Buckingham County

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors Monthly Meeting December 9, 2013

At a regular monthly meeting of the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors held on Monday, December 9, 2013 at the Peter Francisco Auditorium of the Buckingham County Administration Complex, the following members were present: I. Monroe Snoddy, Chairman; Danny R. Allen, Vice Chairman; E.A. “Bill” Talbert; Joe N. Chambers, Jr.; Cassandra L. Stish; Donald E. Bryan; and John N. Staton. Also present were Karl Carter, Asst. County Administrator; Rebecca S. Cobb, Zoning Administrator; and E.M. Wright, Jr., County Attorney. Rebecca Carter, County Administrator was absent.

Re: Quorum

Chairman Snoddy certified there was a quorum-seven members present. The meeting could continue.

Re: Call to Order; Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance

Chairman Snoddy called the meeting to order. Supervisor Staton gave the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance was said by all who were in attendance.

Re: Approval of Agenda

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Allen seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the agenda with the following addendum:

F. Approval of Claims Commonwealth Regional Council- Enhancement project-$4,000 US Bank- School Bond- $500 M. Committee/Commission/Agency/Department/Reports/Requests/Appointments 4. Water System: Refund request for water billed in error* N. Other Matters for Board Consideration 3. Supervisor Snoddy requested to consider resolution against hunting on Sunday.

Re: Approval of minutes

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the minutes of the November 12, 2013 work session and regular meeting as presented.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 231 Re: Approval of Claims

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the claims as presented along with the addendum items.

Re: Approval of Third Quarter Appropriations

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Chambers seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the Third Quarter Appropriations as presented:

General Fund $1,748,786 Water Fund $ 310,000 Sewer Fund $ 61,750 VPA Fund $ 715,182

Schools:

Instruction $3,797,846 Adm/Attn/Health $ 287,895 Transportation $ 494,764 Operations $ 514,095 Cafeteria $ 299,024 Technology $ 256,773

Re: Public Comments

Sammy Smith: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Sammy Smith and I’m from District 5. After reading through the minutes, I want to commend you on your work on the Stormwater action. They promised us initially that residential houses would be exempt and I hope you stick to your guns on that. Thank you.

Charles Smith: I am Charles Smith and I live at 700 Troublesome Creek Road. I am one of four adjacent property owners on the Troublesome Creek Reservoir. In 2008 plans were begun to construct a new water treatment plant which included raising the water level 14 inches. Also in 2008 the county negotiated new easements and compensated the other three adjacent property owners. Five years later today, December 9, 2013, as adjacent property owner, I still have no easement, no compensation even though my land was flooded in April. Is it Buckingham County’s intention not to negotiate an easement with me and compensate me as you have done with the other landowners?

E.M. Wright: Mr. Chairman, may I respond since I was involved in these negotiations. We offered every landowner the same deal, the same language, the same compensation for the land that was chosen. This landowner chose not to accept the offer. We have an easement that goes back to the origination of that watershed when it was first built. It was very comprehensive. Whoever negotiated that one which was a long time ago, got a lot more but whatever but the

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 232 county thought it was fair to compensate adjoining owners because of the situation. You have the right in my opinion to proceed without. We would have been happy when Mr. Smith was offered compensation. All he had to do was say yes.

Charles Smith: We did make additional offers to the county.

E.M. Wright: If I may respond. Mr. Smith is being represented by council so I can’t talk directly to him. The offers they made were entirely different from what any other adjacent landowner was offered. We had already closed all the deals with those and to accept what they had offered was just not an acceptable way to proceed.

Re: VDOT: Road Matters

There were no representatives at this meeting.

Stish: Just a reminder. Isn’t it in January that we have our six year implement plan?

Snoddy: I believe it is.

Stish: Just a reminder for everybody.

Staton: Aren’t we are supposed to have a work session prior to that?

Stish: You are right. We were supposed to have a work session prior to the hearings.

Staton: Somebody needs to contact Mr. Wright or Mr. Shippee and get that scheduled.

K. Carter: I’ll do that.

Re: Introduction: Home Salon/Spa 13/ZTASUP221

Cobb: This is 13/ZTASUP221. This is an application by Rhada Metro for a zoning text amendment and a special use permit for in home salon/spa to be added as a special use in the Agricultural District. Her special use permit is for Tax Map Section 90, Parcel 1, Lot 7A containing an approximate 5 acres, on Rt. 56 which is S. James River Hwy in the James River Magisterial District.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 25, 2013 and is recommending approval with conditions. At this time I am just asking you to set a public hearing.

The conditions are as follows:

1. That all federal, state, and local regulations, ordinances and laws be strictly adhered to. 2. Ample parking shall be provided and no parking shall occur in any right of ways or roadway shoulders.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 233 3. The business shall commence at this location within one year of permit approval or the permit becomes null and void. 4. That all documentation submitted by the applicant in support of this request becomes a part of the conditions except that any such documentation that may be inconsistent with these enumerated conditions shall be superseded by these conditions. 5. Nothing in this approval shall be deemed to obligate the county to acquire any permits or approvals except as may be directly related hereto. 6. In the e vent that any one or more of the conditions is declared void for any reason whatever, such decision shall not affect the remaining portion of the permit, which shall remain in full force and effect and for this purpose, the provisions of this are herby declared to be severable. 7. That any infraction of the above mentioned conditions could lead to a stop order and discontinuation of the permit approval, if it be the wishes of the Board of Supervisors. 8. The County Zoning Administrator and one other county staff member, as appointed by the County Administrator, shall be allowed to enter the property at any time to check for compliance with the provisions of this permit. Notification to the landowners shall be given prior to inspection. 9. That the applicant(s) understands the conditions and agrees to the conditions.

Stish: Mr. Chairman, I’m just going to let everybody know, this is my sister and I have no financial obligation or ties to this application, but since this is my sister and a close personal relationship I’ll be abstaining from voting on this issue.

Staton: Mr. Chairman, I move that we set this for 7:15 at the January meeting and hold a public hearing on this subject.

Supervisor Staton moved, Supervisor Chambers seconded and was approved with 6 voting in favor and 1 (Supervisor Stish) abstaining to schedule a public hearing for 7:15 at the January 13, 2014 meeting to hear public comments on Case 13/ZTASUP221 for a Home salon/spa by Rhada Metro.

Re: Status of RFP’s for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Revisions

Cobb: I have one more item. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Revisions we sent out with RFP’s. Those RFP’s came back on December 6th which wasn’t in time to get into your packet. I did receive one RFP and it’s from the two gentlemen who did our review and they will also pair with Commonwealth Regional Council. I have that before me but I just want to know how you want to proceed from here. I threw out the idea of a subcommittee of two board members; two Commissioners, myself and Mrs. Carter could look over this RFP and then come back with a recommendation, if you wanted to do something like that.

Stish: I like that idea.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 234 Snoddy: I think we should appoint two board members. Supervisor Stish would probably like to serve on it.

Stish: I volunteer.

Snoddy: How about Supervisor Staton?

Staton: Yes, sir. I’ll do it.

Stish: Do we need to select Planning Commission too or will they select them?

Snoddy: I think they will have to do that.

Cobb: Yeah.

Chambers: We have two here tonight. Mr. Smith and Mrs. Gormus. I move we put them on there.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded to appoint Supervisor Stish, Supervisor Staton, Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Gormus to the subcommittee to go over the RFP for Comp Plan and Ordinance Review.

Re: Public Hearing: Case #13-SUP220 Slate River Ranch LLC: SUP to construct and operate a private airstrip

Cobb: This public hearing is for Case #13-SUP220. This is an application by Slate River Ranch for a Special Use Permit for a private airstrip. This request is located on the property of Glade and Kathleen Knight and is on Tax Map Section 122, Lots 44 and 44B containing an approximate 186 acres, off of Rt. 742 (Alcoma Rd.) in the Maysville Magisterial District.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 28, 2013. There were no comments at that time. The Planning Commission is recommending approval with conditions.

1. That all federal, state and local regulations, ordinances and laws be strictly adhered to. 2. That use of the airstrip shall begin within 24 months of the approval by the Board of Supervisors or this Special Use Permit shall be null and void. 3. The private landing strip must maintain an unobjectionable determination from the FAA. If the FAA determination expires the SUP also becomes void. 4. The private airstrip must register with the state. 5. All use shall be by private aircraft with the exception of emergency use. 6. No more than three (3) landings and three (3) take-offs shall occur in any 24 hour period by any jet engines. 7. No landings or take-offs by jet engines shall occur between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and no landings and take-offs by piston engines shall occur between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 235 8. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved prior to any land disturbance. All erosion and sediment control regulations must be strictly adhered to. 9. That all documentation submitted by the applicant in support of this request becomes a part of the conditions except that any such documentation that may be inconsistent with these enumerated conditions shall be superseded by these conditions. 10. Nothing in this approval shall be deemed to obligate the county to acquire any interest in property, to construct, maintain or operate any facility or to grant any permits or approvals except as may be directly related hereto. 11. In the event that any one or more of the conditions is declared void for any reason whatever, such decision shall not affect the remaining portion of the permit, which shall remain in full force and effect, and for this purpose, the provisions of this are hereby declared to be severable. 12. That any infraction of the above mentioned conditions could lead to a stop order and discontinuation of the permit approval, if it be the wishes of the Board of Supervisors. 13. The County Zoning Administrator and one other county staff member, as appointed by the County Administrator, shall be allowed to enter the property at any time to check for compliance with the provisions of this permit. Notification to the landowners shall be given prior to inspection. 14. That the applicant(s) understands the conditions and agrees to the conditions.

The representatives of the applicant are here tonight if you have any questions.

Bobby Snoddy: I’m Bobby Snoddy. You all know me. I’m an attorney here in Dillwyn. I represent Slate River Ranch LLC. With me, I have a representative of Slate River Ranch, Witt Montain seated next to Curtis Pearson who is representing Pearson Construction. They will be constructing the runway should it be approved and passed on by the Board. We are here to answer any questions you may have. Just to answer some questions in general from the start, I have told both the Planning Commission and the County Administration, the airstrip will be a private airstrip but it will be open to emergency that the county wishes to make whether it be Pegasus or rescue squad, fire departments. Anything of that nature. I’m sure there could also be some training events that may occur. The runway is about 4400 feet long on Rt. 742, Alcoma Road which is the road right across from Duck’s Corner by the Saxon home and comes back out on Rt. 60. There will be a considerable amount of fill and a considerable amount of excavation that will need to be done in order to put the landing strip in. It has been approved previously by the FAA. They have given us preclearance through next August and then we would have to get an extension because we do anticipate it will take longer than that to construct the entire runway. As I said, I do have Mr. Pearson and Mr. Montain here if you have any questions. I’ve heard some concern about the fact that the hours listed in the letter are hours are at some point darkness and the FAA has given a permit to a sight landing, not an instrument landing. Obviously the FAA rules are going to govern. But depending on when sunrise is and when sunset is, that is why the variance on the time element on the application.

Bryan: Are you planning on having lights?

Montain: There is potential, yes.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 236 Snoddy: There maybe lights on the side as a future goal. I don’t think it’s in this phase. I think everything is going to be daylight landing and daylight take-off.

Talbert: Mr. Snoddy, this says begin in 24 months. I have a problem with that. It says the permit will be null and void. I have a problem with that because you are setting a limit and with this kind of weather, you can’t move dirt…

Snoddy: When we first came in we were talking 12 months, then 18 months, and then talking to Mr. Pearson on how long it would take and extremely long period as far as taking in buffer zones in the construction, 24 months was agreed to. You might want to add something into the conditional use permit that allows us to come back should the construction take place in that time.

Talbert: I would be comfortable with that.

Snoddy: Just make a provision in that condition, should an extension be needed the applicant would come back in at least 60 days before the end of the 24 month period.

Stish: Could this be handled by administration?

Snoddy: I think it could be handled administratively rather than it dying on its own. You may want to put something in there as an escape route, so to speak.

As I said the construction would be by Pearson Construction Company and you know they employ a great deal of people in Buckingham County and we always like to see that. Additionally, the Slate River Ranch is a very large tax payer in this county as well as has always been a very good neighbor. We are very happy to have them here and I’m sure you agree.

Bryan: I have one other question, I know it says no more than 3 landings and 3 takeoffs, and it says no jet engines after 11 p.m., they don’t plan on doing any engine run-ups?

Snoddy: I think that is pretty straight forward.

Bryan: This is separate from the FAA. If they want to do maintenance runs….

Snoddy: Oh, make maintenance runs to make sure they have the right airflow…

Bryan: What concerns me, is if you are sleeping in the bed and you run an aircraft to power, it gets kind of noisy. Having have worked on airplanes, I know.

Snoddy: As far as the props are concerned, they have about the same noise as a medium size tractor. That’s what I’ve heard it compared to. The jet itself, you know that is going to have more noise, and when it lands, I don’t know if the 4400 foot strip if they would have to put in reverse to stop, I would think not. If you want to add a provision in there that says no engine

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 237 run-ups or not landings or run-ups in that period of time, they wouldn’t have a problem with that. I think you will find that the Slate River Ranch people are very good neighbors. They enjoy their quiet like everyone else.

Any other questions? Thank you Mr. Bryan for your question.

Chairman Snoddy declared the public hearing open.

Charles Smith: I’m just curious about where the approaches to your airstrip would be?

Snoddy: The approaches would be from…the strip is going to be situated on Rt. 742, Alcoma Road. The approach will be from the Northwest across to the Southeast which would be over… the closest facility of any type would be the Wheatland Airstrip off of Rt. 56 owned by Mr. Moseley and across 56 and intersection of Dixie Hill road 638 going across where Judge Spencer and Franklin Spencer’s property. Your property is probably located…let’s say 4 miles. It’s not going to be coming across the reservoir or Rt. 631.

There being no further comments.

Chairman Snoddy declared the public hearing closed.

Chambers: I’ve already made a motion accidentally so I’ll just have it stay there to approve.

Stish: Mr. Chambers, did you want to add one condition for there to be an extension of time that there be a letter could be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for a time extension.

Chambers: Yea, I have no problem with that.

Stish: Are you interested in entertaining Mr. Bryan’s suggestion of a condition regarding engine run-ups after 11:00 p.m.? They are the only two items of discussion.

Snoddy: We have no objection to either one.

Chambers: Mr. Bryan is like myself. He don’t need all that sleep. He’ll be alright.

Bryan: If I hear it down where I live, something is wrong.

Snoddy: It’s coming right over the top of my house.

Chambers: We can do that.

Stish: So with conditions?

Chambers: With conditions.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 238 Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Staton seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve 13-SUP-220 Slate River Ranch, LLC private airstrip with conditions.

Re: Public Hearing: Proposed revisions to the Real Estate Tax Stabilization Ordinance

K. Carter: This public hearing tonight is for revisions to the ordinance for Tax Relief for the Elderly and Disabled. The purpose of this Ordinance is to provide stabilization of real estate for the elderly and disabled persons in the County that deemed eligible. What this is trying to accomplish is the applicants taxes will not go up should the county’s tax rate goes up. You should have a copy for your review.

The ordinance was last revised in 2008 and expires every 5 years and has to be reauthorized by the Board of Supervisors. The Commissioner of the Revenue estimates it costs approximately $11,000 per year.

There is one line in particular that we are changing in this ordinance tonight. Page 1 Section 2 Definition of Real Estate Tax Stabilization and page 4 Section II.D. definitions: Both sections say that the tax payer will be taxed at the tax rate that is in place at the time the application is approved. I ask that more clarification be put into this document as to the intent should the tax rate be lowered. I think that if the tax rate is lowered the property owner should be taxed at the lower rate; otherwise they could possibly be paying more taxes than those not receiving any tax relief. I ask that you consider the following revisions to this ordinance:

Section 2, Definition of Real Estate Tax Stabilization and Section II. D., Definitions Include the following:

If a new tax rate set by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors is lower than the rate set at the Time of the initial application, the successful applicant shall be taxed at the lower rate.

Chairman Snoddy declared the public hearing open.

There were no comments.

Chairman Snoddy declared the public hearing closed.

Supervisor Allen moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to adopt the new language for the Real Estate Tax Stabilization ordinance.

The revised ordinance is as follows:

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 239 Ordinance to Provide Real Estate Tax Stabilization for Qualified Elderly and Disabled Persons in the County of Buckingham, Virginia

Section 1. Purpose and Authority A. The purpose of this Ordinance is to provide stabilization of real estate tax for the elderly and disabled persons in Buckingham County. B. The authority for this Ordinance is §58-1-3210 et seq. of the 1950 Code of Virginia. Section 2. Definition of Real Estate Tax Stabilization as it Pertains to this Ordinance: If deemed eligible according to the requirements of this ordinance, the Buckingham County real estate owner would be taxed according to the real estate tax rate at the time of approval of an application for real estate tax stabilization. The qualified Buckingham County real estate owner would pay that tax rate until which time the property would change ownership. When ownership changes the new property would pay the tax rate according to the tax rates schedules of Buckingham County. If the County of Buckingham should propose a real estate tax rate change, the qualified real estate owner would not experience a real estate tax rate increase. If a new tax rate set by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors is lower than the rate set at the Time of the initial application, the successful applicant shall be taxed at the lower rate .

Section 3. Eligibility: Real Estate Tax stabilization if provided for qualified property owners who are not less than 65 years of age or who are permanently and totally disabled and who are eligible according to this ordinance. Persons who qualify for real estate tax stabilization are deemed to be bearing an extraordinary real estate tax burden to the income and financial worth. Section 4. Determination of Eligibility for Stabilization of Real Estate Tax: The application process shall be administered by the Commissioner of the Revenue. The Commissioner is authorized and empowered to make such inquiry of persons seeking real estate tax stabilization, requiring answers under oath, as may be reasonably necessary to determine qualifications for real estate tax stabilization applicants. The Commissioner shall require the production of certified tax returns and other appropriate documentation to establish income or financial worth. Section 5. General Prerequisites to Granting: A. Under this ordinance, real estate tax stabilization shall be granted to any person who applies for real estate tax stabilization and meets the following criteria: 1. The applicant must own the real estate; Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 240 2. The applicant must occupy the dwelling on the real estate for which the real estate tax stabilization is sought; 3. The applicant must be at least 65 years of age or are permanently and totally disabled; 4. The total combined income received from all sources during the preceding calendar year b (i) owners of the dwelling who use it as their principal residence and (ii) owners’ relatives who live in the dwelling, shall not exceed $35,000. 5. The net combined financial worth, including the present value of all equitable interests, as of December 31 of the immediately preceding calendar year of the owners and of the spouse of any owner, excluding one family vehicle and the value of the dwelling and the land not exceeding 10 acres upon which it is situated, shall not exceed $80,000. The applicant must reside in Buckingham County for five (5) years before qualifying. B. Income shall mean total gross income from all sources, without regard t whether a tax return is actually filed. Income shall not include life insurance benefits or receipts from borrowing or other debt. C. A dwelling jointly held by a husband and wife may qualify if either spouse is sixty-five or over or is permanently and totally disabled. Section 6. Application for Tax Stabilization: A. The applicant shall file with the Commissioner of the Revenue, on forms supplied by the County, an affidavit or written statement setting forth the following: (i) The names of the related persons occupying such real estate; (ii) The total combined net worth, including equitable interests and the combined income from all sources of the persons specified in Section Five of this Ordinance does not exceed the limits set forth in Section Five. B. The applicant shall file the affidavit or written statement on a three-year cycle but, in order to remain eligible, the claimant shall file annually a certification that no information contained on the last preceding affidavit or written statement has changed to violate the limitations and conditions of the ordinance. If such certification cannot be filed, the applicant must file a new affidavit or written statement in order to remain eligible. C. If such person is under sixty-five years of age, such form shall have attached thereto a certification by the Social Security Administration, the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, or the Railroad Retirement Board, or if such person is not eligible for certification by any of these agencies, a sworn affidavit by two medical doctors who are either licensed to practice medicine in the Commonwealth or are military officers on active duty who practice medicine with the United states Armed Forces, to the effect that the person is permanently and totally disabled, as defined in §58.1-3217; however, a certification pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §423 (d) by the Social Security Administration so long as the person remains eligible for such social security benefits shall be deemed to satisfy such definition in §58.1-3217. The affidavit of at

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 241 least one of the doctors shall be based upon a physical examination of the person by such doctor. The affidavit of one of the doctors may be based upon medical information contained in the records of the Civil Services Commission which is relevant to the standards for determining permanent and total disability as defined in §58.1-3217. D. The Commission of the Revenue shall also make any other reasonably necessary inquiry of persons seeking such exemption, requiring answers under oath, to determine qualifications as specified herein, including qualification as permanently and totally disabled as defined in §58.1-3217 and qualification for the exclusion of life insurance benefits paid upon the death of an owner of a dwelling. E. Certified copies of tax returns of the applicant and others shall be produced to establish the income or financial worth of any applicant. F. The application or certification shall be filed after April 1, but before July 1. Section 7. Effect of Applicant’s Residency in Hospital, Nursing Home, or Similar Facility: The fact that a person who is otherwise qualified for exemption pursuant to this ordinance is residing in a hospital, nursing home, convalescent home, or other facility for physical or mental care for extended periods of time shall not be construed to mean that the property for which tax exemption is sought does not continue to be the sole dwelling of such person during such extended periods of other residence, so long as such property is not used by or leased to others for consideration. Section 8. Certification of Commissioner If after any audit or investigation, the Commissioner of the Revenue determines that a person is qualified or not qualified for real estate tax stabilization under this ordinance, the Commissioner of the Revenue shall make any necessary adjustments to that person’s tax bill. Section 9. Notification of Change in Status A. Changes in respect to income, financial worth, ownership of property, or the factors occurring during the taxable year for which an affidavit is filed under this ordinance and having the effect of exceeding or violating the limitations and conditions provided in this ordinance shall nullify real estate tax stabilization for the then current taxable year and the taxable year immediately following. B. A change in ownership due to the death of the qualifying individual, or a sale of such property shall result in the property reverting to being taxed at the present real estate tax rate set in the County of Buckingham. Should this change in ownership take place during a tax year the tax shall be prorated taxing the number of month of the year such property was not eligible for tax stabilization by the present County real estate tax rate. Section 10. Violation of this Ordinance: Should any real estate owner be found to have knowingly provided false information to qualify for real estate tax stabilization status or fail to provide information that would change the qualification status, that property owner will be required to pay back taxes at the effective tax

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 242 rate enacted by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors. If said property owner fails to pay the back taxes, the County may put a tax lien on the property. False affidavits or written statements may be prosecuted criminally. Section 11. Definitions: The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: A. Affidavit or written statement shall mean the form supplied by the County submitted by the application under oath. B. Commissioner means the Commissioner of the Revenue of the County or any of her duly authorized deputies or agents. C. Dwelling means the full-time residence of the person claiming stabilization status. D. Stabilization of Real Estate Tax means that the qualified property owner would be taxed at the tax rate that is set by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors at which time the application is approved. If a new tax rate set by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors is lower than the rate set at the Time of the initial application, the successful applicant shall be taxed at the lower rate .

E. Permanently and Totally Disabled means unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity because of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment or deformity which can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for the duration of such person’s life. F. Property means real property and manufactured homes as defined by Section 58.1-85.3 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. G. Taxable year means the calendar year from January 1 until December 31, for which exemption is claimed. Section Twelve. Advertisement: The Treasurer shall enclose written notice, in each real estate tax bill, of the terms and conditions of this ordinance. The Treasurer shall also employ any other reasonable means necessary to notify residents of the County about the terms and conditions of this ordinance for elderly and handicapped residents of the County. This Ordinance will expire five years from the date of its effective date unless reauthorized by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: This ordinance was adopted by the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2005, and was revised May 12, 2008 and again December 9, 2013. By Order of the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 243 Rebecca S. Carter, County Administrator Re: Nominations for Industrial Development Authority

Chairman Snoddy appointed Tom Hughes for the Industrial Development Authority. Supervisor Stish reappointed Annie Parr for the Industrial Development Authority.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Stish seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to appoint Tom Hughes and reappoint Annie Parr for the Industrial Development Authority.

Re: Consider request from Ellis Acres Memorial Park, Inc. to waive the water/sewer charges for 2014.

Supervisor Talbert moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the request from Ellis Acres Memorial Park, Inc. to waive the water/sewer charges for 2014.

Re: Request from Sheriff Kidd to advertise for vehicle purchases

Memo from Kidd:

This letter serves as my intent to solicit for bids for the purchase of four 2014 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles with approved funds in the 2013-14 fiscal year budget. I request that you send out-to-bid with the appropriate notices and advertising for the purchase of these vehicles.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the request of Sheriff Kidd for bids to be sent out for the purchase of four 2014 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Vehicles with funds from the 2013-14 budget.

Additionally I would like your consideration in purchasing a fifth vehicle, a 2014 Ford F150 Crew Cab truck to replace a 2008 Ford Explorer that is utilized by the Drug Investigator. Funding for this vehicle can be accomplished through a USDA Community Development loan at $27,000 for a five year period at a low interest rate of 3.5% with annual payments of $5,981. By utilizing the USDA loan, we will be able to stretch the cost of this replacement vehicle over a five year period and make payments from our Drug Asset Forfeiture Account with no impact on current or future fiscal year budgets. The account currently has enough funds to support three years of payments and we anticipate generating additional revenue to fulfill the remaining obligation within the loan period. This in essence will fully support the purchase of this vehicle.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Staton seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the request of Sheriff Kidd to purchase a 2014 Ford F150 Crew Cab Truck and finance it through USDA.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 244 Re: Transfer of funds from the Sheriff’s Drug Fund for use with the Regional Drug Task Force

$2500 transferred from the Drug account into a paper check made out to Piedmont Regional Narcotic and Gang Enforcement Task Force which is our part of the funding needed to purchase drugs in undercover drug buys.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the transfer of $2500 transferred from drug account to be paid to Piedmont Regional Narcotic and Gang Enforcement Task Force.

Re: Sheriff Announcement

Kidd: Several months ago the Attorney General’s office contacted all the Sheriff’s Departments to see if Sheriff’s offices wanted to get some of this one time asset forfeiture money that the state won, he was willing to share it with us. So, I got Mr. Uzdanovics to fill out the paperwork because he is very good at it and we have received a letter from Mr. Cuccinelli’s office, On behalf of Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, I am pleased to announce that your department has been approved for an asset forfeiture transfer based upon the submitted proposal in the amount of $299,761.34. We are going to get some much needed equipment.

Re: Water System: Refund request for water billed in error

Staton: Karl would you like to explain this to us.

K. Carter: Yes, sir. What happened is, we had a customer that was inactive but was still being billed. This customer, I don’t know if he had someone paying his bills for him, but he was still paying it even though there was no service. He continued to pay so we need to reimburse him.

Staton: He had no service to the meter.

Carter: That’s right.

Supervisor Staton moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to reimburse Mr. James Lyles the amount of $924.06 for water/sewer paid in error.

Sammy Smith: Mr. Chairman, as a point of order, why wasn’t that included in monthly claims?

Stish: Because it came late.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 245 Re: Consider 2014 meeting schedule

Monday, January 13, 2014 Monday, February 10, 2014 Monday, March 10, 2014 Monday, April14, 2014 Monday, May 12, 2014 Monday, June 9, 2014 Monday, July14, 2014 Monday, August 11, 2014 Monday, September 8, 2014 Tuesday, October 14, 2014 Wednesday, November 12, 2014 Monday, December 8, 2014

Carter: I would like to point out that the Wednesday, November 12th is not a misprint. November 10th we are at the VACo conference and November 11th is a holiday.

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve the above 2014 meeting schedule.

Re: First Day Introduction Requirement

Carter: In your packet you have a copy of an email that Supervisor Bryan got. You may want to speak on this some too but basically what this is they are asking is for us to adopt a resolution because in the past the government has adopted things that have given us a negative impact. This resolution is asking that at some point in the future anything that may effect local government goes to the First Day Task Force Committee and they will look at it first to look at the impact it would have on local government before it’s taken to the General Assembly. They would have some people looking after our behalf before it’s voted on.

Bryan: We discussed that at the VACo Conference as well.

Stish: I think it’s a great idea.

Copy of the email:

Over the last two years, the Governor’s Task Force for Local Government Mandate Review has examined in great detail mandates on local governments and the means through which they are enacted. What has emerged from this work is a clear understanding and recognition that the local government fiscal impact review process needs to be improved. As we have seen over the last two years, the focus on the fiscal impact of mandates has had a positive result in recent General Assembly sessions, and the number of bills referred for fiscal review has increased.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 246

Prior to 2010, a first day introduction requirement was in place to ensure that any bill enacting a local mandate would be sufficiently analyzed by the Commission on Local Government prior to its being considered by the General Assembly. Unfortunately, in 2010 this provision was removed and now only bills pertaining to the Virginia Retirement System must meet this requirement.

Under the current system of review, there are not enough resources for bills to be properly reviewed for fiscal impact within the given time constraints imposed by the current filing deadlines. The Task Force believes that the magnitude of the problems caused by a lack of adequate review of local mandate bills prior to their passage necessitates the reinstatement of the first day filing requirement. We believe proper fiscal impact analysis will result in fewer bills with local fiscal mandates making it through the General Assembly.

The Task Force has made the reinstatement of the first day introduction requirement for all bills with a local fiscal impact its primary recommendation this year. Going into the 2014 General Assembly Session, the Task Force is asking local governments to include their support for this change in their legislative agendas as well as the passage of resolutions by Boards of Supervisors, and City and Town Councils in favor of the change.

For your consideration, a sample resolution is attached. The Task Force thanks you for your attention and consideration of this critical matter. Together, Governor McDonnell, the Task Force and local governments have made historic progress in the repeal of dozens of local mandates, creating a new awareness of the impact of local mandates, and eliminated numerous additional “mandates” via discussion with state agencies and executive action. Your support of the reinstatement of the first day introduction requirement will go a long way to reducing the burden of mandates placed on the Commonwealth’s 324 local governments.

We are continuing our review of local mandates and encourage you to continue to identify and refer mandates you believe should be reviewed by sending suggestions to [email protected] On behalf of the Task Force I thank you for your support of our efforts.

Sincerely yours,

Patrick S. Herrity Chair, Governor’s Task Force for Local Government Mandate Review Springfield District Supervisor, Fairfax County Board of Supervisors

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 247 SAMPLE RESOLUTION FIRST DAY INTRODUCTION REQUIREMENT FOR BILLS WITH LOCAL FISCAL IMPACTS

WHEREAS, many local governing bodies in Virginia have an ever-growing concern about the impact on localities of state mandates and cost shifting; and

WHEREAS, Section 30-19.03 of the Code of Virginia states that the Commission on Local Government shall prepare and publish a statement of fiscal impact for “any bill requiring a net additional expenditure by any county, city, or town, or…any bill requiring a net reduction of revenues by any county, city, or town, is filed during any session of the General Assembly”; and

WHEREAS, numerous bills fitting this criteria have been submitted and gone through the legislative process without review for local fiscal impacts due to limited time and resources to review these bills during the General Assembly session; and

WHEREAS, it is also recognized that a need exists for additional time and resources to provide such information during the tight procedural confines of the current legislative process; and

WHEREAS, we believe it is critical that lawmakers have better and timelier information on the fiscal impact to localities when they consider bills and budget items; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE _(locality)__ HEREBY:

Requests that the General Assembly support measures that require its members to file bills with local fiscal impacts as early as possible and no later than the first day of session.

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Staton seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to adopt the above resolution.

Re: Consider Resolution against hunting on Sunday

Staton: You have a copy of a proposed resolution against hunting on Sunday. Cumberland County and a lot of other counties have issued the same type of thing off of that resolution and I so move.

Supervisor Staton moved, Supervisor Stish seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to adopt the following resolution against hunting on Sunday:

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 248 RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, Buckingham County has a tradition of hunting that is as old as the County;

WHEREAS, The Buckingham County tradition of hunting provides significant economic benefit to the County and its people;

WHEREAS, the Buckingham County tradition of hunting contributes significantly to wildlife management, enhances public safety by reducing moor vehicle collisions, reduces crop damage, disease control and diseases;

WHEREAS, Buckingham County land owners are exceedingly generous with their support of hunting by allowing hunters to their property to pursue their sport;

WHEREAS, Buckingham County values its open space for use by all citizens, for hiking, horseback riding, wildlife watching, outdoor recreation and simply enjoying the blessings of a benevolent Creator without;

WHEREAS, Buckingham County Board of Supervisors recognized that civility is an inherent part of the character of rural Virginians and recognized also, that many citizens do not feel safe sharing the open spaces while hunters pursue their sport;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors supports hunting in its many and varied forms as currently authorized by the Code of Virginia and the regulations of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Buckingham County Boar of Supervisors does not support hunting in any form on Sunday and hereby urges members of the Virginia General Assembly and members of the Board of Directors of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries to oppose any additional laws or regulations that would authorize expanded hunting on Sunday.

Re: Other Board Matters

Staton: I have a couple things Mr. Chairman to add to the list.

First, we lost Bob Saxon in the last week or so. He and his family have been long time residents of Buckingham County and supporters. Mr. Saxon was involved in the Ruritans for years and other organizations in the county.

I would ask the Board if we could do a memorial presentation for his service to the County.

Supervisor Staton moved, Supervisor Allen seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to adopt a Resolution of Memoriam for Bob Saxon.

Re: County Attorney Matters

There were none.

Re: Update on the New Water Plant

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 249 The new water plant is online and operating. We don’t have a report for you right now. We hope to have something to you at the January meeting. Re: Other Board Matters

Staton: Every since I’ve been on this Board we’ve had solid waste problems in a lot of areas even in the manned sites to a degree. I would like to propose for the Board’s consideration tonight that effective February 1, 2014 that we close four unmanned sites and man Rt. 56.

Allen: Do you think it will help the situation?

Staton: Yes, sir. I do.

Allen: I disagree.

Talbert: I do too. Two of them will be in my district. The point I bring up is what else does the people in my district get for their tax dollars. I know we need to do something over there. I’ve already been to a lot of the citizens…if you do this then the people in that area are going to private like they did in Hicksburg. There is no other alternative. You can’t expect a man to drive 16 miles to bring his trash to over here at the Rt. 600 site with the cost of everything and you are looking at year after year. It’s going to cost him a fortune. I think if this happens…we need to come up with a solution. I don’t have a solution. Maybe they can put one down there and somewhere else. I don’t think just saying close them when you have citizens putting their tax dollars here and that’s all they get for it. I know they get fire service and rescue squad service. I’m not talking that point. I just don’t think we can ask a citizen to drive 16 miles at the Appomattox River and down on Crumptown road. It’s 16 miles from there.

Stish: Supervisor Talbert, I understand because we don’t have any sites in the 5th district. There is not one.

Talbert: I think you ought to have one.

Stish: I think that if we close four unmanned sites we would save a lot of money and I think we could take that cost savings and strategically put another manned site somewhere between the lower end like between Toga and down your way. We can mitigate some of those long driving distances. We do have to start some place and we have to start with a cost savings. I think closing the unmanned sites and getting rid of the illegal dumping that’s happening and the construction dumping that’s happening, the trash fires that we have happening and all these other headaches we’ve got. I realize it’s an inconvenience for some people but there are also a headache for a lot of others. I drive 17 miles to haul my trash and I know a lot of other good people that do also. So we are all kind of in this boat together. So maybe we can agree. We can close the unmanned sites and get rid of that problem and we can save some money on the tipping charges. I think we are going to. Then we can look and see if we can strategically add something back in with that savings. But I think we are going to have pay attention to it. Track the changes, see what we are savings and apply it back to the solution. I don’t want it to just go back into the kitty and get absorbed. What do you guys think about that?

Talbert: I think just to make a motion and do it tonight, I think it should come for a public hearing and see what the people say because they are the ones that give us the money. We all pay taxes. I have no problem with the one on 638 and 637. I’ve already talked to the people there. That one down there at Bates is not costing you a dime. The simple reason is that’s where they fill their truck up before they go

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 250 into Prince Edward. If you don’t you go into Prince Edward with a half a load. I’ve been told that time and time again by employees driving the truck. The one on 638 and 637 is the problem.

Bryan: With Prince Edward trash.

Talbert: Did you know that Lyn has done a study? He’s caught 50 some people. What he does with them is their business not mine. You’ve got some all the way from Altavista or somewhere away from here, whether it was somebody here with a camper and put their trash there, I don’t know but they caught them. All you’ve got to do in fine a couple of them $1000 and you will stop it. Look, the other question is what are you going to do with the one down at Sprouse’s Corner? They leave there at 10:20 and don’t come back to after 2:00. You going to pay them 40 hours a week and give them hospitalization? That’s what you are going to have to do. You are going to have to have full time 40 hours a week employees there.

Staton: No sir, Mr. Talbert, you won’t. We can continue until we get them closed and can get the information we need, which we can’t get until we get them closed. We continue part time positions for the manning of these sites and we can look on that. First we have to get them closed so we will have a place to start. People have asked me for figures and figures and figures and I can’t give figures until about a year into this. I don’t have the information and neither does anybody else. People have told me that work at these sites, we have lost revenue on metals because one man told me that when he left to go on break, I was ready to call in a roll back full of metal. When I came back at 2:00 it wasn’t but a wheelbarrow full of metal left at that dumpster. We are bleeding money in a lot of directions.

Allen: That’s at a manned site?

Staton: Manned sites are only manned certain hours a day, Danny.

Allen: I know that. So when you close all these other sites and you are then going to have trash all on the sides of the road.

Bryan: You are going to have that regardless, Mr. Allen.

Allen: You are going to make it worse.

Staton: One of the gentlemen I caught on 657 for six weeks to two months had been strowing trash up and down the sides of the road on 657, 602, 655, 56 because it was falling off his trailer. I stopped and picked some of it up. Now, if people want to do that, I’ve been here long enough to remember when we had a trash container at every crossroad in this county, and they were there and they were hazards for health and everything else. We’ve got another thing to consider here and that is the liability that the county has when one of these children that people sit in these dumpsters in shorts and flip flops, and I’ve seen that, gets hurt guess who’s going to get sued.

Allen: Are you saying they are not going to wear flip flops on these manned sites?

Staton: No body is there to prevent them from going into those containers.

Stish: I’m assuming that your proposal is coming from the Utilities Committee and that you guys have come up with a phased plan.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 251 Staton: We are still working on the phased plan.

Stish: The details of a phased plan are difficult to come up with because we don’t have a comparative data set. So we need to close these unmanned sites so we can get a comparative data set. So we can know what we have here. Is that what you are proposing?

Staton: Yes. I’m not opposed if the data allows it to do things different and I’m not opposed to add what I need to add but I don’t know what I need to add yet.

Stish: So we are asking to close four…well we really don’t have a proposal…this is closing four manned sites so we can get the information we need …

Staton: And man Rt. 56.

Stish: And man 56.

Talbert: I’d like to make an amendment to the motion. Before we approve this, let the public have a say so. They are the one’s that use it. We use it a little bit. I’ve done the study as far as money.

Stish: We haven’t called for question yet.

Talbert: We’ve got to vote on my amendment first.

Stish: There is still discussion, we’ve got two gentlemen who voted. This is the problem. We are still not done with discussion. We have someone who is considering adding an amendment to this motion which would be I’m assuming that we would have a public hearing in January on closing these unmanned sites to be applicable for a study. Are you amenicable to this, Mr. Staton?

Staton: Mr. Wright? Can this Board take this action without a public hearing?

Wright: Yes you can.

Talbert: There is no question about that. I’m just simply saying this is going to affect everybody in Buckingham County. Why not let the citizen have the say so? If the citizens say yes, lets close them, I’ll go along with it 100%. I’ve already talked to my people in my district. They know its going to be closed sooner or later. That’s why we we’ve set up…we already know who’s going to be treasurer, to set up a membership so they don’t have to drive 17-20 miles to dump trash. My neighbor, Roger Edwards, had one for the last 10 years. It costs him $35 a month and he don’t have to worry about his trash. They come once a month and dumps it and that’s it.

Staton: I’ll have to drive 16 miles one way and 21 the other. So it’s an imposition on me as well as anywhere else. I don’t have a problem going into a public hearing and discussion when we go into the next phase prior to gathering information for the public to see as to hours of operation and so forth and so on. I’m not opposed to that at all.

Stish: At this point…

Staton: At this point I want to close them.

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 252 Supervisor Staton moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded to close the four unmanned sites and man Rt. 56 site on February 1, 2014. This motion passed with a 4-3 vote. Supervisors Staton, Bryan, Stish and Chambers voting in favor. Supervisors Talbert, Allen and Snoddy opposing.

Stish: We sort of got a little shuffled around a bit, Mr. Chairman. I really do have something for other Board matters. I have two things but I’m just going to bring one tonight. When we were at the VACo conference this year, I attended a session for economic development in agriculture, particularly. There was a man there from Rockingham County and they were showing their Farm First Program which is a combination of a program and a special zoning code to allow for seasonal on farm activities to be able to be applied for a nominal fee and a review by a local extension agent and an administrative review by our zoning administrator. They can proceed with on farm activities without having to go through the lengthy SUP process. I absolutely loved this because it invigorates the idea of economic development through agricultural activities. I felt that fit very well with our Comprehensive Plan and in the direction that this county is trying to go to utilize these resources better. I ask that this Board approve for Rebecca Cobb to work with Jennifer Liggon to explore this program in Rockingham to see how we can implement it here in Buckingham and bring it back to us. That is my motion.

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Bryan seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to approve for Rebecca Cobb and Jennifer Liggon to look into the Farm First Program in Rockingham to see about implementing it in Buckingham County and bring what they find back to the Board.

Chambers: We had talked about this before the meeting…

Stish: I was concerned that the office was going to be closed for quite a while and the public might actually need to have the County Administration office open sometime during that course of time. I feel it is very generous to give the office staff this time off but I feel it is important to have the office open for the sake of the public to conduct their business.

Chambers: So you are not going to support it?

Stish: No. It’s not that I don’t support it. Don’t take it personally. It’s just that somebody may have a question or need to conduct business.

Talbert: I don’t think anybody will be coming in to get a building permit and all. We have nothing to do with the Constitutional officers and whether they work on Friday or not.

Chambers: I don’t see anything wrong with giving the Friday to the County Administration.

Stish: Fine, it sounds innocent enough.

Supervisor Chambers moved, Supervisor Talbert seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to give Friday, December 27 th as a holiday.

Re: Executive Session

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Allen seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to enter into executive session under the following code: Section 2.2.3711.A.7. – Consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members or consultants pertaining to actual or probable litigation, where such consultation or briefing in open meeting would adversely affect the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 253 negotiating or litigating posture of the public body; and consultation with legal counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel.

Re: Return to regular session and Certification:

Supervisor Stish moved, Supervisor Allen seconded and was unanimously carried by the Board to certify that to the Best of each Board Member’s Knowledge only Public Business Matters as were identified by the Motion by which the Closed Executive Meeting was convened were Heard, Discussed or Considered in the Executive Closed Session.

There was no action taken as a result of the executive closed session.

Staton: I’d like to take this opportunity in case you all haven’t heard it, Sheriff Kidd has a very good piece on the radio on fraud. If you haven’t heard it it’s worth a listen. I’d like to commend him and his department for that.

Chambers: I’d like to wish all the staff a very Merry Christmas and a Happy Hangover.

There being no further business to discuss, Chairman Snoddy declared the meeting adjourned.

ATTEST:

______Rebecca S. Carter I. Monroe Snoddy County Administrator Chairman

Buckingham County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2013 Page 254