Loading...
May 22, 2002 Regular Meeting 027 A Regular Meeting ofthe Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on May 22,2002, at 7:15 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Vice Chairman W. Harrington Smith, Jr.; Robert M. Sager; Margaret B. Douglas; Sidney A. Reyes; Gina A. Forrester; and Lynda J. Tyler. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION The invocation was delivered by Reverend Robert Stainback ofthe Congregational Christian Fellowship Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADOPTION OF AGENDA County Administrator Riley advised that Tab E (Preservation of Historic Winchester's Award to Frederick County for Commitment to Preserve and Renovate the Old Frederick County Courthouse) be deferred until the June meeting at the request of Supervisor Tyler. Tab F (Resolution to Vacate a Plat and Convey All Rights as to "Park" The Meadows Subdivision - Resolution to Vacate a Plat and a Designation Thereon as "Park") be deferred as the county attorney was not provided any of the information, nor was staff by attorney V ondy; therefore, he has not had the opportunity to review same. Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Reyes, the agenda was adopted, as amended, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye CONSENT AGENDA Administrator Riley suggested that Tab P (Road Resolution - Canter Estates, Section I, II, and IV) be approved under consent agenda. Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the consent Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22102 02 agenda was approved, as presented, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye CITIZEN COMMENT Chairman Shickle asked that anyone wishing to speak to Tab K (Water and Sewer Facilities Plan for the Northeastern Sewer and Water Service Area) wait until it is presented to the Board later in the meeting. He realizes this is not a public hearing item; however, he feels any comments relating to this issue should be heard at that time. Kevin Kennedy, Gainesboro District, commented on three issues from the Board meeting of two weeks ago. A former supervisor referred to our Board as a joke, this was done apparently because of view points other than his own are being represented in county government. Different view points are healthy and long over due. Obviously the citizens approve. Congratulated the Board for opening up local government to all the people. He voiced his opinion in favor of Supervisor Reyes especially since there have been a few individuals that have seen fit to attack him. He addressed the Planning Commission and some of the members with reference to their handling of the Route 37 issue. He asked ifMr. Light should not be censored and removed from the Planning Commission in light of his handling ofthis situation with regard to Supervisor Reyes. He addressed the situation with Supervisor Reyes and his use of County stationary and the way Chairman Shickle handled this at the last Board meeting. He felt an apology from Chairman Shickle was in line based on his earlier line of questions concerning this issue. He asked for endorsement of the battlefield funding. Doug Dolan, Red Bud District, does not agree with Mr. Kennedy's comments. He feels a number of citizens are present because they are concerned about the actions of the Board, and not the Board as a whole, won't cover the Board with that brush. He expressed his concern over his Board representative Gina Forrester and what she did after a session of the Sanitation Authority. Where it is alleged that she left the meeting and fabricated a story to support a moratorium on water and sewer hook ups. It was stated that this was positively not true. It would appear that she painted a picture to suit her view, to work her agenda, to stop growth in Frederick County. She is not a slow Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 029 growth candidate, she is not what she promised to be when she ran for the office. He advised Mrs. Tyler and Mrs. Forrester than neither one of them had a mandate, there were only double digits that separated each of you from the other candidate. He felt a number of citizens were present because they feel the Board's agenda is being worked on a hidden agenda. Mrs. Forrester for you to fabricate something like that speaks to your integrity, and if we can't rely on your integrity to bring something to Mr. Riley about how this county is going to grow, then he feels she should resign. If she does not want to resign from the Board then at least resign from the Sanitation Authority. If she will not do that than he would ask Chairman Shickle to have her removed. Bill Shepherd, Gainesboro District, complemented Supervisor Reyes for his remarkable control and refusing to seek to the level of his detractors. He feels the Planning Commission members were wrong in their actions with sending the letter to VDOT concerning Route 37. He feels Supervisor Reyes may not have gone far enough and that these Planning Commissioners received more criticism than they got. He addressed the support received for this issue by the Winchester Star. He warned Supervisors Tyler, Forrester and Smith that this same attack chorus has them in their sites and has already fired a few warning shots. Their votes against Route 37 will never be forgiven. James Still well, Stonewall District, addressed the Northeast Land Use Plan and the fact that he feels due to the various amendments since 2000, he feels it needs to be sent back for review and modification. Land Use Plan needs to be updated before proceeding with this plan. He listed several reasons for this. Pam Kennedy, Gainesboro District, the world needs people who cannot be bought, whose word is their bond. Asked if the County's infrastructure able and willing to deal with the changes ofthe twenty first century? Time given to planning and thought is time well spent. Fred Vondy, Back Creek District, attorney representing the Meadows issue, that has been withdrawn, appeared before the Board advising that he would get the necessary papers to Attorney Ambrogi tomorrow and at the same time thanked the Board for what they are doing, and also thanked them for all their support of the Northwestern Community Services Board as he serves on this Board. Bill Rosen berry, Shawnee District representative to the Planning Commission. Thanked Sid for his service on the Planning Commission, and asked Gina not to resign as liaison to the Sanitation Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 030 Authority. Catherine Whitesell, Back Creek District, she commended the County for their renovation of the Frederick County Courthouse. She is on the Board of Preservation of Historic Winchester, and hopefully next year she will be commending the Board for their preservation of the Stephenson Depot Battlefield. She referred to a petition of over 3700 residents that would like to see it preserved. There is a lot of concern over this battlefield, water and sewer and on the battlefield as well as development. She went back in time to September 27, 2000 Board meeting where she was in attendance and she witnessed the vote of this Board, the vote on the update ofthe Comprehensive Plan for the Northeast Land Use Plan. The vote on that Plan was for a proposed sewer and water service area. There has been no other vote, so she would hope that we all realize in this public meeting that there has been no Board action on that. That there is no policy established for the Northeast Land Use Plan, the sewer and water service. She would like for Mr. Ambrogi or anyone else to challenge that tonight. She witnessed it and it goes on record. Chairman Shickle asked Mr. Ambrogi if the Northeast Land Use Plan was approved? Attorney Ambrogi replied yes it was, definitely. Charles Orndoff, Sr., Stonewall District, addressed the funds that are being proposed for the preservation of battlefields at tonight's meeting and he is opposed to this. He feels that cuts were made in various budgets for this year, and given the area of these cuts, he does not feel tax payer dollars in the amount of $750 should be spent to fund this preservation. He referred to the land proffered by Shockey, thirty-two acres, for the preservation ofthe battlefield, and had his rezoning request been approved, there would have been an additional forty acres that would have been donated for a total of seventy-two toward the preservation of this battlefield that would have been of no cost to the county. He addressed the remarks made earlier with regard to Supervisor Reyes and his handling of the issue dealing with certain members of the Planning Commission and their letter to VDOT with regard to their thoughts about the Board vote on Route 37. He addressed the issue of the Closed Session held on June 13,2001 and its outcome, which he feels had a direct affect on the outcome of the election held in November 2001. Bob Wells, Shawnee District, addressed the 250,000 expenditure proposed for 2003 for the preservation of battle fields. He does not feel the monies are there for the county to be making this type of expenditure. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meetiug of OS/22/02 031 Bill Dailey, Back Creek District, he feels this is an unbeatable good deal. He feels the monies being requested for the battlefield preservation, along with the matching funds, is an unbeatable good deal and asked the Board to approve this request. MINUTES Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Douglas, the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April I 0, 2002 were approved, as presented, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda 1. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye COUNTY OFFICIALS PEGGY MARTIN APPOINTED TO SHAWNEELAND SANITARY DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Upon motion made by Supervisor Douglas, seconded by Supervisor Sager, Peggy Martin was appointed to the Sanitary District Advisory Committee. This is a three-year appointment. This term will begin on July 1,2002 and expire on June 30, 2005. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye VIRGINIA B. MCCLURE REAPPOINTED TO HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD FROM SHAWNEE DISTRICT Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Reyes, Virginia B. McClure was reappointed to the Historic Resources Advisory Board. This is a four-year term. The term will begin May 22, 2002 and expire on May 22, 2006. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22102 032 CHARLES W. WILMOT. JR. REAPPOINTED TO THE WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Reyes, Charles W. Wilmot, Jr., was reappointed to the Winchester Regional Airport Authority for a four-year term. This term will begin on July 1, 2002 and expire on June 30, 2006. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda 1. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye KITTY NICHOLAS AND PAT EMBRY REAPPOINTED TO WINCHESTER- FREDERICK COUNTY TOURISM BOARD Upon motion made by Supervisor Sager, seconded by Supervisor Smith, Kitty Nicholas and Pat Embry were reappointed to the Winchester Frederick County Tourism Board. These appointments are for three years. This term will begin on June 30, 2002 and expire on June 30, 2005. These appointments are with like approval from the City. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye REOUEST FROM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEPARTMENTAL TRANSFER OF FUNDS - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised he is making the following request for transfer of funds: Transfer from Fund 10-1101-1006-000, Compensation of Committee Members - $3300. Transfer to 101101-3002-000 - Professional Services - $1300 Transfer to 10-11014-3007-000 - Advertising - $2000 Appropriation of $81 0 to line item 10-1101-8002-000 - Furniture and Fixtures to cover cost of fax machines purchased for Board members. This amount was received from V ACorp for a property claim filed for a damaged fax machine. Upon motion made by Supervisor Sager, seconded by Supervisor Douglas, the above request was approved, as presented, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 033 W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye REOUEST FROM TOWN OF MIDDLETOWN FOR SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION (#044-02) FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW NATIONAL PARK - APPROVED Administrator Riley presented the following resolution: WHEREAS, like much of the Shenandoah Valley, Frederick County is rich in significant historic sites including Belle Grove Plantation and Cedar Creek Battlefield; and WHEREAS, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Management Plan recommends, the National Park Service "collaborate with partners to establish a new National Park at Cedar Creek Battlefield"; and WHEREAS, the establishment of a unit of the National Park Service at Cedar Creek Battlefield would generate significant interest and visitation resulting in a beneficial economic return to the residents of Frederick County and the Shenandoah Valley through heritage tourism. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby support the establishment of a unit of the National Park Service at Cedar Creek Battlefield; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby request Senator Warner and Congressman W olfto introduce the necessary legislation within their respective legislative bodies so as to establish a new Park Service Unit at Cedar Creek. ADOPTED this 22nd day of May 2002. Upon motion made by Supervisor Douglas, seconded by Supervisor Smith, the above resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shick1e - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC WINCHESTER'S AWARD TO FREDERICK COUNTY FOR COMMITMENT TO PRESERVE AND RENOVATE THE OLD FREDERICK COUNTY COURTHOUSE - DEFERRED UNTIL JUNE MEETING PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION (#045-02) TO VACATE A PLAT AND CONVEY ALL RIGHTS AS TO "PARK" THE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION TO VACATE A PLAT AND A DESIGNATION THEREON AS "PARK". PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY ON THE DEED OF DEDICATION AND DECLARATION OF PLAT OF THE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION DATED MAY 11. 1970 IN THE OPEOUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. FREDERICK COUNTY. VIRGINIA. CONTAINING 72.393 SQUARE FEET. SAID "PARK" IS FURTHER IDENTIFIED ON SAID DEED OF Minute Book Number 28 Board of Snpervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 03 DEDICATION AND DECLARATION OF PLAT WHICH IS FOUND AND RECORDED IN THE LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY IN DEED BOOK 363 AT PAGE 658 - DEFERRED INDEFINITELY PUBLIC HEARING - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE. CHAPTER 155. TAXATION. ARTICLE XVII. MEALS TAX: SECTION 155- 116. TAX IMPOSED: TO AMEND THE MEALS TAX IMPOSED FROM TWO PERCENT (2%) TO FOUR PERCENT (4%). THIS AMENDMENT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET THAT WAS ADOPTED ON APRIL 10.2002 - APPROVED Administrator Riley presented this ordinance amendment to the Board advising that the income would be approximately $1 million. There was no public comment. Upon motion made by Supervisor Sager, seconded by Supervisor Douglas, the following ordinance amendment was approved by the following recorded vote: BE IT ORDAINED, that Chapter 155, Taxation, Article XVII, Meals Tax, by the amendment of Section 155-116, Tax Imposed, to read as follows: ~155-116. Tax imposed. In addition to all other taxes and fees of any kind now or hereafter imposed by law, there is hereby levied and imposed on the purchaser of every meal served, sold or delivered in the county by a restaurant or caterer a tax equivalent to t~(') l''''''''lIt (2'Yo)four percent (4%)ofthe amount paid for the meal. There shall be no tax ifthe total amount paid is less than fifty cents ($0.50); on larger amounts, a fractional cent of tax due shall be rounded to the next higher cent. This amendment shall become effective July 1,2002. Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye PUBLIC HEARING - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE. CHAPTER 158. VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC. ARTICLE III. COUNTY VEHICLE LICENSES: SECTION 158-9 FEES: TO AMEND THE LICENSE FEE ON MOTOR VEHICLES FROM FIFTEEN DOLLARS ($15.00) TO TWENTY DOLLARS ($20.00). AND THE LICENSE FEE ON MOTORVEIUCLES FROM <"'1C\9 FIVE DOLLARS ($5.00) TO TEN DOLLARS ($10.00). THIS AMENDMENT IS IN ~ ACCORDANCE WITH THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET THAT WAS ADOPTED ON APRIL 10. 2002 - APPROVED Administrator Riley presented this amendment request to the Board. Supervisor Smith inquired how much this would bring in. Administrator Riley advised approximately $300,000 per year. Supervisor's Sager and Reyes endorsed this and felt it was being used in a very worth while Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 0:35 area ofthe budget, in that it would be going to the volunteer firemen. Upon motion made by Supervisor Sager, seconded by Supervisor Reyes, the following ordinance amendment was approved by the following recorded vote: BE IT ORDAINED, that Chapter 156, Vehicles and Traffic, Article III, Vehicle Licenses, by the amendment of Section 158-9, Fees, to read as follows: ~158-9. Fees. There is hereby levied and assessed a license tax, fee or charge on all such motor vehicles required to be licensed in the county in the amount of fift(,cn ($15.) twenty ($20.) dollars, except motorcycles, for which the license tax, fee or charge is Gve ($5.) ten ($10.), and further except that such license tax, fee or charge shall in no event be greater than the amount of the license tax, fee or charge by the commonwealth on such motor vehicles. This amendment shall become effective July 1,2002. Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENT RESOLUTION (#046- 02) - THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 15.2. CHAPTER 25. SECTION 15.2-2507. OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA. 1950 AS AMENDED - APPROVED Administrator Riley presented this request advising this is for consideration of a proposed budget amendmentto fiscal year 2002 and 2003. The request is for $250,000 funding for unreserved fund balance to fund the grant application through the Federal Government for matching funds in the amount of$250,000. He advised there was support documentation within the agenda presented by Mr. Kittell to the Finance Committee. He further advised that there is also a request from Lord Fairfax Community College with reference to a science laboratory building and site work in the amount of $437,500. This request has been in the county budget since 1997 and has been conditioned on state appropriations from the Virginia General Assembly. The appropriation was not known to the county until after the adoption of its budget; therefore, the reason for this being back before the Board. He advised these requests can be considered individually. Supervisor Sager requested to have the two issues addressed separately. Howard Kittell, Executive Director of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation, appeared before the Board at which time he thanked them for their consideration of this funding. Jim Giraytys, Back Creek District, felt both requests were an investment in the future and Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of 05/22/02 03 he felt both should be approved. Suzanne Lewis, Executive Director ofthe Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation, offered her board's support ofthis budget amendment. Funding would only apply to new battlefield acquisitions as it is currently stated; therefore, they would request that the current language be amended that would include Cedar Creek and Kemstown Battlefield, equal and eligible partners in this funding process. Bob Wells, Shawnee District, reiterated what he had said earlier. He feels there is a big difference between cutting the defense budget and a battlefield budget. The school board budget was cut, yet we talk about the future of our young people. Firefighters and policemen were discussed, yet we raise our decal tax. You as the Board have to face these people and you will be the ones that have to say, I couldn't spend the money on you there, and I couldn't spend the money on your schools. Nevertheless, I can spend the money to preserve a battlefield, tough decision. Doug Dolan, Red Bud District, referred to the 2020 committee that he served on from 1993 to 1995 and their endorsement of certain battlefields within Frederick County. He would support this funding. Catherine Whitesell, Back Creek District, open land preservation, whether it is battlefields, farmland, more than pays for itself. She addressed the cost involved for those acres that are not preserved and developed instead. The cost involved in building new schools, feels this is a wonderful opportunity for the county to get a million dollars plus, now is the right time. Dr. Marilyn Beck, Opequon District, and President of Lord Fairfax Community College, thanked the Board for their continued support of the community college. The county's investment in this site development for this building will insure a very large state investment in post secondary education for the citizens of this community. She feels the Board will be just as proud as they are on their investment. Wendy O'Sullivan, National Park Service, thanked the Board for the approval of the resolution of support as she feels this is a very important step toward potential legislation for the National Park. She feels the opportunity for the Board is now and the time is right to move forward on this partnership and approve the funding for the battlefield preservation. Larry Duncan, President of the Kemstown Battlefield Association, feels this is a good opportunity for the Board. He feels the $llmillion pool of National Park Service Funds does create Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 37 a unique opportunity that Frederick County and one its preservation partners should capitalize on. He supports the budget amendments, for with these funds and those of other partners, Frederick County's investment can be multiplied three, four or even five times. The Frederick County Board will have the ultimate decision about when, where, and for whose benefit these funds are expended. Kenny Stiles, Stonewall District, asked if the actual expenditure of these funds were conditioned on obtaining matching grants? Administrator Riley replied that he felt it was, as the county is the last one in as far as the funding commitment sources, as all the other funding sources have to be there first. The county's funding is conditioned upon the grant being approved. Mr. Stiles doesn't oppose preservation of battlefields as he has supported them over the years, both publicly and personally over the years. He would remind the Board that it is a difficult time, as the Board tonight raised two different taxes in Frederick County, car tax, and meals tax. You have significantly reduced funding for Fire and Rescue as well as the schools. It's a question of timing and priorities. He thought he had read this does not include Cedar Creek or Kemstown, and if this is the case, that the county does everything to see that they are eligible to receive the funding, as these are the people who have made a commitment on their own to do the job, and have done this very successfully and are deserving of additional support. Kevin Kennedy, Gainesboro District, supported the funding of both the battlefield and Lord Fairfax Community College. Pam Kennedy, Gainesboro District, endorsed this funding for both proj ects, feels it is a good investment, and it would be good for supporting tourism in Frederick County. The timing is good, and the timing is now. Chairman Shickle asked ifthe two amendments could be done together or does each budget year have to be done separate. Administrator Riley advised they could be done together. Chairman Shickle advised that his question related to other folks, doable or not. Howard Kittell, absolutely thinks that those partners that have stepped forward to help preserve battlefields, but there should be more partners. Chairman Shickle asked how this would be done. Howard Kittell advised that the proposal called for three principal partners, Civil War Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 038 Preservation Trust, Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation and the county. There are a number of organizations within the county that should be involved with this. Mr. Kittell stated that he felt comfortable in speaking for both groups concerning this. Chairman Shickle asked ifit could be $250,000 or could it be a lesser amount. Mr. KitteIl, the proposal was for $250,000 and the other two groups, particularly the Civil War Preservation Trust and the Battlefields Foundation, would both pledge up to that amount. This was a ceiling amount. Supervisor Smith stated that Frederick County would be the last one in and the first one out. He asked Mr. KitteIl to explain this. Mr. KitteIl as a potential acquisition was found, all the partners would have to agree to purchase a certain piece of property. Supervisor Smith asked if any of this money would be available for Kernstown? Mr. KitteIl advised that he felt it should be. Larry Duncan advised with Kernstown being the number one battlefield priority it does have access to the same land and water conservation funds similar to the other partners that are in that first proposal that is currently before the Board. Mr. Duncan advised Supervisor Smith that they would probably ask for a quarter oftheir remaining debt, which is $105,000. Supervisor Smith advised that due to the Board's approval, Mr. Duncan will need to go to the county finance committee, and the Board would go from there. Chairman Shickle advised that we need to stay on target with what is currently before the Board. Supervisor Sager asked for clarification. The county's 3/4's of a million doIlars would be matched by your 3/4's, doIlar for dollar, is that correct? Mr. KitteIl - At least doIlar for dollar. It wiIl be 3/4's of a million over three years. Supervisor Sager - I thought it was two years. Mr. KitteIl - That would be Y2 million doIlars. The proposal is that the county's money would be matched by partners who would be raising at least a commensurate, if not several times over, amount of funds. Supervisor Sager - Are you saying, we might triple our money. Mr. KitteIl - That is correct. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 039 Chairman Shickle - The partners, originally all put in equal amounts of money. He questioned those that spoke whether they would be interested in contributing funds to a battlefield other than their own. He is not sure partnership is the right term. Mr. Kittell - you wouldn't necessarily have to have every single partner in on every deal; however, every partner has to come to the table with some matching funds. Supervisor Smith stated that in the very beginning his understanding was that these funds could not be used for debt, it could only be used to purchase land. Mr. Kittell explained that Federal Funds are available to help payoff debt. Supervisor Smith asked for an explanation of "last in - first out." Mr. Kittell explained there would be a number of partners involved in helping to purchase battlefield land. If the county appropriated an amount of pool money up to a ceiling with the suggested amount being 1/4 million dollars a year, then as various partners found land to purchase the county and the partners would sit down and agree that yes, that was a piece of land to be purchased or protected. Certain partners would then pursue securing Federal Funds through the National Park Service for battlefield protection. The statement ofthe county being the "last in and the first out" is a safety measure. Assistant County Administrator Tierney explained the way this was originally conceived was that Federal money was available to match funds to buy battlefields. One of the pots of money that is available to Frederick County is that Federal money. What is being proposed by the Battlefield Foundation and the Civil War Trust originally was that they would also match whatever money the county put toward battlefield preservation. At that point you had Frederick County money, Federal money and two private non-profits, these were your originally potential pots of money to go toward battlefield purchases all on an equal basis. You now have a situation where there are entities within the county that would like to play the game as well. The county is considering putting up a 1/4 of a million dollars in two fiscal years and that money would be earmarked for battlefield preservation. Whatever combination of partners then comes to the county and says, hey, we have this parcel ofland we want to try and purchase it, we have our piece of the money, if you will kick in yours, the foundation will kick in theirs, the trust maybe. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that the county does not have to payout any money until someone approaches the county with a deal that we feel will work. The bottom line is that the county money will get matched Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 04 at least three folds. Supervisor Sager asked when these funds would be available. Mr. Kittell- Federal Funds are available for three fiscal years, 02,03, and 04. We have about 28 months left. Supervisor Sager asked if the City of Winchester had been contacted with reference to this preservation, and whether there was any commitment on their part. Mr. Kittell advised that there have been some informal conversations, there has been no formal action presented to the city. Larry Duncan advised about ten years ago the city and county did go together in the initial purchase contract of the Grim Farm. Supervisor Smith asked ifthere has been a guarantee from the Federal Government that this money will be forthcoming. Mr. Kittell advised in each case an application has to be made. Supervisor Sager asked if the Board approves this money, would it be held in an escrow account? Administrator Riley replied that was correct, it would be designated for the specific purpose of acquisition of battlefields. Supervisor Sager stated that he has voted in favor of every request for the history of civil war here in Frederick County. He is very much concerned that during this budget session the county could not fund the career firefighters the way he felt they should be funded, we shorted the Sheriff s Department vehicles, no new school buses were funded and did not meet the teachers' requirements. Requests from Parks and Recreation were not met and he has just learned that the funds are not available for funding the necessary phone equipment for the Social Services Department when they move to the third floor of the County Administration Building. Which do you take care of first, do you do your housekeeping first and go out and purchase later? Supervisor Reyes moved to adopt the proposed fiscal year amendment for the $250,000 for fiscal year 2002 battlefield fund. Supervisor Forrester seconded the motion. Supervisor Douglas, stated that she would agree that we need to preserve everything that we can for the civil war battlefields; however, she feels this is not the time. Supervisor Forrester asked how much was in the reserve fund. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 '041 Administrator Riley replied $10 million. Supervisor Forrester advised that she felt the time was now if the county is going to be serious about tourism in Frederick County. She believes it is economic development, but she feels there is a difference in the mind set as to what the county is looking toward for the future of the community and how the county sees itself in the terms of economic development. Tourism is a huge revenue generator for the State of Virginia. Chairman Shickle advised that the $250,000 exceeds his comfort level, would have been more comfortable in the $100,000 range. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, meeting in regular session and public hearing held on May 22, 2002, took the following action: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors that the FY 2002 and 2003 Budget be Amended to Reflect: Proposed FY 02 Amendment Expenditures: Battlefield Funds $250,000 Revenue: Non-revenue: Funding from Unreserved Fund Balance $250,000 Upon motion made by Sidney A. Reyes and seconded by Gina A. Forrester, the above amount of $250,000 was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Nay W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Nay Margaret B. Douglas - Nay Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye Proposed FY 03 Amendment Expenditures: Battlefield Funds $250,000 Upon motion made by W. Harrington Smith, Jr. and seconded by Sidney A. Reyes, the above amount of $250,000 was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Nay W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 042 Margaret B. Douglas - Nay Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye Lord Fairfax Community College Science Laboratory Building Sitework $437.500 $687,500 Revenue: Non-revenue: Funding from Unreserved Fund Balance $687,500 Upon motion made by Robert M. Sager and seconded by W. Harrington Smith, Jr., the above amount of$437,500 was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye ADOPTED this 22nd day of May 2002. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE: CHAPTER 144. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: ARTICLE IV. SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCEDURES: SECTION 144-9. GENERAL PROCEDURE: AND SECTION 144-12. SUBDIVISION DESIGN PLAN. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 144. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: ARTICLE VI. PLAN REOUIREMENTS: SECTION 144-36. SUBDIVISION DESIGN PLANS. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 165. ARTICLE XIX: SECTION 165-144. ACTIVITIES REOUIRlNG SITE PLANS: AND SECTION 165-145. SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS. REVIEW: AND SECTION 165-146. SITE PLAN CONTENTS. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WERE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION DESIGN PLAN REVIEW PROCESS - APPROVED Planner II Jeremy Camp presented this plan to the Board advising that the draft amendments concern modifications to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances pertaining to site plan and subdivision design plan requirements. Staff originally proposed these amendment changes to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) in August of 2001. After a few months of discussion, the DRRS unanimously recommended support of the draft amendments at their October 2001 meeting. He further advised that the Planning Commission at their meeting on Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 043 April 17 also endorsed the amendments. (THE AMENDED CHANGES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELQPMENT). There was no public comment. Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the above ordinance amendment was approved, as presented, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye OTHER PLANNING ITEMS REQUEST FOR WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES PLAN FQR THE NORTHEASTERN SEWER AND WATER SERVICE AREA - DENIED Planning Director Eric Lawrence advised that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has submitted to the county a master plan for water and sewer facilities for the Route 11 North Service Area. This master plan provides the general location ofthe proposed water transmission mains and the sewer force mains that will facilitate utility services in the northeast portion of the county. The Code of Virginia (Section 15.2-2232) requires that the public utility facility be substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan; therefore, the proposed facility master plan is being presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors for review and determination of its conformance with the county's 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan. He further advised that the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on September 27,2000. The Sewer and Water Facility Plan illustrates the County's Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). This Sewer and Water Service Area establishes the limits for service ofthe water and sewer public service utility. He further advised that the Board is being asked to determine whether the Sanitation Authority's proposed master plan for the Route II North Service Area is substantially in accord with the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan. Engineer-Director Wellington Jones appeared before the Board at which time he advised the Board that the Authority is proposing a water line from their existing service area in the Stonewall Industrial Park to Clearbrook. This is a 20-inch water transmission main that will parallel the Winchester and Western Railway. Along with that is a sewer forced main that will start at the Red Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 044 Bud Pump Station, in the Fort Collier Industrial Park, and parallel the water transmission main to Clearbrook. He has tried, as best he can, to locate the lines to avoid the area designated along Milburn Road which is that of a historic area. They also proposed to extend water and sewer to the Rest Interchange, on Interstate 81, and will do that by extending a 12-inch water line from Clearbrook parallel Route II to Rest and also extending a sewer forced main from Clearbrook to Rest. The projects will also support the VDOT expansion ofthe rest area of which they are putting up a million dollars. The Authority feels the lines are adequately sized to provide the capacity that will be demanded ofthis area and they do not see any problems with the capacity. The transmission main is sized to take the full capacity of the Northern Water Treatment Plant that is under construction at Clearbrook at this time, and is necessary in order for that plant to achieve its full production. Supervisor Reyes asked how this would affect Stonewall Elementary School. Director Jones advised this would allow central sewerage service to the school, and in turn eliminate the current pump and haul operation at the school, as well as the Parks and Recreation Pool at Clearbrook Park. The following citizens appeared before the Board with their comments: Dr. Raymond Fish, Gainesboro District, feels it is imperative that this sewer project go forward. The problem at Stonewall School would be resolved and the $1700 a month, or better than $20,000 per year, that is being spent for the pumping and hauling of this sewage, would be eliminated. Many failing on site sewage systems in Stephenson, Brucetown and Clearbrook area would also be eliminated, and this would give reliefto the swimming pool at Clearbrook Park where county tax dollars are also being spent to pump sewage. This would also provide a solution to the problem at Flying 1. John Good, Stonewall District, advised that the questions the Board is being asked to address this evening is to determine whether the Sanitation Authority's proposed master plan for the Route II North Service Area is substantially in accord with the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is in accord with that Plan which says the following: 1. Residential land use should only occur in conjunction with public water and sewer servIce. 2. Under the policy section of the plan, insure the public water and sewer service accompanies future development proposals. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 045 3. Under an infrastructure - determine appropriate types of water and sewer systems to serve existing and proposed land uses. It is known that public systems are more appropriate for the area than the private systems. As stated by a member of the PlamIing Commission, approval of this plan helps to avoid future Flying J type systems that no body likes. He further stated that the basic plans submitted by the Authority are not new. Similar versions have been floating around for years including the 1997 report of the Route 11 North Sewer Organizing Committee which the Sanitation Authority approved at that time, and the Comprehensive Plan of something like 1996-97 vintage also included the water and sewer service in all those areas. He does represent a proposal that has some low density residential proposed for some of this area and this is not the cheapest way to go, but it is certainly the right way to go for the environment. He urged the Board to support it. Pat Gallagher, Stonewall District, addressed the two meetings held in January of2000 by Evan Wyatt at the Stonewall Elementary School to gather citizen input for the Northeast Land Use Study. He attended the first of the two meetings and it was made extremely clear, by most of the citizens, that the major concern was a "no growth - slow growth agenda," and in less than 10 months later we were fighting Shockey's Industrial Park. What about the "no growth - slow growth,"why did staff not understand. He is concerned about all the industrial development that is proposed in his district, how much industrial land does this county need when there is already 1260 acres of industrial land that is vacant and some rail access. The historical areas of Stephenson should have been included in the Comprehensive Plan, but was not. The drought, along with the fact that Frederick County relies mostly on ground water for its sole source of water, should raise concems about extending the sewer and water service further into Stonewall District. He asked that this request be denied. Suellen Knowles, Vice President of Business Advocacy for the Winchester-Frederick County Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Knowles read a prepared statement from Chamber President Charles Weiss who was unable to be present at this meeting. His message to the Board was the endorsement of this plan. David Darsie, Stonewall District, feels a person should learn from past mistakes. He feels the Board is about to repeat a past business mistake. He advised that county citizens were told in the early 1990's that the Stephens City quarries were a reliable water source for Frederick County. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 046 Acting on supposedly good science, Frederick County built the Diehl Water Plant with an operating capacity of five million gallons of water per day. The current Sanitation Authority Five Year Plan says the sustained yield is 3.2 million gallons. The reliable yield is 4.9 million gallons per day, but what is this plant actually doing. One million gallons per day for the first four months of this year. The past month 750 gallons of water came out ofthe Stephens City Quarries. This from a plant with a five million gallons per day capacity. We are talking about a 20% operating capacity. The sustained and reliable yields quoted in SAIC Hydro logic evaluations are at best a bad joke, and at their worst they are a fraud. Show us the water, one million gallons a day for four months, 750 this last month. This was fool me once, shame on you Frederick County Sanitation Authority and its experts, SAIC, Science Application International Corporation. Now we have the Clearbrook Northern Water Plant operating capacity four million gallons per day moving up to six million gallons per day, sounds excellent. Reliable yield of quarry and surrounding springs that have been studied 3.75 million gallons per day, roughly 80% of Stephens City. The same organization Science Application is providing the science for these estimates. Will these numbers ever be achieved, if you look at our own history in Stephens City you have to - - - - - -. George Sempeles, Stonewall District, advised that the Board would make a decision with regards to smart growth, a lot has been heard about this term. The Board will decide whether it is in Frederick County's best interest to allow the Sanitation Authority to extend water and sewer lines all the way up to Exit 323 at White Hall. White Hall exit area between Clearbrook and exit 323 is prime industrial ground with rail siding and easy access to Interstate 81, a new proposed six lane interstate bridge. No subdivisions and no Custer's Last Stand. Development pressures exist now for industrial and commercial growth in this area. With public water and sewer we can adequately provide for the stability of the infrastructure that an industry or business requires and deserves. We will pay our share, and we will provide Frederick County with another source of revenue through an increased tax base. Your decision to allow water and sewer expansion for business development is smart growth and good for Frederick County's future. Robert Beech, Vice President of Engineering for Seaward International, located in Clearbrook, and is also a resident of Stonewall District. Advised that Seaward International definitely supports a new sewer line for this area. He further advised there are 35 employees at this location and they currently share a septic tank and drain field with the County Parks and Recreation Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 047 Maintenance Facility at Clearbrook Park. Urged the Board to move forward on the implementation of a new sewer line for this area. Sam Lehman, Back Creek District, passed out a news clipping from the local newspaper from December 22, 1999 which he felt was appropriate. He addressed the county's 2000 Comprehensive Plan advising that it has to be based on a reasonable assurance of having water for its growth. He does not believe this sewer and water service area that is being proposed meets the Comprehensive Plan for 2000. Because the 2000 plan would have required water for the growth that would have been served by these sewers. He does not believe the county has the water. The stream flow varies greatly from year to year. Catherine Whitesell, Back Creek District, my father is Chairman of the Service Authority and when you say to him, there is not enough water out there, he says you can't measure the water. That is true, you cannot, we don't have a reservoir or large storage tanks, but we have a Comprehensive Plan that says Milburn Historic District is used for industrial. What limits our capacity for growth is our sewage. Ifthe Comprehensive Plan is followed as is the capacity on that trunk line to service industrial growth on the Milburn Rural District, it is not there, fact. We can take Mr. Good's word for it, which would be wonderful if we had a few homes on the out skirts of the battlefield land, but our Comprehensive Plan allowed industrial growth. Next year with the new Board, if the smart growth, smart balance, responsible people win, we may have a huge industrial area if need be. Let's be responsible, let's send this plan back, let's deny this, preserve the battlefield, run the water all the way up. Ty Lawson, Gainesboro District, attorney representing Crider and Shockey of West Virginia, and Shockey Dulles, LC. He advised that a sketch plat has been filed with staffto allow for by-right residential development in the Stephenson area. This development will be served by public water and sewer pursuant to a written agreement reached with the Sanitation Authority some time ago. Tonight the Board is being asked to determine whether the Sanitation Authority proposed Master Plan for Route II North service area is substantially in accord with the 2000 Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Lawson further advised that the Sanitation Authority attorney and he agree that the notice requirement to the Board for matters relating to water and sewer extension is not a requirement of law, and as pursuant to the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act. He reminded the Board of their own history that there has been no requirement of such a reporting and in fact has been the Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 048 practice for a number of years. The principal reason is actually in the creation ofthe Authority itself, and that was to unburden the Board from such decisions leaving the important questions of feasibility and capacity to the Authority. But even so, we have all heard the Sanitation Authority's presentations, not only before this body, but also the Planning Commission and that included the presentations of the various independent engineering firms, and of course, the United States Geological Survey. It is clear that the Sanitation Authority plan is well in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, they are performing their services admirably, and very well with capacities that are more than sufficient to service this area, and he asked the Board to endorse this plan. Doug Dolan, Red Bud District, addressed the area of battlefields brought out earlier. He advised that he supported funding for battlefields. He referred to an earlier study done concerning the various battlefield locations within the county and Stephenson Depot did not make the first cut as far as those being considered for a possible Core, central mass of battlefields, that could be looked at as far as a tourism attraction. Mark Smith, addressed the Board as resident of Shawnee District, asking them to support the plan that is currently before them. He feels it is good planning for the county. You don't run from development, you put your arms around it and plan for it and this is what the county has done. They have extended the water and sewer service area. The area around Route 11 and Interstate 81 has been planned for industrial and commercial. The county does need this land planned for that and the comments that keep coming up that there are 1200 acres of industrial land in the county are spotted as has been shown on various maps at different times. The mass that is needed for industrial development is not on these 1200 acres. The mass acreage needed is in this corridor that is before the Board tonight, and he asked the Board's support. Paul Blaker, Shawnee District, wanted to step back and look at this whole thing from a strategic point of view. When you look over the mountain to the east and see all ofthe growth out of control with Loudoun County doubling it's population in one decade, we could ultimately face that here in Frederick County. This is a strategic decision. It's just not about water here and sewer there and the elementary school. You have an overall vision to think about tonight because when you extend the water and sewer district, that opens the door to the floodgates of development. Is Frederick County going to become another Loudoun, or are we going to maintain and cherish our rural character here in Frederick County, develop the areas we already have while protecting the rest Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 049 of the county, something to think about? Kevin Kennedy, Gainesboro District, regarding the water and sewer plan, the Board needs to come together and get a consensus about what your collective vision is for the future ofthe county before you consider anything as major as what you have before you tonight. He has heard that each ofthe Board members has a vision, an interest in preserving the rural character of Frederick County, he has heard this from a number of different people; therefore he feels it must be true. He advised that maybe some Board members had fallen for the old saying, "you can't stop growth," and maybe you can't stop it, but you sure can control it. In order to control growth you have to have a plan, and he knows there have been talks about a plan and a vision and the Board needs to get back to that before they do something like this. Approving this plan, as written, would put the entire northern section of the county in extreme developmental pressure. He hopes that none of the Board wants the northern section of this county completely developed, and this is what the Board will be opening themselves up for if they approve this plan. He asked the Board not to approve this plan. Patricia Kuhn, Stonewall District, feels the Board is trying to push this through and in doing so will be raping the neighbors of their ground water, just as you have raped our neighbors in Stephens City of their ground water. Based on what she has been reading, the entire east coast is in a drought so what do you do when the water is gone, are you going to start pumping something else dry. She feels this looks like a tactic to make sure that the Shockey land gets developed and they have everything they want at the cost ofthe rest of the people that live in that community. That is wrong, he does not deserve to get rich off our backs and our neighbors back while they are trying to find out where they are going to get their water from. This will just cause more Flying 1's to come in, and why not, we have no reason to turn them down because we have water and sewer. She asked that it be checked into as to why the county is having to haul sewage from the Stonewall Elementary School, check into that, it might prove to be interesting. Nancy Gallagher, Stonewall District, the water that you seem to think that you have in Clearbrook Quarry also feeds all the wells in Clearbrook, and Stephenson. There is no way for you to actually tell how much water is in the ground. There are counties in the State of Virginia where wells are going dry, they are trucking water in, we are in a drought. If you approve this, you will be sucking water out of all the wells, including Ms. Tyler's, hers and a lot of other people in that area. Things look good on paper, they sound good in print, but they don't always work the way you Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of 05/22/02 050 think they are going to work. Are you going to be willing to bring water to my house to pay for a water line to come from Clearbrook into her neighborhood, are you willing to pay for that? There are going to be expenses that you are going to incur if you take all the water out of Clear brook and pump it into industrial parks and businesses. She asked the Board to vote no on this, and send it back, think about it and investigate what we have. CHAIRMAN SHICKLE CALLS FOR A 5 MINUTE RECESS Bradford Kuhn, Stonewall District, questioned the amounts of water in streams, etc. Told the Board they really need to look at this plan further. The Board needs to be sure that the people of this area can afford this water. Bill Daley, Back Creek District, feels the question really before the Board is a relatively simple matter, and it is this. There has been no real compelling reason presented to the Board at this meeting for them to go forward with this action at this time. Many doubts have been raised. He would suggest that the wise decision is to step back and consider these doubts and be sure that you have the answers before going forward with this plan. He urged the Board to vote no. Art Bragg, Stonewall District, the problem he sees with Wellington Jones' Comprehensive Plan as he sees it is that it is not comprehensive enough. It leaves out the Clearbrook, Stephenson, and the Brucetown residential taxpayers, and they need to be in the plan. He has purchased, as have his neighbors, drinking water for years. Asked the Board to vote no. Jim Giraytys, Back Creek District, gave the Board what he felt was a compelling reason for not approving this plan. It is not a matter oflaw, it is not a matter of how you voted in the past, not a matter of rectifying bad decisions about Flying J or Stonewall School, it is in fact about water. Is it there or is it not there? Mr. Jones has given a very interesting and compelling presentation that there is all the water we need. Someone said 200 billion gallons of it under the County. He will take issue with that. He is a meteorologist and normally he does not care what happens after the water hits the ground; however, during the last two years he has begun to care. He recently returned from a conference in Roanoke with the American Society of Civil Engineers looking at what they are doing to manage floods and drought. I have come away from this conference with a substantially different view of what is and is not possible to be known about the water underneath the ground that comes through the rivers, through the aquifer, than what was presented by Mr. Jones. This is not a matter of managing risk, risk is when you know what is going to happen and you try to avoid it. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 051 This is a matter of managing uncertainty, because we do not know what will happen with the drought other than the drought will occur. We do not know how much water is really under the ground. He further advised that he presented this plan before the Board anonymously at the conference in Roanoke, along with other materials, and those in attendance said the first thing you need to do is stop digging until you know what you want to do. He does not feel the county has a very good plan on how we wish to handle water in this area. Pam Kennedy, Gainesboro District, the reality is that no one really does know our water status. We have some indicators, and the indicators are not good. Seventeen inches of precipitation below normal, increased residential development, which means people who consume water and all the attendant services. A true lack of knowledge where our underground water really is. The question of our capacity to handle sewerage and our insatiable thirst for and desire to drawn down the Shenandoah River. This list should be reason to say no, that our ducks are literally not in a row. Because we do not know what is going on, because the county has not reexamined its Comprehensive Plan, nor its Northeast Land Use Plan. To move ahead with SWSA represents an act of incredible short sightedness, near sightedness, lack of a sightedness, one of horrific proportions. Vote now and for the future. You the Board must take on the responsibility of making the over all decision regarding SWSA expansion or lack of it. Let us not be trapped in the box, the box of old ideas, prior decisions that were then, this is now. Because you are reasonable people with a vision, who put character above wealth, who will make no, no I emphasis no compromise with wrong. It is really imperative that any action that allows SWSA expansion at this time be soundly defeated until you know more. Marion Poesy - Stonewall District, wanted to remind the Board of what the elections were about. People in this county did not like the old Comprehensive Plan. Told the Board they just want to keep right on going with what the developers want. She does not see any Board member wanting to run the water lines to help the people in Brucetown, but none of that has ever been discussed. It is just to run water up those lines for industry, and we know it is going to be like a magnet, because anyone of those industries can tap in. It was originally run up Route 81 with state funds. The county offered you a 20-year maintenance on their lines, ifthey would run the water line up Route 11 and Mr. Glaize, I understand, (this is hearsay) went up and down Route 11 collecting money to help with the Authority, and I don't feel that we have a lot of control over what the Authority does. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 052 As far as the USAF studies, those gentlemen told me they were very concerned about the underground water that we are taking through the production wells. The water we are taking from underground is the same water that is feeding our rivers and our streams. You will be drying up not only the wells and all the underground water, but this is the same source that is now feeding the nvers. She is opposed to having the water run up Route 11. Kenneth Y. Stiles, Stonewall District, there is a compelling reason to vote for this. The number one environmental problem in Frederick County, and he thinks this is widely recognized, is the contamination of ground water from failing septic systems. This line provides the means to address this in several areas. Ultimately in the Stephenson area, Brucetown area, Clearbrook area. He advised that he could show the Board members failing septic systems, these are systems that have been in for fifty and sixty years or more, and all these areas have them. Yes, the school and some of you are on record as saying yes, and you would support an extension of the sewer system to the school. The park, he would ask the Board very strongly that ifthis is approved that ultimately they consider extending this area to provide service to Stephenson and Bructown. Service was promised to the people of Stephenson more than 25 years ago, long before he was on the Board when the water line was run up there, it was never done. On at least two different occasions the county has investigated and tried to find out how it would be possible to serve Brucetown and have been unable to do that in a way that was financially feasible for the people involved. The Clearbrook Interchange, he can show the Board septic systems with problems there. This is a problem the Board knows how to solve, the technology ifthere to solve, the Sanitation Authority says it can solve it, and what we have heard are many people with no particular expertise say, well we don't believe them. He suggests that this is an effort to turn what is a technical issue into a political one, and create that uproar. This is a responsible plan, it's a plan based on what several of you have supported over the years, over many years, this plan is the culmination of many years of planning and he believes constitutes in the best way the definition of what smart growth is all about. You designate what you want to happen and plan for how it will happen. To solve the problem at Flying J, that alone is worth doing it, as far as he is concerned, he would never have allowed a business to go in on a private system, that should never happen again. This is a good plan and he urged the Board to support it. David Darsie requested to speak again. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 053 Chairman Shickle asked Mr. Darsie ifhe had anything really new, as this has been a very long night. David Darsie replied that he did have something new, and he would try and be brief. He advised ifthe entire northeast corridor with Clearbrook Northern Water Plant justification, this goes back to shame on you, you did not check the numbers to see how their science that supported the initial studies actually has worked out, the real numbers. The Sanitation Authority is a failure at water production. The City of Winchester is our savior. This is his new information. At its March meeting the Sanitation Authority agreed to seek out a second opinion on its hydro geologic studies. In their April meeting Mr. Jones said there would be a candidate list by the May meeting. The May meeting was yesterday. He spoke with Mr. Jones, asked him ifhe had come up with his candidate list for the second opinion. He further advised that Mr. Jones told him that someone in academia would be doing the second opinion study, all very hush hush, he couldn't offer a name or an educational institution this individual is coming from. I hope you know and I hope you know the reputation. The results of this second opinion are to be in by, Mr. Jones told me July. What is the secret, I don't know why they can't give us the name ofthe institution? I can't wait for these results, yet you must act tonight before the second opinion comes in. Is that right, is that proper, he does not think so? He has shown what the Science International numbers are, that it's a bismal. At the very least table this Northeast Plan and seriously look at the Sanitation Authority's record on water production, and consider scaling back this plan tremendously to a more confined area until we can show us real water. It's great to put it on paper on these scientific studies, but the science is not matching up with the real numbers. Show Frederick County the water first, and then do these miles and miles of expansion. History is about to be repeated. Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District, would like to see everyone to be able to work together. She feels that the county does not have a reliable, viable water source. Does not feel the county should depend on Winchester's water source, the north fork of the Shenandoah River. She asked that this plan not be approved. Cindy Rockwell, Back Creek District, she feels that Frederick County is writing a bunch of checks that we are not going to be able to cash. Her well has gone dry. She lives in a town, so you wonder what the heck is going on. Luckily she does have a water source other than the well and the cistern they used to use, but they are very concerned. They are concerned about the precedent that Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 054 will be set tonight if you vote for this. Concerned that Middletown has taken the county's lead and they basically have a pretty callus attitude that the water will be there, and they can cash those checks. I don't believe they will be able to. Supervisor Sager inquired about the last sentence of Mr. Lawrence's memo to the Board regarding this matter. (The Board is being asked to determine whether the Sanitation Authority's Proposed Master Plan for the Route II North Service Area is substantially in accord with the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan.) He asked Mr. Lawrence what is he requesting from the Board at this time. Mr. Lawrence read the last sentence and advised the Board that is all they are being asked to do. Supervisor Sager, that is all, nothing more. Mr. Lawrence, that is correct. Supervisor Forrester - Can you clarify that please. Are you saying that we are not voting to extend the system to allow these lines to be built, if we vote for this tonight. Mr. Lawrence - What the Code of Virginia is asking of you is for you to confirm whether the Sanitation Authority's proposal to serve that area is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Comprehensive Plan's sewer and water service area. Supervisor Sager, its no more, no less, right? Supervisor Forrester directed a question to Attorney Ambrogi. We were given a seventy-day time frame that we had to vote on this. Attorney Ambrogi, I was just looking at the opinion that I wrote back in February. The seventy-day period is correct. I was just looking to see what it referred to. Supervisor Forrester, that is what I wanted to know. Supervisor Smith, whatever it is, is up today isn't it? Attorney Ambrogi, with regard to both water and sewer, any disapproval by the Board must be done within seventy days, that was in the last sentence of the last paragraph on page 2 of the opmlOn. Supervisor Forrester, is that Code 15.2-2151, is that what you are referencing? Attorney Ambrogi replied it was referencing 15.2-2126,2149,2127,2151. That is correct. Supervisor Forrester - If I read then in this 2151, is the floor open first for discussion right Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 055 now? Chairman Shickle - Go ahead. Supervisor Forrester - If! read in the code correctly then, if what we are really doing tonight, we are going by Larry's recommendation to us whether or not we are approving the system within this seventy days and that means we are also looking at this Code 2151 correct? Attorney Ambrogi - It's not approving within, it's if you don't disapprove within the seventy- day period then it's approved. To disapprove it has to be done within seventy days. Supervisor Forrester - Right, but when we are looking at that weare looking at whether or not the water system has an adequate source of supply according to 2151. Attorney Ambrogi - But the sole issue is - is there adequate facilities, is there adequate water, is there adequate sewer facilities, can they provide these things. That is the issue that you all have to - it is not a legislative function, it is more in the nature of an administrative function as you would have in a site plan or a subdivision plan. Supervisor Forrester - So that is a little different than what I believe Mr. Lawrence was saying. One is saying that we are going to determine whether or not we find that the water system is going to be able to provide us with an adequate source of supply, and what Mr. Lawrence was saying is that we are trying to interpret whether their plan is consistent with our Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Ambrogi - The core issue, my understanding is, is there adequate water and sewer to service this area. Supervisor Forrester - Thank you, that cleared it up for me. Chairman Shickle - Everybody else clear? Supervisor Sager - I'm not sure I am, Mr. Chairman. When he read this letter, the letter says, review this to see if the proposed Master Plan for the Northern Service Area is in accord with the Comprehensive Policy. There is a lot of difference between that and the subsequent discussion here. Chairman Shickle asked Attorney Ambrogi to clarify this for Supervisor Sager. Supervisor Sager advised that he did not get out ofthe last paragraph what Attorney Ambrogi had stated. Attorney Ambrogi stated that the sole issue, as he said in his letter, and as he understands it, is there adequate water and sewer. Can this be furnished to this area? Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 056 . Supervisor Sager - At what time limit? Comprehensive Plan covers economic. Supervisor Smith asked Attorney Ambrogi ifhe had read the last sentence in the letter? Attorney Ambrogi advised that he had just read it. Maybe Mr. Riley can explain that. He did not realize that was in there until he just read it. His understanding was this issue was coming before the Board on whatever body anticipated, and I am sure that is what you all thought. Supervisor Forrester - Stated that she anticipated thatthe Board was here tonightto determine whether the Board felt there was an adequate source and supply of water for this plan to move forward, that was her understanding. Administrator Riley - Advised that he felt Supervisor Forrester was right, and he believes in Mr. Ambrogi's opinion there was a two-phase process in this. One was for the issue to go back to the Planning Commission to determine whether in fact it was in conformity with the county's Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission did that due diligence, and reports back to you that in fact it is, and then you are in fact correct that the issue before the Board tonight deals with capacity based on information provided to you by the Sanitation Authority, so hopefully that clears it up. Supervisor Forrester - Are we limited to only considering information supplied to us by the Sanitation Authority? Administrator Riley - That is a tough question because they are the authority established by the Board to provide the service, so I would think you would need to rely on the information they are providing you and the fact they provide that service to the county. Supervisor Forrester asked Director Jones to come to the podium. She advised Director Jones that she was looking at an article dated December 22,1999, and the headline ofthat article is Drought May Lead to Water Hookup Moratorium. In the article it references that the Sanitation Authority sent a letter to the Frederick-Winchester Economic Development Commission waming of the tight water situation. You are quoted as saying, "If an industry comes in I will not guarantee them service," from 99 of June to mid September of 99 Winchester, Frederick County imposed voluntary water restrictions. Jones suggested a moratorium of new connections may be needed. Anderson said a moratorium may be needed, we don't have the water, Anderson said. Ifthis trend continues, the city won't have the water either. The city will provide us with as much water as it can, Jones said. Without precipitation neither the city nor the county will have enough water to go Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 057 around. Her question to Mr. Jones was what has changed in the two years, since your comment, that leaves you to believe that we have more water. Director Jones, at that time the city was experiencing problems transmitting water from their treatment plant to the city. Subsequent to that time they have replaced their old 24 inch cast-iron transmission main with a 30 inch double iron transmission main. They can now transmit the full capacity oftheir treatment plant, 10 million gallons a day, into the core service area. In 1999 the Sanitation Authority had an agreement with the city that expired December 31, 2000. They subsequently negotiated, with their backs in the corner, they were able to extend it on, three two year increments. Fortunately, Mr. Anderson and counselor Buettner renegotiated another agreement which was just signed last month and that extends our purchase with the city for another twenty years, at a much betterrate. This contract was good for both of us, it was a win-win contract for both of us, fortunately. The city wanted the cash flow they could get from the Sanitation Authority for purchasing water in order to pay for their expansion and their upgrades. The Sanitation Authority wanted the insurance they needed because ofthe drought conditions we are experiencing. This way they can pull water from the city during times like we have now and not have to rely so heavily on ground water. But when the rains return and we get back to normal and we do have sufficient ground water, then we can use that source more. The Authority feels it is a very good plan and we are in excellent shape now. We still have to get through this summer and the meteorologists don't know what is going to happen, but we will make it through it. We hope we don't have to impose conservation measures such as you referred to that we did in 1999, but if that occurs, we will do it in conjunction with the city, we are working very closely with the city on this. He feels it is important for the area that this be done. We are in a lot better shape now, and as you know, the Northern Water Plant is coming on line in the Fall. We will have an additional million, million and a half gallons a day available from that point, limited by transmission. With this transmission main that they propose with this plant, then they will be able to go up to three and half million gallons a day. Supervisor Forrester asked Director Jones ifhe felt it was prudent to be looking at expansion during a time in which we are experiencing a drought, not just here in Frederick County, but the entire east coast? Director Jones - Yes, you have to remember that it will take until next year before any of this Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 058 can get into service. Supervisor Forrester - So what has changed in the two years, if! can paraphrase, is that we are now relying more on the city for our water supply, and that is the only additional water source in the two years since you originally suggested the moratorium. Director Jones - No, in that two years we got into an agreement with Global Chemstone in which we have leases on three quarries. Clearbrook is the first one we are developing, and that is why the plant is being built there. The Authority can also go back to the city and expand their treatment plant another four million gallons. It is just a very expensive proposition at this time. The city has expressed a willingness to do that. Supervisor Forrester - Has any restrictions been talked about as to how much water can be pulled out of the Shenandoah River statewide in regards to this drought. Director Jones - No. The city has the right to pull up to fourteen million gallons a day. They are grandfathered for that. Supervisor Forrester - Are you asserting there is nothing that could come from the Governor's Office to put in more restrictions to that. Director Jones - I learned that from the Virginia Department of Health Office of Water Programs. That came from the state level. Supervisor Tyler referred to what Dr. Fish and Mr. Stiles had said earlier with regard to the residents of Clear brook, Brucetown and Stephenson. These residents do have potable water, a lot of them do not, but they can drink out of the faucets. She asked Mr. Jones ifthere were going to be any provisions in this plan to have those residents hook up. We keep saying it will bring water to them, how is that going to happen? Director Jones - Clearbrook is within the water and sewer service area that you all have designated, so Clearbrook is not really a problem. Supervisor Tyler - Brucetown is hurting. Director Jones - Brucetown is outside of it, and Mr. Stiles is correct, we have looked at it several times on extending water there. It is becoming more and more feasible to do that, and it could be done. He feels if this Board would request the Authority to give strong consideration to this they would do that. It has been the policy, or action of the Authority, to use your Comprehensive Plan and the Water and Sewer Service Area that you designate as the area that we Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 059 operate within. Supervisor Tyler asked Director Jones if selecting one, which one would it be, water or sewer? Director Jones replied that sewer is a little more expensive than water. What the citizens have said tonight, if you put sewer in there, if you put water in there, it is not too difficult as far as growth goes, if you put sewer in there, you will have to deal with growth. They will want to develop the land since sewer will be there to serve it. The Authority put water into Stephenson back in the late seventies, they did it with an economic development grant, 100% grant. Supervisor Tyler - With this Comprehensive Plan this kind ofties in with the Land Use Plan and the whole bit. Her understanding is with the 5-year plan you would have to look at each industry on a case by case basis, whether you have water and sewer for industries beyond the expansions that we are currently undergoing, is that correct? Director Jones - That is correct. He did not include industrial growth in the five-year plan, and he will be glad to if someone can tell him what they are going to have. In the past, and he is sure in the future, industry comes into town and says, we are going to need these capacities. Supervisor Tyler - Just as a comment to the rest of the Board not knowing if there are familiar with this or not, but this Land Use Plan and what this is proposing to serve is 2,214 acres of industrial development. She did not sign onto this plan, this is not her vision, in fact she faults this plan, she was here numbers of years ago. She is uncomfortable with servicing 2,214 acres of industrial development, 524 acres of business development. We have 930 residential performance and 4,400 by-right uses that could possibly hook up into a sewer water service area being outside the UDA with little or nothing going to our county coffers. To her this is just, I'm looking at this and she just wants to say no, until we can figure out what our plan is as a Board. This is not her plan for the Northeast Land Use area period, end of discussion. She has fought this every step of the way, but what she would like to see are the citizens that are setting back there in Clearbrook, Brucetown and Stephenson, be able to be satisfied with their needs before we look beyond and start planning out here for all this industry of2500 acres of industrial development. She is not convinced of the water situation. She would like to know about the second opinion, would you be willing to withdraw this, to wait to get the second opinion that you said we might be able to have. That might make a lot of people here feel better. She is very uncomfortable with the whole situation. She feels we have Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 060 the cart before the horse, she wants to send the Northeast Land Use Plan back to have a new look at it, especially in light of what happened over Shockey's land. That little bump out, she has a question to staff about. That water service area is proposed, her understanding with the county's Comprehensive Land Use Plan is not that bump out for industrial and commercial use to be served by sewer for that purpose, and do we not - - - we discourage sewer water service hook ups outside the UDA. Ifwe allow this to be served and then we have by-right coming in that is going to set up by-right situations hooked up beyond this and circumventing, ultimately, the UDA concept of our county. Is it not that bump out there designated for industrial or commercial development? Director Lawrence replied that was the intent. Supervisor Sager asked about the response to Supervisor Tyler's question of Director Jones as to whether this plan could be tabled until the second opinion is received. Supervisor Tyler and Forrester responded that it was tied to the seventy-day kick out. Supervisor Sager asked Attorney Ambrogi what would the legality be of this. Attorney Ambrogi replied that as long as you act within the seventy days. The code reads that it has to be denied within seventy days. Director Jones advised that it came before the Board on the 10th of April. The deadline would be somewhere around June 19th or 20th. Supervisor Sager asked Director Jones ifhe would have the second opinion by that time. Director Jones replied no. Supervisor Forrester - Ifthe Board votes on this tonight, depending on what the outcome is, is there anything to prevent them from coming back with an amended plan, once they have that second opinion. Chairman Shickle - I think what Supervisor Forrester is asking, ifthis is turned down is there a waiting period before it could be resubmitted. Supervisor Forrester - Yes, that is pretty much it. Attorney Ambrogi - I'm not sure about that. Supervisor Forrester - Without having an answer than we have to move forward with what we have in front of us. Attorney Ambrogi - From a legal standpoint, you should move forward and take some action tonight, just to avoid issues like that. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 0611 Supervisor Sager - One of those actions would be not to table, right? The seventy-day issue would not allow that. Supervisor Reyes - Asked Attorney Ambrogi if the govermng body, the Board of Supervisors, have the legal latitude to disagree with the expert, which is the Frederick County Sanitation Authority? Attorney Ambrogi - Certainly you have the right to disagree with them, but that has to be based on facts and evidence. The expert in this field has spoken and has stated there is sufficient and adequate water and sewer. There have been other people expressing their concerns, and they are legitimate concerns, but you have to separate the worries and concerns from the actual facts. Supervisor Reyes - We had compelling arguments from the public tonight. Attorney Ambrogi - That is immaterial, the arguments, there has to be some facts, some statistics, there has to be expert facts, presentations' testimony from the experts. Can they provide these services? Everybody is worried about water, obviously our most precious resource, everybody is concerned about it, that is not the criteria. The criteria is, can they service this area. Supervisor Reyes - So what you are telling me is if I disagree with Director Jones, I am legally liable. Attorney Ambrogi - No, I am not saying that. No, you would not. Supervisor Reyes - I just wanted to make that clear. Supervisor Sager - Asked ifthis is denied when could it be resubmitted. Attorney Ambrogi - Advised this question was asked earlier and he does not have the answer to it. Supervisor Smith - Stated that this discussion has been going on for quite some time, and there have been a lot of "ifs," nothing solid, everybody is shooting in different directions. He cannot vote on an "if." He has the utmost trust in Director Jones, Mr. Anderson, and Mr. Maddox and the utmost confidence until proven otherwise. Ifthere is going to be a moratorium you call it. You notify us why you are going to do it, but you are the one that calls it. He was on the Authority for eight years, he knows Director Jones well enough, he is not going to get the county in trouble. He has to get rid of the "what ifs", they are driving him crazy to be frank. Supervisor Douglas - Advised that she agreed with Supervisor Smith, Director Jones is the authority, and what he has said she believes. She too addressed the last paragraph of the letter and Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 062 the fact there was no mention of water. Supervisor Tyler - She feels the confusion comes, and asked Attorney Ambrogi to correct her if she is wrong, originally when Hiatt Meadows' proposal came before the Board, it was questioned whether Hiatt Meadows had the right to come in outside the county's UDA and to put residential development in there, in a by-right situation utilizing sewer and water. That is where this original request came from this Board. That is why you are looking at the Comprehensive Plan here, and either capacity on a level for the sewer or water. It was a three-pronged answer in your original letter to us, way back when, and then we said, guys we thought the time was ticking that we needed to answer this. That is my understanding, these are not on the same page. Weare being approached to look at sewer and water service capacity. We are also trying to look at the Comprehensive Plan, and if it fails to fit one of those criteria, then it was the Board's discretion to make a decision on those three. That was my complete and total understanding, and now she got here tonight and she is looking at something that says, it is just the Comprehensive Plan, but we had this underlying seventy-day matter going on with capacity of sewer and water. I think that is what is probably confusing everyone. Administrator Riley - I believe you have one more Board meeting before the seventy-day time period expires which I believe is June 12th. Would it be helpful if we could sort out as a staff, Attorney Ambrogi and the Planning staff, any other inquiries that you may have of the Sanitation Authority, that provides the service, to try and sort out some ofthese issues and have some answers back to you in enough time at the next Board meeting to try and bring this to some kind of a resolution, whatever it may be. Supervisor Tyler - That would be helpful for me, Mr. Riley; however, I still have a problem with the Northeast Land Use Plan sitting here before me, and I don't know if this is something that staff can do. We cannot act on that within the time frame of the expiration of the seventy days, but in light of what has happened with the Shockey property, she doesn't see industrial development coming back in there, so why are we having it here as commercial and industrial when the intent now is to not even do a mixed use, but to go strictly with residential, which violates the county's UDA principles by bringing in sewer and water into a by-right property. This is her real hang up with this whole thing. So I don't know if we can do all ofthis at that time, that would require public hearings. Administrator Riley - We can concentrate on the Hiatt Meadows, the conformity with the Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 063 Comprehensive Plan as it is currently written. The authority ofthe Sanitation Authority to provide service, we can answer those questions. The bigger picture of staff going back and redoing the Northeast Land Use Plan, those are all very real possibilities that can be done, but he feels the two issues need to be separated because on the bigger picture of what you are talking about. You are concerned about liability exposure for development based upon the way the plan is currently written. We can go back, as a staff, go back through all the public hearing processes, get the input, come back with a revised plan, but we do have a specific issue before us this evening also. Supervisor Tyler - Which is driven by Hiatt Meadows. Administrator Riley - Right, which also deals with the VDOT Rest Area, those things we think we have an agreement on that we probably want to try and solve. You may have two different balls in the air, and maybe during this two-week period we can help and try to sort some ofthat out and help you with a direction to try and accomplish the objective of a bigger and better plan, maybe not bigger, but a better plan, and then how do we deal with the specifics ofthe issue that is before us. Supervisor Tyler - Would it help the Supervisors here, if we agreed on this, to put what we would like to have looked at and addressed this evening, or do that at another time. Administrator Riley - Sure. Supervisor Forrester - In this Code 15.2-2151 entitled Disapproval of a System by Governing Body of Counties - Failure to Disapprove Within Seventy Days. The Governing Body of any County notified ofthe proposed establishment of a water system or of the extension of any existing water system under the second paragraph of 15.2-2149 may disapprove the same ifit finds that such water system does not have an adequate source of supply, or that the system is not capable of serving the proposed number of connections by reason of inadequate pipes, mains, conduit, pump stations or otherwise. She does not feel that the Board knows if the county has an adequate supply, we just don't know that. Nothing has convinced her tonight, she has heard just as many experts at the podium saying otherwise. Dave Darsie's figures of what the yields have actually been in the Stephens City quarries. I really appreciated hearing those figures. That weighed heavily with her. I just don't feel like coming back whatever it is, June 12th that they are going to be able to come up with concrete evidence that is going to convince her that the county has an adequate supply. She feels the Board needs to wait for the USAF Study, the results are supposed to be out Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 064 in 2004. She does not see any imminent reason to move forward in haste. She feels the county is exposing themselves to a lot of things they shouldn't be. She further stated that in our own Comprehensive Plan, in Section 8.9, its titled Sewer and Water Facilities. The location of public water and sewer lines determines where Urban Development will occur. The Urban Development area described in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan is roughly the same as the service area for public sewer and water. Because sewer and water facility locations determine the location of urban development, great care is needed in planning where such facilities will be provided. Ifwe approve this plan tonight, are we saying is this where we want urban development, because this is what our Comprehensive Plan would be saying, and I don't think this is what we have been saying as a Board. She asked that the Board go ahead and vote on this issue at this meeting. Chairman Shickle - The chair would entertain a motion. Mr. Riley do you want to give any further suggestions before that? Administrator Riley - No, it does not appear that is the way you want to go with it, so I guess whatever the Board's desire is. Supervisor Forrester - Made a motion that the Water and Sewer Facility Plan for the Northeastern portion ofthe sewer and water service area, as proposed to the Board, be disapproved. Chairman Shickle - Is there a second? Supervisor Reyes - Seconded the motion. Chairman Shickle - Discussion. Supervisor Sager - I would like to know at what point and time, this item could come back before the Board with new information. Chairman Shickle asked Attorney Ambrogi ifhe could research that question. Attorney Ambrogi - Once again read what the Code said on this issue. He feels the law is pretty specific, it does not give you discretion, so to speak, it's more or less mandatory. It says you must find that -----it's hard to say how they could ever come back again, or when. What you need is that the provider cannot provide these services for one reason or another. Supervisor Sager - Understands what Supervisor Forrester said, but he does not feel that he has enough expertise to challenge Director Jones and he does not know that there is enough that has been substantiated here that would say you are wrong Director Jones. Attorney Ambrogi advised that some concerns he has heard tonight about development, Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 065 houses, and industry, is not the criteria. They have taken that away from you whether you like it or not. To disapprove it, you have to find there is not adequate water and sewer and the provider cannot provide it. Supervisor Reyes stated that a lot of compelling arguments were presented for and against this issue, should the Board not consider those arguments. Attorney Ambrogi - The arguments are not the issue, evidence and facts are the issue. Supervisor Forrester - We heard a lot of facts from many ofthe speakers this evening. She went back and read the Code one more time. The Governing Body etc. We don't know how many connections are being proposed; therefore, we couldn't even begin to determine if there is an adequate supply. Supervisor Tyler - Asked Attorney Ambrogi what or otherwise meant? What is the significance ofthat? Attorney Ambrogi replied that if you find something in addition to these specifics that are set out, that it is not capable of doing. Supervisor Forrester - So the scope is not limited when it says or otherwise? Attorney Ambrogi - If there are other reasons other than those specificaIly set forth, a compeIling reason not speIled out. Supervisor Forrester - The drought, that could be considered as a compeIling reason. Attorney Ambrogi - Stated that he heard Director Jones say that this would not be put into place for a year. We could have a worse drought by then. We might have a monsoon by then. Supervisor Forrester - I can consider the drought. Attorney Ambrogi - But we always face the possibility of a drought, that is something we do not know about. Supervisor Forrester - Mr. Chairman, don't we have a motion. Let's take a vote, please. Supervisor Smith asked that the motion be repeated. Supervisor Forrester - Repeated the motion that the Board deny the request ofthe Water and Sewer Plan for the Northeastern portion of the Sewer and Water Service Area. Supervisor Douglas - Questioned what the Board was being asked to vote on, based on what is on the Agenda sheet. Administrator Riley explained. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 066 Supervisor Smith suggested to Administrator Riley that in the future two things like this should be separate, as it is confusing. Administrator Riley - That is correct, Supervisor Smith. Supervisor Sager - Supervisor Forrester mentioned so much land for business, industry, and residential. He felt an estimate could be given on these numbers. Chuck Maddox, G.W. Clifford and Associates, appeared before the Board. The design on this system has a 180 gallons a minute pump station, if it were to be built to its extent. 180 million gallons at Rest, 360 gallons a minute pump station in Clearbrook, 540 gallon pump station at Hiatt's Run where it crosses Route 11. 540 gallons a minute pump station at the Route 81 rest stop and 800 gallons a minute (rather than the 540 stated earlier) pump station at Hiatt's Run where it crosses. What that translates into is about 100,000 gallons a day of wastewater capacity at Rest and working its way down to about half a million gallons per day of wastewater capacity where Hiatt's Run crosses Route 11 at the far southern end of the watershed. On a scale of things, this is the absolute capacity of this system. This is not designed to handle large scale urban growth, it's designed to handle the needs of that corridor along the Route 11 and the railroad corridor, and light industry. It would not handle anything wet, any large scale industrial waste. Supervisor Smith - You don't wait until it's built and then say, Ohmy golly, down at the end, we have no pressure. It is all figured out before you put it in, is that correct? Mr. Maddox -It is designed to meet the intent of your Comprehensive Plan, which are light services along that corridor, and no urban development. Supervisor Tyler - Asked Mr. Maddox - according to the study area and the future uses on our Comprehensive Plan, we have 4400 acres of by-rights that are either attached to or close to being in this proposed sewer water service area. Say it is by-right, they do two acres and they take out and make a preservation lot, that is still going to be in the neighborhood of 1500 to 2000 homes, not even counting the residential performance. She is wondering about the demand that is going to be created. Would this even be able to service what the Comprehensive Plan has laid out? Ifwe were going to service, at that scale, we would not do it this way. We would be a gravity sewer system down the tributaries and either maybe another wastewater - - -. You may get to the point where you exceed the regional wastewater treatment plant capacity. That is not the purpose of this system. The intent is to service light industry, and commercial corridor with ultimate Minute Book Nnmber 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 067 capacity to handle the existing residential along the route. A light industry with about 100 employees that uses about 20 gallons a day, you are looking at 2,000 to 10,000 a day for an industrial interest. Supervisor Forrester - To Supervisor Tyler, in heard Mr. Maddox correctly, he said it was designed for the light industrial and commercial, is that correct. Mr. Maddox - That is what the Comprehensive Plan speaks to. Supervisor Forrester - There is nothing that prevents by-right use. So when you are referencing those 4400 that can happen, but it is not designed for that, that is what we are hearing. Supervisor Tyler - Correct. Chairman Shickle - We are ready to vote. Mrs. Forrester - No. Chairman Shickle - Wait a minute, you made a motion to disapprove. Supervisor Forrester - To deny. Yes. Supervisor Sager - I have to accept Mr. Jones' figures, yes, well, now no. Supervisor Smith - Motion to not approve. Chairman Shickle if you vote yes, you disapprove, if you vote no, you didn't disapprove it. Supervisor Smith - Yes. Chairman Shickle - Make sure you keep track ofthis down there, because I'm getting mixed up already. Supervisor Reyes - Yes. Supervisor Tyler - Yes. Supervisor Douglas - No. Chairman Shickle - No. The above motion was approved; therefore, the request is DENIED. DISCUSSION OF SEWER AND WATER SERVICE AREA (SWSA) EXPANSION REOUEST - BEVERLY SHOEMAKER PROPERTY - SENT BACK TO PLANNING FOR FURTHER REVIEW OF AREA Director Lawrence presented this information to the Board advising that information has been prepared by Mark Smith of Green way Engineering requesting an expansion ofthe Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to incorporate a 10.03 acre parcel in the Opequon Magisterial District. The site is presently in residential use. The property owner intends to ultimately utilize the existing Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 068 residential structure as an office. He further advised that the subject site is located on the south side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), east of Double Church Road. Sewer and water currently exists on the north side of Route 277. The property located immediately east ofthe subject site is currently zoned B2, and has previously received permission to utilize the public sewer and water system. He further advised that CPPS, Comprehensive Plans and Programs Sub Committee, considered this request and feels it would be appropriate to include the subject property within the county's Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The CPPS also commented that it had recommended that the subject property, as well as other properties located on the south side of Fairfax Pike from Double Church Road to Sherando High School, be included in the SWSA. Supervisor Sager advised that he was interested in the proposal that would encompass the whole area. He has had numerous calls from property owners whose property abuts Sherando High School wanting to know why they carmot be hooked up to water and sewer. He further advised that it is difficult for him to consider this one parcel when others have been here before and were denied. Supervisor Forrester asked director Lawrence about another group of properties brought before the Board a short time ago. Director Lawrence advised that over the past few months the SWSA was modified to go around those properties and include them, and in the same exercise, picked up the two county facilities. Supervisor Sager advised that this is what he has been hearing from the citizens he referred to earlier, they are saying, you are picking up county facilities, commercial facilities, how about picking up my lot. He feels the Board needs to go back and revisit down to the corner at Route 636, if we have to, before we do anything else to see if this is the position we want to take. Supervisor Forrester advised that she would like to have more information about what criteria the Plarming Department is plarming to recommend that it is not spot zoning. Director Lawrence advised that we are not rezoning; therefore, it is not spot zoning, but because of Fairfax Pike, because of its classification in the road system, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that type of road is appropriate for commercial use, that is why we are not talking about urban development area, we are talking about sewer and water service area. The consensus of the Board was that this be brought back at the next Board meeting with additional options. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 069 SHENANDOAH VALLEY BATTLEFIELDS FOUNDATION (SVBF) IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT GRANT APPLICATION & RESOLUTION (#047- 02) - APPROVED Planner I Rebecca Ragsdale presented this information to the Board advising ifthis grant is awarded to the county the funds would be used to acquire three interpretative signs from Virginia Civil War Trails. V ACWT is a program designed to enhance Civil War sites throughout the Commonwealth by providing interpretative signage and heightening marketing efforts to promote tourism. The county's total cost associated with this project would be $7,800. Upon motion made by Supervisor Sager, seconded by Supervisor Smith the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, in accordance with the funding allocation procedures of Frederick County, it is necessary that a request by resolution be received from this Board in order that Frederick County may provide matching funds if awarded the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation Implementation Grant. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the desire oflandowners to acknowledge the history of their property and its role in the Civil War. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the development of heritage tourism based upon the historic and scenic resources of Frederick County as an economic engine for that area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Board of Supervisors requests the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation to grant approval of Frederick County's Virginia Civil War Trails Sign Project for the enhancement of visitor services at lands related to the battles of Second and Third Winchester through the installation of Virginia Civil War Trails signs. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That Frederick County hereby agrees to provide the 20 percent matching funds for the project, as required by the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation Implementation Grant program. Adopted this nnd day of May 2002. The above resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye KERNSTOWN BATTLEFIELD ASSOCIATION REOUEST FOR GRANT SUPPORT RESOLUTION (#048-02) - APPROVED Director Lawrence presented this request to the Board advising that The Kernstown Battlefield Association (KBA) is submitting a grant application to the Shenandoah Valley Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 070 Battlefields Foundations' (SVBF) seeking funding to erect perimeter fencing on the KBA' s property. The KBA has requested that the county consider endorsement of the grant application, as well as provide a portion of the matching funds necessary for the grant program. KBA has requested that the county provide $1,000 toward the required 20 percent match. Upon motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, in accordance with the funding allocation procedures of Frederick County, it is necessary that a request by resolution be received from this Board in order that Frederick County may provide matching funds if awarded the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation Implementation Grant is awarded to the Kernstown Battlefield Association. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the desire oflandowners to acknowledge the history of their property and its role in the Civil War. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the development of heritage tourism based upon the historic and scenic resources of Frederick County as an economic engine for that area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Board of Supervisors requests the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation to grant approval of the Kernstown Battlefield Association's Perimeter Fencing Project for the protection of the historic resources associated with the First and Second Battle of Kernstown from unauthorized access and enabling use of the property for compatible agricultural purposes. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That Frederick County hereby agrees to provide $1,000 toward the 20 percent matching funds for the project, as required by the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation Implementation Grant program. The above resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye DISCUSSION CONCERNING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO NONCONFORMING USES - REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION Planner II Jeremy Camp appeared before the Board at which time he presented the draft amendments that concern modifications to the nonconforming use requirements of Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. He advised this was being presented for discussion purposes only at this time. These amendments have been approved by the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee. He further advised that the Planning Commission has also reviewed these amendments and favors same. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 071 Supervisor Sager moved, with Supervisor Reyes seconding the motion, to forward the proposed amendments to the Planning staff for their further review and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The above motion was approved by the following a recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye ROAD RESOLUTION CANTER ESTATES. SECTION 1.11 AND IV - APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA This action is necessary in order for 2.09 miles within Canter Estates, be accepted into the State Secondary Road System. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Supervisor Tyler asked if it would be out ofline to consider a motion, pursuant to Virginia State Code 15.2-2229 and 2235, to direct the Planning Commission, along with the professional Planning staff, to come up with an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the maps for the Northeast Land Use Area. Chairman Shickle advised that he had no idea, and asked Mr. Riley. Administrator Riley advised that he felt it was a prerogative of the Board member if she would like to get the support of the Board to do that, she could. Chairman Shickle stated that he felt since a Code section was quoted that all Board members should have the opportunity to review this particular section before being asked to vote on it. Administrator Riley advised that it would be easier, if the motion just stated that it is to be sent back to the Planning staff for further study and delete the State Code Section. Supervisor Tyler was okay with that. Supervisor Sager asked who was it being sent back to. Supervisor Tyler advised due to all the recent changes, she would like to make a motion to amend the Northeast Land Use Plan regarding the additions and modifications of the official map, and regarding the amendments about the Codes to reflect the following: 1. Historical Resources Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 072 2. Jordan Springs Historic Overlay, the land that was just recently rezoned. She would further like the Planning Commission to direct a formulated plan to remove the 4400 acres of residential development land that is inside the proposed SWSA currently outside the County UDA. Chairman Shickle advised that he was not sure he knew what Supervisor Tyler was referring to. Administrator Riley advised that he felt Supervisor Tyler was saying she wanted to send it back for study as there are a lot of ingredients in the soup she wants looked at. All Board members will have a chance to weigh in on this when they get into the public comment and review process. Supervisor Forrester asked if, by sending it back, will that stop the Board from having to take action on various items that might come before the Board in the interim. She feels with Supervisor Tyler citing the Code, this is what she was trying to do. Supervisor Tyler advised that is not why she cited certain code sections. Chairman Shickle suggested to Supervisor Tyler that perhaps she could work with Administrator Riley and print this up before the Board's next meeting. Supervisor Tyler withdrew her last motion. MARK SMITH OF GREENW AYENGINEERING ASKED CHAIRMAN SHICKLE IF HE MIGHT HAVE CLARIFICATION ON AN EARLIER BOARD VOTE Mark Smith advised that since the water and sewer service area has been removed, and we just went through with a rezoning of Rutherford Farm, he has someone that just purchased property, and now they cannot get sewer and water service to. He asked if direction could be given to the county attorney, as he feels there are certain pieces within this area that he felt the Board needed to focus on, because there are going to be hardships that people have, and commitments they have made. Supervisor Forrester asked if this was really the appropriate time for this. Mark Smith responded, it is in that this was a big decision this evening. Supervisor Shickle advised Mark Smith that the County Attorney and the County Administrator know that you need an answer to this action taken by the Board earlier in this meeting as quickly as possible. Mark Smith replied that was fine. Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 073 Chairman Shickle asked Administrator Riley if the Rest Area was in the same fix. Administrator Riley responded, yes. Based on what he understood tonight, there is no water and sewer service area on any part of Route 11 from where it stops at Shoneys, and there is no service. Supervisor Forrester advised that she had some comments to make and they are in response to comments made at the previous meeting, which she was caught off guard; therefore, she did not respond at the time. Chairman Shickle, you asked how other Board members felt about the Planning Commission action of sending a letter to the CTB in support of Route 37, after the Board had already voted to remove it from the transportation priority list. She is in complete agreement with Supervisor Reyes that the action of sending a letter using language which could be construed as an official action of the entire Planning Commission was inappropriate. She also feels the Planning Commission had already fulfilled their responsibility in advising this Board and their official role on the subject should have been completed. Regarding your inquiry about Mr. Reyes' use of the county personal stationary. She does not really understand what that was about. It appeared to her that Mr. Shickle was implying that Supervisor Reyes had done something improper, when in fact he had asked County Attorney Ambrogi how he would be able to use the stationary prior to his using it. Additionally Reyes, Tyler, she and Chairman Shickle had just spent the entire morning together from 9:30 to 1, and there were many opportunities during that time, at breaks, for Chairman Shickle to have asked the others about that matter. One ofthe draft operating guidelines that the Board has been working on suggests that Board members will make every effort to inform other members of issues that may attract significant public or media attention. Chairman Shickle chose not to do that, and it appeared to her that the business of the people is being put secondary behind the business of politics. She asked Chairman Shickle, very politely, to please try and put politics aside and work respectfully with all the Board members, even those of us who have opposing positions to you. Chairman Shickle advised that he needed to respond to a couple of Supervisor Forrester's comments. On the issue ofthe stationary, he did not raise that issue, Mr. Buettner did, and as with all citizens who appear before the Board under "Citizen Comment," he asks for a follow up when it is appropriate. He did not accuse Mr. Reyes of anything, I did ask him ifthat was what happened and he said no. Supervisor Forrester - We receive a lot of citizen comments, and they are not always Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 074 appropriate. Chairman Shickle - Are you going to let me talk, or are you going to interrupt. Supervisor Forrester - I will listen. Chairman Shickle - Mr. Buettner raised the issue. He did receive a couple of phone calls on the matter. He would not have brought it up in the meeting had Mr. Buettner not raised the issue. It was an opportunity for us to do our business out in the open, it was not an attack on Mr. Reyes, in fact it was a chance for him to set the record straight, when none could be done during citizen comments. As far as the other issue you raised about the Planning Commission, he was glad she gave him her opinion, but she neglected to tell him what she felt about the sensor issue because it was a request of Mr. Reyes for Chairman Shickle. The third issue she raised, he asked her for assistance on this. Supervisor Forrester - Just that our draft operating guidelines are to try to work respectively with each other. Chairman Shickle - The reason he did not bring up the issue with the study group during the day on the Planning Commission was because Mr. Reyes made it a public issue with the news release. Had it not been there, he would have discussed it privately. However, it became a public matter, and when things become public, he would prefer to do his business at the Board meetings in front of the public and say things honestly and openly. No disrespect meant to Mr. Reyes. He wanted to have open dialogue with him and all the Board members so the entire public can see what is being discussed and who says what, not some place else where some people do press releases and some people don't. His intent there was to get the thing out in the open, at a Board meeting for all Board members to discuss it. Supervisor Forrester - She does not believe that the Board responds to every comment that they hear at the podium from someone in reference to - - - Chairman Shickle - He generally does if it is - - - - -. He has asked Mr. Tierney to check on, he didn't know how many, and he tries to make it a habit of giving the citizens some feedback on the issues they raise. Supervisor Forrester - I respectfully disagree, but that is your perception. She wanted to clarify that Mr. Reyes did not make a press release of those facts. In fact, the press contacted him first, and when that occurred, then he went ahead and notified the other two so that they would not Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 075 be blind sided, that is a little bit different. Supervisor Reyes - It was the radio station that called him and told him. Chairman Shickle - Advised that he received the letter the day after he had heard it on the radio, or newspaper, he is not sure. Chairman Reyes - He sent the letter to Chairman Shickle first, and he did not comment to the press, he made sure he didn't, but when the media called him and told him that the information they had was that he had resigned, was it true, he replied that yes it was. He further stated that he would not comment further as they would get it mixed up. He would give them a copy ofthe letter he had sent to Mr. Shickle, and so he did that with all three media, so he did not have a press release. They called him and when he asked them how they got the information, they replied it was leaked to them. Chairman Shickle - Advised that Mr. Reyes said something a minute ago that he certainly would agree with the late hour, and probably shouldn't say this, but if the press can mess it up, they will. He did receive his letters after he read it in the paper and heard it on the radio. That is not the fault ofMr. Reyes, he didn't know what they were talking about. Mr. Reyes - The dates of my letter will substantiate. Supervisor Sager - Ifhe understands right, we might have gotten the cart before the horse. We rezoned the Rutherford property so that the county might pursue industrial development, now we have just taken away the ability of putting water and sewer into that site, is that correct? Administrator Riley - I believe so, yes sir. Supervisor Reyes asked Chairman Shickle ifhe planned to respond to him concerning his memorandum about the action ofthe Planning Commission? Chairman Shickle - I can, would you like me to do that verbally or in writing. Supervisor Reyes - In writing. He had not heard an official response from him. Chairman Shickle - Advised that he thought he had done it at the last meeting, but he will do it. UPON MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR SAGER, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR SMITH, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (TIME: 11:40 P.M.) Minute Book Number 28 Board of Supervisors Meeting of OS/22/02 076 -- \2J--Q. ~----' Richard C. Shickle Chairman, Board of Supervisors Minutes Prepared By: ~-<).-L I: ~~ Carol T. Bayliss Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 23 Board of Supervisors Meeting of 05122102