasoline sales were permitted. Therefore, to protect the health and safety of people using this major intersection from more intense development and traffic, Mr. Boger stated that the rezoning request must be denied.
As part of the rezoning petition, the following proffer was submitted:

“As owners of Anderson’s Grocery, Curtis S. and Carolyn B. Bruguiere request that the property shown as Tax Map 7-A-R, being 1.88 acres, be rezoned from R-1 to B-1 Conditional. As owners of this property we voluntarily proffer all uses except 8-1-2 and 8-1-5. The reason for this request is to allow for the use of the space attached to the building as a real estate office and also to bring the use of the Anderson’s Grocery into compliance.”

On May 25, 2005, Mr. and Mrs. Bruguiere submitted the following revised proffer: “We hereby voluntarily proffer that the use of the subject property of this application shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions as set forth below:
(1)   The use of the existing building at 1897 Avon Road, commonly referred to as Anderson’s Grocery, shall be used as a neighborhood convenience store and a real estate office; and
(2)   The existing detached single family dwelling located at 1889 Avon Road located on the same parcel as Anderson’s Grocery will be used as a singly family residence.”
The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the rezoning request for the following reasons:
(1)   Approval of the request would be “spot zoning” which is not “good planning.”
(2)   The rezoning of this property does not comply with the County’s Comprehensive Plan.
(3)   Rezoning the property would have a negative impact on the residential community. The integrity of the current zoning district would be breeched.

Supervisor Harvey questioned if the applicant would be required to meet all B-1 standards. Mr. Boger stated that it is his opinion that it would, but would defer the question to County Attorney Payne for his opinion.
Applicant Curtis Bruguiere restated his request and noted that additional parking is available and the setback requirements could be modified. Mr. Bruguiere also referenced an accident report from VDOT and noted that there have been a total of ten accidents over a thirty month period. Mr. Bruguiere noted that accidents in the area did not increase because of the increase in business.

Supervisor Wood opened the Public Hearing.
Florrie Cerphy, Avon Road, spoke in opposition citing safety concerns and presented a petition with twenty-five names on it opposing the request.
Roy White, Avon Road, spoke in opposition to the request and expressed concern that if the request is approved, it will be setting a precedent for other businesses to come to the area. Mr. White also cited concerns of safety and inadequate parking.
Linwood Lockett, an adjacent property owner, spoke in opposition citing concerns of safety, an increase in traffic, and noise.
Rita Helms stated that she and her husband Paul have a three year lease on the store with two five year options. Ms. Helms stated that if the request is approved, it would violate their contract lease of the building and business.
Carlton Ballowe, Faber, spoke in favor of the request and stated that it is ironic that Mr. Bruguiere could have a business in his house, but if it is a business, he is not allowed to have an office.
Harry Baum, Tank Bark Drive, spoke in favor of the request and stated that the building has been there for 100 years and the State built the road right in front of it, which should be taken into account.
Concluding discussion, Supervisor Wood closed the Public Hearing.
Mr. Harris stated that the Board needs to take a closer look at the request and noted that something has to be done about parking. Mr. Harris stated that he would like to know what impact parking would have on the rezoning request.
Mr. Harvey stated that he does not consider the rezoning spot zoning and that he would like to find a way for the applicant to have his office.
Additionally, Mr. Bruguiere noted that he and his wife will have two businesses at the Store, one for real estate and one for his contractor’s business.
Mr. Boger stated that it might constitute a problem since the application is to allow a real estate office and does not include a business for a contractor. Mr. Boger noted he will confer with County Attorney Payne.

Concluding additional discussion, the Board of Supervisors deferred the request until the August Meeting.

Agenda Item Number X. Public Comments
No additional comments were offered.

Agenda Item Number XI. Other Business
Mr. Carter presented a letter from FFA Advisor, Ed McCann, requesting the Board to consider approval of $2,652.00 for jackets and transportation costs associated with the FFA National Contest in Kentucky.

The Board passed the following Resolution approving the request:
Re: Approval to Fund $2,652.00 for Jackets and Transportation Costs Associated with the FFA National Contest in Kentucky
On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Brennan, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby approve $2,652.00 for jackets and transportation costs associated with the FFA National Contest in Kentucky.

Agenda Item Number XII. Adjournment
Re: Continue the July 12, 2005 Meeting to August 3, 2005
On a motion by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Mr. Harris, with Mr. Harvey voting yes, Mr. Harris voting yes, Mr. Bruguiere voting yes, Ms. Brennan voting yes, and Mr. Wood voting yes, the following Resolution was adopted:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Nelson County Board of Supervisors does hereby continue the July 12, 2005 Meeting to August 3, 2005, 6:00 p.m.

__________________________________, Chair