Board of Supervisors Regular Second Meeting   7/15/2020

1. Call to Order.

2. Pledge of Allegiance.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:00:02
    All right, sorry everyone.

3. Moment of Silence.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:00:03
    We had a portion of the meeting that wasn't working properly, so it sounds like that is fixed.

4. Adoption of Final Agenda.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:00:09
    However, the Zoom portion of the meeting and the recording was working properly.
  • 00:00:13
    If you're on the portion, we have been through the call to order, the Pledge of Allegiance, the moment of silence.

5. Brief Announcements by Board Members.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:00:20
    We've adopted our agenda and we made it through one Supervisor Palmer's announcement, so we'll continue where we
  • 00:00:27
    continue there.
  • 00:00:28
    Supervisor McKeel, any announcements today?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:00:32
    Just one experience that I had and I know the other supervisors are probably aware that we're being invited to a virtual visit at the bridge line.
  • 00:00:44
    which is the facility that we support that is for individuals with traumatic brain injuries.
  • 00:00:54
    I participated in their virtual visit the other day and I just wanted to say to the supervisors and to the members of the public it was a wonderful opportunity.
• • SPEAKER_39
  • 00:01:05
    I enjoyed it very much, had an opportunity to even chat with several of their residents.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:01:14
    And the takeaway for me was two things for them.
  • 00:01:18
    And this is what we hear over and over in our community, transit and affordable housing.
  • 00:01:25
    And one young man was explaining that it took him five years to find an apartment
  • 00:01:33
    Next up, Supervisor Mallek.
  • 00:01:35
    Any announcements today?
  • 00:01:36
    You're muted Ann.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:01:59
    There we go.
  • 00:02:00
    Thank you.
  • 00:02:01
    Tomorrow is the second of the White Hall District COVID-19 testing.
  • 00:02:06
    It is from 8 to 10 a.m.
  • 00:02:08
    at the Crozet Firehouse.
  • 00:02:10
    And again, all of the appointments were gobbled up in the first 90 minutes when they were offered yesterday.
  • 00:02:17
    So there will be another third adventure on the 30th of July at the Earliesville Firehouse and
  • 00:02:23
    Appointments will be taken on Monday of that week starting at 8 o'clock.
  • 00:02:27
    So I want everybody to have that in their mind.
  • 00:02:31
    Part of my adventure in the Bean Patch yesterday was to be participating by phone with the EPA Water Group for the Small Government Advisory Committee, and we heard
  • 00:02:44
    An update from EPA about what has already been done and put up for final approval changes to the certifications for discharges into our waterways under the Clean Water Act from the 1970s.
  • 00:02:59
    And various more experienced people in state government said, so what's in it for us?
  • 00:03:04
    You're asking us to approve something when we haven't even had a chance to discuss it with our state people.
  • 00:03:11
    about what the impacts are going to be for things which our commonwealth is responsible for doing.
  • 00:03:16
    So this is pretty typical of what I've seen over the last two years at the NACo meetings as well.
  • 00:03:22
    The executive just comes in and they chop things with an axe and then expect you to live with it.
  • 00:03:27
    So it's very difficult.
  • 00:03:30
    There was a lot of pushback from the 50 members around the committee and hopefully we will have a better result in the end, but it was very frustrating.
  • 00:03:39
    And I'm glad to hear that the discussion for the updated maintenance code work is coming in September.
  • 00:03:46
    I'm disappointed it's not August, but that's life.
  • 00:03:49
    And we have more and more homes in all of our districts, similar to the one I learned about on Monday, which has been abandoned for eight years, it turns out, and has ivy growing all through the insides.
  • 00:04:01
    is making everybody crazy.
  • 00:04:02
    So we really need to look forward to not leaving our citizens in the lurch to fight for themselves and have a stronger outcome when we get together in September on that.
  • 00:04:14
    And echoing what Liz said about the heat, also having all of our local groups being encouraged to check in on their elderly neighbors, providing they'll be
  • 00:04:28
    Cooling centers, people can reach out to friends to be able to get some of our elders in.
  • 00:04:34
    It's supposed to be 100 at the end of this week, so it's going to be awful.
  • 00:04:38
    Thank you everyone.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:04:39
    Thank you.
  • 00:04:42
    Supervisor Price, announcements today.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 00:04:45
    Thank you Chair Galloway.
  • 00:04:46
    You know, one of the negative impacts that everyone is facing with the social distancing and remote working has been the constraints upon fully functioning internet access.
  • 00:04:59
    And last week we had a really good meeting.
  • 00:05:02
    Michael Culp and the entire ABBA board, as well as the county and CenturyLink have come together and we had a briefing on an incredible increase expansion.
  • 00:05:15
    of fiber optics that is going into in large areas in South Albemarle County.
  • 00:05:21
    Of course, it'll take a little while till I think March or May of next year before that's finished, but that will see a substantial increase in availability.
  • 00:05:29
    But I've also received a number of inquiries from constituents who are working from home and find that the bandwidth is insufficient for them to be able to do their work from home
  • 00:05:40
    We know that students will soon be facing the possibility of virtual education, which will increase the demand.
  • 00:05:47
    And I just want to encourage our constituents to let us know where the problems are so that we can focus our attention to try and get more coverage from more people.
  • 00:05:56
    Thank you, Chair Gallow.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:06:00
    Thank you.
  • 00:06:01
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley, announcements today?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:06:04
    Yes, as usual, Supervisor Price stole what I was going to say because I've gotten a number of requests from or concerns from constituents regarding internet access.
  • 00:06:17
    I do believe
  • 00:06:20
    We need to focus also on, now that the schools are going to be doing online learning, there's a proposal for continuing online learning, we really need to up our game or do whatever we can to help the internet providers
  • 00:06:36
    and the school district, make sure that the children at least have access to internet so that the learning can, as it is, can continue.
  • 00:06:47
    And then also for those who are working from home into our businesses, so that can continue also.
  • 00:06:53
    So yes, I just reiterate what Supervisor Price said.
  • 00:06:59
    Thank you very much.
  • 00:07:00
    And that's all for me.
  • 00:07:02
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:07:05
    Thank you very much.
  • 00:07:07
    I do not have any announcements today.

6. Proclamations and Recognitions:

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:07:12
    And the next item on our agenda, we do proclamations and recognitions.

7. Resolution of Appreciation for William M. Letteri.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:07:18
    And we do have a resolution of appreciation today for Mr. William LaTerri.
  • 00:07:24
    And I would love to be able to read this resolution as a motion.
  • 00:07:29
    Whereas William M. Bill LaTerri has faithfully served the County of Albemarle for over 13 years, beginning in 2007 as the Director of the Office of Facilities Development, then as Assistant County Executive beginning in 2011,
  • 00:07:45
    his deputy county executive beginning 2014 before his final appointment as the county's first chief financial officer in 2018 and whereas Bill shared generously with the county his significant combination of knowledge, skill, talent, and experience in providing overall leadership to several operating departments including
  • 00:08:06
    Finance, Information Technology, Facilities and Environmental Services, Office of Management and Budget, Human Resources, Parks and Recreation, and Social Services, and is credited with many meaningful achievements during his Albemarle County career, including capital projects such as Meadow Creek Parkway, the Northside Library, Seminole Trail, Volunteer Fire Station, and County Courts facilities,
  • 00:08:30
    productive coordination with Albemarle County Public Schools, constitutional officers and other partner agencies, implementation of an organizational risk management program, initiation of the broadband task force, completion of access Albemarle Enterprise financial information system, oversight of the county's healthcare program and reserve fund among many other successes.
  • 00:08:52
    And whereas Bill will always be regarded as an unwavering advocate for the financial stewardship role of county government,
  • 00:09:00
    helping the counties secure and maintain a AAA bond rating from each of the three recognized rating agencies, a leading indicator of financial stability and the highest distinction among counties throughout the country.
  • 00:09:13
    And whereas Bill has been a valued public servant and a trusted colleague who appreciated the best attributes of everyone around him, utilizing those professional relationships as key ingredients for effective problem solving and effective positive change for the organization and the community,
  • 00:09:30
    and whereas, perhaps more than anything else, Bill will be forever known as a really good person whose genuine compassion for and kindness to others was demonstrated consistently in all that he said and did.
  • 00:09:43
    Now, therefore be it resolved by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that Bill LaTerri is hereby honored and commended for his many years of exceptional service to the County of Albemarle, Albemarle County residents, the broader community in which we live,
  • 00:09:58
    and the entire Commonwealth of Virginia with knowledge that Albemarle County is strengthened and distinguished by Bill's dedication, commitment, professionalism and compassion in meeting community needs.
  • 00:10:10
    Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be spread upon the minutes of this meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors as a lasting, visible testament to the esteem in which Bill is held by this board and previous boards for his lasting legacy of community service and the tangible results from his work to make Albemarle County better for future generations.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 00:10:32
    Second.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:10:34
    Claudette, can we call the vote?
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 00:10:36
    Mr. Galloway, Ms.
  • 00:10:38
    LaPisto-Kirtley, Ms.
  • 00:10:40
    Mallek, Ms.
  • 00:10:42
    McKeel, Ms.
  • 00:10:44
    Palmer, Ms.
  • 00:10:45
    Price,
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:10:48
    And at this point, we have Mr. Lotteri with us.
  • 00:10:51
    I am going to give an opportunity, Supervisors, if you would like to make a few remarks and comments, and then I'm going to have some others who would like to do the same.
  • 00:10:59
    And then we'll be giving a chance for Mr. Lotteri to make some comments as well.
  • 00:11:04
    Supervisors, I'll go through our order.
  • 00:11:06
    Supervisor Potter?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:11:09
    I just want to thank him very much.
  • 00:11:12
    And I won't take any more time with that because I know there's a lot of people who would like to say
  • 00:11:18
    many good things about Bill.
  • 00:11:20
    So thank you very, very much for all your long years of service.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:11:26
    Supervisor McKeel.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:11:28
    Bill, I just want to say that whether it was working with you many, many years ago when the LaTerri brothers were putting in a bay window at my house,
  • 00:11:39
    which I will tell you is still there and still working properly and in great shape.
  • 00:11:44
    Or working with you as a supervisor, well really as a school board representative and then as a supervisor.
  • 00:11:50
    It has been a pleasure.
  • 00:11:52
    We will certainly miss you and I do hope you'll keep in touch and one of these days I hope you'll be able to travel again.
  • 00:12:01
    Because I know that's one of your pleasures and joys in life.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:12:07
    Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:12:08
    Thank you.
  • 00:12:09
    I'm sorry I was not able to join the shindig yesterday and I was trying to figure out how to do a movie but I will send you some competitive gardening pictures and I expect to get some in back because for all these 10 years we have been sharing produce as well as successes and failures in our gardens and that is the only good thing about this COVID stuff is that it's too bad I couldn't have a party because the garden looks better than it looks since 1982.
  • 00:12:37
    But anyway, I just want to remember so clearly and fondly how we never would have made it through the recession in 09 without all the leadership that you had in providing
  • 00:12:48
    all those complex background lectures about headroom and how to keep ourselves out of hot water.
  • 00:12:56
    And those are lessons I've never forgotten.
  • 00:12:58
    And that movie to finance the department that touches every single person in the whole entire 110,000 of us.
  • 00:13:06
    Those are just big, big responsibilities and I'm so grateful.
  • 00:13:09
    So you and Nancy have fun.
  • 00:13:12
    and I picked five gallons of beans yesterday and today.
  • 00:13:15
    I mean, five buckets full.
  • 00:13:16
    So the family better be snapping right now at home because I'm going to have to freeze them when I get home.
  • 00:13:22
    Thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:13:24
    Supervisor Price.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 00:13:25
    Thank you, Chair Galloway.
  • 00:13:26
    Mr. Letari, though my time working with you on the board has been relatively brief, I do want to pass on to you that when I was making a decision a few years ago as to where I wanted to settle down, it is in large measure because of what you have done here for the county.
  • 00:13:44
    that made this the attractive place that it is, which really, really contributed to my decision to move here.
  • 00:13:50
    So as a resident, even more than as a supervisor, I want to thank you for making this the place where I wanted to be and where I wanted my family to be.
  • 00:14:00
    Thank you and good luck.
  • 00:14:03
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:14:05
    Well Mr. Letari we didn't get a chance to really work personally together and I'm sorry for that and I'm sorry I hope that's not why you're leaving because the two new board members but I will say that I'm kind of surprised that the the other supervisors and staff that know you well did not offer a name change.
  • 00:14:28
    I think we should call you Mr. AAA.
  • 00:14:31
    Thank you for everything you've done and congratulations on your retirement.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:14:37
    Wilson.
  • 00:14:39
    Bill, I share in Diantha that my first experience was as a school board member and always appreciated your even-keeled approach to discussing things, but I, for one, as a member of that board, and then I came off of the board before the bond referendum passed, but I was as, you know, I was a very public advocate for the passing of that bond, and I recall and appreciated
  • 00:15:03
    both as a school board member and then afterward as a citizen, your guidance through that whole process.
  • 00:15:08
    You were a key player in getting that, making sure everybody was informed about what it meant financially for the county and just making sure we were all educated on it and for that I'm grateful.
  • 00:15:21
    You are obviously somebody that I see that has a tremendous portfolio of skills and knowledge and the county has benefited from that immensely.
  • 00:15:30
    I was thrilled in the resolution that it noted
  • 00:15:34
    genuine compassion for and kindness to others.
  • 00:15:36
    That is something that I think is observed from anybody that has watched a meeting in which you participated.
  • 00:15:42
    You've certainly enjoyed your time to go enjoy and it's well earned and I hope you do enjoy it and just know that my appreciation for your service to this county and for everybody that lives here is sincere and genuine and appreciate all the service you've given.
  • 00:16:00
    I know that there are some in the County Executive Office.
  • 00:16:02
    I will hand this over to Mr. Richardson and then Jeff will also include others who would like to make a few comments.
• • SPEAKER_09
  • 00:16:12
    Mr. Chair, thank you very much.
  • 00:16:14
    The staff did, as Supervisor Mallek pointed out, the staff did yesterday have a virtual celebration for Bill and his family and I believe all of his family members were able to participate and that was quite special.
  • 00:16:30
    We had about 40 people participate virtually on the call.
  • 00:16:35
    We did a fair deal for Bill and his family and a lot of well wishes from the organization as a whole.
  • 00:16:43
    I'd like to heed the rest of my time to our Deputy County
  • 00:16:46
    Executive Doug Walker who has worked with Bill for about seven, eight years, as well as Greg Campner who did not have an opportunity to participate yesterday because he was working to get ready for today.
  • 00:16:58
    But I do know that Bill knows how much I personally appreciate his willingness to work
  • 00:17:05
    and whatever was necessary to move the organization forward.
  • 00:17:12
    He was our utility infielder.
  • 00:17:14
    So wherever you put him, he fit in and he made it work and was quiet but in reserved, polite and very caring.
  • 00:17:28
    So with that, Doug, I'll turn it over to you.
• • SPEAKER_17
  • 00:17:31
    Thank you, Bill.
  • 00:17:33
    Thank you, Jeff, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
  • 00:17:36
    We did have an opportunity yesterday to share some stories and anecdotes.
  • 00:17:41
    And one that I shared was pretty personal in the role that Bill played in enabling me to actually to come to the county, besides Tom Foley is the first person that I interacted with as part of the interview process.
  • 00:17:59
    And I won't share that same story
  • 00:18:02
    today, but I did want to emphasize the role that Bill played as my colleague and counterpart.
  • 00:18:09
    We were both assistant county executives at the time.
  • 00:18:13
    Of course, he was here, had been here, had an established portfolio working on the
  • 00:18:18
    the more internal facing functions of the county.
  • 00:18:21
    And of course, coming in from outside, replacing another colleague that Bill was quite close to.
  • 00:18:29
    And it's always challenging and delicate, bringing in a new personality, bringing in a new person to take over an existing role, typically one that works that closely with the other assistant kind of executive themselves.
  • 00:18:46
    Again, I really appreciate that.
  • 00:18:48
    The story that I did want to tell, and this does emphasize what's already been, I guess, pointed out by others, the opportunity that I had to join Bill and the finance director and our financial advisors to travel to New York to defend our triple AAA bond rating.
  • 00:19:08
    This was now several years ago ahead of a
  • 00:19:12
    Burrowing at the time.
  • 00:19:13
    And that's what you do.
  • 00:19:15
    You go and you present, you make your case for why it is that we should continue to be
  • 00:19:22
    McClelland, and
  • 00:19:43
    I wanted to share, because you all were there,
  • 00:19:59
    is the commentary from the analyst.
  • 00:20:03
    And some of these analysts have known the county for years because they do have their own portfolio.
  • 00:20:09
    And so there's this consistency over time.
  • 00:20:11
    And also they leave really good notes.
  • 00:20:13
    And so new analysts coming in are able to kind of learn from history about what's been shared.
  • 00:20:20
    And the regard that they immediately expressed to Bill and to Betty Burrell at the time
  • 00:20:28
    and to the county as a whole for the consistency with which that we as a county had maintained the stability of our financial position was made the job really easy.
  • 00:20:43
    I've been on those same similar trips with other localities and I've never experienced what I experienced in going up there with Bill and that team and it's a testament to him
  • 00:20:53
    and others, you'd be the first to say, it's not just him.
  • 00:20:57
    Bill was a humble guy, nothing else.
  • 00:20:59
    But this is the time to acknowledge the significant role that Bill played in that.
  • 00:21:04
    It doesn't happen by accident.
  • 00:21:05
    It does take leadership.
  • 00:21:07
    It does take perseverance and persistence.
  • 00:21:10
    And you just don't get that kind of response from those analysts in situations like that.
  • 00:21:16
    So to say it was easy is true in the moment of that exchange.
  • 00:21:23
    But it's only because of all the work that Bill and his team and others have done over the years to put us in that position.
  • 00:21:28
    So I would say I just want to acknowledge that to the board and to those that are listening from the public about how significant that is.
  • 00:21:36
    And goodness knows, make sure Bill knows we'll do everything we can to hold on to it, kind of going forward.
  • 00:21:42
    So thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chair and board members for the opportunity to share that story.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:21:50
    Thank you, Doug.
  • 00:21:50
    Mr. Kamner.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 00:21:55
    Bill and I have already spoken, but Bill, congratulations again.
  • 00:21:58
    It's always been very pleasurable working with you, and Cindy also sends her congratulations, and she looks forward to when we can get together again and talk woodshop.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:22:14
    All right, Mr. AAA, it's time for you to have a few moments, if you would, if you'd like to make a few remarks.
  • 00:22:21
    Mr. Letaria, you're muted, so make sure you unmute.
  • 00:22:25
    Good afternoon.
• • SPEAKER_44
  • 00:22:25
    All right.
  • 00:22:30
    Can you all hear me now?
• • SPEAKER_28
  • 00:22:32
    Yes, sir.
• • SPEAKER_44
  • 00:22:33
    Very well.
  • 00:22:34
    Chairman Galloway, board members, Mr. Richardson and Doug and Greg, I can't thank you enough.
  • 00:22:43
    Thank you so much for this recognition.
  • 00:22:46
    It means so much to me.
  • 00:22:49
    I have to say it has truly been an honor and a privilege to serve the board and the citizens of Albemarle.
  • 00:22:57
    This past decade certainly has been an exciting time and especially exciting to be among the leadership team that makes it all happen.
  • 00:23:06
    I think the county has seen so many transitions and improvements, important improvements, and I'm really proud to be a part of helping to make
  • 00:23:18
    both this organization and the community a better place to live and work.
  • 00:23:24
    I want to thank the board in particular for your confidence and the opportunities you've given me to serve both the organization and the citizens.
  • 00:23:37
    I'm really proud of my accomplishments.
  • 00:23:40
    As Doug says, I didn't do it alone.
  • 00:23:43
    Doug would often say it's a team sport.
  • 00:23:47
    and I thank the board for their guidance and for my staff and the team for helping to get us where we are.
  • 00:23:56
    It has really been for me an exciting and very, very rewarding career.
  • 00:24:02
    Being in public service is, as I said yesterday, really special.
  • 00:24:09
    I also would want to take this opportunity briefly to thank all my colleagues and friends, both
  • 00:24:16
    at the county and in the community for their real unwavering support and friendship over the years.
  • 00:24:24
    It's meant so much to me, and I hope that I will continue to see all of you and all of them in the future as time goes on.
  • 00:24:35
    I certainly intend to stay in Albemarle County residents.
  • 00:24:38
    Nancy and I love living here, and I'm sure we will be here for some time.
  • 00:24:42
    So thank you again.
  • 00:24:44
    I'll certainly miss you all.
  • 00:24:46
    and again, hope to see you soon.
  • 00:24:50
    Thank you so much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:24:52
    Thank you, Bill.
  • 00:24:54
    And again, words cannot express, certain words cannot express the appreciation this board has for your many, many years of service and we wish you well as you enjoy writing the next chapter.
  • 00:25:05
    And you know, as a constituent, there's ways to participate.
  • 00:25:10
    If you decide to do so, I'm sure we would love to have that, we would open it or have an open invitation for you.
  • 00:25:16
    Thank you again Bill and enjoy.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:25:19
    DCAC meetings are right around the corner.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:25:25
    Thank you.
  • 00:25:29
    Very good.
  • 00:25:29
    Board the next item today.

8. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda or on Matters Previously Considered by the Board or Matters that are Pending Before the Board.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:25:35
    From the public matters not listed for public hearing on the agenda or on matters previously considered by the board or matters that are pending before the board.
  • 00:25:45
    Do we have folks signed up today for public comment?
• • SPEAKER_36
  • 00:25:52
    We have one person signed up today that is Peter.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:25:55
    If you'll hold just for a minute then we will I'll turn things over to Vice Chair Price to go ahead with the public comment guidelines.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 00:26:02
    Thank you Chair Galloway.
  • 00:26:03
    During the time set aside for matters not listed
  • 00:26:07
    on the agenda.
  • 00:26:09
    Individuals may address the Board of Supervisors concerning matters previously considered by the Board or matters that are pending before the Board other than items listed on the agenda for public hearings.
  • 00:26:21
    Individuals are allowed three minutes to speak and a sign-up sheet has been established electronically.
  • 00:26:27
    The Clerk's Office manages that.
  • 00:26:30
    Timekeeping is conducted through a timer.
  • 00:26:32
    The timer will commence when you begin speaking and this begins your allotted time.
  • 00:26:37
    You will be notified when the three minutes are up and you are requested to bring your comments to a close as your microphone will be muted after about 30 seconds.
  • 00:26:47
    In order to give all speakers equal treatment and courtesy, the board requests speakers adhere to the following guidelines.
  • 00:26:54
    When called to address the board, please state your name and if you live in Albemarle County, your magisterial district.
  • 00:27:03
    Address comments directly to the board as a whole.
  • 00:27:06
    If you have written statements or other supporting material, you may email them to the clerk to be included in the record.
  • 00:27:14
    If you represent a group or organization, you may identify the group to be recognized.
  • 00:27:21
    If the speaker does not use all allotted time, the unused time may not be shared with another speaker, and speakers are permitted one opportunity to comment during each of the public comment periods per meeting.
  • 00:27:33
    Back and forth debate is prohibited.
  • 00:27:36
    If you are connecting by phone, please press star nine.
  • 00:27:41
    And as a reminder, all comments are live streamed, recorded, and published on the Albemarle County website.
  • 00:27:48
    Thank you, Chair Galloway.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:27:50
    Thank you.
  • 00:27:50
    And I did neglect that when I was doing introductions earlier, we do have our assistant to the clerk, Grace Tamblin, assisting with us today.
  • 00:27:56
    Grace, who is ready for public comment?
• • SPEAKER_36
  • 00:28:04
    We have Peter Krems.
• • SPEAKER_25
  • 00:28:07
    All right.
  • 00:28:08
    Good afternoon, Peter.
  • 00:28:08
    Are you there?
  • 00:28:20
    Peter, are you online?
• • SPEAKER_20
  • 00:28:23
    Yes, thank you.
  • 00:28:24
    Just able to unmute myself now.
  • 00:28:26
    Thank you so much.
  • 00:28:28
    Good afternoon.
  • 00:28:29
    I'm Peter Krebs from the Piedmont Environmental Council.
  • 00:28:33
    I'm speaking today about the Presidio project, which is on the consent agenda.
  • 00:28:37
    I'm not concerned about the voting matter, but rather want to highlight an opportunity to repeat, an opportunity to avoid repeating an earlier mistake at a different location.
  • 00:28:49
    The project site sits atop an important future bicycle and pedestrian connection that is described in the brand new Pentops Master Plan.
  • 00:28:58
    It would link St.
  • 00:28:59
    Tara Martha Jefferson Hospital and the Pentops community to the site of the future pedestrian bridge over the Rivanna, the new Woolen Mills development, the city of Charlottesville, and the wider community.
  • 00:29:11
    The site plan does include a trail to the river, but it's at the rear of the property without dedicated parking or specific public access.
  • 00:29:19
    The only way for non-residents to get there would be a private road that doesn't have bike lanes.
  • 00:29:25
    As a substitute, the developer worked with the county to slice off a difficult but apparently feasible parcel on the site's north side.
  • 00:29:34
    The idea is for the county to build something there eventually, but I have to say that it would be challenging to do so after the fact, and the county's experience bears that out.
  • 00:29:46
    It's a lot like what happened at Fifth Street Station.
  • 00:29:49
    Just last month, the board approved the second multimillion-dollar grant application for the Fifth Street Trails project, which should have been built as part of the shopping center, or at least put in while the ground was broken for that.
  • 00:30:03
    Not doing so, it's made retrofitting the trail extraordinarily difficult, costs millions of dollars, and it's forcing everyone to wait a decade or more for a trail that should already be in place.
  • 00:30:14
    Let's instead find a way to grade this critical connector in while shovels are in the ground for the housing development.
  • 00:30:22
    I've just seen drawings that show that it can be done and it's really exciting.
  • 00:30:27
    It'll make it possible for
  • 00:30:30
    eventually for Willow Tree employees to live in Pantops, for Martha Jefferson caregivers to reduce stress by walking along the river, or for Charlottesville residents to walk to work at State Farm.
  • 00:30:47
    It'll build on exciting work that is happening nearby and throughout the region and be a big win for the community's health, well-being, and prosperity, and also be good for the developer.
  • 00:30:58
    Let's get to work together and get it done.
  • 00:31:01
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:04
    Thank you, Peter.
  • 00:31:05
    Grace, do we have any others who wish to speak today?
• • SPEAKER_36
  • 00:31:10
    We do not have anyone else.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:13
    Very good.
  • 00:31:14
    We will close matters from the public.

9. Consent Agenda (on next sheet)

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:20
    And move to number, I'm sorry, move to number eight, our consent agenda.
  • 00:31:23
    Do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda?
  • 00:31:27
    So moved.
  • 00:31:30
    Second?
• • SPEAKER_31
  • 00:31:31
    Second.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:32
    Right, the motion was made by Supervisor Price, seconded by Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley.
  • 00:31:37
    Go ahead and call the vote.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 00:31:39
    Mr. Galloway?
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:40
    Yes.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 00:31:41
    Ms.
  • 00:31:41
    LaPisto-Kirtley?
  • 00:31:42
    Aye.
  • 00:31:43
    Ms.
  • 00:31:43
    Mallek?
  • 00:31:44
    Yes.
  • 00:31:45
    Ms.
  • 00:31:45
    McKeel?
  • 00:31:46
    Yes.
  • 00:31:47
    Ms.
  • 00:31:47
    Palmer?
  • 00:31:48
    Yes.
  • 00:31:49
    Ms.
  • 00:31:49
    Price?
  • 00:31:51
    Aye.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:52
    Very good, the consent agenda is approved.
  • 00:31:54
    Thank you.

10. Albemarle Agency Budget Review Team (ABRT) FY 22 Application Process.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:31:55
    and our first action item today number nine Albemarle agency budget review team fiscal year 22 application process and I'm seeing names pop up on the screen oh there you go Lori, Lori am I handing over to you on this one to lead off?
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:32:14
    Yes, sir.
  • 00:32:15
    Chairman Galloway and members of the board, my name is Lori Allshouse.
  • 00:32:20
    I'm here to talk with you about a process that we do annually to provide funding for agencies.
  • 00:32:28
    And Phyllis Savitas is with me here today, and she's going to pull up our presentation.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:32:40
    Can you say that?
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:32:41
    Yes, ma'am.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:32:44
    Okay.
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:32:46
    You may want to put it to a slideshow Phyllis.
  • 00:32:54
    Thank you so much.
  • 00:32:56
    So, as I mentioned, we're going to talk with you about a process that we do every year, and we have some suggestions for improvements, which is another thing we do every year.
  • 00:33:05
    Every year, we look at our processes that we've done in the budget, and we identify future improvements.
  • 00:33:11
    And what we're going to do today is I'm going to kick us off.
  • 00:33:13
    Phyllis, who's the director of social services, will be providing information throughout the presentation, and then I'll bring us home at the end.
  • 00:33:24
    So our desired outcome today is for you to hear about our adjustments that we have as a recommendation for human service goals.
  • 00:33:34
    And for those of you that are new to the board, it's really important for us to identify human service goals for the community agencies that apply for our funding contributions each year.
  • 00:33:45
    and we have some, I think, some really important changes to the goals that we really want you to look at.
  • 00:33:50
    You will be asked at the end of the process each year to approve funding, so it's important to have you involved at the beginning.
  • 00:33:58
    The other thing I really want to emphasize at this point is we're talking about fiscal year 22 already.
  • 00:34:04
    As you know, we work in fiscal years.
  • 00:34:05
    We're currently in fiscal year 21.
  • 00:34:08
    And so what we're doing now is we're talking about the process for funding for next year.
  • 00:34:13
    So it'll be funding beginning July of next year.
  • 00:34:17
    And the second thing that we're going to talk with you about is a suggestion that this group has.
  • 00:34:22
    And this group that Phyllis is going to be talking about is a staff team that works very closely with these contributions.
  • 00:34:29
    and how we manage them and how we make sure that we provide good research and good review of their applications and make scoring decisions that are appropriate.
  • 00:34:42
    And to do so, we're going to suggest that we have a county managed application system
  • 00:34:48
    And by that I mean, you'll hear in the next slide, this would be something really just county owned, and it would not only be used for what we call the ABRT system, but also for other funding situations that we are in, such as funding for arts and cultural and future funding programs for those who are requesting housing funding.
  • 00:35:12
    So the first thing I'd like to do is just provide a quick background on what we call ABRT.
  • 00:35:18
    The ABRT was created back in 1991, so this is a long-term approach that the county had done in coordination with the city.
  • 00:35:28
    And so basically since 1991, ABRT
  • 00:35:32
    was a city county process that received the request from the community nonprofit agencies and then made recommendations on the scoring and then the city and the county then would make the funding recommendations based on the overall budgets of the city and the county.
  • 00:35:49
    and over the years every year we do this every year through our continuous improvement process that we do for all of our budget processes we take a look at the process of the previous year and say how can we approve so over the years we did that all along with the ABRT process and as such we made changes we refined we we have a real focus on outcomes and performance that stayed but we made other little adjustments along the way
  • 00:36:13
    and for some of you know that we move the arts and cultural applications outside of human services.
  • 00:36:18
    There was a time when they were kind of competing scoring wise with human services and as you know those two those two types of agencies do very different things.
  • 00:36:28
    So the county had already pulled their own process away for our arts and cultural applications away from this process.
  • 00:36:36
    And then those of you who were on the board remembered that the board approved moving to a county-owned process, a county-only process in fiscal year 20.
  • 00:36:44
    And that process that we, the city was reviewing things and making some adjustments.
  • 00:36:49
    And we had a lot of, we saw a lot of value in the ABRT process.
  • 00:36:54
    And in that it was community volunteer and staff member teams working together.
  • 00:36:58
    There was a real focus on goals and outcome measures.
  • 00:37:02
    And we use an application
  • 00:37:05
    process.
  • 00:37:06
    And so we felt really good about a lot of the functions of the ABRT that the county wanted to continue on with.
  • 00:37:12
    The one thing that we did continue to do though is we used the city's, and I call it for lack of a better word, their grant application portal.
  • 00:37:20
    So basically when an applicant was going to apply for county-only funding, they would still go through a process through the city's website to access an application.
  • 00:37:30
    And so that was something that we had done in the last couple years.
  • 00:37:34
    And also there was still a city-county joint scoring matrix in the past two years as we were changing and evolving in the program.
  • 00:37:42
    And so basically this last year, our current budget, the county, we continued our ABRT approach.
  • 00:37:48
    Again, we use all the same processes that the county bills are very important for this process.
  • 00:37:54
    And as you know, there's $1.67 million of funding in our current budget.
  • 00:38:00
    for human service agencies.
  • 00:38:02
    And it was for 22 human service agencies.
  • 00:38:04
    So that's a little bit about the background.
  • 00:38:06
    And then what we're gonna do is have Phyllis share with you some of the recommended changes for the year ahead.
  • 00:38:12
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:38:15
    Good afternoon, Chair Galloway and members of the board.
  • 00:38:18
    My name is Phyllis Savitas and I'm Director of Social Services.
  • 00:38:22
    Thank you for the opportunity to present our recommendations for the FY22 AVRT process.
  • 00:38:29
    As Lori mentioned, an internal team of staff from Social Services, the Office of Equity and Inclusion, Community Development, and the Office of Management and Budget has been working together reviewing the survey instrument, human services goals, and also the scoring instrument
  • 00:38:50
    Our primary goal was to increase the clarity and efficiency for both reviewers and applicants as well as achieve positive results for the process.
  • 00:39:01
    We have updated the county's human services goals and the next few slides will show some details, but I also wanted to inform the board that we have received permission to obtain a new web-based grant application tool and we will begin working on creating a new
  • 00:39:18
    application questionnaire and scoring matrix.
  • 00:39:22
    This application will also seek to ensure that the applicant follows all relevant policies and procedures.
  • 00:39:32
    So the objectives for our review of the human services goals included an interest in collapsing redundancies.
  • 00:39:41
    We felt like some of the goals were
  • 00:39:46
    We wanted to prioritize a response to the post-pandemic recovery.
  • 00:39:52
    But most importantly, we wanted to include a focus on whether or not the applicant service delivery include an emphasis on equity and inclusion.
  • 00:40:06
    We wanted to make sure that our process was in keeping with the Albemarle County mission.
  • 00:40:16
    The next two slides lists the goals with the revised language that we incorporated, but also reflects a prioritization that we want to recommend and the focus on equity and inclusion.
  • 00:40:34
    And last year, the list of human services goals were not listed in any particular priority.
  • 00:40:41
    But for this upcoming year, we wanted to include that.
  • 00:40:45
    So for example, I wanted to highlight the second bullet.
  • 00:40:52
    that the services are aimed at building an equitable, sustainable food system or increasing access to healthy, cultural, appropriate food.
  • 00:41:03
    In other words, that's directly related to some of the effects of the pandemic.
  • 00:41:08
    And then wanted to highlight number four, which states that the services will address disparities in access or opportunity for youth of color.
  • 00:41:21
    While not the highest priority goals, the goals on this screen are still important in our minds and we want to keep them in the overall list.
  • 00:41:32
    We do not want to minimize the importance of supporting service providers that focus on reducing the achievement gap within disadvantaged students, increasing medical and dental support, and increasing mental health support.
  • 00:41:51
    So lastly, we wanted the board to know that we are proceeding with a county web-based application system instead of using the city system.
  • 00:42:01
    And this slide lists some of the benefits that we believe having our own system
  • 00:42:09
    will provide.
  • 00:42:10
    For example, the number two on this slide, this will allow us to ensure that the applications, i.e.
  • 00:42:18
    the questions, the scoring criteria will be aligned with county goals.
  • 00:42:23
    Another example is number four, having our own system will allow us to have an increased clarity for county residents regarding services provided.
  • 00:42:39
    So before I turn it back over to Lori, I wanted to pause to see if any of the board members have questions regarding the revised human services goals.
  • 00:42:54
    And Siri, Russell, and Stacey Pethey are also on the call, I believe, and any of us would be happy to entertain questions.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:43:02
    Thank you, Phyllis.
  • 00:43:03
    Supervisor Palmer, any questions at this time?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:43:06
    So I don't have questions about the revised goals.
  • 00:43:11
    I think they're great.
  • 00:43:12
    And thank you for all the work that you've done.
  • 00:43:15
    I do think that there is some benefit to the community of the county working with the city and vice versa.
  • 00:43:24
    And certainly for the applicants, there has to be some ease of not having to do two systems, even though this clearly pointed out why this works better for us.
  • 00:43:36
    can the city decide to use this app, this portal in the future if they chose to do this?
  • 00:43:45
    And could there be a differentiation of goals within this system?
  • 00:43:54
    I'm surprised there's not that ability within the city's system.
  • 00:43:59
    I don't know how that works.
  • 00:44:00
    but I guess I can see why there would be.
  • 00:44:03
    So I have a question of what are we losing by continuing to go totally on our own or what could be the disadvantages for the community of going on our own?
  • 00:44:18
    Thank you, that's my question.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:44:21
    So actually, Siri Russell and I met with Kaki Demick, the director of the human services department at the city, and we talked about how we want to continue dialoguing about the feasibility of at some point coming back together, having one system.
  • 00:44:42
    I think that the feedback that we've gotten from the agency applicants is that
  • 00:44:50
    While there is a benefit to having one application portal, there was often confusion among the applicants about how to address the county goals, how to address the city goals.
  • 00:45:05
    So I do think that while it is true that they will have to complete two applications, use two different portals,
  • 00:45:14
    There will also be an ease because it will be very clear what they need to address for county purposes versus the city.
  • 00:45:23
    In response to your question about whether the city could actually adopt the system that we are pursuing, I don't see why not.
  • 00:45:32
    I certainly haven't been informed that they intend to, but it certainly would be a possibility, I think.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:45:44
    Okay, well I'm glad to hear there's still dialogue going on.
  • 00:45:47
    I think that, you know, we have so many folks that take advantage of these programs that move from the city to the county and vice versa.
  • 00:45:56
    So I can't help but think that the continued coordination isn't better for our citizens in the long run.
  • 00:46:04
    So thank you very much and I'll stop there.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:46:08
    Supervisor McHale, any questions?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:46:12
    I don't think I have any real questions.
  • 00:46:15
    I really appreciate this work.
  • 00:46:19
    I think it changes over time and we're really getting it refined down now to what
  • 00:46:29
    to the best place it could be.
  • 00:46:31
    I like the viewing it through an equity lens.
  • 00:46:34
    I think, for example, we talk about just one of our goals about broadband and just to look at that simple and it's about connectivity in the rural area.
  • 00:46:48
    in poverty in the urban ring and so and certainly there's poverty in the rural area too I get that but it's just a really looking at it through an equity lens in both areas I think is really really good I think this is making our review I think stronger
  • 00:47:07
    I understand Liz's point, but I do think that this strengthens the process.
  • 00:47:15
    And it seems like to me right now, Charlottesville is still struggling with where they want to be with this process.
  • 00:47:22
    So maybe our clarifying and improving hours, they'll be able to come back at the end of the day and look at what we're doing.
  • 00:47:30
    And so I don't think this
  • 00:47:33
    precludes or excludes them in any way.
  • 00:47:36
    But it does frame the process around Albemarle County, our strategic work and our goals, and I think that's really good.
  • 00:47:44
    So I thank you very much for the work.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:47:49
    Supervisor Mallek.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:47:57
    Where am I?
  • 00:48:00
    There I am.
  • 00:48:01
    Thank you.
  • 00:48:02
    I'm very supportive of continuing on with our own process and really appreciate the work that our county staff has done with this really focusing on the needs of our own organizations.
  • 00:48:12
    Thank you Lori and Phyllis.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:48:17
    Supervisor Price.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 00:48:20
    Thank you Chair Galloway and thank you all for your presentations.
  • 00:48:24
    I have no questions.
  • 00:48:26
    I'm extremely pleased with the inclusion of the equity piece of this at a higher level than I think in years past we may have had.
  • 00:48:34
    And I am frankly more supportive of towards the county taking leadership
  • 00:48:41
    role than I am being combined back with the city.
  • 00:48:46
    I really think that the county has our own needs that we need to focus on and so that would be where I would prefer to see things going.
  • 00:48:55
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:48:57
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:48:59
    Yes, I just had one question of Ms.
  • 00:49:02
    Cevitas.
  • 00:49:05
    Will someone apply, if they apply to the city and the county, can they get two sources of funding or just one or the other?
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:49:13
    No, the decisions are made in the locality, so historically they've applied for both city and county and often get funding from both jurisdictions.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:49:28
    Would it not be more beneficial if once again we work with the city if possible so that maybe more people can get additional funding or agencies get additional funding or even get increased funding?
  • 00:49:44
    I mean it seems to me that they're just you know I mean
  • 00:49:49
    I find both of them and if they have the same goals that's best use of our resources and the city's resources?
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:50:01
    Well currently the city and county have different goals that the applicants need to respond to in terms of their application.
  • 00:50:11
    Any agency is free to apply for funding from either the city or county in both.
  • 00:50:20
    So I think one of the primary benefits to
  • 00:50:25
    Our proposal is, it helps us really ensure that the services being provided by the nonprofit applicant are directly impacting county residents.
  • 00:50:39
    Historically, it's been difficult to tease that out, you know, what was the impact on
  • 00:50:46
    unique challenges that the residents face.
  • 00:50:50
    So the reality is the two jurisdictions have different goals, so the eight applicants need to respond to both sets.
  • 00:51:00
    And I think having a separate system just makes it easier for them to be able to do that.
  • 00:51:06
    But we really believe that this proposal actually will have much of a positive impact on our county residents in terms of ensuring that they are getting the services that they need.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:51:19
    Does that answer your question?
  • 00:51:20
    Yes, it does.
  • 00:51:21
    Thank you very much.
  • 00:51:22
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:51:24
    Supervisor Mallek, did you have an additional comment?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:51:27
    It was already covered.
  • 00:51:29
    Thank you.
  • 00:51:30
    We are going in different directions and that's why the separate program seems really important to me.
  • 00:51:34
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:51:37
    Yeah, I like the changes.
  • 00:51:38
    I agree with the continued approach that's outlined here.
  • 00:51:42
    I just have one comment on, and this is not a criticism of what was there, but I think on one of your slides relative to the current pandemic, and I think it was response two, or coming out of the pandemic, which obviously should be there, but I think as we're looking further ahead into fiscal year 22, especially as it relates to grants and other organizations and what they'll be looking to, is
  • 00:52:07
    If we think this will be the only pandemic or we won't have situations like this in the future, then I think that would be a mistake.
  • 00:52:14
    So just making sure that we're also looking to work or organizations doing things that focus on what happens if the next pandemic comes around or preparing or preparation for those types of things.
  • 00:52:25
    So just not looking to wordsmith or need any even response to that.
  • 00:52:30
    It's just something that kind of stood out to me as I was watching the slide presentation.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:52:36
    Thank you for that feedback.
  • 00:52:38
    I think one of the reasons for our top priorities is actually to address what's happening within the pandemic, too.
  • 00:52:50
    So it's within and post.
  • 00:52:53
    But thank you for the reminder that we also need to be preparing for what's coming next.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:53:01
    Thank you.
  • 00:53:02
    I'll hand it back over to you.
  • 00:53:03
    Are we going to another section here?
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 00:53:06
    I'm going to turn it back over to L'Oreal's house.
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:53:09
    Thank you, Phyllis, and thanks everyone for your thoughtful questions and comments.
  • 00:53:14
    This slide in front of you right now is our time frame.
  • 00:53:17
    So we just wanted to let you know, because you may be in contact with folks in the community or agencies, so just to kind of let you know the time frame as we move towards fiscal year 22's decision-making process.
  • 00:53:31
    This month, we have already started recruiting volunteers for our community groups.
  • 00:53:38
    As you all know, this is a very community-oriented process that we do.
  • 00:53:42
    So we are recruiting volunteers to serve on scoring teams, and that's underway already.
  • 00:53:49
    We also, now that we have the goals in place, we're going to look at the scoring matrix and make sure that the scoring matrix really backs up the goals.
  • 00:53:56
    So we're going to align that closer than it has been in the past.
  • 00:54:00
    And then we're just going to prepare the materials to get ready to get out the door.
  • 00:54:04
    And then in September, we'll be working towards this.
  • 00:54:07
    We hold an application, an orientation for agencies who may desire to apply for our funding.
  • 00:54:14
    So we think that's a very good place to share with them information about our new
  • 00:54:19
    our new application process, the new goals, and to really share with agencies that they know what it is that the county is looking for.
  • 00:54:27
    And then the applications are usually due at the end of October to meet our regular budget process that we do.
  • 00:54:35
    And at that point, when the applications come in, the teams will start.
  • 00:54:38
    And then our goal is to have the scoring completed by the end of December.
  • 00:54:43
    So that's just it in a nutshell of what's ahead.
  • 00:54:46
    It goes fairly quickly.
  • 00:54:48
    So our recommendation is that you support our improvements to the human service goals and our new county managed application system.
  • 00:54:56
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:54:58
    It looks like we have a couple questions here.
  • 00:55:00
    Is this the time to address those?
  • 00:55:06
    Supervisor Palmer, you had a question for Lori?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:55:09
    Yes, Lori.
  • 00:55:11
    When we first split off from the city, I'm remembering, and you'll correct me, I know if I'm incorrect, that we had to hire part-time help to go through this.
  • 00:55:22
    Who is covering this now staff-wise?
  • 00:55:25
    Are we going to do something similar each year to take on an intern or some part-time?
  • 00:55:31
    How are we paying for that?
  • 00:55:33
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_34
  • 00:55:34
    Certainly.
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:55:35
    Great question.
  • 00:55:36
    We have hired a temporary staff employee to assist us with this process because there is a lot of time involved with setting it up and moving it forward.
  • 00:55:46
    So we had the pleasure of being able to bring on the same temporary employee that worked on it last year to work on it again this year.
  • 00:55:55
    And so as we move forward, we may take a different approach, but it's the right approach given where we are budget wise this year.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:56:03
    Okay, and I'm thinking it was something like $19,000 or something, what we did before.
  • 00:56:09
    What's the cost this year, just for curiosity?
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:56:12
    I'll get you the exact cost.
  • 00:56:13
    I don't have it in front of me right now, but I'll get the exact cost to you.
  • 00:56:17
    It's similar to the same cost as last year.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:56:19
    All right, thank you very much.
  • 00:56:21
    That's it.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:56:22
    And why don't I just run through to make sure there are no questions.
  • 00:56:25
    I know Supervisor Malek has some.
  • 00:56:27
    Supervisor McKeel, did you have any questions?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 00:56:29
    I'm fine.
  • 00:56:30
    Thank you very much.
  • 00:56:31
    And thanks for the great changes.
  • 00:56:33
    I'm very supportive.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:56:36
    Supervisor Malle.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:56:38
    Only a positive comment.
  • 00:56:39
    I know that in the last several years, this has not been a problem.
  • 00:56:42
    But prior
  • 00:56:44
    There were group people, representatives on the committee who did the scoring who actually also got money.
  • 00:56:50
    And so I know you've been very careful to not have that happen in the last couple of years.
  • 00:56:55
    And I would just remind you how important that is to me and probably others that there not be any perception of a big local organization running the show.
  • 00:57:05
    So I will not say any more, but I thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:09
    Supervisor Price, any additional questions or comments?
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 00:57:11
    I have no further questions.
  • 00:57:13
    I do support the recommended changes as well as the purchase of the county application system.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:18
    Thank you.
  • 00:57:19
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 00:57:21
    No questions at this time and I too support the recommendation.
  • 00:57:24
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:24
    All right do we need to take a formal vote on this Greg for this recommendation or is your consensus fine?
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 00:57:33
    I think the consensus would be fine on this.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:37
    All right and Phyllis, Laurie, you guys got what you need?
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:57:41
    Thank you very much.
  • 00:57:42
    Thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:44
    Thank you all.
  • 00:57:45
    Have a good afternoon.
  • 00:57:46
    Unless you're coming back, Lori might be back.
  • 00:57:49
    Phyllis will be back too.
  • 00:57:51
    Phyllis, everyone's coming back.
  • 00:57:53
    Yeah.

11. CARES Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) FY 21 Phase 1 Implementation Plan.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 00:57:54
    Number 10, the next item on our agenda then is number 10.
  • 00:57:57
    This is the CARES Coronavirus Relief Fund fiscal year 21 phase one implementation plan.
  • 00:58:03
    So Lori, you are remaining.
  • 00:58:05
    I'll hand it back over to you.
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 00:58:07
    All right, and so Phyllis again will pull up the presentation because we've also worked on this one together.
  • 00:58:11
    And as she's pulling that up, you recall that only two weeks ago we were in front of you to talk with you about the CARES Coronavirus Relief Fund, the CRF funding, the $9.5 million that the county has received from the state, which is federal funding.
  • 00:58:34
    and what we said to you when we were talking with you before about it that we would bring back to you of what we're calling a phase one implementation plan and before we were talking about fiscal year 22 and as a budget person I need to remind you what we're talking about now is a current fiscal year so that we're talking about present fiscal year 21 phase one implementation plan of this CARES funding.
  • 00:59:04
    So again, we received funds on June 1, $9.5 million in federal care CRF monies.
  • 00:59:12
    July 1, you approved an implementation plan.
  • 00:59:14
    And you may recall that plan established four buckets, basically, of funding, just county general operations.
  • 00:59:24
    It has a column for human services and community needs, one around economic development and business support, and one around technology and broadband.
  • 00:59:36
    So those are the four general areas that we were talking about and approved as our general implementation plan.
  • 00:59:43
    And what we're going to do today is talk about two of those.
  • 00:59:46
    And it's the phase one on, yes.
  • 00:59:49
    Okay.
  • 00:59:50
    Thank you.
  • 00:59:51
    No, that's okay.
  • 00:59:53
    She's doing great.
  • 00:59:54
    I'm ready to go.
  • 00:59:57
    So you might also recall that we had specific things about our approach.
  • 01:00:00
    We had a plan that we put together that we're going to be nimble with.
  • 01:00:04
    And our approach in the county is that we're going to be compliance oriented.
  • 01:00:08
    This is federal funding.
  • 01:00:10
    The rules are changing a little bit as we go and as people learn more about it.
  • 01:00:14
    So we have to keep a real good eye on a compliance piece of this.
  • 01:00:17
    We are very systematic in our approach because we have a deadline that we need to expend these funds by the end of December.
  • 01:00:24
    We also have to be nimble.
  • 01:00:25
    There might be some movements that we're going to make in the plan to meet evolving needs.
  • 01:00:31
    Again, we have to look at the time.
  • 01:00:32
    We also have to stay very focused on this and be mindful that we do have some staff capacity limits as we're working forward.
  • 01:00:39
    So just wanted to remind you again on the approach.
  • 01:00:44
    And what we're going to have today is basically two speakers.
  • 01:00:48
    And basically, the reason we came forward with these two areas, and it's not the full funding for it, it's a portion of the funding that we've identified in our plan for these two areas, is we wanted to make sure that we got funding out in the community for businesses that are being really challenged right now.
  • 01:01:06
    and households that are also challenged in this current environment, in this pandemic that we're living in.
  • 01:01:12
    So we really didn't want to hold anything up.
  • 01:01:14
    We wanted to move as quickly as we can.
  • 01:01:17
    Again, carefully and compliance oriented, but to move as quickly as we can to get the funding appropriated.
  • 01:01:22
    So the two categories will be the human services and community category, which Phyllis will be sharing information with you again very shortly.
  • 01:01:30
    And I do want to mention before she starts, her area is still under development a bit.
  • 01:01:34
    So they have great ideas, they know what they want to do.
  • 01:01:36
    We're still putting things in place.
  • 01:01:38
    So hers might not, you might not get the details that you're going to get on the second program.
  • 01:01:45
    Roger Johnson, who's the Director of Economic Development, is going to be bringing forth several slides about a program called LIFT Local Business Grant Program that is ready to go out the door.
  • 01:01:57
    So I just wanted to share that with you, and I think this is my last slide, and I think it moves me back to Phyllis.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:02:07
    Good afternoon, Chair Galloway and members of the board.
  • 01:02:10
    Again, my name is Phyllis Savitas, Director of Social Services.
  • 01:02:14
    Thank you for the opportunity to present our recommendations for how we can use some of this CARES funding allotted to Albemarle County to assist our county residents significantly impacted by COVID-19.
  • 01:02:28
    As you heard during the presentation on the proposed ABRT process, we are recommending prioritizing human services goal relating to improving financial stability, increasing food security, and supporting housing interventions.
  • 01:02:46
    Our recommendation for the use of the CARES funding in the community and human services area mirror these goals
  • 01:02:55
    and maximizes our support to the most vulnerable populations in the county.
  • 01:03:00
    COVID-19 has resulted in significant needs within our community and these needs are ever evolving.
  • 01:03:08
    What we would like to do is prioritize helping county residents and resident individuals and families who need emergency financial assistance due to the impact of COVID-19.
  • 01:03:22
    This assistance could come in the form of a bill payment or direct financial payment.
  • 01:03:28
    Additionally, we would also like to support the nonprofit agencies which specialize in providing services relating to housing, food security, and financial stability.
  • 01:03:41
    And then finally, as we know, most of our childcare providers are struggling to remain solvent given the increased restrictions brought on by the pandemic.
  • 01:03:51
    And yet with the upcoming modified school schedules, the need for childcare will become more critical.
  • 01:03:57
    Our recommendation is to be able to offer financial assistance to providers in order to help them stay open and provide care to these children.
  • 01:04:07
    So again, we are prioritizing support for the vulnerable populations in these three areas, housing, food security, and financial stability.
  • 01:04:20
    So this slide basically outlines the three entities to whom we want to offer this emergency financial assistance.
  • 01:04:34
    So our intent and recommendation is to contract with an outside entity to help us administer these funds through an application and screening process.
  • 01:04:47
    As I mentioned before, funds will be distributed either through a vendor payment or an automatic deposit.
  • 01:04:55
    Our process will need to include all the components required to be in compliance with federal law regarding this funding source.
  • 01:05:06
    As Lori mentioned, what we are currently working on is identifying that partner entity with whom we can work to administer these funds.
  • 01:05:23
    I think that's okay.
  • 01:05:25
    I'm going to go back.
  • 01:05:27
    So I'll pause here to see if there are any questions regarding the use of the CARES funding for this specific purpose.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:05:39
    One quick one on whoever this contract, this partner entity will be that we contract with
  • 01:05:47
    Are we allowed to use the CARES money to pay for that?
  • 01:05:50
    I assume we are, but if there is a cost, which I assume that there's a cost for them handling this.
  • 01:05:57
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:06:00
    At this point, we believe we can.
  • 01:06:02
    But obviously, as we go through the compliance assessment checklist, we'll need to confirm that.
  • 01:06:11
    But what we are looking at now is some type of administrative fee and we'll need to confirm that we can use this funding for that.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:06:18
    Supervisor McKeel?
  • 01:06:26
    Supervisor McKeel, any questions here?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:06:28
    Just one quick question.
  • 01:06:30
    What I think I'm hearing is a request for proposal going out for a vendor to handle this for us.
  • 01:06:35
    Is that what you're saying, Phyllis?
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:06:38
    Yes, basically we would give the funding to the vendor and then they would create an application process, a screening process so residents can call.
  • 01:06:50
    It's similar to when the board approved the $150,000 that we gave to the City Pathways Program
  • 01:06:59
    and that went to county residents, but the city staff handled the application and the screening process.
  • 01:07:08
    So it's a similar model that we just want to be able to contract with someone else, someone outside of the county to manage the application process and then also to cut the checks or give the assistance.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:07:24
    So that requires a request for proposal process.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:07:28
    I am working with our procurement folks in finance and because the administrative fee is under a certain amount, basically what we are going to do is contact four possible vendors in the community to ask them to respond to a proposal to manage this program for us.
• • SPEAKER_39
  • 01:07:55
    I get it, because I do remember now, if it's under this amount, there are other options.
  • 01:08:01
    Yeah, I get it.
  • 01:08:02
    Okay, thank you very much.
  • 01:08:03
    That's the only question I have.
  • 01:08:05
    Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:08:07
    Thank you.
  • 01:08:07
    In the same vein, it makes me nervous when I hear of something where we're handing the funds off to an unknown agency, because the internet now is full of the latest disinfection specialists and scam artists selling everything having to do with
  • 01:08:25
    everything that is needed today and so I am much less interested in having a partner than I am having a staff person if there is an administrative cost that is in there unless this is someone who is a proven local entity and I would like to hear more about who you think they are because there are some of our local agencies
  • 01:08:49
    who really have not done a good job locally with taking care of their own tenants.
  • 01:08:53
    And so I'm not interested particularly in giving them more money.
  • 01:08:57
    So I'm just, I'm anxious about this whole handoff issue.
  • 01:09:00
    I look forward to hearing more.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:09:01
    All right, Supervisor Price.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 01:09:06
    Thank you Chair Galloway, Ms.
  • 01:09:08
    Savitas, Ms.
  • 01:09:08
    Althaus, thank you again.
  • 01:09:10
    I'm going to echo a bit of what Supervisor Mallek just said.
  • 01:09:13
    I am not opposed to contracting with a partner entity to manage this provided that there is accountability and standards of conduct are imposed and sufficient record keeping exists so that we can ensure that any funds that are distributed
  • 01:09:31
    are not based upon bias and connection and that there are objective criteria for establishing that.
  • 01:09:38
    Other than that for the process I have no other questions or comments.
  • 01:09:42
    I do have a minor comment though and just ask that staff consider this.
  • 01:09:46
    We have phase one, phase two, and phase three of reopening and using the term phase one of these CARES funds to me
  • 01:09:55
    raises the risk of people being concerned at what type of a phase of opening the eligibility may be and would ask that perhaps using something like step or stage rather than phase might help avoid some of that confusion.
  • 01:10:09
    I'm reminded of the Atlanta airport when you take the plane train and it tells you A as in Alpha, B as in Bravo, C as in Charlie.
  • 01:10:18
    They don't use D as in Delta because they are afraid that passengers would be confused
  • 01:10:23
    that only Delta flights fly out of Gate D, they use a different word.
  • 01:10:27
    And I just think it might help avoid some confusion if we don't use phase one for funding when we also have phase one, two, and three for reopening.
  • 01:10:36
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:10:39
    Chair Galloway, can I address that question?
• • SPEAKER_32
  • 01:10:43
    Yes, ma'am.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:10:45
    So I just wanted to share that currently the planning district received some funds for rent relief and mortgage and they are
  • 01:10:55
    contracting with the United Way to administer those funds.
  • 01:10:58
    And I think the city is in process of negotiating with the United Way.
  • 01:11:05
    So that's an example of something that we might do, and that's just one of the possible vendors, and they are already doing that for the planning district and the city.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:11:22
    Thank you.
  • 01:11:22
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:11:25
    Yes, I also am concerned using an outside agency.
  • 01:11:29
    I would frankly much prefer to use our own people.
  • 01:11:34
    Having said that, if that is not feasible, I like the idea of using someone local as long as they're good.
  • 01:11:42
    But I would say if we're going to use an outside agency, if we can't do it in-house or hire someone
  • 01:11:49
    who work with us that is it possible to have someone from our staff be work closely closely with this outside agency.
  • 01:12:01
    The reason why I say that is normally when you have someone working staff there's a buy-in into the community there's a buy-in into the county when you have outside agencies depending on where they're from they come in get the job done
  • 01:12:18
    That's it.
  • 01:12:18
    Then they leave.
  • 01:12:19
    So they could be very good, but then they could be very poor look like.
  • 01:12:23
    So I'm concerned about that.
  • 01:12:25
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_06
  • 01:12:29
    I think it's a possibility that we might be offering some staff assistance to whoever works with us on this.
  • 01:12:41
    The other benefit of the idea of maybe having one phone line for all of Charlottesville, Albemarle, and surrounding counties.
  • 01:12:51
    So that's the other thing that we're looking at is just to try to make it easier for residents.
  • 01:12:56
    But absolutely,
  • 01:12:59
    In terms of working out this process, we need to be clear that we get the documentation we need, that we're following in compliance with the requirements, and also establishing a very robust screening process.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:13:19
    Very good.
  • 01:13:20
    What's the next section?
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 01:13:20
    We're going to move forward with Mr. Johnson.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:13:28
    Reverend Galloway, Members of the Board, Roger Johnson, Economic Development Director.
  • 01:13:32
    I'm here to talk to you about working in concert with the community to lift local businesses.
  • 01:13:37
    I'm going to explain a little bit about a program that we're proposing called the Lift Local Business Grant Program.
  • 01:13:45
    I'll give you some details and then give you an opportunity to ask any questions that you may have.
  • 01:13:53
    First of all, we built this program on a few guiding principles and wanted to share those principles with you.
  • 01:13:58
    We want this program to be compliant with the CARES Act.
  • 01:14:01
    As you heard earlier, Lori mentioned that compliance is very important to this particular part of the project.
  • 01:14:08
    As if we don't spend the money appropriately, then we as an accounting are accountable for those.
  • 01:14:13
    It wouldn't necessarily come from CARES relief funding.
  • 01:14:16
    It may have to come from some other source.
  • 01:14:21
    We wanted to be consistent with the county's response and reconstitution goals.
  • 01:14:26
    to protect the health and safety of our public, to support all people in communities, and facilitate community economic recovery.
  • 01:14:34
    We want it to be consistent with Project Rebound, which is our, for the community at large, that is the economic development strategic plan of Albemarle County.
  • 01:14:43
    We want to provide aid to small businesses, all small businesses in Albemarle County, giving a preference to women, minority, and veteran owned businesses, as well as the hospitality and tourism industry.
  • 01:14:57
    I'm sure items one through three make a lot of sense to everyone who may be listening.
  • 01:15:01
    I'd like to provide just a little data about the fourth bullet, which is that the U.S.
  • 01:15:07
    Department of Commerce studied access to capital, and they found that it was disproportional access to capital for minority women and veteran-owned businesses.
  • 01:15:19
    As for why we gave preference to the tourism industry, they have a direct economic impact in our community of over $400 million, this direct impact.
  • 01:15:29
    That doesn't include indirect or induced impact, which would be things like the things that hotels buy, or the things that employees buy, or the things that the restaurants which those employees eat at buy.
  • 01:15:41
    So there's a downstream impact that is often
  • 01:15:44
    two to seven times larger than what I just mentioned.
  • 01:15:47
    But for the sake of this conversation, I just want to say over $400 million of direct economic impact in our community.
  • 01:15:55
    They were also the hardest hit economic sector of our community.
  • 01:15:59
    Their impact was drastic and immediate.
  • 01:16:02
    Just a couple of stats to share with you.
  • 01:16:04
    I'm sure you've seen all the anecdotal information in certain restaurants closing down.
  • 01:16:08
    But in April alone,
  • 01:16:10
    The occupancy rates for hotels were down by over 70%.
  • 01:16:14
    And not only that, the rates that they charge were down, so the revenue was down by over 83%, meaning the hotel and lodging areas were impacted greatly as was tourism and all those support businesses as well.
  • 01:16:29
    Lastly, the hospitality, tourism, retail, and restaurants had the highest percentage and largest number of layoffs of all the businesses in our community.
  • 01:16:38
    That's why we, as an economic development team, as well as the CARES Relief Fund economic development team, are proposing we target these funds to some degree.
  • 01:16:46
    As I'm going to call it stage two now, giving supervisor prices comments, may look different and we may have other things to add, but for now we're focusing on these areas.
  • 01:16:57
    Again, all small businesses will be eligible to apply.
  • 01:17:00
    Our goal is to provide aid to successful businesses.
  • 01:17:02
    While there are many businesses in need, we would like to make sure that the businesses that we provide funding to have a great chance of survival and being successful post-pandemic, which I'll get into in greater detail as we go through the application process.
  • 01:17:19
    So what is the program itself?
  • 01:17:20
    It's approximately 100 grants using $1.25 million in CARES relief funding to small businesses in Albemarle County.
  • 01:17:28
    Who would be eligible?
  • 01:17:30
    It would be businesses that have at least two employees.
  • 01:17:33
    It would be for-profit businesses.
  • 01:17:35
    They must be operating for at least two years.
  • 01:17:38
    They must have a current business license.
  • 01:17:40
    They must be current on their business taxes as of March 1st of this year, and they must have a physical location in the county.
  • 01:17:48
    Who would not be eligible?
  • 01:17:50
    Next slide, please.
  • 01:17:54
    Who would not be eligible would be self-employed,
  • 01:17:57
    No employees at all, home-based businesses, banks and financial institutions, franchises unless they're locally owned and operated, and then vape, tobacco, gambling, sex-related industries, and weapon manufacturers.
  • 01:18:15
    The application process itself, which may generate some conversation based off of Phyllis's feedback, would be administered by the Community Investment Collaborative.
  • 01:18:24
    In order to apply, they must provide proof that there was a COVID-related impact.
  • 01:18:29
    They must disclose any other COVID-related funding, such as the PPE plans, the EIDL plans.
  • 01:18:36
    They must submit their tax forms, verification as a woman, minority, and veteran-owned business.
  • 01:18:41
    They'll also be asked to provide an application narrative
  • 01:18:44
    including changes to the business plan in response to COVID-19.
  • 01:18:52
    As for the scoring and decision, the application will require both quantitative and qualitative data.
  • 01:18:59
    We have designed a scoring matrix to ensure
  • 01:19:03
    Objectivity to the extent possible.
  • 01:19:06
    This is unique.
  • 01:19:07
    Unlike loans, we would not be farming out the responsibility for scoring the grant applications.
  • 01:19:13
    We would have two separate committees independently review these applications and score them to the extent we can keep those applications blind.
  • 01:19:20
    We will, and then we would award the grants.
  • 01:19:23
    We believe this to be very important to make sure that there is, I think we jumped back to the wrong slide, fellas,
  • 01:19:32
    We believe this to be very important to make sure there's both fairness, no unintended consequences in terms of giving funding to someone's relative in some way, shape, or form.
  • 01:19:44
    But also this is not like a loan, the grants themselves are subject to much more scrutiny and we want to make sure our process
  • 01:19:51
    is defined in such a way that prevents any concerns about that particular situation.
  • 01:19:58
    Next slide, fellas, please.
  • 01:20:01
    And then we will post all grant recipients online for transparency so everyone in the community who receives the grants
  • 01:20:09
    and we're going to require all grant recipients to provide a written follow-up in the first quarter of 2021 which ensures that they complied with the use of these funds as there are certain eligibility expenses that which they can use and some that they cannot as well as to track the progress and success of the grant program.
  • 01:20:31
    What does the timeline look like?
  • 01:20:32
    Phyllis if you would hit the next slide please.
  • 01:20:36
    The timeline would be, if you approve of this in a few minutes, we will begin accepting interest forms online.
  • 01:20:44
    These inquiry forms will create a database of businesses that are eligible.
  • 01:20:49
    We'll begin marketing the program.
  • 01:20:51
    Emily Kilroy and her team has been putting together an exhaustive communication program which includes social media,
  • 01:20:59
    Grant Advertising, amplified messaging from our partners such as the CDPED, SBDC, CIC, Small Business Development Center, et cetera.
  • 01:21:10
    Additionally, we'll begin accepting real applications in late July.
  • 01:21:14
    We're gonna have a webinar explaining the process on July the 27th.
  • 01:21:21
    We expect to score these applications in late July, early August,
  • 01:21:29
    and then make the awards as soon as practical thereafter and disperse the funds.
  • 01:21:35
    There are some restrictions in how much money you can wire.
  • 01:21:37
    So you can't wire a million dollars all at one time necessarily.
  • 01:21:41
    So our third party will have to wire a certain amount each day.
  • 01:21:45
    So some businesses will receive the funds a few days in advance.
  • 01:21:50
    So with that being said, that's the program proposal.
  • 01:21:52
    I'll be glad to answer any questions you may have.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:21:56
    Thank you, Roger.
  • 01:21:57
    Supervisor Palmer, questions?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:22:00
    Yes, I do have one.
  • 01:22:03
    So Roger, thank you very much for this.
  • 01:22:06
    Knowing that the application process will reduce people who aren't able to use this money properly and are unsuccessful,
  • 01:22:20
    If there are people who misuse the money or let's say they just go out of business and don't comply with your, I think it was 2021 first quarter follow up,
  • 01:22:37
    What's the process going forward for that?
  • 01:22:39
    Do you try to get the money back?
  • 01:22:42
    Is there something in the contract that says they have to give the money back and then we have to give it back to the state?
  • 01:22:49
    Just explain how that works.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:22:50
    We plan to include on the application.
  • 01:22:56
    We don't know if it'll be a contract, but part of the application will be responsible for the business to turn around and use those funds appropriately.
  • 01:23:04
    There would be a callback provision, but quite candidly, once you give grant money away, the likelihood of recovering that is slim to none.
  • 01:23:13
    I'm not sure I can directly answer what the liability will be if someone misappropriates the funds and how we would go about recovering that.
  • 01:23:22
    What I pledge to do, though, is run this through our compliance team and get an answer for the board.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 01:23:30
    That's where the county will have to be very careful and where the administrator of these funds will have to be monitoring.
  • 01:23:39
    They should be viewed as grants and if the funds are not appropriately used ultimately the county is responsible to the state and the state to the fads.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:23:53
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:23:55
    Supervisor McKeel, any questions?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:23:57
    You come all right for right now.
  • 01:24:00
    Thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:24:02
    Supervisor Mallek.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:24:03
    Thank you.
  • 01:24:04
    Roger, you mentioned the term third party.
  • 01:24:07
    Are those the local groups who would be helping with the application?
  • 01:24:13
    Distributing millions of dollars is not something you want, you know, anyone they can hear you to do.
  • 01:24:18
    So how do you handle that?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:24:20
    Sure.
  • 01:24:21
    The Community Investment Collaborative is the third party who would be administering the program.
  • 01:24:26
    I think you met Stephen Davis on a couple of occasions at board meetings.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:24:29
    I see.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:24:30
    He is an existing partner agency of the county and the Economic Development Authority, so he has credibility and proven worth of using the funding in an appropriate way.
  • 01:24:41
    I'll also mention that he's administering programs for several other counties as well.
  • 01:24:46
    He is charging us a 3% administrative fee.
  • 01:24:48
    which is consistent with what he's charging other counties to administer the programs for as well.
  • 01:24:57
    We will have access to all the data.
  • 01:24:59
    We will have to include who all the applicants were, who I'll receive.
  • 01:25:05
    In fact, if you'll hit the, if we'll go back to the two-party applicant scoring process, we're actually, we being county staff, will be part of that as well.
  • 01:25:17
    It won't be
  • 01:25:19
    only outside agencies who will be scoring these particular grant applications.
  • 01:25:24
    So we'll be part of the process as well.
  • 01:25:26
    And we have access to all the data which we'll run back through the compliance and review team that the Office of Management and Budget has created.
  • 01:25:39
    Supervisor Mallek, did I fully answer your question?
  • 01:25:41
    I think so.
  • 01:25:41
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:25:49
    Supervisor Price?
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 01:25:50
    Thank you, Chair Galloway.
  • 01:25:51
    Mr. Johnson, thank you very much for your presentation.
  • 01:25:54
    And this slide that is up right now on the timeline, or at least that's the one I believe is up, I am very pleased to see how quickly it looks like you're going to be able to take this action.
  • 01:26:05
    Thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:26:10
    Supervisor Albisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:26:14
    Yes, hi Mr. Johnson, and thank you.
  • 01:26:16
    I just wanted to ask a couple questions.
  • 01:26:20
    You're giving priority to, let's say, women-owned, minority women-owned businesses.
  • 01:26:26
    What is the percentage for that?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:26:29
    We have a total score availability of 45 points, and five points would be added if you're a minority or women-owned business.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:26:38
    Okay, but a woman-owned business, would that be 50%?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:26:42
    Yeah, it could be up to five points.
  • 01:26:44
    If it's completely owned by a woman, minority, or veteran owned business, it would be five points.
  • 01:26:49
    If it was 50%, it would be three points.
  • 01:26:51
    If it was not, it would be one point.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:26:58
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:26:59
    I guess the answer to your percentage is that would be a 20% rating?
  • 01:27:02
    Yeah, yeah.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:27:04
    No, no, I get that.
• • SPEAKER_17
  • 01:27:08
    I'm sorry, were you asking about the percentage of qualifying as a woman-owned business?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:27:14
    Yes.
• • SPEAKER_17
  • 01:27:16
    What do you want to address that?
  • 01:27:18
    What qualifies them as a woman-owned business?
  • 01:27:20
    The certification?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:27:21
    Yes, we're asking for certification that they're minority women or veteran-owned business.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:27:26
    And these would be businesses in Albemarle County or Albemarle County and Charlottesville?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:27:32
    No ma'am, just Albemarle County only.
  • 01:27:34
    Charlottesville has approved a program where they have allocated $750,000.
  • 01:27:38
    It's a similar program in a lot of ways in terms of the qualifications.
  • 01:27:45
    They don't have theirs targeted necessarily at tourism, hospitality, and retail like we do.
  • 01:27:51
    It's just any small business's impact that may apply.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:27:55
    Okay, I'm going to ask this.
  • 01:27:57
    I don't know if it's within the purview or not, but do you give consideration to businesses that are trying to comply with state guidelines regarding COVID?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:28:11
    Well, it's not part of this current program.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:28:13
    Okay, but you see what I mean?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:28:16
    If you hire this board, we can certainly consider that.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:28:20
    Well, what I'm thinking of is it costs more money for someone to be state COVID compliant than not and I would think that that would be given extra points or whatever because that's actually protecting the entire community.
  • 01:28:41
    I guess maybe depending on their business whether or not they come into contact with the community.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:28:49
    We'll have that information already as part of our application, Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley, in that we're asking for the narrative as what is your business model, how have you changed your business model to respond to COVID-19 and what will your future business model be like.
  • 01:29:04
    So it will be part of the scoring process to determine their flexibility, but as it's currently written, we are not providing bonus points for any sort of activities such in that nature.
  • 01:29:19
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:29:22
    We had some additional questions here.
  • 01:29:23
    Supervisor McKeel?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:29:26
    Yes, thank you.
  • 01:29:27
    And thank you, Bea.
  • 01:29:28
    That was a really great question.
  • 01:29:30
    I'm not surprised that Roger already had that taken care of, but it was a good question and very timely.
  • 01:29:37
    I just wanted to make a comment that
  • 01:29:41
    Whether we're talking about the Human Services Community program that Phyllis was talking about or the program Rogers, the business grant program that Rogers is presenting,
  • 01:29:55
    I think it's really important for us to recognize that we always feel more comfortable if our staff is leading these programs and they are under the total control of our staff.
  • 01:30:09
    But we also have a situation where we have capacity issues with our staff.
  • 01:30:16
    and to expect our staff to take over these and run these programs completely right now is probably not realistic just based on capacity.
  • 01:30:25
    Just a comment and I really do trust our staff, and I know you all do too, to keep an eye on these programs and make sure that
  • 01:30:35
    There's a watchful eye.
  • 01:30:37
    But if we wanted these programs to go forward in our work plan and have our staff under our staff's control completely, they probably wouldn't be able to happen.
  • 01:30:49
    So it's just a comment.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:30:54
    Let's see, additional questions.
  • 01:30:55
    Supervisor Potter?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:30:57
    I just have a quick one about the scoring process, Roger.
  • 01:31:02
    Let's just say you're a female.
  • 01:31:04
    and you are a minority.
  • 01:31:06
    Does that get you 10 extra points within the 45 points?
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:31:10
    No, ma'am.
  • 01:31:11
    You just get a maximum of five points.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:31:14
    Or any of those, veteran, female or minority.
  • 01:31:18
    Gotcha.
  • 01:31:19
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:31:21
    And Supervisor Mallek.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:31:23
    Thank you.
  • 01:31:24
    Bea, thank you for that point because it really, I think, honed in very carefully.
  • 01:31:29
    And I would suggest, Roger, that since compliance with
  • 01:31:34
    The community's expectations and the state's expectations is a given, otherwise we will never get out of this mess.
  • 01:31:40
    I would hope you would have that statement very affirmatively made to all participants.
  • 01:31:45
    Number one, in order to fill out this application, you have to commit that we're not going to have to be chasing you about following the rules.
  • 01:31:53
    So that this saves everybody a lot of time if people know that that's what they have to do in order to be participating in this.
  • 01:32:00
    I don't think there's anybody other than someone who's working out in the field by themselves who should not be complying with the mask rules, for example.
  • 01:32:08
    So I just make it easy and simple and put the burden on them and you won't have to bother with it.
• • SPEAKER_26
  • 01:32:14
    We'll certainly do that.
  • 01:32:15
    That's good feedback.
  • 01:32:15
    Thank you.
  • 01:32:18
    All right.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:32:19
    Any additional items here or information?
  • 01:32:29
    Staff, is there any further presentation or anything?
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 01:32:31
    Just a few wrap-up slides, sir.
  • 01:32:36
    So I heard compliance being mentioned several times along the way.
  • 01:32:41
    We wanted to let you know that one thing that we're doing in the county, we have set up a compliance and documentation team and we have been carefully moving ideas and programs in that direction first.
  • 01:32:55
    So that's something that we need to do before we actually get money on the street.
  • 01:32:59
    So I just wanted to mention that to you.
  • 01:33:01
    Next slide, please Phyllis.
  • 01:33:04
    So this is next to the last slide.
  • 01:33:07
    Basically, this is a moment where you would vote.
  • 01:33:10
    We're requesting that you approve the resolution as described.
  • 01:33:14
    This is an appropriation of funding and also that you further would recommend that the board authorize that the county executive can sign all the documents around the business grant program.
  • 01:33:27
    So I'll pause here and this would be a time for you to take action.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:33:33
    Will the Supervisor make the motion?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:33:36
    The Board approved the resolution attachment D to approve appropriations and allow the Executive to sign the documents.
  • 01:33:48
    Second.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:33:51
    All right the motion was made by Supervisor Malek and seconded by Supervisor Palmer.
  • 01:33:55
    Any further discussion?
• • SPEAKER_28
  • 01:33:56
    All right we can call the vote.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 01:34:01
    Mr. Galloway?
• • SPEAKER_28
  • 01:34:02
    Yes.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 01:34:03
    Ms.
  • 01:34:03
    LaPisto-Kirtley?
  • 01:34:04
    Aye.
  • 01:34:06
    Ms.
  • 01:34:06
    Mallek?
  • 01:34:07
    Yes.
  • 01:34:07
    Ms.
  • 01:34:08
    McKeel?
  • 01:34:09
    Yes.
  • 01:34:10
    Ms.
  • 01:34:11
    Palmer?
  • 01:34:11
    Yes.
  • 01:34:12
    Ms.
  • 01:34:12
    Price?
  • 01:34:14
    Aye.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:34:14
    All right, very good.
  • 01:34:16
    Motion carries.
  • 01:34:17
    Thank you everyone.
• • SPEAKER_33
  • 01:34:21
    And just one more slide and then we're finished.
  • 01:34:25
    So what's ahead?
  • 01:34:28
    So I have August 5th on here, but it will likely be the middle of the month, August 19th, that we'll be bringing forward further CARES appropriations.
  • 01:34:36
    Again, we are moving very quickly.
  • 01:34:38
    We have this challenge of needing to get the funding spent by the deadline required by the federal government, but yet we have to be careful along the way.
  • 01:34:46
    So we
  • 01:34:47
    We'll be moving forward and bringing you some more information middle of August.
  • 01:34:52
    And then ongoing, we're going to monitor the expenditures on an ongoing way.
  • 01:34:56
    And I wanted to let you know that we're also going to be reporting on the CARES funding along the way.
  • 01:35:03
    So you'll continue to get updates as we move forward.
  • 01:35:06
    And then again, our goal is to expand the CARES funding in the proper way by December 30th.
  • 01:35:12
    So thank you so much for your attention today.
  • 01:35:14
    We really appreciate it.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:35:16
    Thank you, Lori.

12. Work Session: Improving Stream Health in Development Areas.

• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:35:19
    All right, Board, the next item on our agenda, number 11, this is a work session improving stream health and development areas.
  • 01:35:27
    And I imagine we have several participants here.
  • 01:35:31
    Frank, are you leading this conversation?
  • 01:35:33
    And get your name in parentheses.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:35:36
    Yes, sir, I am.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:35:37
    Good afternoon, sir.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:35:39
    Good afternoon, Chair Galloway.
  • 01:35:40
    And good afternoon, members of the Board and members of the public who may be listening in today.
  • 01:35:47
    My name is Frank Pohl, and I'm here today to review the proposals and the status of the Stream Health Initiative in the county's development areas.
  • 01:36:00
    And I assume you can see my presentation okay?
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:36:04
    Not yet.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:36:05
    Let me try that again.
  • 01:36:11
    I need to click the share button.
  • 01:36:16
    Here it comes.
  • 01:36:17
    There you go.
  • 01:36:17
    You're all set.
  • 01:36:18
    Okay.
  • 01:36:19
    Sorry about that.
  • 01:36:19
    So I'll just back up to the first slide here.
  • 01:36:28
    The STREAM Health Initiative was started by the board and led by David Hanna.
  • 01:36:32
    Starting in 2017, we've held many meetings since then, including public meetings
  • 01:36:38
    meetings with stakeholders, board work sessions, and a Joint Planning Commission board work session last year.
  • 01:36:46
    Since David's retirement, I have been leading the development area efforts and will continue to be the lead staff person for this effort.
  • 01:36:55
    Our new natural resources manager, Kim Biasioli, however, will pick up the torch, so to speak, to restart the rural area efforts.
  • 01:37:03
    Kim is available today at the end of this presentation to answer any questions you may have as it relates to that initiative.
  • 01:37:11
    A few reminders about this initiative is that the proposals I will present today will apply to any project requiring a land disturbance permit, regardless of where they are located.
  • 01:37:23
    Development or rural areas, even though most of the projects are typically located in the development area.
  • 01:37:29
    The intent of every proposal, and this has kind of been a constant theme throughout this initiative, is that they are to help improve stream health.
  • 01:37:39
    And we believe that the proposals are consistent with growth management policies that there's no intent to limit or hinder development in development areas or to increase development pressure in the rural areas.
  • 01:37:54
    So the goals for today's work session are to inform the board of the need to implement the proposals into two phases.
  • 01:38:03
    Six of the ten proposals do not require additional staffing and we're recommending to move these forward as phase one, what I will refer to as a phase one of the development areas initiative.
  • 01:38:16
    The other four proposals do require additional staffing and are being recommended as a phase two effort when the
  • 01:38:25
    and to bring back these phase two efforts when funding is available.
  • 01:38:33
    The next goal is to review the phase one proposals and ask for you to direct us to move forward with these proposals.
  • 01:38:40
    We would also like to receive direction to return to the board with phase two proposals when staffing resources become available.
  • 01:38:47
    And lastly, we would like to receive your endorsement to restart the public engagement process for the rural areas.
  • 01:38:55
    Before moving on to the phase one proposals, two of the proposals that are not included in either phase one and phase two need to be addressed briefly.
  • 01:39:08
    The first one is proposal number one.
  • 01:39:11
    This is a proposal to implement the county steep slope design standards when a VSMP or VESCP application plan is required.
  • 01:39:21
    This CTA is being presented to you later on this evening.
  • 01:39:23
    So I'm not going to speak to this anymore, but I did wanna give you a quick update.
  • 01:39:28
    The second one I wanted to quickly cover is the proposal that had to do with limiting offsite use of offsite nutrient credits.
  • 01:39:39
    The main things about this one is there was an error in attachment B that I wanted to point out.
  • 01:39:44
    And you can see here, I've taken a copy, a snippet of attachment B,
  • 01:39:49
    and in this snippet, this attachment was a holdover from David Hannah's presentations and I didn't modify them at all except for the red notes.
  • 01:40:01
    And one of the things that was in there that I missed, quite honestly, was currently there's not a nutrient credit bank located in Albemarle County and that is an error.
  • 01:40:10
    There is a bank currently in Albemarle County on Little Ivy Creek or on Ivy Creek
  • 01:40:19
    and it is available for nutrient credit purchases.
  • 01:40:23
    The second thing I wanted to address regarding the nutrient credit issues has to do with sediment impairments versus nutrient impairments.
  • 01:40:33
    As some of you may recall, we do have sediment impairments on the Rivanna River.
  • 01:40:39
    However, those are not considered from DEQ's perspective a nutrient impairment.
  • 01:40:46
    So I just wanted to make you all aware that I have received confirmation from DEQ.
  • 01:40:52
    This was just last month in June.
  • 01:40:55
    I finally received written confirmation from DEQ that the sediment impairment that we do have does not allow us to restrict use of offsite nutrient credits.
  • 01:41:08
    The last issue I'd like to address has to do with future DEQ regulations.
  • 01:41:15
    DEQ has draft regulations proposing to expand the limitations of offsite credits to include sediment-based impairments.
  • 01:41:24
    I heard about this proposal sometime last year before we even came to the November work session, and they had told me at that time that it was proposed to go to the state for a vote in December.
  • 01:41:40
    As you may have guessed, those changes still have not been passed, but they are still being considered.
  • 01:41:45
    And I'll just let you know that if they are approved, we will come back to you to adopt those ourselves.
  • 01:41:54
    Now onto the Phase 1 proposals.
  • 01:41:58
    This slide is a summary just to give you a recap of which proposals I'm proposing to be included in phase one.
  • 01:42:05
    These do not include or require additional staff.
  • 01:42:12
    And I will review these individually, but to quickly summarize, proposal three is regarding erosion and sediment control measures and stream buffers.
  • 01:42:21
    Number six is program fees.
  • 01:42:25
    Number 14 is to update the ordinance regarding simple updates and corrections.
  • 01:42:33
    Proposal A2 is regarding stormwater facility maintenance bonding.
  • 01:42:38
    Proposal A4 is regarding pre-existing buildings and A5 is regarding reasonable use for impacts to the outer 50 feet of a stream buffer.
  • 01:42:52
    So onto the first proposal, which is number three.
  • 01:42:55
    This is a pretty straightforward proposal, which refers to section 17603B of the ordinance, which allows erosion and sediment control measures to be constructed within buffers without the requirement for mitigation.
  • 01:43:11
    We are proposing to require mitigation for such impacts which will protect existing vegetative buffers and enhance or improve buffer areas not currently vegetated.
  • 01:43:21
    I will also add there are provisions or requirements to minimize impacts where they can and to avoid them completely if possible.
  • 01:43:33
    The original intent of proposal number six
  • 01:43:36
    which is this proposal in front of you was to address repeat erosion and sediment control violations and non-compliance.
  • 01:43:44
    However, we are proposing to expand this to include review of all program fees.
  • 01:43:49
    Please keep in mind that current inspection fees do not cover all of our costs for our inspectors.
  • 01:43:54
    So we think that an escalating fee structure for repeated violations is justified.
  • 01:44:00
    There are also services that the engineering division provides
  • 01:44:04
    that do not have fees such as stream determinations.
  • 01:44:08
    Other jurisdictions do have fees for these types of services and we would like to include one in our fee schedule.
  • 01:44:15
    The last point is that, and this has been brought up on many occasions or at least several occasions,
  • 01:44:21
    and has been a big discussion about whether or not there are fees or fines.
  • 01:44:28
    The point is that these are fees and they are not fines.
  • 01:44:31
    They're not intended to punish or fine applicants.
  • 01:44:33
    The increase or escalating fee structure would be a way that we could recoup costs and it's not intended to penalize.
  • 01:44:43
    So that's why we think that the escalating fee structure is justified.
  • 01:44:49
    Also, we haven't looked at our fees since this version of the ordinance was passed in 2014, so it's kind of time to revisit our fees.
  • 01:45:04
    Proposal 14.
  • 01:45:07
    include straightforward updates that do not change the intent, meaning, or substance of the ordinance.
  • 01:45:13
    These changes will not impact stream health, but it makes sense to include these updates at the same time as the other revisions.
  • 01:45:21
    Examples include correcting department names that have changed, occasional words or phrases that need to be revised or clarified in their meaning, and revising gender references.
  • 01:45:35
    Proposal A2 requires posting of a maintenance bond for stormwater facilities prior to release of the construction bond if the facility hasn't been transferred to the HOA.
  • 01:45:47
    This is something we discussed.
  • 01:45:48
    It wouldn't be a big impact to developers and it would reduce risk between the time that a bond is released, or we wouldn't release the bond, but between the time that
  • 01:46:02
    Construction is completed in a time that it's handed over to the HOA.
  • 01:46:10
    Proposal A4 is one that we've had issues with in the past year and thought probably more than the past year and we thought we should address this while we were making the changes to the ordinance.
  • 01:46:21
    This has not come to the board before so this is a new proposal added since the November meeting.
  • 01:46:27
    This one and the next one are both added since then.
  • 01:46:30
    So this section applies to buildings or structures built before 1998, which is when the buffer ordinance was adopted.
  • 01:46:39
    And it prohibits the continuance, repair, replacement, expansion, or enlargement of such buildings or structures except as provided in
  • 01:46:50
    and I'll just say that it references two other sections of the code.
  • 01:46:55
    And one of those sections is the non-conforming structures section of the zoning ordinance which gets complicated and to interpret and to administer.
  • 01:47:05
    So what we're proposing to do is incorporate those standards from those other sections into the water protection ordinance to provide clear guidance to not only us but to the public.
  • 01:47:16
    Additionally, where expansions are currently allowed, mitigation is not required.
  • 01:47:22
    We would recommend with this proposal to require mitigation when additional impacts to the buffer are proposed for an addition, for example, or an expansion of a home.
  • 01:47:38
    Proposal A5, as I mentioned earlier, is another one that we didn't have last year.
  • 01:47:44
    But it is another one we've had issues with and the reason why is the term reasonable use.
  • 01:47:51
    It's very difficult to
  • 01:47:55
    to interpret this because zoning has a very strict interpretation of reasonable use.
  • 01:48:00
    For instance, in the rural areas, a single family home is reasonable use.
  • 01:48:06
    I typically need to seek advice from the county attorney's office and our zoning administrator to help me define what reasonable use is.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 01:48:15
    If I can just jump in to give the board a little bit background on why
  • 01:48:23
    that term creates difficulty is that the term reasonable use comes with in the context of constitutional takings law.
  • 01:48:36
    And it may be a little more or too restrictive in the context of the water protection ordinance.
  • 01:48:42
    And it's a term even in takings law that is not defined.
  • 01:48:46
    So it would be helpful to give more
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:48:54
    I have one example I can get into, which is a single family lot where they wanted to expand and put a little sandwich shop on their property, but they needed some parking and the parking was in the buffer area.
  • 01:49:17
    It was determined, this is before I got here, that that was a reasonable use, but
  • 01:49:22
    Lately reasonable use has been, the interpretation has been more strict.
  • 01:49:26
    So I would like to align our ordinance with what we were told back then and what we think I think it means today.
  • 01:49:37
    Now, this would not alleviate mitigation.
  • 01:49:39
    So we would still require mitigation.
  • 01:49:43
    And we would also come up with and have some standards or conditions or both.
  • 01:49:50
    for those impacts, so we wouldn't just allow it haphazardly and we wouldn't allow it, for instance, if the building was in a floodplain or within setbacks that aren't allowed.
  • 01:50:03
    So we would have those conditions, I think, identified a little bit more clearly.
  • 01:50:15
    So on to staff recommendations are to direct staff to proceed with the phase one proposals, which I've just presented to you.
  • 01:50:24
    Direct staff to return with phase two proposals when staffing resources are available and direct staff to return if more stringent DEQ regulations are passed and endorse restarting discussions and efforts to protect stream health in the rural areas.
  • 01:50:41
    I tried to keep it short and simple.
  • 01:50:43
    I hope that helped.
  • 01:50:45
    And I'm opening up for discussion and comments or questions.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:50:51
    So we'll go through the order here.
  • 01:50:53
    Obviously there's several different items and we have some time here.
  • 01:50:57
    So we had a lot of 60 minutes for this work session.
  • 01:51:01
    I think what might be prudent board is if a supervisor asks a question on a specific phase and some have maybe a follow-up question or not, if you could just put it in the chat,
  • 01:51:11
    and I'll work people in so we can kind of work through one slide at a time versus always jumping back to something.
  • 01:51:17
    I don't know if that's agreeable.
  • 01:51:19
    We'll just see how this goes.
  • 01:51:21
    We'll start.
  • 01:51:22
    Supervisor Palmer, your first up questions, comments?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:51:26
    So I have several questions.
  • 01:51:29
    And so what I'm wondering is just for organization, maybe I should address my questions first to phase one, and then we can come back and do phase two.
  • 01:51:40
    That's fine with me because I've got maybe four or five questions if that works, Ned.
• • SPEAKER_31
  • 01:51:45
    Yeah, let's do that.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:51:49
    All right, so anyway, thank you very much.
  • 01:51:51
    It's a long time coming.
  • 01:51:52
    We've had years of this.
  • 01:51:54
    With respect to, and I very much appreciate the effort, with respect to just phase one,
  • 01:52:03
    I really struggled over A4 and A5 and spent quite a bit of time with that having never seen it before.
  • 01:52:14
    But of course I think anybody who has been on this board for any time is very familiar with the problems that you're trying to solve here.
  • 01:52:24
    I have many times asked for a definition of reasonable use and I also understand A4 also.
  • 01:52:32
    My concern is that with these other ones we've been going on for so long with this, that these two are actually quite complicated.
  • 01:52:41
    I don't know what the staff
  • 01:52:45
    time is in moving ahead with phase one, but my gut reaction is that maybe we ought to fold A4 and A5 into the rural area portion possibly or even do them separately so that they do not impede these other things in phase one just knowing that
  • 01:53:14
    You know, just knowing that they're going to be pretty controversial.
  • 01:53:19
    And that's my question with respect to phase one.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:53:23
    Okay, we could also
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:53:33
    Could we just hear from Franken to respond to some of these as we go through and these questions are asked?
  • 01:53:38
    And I'm sorry to interrupt.
  • 01:53:39
    I didn't mean to just jump in, but I'd like to hear the response and what the staff has to, you know, thoughts about them.
  • 01:53:46
    Yeah, I think that's what he's trying to do.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:53:50
    Yeah, if you'd like me to go ahead and address that, I will.
  • 01:53:54
    So A4 and A5, I don't know, you're right, we haven't had any public input on this yet.
  • 01:54:00
    So what I could do is, is try to get solicit some input.
  • 01:54:06
    And we could include them with phase one and still bring them to the board and have an alternate
  • 01:54:16
    resolution that would exclude them if there are a lot of issues that you feel still might need to be addressed during the public hearing.
  • 01:54:27
    That's one way to handle it or we could totally just take them out.
  • 01:54:32
    I don't know how to judge the public
  • 01:54:39
    whether they support this or not because we really haven't gone out to reach out to them.
  • 01:54:44
    But I have, in working with some owners, it has been brought up as an issue regarding, as Greg mentioned, the taking issue and the difficulties in with these two particular sections the way they're written.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:55:03
    I mean, I completely agree that they need to be done.
  • 01:55:07
    I just don't want them to stymie going forward with the few things that we're going forward with.
  • 01:55:13
    And that's my concern.
  • 01:55:14
    Not that they're not legitimate things that we need to take care of, just that they may be more controversial than the other things we're trying to do right now.
  • 01:55:23
    And the coupling could be a problem.
  • 01:55:25
    So I'll leave that at that and wait for the phase two discussion.
  • 01:55:29
    Okay.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:55:31
    Thank you.
  • 01:55:33
    There was a suggestion here that maybe we can stay with phase one to go back to the slides and we can proceed through each slide.
  • 01:55:40
    Would that be useful, Lord, or do you want to proceed just with phase one and phase two kind of at the break down?
  • 01:55:45
    Any thoughts there?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:55:51
    I would love to go slide by slide.
  • 01:55:53
    I think it'll be more organized if people have questions in individual ones rather than jumping all over the place.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:55:58
    I think the slide idea is good, Ned.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:56:02
    that because we do have the time to be able to move through and then I'll go through the order for each slide.
  • 01:56:10
    This was slide one Frank.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:56:12
    This is the first proposal, yes.
  • 01:56:15
    Unless you wanted me to start from the very beginning of the presentation?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:56:20
    No I think this is fine.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:56:22
    Yeah I think it was through the proposals that was the first one we went to and that's probably a better way to go through this order.
  • 01:56:28
    Okay go to that number three.
  • 01:56:32
    I can leave this up also or would you prefer that I... Yeah, let's just go to number three and let's just move through these.
  • 01:56:38
    Okay.
  • 01:56:40
    And then Supervisor Palmer, this is phase one.
  • 01:56:42
    Supervisor McKeel, anything here?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 01:56:43
    I think I'm okay for right now as the discussion goes on, yeah.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 01:56:49
    Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:56:51
    Yes, please.
  • 01:56:53
    So help me understand because I'm confused about what this really says.
  • 01:56:59
    Currently we
  • 01:57:00
    We allow people to put ENS features in the buffer.
  • 01:57:06
    I thought that had been outlawed years ago.
  • 01:57:08
    And then the bullet says current regs don't require mitigation, which is horrible.
  • 01:57:12
    So please sort out where we are, Frank, and we're trying to tighten this up, I assume.
  • 01:57:18
    And do we have the option to just say we're not going to disturb the buffer, period?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 01:57:24
    Yes, so currently it states that temporary erosion in summit control measures provided that to the extent practical as determined by the administrator the control measures shall be located outside of the stream buffer and disturbance impacts are minimized.
  • 01:57:42
    It is in a section of the ordinance that does not require mitigation and I get my
  • 01:57:50
    My thoughts for the reasons why it's not in the mitigation section is that sometimes you just can't avoid depending on the size of the parcel, I'm guessing.
  • 01:58:02
    We do restrict this from happening often.
  • 01:58:07
    It's not something that does happen often.
  • 01:58:10
    But sometimes you have to put them in the buffer because that's where the stream is and you have to get to the stream.
  • 01:58:18
    So we are trying to tighten this up.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 01:58:22
    Okay, the goal is a good one, but what is my main nightmare and has happened multiple times is that they demolished the Greenway and the buffer in order to put the sewer pipe in there or something.
  • 01:58:34
    And then there's nothing left for you to mitigate.
  • 01:58:37
    So if you're trying to erase those kinds of events or prevent them, that would be a very good accomplishment from my perspective.
  • 01:58:49
    We also, as a philosophical question, there are limitations that come with a piece of property.
  • 01:58:57
    And somehow we expect the environment to take it on the chin just so somebody can maximize the use of their square footage when perhaps they should tone down what they're trying to do.
  • 01:59:07
    on a piece of property.
  • 01:59:08
    There may be a reason why it was really cheap because of the limitations that it has.
  • 01:59:13
    And yet we seem to bend over backwards to make it easier for people.
  • 01:59:17
    So that's just my general uproar about this whole thing is I want there to be really good standards and people have to just deal with them.
  • 01:59:26
    And I think that would be much simpler for staff if we had better rules, stronger rules going forward.
  • 01:59:33
    And I will stop now and come back when we get to the next
  • 01:59:37
    Oh, and also to the one last thing in 2014, we lost some buffer protections in the thing that was called technical updates.
  • 01:59:49
    There were whole sections that were removed that have got to be put back in when we can do that because there never used to be these kinds of structures in buffers that were and people weren't allowed to go cutting things down.
  • 02:00:02
    And then in the recession, everything seemed to change.
  • 02:00:05
    So I'm
  • 02:00:06
    always trying to claw our way back to what we had 15 years ago.
  • 02:00:12
    And I'll come back when we get to the next section.
  • 02:00:15
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:00:17
    Supervisor Price, anything here?
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 02:00:20
    Thank you, Chair Galloway.
  • 02:00:21
    Mr. Cole, thank you and thank you also for the presentation you gave a few days ago to give me a little bit of background on this.
  • 02:00:30
    I have a general comment
  • 02:00:33
    and then I'll come back to this.
  • 02:00:35
    And part of this is there are a lot of complexities here.
  • 02:00:38
    I'm very concerned about ensuring that we have received sufficient public input before we take action on some of these types of zoning text amendment changes and I note that we've got item 21
  • 02:00:54
    is a hearing on erosion protection design standards and I just want to make sure that those individuals who are most likely to be impacted or have to work within these ordinances have been given a sufficient opportunity in order to review them and give us their input before we take any action to make any changes.
  • 02:01:17
    That being said, as a general comment, I don't have any particular issues or concerns with what this particular item proposes.
  • 02:01:26
    Thank you.
  • 02:01:27
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:01:31
    No questions at this time.
  • 02:01:33
    Thank you very much for your presentation.
  • 02:01:35
    I like what we're doing.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:01:37
    Frank, you want to go to the next one?
  • 02:01:43
    This is number six.
  • 02:01:43
    Supervisor Palmer, any questions here?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:01:47
    No, I don't.
  • 02:01:48
    But could I just do one follow up on the previous slide on number three real quick?
  • 02:01:55
    but I didn't ask before, thank you.
  • 02:01:58
    So I'm just reading this over again for the 99th time and my question would be, given what Ann was saying, could this be a situation where we don't allow this but now all somebody has to do is put forward performance standards and they can more easily do this?
  • 02:02:18
    I'm a little concerned
  • 02:02:24
    that we're making this more straightforward for somebody to put their erosion and sediment control measures in that landward 50 feet of the buffer?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:02:42
    Actually, no, I don't think it and Greg can, we'll have to look at the final version of the ordinance language, but
  • 02:02:50
    The intent is not to make it any easier.
  • 02:02:52
    We would still, I would think, include the language that was in there previously as determined by the administrator.
  • 02:03:01
    They need to minimize and locate outside of the stream buffer whenever practical.
  • 02:03:07
    And right now, that's the language that's in there, and we've not really had any issues with it, I don't think.
  • 02:03:17
    I wanted to make a point that these are temporary measures.
  • 02:03:20
    So they are typically closed out after construction is over or they are converted to stormwater facilities.
  • 02:03:29
    So that's just another point.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:03:32
    And there's a definition of practicable, I'm assuming.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:03:38
    Yeah.
  • 02:03:40
    It does take some judgment by us, you know, staff.
  • 02:03:44
    So and if I do feel like there's
  • 02:03:48
    I've not really been challenged on when I say state or when our reviewers state they need to be out of the buffers so I don't know that it's been a big issue but I think the fact that it doesn't require mitigation I think is something that really concerns me the most.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:04:04
    Okay all right thank you very much and I don't have any questions on the following slide you can skip me for that one.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:04:15
    All right, Supervisor Foreman, the question is here, number six.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:04:20
    Are you asking me, did you say McKeel?
• • SPEAKER_32
  • 02:04:21
    Sorry.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:04:23
    I barely heard you.
  • 02:04:25
    I was, I'm fine with this.
• • SPEAKER_39
  • 02:04:27
    I think that's absolutely great and I'm good with this.
  • 02:04:31
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:04:33
    All right, Supervisor Mallek.
  • 02:04:35
    Good with this one, thank you.
  • 02:04:36
    Supervisor Price.
  • 02:04:38
    Concur, thank you.
  • 02:04:40
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley.
  • 02:04:44
    All right, Frank.
  • 02:04:47
    All right, we'll go back through.
  • 02:04:48
    Supervisor Palmer?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:04:51
    I'm okay here.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:04:53
    Supervisor McKeel?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:04:55
    I am fine here as well, thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:04:58
    Supervisor Malek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:05:00
    With the caveat of my earlier comment, yes, I'm fine with it.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:05:05
    And Supervisor Price?
  • 02:05:06
    I concur, this is fine, thank you.
  • 02:05:09
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:05:11
    Ditto.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:05:13
    All right, Frank, we can go to the next one.
  • 02:05:17
    Right, A2.
  • 02:05:18
    Supervisor Palmer?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:05:20
    I'm okay.
  • 02:05:21
    It's great, by the way.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:05:23
    Supervisor McKeel?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:05:25
    Yeah, I'm very much in favor of this and maybe I'm missing something here, Frank.
  • 02:05:29
    Just help me a little bit.
  • 02:05:32
    And maybe this is a topic for another day, I'm not really sure, but when these are, this is about if the facility has not been transferred to a homeowners association, right?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:05:45
    Correct.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:05:46
    if it has been and the homeowners association fails for whatever reason, right?
  • 02:05:54
    We have callbacks.
  • 02:05:55
    I mean, maybe I'm getting into an area that we don't need to be talking about right now, but I hear we have had a good number of the homeowners associations who have responsibility that have not been able to maintain that responsibility for various reasons.
  • 02:06:17
    So we have that covered as well.
  • 02:06:19
    I guess I'm just feel free to say you're going down a rabbit hole, Diantha, let's not go there right now.
  • 02:06:30
    I mean, I can name the subdivisions.
  • 02:06:32
    Some of them are in my district and it happens.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:06:38
    Yeah, once the bond is released and it's turned over to a subdivision, then we don't have any
  • 02:06:44
    At least CDD doesn't have jurisdiction.
  • 02:06:46
    Our stormwater group does have jurisdiction to require them to maintain their facilities.
  • 02:06:53
    And they work with them to maintain their facilities and to let them know what they need to do to do that.
  • 02:07:01
    There has been a in one of in the proposal that we presented in November, there was a a proposal to include a
  • 02:07:12
    the developer creating a little escrow to start out that HOA, which is done in, I think it was Roanoke County.
  • 02:07:19
    They require a small escrow to be, account to be transferred to the HOA.
  • 02:07:25
    So that's something we can consider and include as part of our recommendations when we come back.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:07:34
    I'm just very concerned and maybe there are other supervisors that are because what happens is that we see this happen.
  • 02:07:43
    And ultimately it comes back to us.
  • 02:07:47
    I would like to think about at least having that discussion about including that and seeing what that would look like.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:07:55
    Yes.
  • 02:07:55
    If the newer community associations state law requires that the dues cover needed capital improvements, so there should be every HOA.
  • 02:08:07
    I'm not sure when that law changed, but
  • 02:08:11
    HOA should have a capital fund that their dues are going into, in part.
  • 02:08:18
    The older community associations are problematic because, you know, what we've found through experience is that they're often not imposing collecting dues that are sufficient to cover any
  • 02:08:32
    of their common area were an adequate amount.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:08:36
    Right, exactly.
  • 02:08:38
    And I worry about the fact that we think that that's covered going forward, but yeah, exactly.
  • 02:08:47
    We've been there and I'm very concerned.
  • 02:08:50
    So I'd love to have a little bit of a discussion about how we could maybe strengthen that at the, you know, as we're having these discussions, if that's possible.
  • 02:08:59
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:09:03
    Right, Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:09:05
    Greg, do we have the authority to require that the HOA have a bond?
  • 02:09:10
    I mean, I'm thinking of ones where there is a high risk facility, such as I'm thinking of a lake in a neighborhood in Ivy, which was supposed to have $50,000 in repairs in 2008, and they whined and didn't do it.
  • 02:09:24
    And it ended up just costing them $500,000 and a huge amount of mess when it failed a couple of years ago.
  • 02:09:31
    So
  • 02:09:32
    It would see, I don't know if we have the authority to do it, but I would sure love to be able to help a forestall, as Diantha was saying, prevent the kinds of debacles that happen because people are used to running these things on a dollar down dollar when you catch me plan instead of on a really organized way.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:09:50
    Yeah, I'll have to do some confirming research, but I don't think we have that ability, certainly with the
  • 02:10:00
    existing HOAs, and I think I know which product development you're referring to, and that particular project is 50 plus years old.
  • 02:10:12
    One of the solutions, and I just throw that out there, but service districts are a way to deal with these, maybe a way to deal with these, what are currently private improvements and making them public improvements.
  • 02:10:31
    Interesting.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:10:34
    A neighborhood service district.
  • 02:10:35
    That's interesting.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:10:36
    Yeah, that is very interesting.
  • 02:10:37
    Maybe that's where we have a discussion.
  • 02:10:39
    Sorry, I've been meaning to interrupt.
  • 02:10:41
    Excuse me.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:10:43
    Well, as someone who has a private lake and nobody's going to fix it but ourselves, I understand the obligation and the monstrous amount of money that it takes to keep dams functioning.
  • 02:10:55
    And so I don't want people to think that this is some easy deal.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:10:59
    Failing private infrastructure has public impacts.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:11:04
    Yeah, it absolutely does.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 02:11:07
    All right, Supervisor Price.
  • 02:11:11
    Thank you.
  • 02:11:11
    I have no further questions on this one.
  • 02:11:13
    Thank you.
  • 02:11:14
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:11:16
    Yes, I need, I have to ask a question that could be to anyone.
  • 02:11:21
    When you're talking about HOAs, I mean, it seems to me here that there are HOAs and HOAs.
  • 02:11:27
    I know one HOA
  • 02:11:29
    where they collect $5 dues a year for the maintenance of a reservoir or something.
  • 02:11:38
    So I don't know how in the world they could possibly do anything with that kind of money.
  • 02:11:45
    Is that something, and then it's an older neighborhood, Carlsberg.
  • 02:11:52
    I guess I'm asking if we're going to put limitations on HOAs
  • 02:11:56
    What's the definition here in Albemarle of an HOA?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:12:04
    Greg, would you like to address that?
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:12:05
    No, I was muted.
  • 02:12:11
    I'm not sure.
  • 02:12:15
    I don't think we have a definition.
  • 02:12:17
    We would look to the state law for the state definition, but we do have these
  • 02:12:25
    entities that predate the current community association law and they don't have that same kind of fee structure that allows them to maintain their private facilities.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:12:49
    No further questions.
  • 02:12:50
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:12:52
    Frank, we can go to the next one.
  • 02:12:58
    This is a four, Supervisor Palmer.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:13:03
    I already mentioned my issues with four and five knowing that they're very important, but I am, like I said, concerned about rolling them into this process right now because I don't want them to impede the process that we're in now to get phase one done.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:13:28
    Supervisor McKeel, anything here?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:13:37
    Sorry having trouble with my buttons, I apologize.
  • 02:13:40
    I don't have a problem I guess if it's the will of the board to postpone these although
• • SPEAKER_39
  • 02:13:52
    I guess I don't have a good sense, or maybe not as good a sense, of some of the other supervisors about how controversial these would be.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:14:01
    I certainly don't want to slow down the other parts of this work, right?
  • 02:14:09
    With that, I'll just let it go.
  • 02:14:12
    I think I would say my issue is decoupling them.
  • 02:14:15
    I don't know what that means with respect to time.
  • 02:14:20
    I'm just worried about four and five dragging us down.
  • 02:14:23
    Right, and I get that.
  • 02:14:25
    And that, it makes sense to me.
  • 02:14:26
    Okay.
  • 02:14:26
    Okay.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:14:28
    All right, Supervisor Mallek.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:14:38
    Thank you.
  • 02:14:39
    I see Amelia sent us all that we could separate it out in the action, which is what Frank had talked about earlier.
  • 02:14:46
    My concern is a little different here because somewhere in the 2010 to 2014 timeframe, remembering who was on the board when this was done, the eastern half of the county was added to the 100 foot buffer requirements that had been in effect on the western half of the county for the watershed since 1980.
  • 02:15:08
    There are not supposed to be any structures in the buffer period since both of those things.
  • 02:15:14
    So I am really lacking understanding of what we're talking about here.
  • 02:15:18
    There should be no buffers, no buildings increased in the buffer period or new ones built in the buffer.
  • 02:15:29
    So this was the whole point of not having people's chairs and grills and stuff flowing downstream in a flood and smashing into somebody else's house.
  • 02:15:38
    or Carr or something else.
  • 02:15:39
    So it seems like we're going backwards here and I'm maybe just totally confused but it does not sound right.
  • 02:15:49
    I'm having trouble understanding what those provisions are when it says accept is provided in other sections of the code if you are strengthening things and putting in
  • 02:15:58
    requirements from into the MPO, the WPO, that's great.
  • 02:16:02
    I just, I'm a little worried about what this really means.
  • 02:16:06
    And I want to make sure that we're not backsliding.
  • 02:16:11
    So please help me understand.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:16:16
    Well, this may require further discussion.
  • 02:16:23
    I will say.
  • 02:16:25
    But the intent here is to more again, more clearly define or explain and include those exceptions in the ordinance, excuse me, in the water protection ordinance.
  • 02:16:37
    Again, there's the nonconforming section that is referred referenced here.
  • 02:16:42
    And then there's also the the floodplain ordinance.
  • 02:16:47
    So the floodplain ordinance is pretty pretty clear.
  • 02:16:50
    I don't have a
  • 02:16:51
    great grasp on the zoning ordinance for non-compliance and that's one that's been argued and brought forward as justification to be able to expand for instance.
  • 02:17:07
    I don't know what happened back in the past but the 1998 I assume was when the ordinance was passed and Greg may not have to look into that and get you a
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:17:18
    Yeah, that was the date when the, for lack of a better word, the current ordinance was created.
  • 02:17:31
    There was a 1997 version that consolidated three different chapters of the county code.
  • 02:17:36
    It was fine-tuned.
  • 02:17:37
    And then we came up with the ordinance in 1998.
  • 02:17:41
    The 2014 amendments were the
  • 02:17:47
    the wholesale E&S and stormwater overhaul in order to meet the then new state stormwater management law.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:18:00
    And that's when we lost a lot of the controls we had had before that didn't allow tree cutting and mowing and putting up sheds and stuff like that in the buffer.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:18:12
    I would have to go back, we'd have to go back and look at the history.
  • 02:18:15
    I don't recall there being material changes to the stormwater or to the stream buffer regulations as part of the 2014 amendments other than to clarify and to the extent we did in that ordinance.
  • 02:18:32
    And, you know, there were also changes, evolving interpretations, I think, as well.
  • 02:18:42
    of the stream buffer regulations.
  • 02:18:43
    And part of it was because of the, it's probably more an A5 issue that Frank has already identified, but as a result of having difficulty implementing both this provision and the one that's referenced in A5.
  • 02:18:59
    Did you have some comments?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:19:07
    I would like to, can I add something?
  • 02:19:08
    I don't know if you called on me or somebody else.
  • 02:19:10
    Amelia was wanting to get some comments in.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:19:12
    Are you there Amelia?
  • 02:19:19
    She's muted but it doesn't show she's muted.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:19:21
    Frank why don't you go ahead and Amelia get ready to go.
  • 02:19:28
    We'll call on you if you have an audio issues there.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:19:31
    Okay, I just wanted to address one of your comments, Ann, that new structures are not allowed.
  • 02:19:36
    This would not change that.
  • 02:19:38
    So any new structures still would not be allowed.
  • 02:19:41
    This does not apply to them.
  • 02:19:43
    Also, this only comes up a handful of times.
  • 02:19:46
    Every year it's probably happened since I've started three and a half, four years ago, five or six times.
  • 02:19:52
    So it is not a frequent occurrence.
  • 02:19:56
    but we do have homes that are partially within structures, excuse me, structures that are partially within buffers.
  • 02:20:03
    And when they have a kitchen that they want to expand is located on the back of the house.
  • 02:20:13
    That's when I get a lot of pushback about this is my, you know, highest investment.
  • 02:20:18
    I understand that I can't consider that.
  • 02:20:19
    I just wanted to convey that to you about
  • 02:20:23
    some of the issues and I just want to make sure that you knew about that and the board knows about that.
  • 02:20:29
    Okay.
  • 02:20:30
    To possibly provide a way to allow somebody with mitigation to it could improve the buffer if this is something that this is the argument is that this is already lawn right now and we were we're willing to put into an easement or to improve the buffer in a certain area
  • 02:20:50
    if we're allowed to do this.
  • 02:20:51
    So there are some things that could be offered as are required for types of things.
  • 02:20:58
    And the additions that I've dealt with have not been very big either.
  • 02:21:01
    They've been pretty 10 by 20 or something to that effect.
  • 02:21:05
    So just a few points.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:21:06
    All right, that makes a lot of sense.
  • 02:21:08
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_25
  • 02:21:11
    Yeah, any luck there?
• • SPEAKER_05
  • 02:21:13
    Can you hear me now?
• • SPEAKER_25
  • 02:21:14
    Yeah.
• • SPEAKER_05
  • 02:21:15
    Perfect.
  • 02:21:16
    Thank you so much.
  • 02:21:17
    And thanks, Jody, came to help me.
  • 02:21:20
    A couple of points I wanted to make in clarification about this requirement.
  • 02:21:24
    First of all, this wouldn't allow construction in the floodplain.
  • 02:21:29
    And what it relates to is those buildings that are built that existed as of February 11th of 1998 when somebody wants to do a minor addition.
  • 02:21:38
    So for example, there's a house that encroaches into the buffer and you want to add a
  • 02:21:45
    you know a sunroom or something like that under this provision you potentially could be permitted to do it whereas otherwise you would not.
• • SPEAKER_12
  • 02:21:56
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:22:02
    So can I just on that one thing Amelia while you're here can I just clarify a clarifying question?
  • 02:22:11
    Yes, ma'am.
  • 02:22:12
    So when you say a minor addition, I mean, I thought this was right now you can't expand or enlarge into the buffer, unless it's a non conforming structure, which I guess I always get kind of confused on the definition of that.
  • 02:22:35
    And I know this refers to two different parts of the of the
  • 02:22:40
    two different sections, but what's your definition of a small improvement?
  • 02:22:45
    Because what about the nonconforming buildings?
• • SPEAKER_05
  • 02:22:50
    Well, and this is probably where Frank should speak because he is the expert on the water protection ordinance and I'm more knowledgeable on the zoning ordinance.
  • 02:22:59
    I was given the example of a minor change to a building footprint where you might have a preexisting building in that buffer.
  • 02:23:08
    and this is a requirement that you have mitigation if you make changes.
  • 02:23:14
    Is it possible to ask Frank to answer this?
  • 02:23:16
    Because I don't want to misspeak.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:23:20
    Liz, can you repeat that, please, just so I understand what you're asking?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:23:23
    So I guess what Amelia said, a small structure like a sunroom.
  • 02:23:29
    I know some sunrooms that are pretty big, but what's a small structure?
  • 02:23:35
    And I thought the way it reads now, as far as I could figure out, is that you can't expand or enlarge into the flood, into the buffer unless it's a non-conforming
  • 02:23:51
    Building.
  • 02:23:51
    And I, you know, this is one of the reasons why I want to decouple these is because they're really complicated, and I don't know how complicated they're going to be for the public.
  • 02:24:01
    But I thought there, I thought it was more than just a small sunroom.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:24:08
    Yeah, I don't know that I was proposing any limitations on the expansion, be it a bedroom or a an expansion of their kitchen.
  • 02:24:22
    So that's something if we wanted to develop some type of maximum upper limit we could do that.
  • 02:24:28
    The non-conforming reference I think has to do with setbacks and other zoning regulations and obviously the floodplain.
  • 02:24:42
    So floodplain you just can't expand if you if you're in the floodplain even a portion of the structure is in the floodplain.
  • 02:24:50
    So
  • 02:24:52
    We would have to develop, I guess, that proposed some language that might clarify that for you, Liz.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:24:57
    Okay, thank you.
  • 02:25:00
    I didn't mean to go too much into the weeds here.
• • SPEAKER_22
  • 02:25:03
    If I can jump in and just give some examples of what's in 18-6.
  • 02:25:06
    This is the non-conforming structure provision in the zoning ordinance.
  • 02:25:14
    In those situations, previously non-existing sanitation, sanitary facilities in the house, doing repairs resulting from damage caused by factors beyond the control of the owner or occupant,
  • 02:25:32
    doing repairs to correct unsafe conditions, doing structural alterations that actually reduce the size of the structure.
  • 02:25:41
    It could be that there could be an expansion that's on the landward side that might be treated a little bit differently.
  • 02:25:49
    Maybe that there needs to be a modification to the structure to allow accessibility for somebody with disabilities.
  • 02:25:59
    So those are the kinds of
  • 02:26:01
    changes that are allowed in non-conforming structures in 18-6.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:26:04
    Great, okay, thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:26:08
    Supervisor McKeel, you had a comment here related?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:26:11
    Yeah, and I mean really appreciate Liz and Ann in this discussion and what Amelia said and Frank's responses and what I'm starting to think is that for me
  • 02:26:25
    I don't want to let the good be the enemy, the perfect or the perfect, I'm sorry, be the enemy of the good.
  • 02:26:33
    I'll get it straight in a minute.
  • 02:26:35
    So I'm thinking that maybe I'm feeling more comfortable with moving forward with this now and seeing what the reaction is because maybe we will not have the concerns that some of the supervisors are anticipating, especially since I believe
  • 02:26:53
    Frank and staff can explain it really well.
  • 02:26:58
    Just a thought, maybe that we don't need to pull this out and decouple it, but just to be able to move forward if we're not talking about some of these major concerns.
  • 02:27:08
    Anyway, just a thought.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:27:11
    Supervisor Malek, you had a follow-up?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:27:13
    Yes, actually on this one I was going to basically agree with Diantha here that
  • 02:27:19
    I think, and I don't know how much time is involved in doing whatever writing, crafting is required to develop all the materials for this meeting.
  • 02:27:28
    I mean, if that's a two-year process, then I definitely want to separate it.
  • 02:27:31
    But if it's within the normal scope of things and it's going to be marching along in the next month or so, then I think that we can, with good examples such as the ones that Greg have just provided, we'll have a better understanding.
  • 02:27:44
    I feel much better about it than I did before.
  • 02:27:48
    And just one other note I had written down from my homework phase, is this where the Greene County rule would come into effect or is that something different altogether as far as stormwater only?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:28:00
    That's something different altogether.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:28:02
    All right, very good.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:28:03
    All right, let me go through.
  • 02:28:05
    Supervisor Price, anything here?
  • 02:28:07
    No, thank you, Chuck Halloween.
  • 02:28:09
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:28:11
    Nothing at this time, thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:28:12
    All right, I just want to note time.
  • 02:28:14
    We are running up
  • 02:28:15
    We're going to be bumping up against our limit on this item, but we've got to get to phase two.
  • 02:28:18
    Frank, you want to go ahead forward?
  • 02:28:25
    All right, anything here on A5, Supervisor Palmer?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:28:30
    I've already said it, I still need to hear from staff what the time thing is or take the suggestion that we find out more about what the public's questions are going to be before we couple these things together.
  • 02:28:50
    Same thing.
  • 02:28:51
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:28:52
    Supervisor McKeel?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:28:54
    I'm okay with this.
  • 02:28:55
    I think we've talked about this and I feel comfortable with this one.
  • 02:28:57
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:28:58
    Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:29:01
    I have come to become more comfortable and understanding too that these are things which have been prohibited for decades.
  • 02:29:09
    So nobody can come in here and say oh you're changing everything and taking away all of my rights to build.
  • 02:29:14
    Big houses in the buffer.
  • 02:29:16
    We haven't allowed those in years.
  • 02:29:18
    If we're doing a better job of clarifying the process and that's where we're going or we're strengthening things, that's my intent.
  • 02:29:25
    And just to continue to say, as long as we're saying no to structures, then I'm happy to go along with it as long as we have very clear expectations.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:29:37
    Supervisor Price?
  • 02:29:38
    No comments right now, thank you.
  • 02:29:40
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:29:42
    Nothing at this time, thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:29:44
    Okay Frank.
  • 02:29:53
    So we're at this point, there weren't any specific things on phase, I know people had phase two questions Frank, how do we
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:30:02
    I do.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:30:04
    I do too.
  • 02:30:05
    We'll just go with the phase two, I'll go through the order.
  • 02:30:08
    I don't know if there were specific slides on those, I don't recall.
  • 02:30:12
    Supervisor Palmer, you had phase two questions?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:30:14
    So I do and I'm trying to remember exactly which proposals are, what the numbers are that we are going with and not going with, but the ones that
  • 02:30:33
    uh what was it uh two i think it is is one of the the first ones that we have you have suggested we don't move forward with um and i'm sorry i'm trying to i'm trying to which one two five and a three
  • 02:30:56
    Okay.
  • 02:30:58
    Two, five I think is my main one.
  • 02:31:03
    No.
  • 02:31:05
    Anyway, the one that talks about land disturbance and putting off, reducing the land disturbance one.
  • 02:31:15
    Which one is that, Frank?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:31:18
    Number two.
  • 02:31:19
    The VESCP threshold is number two.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:31:24
    Okay.
  • 02:31:24
    All right, so my question, when we went and talked about this back in 2019, one of the issues that we said was this was complaint driven and we wanted to kind of get a hook so that if somebody was a bad actor, we could deal with it.
  • 02:31:47
    And in your materials, it says that,
  • 02:31:54
    that the smaller areas would be an agreement in lieu of a plan.
  • 02:32:03
    And my understanding with these agreements in the past has been that they're just a form that people fill out.
  • 02:32:11
    So I'm wondering what the inspection issues are associated with this.
  • 02:32:18
    I certainly understand the lack of money.
  • 02:32:21
    all right now and that we don't know what we don't know for the coming year.
  • 02:32:27
    But I'd like to understand on those smaller land disturbances what you, how you anticipate that having a staff impact on a regular basis, I guess is my question, if that makes sense.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:32:44
    Sure, let me try to answer that.
  • 02:32:47
    Even though we have an agreement in lieu of, there will still be a need to, one, address complaints, potential complaints, and also to at least visit the site once every, I think it's once every three months, so
  • 02:33:02
    um there are some standards for inspections that do need to occur on those and those agreements just to provide the board some level of comfort maybe is is that those are not those those can be revoked or the higher standard can be required if we think there's a project that requires a higher standard so it's a may be allowed to use an agreement
  • 02:33:27
    Typically that will become the go-to type of permit, but if there is something that appears to be near a stream that's critical resources or something to that effect, or that it's just a very dense project or something like that, then we can require a plan.
  • 02:33:50
    Does that answer your question?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:33:54
    Well, it does to some extent, but not completely.
  • 02:33:57
    So let's say we have a fill operation, and it's a small fill operation, and it's 7500 square feet.
  • 02:34:06
    And typically, right now, they would be able to do that without a permit.
  • 02:34:14
    Is that correct?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:34:17
    Correct.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:34:18
    And so if we went, when we do this phase,
  • 02:34:23
    I mean, excuse me, this proposal, they would require a permit under that circumstance or they would just, tell me how that process would work.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:34:38
    So I answered that incorrectly.
  • 02:34:39
    If that fill is coming from a construction project, we do require permits now, even if it's under 10,000, because it is related with a construction activity.
  • 02:34:50
    It is an off-site construction activity, so we do require them to either extend their permit, which means to include it on the permit that they already have, or to obtain a separate permit for that activity.
  • 02:35:04
    So for the under 10,000 fill projects that we've seen, they haven't been under 10,000, but if they were under 10,000 square feet of land disturbance, then we do have a way to get to them now if they were coming from
  • 02:35:20
    a construction activity.
  • 02:35:25
    To answer your question, it's not related.
  • 02:35:28
    I'm sorry, go ahead.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:35:29
    No, go ahead.
  • 02:35:30
    No, please.
  • 02:35:31
    I thought you were done.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:35:33
    So currently, if it's not related to a construction activity, then we do not have our regulation doesn't that land disturbance activity is under the threshold and does not need to have a permit.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:35:47
    So going forward, pick one that would be changed under this particular proposal, something under 10,000 feet that would require staff intervention.
  • 02:36:01
    Because when I see agreement in lieu of a plan, I'm thinking of just them filling out a form and sending it to you.
  • 02:36:15
    and so I'm not really understanding what the staff, how the staff interaction with that would change.
  • 02:36:23
    So if you could pick an example where it would change.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:36:27
    Sure, this comes up most frequently for amendments to a site plan like an LOR or typically a minor amendment or major amendment when you add on to your structure and that structure and the disturbance to build that structure is under 10,000 square feet.
  • 02:36:47
    So that's where I see this most coming into play.
  • 02:36:55
    And how would it change under this?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:37:00
    How would it change?
  • 02:37:01
    And how would the inspection, like now if they did a site plan change that was under 10,000 feet, your inspectors would not have to go out and re-inspect.
  • 02:37:12
    They would just do it.
  • 02:37:15
    But with this, your inspector would have to go out again?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:37:21
    Yes, if it's under 10,000 feet currently, they don't need a permit or plan approval.
  • 02:37:27
    So we would not even go out there and inspect it at all unless there were a complaint.
  • 02:37:34
    And then we would talk to them at that point about
  • 02:37:37
    what they should be doing, we don't have any authority under the permit because we don't have a permit for that type of or that size of an activity.
  • 02:37:46
    So if we did have an agreement in lieu of, we would probably go out and we need to develop and talk about all of the things that we could do.
  • 02:37:55
    And one of them is, is that we would, prior to a CEO or prior to issuance of a foundation, I think it's not a permit, but inspection,
  • 02:38:07
    require us to inspect to make sure their E&S measures are in place.
  • 02:38:12
    That's something we've been talking about internally.
  • 02:38:13
    I've been speaking with our billing official on to how to improve the E&S measures on these smaller structures or even on single family homes.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:38:25
    Okay.
  • 02:38:26
    All right.
  • 02:38:27
    So I guess you have answered my question.
  • 02:38:29
    Well, I was thinking the agreement in lieu of a plan
  • 02:38:34
    was really wasn't adding to your inspections and that's what I was confused about.
  • 02:38:42
    So clearly that's not the case.
  • 02:38:44
    So thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:38:47
    You're welcome.
  • 02:38:49
    And again phase two they're asking to come back to us.
  • 02:38:51
    I'm just noting time again the questions are relative to that decision of whether or not we want them to return.
  • 02:38:56
    Supervisor McKeel any additional questions here?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:39:01
    Now I feel very comfortable with the staff recommendations at this point.
  • 02:39:04
    Thank you very much.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:39:06
    Supervisor Mallek?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:39:08
    My only concern is that I would like this one to be back in phase one only because the possibility of disaster is so great.
  • 02:39:18
    in the one we have now.
  • 02:39:19
    And we have numerous really rotten examples all over going on where ENF stuff is not inspected, not done because our requirements are so lax in certain sizes and then streams get wrecked.
  • 02:39:35
    and great enormous buildings get built that we might not be able to control but we haven't got control of the erosion and sediment control.
  • 02:39:43
    So that is my concern to try to get this as the highest you know as a very high priority next two rather than saying we're not going to deal with this again for three or four years because it's literally been five years or ten years since we've been talking about things like this.
  • 02:40:00
    and we really, we're so close to the finish line now, I'm very concerned about punting it to phase two.
• • SPEAKER_19
  • 02:40:06
    All right, Supervisor Price?
  • 02:40:11
    No questions or comments at this time, thank you.
  • 02:40:14
    Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:40:16
    Yes, relating to Supervisor Malek's question, when do you anticipate phase two coming in?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:40:26
    I think that would depend on the budgeting
  • 02:40:28
    Just a ballpark, quickly
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:40:57
    We're talking about years, months.
• • SPEAKER_17
  • 02:41:01
    Amelia, can you hear me?
  • 02:41:03
    I can.
  • 02:41:05
    Mr. Chair, members of the board, Ms.
  • 02:41:06
    LaPisto-Kirtley, Doug Walker, Daveney County Executive.
  • 02:41:10
    The work that the board will be doing with staff this fall when we have an idea of revenue projections heading into the latter half of the fiscal year that we just entered into will help inform
  • 02:41:26
    all of us on what initiatives we can pursue.
  • 02:41:29
    And so until and unless we have a good idea about the profile, as it were, for these new initiatives, it's really, I'm not able to kind of offer a suggestion.
  • 02:41:44
    So our intent is to move forward as quickly as we can.
  • 02:41:49
    And we recognize your interest in moving forward with that also.
  • 02:41:52
    We just want to make sure that we are not over-committing
  • 02:41:55
    on the program with funding that is inadequate to support it.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:41:59
    Okay, thank you.
  • 02:42:01
    I support staff recommendations because I get to do what is feasible.
  • 02:42:07
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:42:07
    All right, Liz, you had a Supervisor Palmer, you had an additional question?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:42:14
    Right, I'm wondering how much more work do you have to do on the wording of this proposal for the land disturbance reduction?
  • 02:42:25
    Is there any work that could continue and with the idea that certainly we can't hire anybody until we have the budget worked out?
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:42:38
    Well I do have draft language already prepared so
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:42:46
    I thought you were done again.
  • 02:42:55
    I was just going to ask what process there would be for that language that you've already prepared to be distributed or brought to the public or anything like that.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:43:10
    The process would be to start up as proposed here was the idea was is to begin that process again once we've the staffing resources became available.
  • 02:43:22
    So I haven't developed another process to initiate that review, I guess.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:43:32
    Okay, I don't know what staffing requirements there are for the review.
  • 02:43:37
    But to Ann's point, if there's anything that can go forward given the staff, you know, availability, I think that would be a wonderful thing.
  • 02:43:49
    And then it could be a high priority when the board discusses it in the fall.
  • 02:43:54
    So that would be my only request at this point is if you
  • 02:44:00
    could comment that on now or you could bring it back to us later as an idea.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:44:08
    Okay, I think I'd defer to comment on it later if that's okay.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:44:14
    Thank you.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:44:15
    Saying that this was one that they needed more additional time and resources on to come back, I think that's pretty clear they're stating that they'd like the ones in phase one they can get moving on and get done.
  • 02:44:26
    These ones they're asking for the additional time and
  • 02:44:30
    to be able to do it.
  • 02:44:31
    I mean, resources is time at this point.
  • 02:44:34
    Um, that's going to be budgeted time.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:44:36
    Right.
  • 02:44:36
    I just wasn't sure how much of it.
  • 02:44:39
    I just wasn't sure how much of it was the actual hiring of the folks versus the, um, uh, versus, um, you know, getting the wording done.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:44:52
    So I'm fine with having faced his return.
  • 02:44:55
    Um,
  • 02:44:59
    The board, we are past time on this.
  • 02:45:01
    Staff needs direction to proceed with phase one and if it's okay with phase two.
  • 02:45:07
    I hate to just cut us off but we're gonna just get behind here and be crunched for six o'clock tonight.
  • 02:45:15
    Do we have a motion to walk through some of these recommendations?
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:45:20
    Do you all have a motion prepared or motions?
  • 02:45:24
    I was just looking to see if there was something and I'm happy to make a motion but I think maybe make the first one on that first bullet point.
  • 02:45:31
    Okay I move that we direct staff to proceed with phase one proposals.
  • 02:45:39
    And I just ask one quick thing on that or we can I can second that but with just a comment
  • 02:45:47
    that there was the suggestion by Frank that he could, when he puts out that A4 and A5, if they find that there's a lot of questions and public discussion about that, that he would consider coming back to us and separating those.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:46:05
    I think that's appropriate to include as part of this.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:46:12
    Yeah, I think that was part of our discussion.
  • 02:46:16
    Supervisor Galloway.
  • 02:46:18
    So I second it.
• • SPEAKER_10
  • 02:46:20
    My understanding is these do not need motions and Greg you can correct me if I'm wrong it's just a concurrence or a... Frankly I've already confirmed that with Greg so we're gonna go ahead with the motions.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:46:30
    I apologize.
  • 02:46:31
    Is there any further discussion by the board?
  • 02:46:37
    We can call the vote on this one.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 02:46:39
    Mr. Galloway.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:46:40
    Yes.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 02:46:41
    Ms.
  • 02:46:41
    LaPisto-Kirtley?
  • 02:46:42
    Aye.
  • 02:46:43
    Ms.
  • 02:46:44
    Mallek?
  • 02:46:44
    Yes.
  • 02:46:45
    Ms.
  • 02:46:45
    McKeel?
  • 02:46:46
    Yes.
  • 02:46:47
    Ms.
  • 02:46:47
    Palmer?
  • 02:46:49
    Aye.
  • 02:46:50
    Ms.
  • 02:46:50
    Price?
  • 02:46:50
    Aye.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:46:53
    Then I guess you want another motion?
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:46:55
    I don't think we need to do it bullet by bullet for the rest.
  • 02:46:58
    I think it was very clear for the phase one to proceed if you want to make a motion for the remainder of the recommendations.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:47:03
    Though I move we direct staff to return with phase two proposals with staff resources that are available and direct staff to return if more stringent DEQ regulations are passed and endorse restarting discussions and efforts to protect stream health in the rural areas.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:47:20
    Second.
  • 02:47:22
    Any further discussion?
  • 02:47:23
    The motion was made by Supervisor McKeel and seconded by Supervisor Mallek.
• • SPEAKER_41
  • 02:47:28
    Just one point to add and that is when people are thinking about public engagement there's two and a half years of public engagement on all these with stakeholder groups and everything already done on this whole process which we can all be brought up to date with with some homework and we're not starting from scratch at all on this second phase.
• • SPEAKER_40
  • 02:47:49
    Thanks Ann, I was going to make that point later.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:47:51
    We can go ahead and call the motion here.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 02:47:56
    Mr. Galloway
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:47:57
    Yes.
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 02:47:58
    Ms.
  • 02:47:58
    LaPisto-Kirtley.
  • 02:47:59
    Aye.
  • 02:48:00
    Ms.
  • 02:48:00
    Mallek.
  • 02:48:01
    Yes.
  • 02:48:01
    Ms.
  • 02:48:01
    McKeel.
  • 02:48:02
    Yes.
  • 02:48:03
    Ms.
  • 02:48:03
    Palmer.
  • 02:48:04
    Yes.
  • 02:48:05
    Ms.
  • 02:48:05
    Price.
  • 02:48:06
    Aye.
• • SPEAKER_27
  • 02:48:06
    All right, that motion carries.
  • 02:48:09
    So Frank, do you have what you need here from us today?
  • 02:48:11
    Yes sir, thank you very much.
  • 02:48:13
    Thank you very much.
  • 02:48:14
    Thank you and thank you everyone.
  • 02:48:16
    So Warren, we're up next for a recess.
  • 02:48:18
    If we could do, I'm sure we need to kind of push here pretty long, if we could do a quick ten minute
  • 02:48:24
    Recess, and then we'll come back and have some reports that we'll push into our closed session.
  • 02:48:32
    Claudette, will you let us know when we're...
• • SPEAKER_42
  • 02:59:23
    All right, we're live.