November 21, 2006
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: Harry S. Harris, Chair
Constance Brennan, Central District Supervisor
Allen M. Hale, East District Supervisor
Thomas H. Bruguiere, Jr., West District Supervisor (2:10 PM for the remainder of the meeting)
Stephen A. Carter, County Administrator
Candice W. McGarry, Administrative Assistant/Deputy Clerk
Fred M. Boger, Planning Director
Phillip D. Payne, IV, County Attorney
Mr. Harvey was not present for the afternoon session.
I. Call to Order
Mr. Harris, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:00 P. M. with four members present to establish a quorum.
A. Moment of Silence
B. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Consent Agenda
A. Resolution – Minutes for Approval
RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the minutes of said Board’s meeting conducted on October 3, 2006 and October 10, 2006 be and hereby are approved and authorized for entry into the official record of the Board of Supervisors meetings.
B. Resolution – 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
$ 853.00 3-100-002404-0004 4-100-031020-5804
5,000.00 3-100-009999-0001 4-100-091030-5670
$ 5,853.00
II. Transfers from General Fund Contingency
Amount Credit Account Debit Account
$ 500.00 4-100-999000-9901 4-100-091030-5611
III. Appropriation of Funds (Capital Fund)
Amount Revenue Account Expenditure Account
$ 14,629.50 3-110-004104-0001 4-110-094100-8280
IV. Appropriation of Funds (School Fund)
Amount Revenue Account Expenditure Account
$162,145.74 3-205-003302-0097 4-205-061100-9301
(2,492.22) 3-205-003302-0026 4-205-061100-9301
(16,307.63) 3-205-003302-0032 4-205-061100-9301
(6,267.00) 3-205-003302-0028 4-205-061100-9301
(7,700.68) 3-205-003302-0030 4-205-061100-9301
(2,925.79) 3-205-003302-0024 4-205-061100-9301
(14,984.00) 3-205-003302-0099 4-205-061100-9301
99,481.96 3-205-001899-0999 4-205-061100-9301
(4,394.00) 3-205-003302-0130 4-205-065100-9306
7,500.00 3-205-001899-0010 4-205-063100-9303
$214,056.38
C. Resolution – 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
$ 37.62 Personal Property Lance, Inc.
P.O. Box 32368
Charlotte, NC 28232
$743.40 Personal Property Ford Motor Credit Company
Ford Credit
P.O. Box 67000 Dept. 231601
Detroit, Michigan 48267-2316
D. Resolution-Travel and Credit Card Policies
WHEREAS, an equitable and systematic means for reimbursing and controlling the costs of employee travel while on County business is necessary to adequately account for the use of County funds; and
WHEREAS, Section 6.15 of the Nelson County Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual does not sufficiently address travel regulations;
WHEREAS, a county credit card is beneficial in that fewer payments are necessary in the Accounts Payable system and vendors are paid in a more timely manner, at the same time allowing the County to retain cash for an extended period;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Nelson County, Virginia that the Nelson County Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual be amended to add Chapter 20 entitled “Miscellaneous Issues”, Section 20.1 entitled “Credit Cards” and Section 6.15 entitled “Travel” be amended to read as follows:
6.15 Travel
Authorized travel on County business that is paid with County funds shall be governed by the regulations denoted herein. Should these regulations conflict with travel policy when travel reimbursements are partially or fully paid from state, federal, or grant funding, then state, federal, or grant requirements shall apply. All other exceptions must be approved by the County Administrator or his designee.
Travel on County business includes trips within or outside the County to conferences, conventions, workshops, seminars, educational and training courses, and other County related business meetings or purposes.
(A) Responsibility: Each Department Head/Constitutional Officer is expected to exercise sound judgment when approving travel expenditures. It is the responsibility of the Department Head/Constitutional Officer to manage the department’s total budgetary allocation for travel. All persons traveling on official County business must exercise care in incurring expenses to minimize the cost to the County.
(B) Transportation: Transportation should be via the least expensive and most efficient method available. County vehicles are to be used whenever possible for ground transportation to and from a given destination, subject to availability. A personal vehicle may be utilized only when a County vehicle is not available or if the use of a personal vehicle better serves the County’s purpose. In the event of an accident while using a personal vehicle for County business, the employee’s vehicle insurance will be sole and primary. The County will reimburse the insurance deductible up to $250. Commercial transportation (airplane, rental car, taxicab, etc.) shall be used only when it is the most economical and efficient mode of travel. Airline tickets shall be reimbursed at coach fare.
(C) Mileage Allowance: Authorized use of a personal vehicle for conducting County business shall be reimbursed pursuant to the rate established by the Commonwealth of Virginia. An employee will not be reimbursed for their mileage to and from their homes, except for travel that is not a normal part of the job routine. The County will, however, reimburse members of boards and commissions for their travel from home to scheduled meetings as well as other travel incurred in their conduct of official business.
(D) Lodging: Accommodations for overnight stays must be necessary and reasonable to accomplish the County’s business. It is the Department Head/Constitutional Officer’s discretion as to what constitutes a legitimate need for overnight lodging. Travelers are expected to use the most economical alternative with respect to lodging. When attending a conference or seminar held at a lodging facility, travelers may stay at that facility.
(E) Meals: Employees will be reimbursed for a maximum of three meals per day consumed during official travel. A meal may also be reimbursed in instances where an employee is required to work two or more hours in addition to their normal daily working hours. Receipts are required for meal reimbursement. Meal reimbursements, including tax and gratuities shall not exceed the following:
Breakfast $10.00
Lunch $12.00
Dinner $23.00
Daily $45.00
Maximum meal reimbursement amounts shall be adjusted annually on July 1 in accordance with economic indicators prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in particular the Consumer Price Index which is a measure of the average change in prices over time.
In general, if an employee leaves for business travel prior to 6:30 a.m., breakfast will be reimbursed. If an employee leaves prior to or returns after 12:00 p.m., lunch will be reimbursed. If an employee returns after 7:30 p.m. dinner will be reimbursed. In cases where three meals per day are eligible for reimbursement, the daily allowance rather than specific meal allowances may be adhered to.
Tips must be identified on meal receipts and shall not exceed 15% of meal cost.
Meals costing in excess of meal allowance amounts will be reimbursed in exceptional situations based on cost variations in metropolitan areas. Meal rate tables established for use by the Commonwealth of Virginia may be consulted in these situations. Receipts must be submitted for all meals that exceed the meal allowance including documentation explaining why the allowance was not sufficient. All exceptions must be approved by the County Administrator or designee.
Requests for reimbursement for certain business related meals are permitted. The meal must be conducted in a setting considered appropriate for business and be business related. A receipt must be provided showing the expense, date, number of persons attending, the business affiliation of the guests, and business purpose.
(F) Miscellaneous Expenses: Taxes and surcharges paid by the traveler for lodging will be reimbursed. Necessary expenses that are business related such as conference registration fees, copying costs, faxes, educational materials, internet usage, and phone calls will be reimbursed. Tolls and parking fees are also reimbursable. For overnight travel, personal phone calls may be reimbursed not to exceed $5 per trip. All other incidental charges for reimbursement must be authorized by the County Administrator or designee.
(G) Non-Reimbursable Expenses: Disallowed expenses include:
• Lost or stolen funds or personal belongings
• Damage to personal belongings
• Personal expenses such as haircuts, newspapers, clothes, etc.
• Alcoholic beverages
• Entertainment expenses such as pay TV, movies, health clubs, etc.
• Cost of traveler’s checks or money orders
• Expenses for children, spouses, and companions while on travel status
• Fines, court costs and related expenses related to personal negligence of traveler
• Towing charges
• Expenses deemed by the County Administrator as unreasonable, excessive,
unsupported or unexplained
(H) Foreign Travel: Travelers must have prior written approval from the County Administrator for any foreign travel.
(I) Expenditure Limits: Expenditures for any individual employee to attend any single meeting, conference, training, seminar or other work related function shall not exceed $1,500. This limit is inclusive of travel, registration and other costs associated with attending such work related functions. Any exceptions to the expenditure limit must be authorized by the County Administrator.
(J) Travel Advances: When possible, alternate arrangements should be made to avoid the necessity of a cash advance. A cash advance for greater than $100 may be provided to an employee who will incur justifiable overnight travel expenses while conducting authorized County business. Requests for more than $500 must be approved by the County Administrator. The County Administrator may also deny any cash advance request based on inadequate documentation, history of delinquent settlement of prior cash advances, or other justifiable cause. All requests for cash advances must include appropriate documentation, be approved by the Department Head/Constitutional Officer and submitted to the Department of Finance and Human Resources for provision in the accounts payable process just prior to the planned travel. The employee is responsible in the event of theft or loss of cash advance funds. Within fifteen days of travel return, all travel expense documentation must be submitted to the Department of Finance and Human Resources including repayment of any unused funds due the County. If appropriate reimbursable expenses exceed the cash advance, a reimbursement check will be issued during the next accounts payable process. In instances where expense documentation and/or repayment have not been provided within the requested timeframe, a payroll deduction will be imposed. No additional cash advances will be provided until an employee’s delinquent advance has been cleared. Failure to settle travel advances in a timely manner may jeopardize approval of subsequent cash advances.
(K) Reporting and Reimbursement Procedures: If the traveler did not receive a cash advance, settlement is due within four weeks after returning from trip. All required receipts/documentation should be attached and submitted to the Department Head/Constitutional Officer for approval. Travel reimbursement requests with documentation should then be submitted to the Finance and Human Resources Department to be processed.
Chapter 20
Miscellaneous Issues
20.1 Credit Cards
The County credit card program reduces administrative costs of procurement for small purchases by reducing the number of payments in accounts payable, providing more timely payments to vendors and allowing the County to retain cash for an extended period. Therefore, County credit cards may be issued to County employees who are authorized to make purchases (including travel) on behalf of the County.
Appropriate Use: Credit cards shall be used only for valid County purchases. No personal expenses on the County credit card will be allowed. The Nelson County Purchasing Policies must be adhered to with all credit card purchases. The cardholder, who is the person to whom the card is issued, is responsible for appropriate use.
Documentation Required: Receipts will be required to document all purchases using the County credit card. A detailed receipt sent via fax, e-mail, or mail must be obtained with telephone and Internet orders. If for some reason the cardholder does not have documentation of the transaction, the cardholder must work with the vendor to obtain such documentation. Receipts should be attached to the credit card statement when submitted for payment. Employees will be required to personally pay for expenses with no receipts. Lack of receipt documentation is considered misuse of the credit card.
Cash Advances Prohibited: Cash advances through bank tellers or automated teller machines are prohibited.
Card Loss: Should any employee lose or have their credit card stolen, it is the responsibility of the Department Head or Constitutional Officer to immediately notify the Finance and Human Resources Department.
Misuse of Card: Misuse of a credit card shall result in revocation of the credit card and disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.
Administrative Responsibility: The County Administrator or designee shall be responsible for the administration of the credit card program inclusive of establishing operational guidelines as may be necessary.
E. Resolution-Local Salary Supplements
WHEREAS, Title 15.2-2507 of the Code of Virginia requires a locality to appropriate as part of its annual budget or in amendments thereto amounts for salaries for its constitutional officers that are not less than those established for such offices in the locality by the Compensation Board;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the local government’s “Salary and Classification System” is hereby amended to incorporate governance of local salary supplements for the Registrar and Constitutional Offices as follows:
For the purposes of this amendment, references to the Compensation Board shall also mean the State Board of Elections as it pertains to the salary of the General Registrar. References to Constitutional Officers shall be inclusive of the General Registrar.
Local salary supplements for Constitutional Officers and their full time staff are intended to provide equitable annual salary adjustments for these employees with those of other full time Nelson County personnel. The supplement is subject to annual approval by the Board of Supervisors and shall apply in each year to those employees hired or beginning employment before July 1 of the fiscal year.
The percentage of annual local supplement shall be based on the approved Compensation Board salary in effect on July 1 of the fiscal year. In addition to the local supplement percentage calculated on July 1, prior year supplement amounts in effect on June 30 of the prior fiscal year will be included in the total supplement amount. The amount of local supplement is calculated on July 1 and reduces at such time that the Compensation Board authorizes an annual salary increase, currently on December 1 of each fiscal year. The local supplement amount may also change during the fiscal year as a result of other Compensation Board salary adjustments. The effect of these other salary adjustments shall be handled as designated herein.
Should the annual salary adjustment approved by the Compensation Board, currently effective December 1, result in greater compensation over the course of the fiscal year than the percentage of salary adjustment approved by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors plus any prior year supplement in effect on June 30, the salaries of those constitutional employees shall be paid at the salary established by the Compensation Board (5 months of Compensation Board salary effective July 1 and 7 months of Compensation Board salary effective December 1).
Salary adjustments approved by the Compensation Board as amendments to the originally approved fiscal year budget shall be regarded in the following manner:
(a) Compensation Board salary adjustments that do not exceed the total annual salary (Compensation Board and local supplement) being paid to the employee will not result in a pay adjustment. In cases where the salary adjustment results in an annual salary greater than the total salary currently being paid, the employee’s salary will be adjusted to equal the Compensation Board salary.
(b) Compensation Board salary adjustments that result in a reduction of the Compensation Board salary, such as in the case of a demotion, will be compensated at the approved Compensation Board salary effective on the date of the Compensation Board salary reduction.
F. Resolution-Position Description for Director of Information Systems
RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the position of Director of Information Systems, as delineated in the position description attached hereto, be and hereby is approved for establishment in the Classification Plan within the Nelson County Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the County Administrator be and hereby is authorized to employ an individual meeting the criteria of the herein approved position description to serve Nelson County in the capacity of Director of Information Systems with favorable consideration to be given for the promotion of incumbent personnel currently employed with Nelson County, inclusive of compensation that in the assessment of the County Administrator is commensurate with the position’s requirements.
III. Public Comments and Presentations
A. Public Comments – None
B. VDOT Report – Kevin Wright
1. 151 Weigh Station – Mr. Harris inquired as to whether or not the weigh station is closed. Mr. Wright responded that it is open; however someone has removed the chains at the station. The consensus was that maintaining this station will discourage truck traffic on Rt. 151.
2. Rural Rustic Projects- Completion of Rt. 722 and Rt. 791 will occur after Amherst County projects are done. Surface treatment of the next Rural Rustic projects Rt.s 668, 612, 605, 650, 669 and 712 will be done by State forces, with pipe replacement to occur over the winter.
3. Secondary Funding Report – Mr. Wright explained that there will be a change in how the secondary road dollars can be used. There used to be five categories of funding and now there are nine with the majority being Federal funds, for which projects must qualify. He noted that Rt. 617 qualifies for this funding and Findlay Mountain Road may also qualify. Mr. Wright also noted that the dollars available to allocate to non-federal projects will significantly decrease beginning in FY2009. The report shows this funding to be $255,942 in FY2008, $87,239 in FY2009, $81,986 in FY2010, $78,093 in FY2011, $91,571 in FY2012, and $91,571 in FY2013. Mr. Wright also noted that these funds should be reduced by 25% to allow for funding countywide cost centers, which were previously funded at $100,000 per year; leaving 75% available to allocate to non-federal projects. The Board will need to schedule a workshop with VDOT to determine priorities for these funds and hold a public hearing in the spring.
4. Private to Public Road Stop Signs- Mr. Hale inquired as to the VDOT policy for placement of stop signs where a private road meets a public road. Mr. Wright responded that the land owner is responsible for purchasing and placing the signs.
5. Truck Traffic on Rt. 151 and Rt.6- The truck traffic problem on Rt. 151 and Rt. 6 was discussed. Mr. Wright noted that the Lynchburg office is undergoing regionalization for traffic engineers who look at the main traffic corridors. Mr. Wright commented that an informal review of the possibility of prohibiting through trucks on Rt. 151 and Rt. 6 was being performed. Formal action and review would involve the Board giving its support to the initiative in the form of a resolution after holding a public hearing and advertising an alternate truck route. He noted the absence of an acceptable alternate truck route to be prohibitive.
6. Rt. 151 Park & Ride- Mr. Wright is to report on the status of establishing a park & ride on Rt. 151 in Roseland; interest in this project has been expressed by the Massie’s Mill Ruritan Club.
7. Paving of Rt. 662- Mr. Wright commented that Rt. 662 could be paved if the Board agreed to re-arrange its previously established priorities by resolution. He noted that this route has not had an environmental review done which would cause a delay of about two months.
8. John’s Creek Road- It was noted that the Children at Play signs are up on John’s Creek Road; however Mr. Harris requested that No Parking signs also be placed there as the road is continuously blocked by parked cars.
9. Removal of Old Signs- Mr. Wright was asked about VDOT policy in removing old signs which are no longer valid; he responded that they rely on the public to report when a sign is no longer necessary, such as “bus-stop ahead” signs.
10. Rt. 151 Nellysford Speed Limit- Mr. Wright reported that they have completed the speed limit review of Rt. 151 in Nellysford with the consensus of the traffic engineers and the State Police being that the current speed limit is appropriate and would not be changed from 45 mph; unless this road changes function or use, then it could be re-visited.
C. Nelson Volunteer Coalition – Lynne Carson
Lynne Carson from the Nelson Volunteer Coalition gave an overview of the organization and its functions. She reported that their organization provides transportation to and from medical appointments for citizens and helps them navigate through medical facility procedures and forms with referrals from the Health Department, Schools, JABA, RHOP and doctor’s offices. They also visit homebound individuals, provide respite care for caregivers, help with bills and paperwork etc. She emphasized that the organization helps foster friendship and companionship with the majority of its volunteers being retirees from Wintergreen which bridges the gap between those who have moved to Nelson and native Nelsonians. She reported that they have an anonymous donor who will match raised funds up to $5,000.00 and requested that the Board consider appropriating $5,000.00 to the Coalition to facilitate them leveraging the match by the end of the calendar year. The Board thanked Ms. Carson for the Coalition’s work and agreed that their work is beneficial. Mr. Hale noted that the Coalition could carry-over the leveraged funds into next year, which would put them ahead of the game. Mr. Harris suggested that a motion be made to amend the previously approved budget resolution to allow for the additional $5,000 in funding for the Coalition and noted that they will be sent a request for funding application for the upcoming FY2007-2008 budget year.
A motion was made by Ms. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Hale to amend the previously approved FY 2006-2007 budget amendment to include a $5,000.00 appropriation to the Nelson Volunteer Coalition. The Board approved the motion by unanimous vote 4-0.
D. Region 2000 Water Supply Plan – Mike Lawless
Mike Lawless of Draper Aden and Associates gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the goals and objectives of the Region 2000 Water Supply Plan. He noted that the regional water supply planning group is made up of 12 local governments and 4 service authorities and is working together to meet requirements with the State Water Control Board’s regulation 9 VAC 25-780, Local and Regional Water Supply Planning. Costs of the plan are being allocated to each entity participating in accordance with the budget provided with Nelson County’s share being $32,234. The plan being developed will include evaluation of the existing water supplies including community systems, individual wells, and agricultural users, with analysis of water demand management for the next 50 years and identification of alternative future water supplies.
Conservation and draught response measures will also be incorporated. He noted the plan would contain more detail in the first 10 years than the last and would be reviewed every 5 years with a resubmission with or without changes every 10 years. He noted the benefits of regionalism in a project like this being ease of data collection in terms of time and money involved being shared and the project will ease the permitting process in the future by identifying options with DEQ ahead of the time they are needed. He also noted that upon completion of the plan, electronic copies of the Plan, data files, maps and GIS database will be provided to all participants in the Regional Plan.
Ms. Brennan asked if information on failed or diminished wells would be collected, which Mr. Lawless said would have to be gotten from the public and would be hard to get. She also asked if they would be looking at water quality as well, and Mr. Lawless noted that while the regulations did not address quality, they would look for this data; however no new sampling was planned. He noted that they intend to look at projected growth versus where water supply is and how to connect the two. He stated that vulnerable sources of water to pollution are a concern and explained that the intention is not to limit or exploit the options of one jurisdiction over another and cooperation is key to resolving these issues up front with a framework to address these.
Mr. Lawless noted that the next phase of the planning process will begin in July 2007 and is anticipated to take approximately 18 months to complete in January 2008. The Region 2000 planning group can hold a public hearing on the plan on behalf of the participants according to DEQ, but they are waiting for an opinion from the Attorney General on this. Ms. Brennan asked if localities could hold their own public hearing; which they can. Mr. Lawless encourages active participation from elected officials, planning Commissioners, the Economic Development Authority, local well drillers and the public in the plan development process. He encouraged the Board to give the County Administrator any names to be included in the process.
Those local governments wishing to participate in the Regional Plan are required to provide notification of their intent to participate to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, no later than November 2, 2008 with the plan being due to the VDEQ for review no later than November 2, 2011. If approved by the VDEQ, the region would hold another public hearing including all participating jurisdictions. Additionally, the Board must pass a resolution approving the Plan and adopting other policies or ordinances that are developed during the planning process.
Groundwater Monitoring: Mr. Lawless noted that ground water monitoring was going well at the County’s landfill. He noted that while an off-site well was not required by DEQ, it was suggested. He noted that the data is not supporting the need for the well; and Mr. Carter added that the County had contacted nearby landowners who have said they do not want the well because it would require the cutting down of a lot of trees and a long road would be needed. HE also noted that one property has offered their drinking water well for voluntary testing. Mr. Lawless noted that the Board could petition DEQ to stop groundwater monitoring in five years; and the gas monitoring program was already in a close-out phase.
IV. Unfinished Business (It was agreed by the Board to change the order of agenda items.)
V. New Business - None
VI. Reports, Appointments, Directives, and Correspondences
A. Reports (Board of Supervisors Committees and County Administrator)
County Administrator’s Report:
Mr. Carter reported the following:
1. Board Retreat:
The Board’s strategic planning retreat is scheduled to be conducted on November 27, commencing at 8:30 a.m. in the Dunlop Room of the Wintergreen Nature Foundation (Wintergreen). Mr. Gary Christie, Executive Director, of the Region 2000 Local Government Council, will be the facilitator. The session is projected to be completed by mid to late afternoon.
2. Budget
The Department of Finance and HR’s monthly report provides a summary analysis of year to date budget activities through September 30, 2006, which is the most recent information currently available. As denoted in Finance and HR’s report, staff has concern with specific revenue projections but does not deem it necessary at this time to consider adjustments on the expenditure side of the budget to offset a potential revenue shortfall.
Mr. Carter is to report back to the board the percentage downturn in revenue items such as recordation taxes and building permits that show a lower than projected amount.
Mr. Carter also noted that it has been proposed by County staff to meet with School Board staff ahead of the FY08 budget process this year to ensure greater cooperation.
3. Courthouse/Government Center Project
The Board Committee had a productive meeting on November 10 with the project architect, Wiley and Wilson (R. Vaughan) during which time W&W presented a more defined Scheme 12 (conceptual plan). Next steps include: a) contract for schematic phase, b)visit by Board Committee to Lunenburg County Courthouse, which W&W designed (December 06 with Judge M. Gamble and County staff), c) contract for and completion of final design, d) completion and implementation of project plan of finance; e) construction bid and project completion.
Mr. Hale encouraged the Board to join him on the trip to Lunenburg County to see a comparable project to the proposed one for Nelson County
4. Solid Waste Project
A. Convenience Centers Project: In process. Purchase of one of two sites completed with the second anticipated prior to the end of December 06. Survey assessment of both sites has been completed by Saunders Surveys. Final design and construction bid phases anticipated to be completed by January 07. USDA-Rural Development is the anticipated source of project financing. Third site (Faber-Schuyler-Route 29 North area) is pending identification and purchase.
Mr. Carter noted that an agreement on the Massie’s Mill site is pending. Mr. Bruguiere inquired as to how many acres in Massie’s Mill Massie Saunders was surveying for that convenience center site. Mr. Carter responded 3 acres are being evaluated by Mr. Saunders. Mr. Carter noted that staff is looking into a compactor operation by which trash would be compacted directly into trucks and hauled to the Amherst Landfill (this arrangement may come to pass through the Region 2000 Solid Waste initiative). This type of operation would eliminate double-handling of the waste stream. Research is also being done to analyze the potential cost savings to the County of assuming the hauling operation. Cost savings and analysis will be reported to the board in the near future.
B. Transfer Station Repairs: Project bids (six) received on November 17. Low bidder is Watson Construction Inc. at $59,959. High bid was $119,747. Contract execution and notices of award and to proceed to be completed on 11-21. Discussions with contractor and engineer indicate project completion and resumption of operations by 1-15-07.
Mr. Carter noted that the public had been notified of this project via letters to transfer station account holders and a public notice in the paper.
Mr. Bruguiere inquired about the increase in costs associated with taking our trash to Amherst which is $190 per load in hauling costs. There is some offset in costs not transporting to Amelia, however the tipping fees at Amelia of $26/Ton are lower than the $44/Ton fee at Amherst.
C. Septic System Installations: Pending completion.
D. Region 2000 Solid Waste Initiative: In process. Start up of regional operation possible by January 2008 (potentially sooner). Current operations scenario(s) partner Nelson and Amherst counties jointly utilizing Amherst County landfill.
E. Environmental Monitoring (Gas and Groundwater): Close out of gas monitoring program in process. The County’s groundwater monitoring program is ongoing with DAA continuing to provide overall management of this mandated responsibility.
F. Waste Management Contract Renewal: Completed. Mr. Carter noted that the contract is annually renewable with a clause to be able to give notice within the contract year.
Mr. Carter to check the Code of Virginia for provisions protecting private trash collectors.
G. Gladstone Convenience Center: In process. Draft contract to be reviewed by Amherst and Nelson governing bodies in December 2006. A January 2007 start up date is anticipated, subject to approval of each Board of Supervisors.
5. Paid EMS Project
Program operations are continuing (successfully). Licensing application to Medicare for revenue recovery program is in process through Diversified Ambulance Billing (anticipated January 2007).
Mr. Bruguiere commented on needing improved access for EMS providers to the Ryan School Apartments when responding to calls. They have had trouble being able to access the building when responding to calls there and the care taker seems to be unaware of the problem. Mr. Carter will follow up with the EMS coordinator and JABA to resolve the issue.
6. Piney River 3 Project
A design realignment in the Route 56 west corridor is being implemented due to refusal of property owners to grant utility easements for the current design; USDA-RUS approval requested and required. Realignment work will delay project bid phase by minimum of 90-102 days (to March or April 2007). Staff working with project engineer (Draper Aden Associates) to expedite re-design and regulatory approvals.
Mr. Carter noted that the County Attorney is drafting an agreement to ensure that these easements will be granted if the project is re-aligned. The Engineer is scheduled to walk the re-alignment with the land-owners. Mr. Carter also noted that Rural Development has indicated it is ok with the re-alignment as long as the project stays within budget. It was noted that the costs of the re-alignment will be offset by the elimination of some laterals from the main scope of the project, but will be bid as add alternatives to the project.
7. Other Projects
A. Lovingston Revitalization: Land Planning Design Associates (B. Mechnick) has developed and forwarded a matrix of phases and priorities for the use by County staff as a working tool associated with capital improvement planning and annual budgetary recommendations.
B. Visitors Center Project: Architectural consultant interviews completed with Frazier and Associates, Staunton, VA, selected to provide design and engineering services for the project; services contract pending completion. Staff forwarded a correspondence to party interested in purchasing the proposed visitor center site from the County with a telephone response received on November 20 requesting sixty (60) days to respond to County’s request for information. Staff recommends proceeding with the County’s project.
Mr. Carter noted that the County is positioned to move forward with architectural services, but the contract is pending. He noted that the architectural services could be retained for other projects as well, not just the proposed visitor center. The Board expressed concerns over preliminary best-guess estimates of the cost of renovating the proposed visitor center building and discussed phasing the project. Mr. Hale suggested that the Board explore all alternatives and all other options besides renovating the building. Mr. Harris noted that a decision needs to be made on whether or not the Board was going to sell the building. The Board reached a consensus to allow the interested party 30 days to respond to the County’s request for information and to allow the architectural firm to develop a more firm cost estimate to renovate the building. Mr. Carter also noted that this project could be a possible Transportation Enhancement grant funding application in the spring.
C. Nellysford Planning Project: Draft recommendations received from TJPDC and distributed for review and comment. Next step is completion and distribution of draft plan with presentation by TJPDC planned for (the) December 12 Board meeting.
D. Schuyler Museum: The project is in process.
E. Veterans Memorial: The project is completed, including public dedication.
F. Blue Ridge Tunnel Project: Property acquisition from CSX Transportation is in process and negotiations with two other property owners also being initiated. Transportation Enhancement Grant application to VDOT submitted 11-1-06. Final project design to follow completion of property acquisitions (ensuing 90 – 180 days).
Mr. Hale inquired as to who would be negotiating with the land owners on the property acquisition. Mr. Carter noted that the County and the consultants would be negotiating.
G. 2008 General Re-Assessment of Real Estate: In process.
H. Economic Development: Staff working with new business prospect to assist with establishment of local operations.
I. Water Service Project with NCSA: A revised contract to be completed and forwarded to MG and NCSA for signatory approval week of 11-20. NCSA to finalize funding from DEQ and implement project following execution of agreement (projected time frame is 8 – 16 months).
J. Gladstone Water System Project: Under development by the Nelson County Service Authority. Mr. Carter noted that a CDBG application was in process for the project.
K. Blue Ridge Trail Project: Construction negotiations with project low bidder in process with next project phase to ensue thereafter (i.e. bridge repairs, primarily in Amherst County).
Mr. Carter noted that there was one Amherst resident challenging ownership of trail property that was being resolved.
L. Region 2000 Water Supply Planning Project: Presentation by project consultant to Board of Supervisors on 11-21. Participation in ensuing phase of project pending approval.
M. Ryan School Apartments: Formal close out of grant project with DHCD (by County) in process. JABA has advised that all apartment units are currently rented.
N. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances: Planning Commission reviewing proposed revisions with recommendations proposed to be submitted to Board within 100 days of October 25 work session.
O. Wintergreen Project: Pending.
P. Bi-Centennial: The Bi-Centennial Committee is continuing its work.
Q. Two x Two Meetings: First meeting scheduled December 4, 06.
It was noted that this will be a dinner meeting at the Lovingston Café at 5:30 pm to be attended by Ms. Brennan and Mr. Harris
R. Joint Meeting with Planning Commission: Pending.
8. Rockfish Valley Community Center: Boiler repairs completed and system in operation. Installation of new HVAC system pending design and funding provisions.
Committee Reports:
Ms. Brennan reported that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission approved the Schuyler Wastewater Intergovernmental Review; the TJPDC had received a favorable audit and had a surplus of funds. Mr. Carter noted that staff attended a workshop regarding application for a Broadband planning grant.
Ms. Brennan reported that at the TJPDC Legislative Luncheon, the commissioners identified growth as a priority and want General Assembly Legislation that would allow localities to charge impact fees for the cost of development.
Ms. Brennan reported briefly on the Dental Planning Committee meeting held on October 18, 2006 and minutes of that meeting were requested by the Board members.
Mr. Bruguiere reported that he and Mr. Harvey met with a State Compensation Board representative who noted that there is a lot of unused money available that local offices are not utilizing. Mr. Harvey spoke with each of the Constitutional Officers as to how to get this money that is available for their offices and suggested they pursue this.
Mr. Bruguiere reported that the Planning Commission zoning recommendations were moving along and a public hearing was set for January 16, 2007 and that the Board needed to set their public hearing date.
Mr. Harris reported that he attended a Workforce Investment meeting and noted his disappointment in the lack of progress being made in establishing the “one-stops” in localities. The person in charge is working with a to-do list that was established a while back. He’s hoping some progress will be made soon. Mr. Harris noted that he also attended an aging at home workshop that provided some good information.
Directives:
Ms. Brennan inquired as to whether bonuses for staff had been handled. Mr. Carter said it was subject to input from the Board and could be handled administratively, and there was no further discussion or action taken.
Ms. Brennan noted that she would like to discuss establishing a Budget Committee at the upcoming retreat. Mr. Carter noted he would discuss this with Mr. Christie.
Ms. Brennan noted that she and Mr. Carter would be attending a Pandemic Flu Workshop on December 1, 2006. Mr. Carter noted that Ray Uttaro has submitted preliminary policy documents on this subject.
Ms. Brennan noted that some conversation at the VACO conference implied that DMV stop money returned to the Treasurers of some localities was being re-distributed to the Treasurer’s Office staff as an incentive. Mr. Carter noted that he didn’t think that would be the case, but would check on this.
Ms. Brennan noted that there will be a VACO/VML Legislative day on February 1, 2006 and encouraged fellow supervisors and staff to attend. There will also be a Chairpersons Institute on February 1st and 2nd and she encouraged all to serve on committees. Staff was instructed to provide all Board members with the associated registration and committee interest forms.
There were no other Board directives
Correspondence:
Mr. Carter reported receiving correspondence from the Chairperson of the Planning Commission, Philippa Proulx, asking the Board of Supervisors to extend the time in which it has to review the proposed changes to the current Zoning Ordinance from 60 days to 100 days from October 25, 2006.
After brief discussion a consensus was reached to grant the extension. A motion was made by Mr. Hale and seconded by Mr. Bruguiere to grant an extension of time to the Planning Commission from 60 days to 100 days from October 25, 2006 so that they can adequately review the proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance and schedule a public hearing. The motion was passed with a unanimous vote, 4-0.
Appointments:
Mr. Carter gave the Board background information regarding the recent Piedmont Housing Alliance (PHA) appointment of Ron Enders to the PHA Board and not Mr. Rob Rutherford. It was determined that there was some miscommunication between PHA and the Board on this issue. According to the PHA by-laws, a recommendation from the Board is needed in order to make the appointment, however conflicting information from PHA was received by letter stating that a recommendation was not needed. Prior to the Board’s recommendation of Mr. Rutherford’s appointment, the PHA Board of Directors re-appointed Mr. Enders to another term expiring in January of 2009. The Board expressed the view that they had no objection to Mr. Enders serving the appointment; however the process of making the appointment is the concern. Ms. Brennan suggested that staff send letters to all organizations requesting that they let us know when Board appointments are expiring. No action was taken at this time.
The Board agreed to move other appointments for consideration to the evening session.
VII. Closed Meeting – None
Prior to recessing, Mr. Carter outlined briefly some new information pertaining to the topic of Local Vehicle Licenses to be discussed at the public hearing scheduled for the evening session. He briefly introduced the resolutions to be considered and distributed a second resolution that would allow for the retention of the current County decal. After brief discussion of the pros and cons of having a County decal the Board tabled further discussion until the evening session.
VIII. Recess and Reconvene for Evening Session
At 5:35 P.M., on a motion by Mr. Bruguiere, seconded by Mr. Hale, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call (4-0) to recess and reconvene for the evening session. Items left from the afternoon session will be covered in the night session.
EVENING SESSION
7:30 p.m. – Nelson County Courthouse
I. Call to Order
Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. All Supervisors were present at the evening session. Order of agenda items was changed to include uncovered items from the afternoon agenda.
A. Emergency Medical Services (Revenue Recovery Program)
Mr. Carter overviewed the summary of information provided regarding two methods of revenue recovery: insurance only billing and a subscription program. He noted that the County could initiate both programs as there was no prohibitive regulation. He noted the pros and cons of each program and recommended utilizing the insurance only billing program with a soft billing component for the uninsured with no ability to pay for services, and then re-evaluate the program after one year.
The Board discussed Amherst County’s operation whose subscription rate is 4.3%. Jaime Oliver, of County staff, noted that most localities were starting with a subscription program but were moving toward the insurance only billing option. Ms. Brennan suggested that the subscription program was worth offering to the uninsured, while Mr. Hale was not in favor of setting up a subscription program for so few households and whose projected costs outweigh the expected revenue from the start. Ms. Oliver and Mr. Carter noted that there were costs to promoting and marketing the subscription program as well as personnel costs to administer the program.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Hale and seconded by Mr. Bruguiere to adopt the insurance only billing program resolution as follows and revisit the merits of the subscription program after one year. The motion passed unanimously by roll-call vote 5-0.
Resolution – Emergency Medical Services- Revenue Recovery Program Insurance Only Billing
RESOLVED, by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the County Administrator be and hereby is authorized to utilize an “Insurance Only” billing program, as the basis of Nelson County’s Emergency Medical Services – Revenue Recovery Program, predicated upon Nelson County continuing to provide contributions to the total expense of the County’s emergency medical services programs that are equal to or greater than the uncollected co-insurance obligation that is relieved from payment through the use of an insurance only billing program.
II. Public Hearings
A. Rezoning #2006-003-Scott Collins
Mr. Boger reported that Mr. Collins is acquiring approximately 0.279 acres from the adjoining property of Marshall Mays and adding it to his parcel identified as Tax Map #75-A-4B. Mr. Boger stated that the purpose of this request was to square up Mr. Collin’s property so that he can develop an indoor storage facility with individual units for rent. In order to do this, the acquired property must be rezoned from Business, B-1 to Industrial, M-1. Mr. Boger stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the request.
Mr. Massie Saunders was present representing the applicant and had nothing to add.
The public hearing was opened, there were no comments, and the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Mr. Hale, seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (5-0), to grant the rezoning request for 0.279 acres on Tax Map #75-A-4B at 236 Cooperative Way in Colleen for Scott Collins, such that Mr. Collin’s acquired tract, and subsequently the entire tract would be zoned M-1 Industrial.
B. Rezoning #2006-007- Doug Long
Mr. Boger reported that Mr. Douglas Long is petitioning to rezone a parcel of land identified as Tax Map 58B-A-1 from Residential, R-2, to Business, B-2. The property is located at 978 and 994 Front Street in Lovingston. Mr. Boger noted that the property is located in the Historic District and the architect has since recommended the structure be torn down. Mr. Boger also recommends that this parcel be the last B-2 parcel going North since around the curve from the parcel is an all R-2, residential area. Mr. Boger stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval of this application.
Mr. Long was present and offered no comments
The public hearing was opened, there were no public comments, and public hearing was closed.
Discussion from the Board included the wish that if the structure is torn down that they would build something in its place that would fit in with the village concept and preserve the trees where possible. Mr. Massie Saunders, representing the applicant replied that efforts would be made to keep a vegetative buffer, however trees were literally growing underneath the structure.
On a motion by Mr. Bruguiere and seconded by Mr. Harvey, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (5-0) to approve the Rezoning request for Douglas Long for property located at 978 and 994 Front street in Lovingston from R-2, Residential to B-2, Business.
C. Conditional Use Permit #2006-003 – Lawrence Howard
Mr. Boger reported that Mr. Lawrence E. Howard is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to use the Page House at 27 Chapel Hollow Road for a real estate office. The main house has been used for a bed and breakfast in the past, and the owner will continue to stay here when he comes to visit. Mr. Boger stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the application.
Mr. Massie Saunders representing the applicant stated that the erosion and sediment control plans have been approved for the driveway and parking area.
The public hearing was opened, there were no public comments, and public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Mr. Harvey and seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote (5-0) to approve the Conditional Use Permit #2006-003, allowing the use of Page House at 27 Chapel Hollow Road for a real estate office.
D. Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance and Final Subdivision Review and
Approval – Curtis Bruguiere
Mr. Boger reported that Mr. Curtis Bruguiere had submitted a final subdivision plat to divide a two acre parcel of land identified as Tax Map #7-A, Parcel 58 into two one-acre parcels; however exceptions to §4-4C, Water and Sewer, Individual Wells, and §4-4D, Water and Sewer, Individual Septic Systems, must be granted by the Board of Supervisors in order to have the proposed one acre lots served by individual well and septic systems. He noted that the exception is needed since the current ordinance requires a minimum of two acres. The stick-built house is located at 9968 Batesville Rd. and the singlewide manufactured home is located at 9936 Batesville Rd. Mr. Boger noted that one division right had already been used on this property. Mr. Boger stated that the Planning Commission had two concerns, one being having enough reserve area for the drain-field, which was minor and the most important one that they recommend denial on, being the creation of a non-conforming lot. They recommended denial of the exception based on not wanting to set a precedence of approving the creation of non-conforming lots.
Mr. C. Bruguiere, the applicant, noted that he had received a letter from a soil scientist who stated that the land would allow for a secondary septic system/reserve and his intention would be to put in another well such that each lot would have its own well and septic. Mr. Boger stated that Mr. C. Bruguiere would need to give his office a copy of the letter and give the Health Department a copy of the letter for approval. The Chairman directed Mr. C. Bruguiere to do so. Mr. C. Bruguiere also noted to the Board that approving his request would be a benefit to the community for providing affordable housing when sold and the structures would have better upkeep. He stated that the only thing that would change is that there would be two owners instead of one (upon selling the subdivided lot). It was noted that the Board approved the original subdivision in 2004 and the trailer was there 20 years prior to that on six acres, which was then divided into two tracts, one four acres and one two, with the two acre parcel being sold to C. Bruguiere and the four acres being sold to another individual.
Mr. T. Bruguiere noted his intention to abstain from the impending vote on this request.
The public hearing was opened, there were no public comments, and the public hearing was closed.
Discussion by the Board included noting the need for affordable rental housing as well as affordable ownership. Ms. Brennan noted that she isn’t in favor of creating non-conforming lots however it is frequently done in other situations.
On a motion by Mr. Harvey and seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted 4-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Thomas Bruguiere abstaining to approve the Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance and final subdivision review approval into two, one acre tracts for the parcel(s) located at 9968 Batesville Rd. and 9936 Batesville Rd. and grant an exception to §4-4C, Water and Sewer, Individual Wells, and §4-4D, Water and Sewer, Individual Septic Systems such that the proposed one acre lots can be served by individual well and septic systems.
E. Amendment and Reenactment to the Nelson County Code-Article II, Local Vehicle License.
Mr. Carter stated that the proposed amendment of Article II re-establishes the license fee year, eliminates the requirement(s) of local license tags (decals), requires payment of certain local taxes before local licensure of motor vehicles, provides for agreement with the Department of Motor Vehicles to deny issuance or renewal of any vehicle registration of any applicant owing certain taxes to the County, and establishes penalties for failure to pay the local license fee. The amendment and reenactment of Article II does not propose any increase in the current local license fee. Authority is pursuant to the applicable provisions of §46.2-752 through §46.2-756 of the Code of VA.
Mr. Payne reported that the license fees remain the same as directed, but the fee year for this year will be extended until June 4, 2007 in order to allow the billing of the fee simultaneously with the personal property tax. Current exemptions are maintained. He reported that the big change to the Code is the elimination of the County decal and the incorporation of rules allowed by the Code of Virginia pertaining to the payment of back taxes Sec. 7-31 and working with DMV to enforce the payment of those taxes. Mr. Payne recommended that the language in Sec. 7-31 be kept whether or not the Board decides to eliminate the decals.
Mr. Carter provided some additional information compiled by staff to indicate the amount of money each year the County was paying to process out of County trash to be approximately $117,000 per year. He noted that while the elimination of the decal would save the County approximately $11,000 per year, the decal is an important means of identifying County residents at the convenience centers and its elimination could have significant cost implications for the County as previously stated. Mr. Payne noted that some sort of sticker would be needed for identification for Nelson Residents using the Amherst solid waste collection site when Gladstone is combined with the Rt. 60 Amherst site.
The public hearing was opened:
Mr. Carlton Ballowe noted that he was excited about getting rid of the County sticker.
Ms. Susan McSwain, the County’s Solid Waste and Recycling Coordinator encouraged the Board to maintain some simple and easy means of identifying Nelson County residents and property owners when they come to the convenience centers. She said that the real identification problems stem from those who own property in the County, who aren’t residents and use the sites infrequently. She stated that fast and easy identification was important to maintain the flow of traffic which is averaging 350 cars per day at Rockfish, which in turn would ensure that citizens had a positive experience at the convenience centers.
There being no other public comments the public hearing was closed.
Discussion of the Board included inquiring to the Treasurer as to how the DMV stops work and the cost of this effort. Ms. Ermasue Harris, Treasurer explained that the DMV charges $20.00 to remove a stop on an account, but this $20.00 fee is recovered from the tax-payer at the same time the delinquent taxes are collected as prescribed by ordinance. She noted that the County does pay approximately $120 per month to hook-up to DMV, which is shared by the offices of the Treasurer and the Commissioner of Revenue. The Board noted a letter received from the Treasurer expressing her desire to see the decals eliminated. Ms. E. Harris noted that Amherst County and surrounding localities were all doing away with them. Mr. Carter also noted that other localities have other means of trash collection than Nelson. Mr. Harvey noted that with only one manned convenience center open right now, familiarity with local users should be simple and recommended verifying license and registration. Mr. Carter noted the difficulty in maintaining traffic flow in this scenario and the importance of minimizing out of County trash. Mr. Hale noted that out of County trash was a problem in the Schuyler area and noted favorably Ms. McSwain’s recommendation to tie some sort of trash identification decal into the Real Estate tax billing. Further discussion of how to deal with identifying Nelson County residents in relation to solid waste ensued and the Board decided by consensus to have staff look into obtaining stickers that could be distributed to residents and land owners for this purpose, possibly including them in the personal property and/or real estate tax billings. Ms. E. Harris noted that there would be four to five months before the license fee was billed on the June 2007 Personal Property Tax billing to work this out.
There being no other discussion, a motion was made by Ms. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Harvey to approve the resolution as follows to amend Article II of Chapter 7 of the Code of Nelson County Pertaining to the Local Vehicle License. Supervisors voted unanimously (5-0) by roll-call vote to approve the motion.
Resolution-Pertaining to The local Vehicle License
BE IT RESOLVED, that Article II of Chapter 7 of the Code of Nelson County be, and hereby is, amended as follows:
1. Sections 7-33, 7-33.2, 7-34 and 7-35 are repealed effective June 4, 2007.
2. The title of Article II of Chapter 7 is amended to read: “Local License
Fee,” effective April 1, 2007.
3. Sections 7-26 through 7-32, Section 7-33.1, and Sections 7-36 and 7-37 are repealed and re-enacted, effective April 1, 2007, to provide as follows:
Sec. 7-26. Local license fee levied.
There is hereby levied on the below-described motor vehicles, normally garaged, stored, or parked in this county, the following annual local license fee.
(a) a fee of twenty dollars ($20.00) for each automobile, truck, tractor or other motor vehicle that is self-propelled or designed for self-propulsion.
(b) a fee of eight dollars ($8.00) for each motorcycle.
Every person who owns or leases a motor vehicle normally garaged, stored or parked in this county shall be liable for the payment of the license fee for such vehicle.
Sec. 7-27. License fee year.
The license fee year which commenced April 1, 2006 shall extend to and end on June 4, 2007. Thereafter, the annual license fee year shall commence on June 5th and end on June 4th of the succeeding year.
Sec. 7-28. Payment of license fee.
(a) The registered owner or lessee of each motor vehicle subject to the license fee shall, on or before the fifth day of June of each year, pay to the Treasurer the proper license fee, together with any penalties imposed.
(b) The registered owner or lessee of each motor vehicle subject to the license
fee, other than those temporarily registered pursuant to Virginia Code Section 46.2-652, which has been duly registered for the current calendar year in another state or country and which has displayed upon it the license plate or plates issued by that other state or country, who moves into this county and normally garages, stores or parks such motor vehicle in this county shall, within thirty days of so moving, pay the license fee in accordance with this article.
(c) The registered owner or lessee of any motor vehicle subject to the local license fee for which a local license fee or tax has been paid to another jurisdiction in Virginia who moves into this county and normally garages, stores, or parks such motor vehicle in this county shall pay the license fee in accordance with this article upon the expiration of the license or registration imposed by the other jurisdiction.
(d) Every purchaser or lessee of a new or used motor vehicle which will be normally garaged, stored, or parked in this county shall have thirty days from the date of purchase or lease to pay the license fee.
Sec. 7-29. Proration.
In any case when the license fee is being paid after December 5th of any year, and the owner or lessee was not required by this article to have paid a license fee before such date, the fee shall be reduced by one-half.
Sec. 7-30. Exemptions.
(a) The provisions of this article shall not apply to:
(i) Any motor vehicle exempted by the provisions of Virginia Code Sections 46.2-750 through 46.2-751, 46.2-663 through 46.2-683, and 46.2-755.
(ii) Any motor vehicle owned by volunteer rescue squads and fire companies.
(iii) Any motor vehicle which the Department of Motor Vehicles exempts from the issuance of a registration certificate.
(iv) Any antique motor vehicle licensed pursuant to either Virginia Code Section 46.2-730A or Section 46.2-730B.
(b) Residents who are members of a volunteer rescue squad or fire company, whether located in this county or in an adjoining jurisdiction, shall be entitled to claim as exempt from the local license fee one vehicle owned by such member; provided, however, that a member shall not be entitled to the exemption who is delinquent in the payment of all other applicable local license fees and tangible personal property taxes.
Sec. 7-31. Payment of certain taxes before licensure.
(a) No motor vehicle shall be licensed until (i) all personal property taxes on the motor vehicle to be licensed have been paid, (ii) all delinquent motor vehicle personal property taxes assessed or assessable against the applicant have been paid, and (iii) all tangible personal property taxes assessed or assessable against the applicant for personal property used or usable as a dwelling titled by the Department of Motor Vehicles and owned by the applicant have been paid.
(b) By agreement with the Treasurer, the Department of Motor Vehicles shall refuse to issue or renew any vehicle registration of any applicant therefore who owes to the county any local vehicle license fee or delinquent tangible personal property tax. Before being issued any vehicle registration or renewal of such license or registration by the Department of Motor Vehicles, the applicant shall first satisfy all local vehicle license fees and delinquent tangible personal property taxes and present satisfactory evidence thereof to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Delinquent applicants shall be provided notice of the intent to deny renewal of registration at least thirty days prior to the expiration date of a current vehicle registration. For purposes of this section, notice by first-class mail to the registrant’s address as maintained in the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles shall be deemed sufficient. Any fee charged by the Department of Motor Vehicles in connection with the enforcement of this subsection shall be added to the delinquent tax bill of the applicant.
Sec. 7-32. Penalty.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any registered owner or lessee of a motor vehicle subject to the license fee to fail to pay such fee on or before June 5th of each year, or as otherwise provided in this Article.
(b) Every person who violates any provision of this article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) recoverable before the general district court upon a summons issued by the county sheriff’s department.
(c) A violation of this Article by the registered owner or lessee of a motor vehicle shall not be discharged by prepayment of a fine or by payment of a fine imposed by the court except upon presentation of satisfactory evidence that the license fee has been paid.
F. Amendment to the Nelson County Code – Enactment of a Purchase of Development Rights Program.
Mr. Carter stated that the proposed ordinance enacting a Purchase of Development Rights Program will provide for the acquisition by the County of easements voluntarily offered by owners with the purpose of the program to conserve and protect agricultural, forest, environmentally sensitive and open-space lands and natural and historic resources, and to provide and promote quality of life attributes for the citizenry of the County. The ordinance establishes administrative processes and eligibility criteria for the PDR Program including discretionary authority to the Board of Supervisors regarding program funding. Authority is pursuant to the applicable provision of Chapter 17 (Open-Space Land Act) of Title 15.2 of the Code of VA.
The public hearing was opened:
Ms. Elizabeth Van Deventer spoke in favor of instituting a Purchase of Development Rights Program in order to preserve farm land and open spaces. She noted that this program has been successful in other areas, will keep taxes lower by keeping development lower and that State funding will only be available to those with PDR programs in place.
Mr. Carlton Ballowe said he was not opposed to PDR programs but has reservations about using tax-payer money for this purpose noting that there isn’t as much farm land now because the demand for it is lower than it used to be.
Mr. Michael LaChance, Extension Agent, noted that this issue was a major concern for the Extension Office and that a PDR program is a useful tool. He offered that his office has educational materials on the subject that could be used to educate citizens.
There being no other public comments the public hearing was closed.
Discussion of the Board included who would own the development rights and manage the program with concerns about easement restrictions. Mr. Carter noted that this ordinance allows for the County to obtain the development rights and for how the management of resources will be done. The easements could be set up however the landowner wants and would be approved by the County Attorney by State law. Mr. Payne noted that the County could have a co-holder of the easements such as the Nature Conservancy for example. Ms. Brennan noted favorably that the PDR program allows the owner to use the land as it chooses while maintaining agricultural land and open spaces and thus encouraging development where it’s wanted. Mr. Carter noted that this program comports with the open space ideals that have been set by the Board. Mr. Bruguiere noted that this program was a direct farm subsidy and he was not in favor of giving tax payer money for this purpose and didn’t want to put in place a program without funding available. Ms. Brennan noted that the PDR program had to be in place in order to be eligible to receive future State and Federal funding. Mr. Hale agreed with putting the PDR in place seeing the need to ensure future funding sources but with the understanding that future local funding for the program would be at the Board’s discretion. Mr. Carter noted that should the Board choose to fund the program, it could be done during the normal budget process and be subject to public hearing along with that of the entire fiscal year budget. Mr. Harvey noted that he wasn’t in favor of putting County funds toward the program but he was not opposed to the PDR program itself.
There being no other discussion, a motion was made by Ms. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Hale to approve the resolution as follows to be affected upon enactment. Supervisors voted 4-1, by roll-call vote with Mr. Bruguiere voting no, to approve the motion.
Resolution-To Establish in the Code of the County of Nelson, Virginia a Purchase of Development Rights Program.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors that the Code of the County of Nelson, Virginia be and hereby is amended to enact therein a local purchase of development rights program, as follows:
Section 1. Short Title.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Purchase of Development Rights Program” (PDR Program).
Section 2. Purpose.
The purposes of this chapter include, but are not limited to:
1. Establishing a program enabling the county to acquire easements voluntarily offered by owners to serve as one means of assuring that Nelson County’s resources are protected and efficiently used;
2. Establishing and preserving open-space and the rural character of the county;
3. Preserving farm and forest land;
4. Conserving and protecting water resources and environmentally sensitive lands, waters and other natural resources;
5. Conserving and protecting biodiversity and wildlife habitat;
6. Assisting in shaping the character and direction of the development on the community;
7. Improving the quality of life for the inhabitants of the county; and
8. Promoting recreation and tourism through the preservation of scenic and historic resources.
Section 3. Applicability.
The PDR program shall be available for all qualifying lands in the county, except those under the ownership or control of the United States of America, the Commonwealth of Virginia, or an agency or instrumentality thereof. Any conservation easement acquired pursuant to this chapter shall be voluntarily offered by the owner.
Section 4. Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply in the implementation of this chapter:
A. Conservation easement. The term “conservation easement” means a nonpossessory interest in one or more parcels of one or more qualified easement holders under Section 10 (D) acquired under the Open-Space Land Act (Virginia Code § 10.1-1700 et seq.), whether the easement is appurtenant or in gross, voluntarily offered by an owner and acquired by purchase pursuant to the PDR program, imposing limitations or affirmative obligations for the purpose of retaining or protecting natural or open-space values of the parcel or parcels, assuring availability for agricultural, forestal, recreational or open-space use, protecting natural resources, maintaining or enhancing air or water quality, or preserving the historical, architectural, or archaeology aspects of the parcel or parcels.
B. Division rights. The term “division rights” means the number of parcels into which a parcel could be divided under the conservation district regulations as stated in Article 3, and the agricultural district regulations as stated in Article 4, of the Nelson County Zoning Ordinance, Appendix A of the Nelson County Code, where each parcel could comply will all applicable requirements of Appendix B, Subdivisions of the Nelson County Code.
C. Forced sale. The term “forced sale” means a sale of a parcel with unused development rights in a manner prescribed by law that is conducted under a judgment, order or the supervision of a court of competent jurisdiction, other than a sale arising from a partition action; a sale resulting from foreclosure under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia; a sale that is not the voluntary act of the owner but is compelled in order to satisfy a debt evidenced by a mortgage, judgment, or a tax lien.
D. Hardship. The term “hardship” means an economic hardship, other than a circumstance causing a forced sale, experienced by the owner of the parcel so as to compel him to place a parcel with unused development rights for sale or to use such development rights.
E. Immediate family. The term “immediate family” means an owner’s spouse and his or her offspring residing in the same household as the owner.
F. Owner. The term “owner” means the owner or owners of the freehold interest of the parcel.
G. Program administrator. The term “program administrator” means the person placed in a managerial position over the daily operations of the PDR program. The program administrator shall serve as a direct liaison to the program.
H. Parcel. The term “parcel” means a lot or tract of land lawfully recorded in the clerk’s office of the circuit court of the County of Nelson.
I. Retained division rights. The term “retained division rights” means the number of parcels into which a parcel subject to a conservation easement may be divided as provided in section 9 - A.
J. Construction. Because a conservation easement may contain one or more parcels, for the purposes of the PDR program, the term “parcel” shall include all parcels covered by, or proposed to be covered by, the conservation easement.
Section 5. Designation of program administrator; powers and duties.
A. Designation. The program administrator shall report to the county administrator.
B. Powers and duties. The program administrator shall administer the PDR program and shall have powers and duties to:
1. Establish reasonable and standard procedures and forms for the proper administration and implementation of the program.
2. Promote the program, in cooperation with the Agricultural and Forestal committee, by providing educational materials to the public and conducting informational meetings.
3. Investigate and pursue, in cooperation with the county administrator, state, federal and other programs available to provide additional public and private resources to fund the program and to maximize private participation.
4. Evaluate all applications to determine their eligibility and their ranking score, rank applications based on their ranking score, and make recommendations to the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee.
5. Determine the number of development rights existing on each parcel subject to an application, after obtaining the number of theoretical development rights from the zoning administrator.
6. Coordinate the preparation of appraisals.
7. Provide staff support to the appraisal committee, the Agricultural Forestal Districts Advisory Committee and the board of supervisors.
8. Provide to the public educational materials regarding other land protection programs.
9. For each conservation easement, assure that the terms and conditions of the deed of easement are monitored and complied with by coordinating the program with each easement holder, and if the other easement holders are either unable or unwilling to do so, monitor and assure compliance with the terms and conditions of the deed of easement.
Section 6. Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee; powers and duties.
A. Designation. The Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee, established pursuant to Chapter X, Section X-104 of the Code of Nelson County, is hereby designated as the citizen committee to work with and promote the PDR program.
B. Powers and duties. The Agricultural and Forestal Advisory Committee shall have the powers and duties to:
1. Promote the program in cooperation with the program administrator by providing educational materials to the public and conducting informational meetings.
2. Review the ranking of applications recommended by the program administer, and make its recommendation to the board of supervisors as to which easements should be purchased.
3. Periodically review the program’s regulations, guidelines, administrative procedures and promotion and recommend to the board of supervisors or the program administrator, as appropriate, any changes needed to maintain the program’s consistency with the comprehensive plan, or to improve the administration, implementation and effectiveness of the program.
Section 7. Appraisal review committee established; powers and duties.
A. Establishment. The appraisal review committee is hereby established, as provided herein:
The committee shall consist of three (3) members appointed by the board of supervisors. The committee shall be comprised of one real estate professional, the Commissioner of Revenue, and a member of the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee.
1. The members of the committee shall serve at the pleasure of the board of supervisors. Each member, other than the Commissioner of Revenue, shall serve a one (1) year term. The Commissioner of Revenue shall be a permanent member of the committee.
2. The members of the committee shall serve without pay, but the board of supervisors may, in its discretion, reimburse each member other than the Commissioner of Revenue for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of his/her duties.
3. The Commissioner of Revenue shall be the chair of the committee.
B. Power and duty. The appraisal review committee shall have the power and duty to review appraisals to assure they are consistent with appropriate appraisal guidelines and practices, and to make recommendations thereon to the board of supervisors.
Section 8. Eligibility criteria.
In order for a parcel to be eligible for a conservation easement, it must meet the following criteria:
A. The use of the parcel subject to the conservation easement must be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
B. The proposed terms of the conservation deed of easement must be consistent with the minimum terms and conditions set forth in Section 10.
C. The parcel must be located in the County of Nelson.
Section 9. Ranking system.
In order to effectuate the purposes of this chapter, parcels for which conservation easements applications have been received shall be evaluated by utilizing a ranking system. The initial ranking system and changes to the ranking system shall be approved by the board of supervisors. The ranking system may be used to prioritize the acquisition of conservation easements.
Section 10. Conservation easement terms and conditions.
Each conservation easement shall conform with the requirements of the Open-Space Act of 1966 (Virginia Code § 10.1-1700 et seq.) and this chapter. The deed of easement shall be in a form approved by the county attorney, and shall contain, at a minimum, the following provisions:
A. Restriction on division. The parcel shall be restricted from division as follows:
1. If the parcel is less than one hundred (100) acres, it shall not be divided.
2. If the parcel is one hundred (100) acres or larger but less than two hundred (200) acres, it may be divided into two (2) lots.
3. If the parcel is two hundred (200) acres or larger, it may be divided into as many lots so as to maintain an average lot size of at least one hundred acres, plus one additional lot for any acres remaining above the required minimum average lot size ( e.g., an eight hundred fifty (850) acre parcel may be divided into as many as nine (9) parcels, eight (8) of which maintain an average size if at least one hundred (100) acres, and the ninth of which consists of the remaining acres.
B. No buy-back option. The owner shall not have the option to reacquire any property rights relinquished under the conservation easement.
C. Other restrictions. The parcel also shall be subject to standard restrictions contained in conservation easements pertaining to uses and activities allowed on the parcel. These standard restrictions shall be delineated in the deed of easement and shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, restrictions pertaining to:
1. The accumulation of trash and junk;
2. The display of billboards, signs and advertisements;
3. The management of forest resources;
4. Grading, blasting or earth removal;
5. The number and size of residential outbuildings or structures;
6. The conduct of industrial or commercial activities; and
7. The monitoring of the easement.
D. Designation of easement holders. The county shall be the easement holder, and if designated by the board of supervisors, one or more other public bodies as defined in Virginia Code § 10.1-1700 shall also be an easement holder.
Section 11. Application and evaluation procedure.
Each application for a conservation easement shall be processed and evaluated as follows:
A. Application. Program materials to be provided to owner. The application materials provided by the administrator to an owner shall include, at a minimum, a standard application form and information about the PDR program.
B. Application form. Each application shall be submitted to the administrator on a standard
form prepared by the administrator. The application form shall require, at a minimum, that
the owner provide:
1. The names of all owners of the parcel.
2. The address and telephone number of each owner.
3. The acreage of the parcel.
4. Nelson County tax map and parcel number.
5. The zoning designation of the parcel.
6. Permission for the administrator and an independent appraiser and such other staff as may be appropriate to enter the property after reasonable notice to the owner to evaluate the parcel, and for the commissioner or revenue or an independent appraiser to appraise the property.
7. The application form shall also include a space for an owner to indicate whether he/she volunteers to have his/her parcel be subject to greater restrictions than those contained in the standard deed of easement, and to delineate those voluntary, additional restrictions.
C. Additional application information required by administrator. The administrator may require an owner to provide additional information deemed necessary to determine:
1. Whether the proposed easement is eligible for purchase.
2. The ranking of the parcel.
3. The value of such easement.
D. Submittal of application. Applications shall be submitted to the administrator. An application fee may be required. An application may be submitted at any time during an open application period. However, applications received after an open application period deadline shall be held by the administrator until the next open application period.
E. Evaluation by administrator. The administrator shall evaluate each application and determine whether the application is complete. If the application is incomplete, the administrator shall inform the owner in writing of the information that must be submitted in order for the application to be deemed complete. When an application is deemed complete, the administrator shall determine whether the parcel satisfies the eligibility criteria set forth in section 8 and, if it does, shall determine the number of points to be attributed to the parcel by applying the ranking system in accordance with section 9. The administrator shall rank each parcel with the parcel scoring the most points being the highest ranked and descending there from. The administrator shall submit the list of ranked parcels to the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee after each open application period.
F. Evaluation by Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee. The AFDA committee shall review the list of ranked parcels submitted by the administrator. The AFDA Committee shall forward to the administrator and the board of supervisors recommendations of which conservation easements should be purchased.
G. Evaluation by board. The board of supervisors shall review the list of ranked parcels submitted by the AFDA committee and identify on which parcels it desires conservation easements. The board shall then prioritize the parcels on which it will seek to purchase conservation easements. Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the board to purchase a conservation easement on any property that is eligible for purchase.
H. Requirements and deadlines may be waived. Any requirement or deadline set forth in this chapter may be waived by the board of supervisors if, for good cause, it is shown that urgent circumstances exist that warrant consideration of an application. Under such circumstances, the board may purchase a conservation easement at any time it deems necessary.
I. Reapplication. An owner of a parcel not selected by the board for purchase of a conservation easement may reapply in any future open application period.
Section 13. Program funding.
The PDR program may be funded annually by the board of supervisors in the county budget or by special appropriation. The county shall endeavor to seek funds from federal, state and private sources to effectuate the purposes of the PDR program.
Section 14. Program non-exclusivity.
The PDR program is a non-exclusive means by which the county may purchase conservation easements or control land use development, or by which landowners may establish conservation easements and other self-imposed limitations on land use or development. This appendix shall not be construed in any way as a limitation upon the county’s authority to acquire land for public purposes.
G. Amendment to the Nelson County Code-Keeping of Inoperative Motor Vehicles
Mr. Carter stated that the proposed ordinance is to amend the Code pertaining to keeping inoperative motor vehicles. The proposed amendments define motor vehicle and inoperative motor vehicle and the meaning of shielded or screened from view, establishes limitations on the number and location of inoperative motor vehicles within specific zoning classifications (districts), provides for certain exceptions and for notice and removal, including payment of costs therefore, of inoperative motor vehicles in violation of the ordinance, and, establishes violations of the ordinance as a Class One misdemeanor. Authority is pursuant to §15.2-904 of the Code of VA.
Mr. Payne noted that using the zoning mechanism definition made enforcement of the ordinance very difficult and that the proposed ordinance adopts the States broader definition and deletes language pertaining to farm vehicles in order to be in synch with the Zoning Ordinance.
The public hearing was opened, there were no comments, and the public hearing was closed.
Discussion of the Board included the suggestion by Mr. Harvey to strike item 2F which states “A violation of this Article shall constitute a Class One misdemeanor” from the Ordinance. He noted that he preferred to work with the public in cleaning up the junk cars. The Board agreed by consensus to remove this language from the resolution being considered. There was also consensus of the Board that there is a great need for junk car disposal in the County and that Mr. Harvey and Mr. Harris would work together on a solution. Ms. Brennan suggested compiling and providing an approved list of legal junk car disposal services to citizens in need of the service.
There being no other discussion, a motion was made by Mr.Bruguiere and seconded by Mr. Hale to approve the amended resolution (removing item 2F) as follows. Supervisors voted 5-0, by roll-call vote to approve the motion.
Resolution-Enacting Article III of Chapter 7 of the Code of Nelson County Pertaining to Inoperative Motor Vehicles.
BE IT RESOLVED, that Article III of Chapter 7 of the Code of Nelson County be, and hereby is, enacted as follows:
1. The title of Article III, Chapter 7 shall be: “Inoperative Motor Vehicles.”
2. The following sections are enacted:
(a) The following definitions shall apply in this Article. “Motor
vehicle” shall have the meaning found in the definition in Section
46.2-100 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. “Inoperative motor
vehicle” shall mean one or more of the following: (i) any motor
vehicle which is not in operative condition; (ii)any motor vehicle
which for a period of sixty (60) days or longer has been partially or
totally disassembled by the removal of tires and wheels, the engine, or other essential parts required for operation of the vehicle; or (iii) any motor vehicle on which there are displayed neither valid license plates nor a valid inspection decal. “Shielded or screened from view” means not visible by someone standing at ground level from outside of the property on which the subject vehicle is located.
(b) It shall be unlawful to keep inoperative motor vehicles on any property zoned C-1, A-1, R-1, B-1, B-2, SE-1, or RPC pursuant to Appendix A, Zoning, of this Code, unless such a vehicle is within a fully enclosed building or is otherwise shielded or screened from view. Additionally, it shall be unlawful to keep more than five inoperative motor vehicles on property zoned C-1, A-1, B-1, B-2 or SE-1, or more than two such vehicles on property zoned R-1, R-2, and R PC, unless such vehicles in excess of five or two, respectively, are kept within a fully enclosed building or structures.
(c) The provisions of this Article shall not apply to a business lawfully
engaged as an automobile dealer, automobile repair facility,
automobile salvage dealer, or scrap processor.
(d) The director of planning may remove or cause to be removed any
inoperative motor vehicle stored in violation of this Article
whenever the owner of the premises, after fifteen (15) days’ written notice, has failed to do so. In the event that the director has removed or caused such removal, he may, after giving an additional fifteen (15) days’ written notice to the
owner of such vehicle and the owner of the premises, dispose of
such vehicle. The cost of any such removal and disposal shall be
charged to the owner of the premises or to the owner of the
vehicle, and the treasurer shall collect such charges as taxes and levies are collected.
(e) Every cost authorized by this Article with which the owner of the
premises has been assessed shall constitute a lien against the property from which the vehicle has been removed, the lien to continue until actual payment of such costs has been paid to the county.
3. This ordinance shall be in effect upon enactment.
State Code Reference 15.3-904
III. Other Business
A. Appointments
Mr. Harvey noted that Rob Rutherford’s district should be corrected to be East rather than South on the staff report. It was the consensus of the Board to consider pending appointments at the December meeting.
B. Board of Supervisors Setting Date for Public Hearing on Zoning Amendments
Mr. Carter noted to the Board that the Planning Commission needs to publish a public hearing notice on the proposed Zoning Ordinance changes and send notices to all County households. Mr. Boger noted that the Board should consider setting their public hearing date so that it could be sent out with the Planning Commission’s notice. He noted that the Board could have the public hearing and do the review at a later date if needed. Mr. Hale noted that maybe they should set the date to avoid duplicate mailing of a notice to all households. Upon review of the State Code, Mr. Payne, County Attorney noted that the Board may not be required to send a notice to all households citing language from the code that says that once notice is given, the Board cannot prescribe a more intensive use classification. The Planning Commission gives written notice to all landowners and publishes their notice and then the Board does their public notice separately and holds its own public hearing. Following this discussion, the Board took no action.
VI. Closed Meeting - None.
IV. Public Comments – None.
V. Adjournment
At 10:05 P. M., on a motion by Mr. Hale, seconded by Ms. Brennan, Supervisors voted unanimously by roll call vote, (5-0), to approve the following resolution to adjourn and continue the meeting until 8:30am on November 27, 2006 at the Trillium House of the Wintergreen Nature Foundation for purposes of the conduct of a retreat and such other business as said Board of Supervisors may consider.
Resolution-Continuation of November 21, 2006 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 November 21, 2006 be and hereby is adjourned and shall be continued at 8:30 a.m. on November 27, 2006 at the Trillium House (offices) of the Wintergreen Nature Foundation for purposes of the conduct of a retreat and such other business as said Board of Supervisors may consider.
Copyright 2009 Nelson County, Virginia
Maintained by the Nelson County Convention & Visitors Bureau
and Department of Economic Development
Questions? Contact us 7 days a week from 9 am to 5 pm EST - 1-800-282-8223
Site theme can be downloaded here
