Loading...
CEA_06-27-06_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES • OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY CONSERVATION EASEMENT AUTHORITY Held in the Executive Session Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on June 27, 2006 at 1:30 p.m. PRESENT: Richie Wilkins, Chairman; Bud Good, Vice Chairman; Diane Kearns, Treasurer; Barbara Van Osten; John Light; and, Jim Lawrence ABSENT: Robert Solenberger; Phil Glaize; and, Todd Lodge STAFF PRESENT: Kris Tierney, Assistant County Administrator; Susan Eddy, Senior Planner; and, Lauren Krempa, Zoning Technician ALSO PRESENT: Wingate Mackay- Smith; Pat McKelvy; and, George Ohrstrom (Members of the Clarke County Conservation Easement Authority); Alison Teeter (staff to the Clarke County Conservation Easement Authority); and, Faye Cooper with the Virginia Outdoors Foundation PUBLIC MEETING: Item I -Minutes Members approved the minutes of the May 25, 2006 meeting. Item 2 — Memorandum of Understanding with the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) Clarke County and Frederick County Easement Authority Members began by discussing common issues. Co- holding small easements was the first issue discussed. Frederick County Authority members noted that co- holding could be beneficial to the County since the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) provides the legal backing of the Attorney General and enforcement assistance. Clarke County representatives remarked that they currently hold 15 easements (two are purchased easements) that were too small for the VOF to consider. Clarke County generally directs owners of large parcels to the VOF. Clarke is now seeking co- holders to add an extra layer of protection to their easements. Other organizations that co -hold easements were discussed, but not all have the backing of the Attorney General. Discussion then turned to whether Frederick County should require potential easement donors to exhaust every other avenue before the County will accept their easement. The question was raised several times by members of the Frederick County CEA, "What if citizens are more comfortable with the County holding their easement? Should the County be involved?" Planner Eddy remarked that she had already come across this • issue with county residents considering easement donations. Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority -21 - Minules of June 27. 2006 • Member Good noted that Frederick County was seeking a more cooperative agreement with the VOF. Ms. Mackay -Smith stated that trained volunteers are often used for monitoring. Ms. Cooper explained the history behind the existing cooperative agreement between counties and the VOF, which gives counties the primary responsibility for monitoring the terms of any co -held easements. This agreement was based on the desire of other counties that co -hold easement with the VOF (namely Albemarle and Fauquier Counties) to maintain control over monitoring. The agreement was not considered a burden by those counties, but a preferred arrangement that left the counties in control. It was the impression of the Frederick County CEA Members that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors saw the responsibility for monitoring as a burden, not a benefit. Ms. Cooper clarified that the VOF does not lower its criteria for co -held easements. Ms. Cooper noted advantages of the VOF co- holding easements which included the backing of the Attorney General and some protection from eminent domain. Ms. Cooper informed the CEA that monitoring easements has three main components: court house research which includes changes in ownership, site visits with the property owner to explain the easement and enforce it, and the paperwork following the site visit. Ms. Cooper and the CEA discussed how the VOF and the County would need to work together and each party must be willing to provide resources. Ms. Cooper informed the CEA that there was a possibility to add a clause to all easements that the VOF would become the default holder in the event that the CEA is dissolved or fails to maintain their easements. The language for this clause will be sent to Planner Eddy. Members of the Authority were interested in the clause since the VOF could provide help and support on a higher level than the county is able to provide. Both Assistant County Administrator Tierney and Member Kearns recommended a program of education and involvement for Members of the Board of Supervisors and interested residents of the County. Assistant County Administrator Tierney advised that perhaps County staff could assist in easement monitoring while in the field on zoning violation monitoring. A suggestion was made that members of the CEA could form a voluntary committee to enforce the provisions of the easements at least once per year. Ms. Cooper noted that now might not be the time to pursue the cooperative agreement if the County was not committed to holding easements. Member Van Osten stated that a co- hold needs to be in place for this to work with the County, but the door should not be closed on this program. Some CEA Members were in favor of pursuing a re- negotiated memorandum of understanding with the VOF. Other Members were not in favor of pursuing further negotiation if it was the intention of the Board not to co -hold easements that other organizations are willing to hold. A general discussion of the role of the CEA followed. Ideas included targeting only small properties, targeting particular areas of the County or types of properties, or playing a purely educational role. • Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority -22- Minutes of June 27. 2006 • Other discussion points at the meeting included stewardship funds, PDR matching funds, and recent changes to the Virginia tax credits. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 7 James R. Wilkins 111, Chairman Susan K. Eddy, Secretary • • Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority -23- Minutes of June 27, 2006