|
Adjourned Meeting
June 27, 2000
6:30 p.m.
Meeting Convened. An Adjourned Meeting of the York County Board of
Supervisors was called to order at 6:33 p.m., Tuesday, June 27, 2000, in
the East Room, York Hall, by Chairman Walter C. Zaremba.
Attendance. The following members of the Board of Supervisors were
present: Walter C. Zaremba, Sheila S. Noll, Donald E. Wiggins, James S.
Burgett, and Melanie L. Rapp.
Also in attendance were Daniel M. Stuck, County Administrator; and
James E. Barnett, County Attorney.
WORK SESSION
PERFORMANCE/EFFICIENCY AUDIT
Chairman Zaremba indicated that ever since Mr. Bowen of IMPAC made
his presentation to the Board, the Board had been wrapped up in many
other matters, and the issue of a performance/efficiency audit has not
been one of the Board's top priorities. He indicated that about a month
ago he received another package of information from Mr. Bowen's
replacement, but noted he had not had time to look at it closely. Mr.
Zaremba suggested that the Board leave this matter tabled for the time
being.
Mr. Burgett stated he would like to see an internal audit done
with the goal of saving a certain percentage of tax dollars. He cited
Charlottesville as an example where internally the city was able to save
the taxpayers money. He stated he felt it would be better than hiring an
outside agent.
Mrs. Noll expressed her agreement with Mr. Burgett's suggestion.
Miss Rapp stated she would be interested in reading the article on
Charlottesville that Mr. Burgett cited, and she agreed with Mr. Zaremba
to leave the issue tabled at this time. She also stated she liked Mr.
Burgett's idea of an internal audit.
Mr. Wiggins stated he felt it was a good idea to conduct an audit
with an outside agency. He indicated he had used an agency to have an
audit done in his business, and it saved him a lot of money.
Mrs. Noll indicated she could readily see where such an audit
would apply well to a manufacturing company, but perhaps not as well for
government. She stated that many times the staff came to the Board
telling about cost savings measures that had been instituted, but the
County staff doesn't blow its own horn often enough. Many times cost
savings measures were taken that the Board was not made aware of-they
were just done.
Chairman Zaremba suggested that staff investigate to see if the
City of Charlottesville had a model on how it conducted its internal
audit.
Mr. Stuck indicated there was a wide variety of programs being
used in many jurisdictions. He noted that the Board many years ago
instituted an organizational program whereby each department conducted
its projects in such a way to save as much as possible, and the Board
would reappropriate those savings back to the departments. There have
been several savings initiatives that have saved the County many dollars
such as the telephone system, going self-insured on Workers Compensation
and with the County's health insurance program. Mr. Stuck indicated
these initiatives were taken, but staff did not catalog them in the
annual report.
Mr. Burgett stated the County needed to let the citizens know how
much the staff was saving them.
Mr. Stuck indicated it was his understanding that the Board wanted
staff to develop some sort of reporting program.
Chairman Zaremba indicated Mr. Stuck was correct, but to also let
the Board know if the request was a burden.
Mr. Stuck stated the staff would apprise the Board of what kinds
of programs were available.
Mrs. Noll asked that staff provide the cost for such programs
also.
UPDATE ON THE WALTRIP DEVELOPMENT AND BORROW PIT
Mr. Stuck briefly reviewed the update on the construction of the
lake on the Waltrip property off of Fenton Mill Road in conjunction with
the building permit obtained for the construction of a 4,300 square foot
single-family residence on a 115-acre parcel.
Discussion followed on the design of the lake.
Chairman Zaremba asked what Mr. Waltrip had done to be a good
neighbor, stating he had infuriated the neighboring community. The
neighbors had put up with a massive movement of dirt, and the only thing
constructed so far was a cinderblock foundation and a hole that was
supposed to be a lake. He asked why the County has allowed him to
continue to do this for no one's benefit except his own, and why the
County should reward him by reducing requirements relative to his
development. He noted that it was the County's desire to see more
efficiency in moving water in that area, and the Board would consider
the requested reductions in requirements; but he would hope that this
Board would keep the citizens in mind when making its decision on this
matter. Very few citizens were aware that it was Mr. Waltrip's intention
to build a subdivision now rather than just a home and a lake. Mr.
Zaremba then spoke of the dump trucks of dirt being removed from the
project, asking if the County had ever monitored where they went. He
stated he would bet there were projects other than the flyover where
this dirt was going.
Mr. Stuck indicated he had received a complaint from one
individual, and staff had been corresponding with the gentleman to keep
him updated. He stated the comments he had received had more to do with
why the trees had been allowed to be taken down which was a call staff
routinely got on each development project. He noted that it was not
uncommon to include a lake in a development for stormwater retention,
and staff felt the lake was better than a 2-acre retention pond. Mr.
Stuck then stated he was not satisfied that Mr. Waltrip had moved along
in good faith on building the house, but it was hard to draft
regulations to cover every instance. The lake was now done, and it was
now time for him to complete the house.
Chairman Zaremba asked how long would Mr. Waltrip be given to
complete the house.
Mr. Stuck indicated he would be given a 60-day window to make
substantial progress on the house, and then the staff would go to court
for an injunction if he had not done so.
Miss Rapp asked Mr. Zaremba how many complaints he had received.
Chairman Zaremba indicated he had received innumerable complaints
concerning the truck traffic and about the health issue regarding the
dust. He noted the noise had been a nuisance to many of the area
residents. He also received a number of calls because people perceived
Mr. Waltrip was trying to get something from the County that he was not
entitled to receive. Mr. Zaremba stated it had been a very frustrating
situation for many citizens, and the County may wish to review some of
its development regulations.
Mr. J. Mark Carter, Assistant to the County Administrator,
indicated staff would be looking at the appropriate size for a lake in
relation to a residence. The current ordinance did not provide a limit.
Mr. Burgett noted that staff couldn't tweak every ordinance just
because somebody found a way to get around it because then the citizens
would have more government than they needed.
FUNDING OF THE ZWEIBRUCKEN STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Mr. Stuck reviewed the briefing document provided to the Board
members concerning accounting for the exchange program.
Chairman Zaremba stated that in terms of the students, the School
Division was where the County's education programs were placed. He asked
why was the County involved in funding the program when it seemed more
rationally related to the School Division. The program should be an
educational experience for which the School Division was responsible.
Mrs. Noll stated she felt any time a child was offered some
experience for growth it was important. She stated she would like to see
German majors in the program or at least French or Spanish majors.
American families have to be willing to house a German student for a
time period which was a part of the exchange criteria. As far as the
program being the responsibility of the School Division or the County,
Mrs. Noll stated a fund should be designated for the program so that it
could not be used as a political tool. She stated she felt the funding
should be left in the County budget with the mechanics of the program
left to the School Division.
Miss Rapp recommended when Board liaison appointments were made
that Chairman Zaremba be the Board's liaison for the program. She noted
that she had talked to Dr. Gant who had given her a lot of background
information on the program's history, and that many people thought it
was a trip only for those who could afford it. She indicated that was
not the case, that students from different financial abilities had been
in the program. Miss Rapp stated she felt the funding for the program
should stay with the Board of Supervisors in that the Historical
Committee was very active in the program.
Chairman Zaremba noted he had been involved in the Zweibrucken
program over the past 5 ½ years, but had never been the Board's liaison
to the program. He stated he was very aware of what the program was, and
he was not challenging the merits of the program. Mr. Zaremba indicated
he felt the School Division could handle programs best for the
educational benefits of the County's students. The majority of the
students who had gone to Germany were those who had been more
economically well off than others, and he felt the School Division would
be much more objective in making the decision about which students
should go to Germany.
Mr. Wiggins stated if nothing changed other than just where the
money came from, he would let the School Division handle it. If the
School Division had the only say regarding student selection, he noted
he would then have a problem.
Discussion followed on the application and selection process for
the student exchange program.
Mr. Burgett stated he would like a foreign language to be a
mandatory part of the criteria.
Mrs. Bonnie Karwac, Chairman of the York County Historical
Committee, indicated that only 15 or 16 students even applied last year.
She stated another factor was that the program was limited to 10th and
11th grade students, and many of them did not want to miss out on summer
jobs or athletics. There were not a large number of students being
excluded from consideration.
Mrs. Noll stated she felt Mrs. Karwac's point was a good one. The
language teachers needed to stress the program to their students, but it
boiled down to whether or not the students wanted to apply.
Chairman Zaremba indicated when an agency took ownership of a
program, it would go out and sell it. He stated he wondered if the vigor
to sell the program was at the same intensity as if it were a school
program.
After more discussion, the Board by consensus agreed to leave the
program with its current structure.
RECOGNITION POLICY FOR ACHIEVEMENTS BY SCHOOL STUDENTS
Mr. Stuck explained the long standing practice of the Board not
being involved in recognizing school students. He noted that the School
Division had an extensive number of recognition events for its students.
Mr. Wiggins stated he did not feel the topic would have been
suggested if the boys high school team had not won the state
championship.
Mr. Stuck indicated the County has had several championship teams
over the past years.
Mrs. Noll suggested that the recognition should be limited to
state championships.
Chairman Zaremba agreed with Mrs. Noll, but stated it should cover
academic excellence as well as sports championships.
By consensus the Board agreed that it would direct the staff to
prepare recognition events on a case-by-case basis as decided by the
Board of Supervisors.
CHANGES TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2002 BUDGET PROCESS
Mr. Stuck reviewed the schedule for next year's budget process and
stated that staff was suggesting the same process for the budget as last
year. The staff was open for suggestions as to any recommended changes
the Board members might have. He spoke of Board involvement in
suggesting new programs or personnel in the budget process.
Mr. Burgett stated he would like to see the budget format go back
to the way it was in FY98. He indicated the new budget book was useless
because it was too general. Everything in the old format was open and
up-front by line item.
Chairman Zaremba indicated the reason he asked for this review was
because he thought the Board members needed to discuss the lessons
learned and weaknesses in the process. He expressed his agreement with
Mr. Burgett in terms of format.
Mrs. Noll stated she felt the budget had improved each year, and
she had not had any feedback from citizens who did not like the new
format. She stated the Board went to the current format because it was
simplified, and it was easy for the citizens to follow.
Mr. Burgett indicated the criticism he had received of last year's
budget was that people did not like it without the numbers. He stated he
just felt it had been simplified too much.
Miss Rapp stated she was impressed that the County considered its
budget early, and she didn't have a problem with the format one way or
the other. She noted that if she had questions, she contacted Mr.
McReynolds or Mrs. Kirish.
Mr. Wiggins stated he liked the way the format was before, but he
understood it the way it was now.
Chairman Zaremba suggested that a comparison be done between the
FY98 and the FY01 budgets to show the Board the pertinent parts of the
two budget documents along with the rationale why staff preferred it one
way or another. He stated if the current document was just fluff for the
Board and not of utility to the staff, it wouldn't be of utility to the
Board either.
Mr. Stuck explained that there had been a work session with the
Board on the current format, and the Board chose this particular format.
He stated at the time he recommended to the Board members that they not
make a change unless they thought it was going to be useful to the
public. The effort by staff was to make it more usable to the average
person, and the document showed more of the policy decisions made by the
Board rather than the accounting decisions. He stated that staff could
certainly go back to the old document, but it would not provide the
Board members with as many years of history and would not contain the
charts and graphs or any explanatory information as to why the
expenditures went up or down. He noted it was much easier for staff to
produce the earlier version, and all the Board needed to do was decide
what it wanted. Mr. Stuck stated that staff could also run the Board
members a copy of the accounting document as well as the budget
document.
Mrs. Noll stated the current document was more user friendly and
reached more levels of understanding.
Mr. Stuck reiterated that staff could provide the Board members
with copies of the accounting document as well. He stated that as an
organization, the County had moved to the level seen in the current
budget document which did not have as many line items as it had at one
time.
Chairman Zaremba indicated he saw no problem with the current
format if the staff would provide a hard copy of the accounting
information.
Mrs. Noll suggested that the accounting information should also be
provided to the libraries and the Information Office so that the
citizens could look at it also.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS-TOURIST CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT (TCM) OVERLAY
DISTRICT
Mr. Stuck reviewed the request to look at potential changes to the
County's design and development requirements for certain corridors in
the Williamsburg area.
Mrs. Noll stated she was not interested in changing the land use
so much, but she felt the County needed to control the landscaping plans
and the aesthetics of the buildings in that zone.
Discussion followed on a proposal for a Ripley's Believe It or Not
Museum in Williamsburg and its not meeting the standards of the city's
architectural review board (ARB). It was noted that the developers did
not try to locate in York County or James City County after being turned
down in Williamsburg.
Mr. Stuck stated the Board would have a hard time denying such a
development because of the ownership if it were a permitted use in a
zoning district. An architectural review board establishes a more
cumbersome process, but it provides an individual architectural review
of each building constructed.
Mrs. Noll stated she was leaning towards the ARB, and she would
like the Board to consider the option on page 3 of the memorandum to
look at amendments to the current TCM requirements to strengthen the
minimal design and architectural standards currently applied to By-pass
Road as well as other TCM designated corridors.
Discussion followed on the current TCM areas.
Chairman Zaremba asked what the Board needed to do to move forward
on this issue.
Mr. Stuck indicated the Board needed to provide staff with an idea
of which option it wished to pursue, and staff would draft a proposal to
be referred to the Planning Commission. He then reviewed the options
provided in the memorandum and the pros and cons of each. He suggested
that the Board might want to consider a combination of the options.
Mr. Wiggins stated he would like an ARB with certain use permit
requirements.
Mrs. Noll indicated the Board needed to be careful about personal
property rights. She stated she felt that aesthetically the ARB was the
way to go.
Mr. Stuck suggested that the Board take a look at the TCM district
and the uses the Board was concerned about and decide which ones the
Board wanted to go in the TCM district. The most stringent option would
be to require an ARB for all uses and a use permit for uses which might
have some special conditions. He stated if the Board was concerned about
the aesthetics of the buildings, then the ARB was the way to go.
Chairman Zaremba asked what if the Board was concerned about what
was in the buildings.
Mr. Stuck indicated the Board would then need to go to the use
permit process depending on what the use was.
Chairman Zaremba asked about the timing for the amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Stuck stated it would take anywhere from four to nine months
depending on the option chosen by the Board. He stated staff was in the
process of going through the entire ordinance to make some amendments
according to the Comprehensive Plan, and was looking at making things
more simple and less costly for everyone involved. The staff work should
be complete by December, and then the Planning Commission would review
it and send it to the Board of Supervisors about April of next year. Mr.
Stuck stated that staff could fold this issue into that process and come
out at about the same time with all the changes.
A brief discussion was held concerning the proposed ARB for
Yorktown.
Mr. Stuck indicated it was his understanding that the Board wished
staff to include suggested changes in the TCM along with the overall
revisions being made to the Zoning Ordinance and that changes be
proposed to existing, currently permitted uses so that some might
require a use permit. He stated he also understood that the Board wished
to propose an architectural review board in the TCM district.
Discussion followed concerning Route 199 and why it was not
designated as TCM.
Mr. Stuck stated if the Board believed the area between the
Colonial Parkway and the Interstate on Route 199 should be in the TCM
district, it might want to designate it as such.
Chairman Zaremba stated he felt the Board needed to relook at it
to see if it needed to be added. He stated it was a very sensitive area.
Mrs. Noll indicated her agreement, stating the Board needed to
remember the Fuel Farm property was there also.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (Not on Agenda)
Mr. Wiggins stated he would like to revisit the proposal
concerning the staffing of the Industrial Development Authority (IDA).
He indicated the Board had spent a lot of time talking about who the
staff of the IDA should report to, and he would like to see the Board
place the staff under Mr. Stuck's control with no changes being made to
the Authority itself. Mr. Wiggins moved that the Board direct the County
Administrator to take necessary steps to move the current staff of the
Industrial Development Authority from an independent staff to become a
part of the County organization under the administrative guidance of the
County Administrator.
Mrs. Noll stated she remained opposed to such a move, and she felt
the Board needed more dialog on the subject. She stated she felt the
Board of Supervisors had made its points quite clear to the IDA and Mr.
Noel at the last work session, and suggested that the issue be revisited
in about six months.
Mr. Burgett indicated he supported moving the IDA staff to the
County Administrator's responsibility.
Miss Rapp asked what type of control would the Board have with the
IDA staff moved to the County Administrator.
Mr. Burgett stated the Board of Supervisors would become better
informed about what was happening in the County regarding economic
development.
Mr. Wiggins stated the County Administrator would tell the Board
what was coming up and receive the Board's input.
Mrs. Noll stated if the recent problem was an isolated incident,
she felt the Board should give the matter more time since the Board
members had talked with the IDA and informed the members and Mr. Noel of
their concerns.
Miss Rapp indicated she did not feel she had enough information on
which to make any kind of decision, and stated she would like to give
the matter more time.
Discussion followed concerning the Board's Rules of Procedure and
whether or not they required unanimous agreement of the Board to vote at
this time on Mr. Wiggins motion.
On roll call on Mr. Wiggins' motion, the vote was:
Yea: (3) Wiggins, Burgett, Zaremba
Nay: (1) Noll
Abstention: (1) Rapp
Mr. Stuck indicated to the Board members that there might be other
actions concerning appropriations that would need to be brought to the
Board regarding the above action.
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CONCERNING PRESIDENTS PARK (Not on Agenda)
Miss Rapp noted the Board had been provided with a copy of a
letter from Colonial Williamsburg to Chairman Zaremba concerning his
request for Colonial Williamsburg's comments regarding the proposed
Presidents Park. She asked when Mr. Zaremba had made his request.
Chairman Zaremba stated he had requested the comments about a week
prior to receiving the response. He stated he felt it was a good idea to
ask others for opinions, and letters are going out to them also. He
stated the whole purpose was to provide the Board all the input it could
get before having to make a decision on the special use permit
application.
Miss Rapp stated she felt the Board should have talked about
making such a request on behalf of the Board instead of one individual
Board member asking for opinions on issues in which the entire Board was
involved.
Chairman Zaremba stated he felt he had the prerogative as Chairman
to make such a request. He stated he felt it was obvious that the Board
would want to have input from the key players of the tourist industry.
Miss Rapp indicated that the request was framed according to the
Chairman's philosophy and not that of the entire Board. She stated she
felt some notification by Mr. Zaremba that he was sending such a request
would have been appreciated.
Mrs. Noll indicated she did not remember ever asking for outside
opinions such as Mr. Zaremba's request, and the letter also took her by
surprise.
CLOSED MEETING. At 8:48 p.m. Mr. Burgett moved that the Board convene in
Closed Meeting pursuant to Section 2.1-344(a)(5) of the Code of Virginia
to discuss a prospective business or industry, or expansion of an
existing business or industry, where no previous announcement has been
made; and Section 2.1-344(a)(7) for consultation with legal counsel.
On roll call the vote was:
Yea: (5) Wiggins, Burgett, Rapp, Noll, Zaremba
Nay: (0)
Meeting Reconvened. At 9:25 p.m. the meeting was reconvened in open
session by order of the Chair.
Mrs. Noll moved the adoption of proposed Resolution SR-1 that
reads:
A RESOLUTION TO CERTIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACT REGARDING MEETING IN CLOSED SESSION
WHEREAS, the York County Board of Supervisors has convened a
closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and
in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the York County Board of Supervisors that such closed
meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the York County Board of
Supervisors this the 27th day of June, 2000, hereby certifies that, to
the best of each member's knowledge, (1) only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were
discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution
applies, and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in
the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or
considered by the York County Board of Supervisors.
On roll call the vote was:
Yea: (5) Burgett, Rapp, Noll, Wiggins, Zaremba
Nay: (0)
PRESIDENTS PARK (Not on Agenda)
At this time the Board reviewed the questions for the proposed
survey regarding the Presidents Park project, as well as the filing of
the appeal for the Presidents Park case. By consensus the Board agreed
that it would not hold a hearing on the special use permit application
until the court had entered its ruling.
Meeting Adjourned. At 9:55 p.m. Chairman Zaremba declared the meeting
adjourned sine die.
______________________________
__________________________________
Daniel M. Stuck,
Clerk
Walter C. Zaremba, Chairman
York County Board of
Supervisors
York County Board of Supervisors
Back to Index
|
