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.
Showing posts with label The County's Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The County's Business. Show all posts
Friday, November 9, 2007
Friday, October 26, 2007
The County Line
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
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
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Born at night
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
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
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
The Wheels on the Bus
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Outlanders River Camp
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
And it's "Not in My Backyard"
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.
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.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Boy, am I dumb
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.
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.
Friday, October 5, 2007
What's the Deal?
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
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
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
AND the Zoning Consultant is IN!
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
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
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Full Speed Ahead
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.
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.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Water Quality Meeting
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.
<>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.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Borrow Your Watch?
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.
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.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Land Use Map -- Coming Soon!
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.
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.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
BOS Work Session 4Sep07
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.
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.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Who needs a Fancy Road?
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?
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?
Monday, August 27, 2007
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.
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.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Meeting calendar
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!
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!
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
A Very Long Night
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
