Board of Supervisors Regular Second Meeting   10/16/2024

if all present could now stand as you are able and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

And if we could now join us in a moment of silence.

We have a motion from Supervisor Lapisto-Curtley, a second from Supervisor McNeil with no objection working for the roll.

Aye.

Our next item board is a brief announcement by board members and we'll go through our order for this meeting is starting with Supervisor Pruitt.

Thank you.

I thought I was in costume.

so I just want to again officially thank her for her time and I know that Zarina who's following up will be an apt replacement and once she's up to speed we'll be doing doing just a fine job as well and they're both from the Woodbrook neighborhood so I'm glad to still have that affiliation there so thank you Mary for your service on that board thank you Mr. Chair

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Mel.

Thank you very much.

Supervisor McKeil.

Thank you very much.

Yes.

Thank you.

They should know whether or not those are on the buses.

And we do have a couple of people to speak.

And our first speaker this afternoon is Tom Loche.

Please adjust my microphone.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Neil Williamson.

Good evening, Neil Williamson from the Free Enterprise Forum, where a privately funded public policy organization focused on central Virginia's local governments.

Thanks for the opportunity to speak.

So moved.

Second.

Without objection, if the clerk will call the roll.

Mr. Pruitt?

Aye.

Aye.

Welcome all.

Kilroy and Mr. Blank can assist as well.

Supervisor Prue.

What does this allow to happen next?

And this would just simply expand the classes of offenses that would be subject to the criminal forfeiture provisions.

That's correct.

What this would do would be to add certain additional offenses to that provision.

Would this be able to attach to crimes that have to go through JDR because the perpetrator is under 16?

I'm not prepared to address on the fly juvenile defendants and what would happen in a juvenile court for a defendant being tried there.

But it would have to be something that even could be prosecuted as a felony, which I think can't be done for defendants under a certain age.

I believe that all of these offenses are felonies, which would be tried in the circuit court, at least for adults.

And this is just our five prior.

And I'm certainly willing to accept your comments on that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Callaway.

What else would it be besides a cell phone?

That's, that's a good question.

Where's the list of the new items?

The list of new items is longer on the positions, which we've yet to get to.

The only other item I wanted was the, it was in the packet that I read something about the points on the licenses.

Right, that also is part of the positions that we'll be getting to in a few minutes.

I'm sure I provided a lot of extra that you didn't.

Well, and some of the points that you raised, Supervisor Galloway, we'll be getting to in the positions part of the president.

Thank you, Andy.

Thank you.

Supervisor Mellon.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor McHale.

Why would we waste our energy on, I mean,

It's crazy.

What other examples besides laptops and phones?

So that may be an additional advantage, despite perhaps the difficulty in liquidating a personal property.

Just not sure you're going to see that in this case.

Exactly.

And I think when people compare the two, it added on some angst.

I don't know whether he has anything that he wants to add but but again it would not be JLARC necessarily that would be studying that it would be a different agency and see that's great and so do you want to have that discussion a little bit later though but the discussion I do want to have later to get to the second point was you had you had cited the rent stabilization rent gouging that's part of the position statement and that's what we'll get to in the second part of my presentation that's perfect that's great and that's interesting because I think we're all used to JLARC studies and we just assumed that that would be what and we shouldn't assume

And I think that was all you wanted right now.

Okay.

And that had not been so that is part of understood original.

But also whether that's not that's not related to the photo authority, those two separate items.

Supervisor Lafist, you're correct.

Yes, I just wanted to say the truck restrictions, that would have to be boots on the ground in order to be able to do that, which is the photo.

Yes.

If their children are under 18, maybe that would be, you know, the cell phone, the computer, or could we make their, pardon me, their parents responsible?

Generally, it's the offender, him or herself that is that is facing the charges.

So and that would be difficult with a child.

Correct.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It also made a reference to the EPR program as well, which is the program.

Extended producer responsibility.

So with that, I really will stop and seek any comments or questions that you have.

Supervisor Brough.

And thank you so much for the staff work that went into this.

Thank you, Supervisor Gollum.

I think I've said everything I need to say the only add-on will be just for again from a strategy standpoint I know last year during the packet for the sunset clauses for the development items that that was last year advised that this would be the year that we should really get after that so we just have to make sure that that's a priority in our not just our meeting with our legislators but the advocacy when the GA convenes.

We did not go over all the things that got carried over from last year's to this, but that is in there.

I just the outcome will be curious to make certain.

I haven't seen overweight trucks, but I guess that's also included, correct?

Yes, ma'am.

And the over length trucks would be would come under unpermitted through trucks.

And that and the

That should be included in my opinion.

Supervisor Malik.

And hopefully we'll get there on something.

Supervisor McHugh.

Um, be tell me one more time though, how let's just make it clear how you would change this.

And you can tell if a truck is over 65 feet, if it has a sleeper cab, then they're going to be over 65 feet.

Right.

So we try to stay on top of all the attorneys in our office trying to stay on top of changes and then informing their respective departmental clients about changes in the law from year to year.

But if that's accurate, then we don't have to worry about it.

Not Albemarle, but again, my suspicion.

We don't have to

that's that's my understanding and I can certainly have that conversation with with the police chief.

It doesn't make any difference other than we just need to make sure we're all aware of what we're unable to do.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Are we are we the next thing on my agenda is whether or not you need a motion?

If the chair himself doesn't have further comments or questions about

Additional items, as I said before, and you mentioned, I would like to consider the possibility of extended producer responsibility and the sustainable materials management as a subset of sustainable materials management, but otherwise I have no other additional items.

But what what the motion would be is if there's if there's no concern or no objection to the priorities, simply a motion to attach the or excuse me, a motion to adopt the priorities statement as in attachment A. And then if there are amendments to attachment B, there could be a motion to adopt the attachment B with whatever amendments the board consensus is.

But where in the process do we also figure out which ones we will ask our delegates to carry?

I think that's part of the discussion.

So I'm curious if the board would be interested in on the rent stabilization line, just support legislation that would instead of enable localities to implement rent stabilization that would study local implementation.

And that gets to my concern about not hearing from our from Stacy, from our housing expert.

and I would also like to know the cost involved in that study.

That's a different department.

Just one if I may.

Sorry for stepping on you there.

and they're always looking a year ahead to kind of see what they have in queue for for the next go round.

not hearing a lot of suggestions for revision, so I believe we are in a position to look for a motion to support our proposed legislative priorities as presented.

To adopt Attachment A as the county's legislative priorities.

without objection that the court will call a roll.

Mr. Pruitt.

Aye.

Mr. Galloway.

Yes.

Bye.

Now, board, we are looking at the question of whether we want to amend Attachment B, legislative positions and policy statements, before considering a motion to adopt an amended Attachment B.

And I had heard again in the earlier discussion about the over length trucks that seem to be something that the board had discussed as a possible amendment to attachment.

So that's included.

We certainly could if the chair of the board wanted that to be as we certainly could.

Okay.

We can certainly add that if that's the consensus of the board.

Well, I would suggest for moving it at this point, we have a study coming on JLAR.

support language that would study localities implementing rent stabilization and rent countering protections.

And do we know who would do that?

I think the point is that we would leave it open.

We'd leave it open.

But it would not be us.

Okay, so what I'm hearing if I may for the board suggest that we're looking for a motion to adopt attachment be with the amendments that we include other like trucks that we include extended producer responsibility and sustainable materials management and that refer a reference to rates stabilization be support legislation that would study localities implementing of rent stabilization.

or if I might suggest to support a study or to support the study of or a state study of local information rather than legislation.

State study.

Yes, ma'am.

We have to establish the authority first.

It doesn't, it hurt, sorry, that there's enabling authority that allows that authority to be adopted.

I'm just saying.

So what I'd like to do is look to Mr. Blanermas.

Oh, she's not back there.

And these folks may be better able to address the timing.

Yes.

And why that particular.

Right.

So I'll defer to them as to why that position statement.

So it has, you know, I certainly what you say and I believe that that reflects the position that the group has taken.

for actually dealing with an authority, right?

And so we thought we may as well keep it in there for consistency, but again, sort of change our posture and how we address that in the meetings that we have with the legislators.

I just want to make sure everybody understood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Supervisor Malek.

through the committee halls down there, so I support leaving along.

Did you have something you actually wanted to say?

that it appears that we're based on the discussions that are happening at the RTP that it's one year away.

So everybody's on the same page.

Those would what I'm hearing to be the three amendments to attachment be looking for a motion to that effect.

Did you say the right the right of our first refusal?

My understanding is that there was that in the last that there was no interest in removing that that that would be no interest in removing good that there'd be the my understanding is that the board is ready to prove that is submitted.

We are looking for a motion to approve a test.

Is that correct?

I mean, if the board would like to see the amendments, we certainly can provide that to the board, but we're also looking.

I would like to move that the board adopt the legislative priorities as discussed to include the three amendments adding over length trucks, producer responsibilities, and a study on the effects of rent stabilization implemented locally.

So, and just to clarify, am I understanding that you want to adopt the legislative positions that were articulated attachment be with those amendments?

I did.

I want to make sure that we're talking about legislative positions and attachment with the three amendments that you had articulated.

Do I need to rearticulate the motion?

I'm going to jump in with a second.

But are there any other concerns?

But if he could email us the exact wording, that'd be great.

We can certainly do that.

If there are no further objections, well, if the court will call a roll.

Mr. Pruitt.

Aye.

Aye.

And if that suits the board, that's what staff will proceed with doing in terms of scheduling the legislative form.

Sounds good to me.

Very good.

Thank you.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you.

If in the future, we might consider different words than priority and positions, because I think the fact those both start with a pa sound is really swirling us all up.

again.

So again, it is my honor and privilege to introduce Dr. Cheryl Bailey for the remainder of the presentation, and I'll be available for questions with Dr. Bailey after we're done.

We always look forward to this.

Thank you very much for the honor to be here today.

I guess they're starting with the supervisor approval.

I would like to know if you think that is an unfair characterization or maybe an over extreme one.

So that's a that's a way of saying that the data supports that there are some there are some households that pull that average up very much for overall income.

I assumed that the charts we were looking at were providing medians vice-means.

Yes.

Thank you.

But when you're making a call, it's a tough call.

Supervisor Callaway.

We used to the freak out when it hit three bucks, not too long ago.

Slower inflation is not deflation.