Page County Watch

New Blog In Place Now

2007-11-25T08:19:00.000-05:00

The new Blog with the improved, unmoderated comment procedures is in place. This Blog is no longer active.

Click here for the new Blog.

Planning Works

2007-11-21T10:46:00.000-05:00

In other news, the consultant who is going to help us write the Comprehensive Plan has arrived. This is the one I complained about hiring, but now I think I was wrong. Focus groups started on Tuesday. The county and the consultant held all day meetings getting input about how to prepare the Land Use Map, which is required by the state to be part of the Comprehensive Plan. This is what is used to guide zoning. Without it, zoning decisions have nothing to point to as a basis. The idea is that the Land Use Map is developed by consensus with a large group of citizens, and that's what the consultant is planning to do.

They have set up a website. It is
ourplanningworks.com/pagecounty

You can sign up there to get notifications of meetings, and they will post information about the process.

It looks like a good idea, to at least have a vehicle for citizen input. There have been some things done lately that are starting to look for citizen input. Mark Belton's County Line, and the actions of our new planner, Kevin Henry, have been in line with getting involvement and providing information, and that's a good thing.

Alice

Oh, Shenandoah! You Asked for it!

2007-11-21T00:32:00.000-05:00

The room was packed. Like 40 citizens attended! This is not just a few for our Board. Last month it was just about 4 people! Usually, they sit there pretty much alone!

Person after person got up and told them "don't do it". Except Citizen At Large Lee McWhorter, who thought it was a great idea. The audience applauded for the "don't do its"

The vote was tense, when John Rust proposed they buy the land, and there was NOBODY TO SECOND IT! But not to be deterred from his agenda, Chairman Tommy Ray LaFrance, declared that a second was not required, and proceeded with the vote.

Charlie Hoke said No. (By the way, I'm not mad at Charlie any more.)

John "I'm 100% for the flood plain ordinance" Rust said, YES!!!

Gerald Cubbage said, No. And, he said, he had gotten more calls about this than he did about the schools.

And then we came to Carol Lee. Carol Lee said Yes. Because, she told us later, her constituents wanted it, or didn't mind it after she explained to them that it would cost more if they did it later. And now they won't have to go up to that awful "hill" any more.

Tommy LaFrance, of course, said yes. He also believed that the constituents wanted it and it was the right thing to do.

So, you see, it's not that the Board doesn't listen. They do listen! And this is what we, the voters, wanted. They were doing what they saw as the right thing, and also, those "few" people who showed up at the meeting and spoke, didn't actually represent the majority of the voters. The majority of voters were the ones who stayed home and drank beer, and just left it in their hands so they could do their jobs.

This meeting lasted until 11:30 and I'm not in the mood to describe it in any more detail right now.

Suffice it to say that this property, as it stands, would have the county office building smack dab in the middle of a flood plain. But not to worry. They're going to use fill dirt, at a cost of another $180,000 for site work, and the fill dirt will raise it up out of the flood plain. And also, this was a good price, because Cracker Barrel and Sheetz might have bought it instead. So now you get the Emerald City Government Center instead of a Cracker Barrel and a Sheetz.

So all of you Flood Plain Dwellers out there -- nothing more to worry about. Fill Dirt is the answer.

Those of you who stayed home and drank beer --- well, as John Rust pointed out, he only lost by 34 votes, so I guess he and Tommy and Carol Lee are right. Their real constituents are the ones who agree with them. Two years from now, I guess you'll just stay home and not vote, too.

Thanks to all those who got involved. Look at it this way. The vote was 3 - 2. Usually these votes are 5 - 0

Alice

The Land Gobblers

2007-11-17T06:00:00.000-05:00

This Tuesday, November 20, at 7 p.m. at Stanley Elementary School, the Board of Supervisors will vote on the issue of purchasing the land for the new County Office Building/Government Complex. This is the land that is offered at $66,000 an acre. An explanation of the rationale behind the purchase of the land and the complex building can be found on the county website at http://www.pagecounty.virginia.gov/ Go to Our Government, and then at the bottom left you will see a menu heading for FAQs. This is where you can download the white paper. Look carefully at the section that says The Big Picture Financial Considerations. You have to read that section three or four times to get the full measure of it.

This is the public hearing for this issue, and they will vote on it the same night. If you have anything to say about this issue, please call your Supervisor, and the Supervisor Chairman, Tommy LaFrance, and then call everybody else’s Supervisor, before Tuesday night, and also come to the public hearing and speak. The phone numbers are:
Tommy LaFrance (Chairman) 743-3715 (home) and 860-1122 (cell)
Charlie Hoke (District 1) 743-9434 (home after 4 p.m.)
John Rust (District 2) 743-5316 (home)
Gerald Cubbage (District 4) 778-3227
Carol Lee Strickler (District 5) 652-3211

There are two issues here. The first is the price of the land. The county argues that this is a fair market price, and the best they can do. The land is owned by John Douglas Atwood. The land is assessed at $48,250 (compared to the purchase price of $600,000). The land is assessed at that value, even though a property across the street sold in 2004 for nearly $60,000 an acre.

Both John Rust and Tommy LaFrance can be expected to vote in favor of this. There’s not too much point in calling them, so call the others instead. Charlie Hoke is open to arguments against it. I don’t know for sure, but I believe both Carol Lee and Gerald would be open to hearing arguments against it. Carol Lee is the person most likely to vote for it, in my opinion. But phone calls from you, their constituents, would be important in helping them make their decision.
The second issue, after you stop thinking and thinking and thinking about the assessed value being $48,250 for that property, compared to the assessed value of YOUR property, is the whole concept of building a “county government COMPLEX” .

This is a wondrous thought. A fine and lovely place, where the school administration office can be, and the county offices, and who knows what else, with lots of parking. A legacy left behind by a Board that will no longer be in place when it actually happens and the bill comes in.

Then the people who live here – Chris Says, Peter Rabbit, Concern Taxpayer, P.Od Citizen, the Wizard of Odds, and all the other lovely characters we met during the last few months – including you and me – will have a fabulous place to visit when they need court documents and tax records. But they will also have tax bills that double again, in the near future. A building plan like this, combined with the shortfall of what will still be spent on the new, 75% occupied, schools and the renovation of the middle schools, will decimate the populations’ ability to pay.

The thinking behind actions like this is that “growth is coming.” The population is booming.

Growth is not coming. The roads are not conducive to bringing in jobs, the population is not growing, and for every retiree that arrives, a young person graduates from high school and leaves. The housing market is near collapse, nationwide, and the retirees who could be expected to be the only population who could move here, can’t sell their houses to do it. Those who would argue for this plan say this is a temporary situation, and we need to be prepared for when the market recovers, by taking on this enormous additional debt. Of course, if the market recovers after 15 – 20 years, we will have paid these prices during essentially a full generation, waiting.

Actions and behavior like this impact a community’s entire future. What businesses and retirees will come here, with a tax structure that forces people out of their homes, bad access roads to the county, and a questionable workforce?

We have already purchased land for a county office building. We have already paid for architects’ drawings for it on that land. We did this earlier in 2007, not a long time ago. The argument is we can use that land for something else (what? Something else that’s free, or something else that costs more money?) There is also an argument that buying this land is not a decision to go forward with the Government Complex. It’s just a great idea for the county to buy up land. At 12 times greater than its assessed value. Partially in the Flood Plain, by the way.

If you agree with this decision to buy the land, do nothing. It will be passed on Tuesday night if there is no citizen outcry. Your silence will be interpreted as agreement.

If you disagree, call Gerald, Carol Lee, and Charlie in the next few days. Come to the meeting Tuesday night and explain your opinion before the vote.

Alice

It's OUR Community Blog

2007-11-16T06:17:00.000-05:00

There are a few things I’ve seen happening in the last few days that make me feel hopeful about the future of our community and its government.

1. The County Line, posted on the county’s own website, (http://www.pagecounty.virginia.gov/) is being published with good, possibly even excellent, explanations of the thinking and rationale behind important decisions the county government has been making. The point is not that I or any other citizen may or may not agree with the thinking. What’s important is that the thinking and rationale is explained. By offering the explanation, it allows citizens to prepare reasonable responses at public hearings. Without the information, all citizens can do is rant. With it, there is a possibility of a meaningful dialogue.

2. Planning Commissioners, (okay, ONE Planning Commissioner, but it’s a start) using their own name, are posting to this website, explaining the rationale and clarifying issues. This is tremendously helpful for citizens, as we have limited other avenues to get answers or clarification on topics discussed. By offering the insight of a commissioner, it allows the citizens to become more knowledgeable about the issues, so they can ask the right questions.

3. Anonymous posters are offering both sides of an issue. It’s not much of a debate if only one side is presented. Sometimes there is a tendency of “the party in power” to say, “I don’t need to muddy myself by answering that.” But the purpose of a public forum is to allow the public to hear both sides. If the side that has the upper hand refuses to post, the public can’t get the information required to draw rational conclusions. This website can be a tool to get the position of our elected officials understood in the general public. It’s possible they even have the best interests of the community at heart. With a tool like this, maybe the public could even be convinced that’s true. From the standpoint of the public, if they hear both sides, they have the opportunity to convince elected officials to change their minds.

There are positive things that can be done with this media, that will help the community become informed about the workings of our government. It’s next to impossible for me to moderate the comments on here. It isn’t the concept of a Blog to have comment moderation, as many have pointed out. To those candidates who were insulted and offended by the comments during the election --- people who run for office are public figures, about which the public has a right to debate. If you were refusing to answer, or telling your supporters not to answer, the “debates” only showed one side. As the Blogger, for me to selectively pick and choose comments is considered “no fair.” It’s not for me to judge and arbitrate among viewpoints.

For the other side, the ones who are accusing me of picking and choosing – I’m not. During the election, when you posted insults to candidates running for office, they were there. But you can’t extend that behavior beyond candidates for election, to regular citizens. If your posts don’t insult anyone by name, or inflame and incite to riot, or contain obscenities, I’m posting them. If you object to me not posting something you sent, or posting something you don’t like, you can email me at Research@PageCountyWatch.org and I will explain what specific language is preventing your post from being displayed.

I appreciate the participation by so many citizens in this forum. I believe it can evolve into a tool which will help the community self-direct its future. So tell your friends, speak your mind, and Stay With Me. The Blog is a community tool. If it works, it's because YOU made it work.

Alice

Now's Your Chance

2007-11-14T11:26:00.000-05:00

1. Attention District 5 Citizens: There is an opening on the Planning Commission for a resident of District 5. Ms. Dot Donato has resigned. If you live in District 5 (Shenandoah), and you would like to serve your community by being a voting member of the Planning Commission, contact Supervisor Carol Lee Strickler, 652-3211

To all of the conspiracy theorists out there, here's your chance to be part of the CLICK.

2. Planning Commission Work Session 13 November 07

The only item on the agenda was a review of the proposed By-Right Subdivision ordinance that was drafted by the By-Right Subdivision subcommittee over the last several months. The county planner went over the proposed changes to the ordinance enumerated in the blog below entitled “Consider These Changes Carefully.” Several of the commissioners asked that some of the language be refined to clarify its intent and that a few typos be corrected. Beyond that, it was a pretty routine session. The ordinance will be brought up for public hearing some time after the first of the year. If any of the proposed changes shock your sensibilities, now is the time to make your voice heard.

Alice's opinion: Although I didn't attend the session last night, I am struck by the idea that the Planning Commissioners didn't have much to say about it. There were only 3 commissioners on the subcommittee. The citizens in the audience were not allowed to give their input, as it was a work session. Yet the commissioners who weren't on the subcommittee didn't have substantive questions.

Why not?

Do you have questions about this change? One commenter said this was about keeping your neighbor from selling out to developers. No, it's not. The ordinance that relates to developers is contained in the Class A and Class B rules. This is about what you can do if your kids grow up and you want to split off pieces of your land for them. It's also about what you can do if your taxes get so high that you have to split off a piece of land in order to keep your house.

Read carefully, Citizens. This is about YOU.

Study of Luray Police Dept

2007-11-13T16:11:00.000-05:00

I don't know why I'm doing this, but here it is. Maybe I'm doing it to keep the posts from showing up on other threads.

Consider These Changes Carefully

2007-11-12T09:38:00.000-05:00

The following is a citizens notes on the proposed changes to the By-Right Subdivision ordinance in Page County. The Planning Commission is considering this, and it may be brought up at the work session on November 13 at 7 p.m. I have published here the existing ordinance, and put in red the proposed changes. These are citizen notes, not formal or official changes. It is provided so that you as a citizen can be informed if these changes may impact you, so you can show up at the meetings in time to get your voice heard before the deed is done and the laws are enacted.
_____________________________________________

Chapter 100: SUBDIVISION OF LAND

ARTICLE I General Provisions

§ 100-1. Title. This chapter is to be known and cited as the "Subdivision Ordinance of Page County, Virginia."
§ 100-2. Purpose.
The purpose and intent of this chapter is to assure the orderly subdivision of land and its development, to realize the wise and full utilization of our land resources, to ensure that subdivided lands are reasonably suited for their intended purposes, to ensure that anything which would detract from the full enjoyment of the subdivided property for its intended purposes be fully and fairly set forth in the plat filed of record so prospective purchasers will be fairly apprised thereof and to promote the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the public.

§ 100-3. Word usage and definitions.

In general. For the purpose of this chapter, certain words and terms used herein shall be interpreted or defined as follows: words used in the present tense include the future, words in the singular number include the plural, and the plural the singular, unless the natural construction of the word indicates otherwise; the word "lot" includes the word "parcel"; the word "shall" is mandatory and not directory; the word "approve" shall be considered to be followed by the words "or disapprove"; and reference to this chapter includes all chapters amending or supplementing the same; all distances and area refer to measurement in a horizontal plane.

As used in this chapter the following terms shall have the meanings indicated:
ALLEY — A permanent service way providing a secondary means of access to abutting properties.
BUILDING LINE — The distance which a building is from any street or roadway boundary line.
CLERK OF THE COMMISSION — The appointed representative of the governing body of Page County who is charged with the responsibility for administering and enforcing the provisions of this chapter and with such other specific duties as stated herein, referred to as the “Clerk”.
COMMISSION — The Planning Commission of Page County, Virginia.
CUL-DE-SAC — A street with only one outlet and having an appropriate turnaround a safe convenient reverse traffic movement.
DEVELOPER — An owner of property being subdivided, whether or not represented by an agent.
EASEMENT — A grant by a property owner of the use of land for a specific purpose or purposes.
GOVERNING BODY — The Board of Supervisors of Page County, Virginia.
HEALTH OFFICIAL — Environmental Health Specialist of the Page County Department. The health director or sanitarian of Page County, Virginia.
HIGHWAY ENGINEER — The resident engineer employed by the Virginia Department of Transportation Highways.

Immediate Family Member - Any person who is a natural or legally defined offspring, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent or parent of the owner

JURISDICTION — The area or territory subject to the legislative control of the governing body.
LOT — A numbered and recorded portion of a subdivision intended for transfer of ownership or for building development.
LOT, CORNER — A lot abutting upon two or more streets at their intersection; the shortest side fronting upon a street shall be considered the front of the lot, and the longest side fronting upon a street shall be considered the side of the lot.
LOT, DEPTH OF — The mean horizontal distance between the front and rear lot lines.
LOT, DOUBLE-FRONTAGE — An interior lot having frontage on two streets.
LOT, INTERIOR — A lot other than a corner lot.
LOT OF RECORD — A lot which has been recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court.
LOT, WIDTH OF — The horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at the street front setback line. [Amended 6-21-2005]
ONSITE SEWAGE DISPERSAL AREA- A site specific, survey located area where soils evaluations have found the area to be suitable for installation of a sewage disposal system.
PLAT — Includes the terms "map, plan, plot, replat or replot"; a map or plan of a tract or parcel of land which is to be or which has been subdivided. When used as a verb, "plat" is synonymous with "subdivide."
PROPERTY — Any tract, lot, parcel or several of the same collected together for the purpose of subdividing.
PUBLIC SEWER — A sewer system owned and operated by the County of Page or an incorporated town or a corporation franchised by the Commonwealth of Virginia under the jurisdiction of the State Health Department of Virginia.
PUBLIC WATER — A water system owned and operated by the County of Page or an incorporated town or a corporation franchised by the Commonwealth of Virginia and under the jurisdiction of the State Health Department of Virginia.
SOIL SURVEY — A survey conducted by or approved by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture to determine characteristics of soils and related factors relative to suitability for subdivision.
STREET — The principal means of access to abutting properties.
STREET, COLLECTOR — A medium-traveled Category 2 and 3 (251 to 750 cars per day) thoroughfare which collects traffic from minor streets and directs it to a major street as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation.*1 [Amended 6-21-2005]
STREET, MAJOR — A heavily traveled Category 4 (751 to 1,500 cars per day) thoroughfare or highway that carries through traffic as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation.*1 [Amended 6-21-2005]
STREET, MINOR — A Category 1 (zero to 250 cars per day) street that is used primarily as a means of public access to the abutting properties as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation.*1 [Amended 6-21-2005]
*Traffic volume is not the sole determining factor. VDOT uses: (1) rural local; (2) rural collector; (3) rural minor arterial; (4) rural major arterial.
1NOTE: VDOT geometric requirements will be based on the traffic volume and function of the street.
STREET OR ALLEY, PUBLIC USE OF — The unrestricted use of a specified area or right-of-way for ingress and egress to two or more abutting properties.
STREET SERVICE DRIVE — A public right-of-way generally parallel and contiguous to a major highway, primarily designated to promote safety by eliminating dangerous ingress and egress to the right-of-way by providing safe and orderly points of access to the highway and streets ending in cul-de-sac.
STREET WIDTH — The total width of the strip from property line to property line dedicated or reserved for public use or travel, including roadway, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and planting strips.
SUBDIVIDE — To divide any tract, parcel or lot of land situated in whole or in part in the County of Page, Virginia, into two or more lots or parcels of land for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership or building development and includes resubdivision. However, the term "subdivide" shall not include the following:
1. The straightening or rearranging of property lines of adjoining parcels if the number of lots does not change and the Clerk of the Commission feels that the rearrangement conforms to the intent of this chapter
2. A division of land which, in the opinion of the Clerk of the Commission, meets all of the following requirements:
a. The proposed division is not in conflict with general meaning and purpose of this chapter;
b. No additional streets, roads or rights-of-way are needed to serve any parcel in the proposed division
c. The proposed division of land does not include any dedication of land to public use;
d. No parcel, including any parcel retained or held by the divider, resulting from such proposed division is less than 25 acres.; and [Amended 6-21-2005]

SUBDIVIDER — An individual, corporation or registered partnership owning any tract, lot or parcel of land to be subdivided or a group of two or more persons owning any tract, lot or parcel of land to be subdivided, who have given their power of attorney to one of their group or to another individual to act on their behalf in planning, negotiating for, in representing or executing the legal requirements of the subdivision.

SUBDIVISION — The division of a lot, tract or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, tracts, or parcels, or other divisions of land for sale, development or lease; or the tracts or parcels of land resulting from the division of property.

THE FOLLOWING SECTION WAS DELETED:
The division of a parcel of land into three or more lots or parcels of less than five acres each for the purpose of transfer of ownership or building development, or, if a new street is involved in such division, any division of a parcel of land. The term includes resubdivision and, when appropriate to the context, shall relate to the process of subdividing or to the land subdivided and solely for the purpose of recordation of any single division of land into two lots or parcels, a plat of such division shall be submitted for approval in accordance with § 15.2-2258 of the Code of Virginia. [Added 6-21-2005]

SURVEYOR — A person licensed and certified as such by the Commonwealth of Virginia. Editor's Note: Former § 100-4, Exemptions, which immediately followed this section, was repealed 6-21-2005. This ordinance also provided for the redesignation of former §§ 100-5 through 100-13 as §§ 100-4 through 100-12, respectively.

§ 100-4. Exceptions. [Amended 6-21-2005]
Where the subdivider can show that a provision of the standards of this chapter would cause unnecessary hardship if strictly adhered to and where, because of topographical or other conditions peculiar to the site, a departure may be made without destroying the intent of the provisions of this chapter, the Planning Commission may authorize an exception. Any exception authorized by the Commission shall be reduced to writing, with the reasoning on which the departure was justified set forth. No such exception to this chapter may be granted by the Commission which is opposed, in writing, by the governing body, the Resident Highway Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation or the Health Official.

§ 100-5. Violations and penalties. [Amended 12-12-2004]
Any person violating the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to a fine of not more than $2,500 or imprisonment for not more than 12 months, or both, per each lot or parcel of land so subdivided or transferred or sold, and the description of such lot or parcel by metes and bounds in the instrument of transfer or other document used in the process of selling or transferring shall not exempt the transaction from such penalties or from the remedies herein provided. Editor's Note: Original Section 10-7, Enforcement, which immediately followed this section, was deleted 12-12-1994. See § 100-8 for enforcement provisions.

§ 100-6. Amendments.
This chapter may be amended in whole or in part by the governing body in accordance with the requirements of § 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended.

§ 100-7. Administration and enforcement.
A. The Clerk of the Commission shall be charged with the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter.
B. The Clerk of the Commission shall be the agency or person appointed by the governing body. If no such agency or person is appointed as Clerk, the governing body shall be deemed the Clerk and so act until a Clerk is duly appointed. In so doing, the Clerk shall be considered the Clerk of the governing body, and approval or disapproval by the Clerk shall constitute approval or disapproval as though it were given by the governing body. The Clerk shall also consult with the Commission on matters contained herein.
C. In the performance of his duties, the Clerk may call for opinions or decisions, either verbal or written, from other departments or qualified persons in considering details of any submitted plat. In addition to the regulations herein contained for the platting of the subdivisions, the Clerk may, from time to time, establish any reasonable additional administrative procedures with the approval of the governing body for the proper administration of this chapter.

ARTICLE II Classification of Subdivisions; Requirements

§ 100-8 Non-Family Division
A. Non-family division (excluding immediate family division): In Agricultural and Woodland
Conservation zoned districts, the Clerk may permit one division of a parcel into two parcels once every five (CHANGED FROM TWO TO FIVE) years; provided that: [Amended 4-9-1990; 6-21-2005]

1. Any streets, roads, or rights-of-way providing means of ingress and egress for the tract to be subdivided shall be a minimum width of 50 feet to a dedicated recorded public street or throughfare.

2. Each resulting parcel is in accordance with § 125-9 and 125-10 of the Zoning Ordinance

3. The parent tract has not been the subject of a previous division under this subsection (3) within the last five (CHANGED FROM TWO TO FIVE) years.

a. When the above referenced division is completed, the parent tract status will remain with the parcel that has the greater land area of the two tracts. In the case of equal division of land area between both lots, the subdivider shall note which parcel will maintain parent tract status.

b. Parent tract shall be a minimum of 10 acres in order to divide.

5. If a private access easement is the preferred right-of-way, it shall serve no more than two lots. If an existing private street or access easement already serves two or more lots, no additional lots may be served by that street or easement.

6. Maximum depth. The maximum depth of any tract shall not exceed four times its width at the front setback line.

B. Plat Requirements:

1. Requisites for plat shall be as follows:

(a.) The name of the subdivision owner, subdivider, surveyor or engineer, the date of the drawing, the number of sheets, North point and scale. If true North is used, the method of determination must be shown.

(b.) The location of the proposed subdivision by an inset map at a scale of not less than one inch equals one mile, showing adjoining roads, their names and numbers, towns, subdivisions and other landmarks.

(c.) The boundary survey or existing survey of record, provided that such survey shows a closure with an accuracy of not less than one in 2,500, which shall display the following:

i. Total acreage
ii. Acreage of the subdivided area
iii. Number and approximate area and frontage of all building sites
iv. Existing buildings adjoining and within the boundaries of the tract
v. Names of adjoining property owners.
vi. Zoning, use, and deed-book and page-number references for adjoining properties

(d.) Where onsite sewage disposal systems and water supplies will be utilized, each lot shall include a survey located sewage dispersal area and private water supply location as approved by the Page County Health Department. Easements will not be allowed for locations of sewage dispersal areas or private water supplies onto adjacent or other lots.

(e.) All entrances locations shall meet the Virginia Department of Transportations minimum sight distance requirements and therefore will be reviewed and approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation prior to the County approving the subdivision. When a subdivision abuts a public street which is in the State's highway system, the subdivide shall be required to dedicate one-half of the total right-of-way and any easements necessary to make said street conform to Virginia Department of Transportation or county criteria; in addition the subdivide may be required to dedicate the full right-of-way necessary to make horizontal and vertical adjustments to said street or if the property occupies both sides of the roadway.

(f.) When a subdivision adjoins a road in the State's highway system classified as a Collector or higher the governing body may require that access to such lots be limited to a street within the subdivision.

(g.) All existing, platted and proposed streets, their names, number and width; existing utility or other easements, public areas and parking spaces; and culverts, drains and watercourses, their names and other pertinent data.

(h.) To ensure that residents will have sufficient land upon which to build a house which is flood-free, the subdivider shall indicate any floodplains or floodways on the plat

(changed from: THE CLERK MAY REQUIRE THE SUBDIVIDER TO PROVIDE ELEVATION AND FLOOD PROFILES TO DEMONSTRATE THE LAND TO BE COMPLETELY FREE OF THE DANGER OF FLOODWATERS.)

(i.) Proposed connections with existing sanitary sewers and existing water supply or alternate means of sewage disposal and water supply.

(j.) All parcels of land to be dedicated for public use and the conditions of such dedication.

(k.) Two copies of, all protective covenants, plats, and deed restrictions shall accompany the application plat.

(l.) Any additional information requested by the Clerk.

2. Approval. The subdivider shall be advised, in writing, within 15 days for Non Family divisions, which may be by formal letter or by legible markings on his copy of the plat, concerning any additional data that may be required.

C. Fees: Non-family division Review - $100

§ 100-9 Immediate Family Division

A single division of a lot or parcel for the purpose of sale or gift to a member of the immediate family of the property owner, subject only to any express requirement contained in the Code of Virginia.

THIS SECTION WAS DELETED: and to the requirement imposed by the County of Page that all lots of less than five acres have a right-of-way of not less than 20 feet providing ingress and egress to a dedicated recorded public street or thoroughfare. However, only one such division shall be allowed per family member and shall not be for the purpose of circumventing the purpose or provisions of this chapter. For the purpose of this subsection, a "member of the immediate family" is defined as any person who is a natural or legally defined offspring, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent or parent of the owner. All proposed entrances or existing entrances that will generate additional traffic will need to be reviewed and approved by VDOT prior to establishing the location of the twenty-foot right-of-way. Any new twenty-foot right-of-way created needs to meet minimum intersection sight distance criteria as established by the current edition of VDOT's Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways. A VDOT permit shall be obtained prior to construction of any new entrance(s) or improvement of any existing entrance(s). If multiple twenty-foot rights-of-way will be created adjacent to each other, a single standard private subdivision road/street entrance will be required to service the multiple rights-of-way at one entrance location in accordance with VDOT's Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways.
END OF DELETED SECTION

NEWLY ADDED SECTION:

1. The immediate family division shall adhere to following:

a. All lots shall have a right-of-way of not less than 20 feet providing ingress and egress to a dedicated recorded public street or thoroughfare.

b. The transference of newly created immediate family lots to a person other than a member of the immediate family shall not take place for a period less than five (5) years.

c. The property owner requesting such subdivision shall have held fee simple title to the property to be subdivided for a period of five (5) years prior to the filing of the family subdivision application. The Zoning Administrator shall have the authority to allow a re-conveyance prior to this time period, granted that the family member seeking the exception must provide the Zoning Administrator with documentation displaying either an economic hardship, death, or marital status change occurring within this time frame.

d. The applicant shall sign an affidavit, certifying they are an “Immediate Family Member” which shall be recorded with the deed of conveyance and plat.

e. Maximum depth. The maximum depth of any tract shall not exceed four times its width at the front setback line

Plat Requirements:

Requisites for plat shall be as follows:
(a.) The name of the subdivision owner, subdivider, surveyor or engineer, the date of the drawing, the number of sheets, North point and scale. If true North is used, the method of determination must be shown.

(b.) The location of the proposed subdivision by an inset map at a scale of not less than one inch equals one mile, showing adjoining roads, their names and numbers, towns, subdivisions and other landmarks.

(c.) The boundary survey or existing survey of record, provided that such survey shows a closure with an accuracy of not less than one in 2,500 which shall display the following:

i. Total acreage
ii. Acreage of the subdivided area
iii. Number and approximate area and frontage of all building sites
iv. Existing buildings adjoining and within the boundaries of the tract
v. Names of adjoining property owners.
vi. Zoning, use, and deed-book and page-number references for adjoining properties

(d.) Where onsite sewage disposal systems and water supplies will be utilized, each lot shall include a survey located sewage dispersal area and private water supply location as approved by the Page County Health Department. Easements will not be allowed for locations of sewage dispersal areas or private water supplies onto adjacent or other lots.

(e.) All entrances locations shall meet the Virginia Department of Transportations minimum sight distance requirements and therefore will be reviewed and approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation prior to the County approving the subdivision. When a subdivision abuts a public street which is in the State's highway system, the subdivider shall be required to dedicate one-half of the total right-of-way and any easements necessary to make said street conform to Virginia Department of Transportation or county criteria; in addition the subdivider may be required to dedicate the full right-of-way necessary to make horizontal and vertical adjustments to said street or if the property occupies both sides of the roadway.

(f.) When a subdivision adjoins a road in the State's highway system classified as a Collector or higher, the governing body may require that access to such lots be limited to a street within the subdivision.

(g.) All existing, platted and proposed streets, their names, number and width; existing utility or other easements, public areas and parking spaces; and culverts, drains and watercourses, their names and other pertinent data.

(h.) To ensure that residents will have sufficient land upon which to build a house which is flood-free, the Clerk may require the subdvider to provide elevation and flood profiles sufficient the subdivider shall indicate any floodplains or floodways on the plat to demonstrate the land to be completely free of the danger of floodwaters

(i.) Proposed connections with existing sanitary sewers and existing water supply or alternate means of sewage disposal and water supply.

(j.) All parcels of land to be dedicated for public use and the conditions of such dedication.

(k.) Two copies of, all protective covenants, plats, and deed restrictions shall accompany the application plat.

(l.) Any additional information requested by the Clerk.

2. Approval. The subdivider shall be advised, in writing, within 15 days for Immediate Family divisions, which may be by formal letter or by legible markings on his copy of the plat, concerning any additional data that may be required.

Fees. Immediate family division Review - $100 per lot
Subdivisions not otherwise exempted by definition as stated in Article I, § 100-3 of this chapter, shall be classified as follows:
§ 100-10. Subdivisions classified.
Subdivisions not otherwise exempted by definition as stated in Article I, § 100-3 of this chapter, shall be classified as follows:
A. Class A subdivision: a subdivision creating any lot less than three acres.

B. Class B subdivision: a subdivision which results in all lots being three acres or more.

§ 100-11. General requirements.

General requirements for Class A and Class B subdivisions shall be as follows:

A. Preliminary sketch.

(1.) The subdivider may, if he so chooses, submit to the Clerk a preliminary sketch of the proposed subdivision prior to his preparing engineered preliminary and final plats. The purpose of such preliminary sketch is to permit the Clerk to advise the subdivider whether his plans in general are in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. The Clerk, upon submission of any preliminary sketch, shall study it and advise the subdivider wherein it appears that changes would be necessary. The Clerk may mark the preliminary sketch indicating the necessary changes, and any such marked sketch shall be returned to the subdivider with the preliminary plat.

(2) Requisites for preliminary sketch. It shall be drawn on white paper or on a print of a topographic map of the property. It shall be drawn to a scale of 200 feet or less to the inch. It shall show the name, location and dimensions of all streets entering the property, adjacent to the property or terminating at the boundary of the property to be subdivided. It shall show the location of all proposed streets, lots, parks, playgrounds and other proposed uses of the land to be subdivided and shall include the approximate dimensions.

B. Preliminary plat. The subdivider shall present to the Clerk five prints of a preliminary layout at a scale of 200 feet or less to the inch as a preliminary plat.

(1). Requisites for preliminary plat shall be as follows:

(a.) The name of the subdivision owner, subdivider, surveyor or engineer, the date of the drawing, the number of sheets, North point and scale. If true North is used, the method of determination must be shown.

(b.) The location of the proposed subdivision by an inset map at a scale of not less than one inch equals one mile, showing adjoining roads, their names and numbers, towns, subdivisions and other landmarks

(c.) The boundary survey or existing survey of record, provided that such survey shows a closure with an accuracy of not less than one in 2,500, which shall display the following :

i. Total acreage
ii. Acreage of the subdivided area
iii. Number and approximate area and frontage of all building sites
iv. Existing buildings adjoining and within the boundaries of the tract
v. Names of adjoining property owners.
vi. Zoning, use, and deed-book and page-number references for adjoining properties

(d.) All existing, platted and proposed streets, their names, number and width; existing utility or other easements, public areas and parking spaces; and culverts, drains and watercourses, their names and other pertinent data.

(e.) The complete drainage layout, including all pipe sizes, types, drainage easements and means of transporting the drainage to a well-defined natural drainage.

(f.) A cross section showing the proposed street construction depth and type of base, type of surface, etc.

(g.) A profile or contour map showing the proposed grades for the streets and drainage facilities, including elevations of existing and proposed ground surface at all street intersections and at points of major grade change along the center line of streets, together with proposed grade lines connecting therewith.

(h.) Proposed connections with existing sanitary sewers and existing water supplies. Where onsite disposal systems and water supplies will be utilized, the plat shall indicate proposed locations for onsite sewage dispersal areas and private water supplies. All proposed locations for sewage dispersal areas and water supply locations shall be field approved by the Environmental Health Staff of the Page County Health Department. Field approval shall include the onsite review of soils evaluations of proposed sewage dispersal areas as presented by private evaluators. Proposed onsite private water supply locations must also be approved by the Page County Health Department.

(i.) All parcels of land to be dedicated for public use and the conditions of such dedication.

(j.) A copy of all protective covenants and deed restrictions shall accompany the plat.

(k.) When a subdivision adjoins a road in the State's highway system classified as a Collector or higher, the governing body may require that access to such lots be limited to a street within the subdivision

(l.) Any additional information requested by the Clerk.

(2) Approval. The Clerk or his appointed representative shall discuss the preliminary plat with the subdivider in order to determine whether or not his preliminary plat generally conforms to the requirements of this chapter. The subdivider shall then be advised, in writing, within 45 days, which may be by formal letter or by legible markings on his copy of the preliminary plat, concerning any additional data that may be required, the character and extent of public improvements that will have to be made and an estimate of the cost of construction or improvements and the amount of the performance bond which will be required as prerequisite to approval of the final subdivision plat. In determining the cost of required improvements and the amount of the performance bond, the Clerk shall consult with a duly licensed engineer who shall prepare this data for the Clerk and/or may require a bona fide estimate of the cost of improvements to be furnished by the subdivider. Approval by the Clerk of the preliminary plat does not constitute a guarantee of approval of the final plat.

C. Final plat. Any owner or developer of any tract of land situated within Page County, Virginia, who proposes to subdivide the same shall cause a plat of such subdivision, with reference to known or permanent monuments, to be made and recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. No such plat of subdivision shall be recorded unless and until it shall have been submitted, approved and certified by the Clerk of the Commission in accordance with the requirements set forth in this chapter. No lot shall be transferred or sold until a final plat for the subdivision shall have been approved and recorded. The subdivider shall have not more than six months after receiving official notification concerning the preliminary plat to file with the Clerk a final subdivision plat in accordance with this chapter. Failure to do so shall make preliminary approval null and void. The Clerk may, on written request by the subdivider, grant an extension of this time limit.

(1) Requisites for final plat.

(a) Every subdivision plat which is intended for recording shall be prepared by a certified professional engineer or land surveyor, who shall endorse upon each such plat a certificate signed by him setting forth the source of title of the owner of the land subdivided and the place of record of the last instrument in the chain of title; when the plat is of land acquired from more than one source of title, the outlines of the several tracts shall be indicated upon such plat; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be deemed to prohibit the preparation of preliminary studies, plans or plats of a proposed subdivision by the owner of the land, city planners, land planners, architects, landscape architects or others having training or experience in subdivision planning or design.

(b) In addition, the plat submitted for approval and recording shall be clearly and legibly drawn on stable transparent material at a scale of 200 feet to the inch on sheets having a size of 13 1/2 inches by 17 inches, and a blank oblong space three inches shall be reserved for the use of the Commission.

(c) In addition, there shall be an accurate location and dimensions by bearings and distances with all curve data on all lots and street lines and center lines of streets, boundaries of all proposed or existing easements, parks, school sites or other public areas, the number and area of all building sites, all existing public and private streets, their names, numbers and widths, existing utilities and those to be provided, such as sanitary sewers, storm drains, water mains, manholes and underground conduits, including their size and type, watercourses and their names and names of owners and their property lines, both within the boundary of the subdivision and adjoining said boundaries.

(d) Distances and bearings must balance and close with an accuracy of not less than one in 10,000. All bearings shall be calculated from State Grid North, and at least one point shall have State Plane coordinates.

(e) The data of all curves along the street frontage shall be shown in detail at the curve or in a curve data table containing the following: Delta, radius, arc, tangent, chord and chord bearings.

(f) Where onsite sewage dispersal system and private water supplies are to be utilized, the plat shall include survey locations of Page County Health Department approved sewage dispersal areas and private water supplies. Easements will not be allowed for locations of sewage dispersal areas or private water supplies onto adjacent or other lots.

DELETED: There shall be so indicated on the face of the plat the lots which are currently suitable for sewage disposal system installation by using the following language: "preliminary approval of the local Health Department for each lot, where onsite disposal systems and water supplies will be utilized." There shall be so indicated on the face of the plat the lots which are not currently suitable for sewage disposal system installation by using the following language: "preliminary testing by the local Health Department indicates not suitable for sewage disposal system installation." The Clerk shall require the subdivider to furnish evidence from the local Health Department showing the results of the testing of the lots shown on the final plat. There shall be indicated on the face of the plat the date of sewage disposal system approval or disapproval of each lot by the Health Department. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(g) All lots or parcels that are not approved for sewage disposal systems after subdividing must be added to adjacent lots or otherwise disposed of rather than being allowed to be used as unusable parcels. [Added 6-21-2005 Editor's Note: This ordinance also provided for the redesignation of former Subsection C(1)(g) as Subsection C(1)(h). ]

END OF DELETED SECTION

(h) A deed of dedication shall accompany the final plat, and every such plat or deed of dedication to which the plat is attached shall contain, in addition to the professional engineer's or land surveyor's certificate, a statement as follows: "The platting or dedication of the following described land (here insert a correct description of the land subdivided) is with the free consent and in accordance with the desire of the undersigned owners, proprietors and trustees, if any." The statement shall be signed by such persons and duly acknowledged before some officer authorized to take acknowledgment of deeds. When thus executed and acknowledged, the plat, if so approved, shall be filed and recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court and indexed in the general index to deeds under the names of the owners of land signing such statement and under the name of the subdivision.

(2) Approval and recordation.

(a) The Clerk shall act on any proposed plat within 60 days after it has been officially submitted for approval by either approving or disapproving such plat, in writing, and giving with the latter specific reasons therefor. Specific reasons for disapproval may be contained in a separate document or may be written on the plat itself and shall relate in general terms such modifications or corrections as will permit approval of the plat.

(b) If the Clerk fails to approve or disapprove the plat within 60 days after it has been officially submitted for approval, the subdivider, after 10 days' written notice to the Commission or the Clerk, may petition the Circuit Court of the County to decide whether the plat should or should not be approved. The Court shall hear the matter and make and enter such order with respect thereto as it deems proper, which may include directing approval of the plat.

(c) The plat shall not be approved until the subdivider has complied with the general requirements and minimum standards of designs in accordance with this chapter and has made satisfactory arrangements for bond with surety to cover the cost of necessary improvements, in lieu of construction, to the satisfaction of the Clerk. Approval of the final plat shall be written on the face of the plat by the Clerk. The subdivider shall record the plat within 60 days after final approval; otherwise, the Clerk shall mark the plat "void" and return the same to the subdivider.

(d) A plat of the size and scale required by this chapter shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Revenue's office for transfer to the Page County Tax Maps and Records at the time of recording of any subdivision with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Page County.

(e) Recordation of plat as transfer of streets, termination of easements and rights-of-way, etc. The recordation of such plat shall operate to transfer, in fee simple, to the County such portion of the premises platted as is on such plat set apart for streets, alleys or other public use and to transfer to the County any easement indicated on such plat to create a public right of passage over the same; but nothing contained in this subsection shall affect any right of a subdivider of land heretofore validly reserved.

(3) Appeal. In the event that a plat for a subdivision is disapproved by the Clerk, the subdivider may appeal directly to the Planning Commission of Page County, which may override the recommendation of the Clerk and approve said plat. In the event that a plat for subdivision is disapproved on appeal by the Planning Commission, the subdivider may appeal to the Board of Supervisors of Page County, which may override the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve said plat. If the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors disapprove the proposed plat and the subdivider contends that such disapproval was not properly based on the chapter applicable thereto or was arbitrary or capricious, he may appeal to the Circuit Court, and said Court shall hear and determine the case as soon as may be, provided that the appeal is filed with the Circuit Court within 60 days of the written disapproval by the Board of Supervisors. The subdivider shall, however, have the right to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission directly to the Circuit Court within 60 days of the written disapproval by such Planning Commission.

D. Changes. No change, erasure or revision shall be made on any preliminary or final plat, nor on accompanying data sheets after approval of the Clerk has been endorsed, in writing, on the plat or sheets, unless authorization for such changes has been granted, in writing, by the Clerk.

E. Fees. There shall be a fee of $250 per plat and $40 per lot for the examination and review of every plat submitted to the Clerk…Lot fees shall be returned if the plat is not approved; however, the plat fee of $250 will be retained.

Class A & B divisions - $250 per plat and $40 per lot

F. Bonding.

(1.) Before any subdivision plat will be finally approved by the Clerk, the subdivider shall, as a condition for the acceptance of dedication for public use of any right-of-way located within any subdivision which has constructed or proposed to be constructed within the subdivision any street, curb, gutter, sidewalk, bicycle trail, drainage or sewer system, waterline, as part of a public system, or other improvement, financed or to be financed in whole or in part by private funds, be required to certify to the governing body that the construction costs have been paid to the person constructing such facilities or furnish to the governing body a certified check or cash escrow in the amount of the estimated costs of construction or a personal, corporate or property bond, with surety satisfactory to the governing body, in an amount sufficient for and conditioned upon the construction of such facilities or a contract for the construction of such facilities and the contractor's bond, with like surety, in like amount and so conditioned, or furnish to the governing body a bank or savings and loan association's letter of credit on designated funds satisfactory to the governing body as to the bank or savings and loan association, the amount and the form; and, in the event that the governing body has accepted the dedication of a road for public use and such road, due to factors other than its quality of construction, is not acceptable into the Virginia Department of Transportation system, the governing body shall require the subdivider or developer to furnish the County with a maintenance and indemnifying bond, with surety satisfactory to the governing body, in an amount sufficient for and conditioned upon the maintenance of such road until such time as it is accepted into the state highway system or, in lieu of such bond, a bank or savings and loan association's letter of credit on certain designated funds satisfactory to the governing body as to the bank or savings and loan association, the amount and the form. "Maintenance of such road" shall be deemed to mean maintenance of the streets, curbs, gutters, drainage facilities, utilities or other street improvements, including the correction of defects or damages and the removal of snow, water or debris, so as to keep such road reasonably open for public usage. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(2.) The performance guaranty shall be calculated by the Clerk to secure the required improvements in a workmanlike manner and in accordance with specifications, geometric design standards and construction schedules established or approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation Engineer, the Health Official, etc. The completion schedules shall be made known by the subdivider to the purchasers of the properties affected. Such performance guaranty may be extended upon application to and approval by the Clerk and the governing body. All performance guaranties shall be payable to and held by the governing body. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(3.) The governing body shall provide a complete release of any bond, escrow, letter of credit or other performance guaranty required hereunder within 30 days after receipt of written notice by the subdivider or developer of completion of part or all of any facilities required to be constructed hereunder unless the governing body notifies said subdivider or developer, in writing, of any specified defects or deficiencies in construction and suggested corrective measures prior to the expiration of said thirty-day period; provided, however, that the governing body shall not be required to release such bond, escrow, letter of credit or other performance guaranty in an amount to exceed 90% of the actual cost of the construction for which the bond was taken until such facilities have been completed and accepted by the governing body or state agency. For the purposes of this subsection, a certificate of partial or final completion of such facilities from either a duly licensed professional engineer or land surveyor or from a department or agency designated by the local government may be accepted without requiring further inspection of such facilities.

G. Resubdivision of existing lots. [Amended 9-6-1994]

(1.) Lots in an existing subdivision may be resubdivided if the lots resulting from such resubdivision meet all other requirements of the Code of Page County, Virginia, including, but not limited to, lot size, acreage and road or right-of-way access. The owner of such lot requesting a resubdivision shall furnish to the Zoning Administrator certified copies from the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Page County, Virginia, evidencing the restrictive covenants and restrictions currently in effect in such subdivision. If the restrictive covenants or restrictions in effect in such subdivision disallow redivision of lots in the subdivision, then such proposed resubdivision shall not be approved by the Zoning Administrator. Prior to the Zoning Administrator authorizing approval of the resubdivision, the owner of such lot shall apply for and receive written approval of the Page County Health Department that the proposed lots resulting from said resubdivision shall meet preliminary approval for a sewage disposal system installation. [Amended 9-15-1997; 6-21-2005]

(2.) Resubdivided lots shall not be smaller in size than those lots allowed in the original subdivision. Requests for such resubdivision shall be accompanied by the appropriate plat as required by this chapter.

H. Suitability of land; flood control and drainage; sediment and erosion control.

(1.) The Clerk shall not approve the subdivision of land if, from adequate investigations, including a soil survey where required, conducted by all public agencies concerned, it has been determined that in the best interest of the public the site is not suitable for plotting and development purposes of the kind proposed.

(2.) Land subject to frequent overflow or land with Category E or F slopes with highly erosive soils, as determined by a soil survey, shall not be platted for residential occupancy nor for such other uses as may increase danger to health, life or property or aggravate erosion or flood hazard. Such land within the subdivision shall be set aside on the plat for such uses as shall not be endangered by frequent overflow or shall not produce conditions contrary to public welfare.

(3.) To ensure that residents will have sufficient land upon which to build a house which is flood-free, the subdivider shall indicate any floodplains or floodways on the plat

(4.) The subdivider shall provide all necessary information needed to determine what improvements are necessary to properly develop the subject property, including contour intervals, drainage plans and flood control devices. The subdivider shall also provide a qualified certified engineer's or surveyor's statement that such improvements, when properly installed, will be adequate for proper development. The Virginia Department of Transportation Engineer shall then approve or disapprove the plans. The subdivider shall also provide any other information required by the Virginia Department of Transportation Engineer. [Amended 6-15-2005]

(5.) Maximum depth. The maximum depth of any tract shall not exceed four times its width at the front setback line

§ 100-12. Class A subdivision.

A. In addition to those general requirements specified in Article II, § 100-11, a proposed Class A subdivision shall be subject to the following requirements and regulations acknowledging that there is a mutual responsibility between the subdivider and Page County, Virginia, to divide the land so as to improve the general use pattern of the land being subdivided.

B. Required improvements. All required improvements shall be installed by the subdivider at his cost. In cases where specifications and geometric design standards have been established either by the Virginia Department of Transportation Highways for streets, curbs, etc., or by local chapters and codes, such specifications shall be followed.

(1) Lot size. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(a) See Zoning Ordinance § 125-11.E

(b) Exceptions. Greater lot areas may be required where individual sewage disposal systems or individual wells are used if the Health Official determines that there are factors of drainage, soil conditions or other conditions to cause potential health problems.

(2) Lot shape, design, arrangement and purpose. The lot arrangement, design and shape shall be such that lots will provide satisfactory and desirable sites for buildings and be properly related to topography and conform to requirements of this chapter. Lots shall not contain peculiarly shaped elongations solely to provide necessary square footage of area which would be unusable for normal purposes.

(a) Location. When a subdivision abuts a public street which is in the State's highway system, the subdivide shall be required to dedicate one-half of the total right-of-way and any easements necessary to make said street conform to Virginia Department of Transportation or county criteria; in addition the subdivide may be required to dedicate the full right-of-way necessary to make horizontal and vertical adjustments to said street or if the property occupies both sides of the roadway.

(b) Side lines. Side lines of lots shall be approximately at right angles or radial to the street line. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(c) Remnants. All remnants of lots below minimum size left over after subdividing of a tract must be added to adjacent lots or otherwise disposed of rather than allowed to remain as unusable parcels.

(d) Separate ownership. Where the land covered by a subdivision includes two or more parcels in separate ownership and lot arrangement is such that a property ownership line divides one or more lots, the land in each lot so divided shall be transferred by deed to single ownership, simultaneously with the recording of the final plat. Said deed is to be deposited with the Clerk of the Court and held with the final plat until the subdivider is ready to record the same, and they both shall then be recorded together.

(e) Business or industrial lots. Lots intended for business or industrial use shall be designated specifically for such purposes with adequate space set aside for off-street parking and delivery facilities. Each case must be approved in advance by the Planning Commission of Page County.

(f) Automobile access required. All lots appearing on a subdivision plat will have access by conventional automobiles primarily designed for highway use to an approved building site on that lot, or, if any lot does not have such access, sufficient warning will be set forth on the plat to so alert prospective purchasers. Any lot not having such access and which is identified by such warning will have access to sufficient area for off-street parking that will accommodate at least two ten-foot by twenty-foot parking spaces.

(g) Lots marked. Lot corners shall be marked with iron pipe not less than 3/4 inch in diameter and 36 inches long and driven so as to be not less than 10 inches above the ground with finished grade. When rock is encountered, a hole shall be drilled four inches deep in the rock, into which shall be cemented a steel rod 1/2 inch in diameter, the top of which shall be not less than 10 inches above the finished grade.

(3) Blocks.

(a) Length. The maximum length of blocks shall be 1,200 feet, and the minimum length of blocks upon which lots have frontage shall be 500 feet.

(b) Width. Blocks shall be wide enough to allow two tiers of lots of minimum depth, except where backing on major streets, unless prevented by topographical conditions or size of the property, in which case the Clerk may approve a single tier of lots of minimum depth.

(c) Orientation. Where a proposed subdivision will adjoin a major road, the Clerk may require that the greater dimension of the block shall back upon such major thoroughfare to avoid unnecessary ingress or egress.

(4) Streets.

(a) Alignment and layout. The arrangement of streets in new subdivisions shall make provision for the continuation of existing streets in adjoining areas. The street arrangement must be such as to cause no unnecessary hardship to owners of adjoining property when they plat their own land and seek to provide for convenient access to it. Where, in the opinion of the Clerk, it is desirable to provide for street access to adjoining property, proposed streets shall be extended by dedication to the boundary line of such property where they shall terminate in temporary cul-de-sac. Upon extension to the adjacent street system, remnants of the temporary cul-de-sac shall revert to the lot owners adjoining said cul-de-sac. Half streets along the boundary of land proposed for subdivision shall not be permitted. Whenever possible, streets shall intersect at right angles as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(b) Service drives. Whenever a proposed subdivision contains or is adjacent to a limited access highway or expressway, provision shall be made for a service drive or marginal street approximately parallel to such right-of-way at a distance suitable for an appropriate use of the land between such highway and the proposed subdivision. Such distance shall be determined with due consideration of the minimum distance required for ingress and egress to the main thoroughfare. The right-of-way of any major highway or street projected across any railroad, limited access highway or expressway shall be of adequate width to provide for the cuts or fills required for any future separation of grades as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(c) Approach angle. Major streets shall approach major, collector or minor streets at an angle of not less than 80°; and in all hillside areas, streets running with contours shall be required to intersect at angles not less than 70° 60°, unless the Clerk, upon recommendation by the Virginia Department of Transportation Engineer, shall approve a lesser angle of approach for reasons of contour, terrain or matching of existing patterns as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(d) Minimum widths. The minimum widths of proposed streets, measured from lot line to lot line, shall be as shown on the major street plan as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation. [Amended 6-21-2005]

i. Local service drives which cannot be extended in the future: not less than 50 feet.

ii. Alleys, if permitted: not less than 20 feet nor more than 28 feet.

(e) Access streets, roads or rights-of-way. Any street, road or right-of-way providing means of ingress and egress for the tract to be subdivided shall be of a minimum width of 50 feet.

(f) Construction requirements. All subdivision streets and roads shall be constructed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation secondary subdivision roads specifications and requirements. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(g) Alleys. Alleys should be avoided wherever possible. Dead-end alleys, if unavoidable, shall be provided with adequate turnaround facilities as determined by the Clerk.

(h) Private streets and reserve strips. There shall be no private streets platted in any subdivision. Every subdivided property shall be served from a publicly dedicated street. There shall be no reserve strips controlling access to streets.

(i) Cul-de-sac. Minor terminal streets (cul-de-sac) designed to have one end permanently closed shall be no longer than 400 feet to the beginning of the turnaround. Each cul-de-sac must be terminated by a turnaround having a right-of-way width as established by the standards and rules of the Virginia Department of Transportation. A 45' minimum pavement radius and 55' right-of-way radius be required for cul-de-sacs. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(j) Names. Proposed streets which are obviously in alignment with other already existing and named streets shall bear the names of the existing streets. In no case shall the names of proposed streets duplicate existing street names, irrespective of the use of the suffix street, avenue, boulevard, drive, way, place, lane or court. Street names shall be indicated on the preliminary and final plat and shall be approved by the Clerk. Names of existing streets shall not be changed except by approval of the governing body. The Clerk shall keep a list of all street names.

(k) Identification signs. Street identification signs of a design consistent with the regulations of the Virginia Department of Transportation shall be installed at all intersections. Also need to be consistent with regulations of County of Page since named street identification signs are not installed or maintained by VDOT. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(l) Monuments. Concrete monuments four inches in diameter or square and three feet long, with flat top, shall be set at all street corners, at all points where the street line intersects the exterior boundaries of the subdivision, and at right angles, point and points of curve in each street. The top of the monument shall have an appropriate mark to identify properly the location and shall be set three inches above the finished grade. Upon completion of subdivision streets, sewers and other improvements, the subdivider shall make certain that all monuments required by this chapter are clearly visible for inspection and use. Such monuments shall be inspected and approved by the Clerk before any improvements are accepted by the governing body.

(5) DELETED: Sewage disposal system. The Clerk shall require that data from a soil survey be submitted as a basis for passing upon subdivisions dependent upon on site sewage disposal as a means of sewage disposal. The Clerk shall not approve any subdivision where a sanitary sewer system is not provided, unless the Clerk shall receive, in writing, from the Soil Conservationist of the United States Department of Agriculture a statement to the effect that the area contained in the subdivision is generally satisfactory for the installation of sewage disposal systems and that they will not, so far as can be determined, create hazards to public health and that such approval by the Clerk is only with the understanding that where on site sewage disposal systems are to be installed these must be approved on an individual lot basis by the State Health Department of Virginia or the Local Health Official. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(6) Easements. The Clerk may require that easements for drainage through adjoining property be provided by the subdivider. Easements of not less than 15 feet in width shall be provided for water, sewer, power lines and other utilities in the subdivision when required by the Clerk.

(7) Public water. Where public water is available within 200 feet of the boundary line of the subdivision, the services shall be extended to all lots within said subdivision.

(8) Private water and/or sewer. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the installation of privately owned water distribution systems or sewage collection and treatment facilities; provided, however, that any such installations must meet all of the specific requirements of the State Health Department, and specific approval of the same must be obtained from the Commission. [Amended 6-21-2005]

(9) Fire protection. The installation of adequate fire hydrants in a subdivision at locations approved by the Clerk shall be required, provided that public water is available. The Clerk shall consult with the National Board of Fire Underwriters before approving such locations.

§ 100-13. Class B subdivision.

A. In addition to those general requirements specified in Article II, § 100-11, a proposed Class B subdivision shall be subject to the following requirements and regulations, acknowledging that there is a mutual responsibility between the subdivider and Page County, Virginia, to divide the land so as to improve the general use pattern of the land being subdivided.

B. Requirements.

(1) Roads. Each lot shall front on a public right-of-way of a minimum to be in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation secondary subdivision road specifications and requirements, and each lot shall have a minimum frontage on said right-of-way of 200 feet with specific requirements as follows: [Amended 6-21-2005]

(a) All subdivision streets and roads shall be constructed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation secondary subdivision roads specifications and requirements.

(b) An adequate cul-de-sac shall be provided in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation to allow safe maneuvering by service vehicles, highway equipment, school buses and fire trucks. A 45' minimum pavement radius and 55' right-of-way radius be required for cul-de-sacs.

(c) Private entrances to lots shall be at least 50 feet apart and shall be arranged in such manner as to assure the safe channelization of traffic.

(d) At all intersecting streets, a relatively flat landing should be provided on the side streets and should be of sufficient length to accommodate at least one vehicle. An appropriate transition vertical curve shall be provided to blend intersecting routes and to direct storm drainage to the curb or ditch to prevent the sheet flow of drainage across the intersection from the intersecting street.

(2) Access streets, roads or rights-of-way. Any streets, roads or rights-of-way providing means of ingress and egress for the tract to be subdivided shall be of a minimum width of 50 feet. When a subdivision abuts a public street which is in the State's highway system, the subdivide shall be required to dedicate one-half of the total right-of-way and any easements necessary to make said street conform to Virginia Department of Transportation or county criteria; in addition the subdivide may be required to dedicate the full right-of-way necessary to make horizontal and vertical adjustments to said street or if the property occupies both sides of the roadway.

§ 100-14. Subdivision of land adjacent to incorporated town.
Whenever any part of any subdivision lies within the corporate limits of any town having a zoning or other land use ordinance, the Planning Commission may require compliance with such town's ordinances, in lieu of this chapter, in order to provide for unity of subdivision and to avoid future conflicts in case of the expansion of such town if, in their judgment, this compliance would be necessary for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of future residents and for the orderly development of the general area.
§ 100-15. Pit and tank privies. [Added 6-21-2005]

In no case shall pit or tank privies be approved in any zoning districts unless approved by the Board of Supervisors.

§ 100-16. Advertising standards.

A subdivider, when advertising a subdivided tract of land for sale, shall be specific as to the following items:

A. Whether officially approved public water and public sewage facilities are available or not;

B. The amount of officially public approved water available to each lot purchaser in terms of gallons per day; and [Amended 6-21-2005]

C. No advertising signs advertising a subdivision tract for sale shall be placed within VDOT's roadways rights-of-way. [Amended 6-21-2005]

Listening Post

2007-11-10T08:42:00.000-05:00

As promised, we are going to talk about the position of women, and the culture of Page County. This is where you can post your concerns about the culture. But those concerns can not speak in any manner about issues that are under investigation. Why? Because they are under investigation, that's why. I can't post anonymous comments about that. You cannot say any words, of any type, good or bad, about any person by name.

But here's what you can post about. You can post about your situation, your feelings, your opinions. You can be heard about your frustrations. You can talk about your wishes and hopes and dreams. You can talk about why you feel you cannot reach your dreams. You can describe your needs and desires for the future. You can wonder about the World Outside Oz. (WOO)

Why should we do this? Because apparently, people want to. That is good enough reason. And after there is enough open talk about how people feel, a pattern will emerge. That pattern should help our elected officials, whom the people voted for, to help the community. And all of our charitable organizations, NorthWest, Page One, Choices, and many others, may benefit from hearing this.

Or, maybe not. If no one wants to post these things here, don't post them on other threads, either. The other threads are about the Board of Supervisors spending us to death.

An open forum is more than just a listening post. It's a place to explore and consider what can be done, and examine issues.

Alice

$66,000 an Acre in Page

2007-11-09T05:48:00.001-05:00

Seriously. We could move the county administration building to Rappahannock and buy land for a lot less than $66,000 an acre.

It turns out its 9 acres for $600,000.

In a down market. With no one else bidding or trying to buy that same land.

The real beauty of a plan for the county to buy land at $66,000 an acre is that after the sale, that number will go into the database of sold land, and when the state counts the land sold compared to the price, considering how LITTLE land will be sold in Page, it will dominate the numbers, and make our real estate values look LOW, because the database contains very few sales except that crazy one.

Then Tommy La France can tell Charlie Campbell it's okay to do a reassessment, because the values went up again, and they need the extra money to pay for the school athletic fields, the county office COMPLEX, etc etc

Anybody who can find some alternative land for the county to buy, at an actual reasonable market price -- they're looking for 9 acres. Somebody go find them an alternative and post it quick. They need parking areas, flat land, easily accessible, near town. Then call 743-4142 and ask to talk to Mark Belton.

Fact is: if no alternative 9 acres shows up, they still have 3 of the 5 votes to push this kind of stuff through. Who will vote for it? For SURE, John Rust will vote for it. Tommy LaFrance will vote for it. And then either Carol Lee or Charlie will vote for it, depending on factors I haven't figured out yet. Interesting that Charles Ballard's seat was left empty for so long, without a temporary fill in. It makes 3 the winning number.

Mark Belton. What are you thinking?

To the posters out there whose posts are being rejected. Try focusing on THIS. Baby steps, people. Take it slow. Don't step on the mines.

OR, maybe the Blog is still full of crap, and it's true that "prime" commercial land in Page is worth $66,000 an acre.

Let's go with that. Does anybody have any data to support any price in Page on land for $66,000 an acre? What did that developer who bought the land next to the Mimslyn for condos pay? That's prime commercial real estate in town. Yo, I'd bet HE'd sell it for $66,000 an acre. And hire a band to play "happy days are here again" after he signed the contract.

Can anybody come up with some FACTS? Blissful? Peter Rabbit? Chris Says? This is the way to accomplish your goals, through facts and responsive information.

Without that, all we got here is a Yellow Brick Road.

Back to Work

2007-11-08T04:38:00.000-05:00

Board of Supervisors work session November 7, 2007.
These are not minutes of the meeting. They are the personal notes of a citizen who attended.

The Board started with closed session for Acquisition of Real Property.

Open session:

*Appointment of Advisory Committee for the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Kevin Henry asked the board to appoint 6 more people to the advisory committee. The Board agreed to work on that.

*Focus Group Meetings for Advisory Committee for the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan. Mark Belton talked about the Focus Groups and how they were broken down into 4 groups. Agriculture, Development, Business and Environmental.

*Discussion to the New County Office Building Mark Belton talked about purchasing 10 acres of land along Hwy 211 and Hawksbill Street near LFCC for the new county office buildings. The cost for the land would be $600,000.00. The Rescue Squad may also want to build in that area.

*Update on the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission Activities.

Nora Belle Comer talked about the different concerns of the Commission which include: Water, Clean Air, Transportation, Waste Water, Housing Plans and River Use. Then Maggie Weaver talked about the Valley Commuter Assistance Program. This program helps county residents commute to other areas to work. It includes van pools, car pools and ride share data.

*Pump and Haul Permit Guidelines. Gerald Dovel asked the board to consider writing a policy on pump and haul septic system that would require the owners to give usage updates. Mark Belton said he would work on that policy.

*Health Department Staff Rotations Someone - I didn't get his name. I think he is an Environmental Manager with the state talked to the board about an additional fee of $25,000.00 to be paid from Page County to help support the State Health Department because of budget cuts. He also asked that one employee be transferred to Front Royal to help with septic inspections. The Board did not agree with this.

*Monthly Report from the Public Works Department Henry Mikus talked about tonnage and finances which he said were the usual. He reported that DEQ had done their quality inspection and that they had passed without any negative comments. He also told the Board that he had found a new place to take our paper.

*Solid Waste Policy Henry Mikus said that some people had complained about paying for bringing in clean recycling. The Board discussed dropping the fee in hopes of encouraging more recycling.

*Increase in Cat/Dog Adoption Fees Mark Belton asked the Board to consider raising the cat adoption fee from $20 to $25 and the dog adoption fee from $35 to $40.

*Review of Recent Legislation for CSA Georgia Sours talked about the new legislation which may affect the Foster Care Prevention Guidelines. She said the new policy would be out on November 20.

*Board of Zoning Appeals Appointment Regina Miller said someone from the Board of Zoning Appeals was coming to the end of their term. I believe the issue will be handled after JD Cave takes office since the person is from his district.

The Board went into closed session for Consultation with Legal Counsel and Personnel Matters.
____________________________________________________

This is what Page County Watch is all about. Watching the process of our government. This is where the process takes place. At the Board of Supervisors' meetings.

This is who runs our county.

When you read this, do you hear the KaChing KaChing of your tax dollars at work? The Advisory Committee for the Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan is a very big deal. This is what will decide many of our future issues regarding our homes here in the land we love. When they talk about Focus Groups for this plan, they are saying that people will be getting together to talk about the vision for the county's future in each of those areas. Who are these people? Are they you, your neighbors, your family, your friends? Whoever they are, they will be guiding and giving input to the direction of the county.

If you care about making the county a good place to live and raise children, WATCH THIS SPACE. It's the devil in the details that make our lives calm and happy, or stressed and burdened. These little details, discussed at these meetings, add up to our quality of life.

If the issues you care about aren't being discussed in these meetings . . . they aren't being addressed by our local government.

The County Line

2007-10-26T06:10:00.000-04:00

As in, the Party Line of the County.

Actually, this is good stuff. Go to the county website.

http://www.co.page.va.us

In an attempt to be responsive, which is what we all want, the county administrator has started posting explanations of issues there. You select Our Government, and then select FAQs.

There are three FAQs posted so far.

1. The Reassessment Process

2. The Battle Creek Landfill

3. Economic Development Efforts

Yes, it's the Party Line. but it's a start at being responsive, and I'm really impressed with it as an effort.

I applaud Mark Belton and the county administration for doing this. Information disseminated like this gives the citizens a good opportunity to ask thoughtful questions and participate in the process of governing.

Thank you, County Administration Team.

Alice

Illegals in Page County?

2007-10-22T08:15:00.000-04:00

Delegate Todd Gilbert will be on this panel. I don't get this channel, so if anybody watches it, post about what it said.

WVPT to air illegal immigration documentary

HARRISONBURG —WVPT will broadcast "Virginia Reports: The Latino Underground" at 9 p.m. Monday. The broadcast will feature interviews with several undocumented immigrants; Dr. Laura Zarrugh, a cultural anthropologist and adjunct professor at James Madison University; Charles Bowden, an author and investigative journalist who has spent more than 20 years writing about illegal immigration; George Taplin of the Virginia chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps; Hobey Bauhan, president of the Virginia Poultry Federation; Micah Bump, a Georgetown University research associate; and others, including an immigration lawyer, Del. Todd Gilbert and Donald Ford, superintendent of Harrisonburg City schools.

The show will repeat at 10 p.m. Oct. 26, at 3 p.m. Oct. 28 and at 9 p.m. Nov. 1.

________________________________

Charlie Hoke introduced a resolution that the Board passed, asking the state to take stronger measures to keep illegals out of Virginia. Todd Gilbert, our Delegate, is on the governors panel to study this.

I think we are getting some illegals in the county. Why is this happening? Do we have jobs here that nobody is willing to take?

Born at night

2007-10-20T04:52:00.000-04:00

This forum is full of stupidity, foolishness, wrong thinking, dumbheadedness, stubbornness, and all the rest of the things that regular people are. But please let's not grind the cigarette butts into the open wounds, too.

This election will be over in a few weeks. What topics would YOU, the citizens of Page County, like to see covered AFTER the elections, knowing that the newly elected officers will see the forums? What are the top issues in the county for our government to address?

Alice

The Wheels on the Bus

2007-10-17T06:24:00.000-04:00

The following are the notes of one citizen who attended the meeting of the Board of Supervisors on October 16, 2007. They are not official minutes of the meeting.

1. The Board met in closed session to talk about buying property for a business park and for a county office building.
2. They passed an ordinance to add more members to the Economic Development Authority and stagger terms.
3. They changed some people’s 911 addresses.
4. They appointed Tommy LaFrance and John Rust to a committee to consider who should own the airport. (It is currently owned 50-50 by the Town of Luray and the county, and apparently there’s some reason to change that.)
5. They changed 3 tax assessments that Charlie Campbell said were mistakes.
6. Big News Alert! Mark Belton had some figures that said some state agency measured our real estate sales in actuals, compared to our real estate assessments, and the measure was 92.7%. That means our assessments are a little bit LOW compared to actual sales. So Mark suggested that maybe we want to reassess sooner, so there is not so much of a gap between our market value and our assessments. Tommy said, we’ll just keep an eye on that number and when it changes too much in either direction we can reassess again.
7. They appointed people to committees: John Van Wyck (sp?) was appointed to the Northwest Community Services Board, Dawn Liscomb Ponn was appointed to the Planning Commission, and Robin Stevens was appointed to the Community Policy and Management Team.
8. Mark Belton explained that in 2004, there was a court ordered audit of the landfill, which was a result of a citizen lawsuit, or petition, or something. Well, here it is 2007, and the auditors are just getting around to doing it. This only came up because the auditors are now sending bills for their work. By the end of this month there should be an audit report of what happened to the landfill and why things went wrong. Mr. Rogerson (a member of the audience, not a board member), said the reason the citizens filed that lawsuit was in the hopes of getting some of the lost money recovered, which is now a moot point since it took so long to do the audit. The auditors are allowed by the court to bill $30,000 for their work. So the point is moot and irrelevant now, but the bill for the auditors is actual now. Mark thinks the report will say something like, “there was a bad contract in place and it wasn’t monitored closely”. But since the audit was court ordered, it will take place anyway.
9. The auditors for the fiscal year financials that ended June 30 will be late with their report this year because the documents they need were taken to the court in Abingdon.
10. Mr. La France wanted to set the record straight in response to Randy Arrington’s editorial in the Page News last week. Randy said there was an “us vs them” mentality between the county and the town, and he suggested there should have been more communication about the Salyards business, Shenandoah Waste Services, and maybe the three towns should have a seat on the Economic Development Authority. Tommy wanted to be sure everybody knew that there was this ordinance which had been in process of being passed since July 18, 2006, that would put new members on the EDA, including one from each town. He showed a stack of emails from Tom Cardman, Economic Development Director, and the town about the SWS business, and he pointed out that the town Planning Commission approved the SWS location. He said that 1 ½ to 2 years ago, the Board considered economic development to be the biggest challenge facing them, and they had to change from Industrial Development to Economic Development Authority and we are a Dillon Rule state, whatever that means, and now we’re adding people to the EDA, and all of this stuff takes time to get passed.
11. Tommy asked our attorney to look into other ways to make public announcements other than the Page News. (Now, would that action be motivated in order to make it easier for the public? Or is that vengeance over an editorial? Surely it must be because our Board Chairman is ever searching for ways to make the public aware of what the Board is doing.)

Citizen comments:
John Rogerson said:
1. If we build the longer runway at the airport and the hangars, and the people don’t come with their airplanes, are we going to end up having to pay out of our taxes for a failed airport that only benefits a few families? And also, putting John Rust and Tom LaFrance on the committee to discuss ownership of the airport is stacked, because both of them are for the airport expansion. (Tom answered this, and after many words, it sounded like the answer was yes, the taxpayers will be stuck with a loan that doesn’t get paid back if the airport were to fail to get the hangars filled.)
2. The purpose of the landfill lawsuit was both to hope to get some money back, and also to send a message to future Boards that they had to follow the law when paying invoices, and not just pay for things that hadn’t been received, just because they got a bill.
3. Maybe Randy didn’t get some things right in his editorial, but the fact that there is a dysfunctional relationship between the town and the county was the point, and that was correct. There is also a North-South divide in the county between the town of Luray vs the towns of Stanley and Shenandoah.
4. John Rogerson said Tom Cardman (EDA director) and Henry Mikus (Landfill Manager) both just got big pay raises, but the county hasn’t gotten any new business and the landfill doesn’t meet its minimum intake to breakeven. He wonders why pay isn’t tied to performance. He said it’s not right to say the landfill has forty years life left, because we were putting in 1500 to 2000 tons a day and that’s not calculated in correctly.
5. He said now that everybody knows you’re trying to buy land for an industrial park and for the county office building, everybody who’s willing to sell will raise the prices.
6. He said, for the county office building, why did you buy the land and get the plans ready, at a cost of $400,000 and then just throw them away over a tree that nobody knows where the documents are that say it’s a historical tree, and if you can overturn the guy’s will who didn’t want you to park the cars for the fairground on his land, why can’t you adapt the plans around an old tree?

Supervisors responses:
1. Charlie “Potted Plant” Hoke, said what he always says, “Thanks for coming.”
2. John Rust said, “Don’t forget to come out to vote. Voting is your input into government.”
3. Gerald Cubbage said a couple of interesting things, about building coalitions and getting the towns involved.
4. Carol Lee said coalitions are where it’s at, and Shenandoah has an office of the EDA and also a Chamber of Commerce in Stevens Cottage.
5. Tom said the airport is paid for 95% by federal, 3% by state, 1% by county and 1% by town. If the hangars are built there is a federal grant plus the county has to give a loan to the airport for the rest, but the loan will be paid back from the money for renting the hangars. The hangars need 27 out of 30 filled in order to pay the loan back.

So that’s your local government at work.

Alice's Opinion: Leadership is in choosing the topics to be discussed, in setting the course, and in working toward goals. What are the goals here? What is not being talked about that needs to be? What issues are not addressed and ignored every time they're brought up? VOTE NOVEMBER 6. Good, informed voting is the beginning of good government. Then holding those elected accountable to the people is step 2.

And I'm just going to ASSUME that Chairman LaFrance asked the county attorney to find a way to inform the public about hearings other than the Page News because our Board Chairman is concerned about getting the news out to the people in better ways.

School Safety

2007-10-12T17:42:00.000-04:00

Many people have called in to the radio, on the shows for Supervisors, for School Board, and again for Sheriffs, bringing up resource officers in the schools. Here is an email I received from April Campbell.

________________________________________________________________________________
Alice,

After listening to your radio show this morning with the
four candidates for sheriff, I found myself in question of
something. I am a student at Lord Fairfax Community College
here in Luray and I also have a 1st grader who attends Luray
Elementary, and another child who will be attending public
school next year. I am a concerned student, parent and
taxpayer in the county of Page. The lack of resource
officers in our schools is something that should be a top
priority and concern for all parents, teachers and
students.

Back to my question: If the county is so interested in
building 2 new schools, are they interested in protecting
the students who will be attending these 2 brand new
schools? And if not, why? Also, what do the board of
supervisors plan on doing to obtain the needed funds for
this project, or do they? If they do, when? Does a child,
student or teacher need to be hurt for someone to wake up
and realize that the protection of our educational
facilities should be a top priority?

To my county supervisor, Charles Hoke, will you be planning
on voting for providing the funds to the newly elected
sheriff of Page County for the protection of our precious
children?

I think that opening up a blog to address this concern,
could be a great asset to finding a solution to this serious
problem.
Thank You

April Campbell

Outlanders River Camp

2007-10-10T07:27:00.000-04:00

Here’s a good example of how zoning ordinances impact people.

The folks who own and operate Outlanders want to create a new campground business in the county off of Rte 211. It will be located on the Southfork adjacent to the bridge at Whitehouse. To do this, they have to get some of the property’s zoning changed. The need to change it from residential/commercial to agricultural use. Campgrounds can only be located on property zoned for agricultural or woodland use. A small portion of the 80 acres of the property is already zoned agricultural.

To get the zoning changed, they had to have all the plans ready and take their plan to the Planning Commission. The commission will have a public hearing about it after they have reviewed it in their work sessions.

They are planning a phased development. Ultimately, there will be 100 sites for camping accommodations ranging from primitive camping to “high end” luxury camping cabins. The Planning Commission seemed basically pleased to entertain this venture. Based on the presentation, it would seem the Outlanders folks have done an extremely good job of considering the visual impact of the business on the county and appeared to have touched all the bases with all of the county entities (health, building, planning, etc.) required to proceed with the project. They plan to protect the scenic nature of the county by using low level lighting, hiding the site from the road by putting in trees, and keeping the signs unobtrusive.

After they get the county to approve changing their zoning from Residential/Commercial to Agricultural, the next thing they need is a special use permit to let them have a campground. The duration of the special use permit would be 30 years and pass with the property should it ever be sold.

While the current ownership has all good intentions, perhaps even to the level of creating a gold standard for campgrounds, if it is ever sold, a subsequent owner may not be so well intentioned. To that end, the Planning Commission is required to include provisions within any special use permit that will specifically set forth the conditions of the permit. Mr. Shanks cautioned the Planning Commission to think those conditions over very carefully and ensure they are clear and enforceable. Pretty good advice!

There are a lot of details remaining to be worked out (for example: how many people will be allowed to stay there? How long can they stay? What kind of special events could go on there? These details are important because right now, Outlanders is planning a nice campground, but the permit lasts for 30 years. So if somebody bought it from Outlanders, the permit would still stand. What if the new owners wanted to turn it into a migrant labor camp, or a Woodstock-type event? That's why the permit has to be very specific, so it is just for the type of thing that Outlanders wants to do. The Planning Commission will be addressing the details of the special use permit at their next Regular Session (23 October)

Old Business:

Ms. Hammel, Chairman of the By-Right Subdivision subcommittee has been working toward having its presentation for the Planning Commission by the meeting on 12 November. If anyone is interested in this action, now would be the time to look at what the subcommittee is doing. Citizens can attend their meetings every Thursday at 7 p.m. at the courthouse. See the post By Right Subdivisions in September.

And it's "Not in My Backyard"

2007-10-09T21:42:00.001-04:00

With not much more to say, the Town Council of Luray voted unanimously to deny Shenandoah Waste Services permission to locate in the industrial park. (See the thread "What's the Deal?")

Although some council members visited a similar facility and were disappointed, SWS maintains that the facility they visited was not as similar as they believed, and did not represent the operations that SWS is proposing.

The next move is up to the county now. SWS is currently operating in the county, and it would take a change to the zoning ordinance -- something in process in varying degrees anyway in the county -- to let it continue to operate in its current location.

Both EMCO and the DEQ are supportive of this operation.

Boy, am I dumb

2007-10-07T20:46:00.000-04:00

I am an idiot. I’m running off at the mouth about why doesn’t anybody care about the zoning ordinances and the Land Use Map and the Board of Supervisors, and what is this big fascination with the sheriffs, and why does everybody care about the sheriffs when the supervisors impact your life more. And finally somebody has the sense to say, “Hey, Alice. What’s a zoning ordinance?”

Thank you so much for that question, because it tells me why so few people were interested. I can’t believe I was so dumb as to just blabber away about this stuff. There is no such thing as a dumb question, so I appreciate you calling a time out so I can explain this.

Here’s what it is and why it’s important.
_____________________________________________________________________
1. What is a zoning ordinance.
When you buy land or a house, you think you own that property, and you can live your life as you choose and do what you want with your land. You sure spend enough money on it, and you pay taxes on it, so we all think it’s really ours to decide. But it turns out that our laws say you can only do what is allowed within a set of special, local county laws, called our Page County Zoning Ordinances. So if you want to put a deck on your house, or add a new room, or put a shed in the back, or add another bathroom, or put an apartment above the garage for your mother in law to live in, you have to ask the county if you have permission to do that, by getting a Building Permit. When you go to the county to ask for a Building Permit, they will check the set of laws called the zoning ordinances first, to see if you are allowed to do that on your land.

These zoning ordinances will even tell you if you can divide up your land and sell pieces off. For example, suppose a piece of land has been in your family for the last three generations. Let’s say you want to break it up into ten lots, because you want each of your children and your nephews and nieces to have a space to build their own house. The zoning ordinances will say in there whether you are allowed to do that.

Another example: suppose you want to sell your family land to a developer to build a housing development. Suppose this would be the best price you could get for your land. The zoning ordinances will say if you are allowed to sell for that purpose.

Another example: suppose you buy a piece of land and you want to build a house on it. The zoning ordinances will say if you are allowed to build on it, and what kind of building it can be. They will also tell you if you are allowed to fix cars in your garage, or sell eggs from your home, or raise goats in your yard.

2. Where do zoning ordinances come from?
The state of Virginia has a code, or a set of rules about how to write laws. This Virginia code says that each county is supposed to lay out their land on a map, and together as a community, come up with a plan for how the community wants that land to be used. Depending on things like how the roads and the mountains and the valleys lay out, the community should pick places where it would be good to have heavy industry, where a lot of trucks come in and out, and other places where it would be good to have retail stores, and places where it should just be open green space and untouched land or parks, and other places where there should be houses and apartment buildings. This community based “vision” of how the land lays out is called a Land Use Map, and it is supposed to be part of each county’s “Comprehensive Plan”.

Our Board of Supervisors is charged with approving this Comprehensive Plan, and they did that in June, but they didn’t ask anybody what the vision was. They just decided for themselves without citizen input.

Oh, and they also forgot to put the Land Use Map in it. So to correct that, they are hiring this consultant, and the consultant is going to hold meetings with the citizens to ask how to lay out where we want business and where we want houses. The reason I and some others object to spending the $43,000 for the consultant to do that is because I think it would be better to have our own county employees and supervisors ask the citizens where they see the vision of the land use, instead of paying a consultant. We will probably need a consultant later, after the land use map is done, to help us to write the correct language that will be legal and pass the Virginia code, and we should save the money for that. The consultant wants $112,000 total, and the $43,000 is just to start, for the easy part.
We don’t have the whole $112,000 budgeted, so to pay the consultant, we have to raise taxes again in the future.

3. How do these decisions get made?
During each election, we elect 3 out of our 6 County Supervisors. One is elected for each of our five Districts. The county is divided into districts based on population. There is also a sixth supervisor who is elected “at large” to cover the whole county, and that person is the chairman of the board. Each supervisor who is associated with a district may appoint two people to be “planning commissioners”. That makes a total of 10 planning commissioners. The planning commissioners meet twice a month at the courthouse, and they consider people’s requests to change the zoning of their land. They can ask for a “special use permit” if the zoning doesn’t let them do what they want to do.

For example, maybe a person wants to build three houses on their land, and they have to ask for a special permission. The Planning Commission listens to their argument about why they want to do it, and they decide yes or no.
If the Planning Commission decides no, then the person is not allowed to do what they want with their own land. If they decide yes, then the person gets to ask the Board of Supervisors if they can do it. In theory, the Board is supposed to look at the Land Use Map and see if the request will fit in. But we don’t have a Land Use Map so they just decide whatever they think is right, without one.
If the Board then says no, the person cannot do what they want to do with their land.

4. What is the consultant going to do?
Hopefully, the consultant will help us get a land use map so that zoning decisions can be made from it. If the consultant is worth what we are paying him, he will hold citizen meetings to get input about how the land use map should be. But if the citizens don’t care and don’t show up at the meetings, the consultant will still get paid, and then our land use map will be what someone other than the citizens (the click? The Trogs and the Crits?) wants instead of what the community wants. Then we can use that map to write more zoning ordinances. There is one being rewritten right now. It is called the ByRight Subdivision ordinance (ordinance means law, or local law). It is about what you can do if you want to sell off pieces of your land. It tells you the rules for selling it off.
_______________________________________________________________
I hope I have explained it more clearly. If you have any other questions, please do not feel embarrassed about asking. I should have realized this would not be common knowledge.

To get involved with this process, and make your voice heard and your wishes known, come to these county meetings. The schedule for them is on the county website at http://www.pagecountyvirginia.gov and you can call the county office at 743-4142 to find out the location and what is going to be talked about. You can also ask the county to automatically notify you by email if any meetings are being held. You can also ask the county for copies of the minutes of the meetings, but they take months to print them, so the best thing is to keep reading this website. We try to post what happened the next day.
They are usually on Monday or Tuesday nights at the Luray Courthouse, or at Stanley Elementary School or Shenandoah Elementary School.

COMPLAINTS DEPT

2007-10-07T12:12:00.001-04:00

If you would like to register a complaint against something that was posted and shouldn't have been, or something that wasn't posted and should have been, my email is Research@PageCountyWatch.org

You must sign your name to complain.

Here are the Posting Rules

What's the Deal?

2007-10-05T06:18:00.001-04:00

The Salyards Business. What's the Deal?

Is this good for Page County or is it bad? What do we know about it?

Email Research@PageCountyWatch.org and let us know. The Town Council votes Tuesday night. Are they going to let a new business in, and bring jobs? Or are they going to chase it away?

Why or why not? Post what you know.

Jody sent this information in. I have signed his online petition. The link is here for anyone else who wants to. Also, the phone numbers of the town council members are here so you can call them and express your opinion.

Dear Alice,

Thank you so much for the opportunity to express our views this morning on you show. Here is some basic information about our proposed facility.

Shenandoah Waste Services, llc is requesting a special use permit to operate a Materials Recovery Center in the Town of Luray, Virginia, on the north side of Stoney Brook Lane, south of U.S. Route 211, and north of the present location of the EMCO Enterprises manufacturing facility. This project will create 80 new jobs paying over $30,000 per year for the people of Page County, help protect the 280 jobs at Emco, and place Page County on the forefront of environmental responsibility. The proposed facility will not operate as a transfer station, will comply with all state and federal environmental laws, and lengthen the life of our current landfill. This facility will attract other industry to the County of Page creating future Job growth so that the people of Page County are not forced to commute outside the county for employment. Our main concentration is to help manufacturing facilities obtain waste free status by recycling there cardboard, wood, ferrous and nonferrous metals, plastics, drywall, and shingles. all operations will be indoors, there will be no processing of garbage, hazardous waste or infectious waste. The plant will help local builders be able to achieve green building credits. We urge all of the constituents of the Town of Luray and the County of Page to contact the staff , mayor, and members of the town council of Luray to express you support the Council will vote on this request Tuesday October the 9th.

Also please sign our online petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/sws10909/petition.html
Mayor of the Town of Luray

Ralph H. Dean 540-743-3208

Luray Town Council

Barry Presgraves 540-743-5326

William Menefee 540-743-7721

Lonnie Arrington 540-743-2556

Earl L. “Rock” Racer 540-743-5439

Nancy Lee Shifflett 540-743-6709

Leroy Lancaster 540-743-5072

Town Planner

Ligon Webb 540-743-5511

Town Manager

Rick Black 540-743-5511

AND the Zoning Consultant is IN!

2007-10-03T11:03:00.000-04:00

Page County Board of Supervisors Work Session, Oct. 2, 2007.

Present at meeting Hoke, Rust, La France, Strickler, Cubbage.

The first item on the agenda was the Monthly Report from the Public Works Department by Henry Mikus.

He reported that they had a Public Hearing in September on Amendment 7 for the Battlefield Landfill and that it was a very positive meeting. He also noted that their 2 year anniversary is coming up soon.
He said that repairs had been made to floor joists in the circuit court room and a privacy railing had been added in one of the offices.
He told the board that the paper recycling plant in Edinburg was closing and that he would need to find a new company to handle our paper products.

The second agenda item was the New Stanley Well Location by Henry Mikus.

Mr. Mikus talked about the wells near the landfill being closed and the new well location off Goodrich Road. They need electric run for the new well and they discussed whether to have underground or above ground cable. He said they also need a new pump and a fence around the well. The board also discussed digging the electric line and water line at the same time to save money.
Mr. Mikus said there would be a Public Hearing on the Town Annexation on Oct. 30.

The board changed there November work session to Wednesday November 7 at Stanley.

The next agenda item was the Ordinance Amendment on the Personal Property Tax for Aircraft.
Dr. Cardman and Mr. Markowitz discussed the economic benefits of lowering the personal property tax on aircraft to .50 on the accessed value. After some disagreement from Hoke the amendment passed unanimously.

The next agenda item was the Contract for the Phase 1 of the Zoning Ordinance Update. Kevin Henry told the Board that the Planning Commission unanimously supported the update. After some discussion the Board approved the Contract.

Next Tom Cardman talked about the Wrangler Job Retention Grant. This is as I understand it a $65,000.00 dollar incentive grant in the form of a machine and tool tax reduction for employee retention. The Board approved the grant.

Lastly Shanks talked about the Ordinance for the Economic Development Authority Membership. He was talking about staggered terms for members.

They then went into closed session to discuss:
Consultation with Legal Counsel and Briefings by Staff Members Pertaining to Probable Litigation.
Discussion Concerning a Prospective Business or Industry
Acquisition of Real Property

The Davenport Study

2007-10-03T08:03:00.000-04:00

While we're on the subject of consultants reports (see Buracker Study), who knows something about the Davenport Study in 2002 or 2003? This was a study about the costs of the schools and how to pay for them. With the School Board radio show coming up on October 5, now might be the time to dredge THAT up.

I posted the research I did about the landfill for the September 21, SPEAK OUT. You can find it here.

The reason this is important is because many of the same names are up for election. Read that in connection with your candidate choices. The names associated are: Raymond Kite, Gerald Cubbage, Allen Cubbage, Charlie Campbell, and Ron Wilson. Don't vote on rumor. Read the Minutes Book first.

Throwing Away Money

2007-09-28T21:14:00.000-04:00

This was posted by Barky Von Schnauzer farther down under another topic. But it is important. We do not have the money to pay for this landfill to continue. And yet it continues. We have about 20 Tons of trash a day in page County.

GUEST BLOG

On the subject of the landfill it does seem that we are not breaking even, with large equipment purchases (Compactor, etc.) and only receiving 100 tons of waste per day and all the ongoing monitoring costs, both gas and ground water monitoring. Keep in mind it takes approximately 200-250 tons of trash per day, paying tons to break even, with a Sub-Title D Landfill. In addition, we have the on-going post closure costs of the Stanley Landfill, this landfill (and many like it) called HB 1205, as in House Bill 1205 is an unlined facility. So chances are there will be additional costs associated with remediation, check out the Ivy landfill in Albermarle County, they are curently in GPS (Ground Water Protection Standards), this is a remeadiation process to abate and take care of any ground water problems the landfill is/or has caused. We have 30 years of post closure care at Stanley. The county already has a passive system for burning off gas the old candle sticks as they have been called, as well as they manage an active gas extraction system which pulls methane gas from the Stanley Landfill, this is the active system. I beleive the county is only in about the 5th or 6th year in post closure care at Stanley. And again this is an unlined facility, Battle Creek is a lined facility meaning a compsoite liner is used to protect the ground, however EPA can not without a doubt say that even a lined landfill will not leak at some point in the future. The solid waste management regs are constantly being amended and changed and their has been discussion to make monitoring 50 years instead of 30 years. Where I am going with this is that costs are going to be ongoing for a long time with both landfills. To close Battle Creek, would mean the start of 30 years of ongoing post closure care while we would still have 24 to 25 years of post closure care at Stanley, and we would still have to construct a Transfer station, which has ongoing costs as well. Hind sight being 20/20 as they say, we should have closed the landfill that is Stanley back in 1994 when post closure requirements were only 10 years in length and not 30, we could have constructed a transfer station, handled only the waste generated in Page County, know that all the waste prior to 1994 would have been only Page Conty's trash being deposited at the Stanley landfill. Ths is what Warren County did, they closed their landfill prior to 1994 constructed a transfer station, and only had to monitor their facility (Landfill) for 10 years. And even with a transfer station, in addition to operational costs their would be transportation costs to Culpeper and that is even if they were allowed by their permit to accept waste from Page County. What is funny to me is their is a transfer station (Warren County's in Bentonville) less than 20 miles from Battle Creek taking their waste almost three hours to a landfill in Richmond. We should be opening up discussions again with Warren County to get their waste (approximately 100-110 tons per day) so we could at least maybe break even. They have quality municipal waste such as Page, and it seems we could offset their transportation cost (traveling 3 hours) to about 30 minutes and offer Warren County a tipping fee palitable to them and Page as well. Again we are only receiving about 100 or so tons now while I believe all three towns are dumping for free in this 100 tons. What is even more interesting, is to follow the Waste Management truck(s) outside of the town limits and watch them pick up green and blue containers and put them in the same truck as the "free" town waste, who is paying for that trash, our tax $$$. What is even more interesting is the businesses who have green/blue trash containers whos trash also goes into the waste management truck, so if we (County tax payers) are really paying for the towns residents to dump for free while are their residents outside of the town as well as businesses dumping in the "free" truck. If this is the case why have conveience sites, allow the WM truck to pick up trash at every household in Page County, on our tax paying tab. Just food for thought to go along with the Crooked County Book and Marvin Bush

Gilbert's on the Job

2007-09-28T13:45:00.000-04:00

Todd Gilbert, running unopposed for state representative, is on the Virginia Immigration Commission. He's also on the Internet. After seeing information about a member of the Immigration Commission on the Internet, Gilbert contacted Kaine's office with the information.

Here is what Gilbert may have seen. CLICK ON THOSE WORDS

According to Northern Virginia Daily, in an article on Friday, Sept 28, by Garren Shipley, Kaine announced the resignation of Dr. Esam Omeish, the president of the Falls Church-based Muslim American Society, from the 20-member commission studying the impacts of illegal immigration on the commonwealth on Thursday afternoon.

Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock, who first approached Kaine with concerns about Omeish, said he was "gratified that Kaine acted so quickly," but added that the incident raised serious questions about how thoroughly the administration was checking into the backgrounds of its policy advisers.

________________________________________________________________________

Congratulations to our Delegate! He has proven time and again that he is awake and aware and on the job for all of us.

And qudos to the power of the Internet.

Full Speed Ahead

2007-09-26T07:09:00.000-04:00

Planning Commission notes from Sept 25

Quoted from my notes of the Board of Supervisors meeting on September 18:

“The contract for the consultant to do the Land Use Map was shown. Kevin Henry wanted them to approve the money ($43,000) and the contract (pure time and travel, no specified deliverables, just send the money based on timecards) but Tommy LaFrance said something on the order of (paraphrased and caricaturized) “why do we need to pay a consultant to borrow our watch and tell us what time it is?” And Gerald Cubbage said why do we need some outsider to tell us where to put the bubbles on the bubble map, and Carol Lee said, well, maybe we could just get a little bit of help, not this much, and Charlie Hoke said, why don’t we go talk to the Planning Commission about this again and John Rust was absent. So they tabled it, pending talking to the Planning Commission about it some more. Tommy and Gerald thought Kevin Henry was up to the job, and the job really entails input from the towns and the citizens, so what does that have to do with a consultant. Kevin said, but there’s only one of me, so it’s going to take a long time.”

I thought that meant they didn’t want to spend the consultant money on the easy part, the part which just entails facilitating meetings to find out how the citizens want the county to look. That would mean the money would still be there after the Land Use Map was developed, when they might need real expertise to develop zoning ordinances. The danger in spending the money now, on the meeting facilitation, at $43,000 for 266 hours of time, is that then, when the money is all gone, and there still is no Land Use Map because the consultants held the meetings, but citizens didn’t attend, and so consensus was not built, the Land Use Map we spent $43,000 for will still not be accepted by the community, and the money will have been spent for no good reason. Building consensus within the community is time consuming and long. You can’t just hold a meeting, to which nobody comes, and then declare that you’ve fulfilled your obligation to hold a meeting, and proceed without consensus or community understanding.

The thing about our citizens is that they won’t figure out what’s going on until this is way down the road, and somebody tells them their land is being condemned because maybe a sinkhole is under it, and now it has to be a park. THEN they want to come out with picket signs, even though this has been brewing for years, under the radar, where nobody’s paying attention to it. So the point of not hiring the consultant for the Land Use Map is just that it’s a Time and Materials contract, with no deliverables, except the Timecards. Nothing to showing up for a meeting, conducting it whether anybody attends or not, and sending a bill. So the consensus building will be particularly hard, especially because there was no citizen involvement in developing the Comprehensive Plan that was just approved, so you are not starting with agreement that the goals stated there are in the community’s best interest in the first place. You won't even be able to get the bubbles placed on the bubble map without that.

The consultants part in building that consensus, at between $150 and $300 an hour, could maybe be cut down to just a little advice, rather than to spending all that was budgeted on this part. Perhaps the consultant could just spend a week with Mr. Henry, getting him ready to run these consensus building meetings, instead of paying the consultant to run them, because in Page County, these meetings aren't going to "take" the first time. They'll need a rerun. Or maybe three or four reruns.

At the Planning Commission meeting September 25, though, nobody from the Board was there to talk about the reasons why they wanted to proceed on the Land Use Map without a consultant. Nobody from the Planning Commission had been briefed on their reasons. So the Planning Commission just had a short discussion about it, and then re-requested or reaffirmed that they wanted to hire a consultant. They didn’t have anyone to explain to them why this contract was not immediately approved. When the Board, ie Charlie Hoke, is about to turn something down, but then Charlie pipes up with, "Let's talk to the Planning Commission about it first," we, as citizens, think that means they are actually going to talk to the Planning Commission, not just let the Planning Commission go off and vote again without any discussion.

Meanwhile, the Water Quality Advisory committee has issued a report on cleaning up the river. It says there is fecal cloriform (from warm blooded mammals) in 22% of our wells. And some other kind of bacteria in 44%.

I haven’t read that report yet, but I hope it says that comes from the cows in the river instead of saying it comes from people. All the people I know have health department approved septic systems. I wonder if there are people living on the river who don’t have septic systems. I will get a copy of the report and tell you.
Or, you can call 743-4142 and get your own copy, and tell me what you think.

Also, there was more talk about Karst and how the runoff endangers wells and causes sinkholes.

I haven’t seen any news reports about sinkholes, people falling in them or cars and houses being swallowed up. I guess that’s something that would happen if we got development here. If anybody wants to post any reports about sinkholes in the county, I’d be happy to post it. Or just hit the comments button.

There was also talk about a consultant who is in the process of writing a proffer model for if developers come here. One part of the proffer model is if you allow “age-restricted” communities. Apparently, with the Baby Boomers retiring, that is a popular model, because when you get to be a grandparent, you like everybody who lives around you to just have their grandchildren visit, not live next door to you. The problem with these “55 and over only” communities is that the developer doesn’t have to pay any “proffers” for schools, and that’s why developers like them. But they potentially strain the hospitals and ambulances, if you get too many of them. Also, they can be a problem for a person who buys a house in one of these communities, and then later, events overtake them and maybe a grandchild needs to come to live with grandpa and grandma because of some problem, and then guess what? Grandpa and Grandma either have to move, or they have to refuse to take the child in. Of course, this is planning ahead, for that sunshiny day when a developer decides it would be worth his while to build houses here. That’s what the whole Planning Commission is about. Planning ahead for the future.

To quote Commissioner Charles Newton, “We don’t want to do something now that causes a problem that is very expensive to fix in fifty years.”

So this is big, long range planning. With amazing foresight.

Wish you’d been there.

Alice

I know everybody’s too busy gossiping about the various Sheriff candidates to bother paying attention to this, but I think someday you’ll be sorry you didn’t watch what’s going on here.

Water Quality Meeting

2007-09-24T07:04:00.000-04:00

The following is a condensed version of a notice published in the Page News & Courier last week. Sorry for the late notice. I just spotted it this morning. The issue of water quality in the county is an important one. If anyone can make it to this event, please report back on any issues addressed.

<>The Page County Water Quality Advisory folks are having a Water Gathering accompanied by a fish fry on Sunday, Sept 30 at Compton Rapids. (I assume access from 340.) People knowledgeable in water resource matters will be there to answer any questions or concerns you might have. The event is free to Page County residents but reservations are required by 24 September, call 540-244-8366 or 743-4808.

Regarding any other county meetings or issues like this, if you would like your event posted here, email a notice to Research@PageCountyWatch.org and i will post it. If anyone attends and would like to post information about it, email me and I will post it.

POSTING RULES

2007-09-22T11:13:00.000-04:00

Because of the hot issues, and the election issues, and the few posters who are threatening the credibility of the Blog, and because I don’t want to disallow Anonymous posting and I don’t want to install moderation, I’m instituting this policy.

This document serves as a "plain language" guide to conduct of users of the Page County Watch Blog and sets forth how violators will be treated.

Infractions

* Abuse of Other Posters
Our Posters are all to be treated as members of a community. Name-calling, intentional abuse or otherwise creating a hostile environment for other Posters is unacceptable. Posts which do this will be deleted. Constructive, non-personal criticism and civil discourse is permissible; personal attacks are not.

* Obscene and/or Racist Postings
Linking to obscene web sites, posting obscene or graphic language, or violating the standards of decent behavior falls under obscenity, and is not allowed. Any postings which are deemed, in the discretion of the PCW Blogger, to be racist, anti-Semitic, or condemning any persons ethnicity or religious beliefs, or which otherwise reflect prejudice are not allowed.

* Flooding/Excessive Posting
"Flooding" is generally defined as the same person posting so much that others views are relegated to a minor position. If the same position is posted in multiple threads, posted multiple times, and continually appears, PCW will delete it.
* Spamming/Advertising
No advertising of anything. Advertisements will be deleted, but announcing events of community interest is allowed.

* Trolling
"Trolling" is generally defined as posting derogatory, inflammatory or otherwise irritating comments in an attempt to "bait" other members into responding angrily. This is not allowed on our site.
Procedures

Any posts that break these rules will be deleted. No warnings.

After attempting to enforce this rule for 2 days, it turned out to be too difficult. So as of Sunday afternoon, Sept 24, this is a moderated forum from now on out. That means your posts are still anonymous, but instead of posting as soon as you submit them, they come to my email for approval before they can be posted. Any posts which break these rules will be rejected before it is ever posted.

Borrow Your Watch?

2007-09-18T22:34:00.000-04:00

Notes from the Board of Supervisors Public Hearing, Sept 18, 2007

1. The school board needs another $40,000 or so because they missed something, I’m not sure what, something to do with a road and a cell phone tower. Mark Belton said they had it in contingency funds, it was approved.
2. The 911 system needs some people’s addresses changed. That was approved.
3. The contract for the consultant to do the Land Use Map was shown. Kevin Henry wanted them to approve the money ($43,000) and the contract (pure time and travel, no specified deliverables, just send the money based on timecards) but Tommy LaFrance said something on the order of (paraphrased and caricaturized) “why do we need to pay a consultant to borrow our watch and tell us what time it is?” And Gerald Cubbage said why do we need some outsider to tell us where to put the bubbles on the bubble map, and Carol Lee said, well, maybe we could just get a little bit of help, not this much, and Charlie Hoke said, why don’t we go talk to the Planning Commission about this again and John Rust was absent. So they tabled it, pending talking to the Planning Commission about it some more. Tommy and Gerald thought Kevin Henry was up to the job, and the job really entails input from the towns and the citizens, so what does that have to do with a consultant. Kevin said, but there’s only one of me, so it’s going to take a long time.
4. Then the aircraft personal property tax thing came up again. That hasn’t been approved yet. Earlier, before the meeting actually started, John Rogerson made a citizen comment that if they approved the tax rate on the new basis, could they potentially change it back to the old basis without a public hearing, and the lawyer said no, they couldn’t do that. But they tabled this again anyway.
5. There were some budget changes, but they were minor moving around things.
6. John Graves was appointed to the Water Quality Advisory Committee. There is also an opening on the Planning Commission, but the surprise candidate is not being announced until John Rust comes back from wherever he is, and there’s also an opening on the Economic Development Authority committee in District 3.
7. The Revenue office needs a new computer. Something about they upgraded the software and it used up all the old hardware. The old hardware was 4 years old anyway. Ancient. Anyhow this new computer cost $75,000 and it wasn’t budgeted.
8. And then there was a bunch of money that seemed to be laying around unused, so Mark was suggesting ways to use it. One way was to spend half a million dollars buying an option on land to become a Luray Business Park. Another way was to put $100,000 into a revolving loan fund that local businesses can use. This isn’t “extra”money, it’s just money that is unused cash. It’s an accounting thing. It’s about returns on money, and the best places to put it. It sounded okay. It’s like not a “spend” of money, it’s a “park” of money.

The actual meeting was shorter than the citizen comment and Supervisors Time (that’s when the Supervisors talk at the end). In citizen comments:
1. Jeff Vaughn (Shenandoah Speedway) said he’s measuring noise a certain way, and if that’s not the right way, he needs them to work with him to figure this out, because he thinks he’s following the rules, but then he gets notices saying the noise is too high, so what’s up with that?
2. Jeff Vaughn said the Supervisors need to talk to property owners about the Land Use Map not just consultants.
3. John Rogerson said what’s up with that tree you can’t cut down that you went and bought the land and got the plans and spent all that money and why can’t you rethink that instead of buying more land somewhere else.
4. John Rogerson said the school funding has a lot of things missing, this is just the beginning.
5. John Rogerson said there was a DEQ meeting about the landfill and there are violations there and the Board isn’t paying attention to them.
6. John Rogerson said what’s this about voting on the Voters Rights Act when it wasn’t on the agenda and there was no background given about it.
7. John Rogerson said why is Henry over at the dump preventing people from leaving good stuff there for other people to pick up?
8. John Rogerson said why do we have to buy land for a business park in the hopes that it will bring business. That’s like lengthening the runway in the hopes that it will bring planes. You can’t just build it and they will come.
9. Natalie Zuckerman said we need the consultant to finish up the Comprehensive Plan because it didn’t have a Land Use Map and that’s just like when they couldn’t finish the Comprehensive Plan because there was nobody to update the tables, and she updated the tables and for all her hard work she got called the “Unelected Citizen”. (Understand, the Board didn’t call her that. The Board thanked her for her work.) So they should hire a consultant because the Planning Commission needs one, and they already got together with the Planning Commission about it and the Planning Commission told them they needed one.

Then the Supervisors tried to answer some of these. Or, at least Tommy, Gerald, and Carol Lee tried. Charlie always just says, “yeah, thanks for coming.” Like a Potted Plant.

At the end, they went into a closed session with the lawyer because there is a potential litigation problem with the airport. That’s what I think they said.

Alice’s opinion:
It was a pretty good night. The contract with the zoning consultant is time and materials. For $43,000, the consultant is going to facilitate the meetings that need to go into a comprehensive plan, in order to be sure the layout of the Land Use Map actually reflects what the citizens want. That is, unless he spends all $43,000 before that actually happens, because his contract doesn’t have any deliverables. It’s a not to exceed. But it’s also a No Standards Specified. So when he bills $43,000, he’ll just stop showing up until we send him a new contract. But it is exactly a “borrow your watch to tell you what time it is” function. Yes, we hired a planner who is not a senior manager, and who doesn’t have years of experience, so he’s somewhat skittish, considering that he already has alligators snapping at him, and this looks like a “drain the swamp” problem. But he can do it. It may take a year, year and a half, two. So what? There is no emergency housing development pending.
I think that’s good enough. Truthfully, I think it’s going to take that long with the consultant. Plus, the consultant’s money will run out before the product is delivered. So let’s just save the $43,000 for the next “budget change” for the schools.

The Elephant in the Room

2007-09-17T21:16:00.000-04:00

The Elephant in the Room (At What Price, Part 3)

There is a history in this county, that impacts the culture and the way things are perceived to be. Like it or not, that history has something, I'm not sure exactly what, to do with the Landfill. As I've looked at various actions currently, I think it looks like not only the past, but a lot of the present and the future, also have something to do with the landfill. Why? Because the landfill has in the past, and seems to be continuing in the present and the future, to be using up a considerable number of our tax dollars. I don't exactly know why yet.

I'm not talking about the 11 cents on the dollar, oh, yeah, it costs money to get rid of trash, type numbers. I'm not talking about the $400,000 a year in operating expenses plus the $600,000 a year in debt service plus the couple of million here and there that gets classified as new investment to open up new cells.
I don't actually know what I'm talking about yet. I'm still looking to find out.

Maybe someone reading this knows, and will tell me. Gary Gibbs suggested that I go get the court documents from June 2005. I'm doing that. It's in process. I've also been offered a copy of the actual contract buyout documents. But right now, I'm not quite sure what's going on. I'm just uncomfortable that the numbers and the documents I'm seeing don't have all their pieces yet.

Someone else suggested that I go back through the Board of Supervisors meetings from that time period. That would be the time period before electronic records were kept, so it would be quite difficult. Plus the meetings were closed. Perhaps someone out there would like to tell me where to look.

You see, here's what has me uncomfortable. I'm meeting the people who were around a long time, and I'm not meeting any Bad Guys. I read that Ed Kieloch book, but it didn't ring true to me. It didn't seem to present a rounded picture of what was happening, or present motivations, or describe the complexity, of how what looks like a bunch of normal and well intentioned people could have gotten into such a mess. It painted everybody as a Bad Guy, and then I met them, one by one, and they just didn't have any horns. People have flaws. They respond oddly under pressure. And they make mistakes. You can’t elect anybody to do anything, without later finding out they’re not perfect. Human beings are imperfect. Once in a while, one of them lashes out and tells the people not to touch the pastries, but things like that are just human mistakes, not actual character flaws.

It would seem like we could say, “It’s time to forget it and move on.” I would agree, but there are three reasons why we can’t.

First, we can’t forget it because we have the same names running for office or sitting in office that we had at various times during the landfill issue. Raymond Kite. Charlie Hoke. Carol Lee Strickler. Gerald Cubbage. Allen Cubbage. C R Suddith. Ron Wilson. Charlie Campbell. And more. These names appear in the past, the present, and in hopes for the future. If we don’t know what happened before, how will we prevent it from happening again?

Second, we can’t forget it because it hasn’t been fixed. That’s the part we need the contract documents to untangle. It seems it got somewhat fixed, sort of. But you can’t turn your head and look away yet. It’s not gone.

And then there’s a third reason we can’t forget it. The third reason is: you can’t forget what you never knew. People get impressions, perceptions, misunderstandings, half-truths, and just plain wrong information. It gets in their heads. And if nobody challenges it, it rots there, where it becomes a memory of something that never happened. This mistaken memory sits there where it calls and recalls emotion, which eventually triggers rage, frustration, and a sense of powerlessness. It is not empowering to fail to know. It is empowering to know. If we don’t know something, but we think we know it, that is the worst of all worlds.

Right now, in this beautiful county, full of wonderful people, we have a culture that promotes “lack of empowerment”. Because too many people think they know something that never happened. It creates a Boogeyman. It encourages fearfulness. It incubates apathy. It creates a populace that is willing to roll over and play dead. It reminds me of that old saying, “Nobody can be your boss without your permission.” The citizens are the boss of the Board of Supervisors. It’s not the other way around. A long term resident told me once, “There’s no point going in and talking to them (the Board). They just let you talk a while, and then they go do what they want to do anyway.”

Sarah, this man who said that to me was not talking about Allen Cubbage. It doesn’t matter which Board it is, or who the Chairman is. These aren’t professional politicians. They sometimes seem to the citizens to be arrogant baboons, and that is more than likely to happen, no matter who gets the job, once in a while. We just hope that the people who are elected have an intention to be kind, an intention to be responsive, and an intention to respond to the people. Even if they do, there will always be a time or two, under pressure, when it won’t look that way.

So here’s what I think.

I think we have to go back and correct the record on this landfill thing. I think we can’t let the Ed Kieloch book sit out there as the only recorded history of it, with the Karen Kwiatkowsky article as the entry point to Page County that comes up every time a tourist wants to rent a cabin. I think we can’t do well at marketing the county for business and tourism when it looks like people can expect to meet Boss Hogg and Cooter on Main Street.

I’m not talking about writing any books. I’m talking about getting the minutes of the Board meetings during the right period, getting the contract documents, and the court documents, and getting it clear and straight who did what to whom when. Summarizing it. And posting it on the Internet.

I think that’s the only way we’ll know.

Perhaps many people will say we don’t need to know, that it’s a dead horse. But I say . . . it’s a dead Elephant. And its carcass is rotting in the living room, while we all turn our eyes and our focus away from the current landfill issue, and bleed our property taxes onto the living room carpet.

So, whomever would like to help me find out . . . email Research@PageCountyWatch.org or post your clues for where to look right here.

And whomever thinks this isn’t important, just go Blog under a different post.

Alice

The Clique that Rules Page County

2007-09-15T09:03:00.001-04:00

According to Bloggers on this site, there is a Clique ruling Page County. The members of this clique are both Republicans and Democrats, although it seems the Democrats usually just voluntarily bow out and let the Republicans primarily win. What NICE Democrats! People who run for office as either a Republican or a Democrat, are subject to being co-opted as members of this clique after they win. So if they are not members before they are elected, they become members after the election, and get enveloped in the arms of the clique, where their minds are influenced, and they change their votes, AGAINST the people, in favor of the dangerous Clique. The only people who are not subject to this seductive pressure to join are the Independents.
Folks, I didn't write that, I'm just summarizing the opinions posted on the Blog.
But this next part, I did write:
Calling on my twenty plus years as a corporate manager, and my seven years teaching Organizational Behavior at the college level . ..
that's not really as outrageous a proposition as it at first sounds.
Every group in humanity has a culture, really a subculture, that defines its “rules of behavior” and its accepted norms. This will happen in every human group, be it a family, a high school, a summer camp, an office, a farm, or a factory. In high school, which is where most of us first noticed that ‘cliques’ existed, this clique will define the measure of what it takes to be cool. Others will copy the mode of dress of the clique they wish to join, as there will be various types of cliques, and membership will center around behaviors such as dress code, language, tattoos, and risk taking. Membership in said Clique confers privileges. You are respected by others. You are associated with high prestige people. It enhances your self esteem. This is true whether the clique is a group that rides motorcycles, or a group that rabble rouses, or a group that governs. A clique runs Page County Watch. Every person chooses which cliques they join, and which cliques they aspire to join, in their daily life choices.
If you are not in the “in” clique, you will be in the “out” clique.
In a few scattered places, there will always be a Lone Ranger, who bears no allegiance, and carries his own flag. But even then, others will associate themselves with HIM, and then there’s a clique of the Lone Ranger.
When we elect our governing officials, we hope that each of them will consider US to be their clique. We hope that their clique allegiance will be to all the people they represent. If we don’t want illegal aliens in our county, we hope they will work to keep illegal aliens out. If we don’t want trucks barreling over 211, we hope they will do what it takes to keep . . . wait a minute. If we don’t want trucks, that pretty much means we don’t want business.
So now we’ve presented our elected officials with a dilemma. We do want business. But we don’t want trucks. We do want jobs. But we don’t want to change the rural nature. We’ve given them a dilemma, and a paradox. One too difficult to solve.
Now even though our elected officials have listened to us, and have wanted to make US their clique . . . they don’t know what to do. The question is too hard. And let’s not forget, these are basically volunteers. We don’t actually pay them enough to quit their day jobs to do this.
So in the time they have to work on this, they say, “what should I do?” They look around to see where to get advice and information. They look in the audience of their meetings, and who do they find? Empty seats, basically. So what else are they going to do? They can’t wait for a referendum on the ballot with every decision. They have to make decisions. So they obviously, as anyone would do, have to call on their own value system, and the people they consider to also have good judgement, which must be, would always be, their own friends. Anybody would do that. And as it happens, in a small town, where people can sit around and rock on the porch, their friends happen to also be in the Rotary Club, or fellow Republicans, or Democrats that are sitting at the next table at the Supper club. Well, who else would it be? What else would you expect them to do?
And then to those who aren’t in that circle of friends, who don’t go to those specific places, it looks like a clique.
By strict definition, it is a clique.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
So, yes, I think there is a Clique that Rules Page County. And by the nature of Humanity, there always will be. You, the voters, get the right to object to or affirm which clique the people you elect are in. If you throw out everybody who is in office right now, because you object to the clique they are in, you will get new people who are in a new clique, and then there will be a DIFFERENT clique who rules Page County. Maybe it will be better, maybe it will be worse. But it will be a clique, just the same. The trick is to get the voice of the people to be so loud it pressures whichever clique is in power to get with the program.
So, speak up and Speak Out. And most importantly, say what you say based on facts and numbers and research, whenever possible. Keep the personal attacks down, and the objective arguments up. There’s going to be a Clique that rules Page County, whether it’s this one or the next one. So give that clique what it needs to do the job right. The Clique isn’t Evil, Bad, or Corrupt. It’s just a natural phenomenon, like weather.
It’s Nature’s Law. So go with it, don’t fight it. And most importantly, don’t throw up your hands in defeat and say, “why should I vote?” Vote and Blog and Call in to the radio show. Your voice will influence the clique. Maybe you think it didn’t in the past, but it did, it just sometimes takes a while.
What do you think? Post your Comments.

Ideas to Stop the Bleeding

2007-09-13T09:21:00.000-04:00

Steve Whisler made this comment and it seemed like a good start to begin a Blog Thread about possible solutions, so I'm posting it as its own Blog. Post here ideas for solutions. We can feel confident that the Supervisors will either read this here or someone will print it out for them and show it to them, eventually. And as ideas develop, people who see the Supervisors or call them, or go to public meetings, can talk about it and tell them what they think.

"Steve Whisler said:"
"All of the political rhetoric going on about the very real landfill problem is beginning to sound like a broken record of Alvin and the Chipmunks Greatest Hit.”

Droning on about who did what and when doesn’t do a thing to solve the problem. As a practical matter it is old news. The landfill is what it is. To be sure, a string of bad decisions were made leaving the county in an increasingly troublesome situation. The reality is, as someone mentioned previously, the county has to put its trash somewhere.

There was also a suggestion that the county landfill should be shut down and the entire county’s trash be transported to Culpeper for disposal. What would be cost to haul and pay “tip fees” for disposing of the county’s trash in Culpeper? How and where would you stage the trash for transport to Culpeper? Also consider that there probably would be a bit more truck traffic involved. Would that be acceptable? I guess I just don’t see Battlecreek being shut down. I am not aware of any county that doesn’t have its own landfill.

However, the suggestion to carry the county’s trash elsewhere is perhaps a clue as to where we might look for answers. It is my understanding Fauquier County has a great deal of solid waste reduction and disposal capability they have acquired using state grant money. Could not Page County do the same? If the trash has to be staged at the landfill and then carted away, why not just process it right at the landfill? Many of the technology based solutions are held out as “green” or near “green.” Some of the processes produce energy related by-products and could save some operating costs as well. There may even be a few better paying jobs created.

There seem to be real solutions readily available that Page County hasn’t yet explored. It’s probably reasonable to assume there isn’t enough county staff to do anything significant any time soon. At least not without help!

Problems aren’t solved by wringing one’s hands and continuing to proclaim “We have a problem. Damn those who created it!” Rather than continuing to beat that poor old dead horse, would it not be a better use of time and energy to look for solutions? We can continue to run in circles and watch the landfill bleed or we can do something about it. The sooner, the better!

Moving forward in the near term is possible but doing so would require a few citizens to roll up their sleeves and do a little hard work. Are there any folks out there who might be willing to help find solutions to the problems that plague the landfill?

This all leads me to a question for Jim Turner and J.D. Cave, as well as for any other candidate for Supervisor, “If you are elected, what will you do to solve the existing problems associated with the landfill?”

The Landfill is still bleeding.

2007-09-11T07:37:00.001-04:00

ANONYMOUS made this post on September 11.

"Your comments, People have to get involved and pay attention to what the Board is doing, or what will happen may not be the same county and land we all appreciate so much.

This sounds like you could be talking about the Battlecreek Landfill.

People got involved; People Paid Attention; The county and land are not the same anymore! And like the people have tried to tell you over and over....their voices were simply a distant cry to the Board sitting at that time. At least, the flood plain folks had positive results with the present board. And at least the landfill is back in the hands of the county."

Everybody -- post the history here. Who did it. What did they do. I think this is not over. The landfill is still costing us money. Big money, when you compare it to our tax bill. This is not resolved.

Poem War

2007-09-11T06:30:00.001-04:00

This is the place to post poems, because Jim and J D need questions for the call in show on Friday. So please post poems here, and post questions for the District 3 Supervisors under the Speak Out area.

The Supervisors race is not about the Sheriffs race, it has its own issues. If you have things to say about the Sheriffs race, remember that you just make yourself look like a goofball unless you post facts. Name calling, while certainly a Standard of Internet Blogging, generates anger, it doesn't speak well for your argument, and it makes "your side" look like the characters from Dumb and Dumber.

So:
1. Poems Here
2. Questions for Jim and J D or the Supervisors race in general under Speak Out
3. Name calling -- don't post it.

Land Use Map -- Coming Soon!

2007-09-11T06:08:00.000-04:00

Page County Planning Commission Work Session, 10 September 2007

1. The Land Use Map work is starting soon. There is a committee forming to work with the consultants to prepare it. The committee will have some Planning Commission members on it and some citizens.The session was primarily devoted to a preliminary effort in preparation for introducing changes to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Mr. Henry made a presentation on Land Use in general. The presentation addressed land use classifications (i.e. residential, agriculture, commercial, industrial and mixed.) as well as those things that should be considered when classifying land for future use and implementation strategies.

Then he described how land use characteristics should be considered in the rezoning process such as compatibility with adjoining land uses, lot size, transportation routes, etc. The issuance of special use permits requires consideration o the same types of things. However, the restrictions put on special use permits can exceed zoning ordinance provisions.

2. The public meetings about the By Right Subdivision ordinance occurred last week. About 30 - 45 citizens attended, depending on whether you count the ones that came to both meetings twice. The committee that is working on that will be meeting beginning Thursday, September 20, in the courthouse at 7 p.m. Citizens are invited to attend, but unless you are on the committee you can't speak at the work sessions. These sessions will probably be held weekly until the recommendation is made, as there is a 100 day clock on coming up with a recommendation or at least a report.

The membership of the Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee has yet to be finalized. If I understood correctly, the intent is for its member to act as a team in concert with a land use consultant for the purpose of generating detailed land use maps. There will also be an Advisory Board to this subcommittee. YOU COULD BE ON IT! VOLUNTEER! CALL THE COUNTY AND SAY YOU WANT TO GET INVOLVED! 743-4142

If you want to know more about county land use, you can get a copy of the presentation from the county administrator’s office. It will cost you $.25 a page.

3. Jeff Judd resigned from the Planning Commission. He is in District 2. A person has been chosen to replace him, but that person will not be formally announced until John Rust can do it at a public hearing.

4. On Thursday night, there is a meeting at the courthouse about cleaning up the Hawksbill and Mill Creek. Citizens are invited.

By Right Subdivision

2007-09-07T07:29:00.000-04:00

Informational Meeting on By-right Subdivision
5 September and 6 September 2007

The county planning staff held an informational meeting at the Luray Elementary School on 5 September and the Shenandoah Elementary School on September 6.
The intent of the meeting was actually twofold:

1. First, to provide information to the citizens of the county on what a By-right Subdivision is and to identify potential problems associated with them under current county ordinance. A By-Right Subdivision provides that a land owner may subdivide a parcel of land by cutting out a portion of his property and sell it once every 2 years. There are virtually no guidelines in the current ordinance on how this may occur so there is a tendency for development of the property to be somewhat random.

2. Second, to solicit input from county citizens on how the county planning staff and planning commission might best address issues surrounding apparent shortcomings in the county ordinance that create problematic situations.

Also, there were refreshments offered for the masses! How good is that! For those who need to know – there were Oreo cookies! And fig newtons! And cheese and crackers! And other stuff, plus soda. So if you weren’t there, you missed a good time!

Mr. Henry, ably assisted by Michelle Somers, did a fine job of laying out the essence of By-Right Subdivision means and the issues the county should consider while it is being revised. They are:

1. Public Health.

Under current code, septic drainfields can be placed virtually anywhere during the subdivision process. This can result in a drainfields being located on an adjacent lot or across several lots via easements. This seems to be a big time problem. I would tend to agree that something really needs to be done.

2. Lack of a Definition of a Parent Tract.

The implications associated with not better defining a Parent Tract is difficult to explain in words. The following is but a brief outline of what has occurred under the current ordinance in a non-family By-Right Subdivision:

If Mr. X owns 100 acres, that acreage is nominally a Parent Tract. If Mr. X decides to sell a part (20 acres) of that Parent Track to Mr. Y, a new Parent Tract is created within the original Parent Track. Under the current ordinance there is a restriction on how often a tract of land can be subdivided (i.e. once every two years). That restriction would now apply to the newly created 20 acre tract. Mr. X would not be able to subdivide for two years but Mr. Y could subdivide immediately, creating yet a third Parent Tract. The two year clock is restarted for each newly created Parent Tract. This could continue to happen until subdivision is no longer possible due to the 1.75 acre minimum lot size restriction. All of this can happen without consideration of the impact on county infrastructure (i.e. roads, schools, emergency services, etc.) Since a By-Right Subdivision doesn’t require the subdivider to provide financial support for the expanded needs of the infrastructure, who will bear the cost? The property taxes of the By-Right Subdivision property owners would not be sufficient to cover associated costs to the county leaving the additional burden to be borne by the taxpayers of the county as a whole.

The second category of By-Right Subdivision is family subdivision. A land owner can give or sell portions of his property to each of his family members one time. However, once the property is subdivided, the family member can turn around and subdivide their portion again. The multiplier effect of the cycle presented above would then take over potentially creating the problems associated with non-family subdivision.

3. Poor Planning.

Having done a poor job of planning in the past, the county wants to improve how it deals with By-Right Subdivisions. The two biggies here are:

• Current development requirements do not track with the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

A lack of planning can often lead to problematic situations associated with property subdivision when a buyer really doesn’t know what they are getting when they acquire a property.

Inadequate property descriptions on permit applications describing adjacent property can lead to problems for property buyers. At present there is no requirement to show land use for property adjacent to a property that has been subdivided and offered for sale. Once someone buys the property, they may find restrictions on what they can do with the property based on the land use of adjacent properties. For example, the presence of a chicken house on an adjacent property would require a 300-foot offset that may affect a property buyer’s ability to build where they choose or to build at all.
.
The identification of property totally or partially within a floodplain should be included in subdivision permit requirements so buyers know before they buy what restrictions they might be subjected to when they do decide to build. Currently, buyers often only find out after the fact there are restrictions on what they can do with the property.

If a bank loan is involved in the building a house in a floodplain, the bank will want insurance. The construction requirements on building in a floodplain levied by FEMA come into play. The cost of flood insurance is not cheap nor is cost of building a structure in a floodplain. Again the new landowner may not discover this until after the property is purchased. Most people are not so unaware as to buy a property within eye shot of running water that they would not ask themselves “Does this area flood?” I guess it does happen, so having floodplain areas identified during the subdivision process seems to be a good idea. I might also note that under State requirements, you can’t put a septic field in an annual floodplain under any circumstance. Identification of a 100 year floodplain is one thing but most certainly annual floodplain areas should be identified as well. Due to the nature of the soil, particularly on the west side of the South Fork, if the only location for a septic field is in a floodplain, a buyer might find himself out of luck if the only place to locate a drainfield is in an annual floodplain.

• Impact Mitigation.

This refers to the need to address the impact on the county’s infrastructure (schools, roads, services, etc) that are generally encountered as the result of By-Right Subdivision. While a conventional development is required to provide consideration for the impact on the county’s infrastructure, By-Right Subdivision does not. The county assumes the cost of any impact on roads, schools and other services. Ultimately, the taxpayers are left holding the bag.

4. Private Right-of -Ways.

By-Right Subdivision often requires the creation of private right-of-ways (rights-of-way?) to access lots. However, there potentially problems associated with doing so:

• Emergency Services.

Often the access road built on private right-of-ways is not very good since it isn’t built to VDOT or county standards. In emergency situations, emergency vehicles could have a difficult time responding because access roads are poor.

• Snow Removal.

Often people who live on private access roads have the expectation that the county or VDOT will perform snow removal on private access roads. Such is not the case.

• Homeowner’s Associations.

Homeowner’s Associations tend to have a life expectancy of about 10 years. At first, everything is wonderful. They have a new road (maybe a bridge) to access their property. As time goes on the new road (or bridge) deteriorates and requires significant maintenance. Perhaps property also changes hands and the band of once happy campers are not so compatible. Property owners may stop paying association dues. Little or no money is available to pay for repairs to the road (or bridge). The cycle continues and the road is a mess. More importantly (Here comes the bridge!) the bridge collapses. The property owners in one instance would have to come up with…$7,000,000 to replace their bridge. It would not be the county or states responsibility so what do they have…no bridge and no access to their homes. Ouch!

That is pretty much the essence of what was presented at the two sessions. The citizens who attended asked a number of questions, mostly to obtain clarification on a particular point.

My general impression is that the county planning staff is really looking for assistance from the citizens to help shape the outcome of this action. Unfortunately, a relative few showed up. Without broader citizen participation there may be some people who will later say they didn’t have a say in what might ultimately fall out of all of this. If they don’t make their opinions known, others will decide for them what is to be done. At that point, I can’t say I would be particularly sympathetic.

There are also zoning ordinance implications underlying the subdivision ordinance that may follow. Of particular note is the notion that larger lot sizes might be the answer. Only for those who can afford them and pay taxes on them! The average person in this county could end up being driven out due to ever increasing taxes on property. If you want to know what can happen, check out what is currently going on in Rappahannock.

All in all, it was a good start to what will be a long process. Since there is nothing predetermined on the table at this point, now is the time for people to pay attention. People should be aware that there are significant tax implications for the county if there are not some reasonable solutions forthcoming on By-Right subdivision.

If I have misrepresented or missed anything, corrections and comments are welcomed.

Alice’s addition: There was a citizen comment about breaking up a ranch, and needing to be sure you can still put houses for the workers on the tracts that are broken up to give to family members. It is important that everything that is necessary for encouraging farming be offered and provided in any changes to the zoning ordinances. Nothing being done, I believe, is intended to harm the farmers, and care should be taken that those who want to continue farming are not inadvertently harmed by our zoning laws.

BOS Work Session 4Sep07

2007-09-05T09:01:00.000-04:00

1. Request to Address the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Jeff Vaughan had requested an opportunity to speak to the Board regarding his pending appeal of the decision of the County Administrator to issue a Special Use Permit violation. Apparently the appeal must be filed within 30 days of being notified of the violation. However, Mr. Vaughan was not aware of how the appeal process worked. The county will start the 30 day clock once Mr. Vaughan is provided with information on how to proceed with the appeal process.

Mr. Vaughan did not appear to speak to the Board as he had requested.

2. Monthly Report from the Public Works Department.
Mr. Mikus gave his usual report on happenings with the Public Works Department. Of particular note was his report on the progress of the opening of Cell 9 at the landfill. The specs have been prepared to begin the process. The have to be approved by the USDA before an invitation for bids can be issued. Once approved, and the bidding process is completed and bids are received, the details of the pricing structure will also have to be approved by USDA. I got a little confused here. If I understood correctly, there will need to be a Public Hearing before a contract can be awarded.

Also, apparently there is a leak problem at the Stanley landfill. The lack of detailed information on how the landfill was initially set up had caused something of a problem in the initial attempts to fix the problem. The Public Works folks believe they have stopped the leak.

Mr. Mikus also noted that a house has been constructed near the landfill. While there was nothing wrong with construction of the house, apparently it does pose some problems for the county. Mr. Mikus would like to address this matter to prevent the creation of more problems. I presume somewhere in the land use or zoning process.

3. Review of VDOT Chapter 527 Legislation.Mr. Henry addressed the Board on new state legislation that would seem to require a review of road construction plans (?) by VDOT. Apparently the requirement is supposed to be included in the county’s Comprehensive Plan. I gathered that Page County is already pretty much in compliance with the requirement. Apparently, the requirement will affect the towns in Page County more than the county itself. The legislation is so new that there will be training on what it means.

4. Discussion of Opting Out of Voter’s Rights Act.
This issue is not as onerous as it may sound. A number of sister counties have already opted out of the Voter’s Rights Act. Apparently, the Federal government requires that any issue that is offered for vote to the people of the county must be reviewed and approved by the Department of Justice. This would include things that are offered to the voters by referendum like staggered terms for the School Board membership, the addition of an At-Large Chairman to the School Board, etc. All current issues that require the DOJ review have been blessed by DOJ.

There is already a requirement for receiving approval from the State before offering an issue to the voters as a referendum. The power to the Board flows from Richmond. It seems that the DOJ process is an unnecessary overlay to the State requirement.

The action will require that Page County apply to DOJ to do so. Apparently this requires the retention of a Washington, D. C. based attorney that specializes in this type of action. If I heard correctly, the action would result in a one-time cost somewhere between $5,000 and $15,000. It was suggested that the one-time cost would result in a long term savings to the county since there would be no need to process future requests of approval to DOJ.

This action seems to be in its early stages as is for the purpose of gathering additional information and not to spend money. Mr. Shanks was asking the Board for an O.K. to proceed with pursuit of the matter. I couldn’t quite make out what was being chatted about but it appeared that the Board gave Mr. Shanks the nod to go forward.

I suffered from the same difficulty as Mr. LaFrance (and probably all of the Board members). Legalese overload! I trust I have captured the essence of the discussion.

5. Drug Free Workplace Policy.
This is something of a puzzle. It would seem the overall county government’s policy on drug and alcohol use in the workplace is lacking. I also gather each constitutional entity has its own policy. Apparently Mr. Belton and Dr. Cardman have drafted a proposed policy document. The main concern with the document is with invasion of privacy issues regarding method of testing, with random testing suggested as the best solution.

However, due to concerns with safety in the workplace, there may be a need to deal with those county employees who operate heavy equipment differently than people who do clerical work.

The Board may want to look at the School Board’s policy rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.

6. Illegal Immigrant Resolution.
Apparently there have been incidents where students who are illegal aliens are occupying available slots in State universities and paying in-state tuition. Supervisor Strickler wants to ensure that the resolution address the issue to ensure that Virginia residents receive equal or preferential treatment when they apply for acceptance to state institutions of higher learning.

Apparently there is a state law that if an education institution receives Federal funding, it can’t charge illegal aliens in-state tuition. I may have this a little wrong but Mr. Shanks also pointed to an existing law that prohibits illegal immigrants from being admitted to institutions of higher learning that receive government funding. The question is how would you know who is illegal and who isn’t. It was suggested that the immigration department would know.

This was a little muddled to me. Since laws already exist regarding the issue, I assume the intent here was to ensure the county’s resolution simply addressed the matter.

The Board moved to go into closed session to discuss various issues as permitted by Virginia Code.

This is very disturbing

2007-09-04T17:41:00.000-04:00

For the Speak Out radio show, I've invited all the candidates to come on and speak. So to kick off the program, I thought it would be good to have our new Registrar give us a summary of the elections process: how it works, and how we can feel confident that our votes count. I called the Registrar, Carol Gaunt, last week and invited her on the show.

As Carol is new, she at first suggested that one of the members of the Electoral Board appear with her, and I thought that was a great idea. She said she had to check with them before committing, which is a reasonable response. The next day, she told me that they "checked with the state board of elections" who told them she could only appear if
a) there were no call-ins allowed
b) she had the questions in advance
c) the interview was taped.

I said we couldn't tape the interview, but I would agree to allow no call ins and give her the questions in advance. She said that would probably be okay. Over the weekend, I emailed her the questions.

Here are the questions I sent:
Questions for Carol Gaunt
1. What is your background (resume)?
2. What are the responsibilities of the Registrar?
3. Who is on the Electoral Board, and how are they appointed? How long have they been on the Board? What are their responsibilities?
4. How many registered voters do we have in Page County?
5. How many people usually come out to vote?
6. How are the votes counted? What is the process for counting them?
7. What about the computer votes? How are they counted? How do the computer votes and the paper ballots get added together?
8. Are the computer votes safe? Are we sure they are being counted correctly? If we have to have a recount, would we be able to do it?
9. What is the procedure for making sure our voting process is clean? Would it be possible for dead people to vote? Would it be possible for illegal aliens to vote? How do we make sure people are only voting one time?
10. How are absentee ballots counted? How do we know they are really coming from the person who is registered?
11. What would you like to say to the listeners about the voting process?

On Tuesday morning, I received an email back from Carol, stating that after further consultations, she would be unable to participate in the broadcast. Her reason is that the timing takes her away from the office during a busy election season.

Now. What I have posted here is a set of facts. If I were speculating, I would say that the voters are not being well served by being told that the Registrar doesn't have time to kick off an informational meeting about the process of the elections. Or that the Registrar doesn't have time to answer questions about the voting process and its integrity.

What do you think? Blog here about your assessment of what just happened, and also tune in to the Speak Out radio show on Friday at 9 a.m., 1330 AM. Call in to the show with your opinion, on 743-5167.

Alice

Who needs a Fancy Road?

2007-08-29T08:17:00.000-04:00

By Right or By Wrong?

The Page County Planning Commission is ready to consider changes to the zoning ordinance called the “By Right Subdivision” laws. On August 28, the Planning Commission watched a presentation by our county planner, Kevin Henry, about the consequences of our current By Right subdivision ordinance (county code 100). The problem, according to Mr. Henry’s presentation, is that the county’s code has a loophole. Some time ago, the county passed laws that you could only subdivide your land a limited number of times per so many years. The intention of that law, I can only infer from the presentation, was to slow growth and chase away developers. But there are two loopholes in the county code.
The first loophole is that after you subdivide once, the newly platted land becomes its own “parent tract” and it can subdivide again. This allows the land to be divided into more and more pieces, more quickly than the county intended.
The second loophole is that families can subdivide the land for their own use, and then the new family member can sell off the land.
I’m somewhat confused about what the rules are. As I get more into this, I’ll look up the codes and figure out the point better. As soon as I do, I’ll post them here.
Why is this a problem? Mr. Henry showed that a plot of land could then be fully developed within, say, a ten year period, but the streets would be all private roads, not state roads, and they wouldn’t follow the rules of the Virginia Dept of Transportation, and they wouldn’t be well maintained. Plus, the lot sizes would be all different, and in many cases there would be problems with septic fields for one piece of land actually being on somebody else’s property . The privately owned roads would then cause problems for snow removal, emergency services, fire trucks, etc. Plus, the county would not get a chance to get a developer to offer “proffers” for the development, and services required by the people who live there would not get paid for by the developers of the property.
On top of all that, when a person gets permission for the new plat (and these permission requests are coming into the county office about 1 every 3 days), they don’t have to show the surrounding land on their plat. That means they can get permission for a plat, but when the new owner tries to get a building permit, the county might have to say, “no, this is not a buildable lot because it’s next to a chicken farm and you need a 300 foot setback”. And then the new owner would be mad at the county instead of being mad at the person who sold him an unbuildable lot.
The Board of Supervisors has asked the Planning Commission to take an action to “fix” this ordinance within 100 days.
The Planning Commission set up a subcommittee to look into this and report back. The subcommittee consists of Planning Commissioners: Hammel, Short, DeSerio and one private citizen, Mr. John Sylvester. Another private citizen will be asked to join the committee.

My opinion:
On the one hand, we say we “don’t want developers”.
On the other hand, our County Planner points out that developers bring proffers for payment for roads, new schools, and other payments for services the county needs. Without them, we get development with scraggly roads, people stuck with no access, people with no septic fields on their land, etc. And, the county is left having to raise property taxes because they couldn’t squeeze some bucks out of the developers.
My personal opinion is:
Page County people LIKE scraggly roads with no access.
I personally see absolutely nothing wrong with a development where all the lots are different sizes, all the houses are different styles, and some people have to expect that if it snows, they’re stuck inside until it melts.
And if you lived where I live (and I know many of you do live in places like I live) you have absolutely no expectation that a fire truck or an Emergency Medical Technician would ever be able to show up in time when you need them. Not due to any fault of theirs, but just because they can’t get here that easily. An example: I tried to get somebody to deliver firewood, and they told me there was a $10 surcharge per truckload, just for the inconvenience of driving down my road.
So on the one hand, we have a Board of Supervisors who turns down Danny Comer’s request to build a duplex on his own land, because it’s “spot zoning”, considers giving the airplane owners a break and letting the airport grow so that the Learjets can come in, and wants to change the By Right subdivision ordinance so we won’t have all these unmaintained dirt roads.
And on the other hand, we have nearly universal agreement in the county that nobody wants the Big Bad Developers (hereafter referred to as The Wolves) to come in and turn our beautiful land into Warrenton.
I have to say, I think if you asked the citizens of the county if we should pass laws to prevent people from cutting up their land and selling it whatever way they want, to whomever they want, so that there would be better emergency access for services, the chances are the vote would come out to say, “Keep your emergency services. Let us alone.”
Because, you see, that’s what makes Page Page. We have our Supervisors saying, “we want to maintain the rural nature of the county.”
That’s what the rural nature is. Dirt roads. Poor access. Nothing standard.
I don’t think we can have both. What will it be, Supervisors? Learjets and Planned Subdivisions? Or Country Living?

Anyone need a Learjet?

2007-08-29T07:28:00.000-04:00

The Board of Supervisors held a special meeting on 28 August to hold a public hearing on a proposed change in the property tax rate for aircraft kept at the Cavern’s airport. The change would reduce the tax rate from $3.90 per $100 of depreciated value of an aircraft to $.50 per $100 of the current blue book value of an aircraft.

According to Powell Markowitz (Airport Commission) a reduction in the tax rate on aircraft would attract more people and businesses to keep their aircraft in the county. If I understood correctly, the net effect would be to provide more tax revenue in the long run. To be sure, Mr. Markowitz and his associates have clearly done their homework (Lots of numbers and supporting rationale.) The proposed reduction in the tax rate is reasonably consistent with the tax rates levied by other counties within the state. The rates vary from pennies on the dollar to rates slightly above the rate proposed for Page County. The basis for aircraft valuation varies from county to county. The proposed use of blue book value for aircraft kept in Page County seems to be reasonably consistent with how other counties operate. The long term promise from the airport folks is there will be offsetting revenue accruing to the county by virtue of having more taxable aircraft kept in the county (taxed at a relatively constant value (i.e. blue book vs. a declining value based on a straight line depreciation). In addition, it was suggested additional revenues would accrue to the county based on some unspecified increase in better paying jobs in support of the airport operations and some unspecified increase in tax revenue due to more unspecified businesses wanting to come to the county.

The improvement and expansion of the airport would be funded, I assume over time, by Federal grants (95%), State grants (3%), Luray (1%) and Page County (1%). At present, the airport folks have obtained a state grant to begin the process in the amount of $500,000. If I understood correctly, it would be used to add 30 T Hangars. Apparently, there are approximately 15 people with aircraft waiting in the wings, so to speak, for these hangers with promises for more.

One citizen, John Rogerson, spoke at the public hearing. The essence of his concerns seemed to reflect skepticism mostly about the promises offered as part of the rationale for reducing the tax rate in that it benefited the wealthy aircraft owners and would cost the county more money in the future. I believe he was referring to the 1% contribution by both the town and county to support the development of the airport. In terms of real dollars, it is unclear what that cost would be. As a practical matter, I share some of Mr. Rogerson’s concerns. If we build it, will they come?

The airport folks are asking the county to take what I would call a business risk by making an investment. The investment would be a short term loss of some tax revenue with the promise of a long term return on that investment of higher tax revenues and possibly the creation of a few new jobs. Mr. Cubbage asked when the county might expect to begin realizing the promised returns. Mr. Markowitz suggested that it would certainly begin within a year.

Mr. LaFrance offered a very astute observation. If I understood correctly, it would seem the county has to come to grips with what it really wants the county to look like down the road. Should the county strive to maintain its rural character or should it really look to the future and support economic growth opportunities? I gathered the real decision is a tough one. Certainly anything that increases tax revenues and adds jobs to the economy is desirable. The decision would boil down to “at what cost,” not only in terms of financial support but at some compromise with maintaining the rural character of the county. I do not envy the Board having to make this particular decision.

The issue will be offered for vote at the next regular session of the Board of Supervisors.

I have attempted to capture the essence of the hearing. If I have misrepresented anything, comments and corrections are welcomed.

2007-08-27T17:32:00.000-04:00

PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
WHO: Page County
Planning Department

WHAT: Planning staff will review current issues in the Subdivision Code followed by an open session for citizen comments.

WHEN: September 5th- 7:00 P.M.
Luray Elementary School

September 6th- 7:00 P.M.
Shenandoah Elementary School

Refreshments will be available. Questions or concerns, contact Page County Planning Department, 540-743-4142

_______________________________________________

This meeting is a great step toward getting people involved before laws are changed that impact their property. If you have any possible involvement with land that has been zoned for a subdivision, or you think you may want to in the future, I urge you to go to these meetings to find out what the county planners are thinking about the future of laws that could impact you!

Now is the time to get involved before things go too far down a road that you might not like.

Tuesday night at the County

2007-08-22T09:11:00.000-04:00

Here is what happened at the Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, August 21, 2007. These are the combined notes of a group of citizens who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. They are just citizen notes, provided here so that Page County citizens who might find they want to do something or get involved with any of this, have a chance to do so while it is still possible.
The meeting went from 7 p.m. to about 10 p.m. The topics covered were:
- A permit to put a light on a cell phone tower
- An ordinance to allow people to get business licenses if they work out of their homes
- Motor vehicle licenses
- Transferring land
- An ordinance to make a person pay for the use of emergency services if they are incurred while that person is committing a crime (ie drunk driving)
- A presentation about the status of broadband Internet access in the county
- A shameful turndown of Danny Comer’s rezoning request (editorial comment to follow)
- A resolution to declare the county in a state of Agricultural Emergency because of the drought (I take it this is in preparation to ask the state for money)
- An ordinance to start collecting real estate taxes as soon as an Occupancy Permit is issued (meaning, they didn’t hear Charlie two weeks ago when he told them people don’t get occupancy permits around here )
- A contract for Northwestern Community Services
- Some 911 address changes
- Some inaudible and impossible to follow changes to the budget that’s unreadable in the first place
- Some additions to the Capital Improvements Wish List
- Some new citizen members of the Water Quality committee
- A vacancy on the Planning Commission in District 2
- An approval to move forward with the pond at the end of the runway at the airport (more editorial comments to follow)
- A fire training center in Stanley
- A resolution (non binding) to tell illegal immigrants to get out of Page County
- Approval to pay a consultant to help build a Land Use Map (but just phase 1, the map, not the rezoning rewrite) -- this one is going to have its own Blog

I’m going to put this entire citizen’s report in one Blog here. If a topic gets significant comments, I’ll open up its own Blog.

I’m also going to make a special Blog for Rezoning, since that’s a hot button.
A. Special Use Permit: Shenandoah Mobile Company.

The special use permit allows the placement of a warning light at the top of an existing communications tower. The tower is located in an area frequently used by Medevac helicopters and presents hazard to public safety. Under current county ordinance, a light is only permitted if required by the Federal Communications commission. This requires an exception to county ordinance. In the interest of safety the waiver was approved. The special use permit was approved with certain restrictions, most notably that the light be red from dusk to dawn and white at all other times. The waiver and special use permit were both approved.

B. Ordinance Amendment to Home Occupations

This ordinance amendment has been percolating for a couple of months. It will allow certain small home businesses to operate without obtaining a special use permit. The intent is to encourage virtual businesses in the county. The biggest concern was the potential for excess traffic created by delivery trucks (UPS). It would seem there is really no way to enforce any restrictions that might be applied. Apparently the business licensing process will provide some sort of control. It wasn’t clear but I guess the business licensing process will react if there are a lot of complaints about too many trucks coming and going. The change was approved by the Board.

C. Ordinance Amendment to the Motor Vehicle License.

When the requirement to purchase a county decal for motor vehicles was eliminated the language that replaced it to continue to collect revenue on vehicles was a little muddled leaving some question as to exactly what constituted a taxable vehicle. This change defines a taxable vehicle as one that is licensed and on the road. An exception for disabled veterans was provided for in the amendment. This amendment was approved.

D. Transfer of Real Estate to the Economic Development Authority.

This provides for the transfer of ownership of real estate within the Luray town limits to the county’s Economic Development Authority. If I understood correctly, this property is adjacent to existing industrial park owned by the county and completes the transfer of ownership of property contiguous to the existing property. This action was approved.

E. Ordinance to Permit Reimbursement to the County for the Costs of Response by
Law Enforcement, Firefighting, Rescue & Emergency Services for Criminal Violations.

This ordinance provides for the ability of the aforementioned county functions to collect reasonable cost of response to situations where a criminal act has taken place. I understand this to mean that if a drunk has a car accident and is found guilty of DWI the cost associated with police and EMS response will be reimbursable to the county by the perpetrator. Makes sense to me! This action was approved.

Presentations.

Bluebird Presentation – Phase I Final Report.

The county, through the Economic Development Authority, has hired a consultant to pursue the potential for extending the availability of broadband internet (high speed) access throughout the county. The term Bluebird has been applied to the project. During Phase I, the consulting firm performed assessed the need for broadband internet access as well as for broadband education development.

The presentation provided a lot of numbers developed by the consultants based on citizen response to questionnaires. I assume if anyone is interested they can obtain a copy of the report or at least read it in the county administrator’s office. The bottom line is county citizens seem to want to proceed with creating the availability of broadband internet access to expand educational and business opportunities with the provision that its cost be reasonable.

The report also provided an assessment of the need for developing educational opportunities for potential broadband users. There are a number of educational partners including James Madison, Lord Fairfax Community College, PRISM (don’t know what the acronym stands for). I gather the long range view is to provide a pathway from tech training to higher education on computer/internet technology for educational and business purposes. Other educational opportunities exist with the Shenandoah Community Computer Center and the Page Workforce Job Center. I gather that these organizations tend to provide more hands on training to develop skills in specific software application use.

There is enough county interest to continue pursuit of expanding broadband internet access but to do so will require some investment spending. It wasn’t clear to me if the county will be willing to foot the bill. If I understood correctly, the state has expressed interest in using Page County as a pilot project for modeling rural broadband access. I assume that means they will provide funding for this purpose.

SWBA/IPV6 Presentation.

The Bluebird project will eventually dovetail into the existing but limited broadband access capabilities with in the county. I missed exactly what the acronyms stand for but the there is an entity in Shenandoah that operates as a wireless broadband authority (SWBA?). It was created under a grant and provides access to the Shenandoah area. Once the grant is ended, it will be able to expand into other parts of the county. If I understood correctly, funding to expand the capability will come from the state. The capability will have to provide an open network so that any service provider can use it. It will necessitate having a few more communication towers in the county. The I PV6 reference is to the next generation of internet technology. I am not too sure what that means at this time but I would surmise that it will be incorporated into what I hope will develop into the availability of broadband internet access throughout the county.

Public Comments on the Agenda Items.

There weren’t any!

Action Matters.

F. Rezoning Request – Danny Comer

This request provided for the rezoning of about three acres of agriculture use to residential use to build a duplex dwelling. What transpired between the Planning Commission being opposed to doing this but somehow it was sent forward to the Board for approval. The county’s concern is that this would be viewed as “spot development” and would therefore be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan (protect rural environment) and set a precedent. This could lead to future conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan. The fact that the proposed dwelling would be a duplex did not help the matter. Mr. Cubbage did not see a problem and asked that the rezoning be approved. The property is in his district. Mr. Shanks added that if the “vision” of the county is to ultimately consider that general area for residential use, then perhaps it would not be considered “spot development.” The rezoning request was disapproved (Supervisors Strickler and Cubbage voted to approve it.)

G. Resolution to Declare an Agricultural Emergency.

Mr. Whittle from the Virginia Cooperative Extension asked for a resolution to be sent to the Governor’s office to declare Page County in the state of agricultural disaster due to the effects of drought conditions during the summer. In view of the recent rain, it seemed that calling the situation an emergency was a little strange. Nevertheless, the drought has had a negative impact on the agricultural community. I gathered that the ultimate intent was to get on record with the state with the county’s problem. At some later date, depending on what Mother Nature does, it would be in place to enable the county to obtain emergency relief such as low interest loans. The implementation of a resolution was approved.

Mr. Whittle introduced a new county agent with a specialty in Food, Nutrition and Health. I didn’t hear her name very clearly but it sounded like Britney Wilkins. She will cover Page as well as neighboring counties.

H. Ordinance to Amend Article XIV of the County Code Pertaining to Real Estate Taxes.

The intent of this ordinance change is to provide for prorating real estate taxes to collect revenues on homes that obtain occupancy permits during a given calendar year. Essentially this would mean if an occupancy permit is issued in October, the homeowners tax bill for the next year would be adjusted to collect taxes accruing through the remainder of the tax year during which the occupancy permit is issued.
This was approved unanimously.

I. Northwestern Community Services Performance Contract.

Don’t have a clue what this was all about but it was approved.

J. Proposed Address Changes.

Due to some inconsistencies in county address designations there was a need to change the addresses (and create street names?) for a few folks to facilitate 911 Emergency Services responses. The homeowners were all notified and I assume in agreement with the changes.

The changes were approved.

K. Budget Changes.

Since I didn’t have a copy of the proposed changes, it was difficult to follow exactly what Mr. Belton was proposing to change. I gather one of the items was to “earmark” some excess funds from the School Board for use in funding items for the new schools that are not currently funded. The rest was somewhat inaudible. It would be helpful to citizens if there is a PP slide showing the budget changes. Anyway, the proposed changes were approved.

L. Appointment of Committee to Review EMS Revenue Recovery.

Members to the committee were nominated. I didn’t catch all the names but Mr. Shifflet and Supervisor Strickler will be on the committee. Its estimated time to perform the action is 6-12 months. They would like it to be shorter to accommodate next year’s budget process but it would seem unlikely that it will occur any more quickly.

The nominations were approved.

Adoption of Capital Improvements Plan.

I have no idea what the Capital Improvement Plan proposes to do from one day to the next. It is a document that serves as a planning tool. Its adoption does not constitute approval of any future capital improvement projects. It seems to represent a moving wish list.

Anyway, it was adopted.

M. Board, Commission & Committee Appointments.

There are three openings of the Water Quality Advisory Committee. Supervisor Strickler recommended appointment of a lady from Shenandoah. I couldn’t quite hear the name but it sounded like Alice Pence. Supervisor Hoke recommended Neil McHenry. Apparently, Chris Anderson has identified yet another nominee to recommend. The two initial nominees were approved, I guess with a future draft choice to be named later.

This is where my head went as numb as my butt….

I think I heard there is a vacancy on the Economic Development Authority.

The resignation of one of the Planning Commissioners was announced although I did not hear who it was.

N. Consent Agenda.

Approved.

Old Business.

Luray Landing Easement Proposal.

The location of a storm water management pond is at issue here. In moving forward with the easement proposal, the county wants to ensure that it will be in compliance with FAA requirements as well as staying in good standing with the DEQ. The intent here is make sure whatever happens will be in compliance with appropriate county ordinances as well as FAA requirement so as not to jeopardize obtaining future FAA grants.

The only real issue seems to be who will have permanent maintenance responsibility for the retention pond. To leave it with a homeowner’s association could lead to problems since they tend to disappear or may not be able to afford the necessary maintenance requirements. The question is “Once the developer is gone, who will have the ball?”

It seemed that all of the Supervisors were in agreement to move forward under the above guidelines.

One additional note is that Congress did not budget much, if anything, for acquisition of land under FAA grants this year. I gathered the airport folks will have to wait until sometime in the future to offer to buy property for airport expansion.

Fire Training Center.

Mr. Shifflet proposed moving forward with using the property near Stanley for a new low impact fire training center to better serve the people of the county. Most of cost would be paid through grants but I gathered there might be some county money involved as well in FY 10 ($474K is in CIP) Mr. Cubbage suggested that the Board take a look at the property. They plan to do that before the special meeting of the Board next Tuesday. Supervisor Strickler expressed her concern that the county make sure it does not take on a liability when others use the facility. I assume this will require some sort of indemnification agreement with other users.

O. Proposed Resolution for Illegal Immigrants.

Mr. Hoke proposed a resolution to prevent illegal immigrants from taking advantage of county taxpayers. Mr. Shanks prepared a draft that was subsequently amended by the county staff folks. The essence of the resolution is to provide an incentive to become a legal citizen and provide a disincentive to remaining illegal. The ultimate intent is to forward the resolution to the federal and state level to encourage them to act on illegal immigration issues.

The resolution as amend was approved.

P. Contract for the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite.

The intention of this for quite a while has been to hire someone named Dr. Michael Chandler from Charlottesville to completely rewrite all our zoning ordinances. The problem was -- there was only $25,000 budgeted for it in the Planning Commission budget, and there was another $40,000 budgeted in the Planning staff budget (this is what makes the budget so hard to read. Different pieces are in different pots). The consultant is ready to go -- but $65,000 is not the number he wants to do the job. The question was, should they go ahead and spend the more money he wanted. I couldn't tell how much more he wanted, but I will FOIA that soon. It was a lot more.

Mr. LaFrance said he didn't think it would ultimately be productive to rewrite all our zoning ordinances in one big consultant inspired push, because the citizens would push back on that, and it would turn out to be something that ultimately couldn't get passed and implemented. So in the end it would be a waste of money. John Rust didn't agree.

Kevin Henry pointed out that they do have more than enough money budgeted to just hire the consultant to do the Land Use Map, which is the Phase 1 portion. That if they just approved the Land Use Map, which is needed before any zoning decisions can be made anyway, they don't have to make a decision about further use of the consultant after that, and they would have a Land Use Map that could guide zoning decisions in the future, whatever path they chose to take. He also pointed out that the consultants plan included plenty of public involvement and public meetings, so that this would be something the citizens would be fully informed and participate in.

Carol Lee wanted to be sure that any contract we made with Chandler would ensure that we actually got a good percentage of Chandler himself, not junior staff.

Somebody, I think it was Mr. LaFrance, said maybe if we had a good Land Use Map, then issues like Mr. Comer's request could have a solid basis to be either approved or disapproved, and we wouldn't have the issue of dragging somebody along for months and then disapproving them in the end.

They voted to approve going ahead with the consultant for Phase 1 only, the Land Use Map.

I (Alice) will FOIA all information regarding Chandler's contract and keep this issue out in front as much as possible. This also will tie in to the By Rights Subdivision zoning change which is going to the Planning Commission on Aug 28. We will have separate Blogs for all zoning issues.

So that's what happened in three hours on a Tuesday night. If you see anything of interest to your life, push the link that says "Post a Comment" and Blog!

It's Official!

2007-08-21T14:36:00.000-04:00

There is an immediate opening on the Planning Commission for a new member from District 2. This is not a rumor!

You must be a resident of District 2, and if observation serves well, preference will be given to a Republican member of the Rotary Club.

Members of the Planning Commission don't get paid, or at least they don't get paid anything worth mentioning. But, they get to decide things like whether or not Danny Comer can build a house on his lot, whether Brenda Jolly can open a pet grooming business, and whether there can be a light on the cell phone tower so the helicopters don't hit it.

Also, they are deeply involved in the rezoning process which is trying very hard to occur.

If you are willing to get involved and volunteer for this critical and important position, please call Supervisor John Rust and tell him you want to be considered. His phone number is 743-5316 or email yogilura@shentel.net

Also, you might want to let me know about your interest. Research@PageCountyWatch.org

Alice

Meeting calendar

2007-08-13T09:07:00.000-04:00

Alert! Tonight's meeting, August 13, of the Planning Commission work session is cancelled, according to the county website at http://www.pagecounty.virginia.gov

Don't know why. But if you were planning to attend, why not spend the evening blogging instead? Just read through and push the link that says "Post a Comment" at the end of each blog.

Next important meetings:
Monday, Aug 20, 7 pm Luray Courthouse. The Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee of the Planning Commission. Citizens are invited to attend and participate in this important process of continually updating the Comprehensive Plan.

Tuesday, Aug 21, 6:30 p.m., Luray Courthouse. The Board of Supervisors public hearing. Note the early time. Come early to get PASTRIES!!! The Supervisors will be honoring and acknowledging the sheriff's office for their accreditation.

Tuesday, Aug 28, 7 p.m. Luray Courthouse, Planning Commission public hearing. This is when we are looking to hear about the zoning committee. This is a "don't miss" night.

Mark your calendars! Come to the meetings! There are nuggets of Fun hidden in each one!

A Very Long Night

2007-08-08T08:34:00.000-04:00

The Board of Supervisors Work Session of August 7, 2007. Here’s what happened.

These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.

This meeting started at 5:30, and when I left at 9:45, it was still going strong. I missed the part about the landfill monthly update, the emergency management services at the end, and I missed Mark Belton’s update on the Capital Improvement Projects. On top of that, there was a closed session at the end, so the Supervisors themselves must have been there very late.

Topics covered before I gave up and went home were:
- The Airport
- VDOT’s rules for business entrances
- Prorating the real estate tax
- Resource officers in the schools
- School Construction and Funds
- By-right subdivisions

I’m going to post each of these as a separate Blog topic, so the comments don’t get confused between topics. Select a topic from the list at the left. Push the Comments button to continue the conversation. These topics will be filed under the label “The County’s Business” for future reference.

The Airport

2007-08-08T08:28:00.000-04:00

Topic 1: The Airport – Aug 7 Work Session

These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.
1. Property tax reduction on aircraft.

The first issue for the airport was the reduction of the property tax on aircraft from $3.90 to 50 cents. A committee had been appointed previously to study this. The recommendation from the Airport Commission was that the tax had to be reduced in order to attract people to park their planes at our airport, because the surrounding counties had a low tax or no tax. The committee concluded that we needed to change our formula on how to calculate the value of the airplane. We had previously been depreciating the airplane quickly, just as we do on cars. By changing our assessment of a plane’s value to something like it’s “Blue Book” equivalent value, we could get the same total revenue at a 50 cent tax rate as we currently do at $3.90. This total is something in the area of $11,000 in tax revenue, so it’s not a big part of the county budget. The compelling reason to do this is to attract more aircraft to be parked there, so we can justify building more hangars, extending the runway, and upgrading the overall airport. The key to our reason for doing this is that we can get grant money for all of it, and having a bigger and nicer airport makes the community more attractive to business.

If the Supervisors turn down this request to reduce the property tax rate, it is the same as saying they don’t want the airport to attract more planes, and then it won’t need more hangars, or be in a good position to get the grant money.

Regarding the extension of the runway and the people who have received letters that the airport wants to buy their land: This topic wasn’t brought up at the meeting, but I asked Powell Markowitz to explain it. He said some people have received letters, but there is no invocation of eminent domain in this process. He said the airport was negotiating in good faith, with multiple independent assessors to determine the value, and that they would negotiate the purchases, not force the sales.

As far as the extension of the runway in the north direction, that is a long term plan, not expected until 2014 or later. If you have received a letter asking to buy your land, that's exactly what it is. A request. The County Supervisors have not been involved in this. It is not an eminent domain situation.

The Supervisors decided to call a special public hearing to consider the question of whether to reduce the property tax on aircraft (and remember the comments were that this is pretty nearly the same as considering whether to expand the airport). So if this is an important issue to YOU, you have to attend the public hearing and make your voice known. There will be a teeny, tiny notice in the classifieds section of the Page News when this is scheduled. Or, you can keep watching this website, and sign yourself up to receive notices from NewsList@PageCountyWatch.org and I’ll let you know when it’s scheduled.

Alice’s Opinion (which falls under the category “Everybody has one”)
This is a perfect example of the process by which the county (perhaps all counties, but definitely this county) operates. The question is never put to the citizens, “Do you want to have an expanded airport, with both the consequences and the benefits of such?”. There is no public debate, answering the questions posted in the comments section of the Blog, “Taking Land Again”. Nobody poses the big questions: what are the benefits, what are the consequences, what is the big picture. From what I heard, I doubt that the county supervisors are even AWARE that citizens received letters from the Airport Commission notifying them that the airport intended to buy their land. It surely didn’t come up at any Supervisors meeting in the last six months. Now, the thing is, if the airport intends to buy your land, and you don’t want to sell, what will happen? Either you will eventually decide that they are making an offer you can’t refuse, or they will eventually decide they can solve their problem by buying somebody else’s land, and your house will be sitting there surrounded by an airport, deteriorating in market value with every takeoff and landing. So in truth, if your house is next to an airport, and the airport wants to expand, you might as well start looking for a better place to live. These are not eminent domain “takings”. They’re going to negotiate with you in good faith. But there is no doubt, your bargaining position is considerably weak.

But back to the big picture. From what I’ve seen, the county isn’t going to hold a public meeting to discuss the wisdom of expanding the airport. That’s something that should have been done in the Comprehensive Plan, but wasn’t, because of the previously examined glaring deficiencies of such plan. (See this Blog in June and July) Rather than open debate on the big picture, the county is going to post a small notice in the Classifieds that invites citizens to a public hearing on whether or not we should lower the property tax rate on aircraft.

It doesn’t say, “Should we or should we not expand the airport, and here are the downsides and the upsides.”

It says, “Should we lower the property tax rate on aircraft?” Citizens see it, but they don’t understand the implications of the question, so they don’t show up at the meeting.

The answer to should we lower the property tax rate on aircraft is: Do we or do we not want to expand the airport? If we do, then yes, we should lower the property tax rate on aircraft. That we want to expand the airport is taken as a “given” by the Supervisors, but never posed as a question or a debate to the people.

As a result, citizens don’t understand the implications of the question asked, so it becomes difficult to have a researched, intelligent, and thoughtful comment to add at the public hearing. Our public hearings then become a forum for a handful of frustrated people, who wonder why the Supervisors don’t pay any attention to them.

So my opinion is: Yes, we should expand the airport, and we need to lower the property tax rate on aircraft in order to do that. But my opinion is based on my desire to see more business come to the county, and a totally unproven and unstudied bias, based on subjective and unfounded feelings that a bigger airport would be an attraction for business. Your opinion might be different from mine, and neither of us can point to any set of facts or studies to say anything either way.

And why don’t we ever have that public debate? Because we didn’t open up the development of our Comprehensive Plan to a large group of people, with diverse viewpoints, and we didn’t have the public debates about the big picture that a Comprehensive Plan requires. We didn’t develop a Land Use Map, like the Virginia Code requires, and now we’re faced with making every decision out of context.

That’s Alice’s Opinion, for what one citizen’s opinion is worth.

2. Luray Landing’s storm drain proposal

Now, the other airport issue discussed was the Luray Landing plan to put a dry pond at the end of the airport runway, in the no-fly zone. The Airport Commission wants them to put it somewhere else, and the issue here was that there is disorganization in the discussion process. There is the Developer of Luray Landing, who needs to coordinate this stuff with the Airport Commission, the Town of Luray, Page County, and the various state and federal agencies who are concerned about storm water management and airports. What really came out is that there are too many people involved who aren’t all in the same room at the same time. The resolution on this was to direct the developer to coordinate with Mark Belton and come to an agreement with the Airport Commission.

Alice’s Opinion on this is: Who is going to buy a house crammed into a subdivision stuck between Wal-Mart and an airport, when there is all this beautiful land out here that you can quick grab while the By-Right subdivisions are still legal? See the Blog on By-Right Subdivisions, coming later.

VDOT and Business Entrances

2007-08-08T08:27:00.000-04:00

Topic 2: VDOT’s rules for business entrances - August 7 Work Session
These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.

Jeff Lineberry from VDOT was invited to talk to the Supervisors. The topic was: can VDOT please identify what is a requirement, versus what is an “aspiration” when they review business licenses. The problem that is arising is that it is Page County’s policy to withhold a business license until VDOT approves the application. But, VDOT is coming back with comments of things that would be “nice to have” instead of just things that are required by law. So somebody applies for a business license, and VDOT says, “Gee, it sure would be great if you would move that electric pole so it won’t line up with all the other electric poles on that section of the road”, and then Page County holds up the business license and won’t let the guy operate. Then it takes forty phone calls while everybody tries to figure out whether it’s a Virginia LAW to move the electric pole or not.

The conclusion of this was that VDOT will answer more directly, maybe.
Don’t even Comment on this, I can’t take it.

Real Estate Taxes

2007-08-08T08:26:00.000-04:00

Topic 3: Prorating Real Estate Taxes – August 7 Work Session
These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.
Charlie Campbell was asked a few sessions back to come up with a plan to start collecting real estate taxes when the building is finished, instead of waiting until January of the next year. Charlie presented that he would need more staff to do that because he would have to send people out to the field to see if buildings were actually finished. So the Board asked him why he couldn’t just trigger the tax collection from something normally in the building process, like an Occupancy Certificate. And Charlie said (I’m paraphrasing here, Charlie didn’t exactly say this): “Not all that many people actually get Occupancy Certificates” That was the IDEA of what Charlie said, it’s not what he said.

This caused a realization on the part of the Board, I think, that there was a bigger problem at work.

Anyhow, the Board emphasized that they hadn’t intended to cause so much more work for the department that new staff would have to be hired for this task.

Resource Officers in the Schools

2007-08-08T08:24:00.000-04:00

Topic 4: Resource Officers in the Schools – August 7 Work Session
These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.

There was a petition circulated where hundreds of citizens asked for resource officers in the schools. Dr. Randy Thomas presented that the schools didn’t have an immediate problem, that there were some resource officers there now. He said he thought officers in the school were a good thing, and it would be nice to have more of them. Their value, in addition to being available for problems, also existed in making the students feel more safe, getting them to feel like officers were helpful to them, and keeping some students from being bullied. Bullying in the schools is often the problem, and many of the problems in the news were about students who felt bullied. In the new plan, when the new schools are built, and there is less overcrowding, it will be possible to have everyone in one building and a lockdown can occur when there is any threat. This will be the effective security measure. Chairman LaFrance and Supervisor Cubbage said they don’t think the citizens who asked for this understand the tax implications of it. I think the conclusion of this was that the appropriate number of resource officers would have to be included in the personnel forecasts and budgeted, but I’m not sure exactly how it turned out.

Schools and Money

2007-08-08T08:23:00.000-04:00

Topic 5: School Construction and Carryover Funding – Aug 7 Work Session
These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.

Dr. Thomas reported that the school construction has begun on both high schools. All is well. Everything is on budget.

This is the part I didn’t follow very well. Furniture for the new schools wasn’t included in the operating budget? I might be wrong about that, I couldn’t follow it. There was a grant given, but they didn’t spend it all, and the fiscal year ended in June, so they were giving it back to the county, but they wanted to make sure the county didn’t spend it on something else, like they did the last time this happened.

So the School Board was asking the county to put their leftover grant money aside so it can be used for the purpose it was intended, but just not this year. And they wanted to make sure this money didn’t get “disappeared” into some other category.

That’s what I understood from what I heard, but I was confused.

Alice

By-Right Subdivisions

2007-08-08T08:22:00.000-04:00

Topic 6: By-Right Subdivisions – Aug 7 Work Session
These are my notes, the notes of one citizen who attended. They are not minutes of the meeting. I post them here, because if you wait for the official minutes to come out, it will be October, and then if there were anything discussed that you wanted to take action about, it will be too late. If anyone was there and had a different take on what happened, just hit the Comments button and add your two cents.

County Planner, Kevin Henry, gave a very impressive presentation on By-Right subdivisions. He said there were 74 of them approved this year, and they were receiving an application about once every three days, partly because people are thinking they need to act now before the zoning ordinances are rewritten. He showed how doing things through this means often causes us to have a hodge-podge of lots of varying sizes, set up at varying times, and many times the drainfields for the septic systems don’t end up on the lots themselves. So people are buying lots that end up having septic fields on somebody else’s land. He said that by the way the code is written, they lose the identity of the “parent tract” and then the intent of the law to keep areas from being developed quickly, gets defeated. Also, the breaking up of land this way causes private right-of-ways instead of state roads, and then we end up with 510 private right-of-ways, which are hard to handle by emergency services. He was asking the Board to task the Planning Commission to take an action within the next 100 days to solve this problem.

In the discussion that followed, some Board members, specifically John Rust, said this needed to be handled in the context of the big, overall zoning ordinance rewrite, and others, specifically Tommy LaFrance, said we couldn’t risk waiting for that to happen, because it would be such a long and difficult road to get the overall big picture solved, that we would risk not getting anything done on this immediate problem. The resolution was that they voted to go ahead and task the Planning Commission to solve this immediately.

Taking land again?

2007-08-05T19:22:00.000-04:00

There was a comment just posted to the June 5 blog here, called "Note from the June 5 meeting". The comment said that the airport wanted someone's land, and they were just going to take it, by offering fair market value, whether the people wanted to sell it or not. Is that right? The justification would be that the airport is good for the economy of the county.

Can they do that?

I don't know if they can. Does someone out there know? Please, whomever knows about this, look into it and post here what is going on.

Alice

Mark your Calendars

2007-08-03T12:45:00.000-04:00

Upcoming events in the county government:

Tuesday, Aug 7, Board of Supervisors work session, 7 pm, Luray Courthouse

Monday, Aug 13, Planning Commission work session, 7 pm, Luray Courthouse

Monday, Aug 20, Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee, 7 pm, Luray Courthouse

Tuesday, Aug 21, Board of Supervisors public hearing, 7 pm, Luray Courthouse

Tuesday, Aug 28, Planning Commission public hearing, 7 pm, Luray Courthouse

Agendas for these events are usually posted on the county website at http://www.pagecounty.virginia.gov but they don't get posted until the day of the meeting.

I don't know of any particular controversial topics that are on the agendas for these meetings, but things can come up that are not on the agenda.

If you can go, think of it as "dinner and a show". Go out with your spouse, later go to the county meeting, and then post to this website your view of what happened, by pushing the Comments button here.

Quiet Time

2007-07-27T06:28:00.001-04:00

It's a quiet time at the Board of Supervisors. The big controversy over the flood plain ordinance is over. The Comprehensive Plan is what it is, and the amendments made satisfied the worst objections. The County Attorney missed out on his big chance to get extra extra rich defending the county over the flood plain lawsuits. And Charlie Hoke figured out what he could say that would make him sound like he was in tune with the will of the People.

At the end of the last Board meeting, Supervisor Hoke introduced a proposal to deny county services to illegal immigrants. Lee McWhorter, who makes it his function to provide the comic relief at these meetings, suggested that we should check to see if we have any illegal immigrants before we waste the money paying the county attorney to write something up. Tommy LaFrance said we do, because the school board was forced to hire Spanish tutors for them last year. (I don't think that's exactly what he said, remember I'm just a citizen taking notes, and I write down things as I hear them, which is not necessarily exact. My reports are not minutes of the meetings.)

Lee pointed out that other counties who have done this have ended up paying lawyer money to defend themselves over it, and it would be a shame to spend our money that way if it's not really much of a problem.

The meeting wasn't really about this issue -- it was about the dogs at Brenda Jolly's place and about the passing of the Comprehensive Plan more. There were a lot of people there, which was a very good thing. But, although this was just a short comment at the very end, it got a big front page headline in the Page News.

Why? Because most probably, it's a very popular proposal. A lot of people will agree with it, and not many will oppose it. So Charlie Hoke, who made his constituents so angry at the district meeting over the Comprehensive Plan in his district, when he opposed the changes to the Comprehensive Plan about the flood plain -- made them so angry there was murmuring and aggravation so intense that some people started looking up the rules for how to impeach a Supervisor --- pulls himself out of the hot seat by:
1. voting unanimously with the rest of the Board FOR the changes to the Comprehensive Plan, and
2. introducing this illegal immigrants proposal which gets him front page news AND HIS PICTURE in the paper. Although the picture doesn't really look like him. Where's the little beard?

In any case, a lot of people will think "Charlie Hoke -- isn't he the guy who introduced that legislation for the county against illegal immigrants?" and will feel kindly toward him.

Honestly, I can't even think of an argument FOR providing county services to illegal immigrants. I think most people, if you tell them we are hiring special tutors in the schools and providing emergency services to people who came here illegally would say --- "Yo, Not with MY tax dollars, I hope".

I think Charlie came up with a winner, in terms of introducing something that most people will agree with. Although I surely hope we don't have to get involved with lawsuits over it.

Alice

Green Stuff

2007-07-22T09:41:00.000-04:00

This thread is for posts that are about positive actions we can take to help the environment. What organic farming measures do we have in the county? What construction has been done in a green way? What grocery stores are offering naturally grown products? Lots of people here care about the environment, and many are taking actions to make their personal lives considerate of sustainable practices. I know there are small farms here that offer eggs from free range chickens, baskets of produce in a coop way, and hormone-free, antibiotic free beef. Post any information you have about places to buy organic food (not WalMart organic -- real organic, the word's been co-opted). If you know of anyone who has used energy-efficient practices in building, tell us about it. Post about positive actions people have taken in this area. Post about incentives that are offered for people to do these things.

Where do we go from here?

2007-07-20T14:56:00.000-04:00

This is the thread for people who want to talk about where we go from here. What do we have so far? We have a proposal to hire a consultant to come in and start the process to rewrite the zoning ordinances. The budget says $25,000, which would pay for what? A couple of weeks of a consultant? I've heard unofficially that that's been raised to $100,000.

Next step: the Planning Commission will be selecting a zoning subcommittee soon, and then the process will probably start. Since the Land Use Map hasn't been done, that will have to be the first step for zoning.

I think once we see a map with the available land use marked on it, it will shed new light on what we can do with what we've got.

At What Price - Part 2: The 57% Solution

2007-07-18T10:45:00.000-04:00

At What Price – Part 2: The 57 Percent Solution
Why did this happen?
On July 17, The Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Page County Board of Supervisors. By the time they made the amendments which they worked out during the Retreat and in the following weeks, enough changes were made that the plan no longer said the most egregious things that had been added to it. In fact, those of us who call ourselves Page County Watch felt that the process worked in the end, and the final plan approved had the input of a broader group of citizens. We congratulate the Supervisors for listening to and understanding the intent of that broader citizen participation.

Some Supervisors said they were proud of the Comprehensive Plan, that it was a good plan. Page County Watch doesn’t agree. We agree that the changes the Supervisors made were good changes, and that they did manage to make it stop being an exceptionally bad plan. For that, we applaud them. But a Comprehensive Plan, by Virginia Code, contains the county’s Land Use Map to guide zoning. Our plan doesn’t have one.

Instead, our plan says, “Areas of severe development restriction are found along sections of the Shenandoah River and throughout the valley lowlands where Karst topography predominates and flood-prone areas are numerous. Because of these constraints, approximately 57 percent of the land in Page County is not suitable for development.” Understand, 34 % of the county is national and state parks. So that’s 57 + 34 = 91% of the county that “is not suitable for development.” In other words, we just approved a plan that wants to turn the county into a great big wildlife habitat. Great idea, if you’ve already got yours, and you want to make sure nobody else gets theirs. Taking a wild guess, I’d assume that some of that suitable 9% left for development is located on that large flat, non-flood-prone land area surrounding Yogi Bear park along route 211. I’m telling you, if I owned Yogi Bear park, I’d be hoppin’ up and down saying, “wow, what a great plan, let’s quickly move to keep development out,” myself.

So, yes, we’re happy that the Supervisors improved a bad situation, but we don’t go as far as saying, in the end, it was a good plan. Now, the important thing to learn from this situation is: how and why did we get ourselves into this place? We need to know that so that we don’t come here again next year and the year after that.

I think I have an answer to “how and why did this happen”. It’s a theory, yes, and I can’t prove it. Others might propose other theories, and that’s what the Comment button is for at the end of this Blog. How this happened is a matter of historical fact. The motives behind it, however, will remain speculation.

The “How” Part. Historical Fact.How it happened is simple. The time came to update the Comprehensive Plan, which was put together in 2001 by a large group of citizens. The thinking was that this would be just an “update” of the numbers in it, rechecking the population figures, assessing whether things were still true. So a subcommittee of the Planning Commission was charged with this update.

Only two citizens turned up to help the subcommittee write the Comprehensive Plan, and those two citizens both happen to be of the same mind regarding what the county should be. It should be a wildlife preserve, in their opinion. (That’s an editorial comment. I have no idea what their opinions are, except by what I hear them say and write, and that’s what it sounds like they are saying, to my ears.)

So for lack of staff to do the work, the volunteering citizens put a lot of effort into getting new numbers to update the plan, and oh, by the way, they also made a few “minor word changes” on An Unelected Citizen’s home computer. The minor word changes turned out to be similar to the famous “however” addition. That’s the one where “the scenic beauty attracts tourist and vacation cabins” was changed to “the scenic beauty, however, attracts tourist and vacation cabins”. While the changes were minor, they were lethal in their impact. The minor changes turned the TONE of the Plan around. It went from a simple statement of facts about the county, to a more complex statement of facts with moral judgements attached. Little and subtle word changes make a document that leaves a taste in your mouth. The flavor changes.

Don’t even tell me you can’t taste what I’m writing here. That’s what An Unelected Citizen did to the Comprehensive Plan. The citizen gave it a flavor, with a comma here, and a “but” there, and a subtle twist of the knife in the back. Words have the power to do that. I could write a document that could make you feel the nails sticking out of the paper, and yet you couldn’t exactly put your finger on which words were the ones that did that. The Intent of the Author shines through a document. This Author had an Intent based on a Belief and a Value System, and that Belief and Value System weeps from the page. These were not acts taken with evil intention. They were that citizen’s opinion about what was best for the county.

We all have an opinion, and individually, each of our opinions is worth what we pay for them. The key to opinions is that you need a whole large Gaggle of them, from differing viewpoints and broad backgrounds, before they’re worth any more than two cents. You can never do something with the impact of a Comprehensive Plan without actively soliciting that large Gaggle of opinion. Some people are of the opinion that their opinion is worth more than other people’s opinions, and so they try to impose theirs on other people’s houses, bank accounts, and lifestyles. From here on out, for ease of reference, let’s refer to those people as “True Believers”.

So when we look at the “How” of what happened, we can sum it up by saying, “True Believers wrote the plan, and then it got into the Process, and the Process is like a runaway train. It takes one big Bump in the Rail to try to stop it.”

Now that’s the How. What’s the Why?The real Why here is “why didn’t the Supervisors recognize what had happened here and step in and stop it before it got this far?” Why didn’t they acknowledge that the Plan had not been given an opportunity to have widespread distribution and citizen input, before it got to the point of “needing” to be passed before the deadline?

The closest thing I’ve ever heard as an answer to this question is that the Supervisors individually said they liked the plan. They liked the idea that the plan strongly promotes “retaining our rural lifestyle” by limiting development. They wanted a vision statement that says we are managing growth. More importantly, they wanted to get this phase over with, so the more important issue of the specifics of zoning ordinance changes could begin. They didn’t think the plan was bad enough to need changing any more than the changing they actually did do, as a result of their Retreat and followup work. Being pragmatic, they thought it was more important that a general plan be approved, and a specific zoning change process begin, than it was that wider citizen input be introduced late in the process. AND . . . and this is an important AND . . . they weren’t accustomed to having wide citizen input for any reason.

By their reasoning, if any citizens had wanted to have input or cared about the process, those citizens would have shown up three years ago in the beginning and wrested that disk out of the hands of An Unelected Citizen in the first place. So they thought, “if no citizens cared enough to bother stepping in and competing for Air Time to get their opinions included in the Plan when it was being written, then that means they’ve abdicated their right to complain about it after it’s been done.” They didn’t believe they were responsible to proactively inform the citizens about what their government was doing to them. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to proactively seek out the information for themselves.

This was the attitude the Board showed when they raised the real estate taxes from $6.7M to $11.3M in one year. They didn’t believe it was their responsibility to justify or explain themselves to the citizens about how and why they were doing that. They didn’t think it was necessary for them to explain the budget increase. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to look into it themselves, should they so desire to be informed.

So the Why of how this happened is:
It happened because the Beliefs and Values of the Board are that they are following the Process, and following the Process is what they are obligated to do. In their Belief, it is the Citizens’ obligation to take the initiative to participate in that Process, and learn how it works. In their Belief, it is not the Board’s obligation to go the extra mile to bring the Citizens into Enlightenment about the process’ inner workings. Once they follow the Process . . . well, then, the Results are “not their fault”.

This is Why it happened. It happened because the leadership of the Board of Supervisors, which sets the stage for its culture, believe that Process trumps Common Sense. I admit that now and then, I have personally seen Common Sense peek out from beneath the curtain. But it spends most of its time, hiding in shame, hoping the Lawyers don’t see it.

Next Installment: Who chased Common Sense into hiding? (And why does it smell like a Landfill)

Got a Comment? Push the Comments button. Anybody can do it. No Names Required.

At What Price - Part 1

2007-07-13T08:58:00.000-04:00

At What Price – Part 1 of a Series

Now that the Comprehensive Plan will be adopted on Tuesday, July 17, the next move will be to write new zoning ordinances. This series of Blogs will cover the development of zoning ordinances, their trials and tribulations, and the end result. We begin with a brief history, for those who are joining us late:

History:
• In December, 2006, the Board of Supervisors was set to pass a new flood plain ordinance. It was about to happen. In the nick of time, Jim Turner wrote a Letter to the Editor in Page News describing it. Donna Eames saw the letter, and called everybody in the phone book to get them to come to the Board meeting. As a result of the citizen objection, the Board returned the flood plain ordinance to the planning commission for review. (In their defense, Board members say they were never going to pass it as it was, that they had amendments which would have fixed its problems. However, the amendments don’t seem to have survived the process, and “the public” hasn’t seen any amendments that would have done that)

• From January through April, the Planning Commission received a stack of letters and analysis from the public 8 inches high, screaming in pain over what was written in that ordinance. What was wrong with it? Its objective was to clear the flood plain of all structures, over time. It told existing homeowners they could never repair their houses, no matter what went wrong, flood, fire, lightning, or things that go bump in the night. If their houses were damaged, they would just have to move out and abandon them. Its goal was to turn the flood plain into an extension of the national park, without paying for the land.

• In April, the Planning Commission voted to end debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance and revert to the existing, perfectly fine flood plain ordinance, which meets all state and federal requirements and allows us to have national flood insurance. At the same time, the Planning Commission approved an update of the Comprehensive Plan. Both the Comprehensive Plan and this recommendation to drop the proposed flood plain ordinance went before the Board on May 15, 2007. It occurred to the citizens who live on the flood plain that, given what was written in the flood plain ordinance, we better check the “updates” to the Comprehensive Plan.

• Sure enough, the “updated” Comprehensive Plan had a little more than a set of new population figures in it. Its goals were changed. Subtly. With small word changes. One example: the old plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes”. The new plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county, HOWEVER, also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes.” Is that a small change? Unimportant? Minor? In the first case, it’s a descriptive statement. In the second, it’s a moral judgement of the roaches who have invaded our beautiful county with their smelly tourist cabins and vacation homes. Words count. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but WORDS do permanent damage. The attitude of the persons writing the plan come through in the words. Just like this Blog. When you read this, you can see my Attitude. Same thing in the Comprehensive Plan. The Update had an Attitude.

• More than 70 citizens showed up at the Board meeting on May 15 to object to the proposed flood plain ordinance and the Attitude in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board felt unable to answer on the spot. They decided to go on a Retreat to consider what to do. Chairman LaFrance said, “This Board is up to the task” of fixing the problem in the Plan.

• It really P.O’ed the flood plain people, that the Supervisors couldn’t see their way to just vote that ordinance down and get that Attitude out of the Comprehensive Plan, so we followed them to their Retreat, and we took videocameras. By this time, most of the citizens who had been active in January through April, believed they had made their point to the Supervisors, and attendance fell off at the meetings. Most citizens believed the Supervisors had heard them and would do something to fix the problem. After all, the Supervisors said they would fix it, so why wouldn’t everyone just believe them? When the citizens took the Supervisors at their word, and stopped attending the meetings in full force, that’s when the Page newspaper started referring to the citizens who lived in the flood plain as “a small group of activists”.

• At the Retreat, the Supervisors spent only ONE HOUR discussing the changes to the Comprehensive Plan. They decided to change the word “prohibit” to “regulate”. While this was a positive move, it still left the words “Develop ordinances that REGULATE buildings and businesses in the 100-year flood plain” implying that it was specific direction to start all over again with a rewrite of the flood plain ordinance.

• In the ensuing month, Supervisors refined and rewrote enough of the words in the plan so that it no longer gives specificity to attacking the citizens who live on the flood plain. By the time of its adoption, the Comprehensive Plan was no longer directly attacking a group of existing citizens. Peace returned to the Valley.

It took from December 2006 to August 2007 to calm down this issue. Soap opera stuff happened that I can’t even write HERE because it would embarrass and humiliate people who really don’t deserve to be embarrassed. There was a time period when the people under attack (ie the residents of the flood plain) were convinced there had to be a payoff and corruption involved, because the behavior was so irrational, it couldn’t be motivated by anything LEGAL.

I personally FOIA’ed (Freedom of Information Act) everything I could think of, and reviewed the financial disclosures and the campaign financing reports of every Supervisor. And you know what? I couldn’t actually find anything wrong. I turned over every rock. If there was corruption in the County, it was too well hidden for me to find. It confounded me. If this wasn’t corruption, and yet it was so bewilderingly irrational, what was it? WHY would these seemingly sincere public servants, working for essentially FREE, choose to take an action that would harm existing residents of the county, and would not produce the positive benefits it was touted to provide?

In the end, if July of 2007 is the end, the final approved Comprehensive Plan will have the most harmful language removed, as far as residents of the flood plain are concerned. This is a great relief. However (note what an important word “however” is), it was an enormous diversion of time and energy by a large number of people, including the Supervisors and the Planning Commission. This time and energy could have been better used creating a Land Use Map, which is what is supposed to go in a Comprehensive Plan in the first place.

NEXT INSTALLMENT: Why did this happen?

This is the Blogger's version of the History of the Flood Plain issue so far. If you have more to add, or you disagree, or you just want to vent, push the Comments button and Blog.

Has the Tide Turned?

2007-07-10T06:26:00.000-04:00

I wasn't at the first of the five District meetings, held in Shenandoah, but preliminary reports say . . . all is well. What I heard briefly late last night was that Goal 3, Objective 2, line C has been removed and replaced with a substitute language that is . . . just fine.

This would be tremendous news, and frankly it would speak very well of all the Supervisors. It would make peace return to the Valley. When I hear more, I'll post it.

If you were there, or you heard from someone who was there . . . tell us more.

Push the Comments button and Blog.

The Line of No Return

2007-07-04T00:32:00.000-04:00

Here's what happened:
At the July 3 Work Session, the Board of Supervisors reviewed their changes to the Comprehensive Plan, made at the Retreat.

Their changes were: change the word "prohibit" to "regulate".

Supervisor Gerald Cubbage, District 4, proposed that the newly added goal, 3 C, be removed entirely. The goal says:
"Develop ordinances that REGULATE (instead of Prohibit) buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain"

Supervisor John Rust objected to removing it. County Administrator Mark Belton suggested that removing that line might jeopardize our compliance with FEMA. Charlie Hoke recommended that we ask if it would do so. Tommy LaFrance said he didn't see why we couldn't just leave it there.

Chairman LaFrance complimented Natalie Zuckerman on her work to prepare this Comprehensive Plan for the County.

Mark Belton then explained that there would be public meetings held by District, beginning Monday and continuing for five nights. There was a small notice in the July 3 Page News and Courier, in the Classified section, that said these meetings would be held.

At the break, I went up to Tommy LaFrance and said, "what happened to your statement that the flood plain ordinance was dead. If you leave that in there, it's the same as directing the planning commission to revive it" and he said, "okay, he didn't care if it was taken out" and I asked him if he would tell Kevin Henry to take it out, and he said yes, he would do that.

After the break, he moved on to the next agenda item and didn't do it. If one were to assume that he was sincere in what he said to me, one would expect that meant he was planning to do it after the meeting at some point. I will continue to call him and Kevin Henry and let you know if it's taken out.

Here's what's next:
It is entirely unlikely that anyone will show up at these five district meetings. Their importance and the significance of the Comprehensive Plan has not been publicized by the county in any manner, and the notice in the Classified section would not mean anything to many people. There has been no explanation in the Page News about the significance of these meetings. In fact, Virginia Code says a Comprehensive Plan is supposed to contain a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Ours doesn't. Ours guides zoning by saying, "corral all the people into the towns, keep them from building anything outside of the towns, don't let anybody build on any more than a 16% slope, and keep them away from all bodies of water" It's a no-growth plan, which leaves the county areas with fewer and fewer houses over which to spread the exploding tax burden. The landfill continues to be a cash guzzler, and the purchase of a new County Office Building and Regional Jail will require additional tax hikes for years to come.

After the five meetings occur with no citizen pushback, the Comprehensive Plan will be approved on July 17, and the Planning Commission will be free to begin the process of rewriting the Zoning Ordinances. Any complaints about how the zoning ordinances are rewritten will be met with the refrain, "but it was in the Comprehensive Plan, and we tried to take it to the citizens, but the citizens didn't show up at the meetings."

If you would like to attend one of the public meetings, the places and dates are listed in the Blog previous to this one. If you go, please post your experiences here on the Blog, or email me and let me know what happened at the meeting you attended.

Email Research@PageCountyWatch.org

Thank you,

Alice

The Scorecard

2007-07-03T06:40:00.000-04:00

Here's the Scorecard for the Comprehensive Plan Informational meetings to be held July 9 - 13 and the meeting tonight, July 3.

Tonight's meeting is a Board of Supervisors Work Session at the Luray Courthouse at 7 p.m. This is the culmination of the famous Retreat. The Retreat came about because at the May 15 public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan, where more than 70 citizens came to object to the line "Develop ordinances that prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain", the Supervisors determined that they were "up to the task" of making the necessary changes to the plan themselves. They scheduled a Retreat at Skyland in order to do that.

When they got to the Retreat, they only spent an hour talking about the Comprehensive Plan. They concluded during that hour that all they had to do was change the word "prohibit" to "regulate". They also said that if there were any further changes the Supervisors would like to individually propose, they could do so privately, after the few citizens who were in the audience were no longer there.

At this July 3 meeting, we will find out what changes were actually to be made to the plan.

After this meeting, five district meetings will be held to explain the plan to the citizens. The meetings will be held at the following locations:
July 9 - Shenandoah Elementary School
July 10 - Page County High School
July 11 - Stanley Fire Hall
July 12 - Luray Elementary School
July 13 - Springfield Elementary School

The district meetings all start at 7 p.m.

Go to at least one of these meetings if you can. The questions to ask are:
1. According to Virginia code, a Comprehensive Plan contains a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Where can I see that Land Use Map? (The answer is: one wasn't developed yet)

2. The county is in the process of hiring a consultant to help with a rewrite of the zoning ordinance. Why is the zoning ordinance being rewritten? (The answer is: the Supervisors want to keep our county from becoming too crowded so they want to change the zoning so that people can't build outside of the towns areas, unless they can buy a lot of land)

3. I'm aware that our existing flood plain ordinance is in compliance with state and federal requirements. What is the intention of the Supervisors in refusing to vote changes down and put attempts to throw the people off their land to bed once and for all?

4. Will zoning changes impact me and my family?

And the big one . . .

5. Will these zoning changes increse or decrease our chances for a bigger real estate tax increase in the next two or three years?

Answers to these questions are important to the citizens of this county. Shouldn't you know what the Board of Supervisors intends to do and why?

To comment on this Post and Blog, hit the Comments button. All you have to do is type into the box that comes up, you don't have to do any special codes. Then you can select Other if you want to sign your name, or Anonymous if you don't. Anonymous posts really are anonymous. Nobody can tell where they came from.
Alice Richmond

The REAL Page County

2007-06-29T23:35:00.001-04:00

I just went to the nicest, homiest, warmest event. It was the Election Debate hosted by Mary Whitehead at the VFW. Mary was a fantastic Mistress of Ceremonies. She really knew what the deal was in Page County, and seemed to have everybody’s “number.” Mary invited all the candidates running for office, and the VFW hall was filled to overflowing with citizens. Every candidate got to say their piece and give their platform. Mary was very strict about not having any negative campaigning or crucifying anybody, either on the stage or from audience questions.

You know what? It was really nice. It was heartwarming to hear each person talk about why they wanted to run for office and what they wanted to do. It was amazing to me how many people came, since I knew it wasn’t publicized much. In addition to the candidates, Mary also had Todd Gilbert there, and a representative of Mark Obershain.

All the candidates were there except District 2 Supervisor John Rust, and District 4 Supervisor Gerald Cubbage and his Democratic challenger Raymond Kite. Other than that, everybody else running was there. They gave such GREAT speeches. I’m not kidding, they were really, really good speeches, from everybody.

What was so good about them was that these were real people, with real heartfelt desires to serve the people. It didn’t matter whether they were polished public speakers or just speaking from the heart. You could tell they were people who cared. All of them.

In fact, when you listened to them, you started to think, Gee. It wouldn’t really matter which of these candidates got the most votes.

They were all winners.

I hope everybody in Page County gets to meet the people who have put themselves on the line to run for office. Mary will be running another one of these debates in the Fall. In August, Page County Watch will be setting up a special Elections Section of the website, where every candidate will have their own pages, and citizens can submit Questions for the Candidates.

Dear Ms. Getz

2007-06-28T07:38:00.000-04:00

Dear Ms. Getz, and Like-Minded citizens of Page, This is a response to your Letter to the Editor in the Page News on June 28, 2007

Page County Watch is not the "local activist group" that got the Page County Supervisors to buy back the landfill, costing the taxpayers a debt of $13M and counting. We weren't involved or active in that issue. Indeed, we did not exist at the time.

Page County Watch did not criticize or attack the previous Boards of Supervisors. We did not exist until April of 2007. We only formed as a result of the December 19, 2006, meeting of the Board, in which our houses were threatened over the flood plain issue. Before that time, many of us either didn't live here, or weren't paying any attention to elections or politics.

We are not a "local activist group". We are just homeowners who went into shock when we found out the local Board of Supervisors had the power to take away our property rights. And no one was watching what they were doing, or paying any attention to them.

You're right that the people who are elected to the Board believe they are civic minded citizens doing what is the right thing for the county. They don't have an evil intent. But they are people spending a few hours a month, in addition to their day jobs, who are making decisions that will impact the taxpayers of the county for 25 years or more. They can't do that job well in a vacuum. They shouldn't be sitting in that boardroom alone, with no citizen input, no citizen feedback, no citizen pushback, no citizen guidance. But they are. Because Page County citizens just elected them and walked away.

Like you, I never attended or paid any attention to the county government until it tried to harm me. Right now, looking at the budget that grew in one year higher than the property tax rise, the debt that will require another property tax rise next year and the following year and the following year, etc, this Board is harming YOU. The property tax rise does not pay for the schools. The money is not being managed in a way that will allow citizens to live here peacefully, business is not moving here, and the Board is about to pass a Comprehensive Plan that will guide zoning toward lot sizes that will not allow the children who grew up here to buy houses, get jobs, and live in their own homes.

These are big problems, big issues, and dramatic impacts on the citizens of Page, that can't be resolved by a couple of well intentioned but not "up to the task" elected citizens, who run from citizen input and "retreat" when they are challenged. Ms. Getz, it is YOU and people you know who need to help them figure out what you want. Do you want them to rezone your neighborhood, changing the value of your home and possibly forcing your family and relatives to sell and move away? Do you want your property taxes to rise again next year and the year after and the year after that? Do you want your friends and family to have to car pool down route 66 to get jobs? If you do, then keep doing what you're doing, and ignore this Board and these upcoming elections, because that's what you are about to get, if all goes according to the Comprehensive Plan which they created WITHOUT broad citizen input.

If you don't want those things, then show up at these Board meetings, find out what these plans are, and get involved. That won't make you an "activist" any more than it makes me one.

Alice Richmond

The Incomprehensible Plan

2007-06-20T07:19:00.000-04:00

Guest Blog by Steve Whisler

PCW has posted the editable versions of the revised amended Comprehensive Plan, Comp Plan 5-8 rough scan (intended for inclusion in the Comp Plan) and Virginia Code 15.2-2223 under Comprehensive Plan on the main site at http://www.PageCountyWatch.org The DVD of the Comprehensive Plan portion of the Supervisors Retreat will be made available as soon as possible, most likely in time for the individual District Supervisor meetings to be held.

The Incomprehensible Plan

The Board of Supervisors has now returned from its retreat after deliberating for an entire hour on a 100 page document, a revised amended comprehensive plan. I have read the document as well as the Virginia code that requires county governments to have a comprehensive plan. The Virginia code states that a comprehensive plan is to address the physical development of the territory, in this case Page County. It is essentially described as a mapping/planning exercise intended to identify and document current land use and infrastructure and what it will need to be to accommodate projected changes in land use requirements.

The revision to the amended comprehensive plan under consideration by the Board is quite a different bird. It is a hash of goals and objectives only a few of which have anything to do with planning the physical development of the county. For some unexplained reason, even after significant editing, there remain academic discourses on unrelated topics such as Karst topography, acid rain, air pollution, etc, as well as policy implication statements, statements to encourage or discourage this, promote that, to prohibit or regulate the other, most of which have nothing to do with planning land use
(i.e., educating kids about robotics and aerospace technology; educating citizens about environment and water quality; promoting tourism; obtaining funding, etc. It goes on and on.). Buried within the document are the elements of what a comprehensive plan is suppose to be according to Virginia code. However, even those elements fall short of completeness.

Virginia code also calls for performing careful and comprehensive surveys and studies of existing conditions and trends of growth, and of the probable future requirements of the county and inhabitants in the context of land use. There is no evidence those types of things were ever done. Interestingly, there are elements of the plan that call for performing surveys and studies that should have been done prior to the development of a comprehensive plan. Even stranger is the fact that in the little snippet called “Comp Plan 5-8 rough scan” under the heading Land Use, what is suppose to be a land use plan calls for the creation of a land use plan. What?

Further, a comprehensive plan under Virginia code is mandated to include “A zoning ordinance and zoning district maps.” Why is the comprehensive plan subcommittee just now beginning work on that issue? What exactly would the Board of Supervisors be approving under the amended plan? It would seem that the comprehensive plan committee may have a little malfeasance problem as well. After three years or so of fumbling around they have produced absolutely nothing of value for the Board of Supervisors to adopt.

To be sure, many of the elements that are irrelevant for inclusion in a comprehensive plan as contemplated by Virginia code should be considered in developing it. However, they should be addressed somewhere else, possibly as part of a broad county strategic plan. It is a mystery how what was supposed to be a comprehensive plan was corrupted into what it has become. It may well be that somewhere, way back when, there was a recognition there was a need to have a broad strategic vision for the county and it seemed like a good idea at the time to roll it into this thing called a comprehensive plan. Egad, now we have a precedent!

What really concerns me is the Board of Supervisors is in the mood to adopt a comprehensive plan regardless of how fouled up it is. Changing a word here and shifting a sentence there really does not answer the mail. I would be willing to wager if the title “Comprehensive Plan” was to be placed on a comic book, as is the case here, they would approve it. Over recent months, the Board has shown little overt interest in what the citizens of the county have to say. If they do come to their senses regarding the comprehensive plan, they will realize that attempting to put lipstick on a pig will not make it anything other than a pig.

Steve Whisler

Note: The Board will review their “changes” to the Comprehensive Plan in the work session of July 3. At the Retreat, they said they would then take this plan to the citizens in individual district meetings, Supervisor to Citizen.

Adopting the Budget

2007-06-20T07:04:00.000-04:00

Events of the June 19 meeting of the Board of Supervisors

This meeting went on for 3 1/2 hours, but nothing happened.

The tenor has changed from a game of Rope-A-Dope to a game of Trivia.

The Performing Arts Center was granted a waiver of their property taxes because they are 501c3.

The budget was passed.

Citizen comments were heard but ignored, unless it was to respond defensively to any perceived criticism.

Natalie made a plea to be careful if they are changing the Comprehensive Plan because they could be Revising it if they do that, and this was only an Update not a Revision. (See the Comprehensive Plan section on the main website)

John Mayeaux made a request that they consider doing something about all the people who don't have affordable housing. (This was ignored.)

McWhorter commented on everything, ending with praise for what a good job the Board was doing.

Rogerson, Lansberry, and Richmond talked about the budget and the lack of information presented about it. We all pointed out that there was information that the citizens do not have about the debt, the budget and the tax raise.

At the end, Carol Lee Strickler pulled out some old newspapers from 1985 and gave a little prepared speech. Rather than address citizen comments that the budget had not been presented with understandable line items that would actually inform the public, she said there was so much "misinformation" being spread. Terrible misinformation in Letters to the Editor and other places. For example, we said "nobody ever died in a Page County flood". So she held up some old yellow newspapers from 1985 that said three people died in Elkton and McGaheysville (which are not in Page County). And said it was a shame there were people who were putting so much effort into spreading misinformation instead of behaving properly like the good people who work on these committees. LaFrance echoed her sentiment. They also said if anybody wanted to understand the budget, they could have come to all the meetings in January, February, and March when the departments made their budget requests. (The issue citizens were trying to talk about was the debt and the construction financing, but that was ignored.)

Alice

Ding Dong

2007-06-18T21:20:00.000-04:00

Ding, Dong

At the Planning Commission Work Session of June 18, 2007, the following happened:

1. They reviewed the change to the rules for Internet businesses.

2. They discussed setting a date for the Comprehensive Plan subcommittee to work on the Land Use maps in preparation for the Zoning Ordinance rewrite.

3. They discussed changing the date for the work sessions from the third week of the month to the second week of the month.

4. Chairman Woodward abolished the Zoning Ordinance subcommittee for malfeasance.And YOU weren’t there! You have GOT to go to these meetings. They are way, way better than Reality TV.

Here’s the Blow by Blow:

As the meeting was ending, Chairman Woodward held up the Page News article written by Jamie Turner (wonderful article, Jamie) about the Donato vote rescinsion and the Newton motion to put the flood plain ordinance back into the zoning subcommittee. (You remember that one, when I was about ready to throw in the towel because I couldn’t stand this continued version of Rope-A-Dope) He said that was uncalled for and it constituted an act of malfeasance. He said as Chairman, he was able to abolish that subcommittee and he hereby did it, and he banged his gavel. So as of 7:45 or so on Monday, June 18, 2007, the Zoning Ordinance Subcommittee of the Planning Commission, no longer exists. On Monday, June 25, 2007, he will appoint new members.

This is so good.

Mr. Eldridge protested, and Mr. Shanks seemed to back him up, so don’t think the drama is fully over yet. In fact, chances are good this might happen all over again next Monday night, June 25, at the regular meeting of the Planning Commission. So it’s not too late for you to catch the second act!

Put it on your calendar! Dinner and a show in town, Monday, June 25, at 7 p.m. at the Courthouse. Be there! Why is this so important? Well, Flood Plain dwellers, these are the people who tried to get you. And were still trying at last month’s meeting. Don’t stop going to the meetings until this stops. This could be the act that finally stops it. But the Good Guys need you to show up so they know how much it matters.

I can’t be there next Monday night, because I have a business trip. I hope a whole bunch of other people will go, and email me what happened so I can post it here next week.

Alice

Follow the Smell

2007-06-17T07:52:00.000-04:00

Follow the Smell

Something stinks with the Page County Board of Supervisors, and it isn’t the Landfill. First, they brought us the Flood Plain Ordinance. Then, they reassessed our houses above what the market will pay. Then, they raised taxes to the point that they are forcing some of our citizens to sell. Now, they are about to approve a budget of $99M. Last year, it was half that. The difference, we were told, was to pay down the debt for the schools. Makes sense. Borrow $46M for schools, pay $36M off this year, and then next year borrow a little more, pay off the schools in two years. Solid, cash based financial management.

But now the story is changing. Now the $36M is just debt service. It’s not paying down the debt. At the Supervisors LaLaLand Retreat last week, suddenly that money wasn’t paying off anything. Chairman LaFrance expressed his dismay that citizens attended the meeting, and clearly cautioned the few people in the audience not to touch the juice and pastries set up for the Supervisors. That’s going to play really nice on YouTube, Tommy. You see, Page County Watch brought videocameras. We have the one hour on tape, showing the arrogant disregard for the more than 70 citizens who protested the sentence in the Comprehensive Plan that says: “Develop ordinances that prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100-year flood plain”. At that May 15 meeting, according to the audiotape, Chairman LaFrance says, “This Board is up to the task” of reviewing and fixing the problems with the Comprehensive Plan. But after “retreating” to take up the task, the Board only needed one hour to do it! Their solution: change the word “prohibit” to “regulate”. That’ll do it, our Supervisors concluded.

Later, after the cameras were turned off, Chairman LaFrance insisted to citizens that the Flood Plain Ordinance was dead, a dead issue, no longer being considered. Yet, citizens who have asked Supervisor Hoke say he doesn’t think so. Citizens who have asked Supervisor Strickler say she doesn’t think so. We know for a fact that the Gang of Five on the Planning Commission doesn’t think so, as they keep trying to breathe life into it. And here this sentence stays, sitting there in the Comprehensive Plan, now saying: “Develop ordinances that REGULATE buildings and businesses in the 100-year flood plain.” Never mind that we already have a perfectly good ordinance that meets state and federal requirements at this time. Our Supervisors want to do MORE. Why? That is the answer we cannot get. Except, of course, it must be because of the Karst topography, tongue-in-cheek. (For those of you who didn’t get that joke, you have GOT to attend these Planning Commission meetings. They are so much funnier than Reality TV.)

Now here’s the deal. There is something fishy about that budget. Citizens can’t read it, the way it’s being presented. But, among all our citizens out here, we’ll find somebody who can. We’ll present it in more understandable ways. Our Page County citizens are being harmed by the very people who were elected to represent THEM. The arrogant members of the Board of Supervisors are not representing the people of this county.

We will be posting the details of that budget on the main site, at http://www.PageCountyWatch.org soon.

Alice Richmond

The Supervisors Retreat

2007-06-15T04:41:00.000-04:00

The Supervisors Retreat June 14, 2007

Background: At the May 15 Supervisors meeting, a motion was made for the Supervisors to go on a Retreat so that they could discuss the Comprehensive Plan in detail, and make any necessary changes. At that time, the Board had before it a motion from the Planning Commission to end debate on the flood plain ordinance until there were specific maps from FEMA. With 70 + people in the audience at Stanley Elementary School, and many citizen objections to the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the line that said “prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100 year floodplain”, the Board decided to postpone action on that motion until after dealing with the Comprehensive Plan. The Retreat was scheduled for June 14 at Skyland.

Attendees: In attendance were the five supervisors, plus Dr. Tom Cardman (Economic Development), Mr. Mark Belton (County Administrator), Ms. Regina Miller (Executive Assistant to the Board), Mr. Kevin Henry (County Planner).

Members of the audience were Mike Trader, Jean Trader, Jim Turner, Carl Turner, Alice Richmond, Steve Hunsicker, Natalie Zuckerman, and Jamie Turner (Page News and Courier). The audience (Page County Watch) brought two professional level videocameras and set them up in the room, in consideration of the many people who wanted to attend but were unable to because of the date and time of the meeting.

The Room: The Mountain Room at Skyland held a conference table, and a side table filled with coffeee, juices, and breakfast pastries. There was plenty of seating available for the public.

The Agenda: The agenda allowed 1 ½ hours for discussion of the Comprehensive Plan, followed by a break, followed by an hour for discussion of the school construction, followed by lunch, followed by a discussion of the county office building. The meeting was scheduled to be over by 2 p.m.

What actually happened: Mr. LaFrance opened the meeting. He expressed his dismay that the public and the press chose to come, and to bring videocameras. He said that the Supervisors are not allowed by law to talk among themselves about county business, and so when they set up a Retreat, it is with the hope that this will give them an opportunity to really hammer things out with some privacy. However, he said, this was a public meeting and if that is what we chose to do, then we had the right to do it. He noted that the juice, coffee, and pastries were for the Supervisors only, not the public.

The discussion about the Comprehensive Plan began. Each Supervisor had with them a copy of the changes that were made to the Plan, showing the markups. However, the discussion was subdued. Mr. LaFrance said he thought the objections of the citizens could be addressed if Mr. Henry would take his electronic copy of the plan and do a “find and replace” of the word PROHIBIT, replaced with the word REGULATE. He said that the word Prohibit was profusely scattered throughout the plan, and that as a result, it appeared to give the Planning Commission guidance to write ordinances that were restrictive to a fault, aka the flood plain ordinance. He said that changing that word would seem to essentially address the citizen objections. For example, instead of saying “Prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain”, the plan would now say “Regulate buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain” There was general agreement that this would be a good thing. The Supervisors were then asked to give any other changes to the specifics of the plan that they would like to see to Mr. Henry by June 28. He would then print out the corrected pages of the Plan, and they would review them in the work session on July 3. Mr. Belton pointed out that they would not need another public hearing, because the public hearing was held on May 15. However, Mr. LaFrance thought it would be a good thing to hold informational meetings about the Plan, district by district. That is, each Supervisor in their district would set up a citizens meeting, for their district residents only, to openly talk about the plan Supervisor to citizens.

Mr. Rust (Supervisor District 2) said he was eager to get this plan approved so that they could get on with the business of the Zoning Ordinance rewrite. He said they had spoken to someone at Virginia Tech (I may have that wrong, it may have been a state agency) and they had a project whereby for no or minimal cost they would come out and speak to the citizens in groups about the reasons and the needs for zoning ordinance changes. He thought this would be a good thing, to help the citizens understand why certain things had to be done.

Mr. Cubbage, Ms. Strickler, and Mr. Hoke made a few comments each, but none that I wrote down in my notes.

They then decided that the plan to move forward would be for Mr. Henry to make the Prohibit to Regulate change, and for each Supervisor to give Mr. Henry any other changes they would like to make privately, and the changes to be reviewed in the July 3 worksession.

After one hour, the meeting about the Comprehensive Plan was over.

Then they took a half hour break. Then they talked about the school construction bids. Then they talked about the county office building. At 11: 45 a.m. the meeting was over and they went to lunch. Before breaking for lunch, Mr. LaFrance addressed the audience regarding the flood plain ordinance. He said, while the cameras were still rolling, “The draft flood plain ordinance died when the planning commission failed to act on it after 90 days, and the Board of Supervisors has no action before it to respond to anything or do anything regarding the flood plain ordinance.”

After the meeting, after the cameras were turned off, we, in a group, asked Mr. LaFrance to further explain his statement about the flood plain ordinance. We asked, “what about the motion that was before you, and what about the statement by Mr. Hoke that you were postponing action on that motion until after the Comprehensive Plan was dealt with”. Mr. LaFrance said they didn’t act on that motion so that it would die, and it was dead.

We asked him if we could now tell all the real estate agents and everyone that absolutely, it was dead, and he said yes, it is dead. He said if the Planning Commission were to rewrite a new one, it would be starting over, and it would have to go through the entire process all over again, but the Board has not asked them to write a new one or to rethink any old ones. It is dead.

And that’s what happened at the Supervisor’s Retreat. If you would like to Blog about this, push the Comments button.

Directions to the Retreat

2007-06-09T06:16:00.000-04:00

The Supervisors Retreat, which will be held on Thursday, June 14 beginning at 9 a.m. is an open public meeting. The purpose of the retreat is to review the Comprehensive Plan, which is the document with the four references to the flood plain ordinance. It is expected to be a meeting that runs from about 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. (that's how long the room is reserved for)

The room the meeting is in is either called the Mountain Room or the Montana Room. Anyway, it's the room next to the Dining Room, so follow the signs to the Dining Room. Skyland Resort is on the Skyline Drive, so you have to pay a fee to get on the drive of $15. Try asking at the toll booth if you can skip the fee because you are going to this public meeting. The Resort is about 10 miles south of the Luray entrance to Skyline Drive (which is on Rte 211 between Luray and Sperryville) It takes about 40 minutes to get there from Luray.

See you there.

Alice

http://www.nationalparkreservations.com/shenandoah_skyland.htm

http://members.aol.com/adnascar/skyland.html

The Original Donato Document

2007-06-08T05:33:00.000-04:00

This is what the Donato Document was before Dot sat down with Natalie to revise it. The background is this. Dot called me and apologized for her hiccup vote. She said that wasn't what she meant to do. She said what she meant to do was take advantage of the broad citizen participation to work out something that would broadly address the destination and tourism aspects, which would also include bio-friendly business. I thought her ideas sounded good. I agreed to work with her to develop this document. She and I emailed back and forth and came up with the document below. However, after one iteration, she sent back a new draft, the one which I posted as The Donato Document. This is the draft before it was changed. Is it my imagination that these two documents have a dramatically different intention? (See the Donato Document DRAFT to compare.)

The Original Donato Document

Destination and Tourism Industry Strategic Plan
Given:
1. Our Comprehensive Plan includes competing objectives
2. We have Economic goals, Preservation of the Rural Nature goals, Service to existing citizens goals, Property Rights goals, Environmental goals
3. These goals tend to conflict, which would cause confusion and inconsistency when we ask our Planners to form tactics for zoning and other ordinance formation.
4. Further guidance and development is required in the Comprehensive Plan, to show leadership for the county and promote and advance our precious lifestyle, while moving the county forward economically, and incorporating inevitable change.
5. A consistency in the Comprehensive Plan requires resolution of these competing objectives for economic advancement, preservation of the rural nature, and environmental awareness.With these challenges in mind, I

Move to appoint:
A nucleus of visionaries who are diverse in talent and who are, by intellect, experience, or position, aware of the challenges and obstacles defining Page County. This ad hoc citizen committee will work in concert with and integrate the objectives found in the Economic Development Strategic Plan, the EDC, the Tourism Council and Chamber of Commerce, the local and regional hospitality industries and incorporate the goals and objectives of the river and recreation groups. This committee will address policy, ordinance, and objectives found in the Comprehensive Plan but which need specific focus on the impact on our internal citizenry and the tourism industry. Its composition will include representative citizens from a wide range of community interests. It will submit its work directly to the BOS.

A document will be delivered to this BOS which recognizes the physical attributes, the environmental considerations, the recreational potential and the cultural aspects that will be declared as representative of Page Valley. Our vision can then be publicized very specifically in brochures and distribution materials.

Prologue:
We are an island (a unique travel location) destination. Beyond the caverns and the National Park, the recognition of Page County as a destination lies in the vision and language we choose to project. This can be an asset or a stumbling block. Potential travelers read the paper, study the area and search for information on the internet. Our county’s roads isolate it from the surrounding communities, making it difficult for our citizens to work in nearby counties without driving more than an hour over a mountain. If we can take advantage of that tourism to bring jobs to our citizens, we have accomplished multiple strategic objectives in parallel.

The Tourist as Participant

Tourists are much more than spectators. Tourists are you and I coming HERE for the first time. I seek out the music, you may seek out the conference or the river or the caves. They see what we offer, they go where we suggest they go…but for the most part they see themselves “inserted here”. Whether they respite from an illness, retreat from the day to day, pause from their worldly travels or simply leave the traffic and pollution from the city they are “us” on a holiday. Tourists are artists, writers, doctors, scientists, geologists, tradesmen, investors and teachers. They hike, canoe, hunt, and fish. They breathe in our clean air; they wonder as they stand by a spring bubbling fresh clean water from under a rock. They feel healthier just being here. Many become part of the process and bring with them ideas and attitudes. Who comes is, in many ways, still up to us. I recently met a scientist counting dead fish. He moved here and his intelligence is part of our network now. When we project a goodness and welcome and invite their individual participation they want to know us. We become a very desirable destination.
They might have seen the world but they feel a sense of belonging. Whether they stay longer, come often or choose to relocate here, our economy grows with their choice.

Impact and Direction

A Plan is the work that needs to be done in advance of their visit. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the need to promote tourism and we need to study closely the cause and effect of policy. Many of the rental cabin owners and the riverside property owners want to participate in this work. Additionally, our community consists of a wide and diverse body of people, all of whom desire to be included in the direction of the county. A Plan should contain, not only the reasons for supporting the efforts of tourism, but must include the fundamentals. Issues will be addressed to include suggested Land Use particulars, zoning requirements (including necessary restrictions and variances as in overlay districting), services, safety, recreation specifics, visitor welcome areas, special needs “help” and much more. Any decisions will be made with consideration to the local citizenry and with their active participation and understanding. Also included will be the cooperation with the Town’s Comprehensive Plans. A promotion of synergy for cottage industries and local shops to benefit from visitation should be encouraged. Promotional ideas, designs and concepts might be included in the documentation forwarded to the Board for consideration.

The Bio-Valley Hub

This valley has the potential for being recognized as a global leader, incubator and study area for new and innovative environmentally-focused technologies. Consistent with our desire to remain a rural area, with agriculture and tourism as our main industries, we can also be a hub for bio-fuels, green building, recycling, renewable food sources and a gathering place for the innovators. For example, a university group initiated a low cost fertilizer project for some ravaged and poor area in Africa. The result of higher yield and renewable crops was extremely successful. Page County not only has the chicken farming knowledge but has the bi-product export. Government grants are available to pursue environmental businesses. Page County has a need for jobs, an expanding population of talented, retired professionals, and the potential to become the hub of environmental research. This attraction of environmental businesses would:

• Provide much needed jobs for our citizens
• Increase the attraction of tourism, as tourists would visit the cutting edge facilities
• Address the concerns of citizens on both ends of the spectrum, environmentally concerned and economically concerned

Preserving our Precious, Rural Lifestyle

There is much concern in the County that growth will ruin our culture and destroy our lifestyle. There is a temptation to interpret that concern as a need to restrict the rights of property owners, devaluing land by adding restrictions to it, so that we can be assured that “nothing will change.” But that response overlooks the fact that the forces of the market are forces of nature. To fight forces of nature by attempting to restrict them, will result only in a spiral downward in our economy, and a growing population of poorer people who need more services and have less to offer the tax base. Our only chance to preserve our lifestyle, while serving our people, is to embrace the market forces, accept the inevitable influx of retiring Baby Boomers, and let the county become a hub of a specific “type” of business, by actively seeking out grants and opportunities in the environmental industry. By planning in advance for this growth, we can shape it in a way that satisfies the potential new citizens without displacing our current rural nature. We can provide jobs for our citizens that will raise their standard of living. Tourists will love it, it will provide the tax base our community needs, and the community can support it on multiple levels.

Community Vision
We have so much to offer visitors who then, in their life work, might change the future. We simply require the determination to Prepare Ourselves, Write the Documents for grants and to encourage business, and invite the world (for a visit). We already have 500,000 visitors a year. Let’s turn those visitors into tax revenue, provide stable incomes for our resident citizens, and preserve our rural lifestyle all at the same time. With widespread community representation from all “factions” (long term residents, farmers, townspeople, environmentalists, business proponents, riverkeepers, river property owners, tourist cabin owners, and any other faction that self selects), we can unite this community behind a vision and build a county that truly reflects what we all know this county already is.

Conclusion
There is community support for a determined effort at this time. A milestone report could be delivered tothe Board with significant fanfare before the November elections. This Board can be seen as the Board with Vision and Leadership for this county. This is the time to have these discussions and to suggest the options. We are not Silicon Valley, we are not Napa Valley. But we can be uniquely Page Valley.What Valley do you see?

Respectfully submitted,
Dot Donato, Page County Planning Commissioner, 5th District

Endorsed and supported,Alice Richmond

FLOOD PLAIN documenting

2007-06-06T10:20:00.000-04:00

This Blog Thread is for all the people who make phone calls to the Supervisors and Commissioners, etc. Just push the Comments button and document what your conversation was about. Here's the first one. Add yours.

June 6, 2007
At 10:15 a.m., Donna Eames called Supervisor Tommy LaFrance. She quotes him as saying that the Flood Plain Ordinance, with all its restrictions, was never going to pass the Board. He said they would never do something like that. She asked him what this business was of the Planning Commission making motions and going back to take another run at it, in the Zoning Subcommittee again. She brought up the conversations she had with Mr. Eldridge, in which he reiterated his desire to have all the people who live on the flood plain, essentially "turn themselves in" to get new occupancy certificates. Mr. LaFrance said the Board cannot stop the Planning Commission from working on something, but he thinks they should work on something more productive, as restrictions like this are not going to be passed by the Board.

Push the comments button and record phone conversations you have had about this issue.

The Donato Document DRAFT

2007-06-06T08:27:00.000-04:00

The following document is presented to citizens for comment, editing, and augmenting IN ADVANCE of it being presented before any commission or Board for action. This document was prepared by Planning Commissioner Dot Donato. Essentially, Ms. Donato is asking for citizen comment, as an apology for her ill-considered "vote rescinsion" that would have revived the Flood Plain Ordinance. She says she did not mean to do that, she just wanted citizen participation and involvement, and didn't want to lose the opportunity now that everyone was paying attention and getting involved. This document is what she meant to do instead. Please read it and comment, by hitting the Comments button. Now is our chance to be involved before things get out of hand and become "too late." This document has NOT been submitted to the Board. Please comment now, and your comments have an excellent chance of making a difference.

The Donato Document - DRAFT

Dear Board:

Following numerous discussions with citizens on the Scenic 340 group and the cabin and landowners in Land of Luray, I am finding consensus on the following proposal. Please read the attached and consider a motion to establish a committee to discuss and prepare a Strategic Plan detailing issues specific to Destination Tourism.

The Comprehensive Plan currently under review includes a set of Objectives. It sets a broad vision for those elements of valley life that should be primary in our planning. Separately we provide goals to promote and protect the rural and natural environments, economic balance, citizen services levels, property rights and the general term, tourism. To base planning criteria on the Plan with these objectives is certain to leave room for confusion and inconsistency. I suggest we augment the Comp. Plan with a supplemental Addendum with specific guidelines for tourism industry group factors. For instance, clearly define the building and zoning criteria, which may need variance or special use tactics to enable the building of mountain and river cabins, lodges, recreational facilities, ingress and egress, and other considerations. Encouraging public visitation to many areas of the County may require different allowances that are not in compliance with our standard zoning ordinances. It may be preferable to establish land use particulars for overlay districts for those areas we define as “destinations”.

The suggestion here is to discuss, define, and write a document, which will review as many scenarios as possible by a diverse group of professionals and present the document to the BOS for acceptance into the Comprehensive Plan. Use of the Economic Development Strategic Plan as the guiding document is also suggested.

Thank you for your time in reviewing and discussion this. A description and supportive documentation is provided.

Regards,

Dot Donato, Planning Commissioner D5

Move to Appoint:

Please consider a motion to establish:

A nucleus of visionaries who are diverse in talent and who are, by intellect, experience or position, aware of the challenges facing the Board of Supervisors. One objective in the Comprehensive Plan (rewrite draft 2007) defines Tourism as an economic engine. This citizen committee will work in concert with the Planning Commission in an attempt to provide more detail specific to the growing Tourism industry. The accepted Economic Development Strategic Plan will guide the process. The purpose of the document will be to integrate the objectives found in the ED Plan, the EDC, the Tourism Council/Chamber goals, the incorporated towns and the local/regional hospitality groups. The committee will address policy, ordinances and objectives desired and required by destination owners. This guiding document should support the Board of Supervisors in the future by providing an assessment of a variety of special use facilities (destinations) and the resulting revenue projections for each. This will serve as a resource for determining service levels for our CIPs and models.

The citizens of Page will have many opportunities to suggest input to the overall vision for the county. This group will lead forums for comment and discussion that will be very open and inclusive. Considerable effort will be taken to include the planners, the Board, the industry, property owners and citizens who may be affected by design or policy changes. Public reaction will be documented and included in a final draft.

Expected results will include a structured plan for review, inclusion and implementation. Statements of vision for a tourist friendly community will give us the words to be shared universally. Descriptions of the valley’s unique environments with emphasis on attracting tourism industry prospects will be drafted. The document will provide criteria and provisions for use in the Zoning rewrite process and the Land Use planning process specific to tourism destinations.

Prologue:

We are an island (a unique and separate travel destination). Beyond the Caverns and the National Parks, the recognition of Page County as a destination lies in the vision we project. Potential visitors read the local paper, study the area on the Internet, or more than likely ask someone they know about the county. Our byways separate us from the mainstream destinations along major routes so visitors have to choose to come here. A negative result of limited access is the limited job market. Small business owners also need to have incentive before investing in a site for their retail or service shop. If we can take advantage of preparing the economic climate for business success we will benefit from a growing employment base, a very desirable result for this county.

Each tourist has huge potential to become part of our expansion. Tourists are much more that spectators. Tourists are you and I coming here for the first time. I seek out music in the park and invitations to sing. Does the conference or the river attract you? Tourists see what we offer them, they go where we suggest they go, but they come here to experience themselves. I am here to participate and you certainly are involved in the community. The secret key to travelers becoming our valuable asset is in the level of their participation. The business traveler becomes the landowner who builds rental cabins who provides tours who sends guests to the restaurants in town who, in the end, pays taxes. The annual guest to the caverns decides to purchase a farm and then retires here. He may be a great musician or a philanthropist giving back invaluable gifts to our citizens. Preparing for tourism is not simply distributing a brochure full of enchanting photos, it requires patience and planning. We can discourage a new landowner by rejecting their applications or making it impossible to live out a dream. The opportunity is now to define our future recreation and destinations and invite the dreamers who protect our environment and history. We welcome the right industry by paving the way for those businesses that are appropriate. Generic ordinances are, in the long run, shortsighted. Our landscape varies widely and the right rules need to be assigned (using overlay districts) to accommodate bus tours and individuals.

Impact and direction

A Plan is the work that is done in advance of the outcome. In the case of tourism it is the preparation that we will do in advance of each visit. The Comp. Plan recognizes the need to promote and encourage Tourism. We need to study closely the cause and effect of our current policies and recommend changes. Many of the rental cabin owners and the riverside property owners want to participate in this work. Additionally, our community consists of a very diverse body of people, all of whom desire to be heard. Everyone has an interest in directing the future of the valley. Some have a vested interest some have a legacy to protect. Everyone should have a say and this work group will provide forums and open air gatherings where ideas will be shared.

Items for discussion will include: building specifications and codes; zoning ordinances, VDOT regulations and exceptions, alternative energy applications; passive solar, wind, subterranean building, non-electric septic solutions and lighting exceptions, green building materials etc. Recreation issues both water and mountains. A discussion of finding areas conducive to extreme sports and cycling may influence a new industry here. There are numerous critical issues to share and we hope to initiate the conversation and the groundwork to enable us to grow our destination offerings and our revenue base.

Vision for the future.

This valley has the potential for being recognized as a global leader. How you ask?
Consider our valley as an incubator and study area for new technology and innovative global initiatives. The federal government is looking for a site for a multi billion dollar electric plant, which will provide enough energy for half of the east coast. This is a project by the energy department that is the first complete life cycle (no emissions) plant. Think of the tourist who would be invited to see this “global warming solution”. Consider the evolving research for alternative bio-products. For fuel, for food and for self-sustaining communities around the world, the universities are looking for places to grow plants. Expand the Land Use program to encourage young people to live and work here.

A recent story has been published about a Columbia University group who sent low cost fertilizer to a few African villages who continually suffered food shortages. They sent a derivative of chicken litter. The renewable fertilizer was a huge success. We have chickens (sustainable) and the bi-product already in production in Page. Federal grants are available for environmental, clean water and global warming solutions we just need to attract those tourist/scientist/decision makers for a visit. Of course Dr. Cardman can show them where their innovation can take root. We’ll set the course and the great people will come. This attraction to cutting edge businesses will provide a unique tourism industry base and will provide much needed high-end jobs. Our citizen base increases and our knowledge base grows.

There is much concern in the County that growth will ruin our culture and destroy our lifestyle. We all share this concern because we have many examples in surrounding localities. We see the results of uncontrolled development. This trepidation temps us to interpret that concern as a need to restrict the “best and highest use” provided us in property ownership by drafting zoning regulations that generalize use and forbid any building. I interpret the growth as forces of the changing market, a force that will infiltrate the valley simply by supply and demand for homesites (the American Dream). To fight the forces of nature by universally projecting a policy of “no growth” will result in downward trends in our economy. Herein lies the challenge, the challenge of adopting a publicity piece, the Comprehensive Plan. Land owners, citizens, taxpayers have every right to opinion and position in any thoughtful land use planning. It is the current populace who connects the past with future. Change is inevitable and we need consensus in defining our vision.

Conclusion:
There is community support for a determined effort to communicate openly. A milestone report could be delivered to the Board that at the very least provides various prospectives. There are support groups, conscious groups, industry leaders and many others who deserve the opportunity to be heard. The public forum provided by the Planning Commission meetings and the BOS meetings is failing to satisfy the involved public. This proposal will expound on the subjects heard before and allow for opinion and options based on vision of the whole. It will also generate a Strategic Plan for Destination Tourism for the Board to review and accept as an appendix to the Comp. Plan and an addendum to the Economic Development Strategic Plan.

This is the time to have these discussions. We are not the silicon valley, we are not Napa Valley….we are unique so lets find the words to describe Page.

Respectfully submitted for consideration by,

Dot Donato, Page County Planning Commissioner D5
Director, Loudoun County Convention and Visitors Bureau (1992-1997)
Executive Director, Harpers Ferry Merchants Assoc. HF, WV (1987-1991)

Notes from the June 5 meeting

2007-06-06T08:23:00.000-04:00

News from the Board June 5, 2007-06-06

The Board of Supervisors met in Work Session on June 5. Here’s what happened. (Disclaimer: these are one citizens notes from observation. They are not the official minutes of the meeting.)

1. The Special Use Permit for Joseph Salyards was approved. This is that business that does some kind of waste and recycling stuff. It had been closed down since April because it was operating in a place that wasn’t zoned for that kind of operation. It can now reopen, which will allow it to clean up all the materials that have been building up since it was closed. It is reopening under a temporary arrangement, while it builds a place to move to that is zoned for it. Dr. Cardman, of the Economic Development area, is working with this business. It sounds like a very good business for our area, which has the promise of building jobs.

2. The County Budget was presented for public comments. Nobody commented. I have a comment, but I’m reserving it for its own topic. Basically, the budget is a little bit higher than last year in most categories, and it adds $36M to pay the debt for the schools. We’ll talk about this more over time, but it’s one of those topics you have to dig deeply into, and I’m still focusing on the Comprehensive Plan and the Flood Plain Ordinance right now. If anybody wants to dig into the budget, just call Carolyn at the County offices. 743-4142 Ask for a line item copy of the budget to be mailed to you under Freedom of Information. If you do analyze it, email Research@PageCountyWatch.org and let us know your thoughts. The Budget will be voted on at the June 19 Board meeting. My basic take on it is: there’s time to consider that later. If this year has an extra $36M to pay for the schools, that means the schools will be paid for in two years. So three years from now, what does the county do with all that extra money?

3. There’s some kind of internal conflict on the county’s co-ed softball team. It’s about who is allowed to play. The Supervisors are going to discuss it with the Recreation Director.

4. Henry Milkus gave a report on the Public Works Department, but I didn’t actually understand it.

5. Powell Markowitz talked about his proposal to lower the property tax on aircraft. The basic proposal is this: all the surrounding counties have tax on aircraft that is about 50 cents and ours is $2.70 (I think, I’m not sure, but its high). Powell says this causes people who have airplanes to park their planes in some other county, at some other airport. We then can not attract new planes. We only get the old planes that are depreciated already and don’t have to pay so much tax. Powell is trying to get grants from the FAA to build hangers, I think about 30 hangers. And also to expand the airport more, and add instrument landing and stuff like that. Powell says the airport is a draw for business to come to the community, and should be supported. He quoted some studies about what an airport does for a community’s business base. He is getting $10Million in FAA grants to build it, and the county loaned him about $45,000 at one point, for engineering plans for these hangers, which he needed to get the grant, and which will be paid back from these grants. So once he gets all these hangers built and the longer runway and the 30 hangers, then all the planes and the people who maintain them are jobs, plus the attraction of an airport here allows jobs. Supervisor Hoke said something about it not being right for poor people to pay their full taxes, but people who can afford airplanes get their taxes reduced. Markowitz said these planes are sometimes used for sport, but they are often used for business and to attract business, and we as a community need this airport to be a leverage for business attraction. Mr. LaFrance said he was “not opposed to taxing people who can afford airplanes.” Mr. Markowitz cited some figures about how we aren’t getting the new planes because of this, and he calculated how much tax revenue there would be if he completed his plan and got the new planes in, and he showed how there would still be the same total dollar revenue to the county as there was now, even with the reduced tax rate, if he could get the new planes in, and then there would be a draw for business and it would be a win-win. So Chairman LaFrance appointed a committee to study the issue and report back. The Committee is chaired by Supervisor Strickler, and members are Dr. Cardman, Charlie Campbell (Commissioner of Revenue), and Powell Markowitze.

6. Next was an issue about the new houses being built by the airport. The developer was thinking of putting a drainage pond at the end of the runway, and the FAA says that’s no good, and the county doesn’t really have a representative, no “dog in the fight”, as Mr. LaFrance said, and they need one. But I missed how that was resolved.

7. George Shanks suggested that the county add a probate tax, which we currently don’t have. It would generate $7,500 a year in tax revenue, I guess because people around here are so poor they don’t have much of an estate to pass on, so the probate tax wouldn’t be much. Mr. Shanks said it wouldn’t be a significant imposition, and Charlie Hoke said, “all tax is a significant imposition”. But they decided to go ahead with it. There will be a public hearing scheduled.

8. They changed the security fee you have to pay if you go to criminal and traffic court and lose. It was $5 and now it will be $10. This money goes to a fund that pays for courthouse security. You don’t pay it if you win the case.

9. There was a topic on vehicle use, but I must not have been paying attention because I didn’t write anything in my notes about that.

10. There is a National Association of County Officials conference, but nobody is going.

They then went into closed session to talk about the new County Office Building. This is a valid closed session topic, because if you are talking about contract negotiations, it isn’t sensible to do it in a public forum.

Oh, now I remember why I missed that vehicle use topic! George Shanks brought up (again, this was not on the agenda) the Vote Hiccup on the Planning Commission last time about the Flood Plain Ordinance. I’ll make a new topic to discuss that.

FLOOD PLAIN news

2007-06-06T08:14:00.000-04:00

1. Vote Hiccup

At the June 5 Board of Supervisors work session, George Shanks brought up the Vote Hiccup at the last Planning Commission meeting. He said that Ms. Donato's "vote change" was not valid.
However, he also said that the "proposed flood plain ordinance" had not been acted on for 100 days by the Planning Commission so that document was dead as far as they were concerned, but it had no time limit as far as the Board was concerned (do not ask me how this convoluted interpretation came about, I don't know). THEN he said, the Planning Commission's motion to start up again with a NEW flood plain ordinance WAS valid, and they could do that in the Zoning Subcommittee if they wanted to! In fact, when asked, most but not all of the Supervisors said, no, no, it's in our hands, but Shanks said the Planning Commission could start all over again if they wanted to. We also asked Mr. Shanks if they could talk about items not on the agenda, and he said yes.

So the Chairman of the Zoning Subcommittee, who is Alan Eldridge, based on that motion made at the last Planning Commission, apparently has the legal right to pick up the Flood Plain Ordinance and start all over from the beginning, without putting it on the subcommittee agenda. We already established that he was not legally obligated to have minutes of the meeting. Although in April, Chairman Woodward announced that subcommittees in the future would have minutes, the subcommittee which wrote the flood plain ordinance originally (which is the zoning subcommittee) did not have minutes in the past. Page County Watch will request subcommittee minutes.

2. Zoning Subcommittee
The Zoning Subcommittee will meet today, Wednesday, June 6, at 6 p.m. at the Courthouse. The agenda topic is "home based businesses". I will not be there. If any of you can go, please let me know what happened.

3. The Donato Document.
Under the topic "The Donato Document - DRAFT" written by Planning Commissioner Dot Donato. Ms. Donato called me after the vote hiccup, and apologized for the surprise. She said she did not mean to revive the Flood Plain Ordinance. She said she meant to get community involvement in a larger issue. This document reflects the larger issue. On the surface, I agree with her concept, but I am deeply concerned that its implementation not be turned over to the Zoning Subcommittee of the Planning Commission, for all the reasons that we saw on the Flood Plain issue. Ms. Donato has asked that we review her document, and give her feedback and assess whether we will support the effort. I do appreciate her effort in getting feedback, and I hope you will go to that topic and Blog it. Press the Comments button.

4. The Retreat

The Supervisors Retreat will be on June 14 at 9 a.m. in the Montana Room at Skyland. It will probably last until 2 p.m. The Montana Room is right off the dining room, so follow the signs to the dining room. Skyland is located on Skyline Drive, so you have to pay the fee to get on the drive to get there. It's possible that if you tell them you are going to this meeting they will let you through without paying. Please let me know if you are coming. The topic is the Comprehensive Plan, which can be downloaded from the county website. It is posted under "public notices" The file is 25Mb so I can't post it. The Flood Plain Ordinance is not the topic, but it may be discussed. The key issue is all those references in the Comp Plan to the Flood Plain ordinance.

5. My notes from the June 5 Board meeting are posted on the Blog, under the label "The County's Business."

Meet the Republicans

2007-06-02T01:51:00.000-04:00

Meet the Republicans

Before I tell you about Meeting the Republicans, I should tell you I’m a lifelong Democrat. But regardless of our party affiliation in a Democracy, we choose who we vote for one by one. That’s what I was doing when I went to the Republican meeting.

There was a very nice event at the Bridge Theater behind Brown’s Restaurant last night. The Republican candidates for local office invited the public to have a social evening, a buffet, an open bar, and listen to some campaign speeches. Each candidate for office stood up and said why they would be a good choice. It wasn’t just a night for Republicans to come. It was for any citizen who wanted to meet the candidates and know what they stood for. Republican, Democrat, or Independent, on the local level, we vote for the person, not the party. It’s a small town. You can know who’s running, and you should. When you know the person, the party won’t matter.

Every candidate had their little speech, and I have to say, every one was impressive. Maybe even endearing. Well, okay, maybe Charlie Campbell was a little on the boring side, but he’s the Commissioner of Revenue, so what can you say? So far, nobody’s come out to run against Charlie. There’s no Democrat running against him, and the deadline for Independents is June 12. My only personal experience with Charlie is that I heard him ask the Board of Supervisors to give him a person who could monitor and supervise the appraisals, so the consultants couldn’t make mistakes that were not caught. That sounded like a good thing. I also heard him ask the Board for an approval to let Internet businesses have licenses. That also sounded like a good thing. So everything I’ve seen with my own two eyes says this man is doing his job. I’m one of those “imports” so maybe I don’t know much. All I know is what I see, and so far, that’s what I see. I see Charlie Campbell as a Thumbs Up. I can be wrong. I’m reporting what I saw.

Grayson Markowitz . . . fabulous speech. The kind of speech you know he practiced for hours before he gave it. Great delivery. Excellent body language and tone. Total sincerity. If I had to sum it up, I’d say, “Grayson said, you’ve known me as a man of integrity for all these years, you’ve seen that I work hard and I’m honest and I’m fair and I’m true to my word, and I’m going to keep on being that.” Geez. What more could a person say? I know, as an “import”, that when I needed a washing machine and dryer, Grayson didn’t just put it in, he adjusted it and fiddled with it until it was just right. When my refrigerator was broken, he fixed it. When I was looking for a freezer, he discussed the merits of various options with me. I have to tell you, folks, you do not get that in the city. If you know a man who has shown over the years that he will respond when you call, he will treat you with respect, he will consider issues with a sense of integrity, and he will work for your interests . . . you can elect a man like that to anything. I almost wondered whether Grayson wanted to run for President, but the field is getting pretty crowded, what with Fred Thompson entering. So Grayson Markowitz sounded like a winner to me.

Understand, folks, I don’t know Ron Wilson, the Democratic candidate, and the incumbent. I’m just telling you that I, personally, was deeply impressed with Grayson’s presentation. I believe that in a democracy, we have to look at both or all candidates and compare them, and then make our choice. I’m only telling you what I saw last night, and I was WOWed. I absolutely want to also look at Ron Wilson’s presentation. Voters need to do that. Look at all the choices, and then decide. We’ll do that in these columns, over time. But right now, last night, I saw Grayson Markowitz and I was deeply moved. To me, this was democracy as Thomas Jefferson envisioned it. A fine man, a member of the community, with a proven record, offering to “serve” in public office.

Next. Sheriff Daniel Presgraves. I can not describe how impressed I am with that man’s record and his presentation. Sheriff Presgraves has accomplished major objectives in this county. This I know for sure. When a person does a lot, that same person comes under a lot of criticism. Since the big controversy started, I’ve been asking people to tell me what it is that Danny has done wrong. Specifically, not in general “oh, he’s a bad guy” terms. I’ve been a person who has done a lot in the past. I know what kind of criticism emerges from that. All I saw last night was a guy with a long list of achievements. Guys with long lists of achievements, do generate enemies here and there. It’s like a Law of Physics or something.

Now, there are people running against Danny, and I will also look into them, and post their presentations. But I’m telling you right now, from what I can see, Re-elect Sheriff Presgraves signs are going to be posted in my yard, and Presgraves bumper stickers are going on my car. The objective record is too clear, and the rumor record is too unsupported by detail or fact.

That doesn’t mean I’m right. It means I’m participating in the political process. And you should, too. We live in a small place. You can know these people you are electing, and you need to do that.

More. We have three Board of Supervisors up for election.

District 2. John Rust. John is the incumbent, running against Larry Sours, the Democratic candidate. I truly wish John Rust would come out and say, “I’m against the Flood Plain Ordinance.” I cannot understand why he will not. And believe me, I have asked him to do so. BUT, I’m reluctant to suggest that he is NOT against the flood plain ordinance.

Trust me, to NOT be against the flood plain ordinance would be a ‘CHECK YOU OFF’ offense, in my book.

The reason I can’t check John Rust off is because if we get to the specifics, he is against all the bad stuff, and for all the good stuff. I just can’t understand why that doesn’t translate into the simple act of stating that the proposed flood plain ordinance needs to be dropped. If he would just read the thing, that would be the conclusion. Nobody could read that document without being incensed, so we have to conclude he still hasn’t read it. This is understandable, considering how obtuse it is, but it is not really excusable, considering how critical it is.

I’m failing to check him off because I’m thinking just maybe, he doesn’t like the idea of being pressured to answer a certain way without coming to his own careful conclusion. You can’t blame a person for not wanting to be pressured into an answer. That wouldn’t be right, either. You have to start with an assumption that people are acting to their own best integrity. In truth, I think that is usually, and most often, the case. Usually, the people you are talking to are making every attempt to answer with their own best integrity. Not always. But Usually.

So John Rust is still a “Jury’s Out” with me. He won’t answer directly on the Flood Plain Ordinance. He implies, he impugns, he dances around. But he doesn’t come right out and say it. So I can’t answer directly on him.

I can tell you that Larry Sours doesn’t have any problem saying “the flood plain ordinance is a bunch of silliness that should not be taking up all this time”

But maybe John is just a careful thinker and careful actor. That happens. We’ll see on June 14, at the Retreat. Residents of District 2 . . . I’ll tell you as soon as I know.

District 3. J D Cave. J D is not the incumbent. Charles Ballard is the incumbent, but he has taken ill, and can not continue his duties. J D was formerly the radio personality on the Friday morning SpeakOut. J D stood up and said he would always tell the truth, and he had expectations for himself and his constituents. A fine speech. A solid entry. And, most importantly to me, J D is against the flood plain ordinance. That was tongue in cheek, actually. It is most importantly to me, but it is also important that he present as a person who cares about the people in the county and will represent their interests. This all seems solid and stable and good to me. J D presents as and appears to be a good man, a solid candidate, and a fine representative. J D is running against Jim Turner, an Independent. Jim Turner is also a good candidate. Jim Turner is also against the flood plain ordinance. And where I live, that’s what counts. So this would be a real toss up. Luckily, I don’t live in District 3, so I will never have to make that choice.

District 4. Gerald Cubbage. Gerald Cubbage seems to me to be the quintessential local farmer. The man who represents Page County’s roots. As much as Gerald Cubbage is the standard of the “home boy”, I am the standard of the “import”. I am the Boomer who has come here to retire. Gerald is the farmer who represents generations of locals. Yet, we have a lot in common. Even though I only have a little plot of land to build my house, I brought my children here to that little plot, for twenty years. My boys grew up here. Their weekends were spent on this river. And when they grew up and left home, my husband and I decided it would be best for us to move here, so that our children could bring their children to the place they remembered growing up. It is these family values that Gerald Cubbage and I share. We both delight in our families and their relationship with the land. My land happens to include the river. Gerald’s land is far more extensive than mine. But he can see the tie. So he has no trouble saying, “let these people live their lives, and butt out” Gerald had no trouble saying that he saw the flood plain issue as one of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”

Are you tired of hearing about the Flood Plain yet? Think of it this way. It’s home. If someone threatened your home, you would be as passionate to chase them away, too. Our point is: this is like the Germans and the Jews. If you stand by and let someone threaten our homes today, it will be your homes tomorrow. So far, Gerald Cubbage, and J D Cave, on the Republican side, have clearly declared that they will not take our homes.

John Rust, Charlie Hoke, Carol Lee Strickler, and Tommy LaFrance have not made that declaration.

If you press them, they will say they would never do such a thing.

So why won’t they end the Flood Plain Ordinance change now? It has nothing else in it, as it stands. What “good parts” are they waiting to uncover? Why don’t they just read it and end the pain?

One cannot hide behind a process, when the homes of constituents have been threatened.

Stay tuned to Page County Watch for more on the elections and their process. AND. . .

Go ahead and BLOG by pushing the Comments button.

Following Alice Down the Rabbit Hole

2007-05-30T16:39:00.000-04:00

Following Alice Down the Rabbit Hole
(Guest Blog)

You know folks, last night’s show at the Planning Commission really wasn’t much when you think about it. It was so flawed that what the Zoning Committee does or doesn’t do really is of no consequence. The Board of Supervisors should be embarrassed, just as the honest folks on the Planning Commission and county staff appeared to be last night.

While I do not profess to be a parliamentarian, when read in plain English, Robert’s Rules seem pretty clear to me.

First, there is Article IV, Section 21. Incidental Motions. In the second paragraph it reads “The question of order must be raised at the time the breach of order occurs, so that after a motion has been discussed it is too late to raise the question as to whether it was in order or for the chair to rule the motion out of order. The only exception is where the motion is in violation of the laws, or the constitution, by-laws, or standing rules of the organization, or of the fundamental principles of parliamentary principles, so that if adopted it would be null and void. This is called raising a question, or point, or order, because the member in effect puts to the chair, whose duty it is to enforce order, the question as to whether there is not now a breach of order.” Don’t think that happened! What was Ms. Donato thinking? Is there such a thing as a retroactive "point of order?” I don't think so.

Second, there is Article VI, Section 40. Dilatory, Absurd or Frivolous Motions. The very nature of this potion of Roberts’ Rules is to protect the parliamentary process from continued renewal of issues like the floodplain ordinance.

Third, there is Article VIII, Section 46. Voting. Paragraph 9 reads “A member has the right to change his vote up to the time the vote is finally announced. After that, he can make the change only by permission of the assembly, which may be given by general consent; that is, by no member’s objecting when the chair inquires if any one objects. If objection is made, a motion may be made to grant the permission, which motion is undebatable.” Nothing like what is suggested above occurred during last evening’s show. Also please note that the chair may entertain the motion. The word “may” is permissive not mandatory.

And lastly, the so called "vote" on a matter of great importance was manipulated without notice to the public. Duh!

Poor Ms. Donato was duped into her action. It is ironic that some of the best friends she could have in pursuit of good things for this county were right in front of her, sitting in the audience, and she chose to slap them in the face. It is too bad she fell for the nonsense her disreputable colleagues fed her, embarrassing herself as well as those honest and capable folks on the Planning Commission and county staff, who were not participating in this ruse.

Let the Zoning Committee meet their little hearts out, whenever and wherever they want. If you give them enough time, they may even be able to get it right. If I understand correctly, it took three years for them to produce the first floodplain ordinance abortion. If the same monkeys bang on word processors for an infinite amount of time, eventually they will produce another work of fiction to waste more of the county’s time. PCW has already wasted enough time on this silliness. Let the monkeys play with themselves, as it were.

Time to move on to things that matter!

(This is A Guest Blog by An Anonymous Page County Watch Blogger)
If you would like your Guest Blog to show up here, email Research@PageCountyWatch.org OR hit the comments button and say your piece.

FLOOD PLAIN Slime Alert!

2007-05-29T21:59:00.000-04:00

FLOOD PLAIN slime alert!

May 29, 2007

In the most stunning act of slimy manipulative behavior, the Page County Planning Commission brought the proposed flood plain ordinance back to life tonight, and gave it back to the very same subcommittee to do a "revision."

Tonight's agenda made no reference to the flood plain. In fact, only a few minor zoning issues were on the agenda. Page County Watch had five people present, just in case.

It was lucky we were there.

Chairman John Woodward was absent. Commissioner Dot Donato was chairing the meeting. After all business was attended to, Ms. Donato said she had a "point of order". Her point of order was that she wanted to change her vote from April 23, which ended debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance. Then either Newton or DeSerio, I was too blinded by rage to tell which one, made a motion that they should bring the proposed flood plain ordinance back alive, and give it back TO THE SAME PEOPLE, to make revisions. This motion passed.

Here's who voted for it:DeSerio, Newton, Eldridge, Judd, Otto, Donato

Here's who voted against it:Short, Bosley

Since the Board of Supervisors TOOK NO ACTION in the May 15 meeting when we were all there, Attorney George Shanks sanctioned, hopefully only through temporary insanity, this action to bring the Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance back alive and give it back to the same people.

In the Public Comments section, Alice Richmond (me) pointed out that this item was not on the agenda and should not have been brought up with out public notice. Mr. J D Cave also made a public comment, I'm sorry I can't exactly remember what he said, but he was on our side. I think he said something with the word slimy in it.

I was going to use this space to bring up the June 1 "Meet the Republican Candidates" meeting at 7 p.m. at Browns Restaurant. This would be a good place to make sure that John Rust and Gerald Cubbage, who are up for election, know what the public thinks about how the Supervisors and the Planning Commission are acting.

Planning Commissioner Eldridge, who is Chairman of the Committee that wrote this, named a date and a time for the first meeting of the subcommittee, which he said would be no more than 90 minutes long. If citizens would like to know when these subcommittee meetings are held, I would imagine they will have to call the county office and ask. I won't be posting them on the Page County Watch website.

At this time, I will no longer be attending Planning Commission meetings.

Call your lawyers.

Respectfully,
The Page County Watch Blogger, Alice Richmond

Please print this blog and pass it around to all the people you know who don't have Internet.

You can comment here, but why bother? Best to comment here:

Mr. Tommy LaFrance Telephone: 743-3715

The Brenda Merica Story

2007-05-27T06:35:00.000-04:00

Page County Watch wondered what the hullabaloo was with the County Registrar.

Here's the scoop.

The County Registrar is the person who makes sure our elections are set up and run in accordance with the rules. Brenda Merica has been doing this for 24 years. Her job is a salaried job, and she has been chosen and reappointed to this job time and time again, by both Democrats and Republicans. She has it down. She knows the rules. She makes sure they are followed, so our elections can be above reproach. This is a good thing.

But the Registrar's job is a political appointment. She is appointed by the Electoral Board, and the Electoral Board has the right to appoint someone else. They don't need a reason. They don't need to have cause to get someone else. They are elected, and the Registrar is apointed by the elected Board. That's it. It's their choice.

The Electoral Board is currently two Democrats (Nancy Bell Gordon and Juanita Sedwick) and one Republican (Bob Forrest). It's two Democrats because Tim Kaine is governor. If we had a Republican governor it would be two Republicans.

The Electoral Board started advertising for the Registrar's position. They will take applications and make a decision at the end of June. It is their right to do this, even though the current Registrar is doing a good job. I looked it up.

The only public concern would be that the new Registrar be capable of making sure our elections are on the up and up, and we don't run afoul of any state rules in the process. In many counties, there is an unpaid "Assistant" to the Registrar, who learns the ropes so that there will not be a glitch during any transitions. Our county didn't have an Assistant Registrar, so the rules are known inside and outside by only one person. Brenda.

If you think failing to reappoint Brenda Merica to this job is bad for the county, you are the citizens who elected Bob Forrest, Juanita Sedwick, and Nancy Bell Gordon to the Electoral Board. It is their decision, and they have not yet formally made it. They have the control over this. This wasn't done by the "imports", or the Sheriff, or the big bad developers.

If you think it's not right to pull this public servant out of her job of 24 years, and expose the county to potential disruption by mistakes in the election processes, call your elected representatives on the Electoral Board and tell them you as citizens want things done differently.

That's all the blogger has to say about this. What's your opinion? Hit the comments button.

You heard it here first

2007-05-25T10:27:00.000-04:00

Why wait for the Page News when you have Page County Watch?

At last night's Democratic Caucus, Larry Sours was selected as thecandidate to run against John Rust in District 2. Raymond Kite will run against Gerald Cubbage in District 4. There will be no Democratic Candidate in District 3.

The most important thing to me was that both Democratic candidates spoke out strongly against the flood plain issue and for property rights. They were willing to be pinned down about what they think. It was an important issue with the audience that the candidates they run not agree with this rezoning idea where you have to have a minimum of 10 acres to build a house. If it takes 10 acres to build a house, that means that the young people growing up here, basically can't stay. 10 acres costs at least $100,000 to $200,000 just for the land. For the board to pass that says, "go ahead and let our kids move on and move out, we won't have businesses or jobs here for them anyway"

Page County Watch, having members from both parties, can be EVERYWHERE. AND, we can report it faster than the newspaper. On Friday, June 1, there is a "meet the candidates" function for the Republicans at Browns restaurant at 7 p.m. Let's go meet them. And let's be sure we pin them down on what they think and believe about issues in the county. Don't let them get away with vague answers.

What questions would you like the candidates to answer? Post your questions as comments, and Page County Watch will try to set up a debate for all the candidates, somewhere, sometime.

Or, send your tips and information to Research@PageCountyWatch.org

This Week with the Sheriff

2007-05-24T01:30:00.000-04:00

Okay, the rumors are quelled. No, the sheriff did not resign. Nor did his deputy. No, the sheriff's wife did not leave him.

It's an election year, and all is fair in politics, right?

Grand juries are about looking to see if there is anything wrong. They are not a charge that there is anything wrong. Someone can allege things, imply things, throw innuendo, and start a grand jury based on things that are out of context. The grand jury is meant to go look more closely. Like a fishing expedition. The bad part is then rumors get started, and the next thing you know, people start believing the rumors. It is very easy to get people to believe rumors.

Got something to say about this? You can comment anonymously, but please throw in a fact here and there if you do.

Attracting Business? Or Persecuting it?

2007-05-24T01:20:00.000-04:00

On May 21, the Planning Commission work session heard an application by Mr. Jody Salyards about his chip mill. He's got an ongoing business that employs 11 people. It's in Page County. I didn't quite follow this part, but it seems that he is located in the "wrong" place. He doesn't have a commercial entrance and he's in the forest, when our Comprehensive Plan says all businesses should be in the industrial parks. So the trees can live free.

Now, the county, it appears, forced him to shut his business down. He is going through the process and agreeing to move his business. He needs a special use permit so that he can operate while he is carrying out these requirements. That's what it sounded like to me. These are not official minutes, just what I heard as an innocent bystander.

But it will take him nearly 3 months to complete the process to apply, and that means he will be out of business for 3 months. Losing revenue for 3 months.

The Planning Commissioners didn't care that he was losing revenue for this time. They were more concerned about being "right" than about being "fair." It was wrong, apparently, to locate a business in the woods, because woods are protected, but jobs and businesses are not protected. Nobody could see their way to giving him permission to stay in business while they mulled through the process to give him permission to stay in business. Which they apparently intend to do, but only after he loses so much revenue that he may not be able to do so.

That's what I heard.

If I were this guy, I'd move all right. I'd move right out of Page County.

Mr. Salyards deserves our gratitude and respect for putting up with such behavior, and for giving up months of revenue just so that he can be allowed, if he forfeits enough, to bring jobs to Page County. Men like this are the heroes we need.

Planning Commissioners. WHAT are you doing???

Holy Moly, now I get it!

2007-05-17T20:35:00.000-04:00

Alert! Alert! WE can go to the Retreat! Page County Watch has learned that the Retreat is a public meeting! We are allowed to attend!

By George and By Jove . . . we WILL attend! In fact, we will attend with Bells on. And when you see our Bells, you will know what I mean.

So . . . mark your calendars. Page County Watch will post the date, the time, the location, and the directions to get there. And chances are . . . we will know before it's announced in the paper or posted on the website.

Current thinking: it's going to be mid-June, at Skyland, on a weekday, just one day from about 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.

PLAN to be there!

The Ongoing Saga

2007-05-15T23:25:00.000-04:00

I know you're all just dying to hear what happened at the Board of Supervisors meeting tonight.
We had a lot of people there. We had a great showing and a lot of really good speeches and serious citizen comments.

When we were done talking, the Supervisors decided to go on a Retreat, so they could consider what should be done with the Comprehensive Plan. And they didn't like the two options they had with the motion re: the Flood Plain Ordinance. The options were to accept the motion to end debate until there were definitive maps or to reject the motion and send it back to the Planning Commission. So they decided to consider that after they decided what to do about the Comprehensive Plan on their retreat.

I kid you not.

That's what happened.

Push the Comments button and VENT.

Page News Suspect?

2007-05-10T08:08:00.000-04:00

The Page News and Courier

Small town newspaper, comes out once a week. Everybody reads it.The Fourth Estate. That's what we learn in school that the newspapers are. Journalists play a big part in our government. They keep our government honest. They report the FACTS. Yet, here we are, a few months from an election for Sheriff, and the newspaper puts a big front page headline out that says "Sheriff's Office under federal investigation?" Notice the question mark at the end of the headline. When you read the article, it says, the Department of Justice was in Page County collecting information, but no one knows why or what it was about. They also collected information on other things in the county. But no one knows whether the Sheriff's Office is under investigation, or whether some other office is under investigation.

So why would the Page News use a headline that implies it is the Sheriff's Office? News people know that many people just read headlines. Many people will remember only the words in the
headline, and believe that the article said the Sheriff's office WAS under investigation. That's not fair and balanced news reporting, Jamie Turner and Randy Arrington.

Page County Watch has seen this business of implying and impugning in other articles in the Page News. For one thing, Jamie wrote that the Flood Plain Ordinance came about because there was a letter from the state saying the county's existing ordinance was not in compliance. That wasn't true, but Jamie didn't check her facts. When PCW pointed out to her that she had written something untrue, she shrugged it off, as if writing untrue things was unimportant to a journalist. Then, in an article about the Comprehensive Plan, Jamie cherry-picked the audience comments, reporting the glowing and happy statements, without reporting the disgruntlements.

We don't need a small town newspaper with a bias. Local folks need just the facts. Our newspaper isn't supposed to be some type of Happy Hannah, guiding people's thoughts into one track, and putting light on only what the newspaper thinks is right.

If you have comments about this Blog, push the Comments button. Your opinion will show up immediately, without censorship. Page County Watch will delete anything that uses swear words or refers to taking illegal actions. Other than that, we publish whatever you say. You may post anonymously, or sign your name.