AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE RAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HELD ON THE 3rd DAY OF MAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN AT TWO O'CLOCK P.M. AT THE COURTHOUSE IN WASHINGTON, VIRGINIA

Present	Present	Absent
Roger A Welch, Chairman S. Bryant Lee, V-Chairman Ronald L. Frazier I. Christopher Parrish Michael J. Biniek	John McCarthy, Co. Adm. Peter H. Luke, Co. Attorney Margaret R. Ralph, Clerk	None

Chairman Welch called the meeting to order. All members were present.

MINUTES: Mr. Frazier requested the following correction to the minutes: On page 2, paragraph concerning Dr. Chappell's raise. The dates should be 2008-2009 not 2008-2008. On motion of Mr. Lee, seconded by Mr. Frazier, the minutes were approved as corrected.

AGENDA: Mr. McCarthy explained the Dr. Chappell had expected to be at a meeting, but he is in attendance and will be presenting "About our Schools" with additional information. Mr. Welch called for a motion to accept the revised agenda. On motion of Mr. Parrish, seconded by Mr. Biniek, the revised agenda was adopted, with Mr. Parrish, Mr. Biniek, Mr. Lee, and Mr. Welch voting aye and Mr. Frazier voting nay. The motion carried.

ABOUT OUR SCHOOLS: Dr. Chappell spoke; Mr. Frazier said he believed that there needed to be some discussion before the meeting could continue in the event that Dr. Chappell was presenting new budgetary information. Mr. McCarthy explained that according to the Board's rules anything can be added to the agenda with the agreement of a majority of a quorum. For action to be taken, a majority would be required. Mr. Frazier added that he thought Dr. Chappell would be presenting information pertaining to the budget, and that might require Board action. Dr. Chappell answered that he didn't plan to offer any information on the budget.

Dr. Chappell took the opportunity to say good-by. After working in Rappahannock for 20 years, he has a special love for the school and the county. He wanted to thank this board and all previous boards for their support to him and to the schools. Dr. Chappell then introduced Aline Johnson.

Mrs. Johnson presented a letter from the Rappahannock County School to the Board member. She said she would not read the letter, but would like to comment on several items in the letter. She continued by saying the School Board realizes there are problems to be addressed and that the board will work to solve them. Mr. Frazier interjected saying that this is the situation that he previously referred to. Some discussion followed.

Mr. Welch commented that since the letter was not seen by all the members of the board, and does contain budgetary information, it could not be considered by the Board. Mrs. Johnson continued her statement without any reference to the dollar amounts mentioned in the letter. She added that the School Board is as concerned as the Board of Supervisors about the problems facing the school system and that the School Board will continue to work with the Supervisors to solve these problems.

Mr. Johnson then shared some Art Work of a 4^th grade student (her granddaughter)

and a letter from Todd Gilbert. Mrs. Johnson said that this was a lesson in Art as well as history and politics. Mr. Welch read the letter to the audience.

ADOPTION OF THE SCHOOL BUDGET: Mr. McCarthy stated that the school board budget before the Board was for $11,592,166.00 – duly advertised and noticed with a public meeting held on April 26, 2010. It is now before the Board of Supervisors in compliance with State law.

Mr. Welch recognized Mr. Frazier, who had a few comments concerning the school budget in general. He continued by talking about tools as provided for us by a set of ordinances and offered as an example a set of 7 wrenches as an analogy for his comments. He added that we have been given tools to correct our problems, but we can't fix them with a "one size fits all" approach. Approval of the School Budged by category will give us an opportunity to attempt to fix things. He said the problem is not just with the heating system. He asked if the Board knew that every 7^th grade student is not issued a textbook. Categorical approval of the budget will allow us to ask this question before money is moved from one category to another. Categorical approval of the budget will allow is to determine our maintenance needs.

Mr. Lee commented that last year his son had textbooks, and if he asked the teacher he could take it home. Mr. Frazier countered with the question: could all the students take one home.

Mr. Frazier continued that a vote for categorical adoption of the school budget would be a vote for the teachers, the parents, the taxpayers and most importantly, a vote for the students. Mr. Frazier moved that the Board approve the School Budget by category. Mr. McCarthy asked for a clarification of the motion for the record is the motion to adopt the budget by category or to set the dollar amounts by category. Mr. Frazier said it would be the latter. Mr. Luke suggested that the budget could be approved by category but not by amounts. Mr. Frazier agreed that it would be by category and added all numbers would be the same except for the following:

Administration was advertised at $750,210.00 and would be reduced to $620,210.00 - a difference of $130,000.00. Debt Service would be increased by that same amount to $691,176.00. The bottom line would remain the same - $11,592,166.00. Mr. Frazier stated that he would not be opposed to revisiting this issue with the School Board.

Mr. McCarthy explained that statute obliges the Board to adopt a school budget by May 1. Since that date was a Saturday, today, May 3, would be adequate. He and Mr. Luke are confident that the Board can adopt the Budget and adjust the appropriations at a later date.

Mr. Welch asked for any comments. Mr. Biniek said he felt that approving the budget by category took away capability of the superintendent to manage the school system, because he would not be able to transfer money to where it was needed. Mr. Frazier disagreed.

Mr. Parrish said that he was uncomfortable with making a decision about a system that he doesn't know too much about. He has gone to the school and spoken to some of the administrators and teachers. They feel it would be devastating to lose funds for administrative purposes. Mr. Parrish continued by saying that approving the school budget by category or by bottom line probably won't make much of a difference. One would think that in a year when the school budget has not gone up and when real estate taxes have not gone up, there should not be a problem. He doesn't have a problem either way, but he does feel that it should not come out of administration. We have two choices: to go ahead and presume that the School Board and School Administrators will do what they say they will do and go with the bottom line or to do a category adoption and to get back with the School Board at a later date to reallocate the funds.

Mr. Lee commented that the "message is out there" and the school board and system know what has to be done. He has faith in them. There are problems and they know it and we need to give them the opportunity to do their jobs. He thanked the School Board for keeping funding level especially in these hard economic times. He has confidence that things will get done and problems will get solved and hopes for bottom line approval of the budget.

Mr. Welch spoke on the emotional aspects of this situation. We've been through budgets in the past, but this year seems to have a special significance and it caught his attention more than before. The action we take is for the students. If we were to put this decision before a group of students, how would they react and what would we do. Since this budget doesn't involve more money or increased taxes, the decision is this: how do we approve it. He continued that not too many people really read the budget. Estimates on repair and maintenance are devastating. As mentioned by several board members, we can approve this budget by different methods. However, approving the budget by bottom line requires the School Board assurances that the problems will be corrected. We haven't had these assurances in the past few years. But, the Board cannot micro-manage the budget; that is not our job. We have great schools and good students, and we need good facilities.

Mr. Welch continued that Mr. Frazier has a motion on the table, and either method of approval would work. Mr. Welch called for a joint resolution between the boards, and then either method would work. Do we have a second? Mr. Welch asked Mr. Frazier if there was any way to modify the motion or will he leave it the same? Mr. Frazier modified his motion as follows: approve the budget categorically and work with the School Board on the amounts. Mr. McCarthy asked for clarification on the motion. It is to approve the budget by category and work on the amounts later. Mr. Welch asked if everyone understood. Motion seconded by Mr. Welch.

Mr. McCarthy interjected that statute requires that the Board adopt at bottom line budget number by May 1. Appropriations can be dealt with at a later date. Motion will be to adopt the budget by a bottom line figure with appropriation set a later date.

A roll call vote was taken: Mr. Frazier – Aye

Mr. Lee – Nay

Mr. Biniek – Nay

Mr. Parrish – Abstain

Mr. Welch – Aye

The vote was tied and the motion failed.

Mr. Lee offered the following motion for consideration: Adopt the budget by bottom line and let the School Board do their job. The motion was seconded by Mr. Biniek.

Roll call vote: Mr. Frazier – Nay

Mr. Lee – Aye

Mr. Biniek – Aye

Mr. Parrish – Aye

Mr. Welch – Nay

Motion carried.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Roger Cordani, Wakefield District, said he thought the budget should have been adopted by category. He commented that the Board was not doing its job.

Don Loock thanked Ron Frazier for his comments and he feels that there will be progress because everyone is now talking about the problems.

Demaris Miller, Hampton District, thanked Mr. Frazier for his attempt to get the Board of Supervisors to recognize that they are directly responsible to the taxpayers. She is concerned about what has happened in the past, continuing that this year was tough and next year will be tougher. Taxpayers are in no mood to trust, they want to see that everything is spent how it is supposed to be spent.

Steve Carroll, Stonewall-Hawthorne District, wanted to thank the Board of Supervisors for the trust they have put in the elected School Board.

Evelyn Kerr, Stonewall-Hawthorne District, commented that maintenance has been a long-term problem, which needs to be addressed. She doesn't think it is right to allocate funds to one thing and to spend them on another. She expressed her unhappiness with Mr. Parrish. Decision made today was wrong.

Bill Fletcher said that the Board of Supervisors have a tough job and he admires both the Board of Supervisors and the School Board for what they do, but when you don't approve the budget by category you give up a right given by the US Constitution and when you waive that right you give up a lot.

Tom Junk, Piedmont Jackson, commented that it all has to do with responsibility. Things have been allowed to get by. Who is responsible? The Taxpayer? The Board should be asking the Taxpayers for their input, not the children. The Board had the chance to adopt the budget by category and it was lost. Things need to be done. The School Board won't do it, they haven't done it and they won't. The Board should be ashamed that it didn't adopt the budget by category.

Kathryn Treanor, Jackson District, thanked the Board for their continued work with the School Board, and she appreciates the passing of the School Budget by bottom line.

Kathryn Wayland, Piedmont District, appreciates the Board vote to approve the budget. She commented that we have no reason to tell the school Board how to spend its money. The School Board is elected and we should let them do their job.

Geneva Welch, Wakefield District, feels this is an ethical problem. We are tempted too often not to do what is budgeted in favor of other things more attractive at the moment; we must stick with our plans.

Cathy Frazier, Jackson District, agrees with Mrs. Welch and when a budget is made is should be done wisely. The problems have been present for a very long time and people are aware what the schools need. The vote was wrong.

Henry Gorfein, Hampton District, revisited several items saying there is a lot of misinformation about many school projects. 1. About repairs-he attended a meeting that John McCarthy arranged with state officials, Ameresco, School board members – not a single person in the room today, with the exception of himself, Meredith Gorfein, and one person, came to that meeting. We were given the opportunity. 2. Roof on the school – never been properly repaired only piecemeal fixes. 3. No evidence of misappropriation of funds, just innuendos. This should stop and we need to be supportive. 4. There should be more money for textbooks. The School Board is not unethical. Any entity that works within a budget has a right to appropriate funds as it sees fit.

John Tole, Stonewall-Hawthorne District, can't believe that the School Board would not do maintenance that is needed. Operation of a school system is a lot more complicated and there are constraints. He saluted Mr. Parrish for abstaining because he didn't have enough information. Finally, the boards should work together to find creative methods to deal with repairs and other problems.

Chilton Raiford, Amissville, Virginia, thanked Ron Frazier, said the school system is honorable and we are blessed to have the School Board. There will always be discussion. The Board of Supervisors should be congratulated.

Public comment Closed

OLD BUSINESS:

RSW Regional Jail: Mr. McCarthy spoke on the fate of the Regional Jail project. There were substantial amendments proposed, but all provisions have been deleted and it was approved with amendment. The plan is back on track.

Jail Office Expansion: Mr. McCarthy continued with an explanation on the Rappahannock County Jail office expansion. Mr. Parrish and Mr. Biniek sit on the Public Safety Committee (Art Candenquist is also a member of that group). This committee was approached by Sheriff Smith, who is seeking to add to the office space at the jail, by an L-shaped 1000 sq. feet addition on the same level as the office now exists. The Public Safety Committee approved the project, which will be funded entirely by work release funds. The County would "front" $90,000.00 to start the project because all funds will not be on hand until July 2011. One of the old accessory structures on the site will be lost but the other will be saved and relocated. There will be a necessity for an architect and the expenditure of some money. Mr. McCarthy feels that this cost can be handled from the building and grounds portion of the budget.

Mr. Parrish asked that if we are getting a regional jail, is this project premature. Mr. McCarthy explained that use of the Regional Jail would only free up one cell block. Mr. Parrish continued, is one of the problems the need for evidence storage? Mr. McCarthy added that this is one concern, but the primary concern is one of security. He continued by describing the situation in the existing office space and the problems with officers carrying or not carrying their weapons.

Mr. Frazier asked about the holding cell and Mr. Lee inquired about the location of the Regional Jail. It will be located in Warren County on the Rt. 522 industrial corridor.

An update will be given at the next board meeting.

Continuation of the County Budget Public Hearing:

The Board needs to set a date for this continuation.

There was no public comment on the county budget.

Mr. Frazier asked if there would be a work session. Members agreed that it would be helpful. There is a date available – Wednesday, May 19 at 7PM. Public Hearing will be continued until that date.

Mr. Frazier spoke about questions he received from a citizen: 1. The deficit in 3 categories in the Building/E-911/Emergency Coordinator Budget. 2. Budget for the Magistrate Office. Mr. McCarthy explained that this office is now operated by video session. 3. The need for new automobiles for the building office when there is not that much building at this time. It was explained that the issue is one of high mileage. A discussion followed.

NEW BUSINESS:

Hazel Scenic River Designation Hearing:

Data is now complete and a public hearing will be advertised for the June Board Meeting.

Appointments:

Gary Settle is willing to be reappointed to the Planning Commission. On motion of Mr. Biniek, seconded by Mr. Parrish, the Board voted unanimously to reappoint Gary Settle to the Planning Commission.

Correspondence:

Mr. McCarthy called the Boards attention to the North Central Virginia Legislative report and to the meeting for the Flint Hill Rural Historic District hearing on May 10. Mr. McCarthy explained the difference between a Virginia Historic District and a Rural Historic District. Discussion followed.

Mr. Biniek inquired about the VDOT report on the speed issue in Sperryville. Mr. Cubbage will be at the meeting this evening.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Mr. Welch explained that this second public comment is a new item on the agenda.

Phil Irwin, Flint Hill, thanked the Board of adding this public comment time. He spoke on the Historic Districts in the county and the progress of the Tourist Information Center located in Avondale, the county owned property adjacent to the library. Jail trustees have been working and a Memorial Day opening is planned. This center will have an all-volunteer staff. No county funds will be used.

Don Loock commented that the Piedmont Environment Council is very supportive of the Historic District concept.

There being no other speakers, the Public Comment session was closed.

ACCOUNTS: On motion of Mr. Parrish, seconded by Mr. Lee, the accounts were approved as presented.

EXECUTIVE SESSION: On motion of Mr. Lee, seconded by Mr. Biniek, the Board voted unanimously to retire into executive session pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A).(1) to consult with legal counsel employed or retained by the Board of Supervisors regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advise by such counsel under Section 2.2-3711A.7. The subject matter of the closed meeting will be the Aileen property. Record of the vote was as follows: Ayes: Mr. Welch, Mr. Frazier, Mr. Lee, Mr. Biniek, Mr. Parrish. Nays: None.

Open Session: On motion of Mr. Frazier, seconded by Mr. Lee, the Board voted unanimously to reconvene into open session. The following roll-call vote was taken: Ayes: Mr. Welch, Mr. Frazier, M. Lee, Mr. Biniek, Mr. Parrish. Nays: None

Certification: The Chairman polled the members of the Board as follows: "To the best of you knowledge, do each of you certify that only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements under existing Virginia law, and only such public business matters as were identified in the motion by which the executive meeting was convened, were heard, discussed or considered by the Board in the executive meeting just held?" The following roll-call vote was taken: Ayes: Mr. Welch, Mr. Frazier, Mr. Lee, Mr. Biniek, Mr. Parrish. Nays: none

Mr. McCarthy requested authorization to executive documents appointing a Substitute Trustee on the Aileen Property to institute the process of foreclosure. On motion of Mr. Frazier, seconded by Mr. Lee, the Board voted unanimously to authorize Mr. McCarthy to execute the documents he requested.

On motion of Mr. Frazier, seconded by Mr. Lee, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn until 7PM for public hearing on the Six-year Secondary Road Plan and FY2010-2011 Budget and the Special Exception Hearing on the Williams Contractor Yard.

7:00 PM MEETING: Mr. Welch called the meeting to order. There are two items on the agenda tonight: the Six Year Secondary Road Plan and the Williams Contractor's Office/Shop Yard.

Six Year Secondary Road Plan: Plan and Budget, duly advertised, is now before the board. It is a continuation of last year's plan and there have been no additional projects added.

David Cubbage echoed Mr. McCarthy's comments concerning the plan before them. Because of budget constraints, nothing has changed. He introduced Karen Kilby who will be handling the advertising time lines.

Mr. Lee asked about a steep section of roadway on Route 627. Mr. Cubbage stated that there could be reconstruction in the future. Discussion about the problem and its solution followed.

Public Hearing Opened:

Al Henry, Hampton, commented on the problems on Rte. 627. He mentioned that there were at least 2 vehicle accidents each year at this steep section of the road.

There being no other comments, the Hearing was closed.

Mr. McCarty asked that the Board approve the Resolution to Adopt the 2010-2011 The 2015-2016 Rappahannock County Secondary Six-Year Plan and the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year Budget. On motion of Mr. Parrish, seconded by Mr. Lee, the Board voted unanimously to approve the Plan and Budget.

Special Exception #10-03-01 Williams Contractor's Office/Shop Yard:

Mr. McCarthy gave a brief explanation of the application to convert the ECOW property at the intersection of Route 729 and Route 211 to a Contractor's Office & Shop. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended this application for approval by the Board (Papers attached). Sign limits and lighting must be in keeping with the County Ordinance. This property is grand fathered commercial. However, the use is more intense – hence the special exception.

Greg Williams was represented by Attorney Michael T. Brown. The only item in question is the lighting, which will be for security purposes only. All equipment will be kept behind the building in a partially fenced area and that is the concern.

Mr. Parrish spoke to Mr. Williams about his concerns about the lighting. He asked about motion lights. He would like to see the elimination of all lighting inside the fenced area and if vandalism took place the issue could be revisited.

A discussion concerning fencing at the property, commercial lighting systems, the constraints of the County Code, Photometric plans, vandalism and security.

Mr. Welch opened the Public Hearing:

Monica Worth, RLEP commented about the concern about lighting, the "dark skies" in Rappahannock, as well as the site maintenance.

Aline Johnson, Piedmont District, commented that it is a good thing to keep our young people in the County and that she was sure that Mr. Williams would do things properly.

Mr. Biniek asked a question about the type of fence that will be used.

Mr. Parrish questioned about the candlepower of the lights that will be used. Mr. McCarthy explained the requirements in the County Code for lighting standards. Mr. Parrish asked about the approval process. Mr. McCarthy said the Board could approve the use tonight and ask for a lighting and site plan for approval at a later date. This approval can be done administratively by Mr. McCarthy or by the Board.

There being no other comments, the Public Hearing was closed.

On motion of Mr. Parrish, seconded by Mr. Lee, for approval subject to submission of a site plan for lighting. The site plan approval will come back before the Board. The approval will also be subject to the conditions set by the Planning Commission. The motion was passed unanimously.

On motion of Mr. Frazier, seconded by Mr. Biniek, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn.

___________________________________

Roger Welch, Chairman