Board of Supervisors Adjourned Meeting - Legislative Forum   11/20/2020

This meeting is being held pursuant to and in compliance with ordinance number 20-A16, an ordinance to ensure the continuity of government during the COVID-19 disaster.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Happy to be here.

Good to see everyone.

And those representing legislators?

Bryce Reeves of the 17th, thank you.

Fulmer.

Yes, Delegate Ferris is going to be hopping on in about 15-20 minutes, but I'm happy to be here in his place until he does.

And let's see, David, who do we have from the TJPDC today?

And David Blount, director of legislative services.

So, Ann Mallek.

Thank you.

You're muted there, Bea.

We really appreciate it.

And Liz Palmer?

Yes, I'm Liz Palmer and thank you all.

And Diantha?

Great to see everybody.

And then from Mr. Richardson, should we take some time for the staff that's here today just so that we can put the faces to the name?

Thank you very much for everyone's time today.

Lori, good afternoon.

Nice to see everyone.

And Bart, I see you on today.

Barcelona Community Development Zoning Director.

But again, I wanna welcome everyone to take the time here on a Friday afternoon to discuss the important items that will be introduced.

And Mr. Blount, am I turning to you?

And again, thank you for the opportunity to be with you all this afternoon.

All right, seeing none, always have a chance to loop back.

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Can everyone see my screen okay?

Yes, we can.

at the end.

Anybody have questions or comments here?

This is reasonable, I think.

So Senator Deeds, are you saying that you've already got your 12 bills laid out for you?

I've probably got more than 25 bills laid out that I'm still trying to cut through.

You're just saying that it has to compete.

So that means that a lot of adjustments have to be made.

Thank you.

The bill limit would be less severe in the House if we were to be able to work our full 45 days as is custom.

So this is Diantha just asking then, is there a way that we could help with that or input from us or just trying to wrap my head around what you're saying?

and so that the only thing that it would take in order for us to work our 45 days as is typical would be for at least would be for enough members of both parties to vote to do the customary thing and exchange a session so you know if you wanted to be helpful in that way Supervisor McKeel we could have all of the members of the Albemarle delegation agreed that that work is important to represent the interest of the county well and to vote to carry on our business for the typical length.

So, do any of the other delegates that have joined us have any thoughts?

Seeing any mics become unmuted.

It would be helpful to hear from folks.

And so the idea of having a smaller number of bills, I would suggest might have some benefits, but again, I understand we may not all reach the same conclusion here.

Well, the difference...

That's why we're having this meeting.

Thank you.

I think it's too little time

I mean, we're in a crisis and I can't see why you wouldn't have more time instead of less time because we are in a crisis.

Thank you.

but it would seem to me that even with that small amount you would still need time to be able to do the back and forth so exactly what you're talking about does not happen and someone doesn't recognize the bill because they've had the time to be able to do the back and forth.

Thank you.

is to pass procedural resolutions capping the number of bills at say 10 or 15 and having us go to subcommittee but the shortening the session is a rather draconian and sort of misaligned way of achieving the purpose which is strong deliberation which I think we all agree should be part of our work.

I keep hearing traditionally it's happened.

Historically, it's been extended.

But it does put a damper, if you will, on hearing that we can't add things in, potentially.

But the reality is we would just have the fewer bills to even if there's a special session called the end of the 30-day session I don't think the I don't think the bill limits will change at least as far in respect to the Senate

We can proceed through our items.

2209 so that it more closely matches the criminal penalties that can be imposed for those localities that enforce their zoning regulations through a criminal process.

I don't have a lot of, I've not done a lot of land use work, but does a violation occur every day that you were in violation so that the $500 penalty could apply every single day?

It's every day, but it is spread out, so you can't have more than one violation within a 10-day period.

But if it really was $500 a day for separate offenses, it would be different.

And I will just add that Bart Savota from our Community Development Department just added in the chat and he said that there's also a cap on the amount.

So once that cap is reached, the locality has the ability to seek criminal enforcement or injunctive relief.

So Senator Deeds, would it be easier for you to be able to just up the cap limit?

except a little extra cash.

I'll ask Mr. Sabota if he has any more, anything to add to that?

These are for more severe cases.

What are the violations that we're concerned about?

Those are our top ones.

We're talking about properties that are a quarter of an acre or a third of an acre in a neighborhood.

Yeah.

And there are other examples as well but I'm just giving you one.

All right Mr. Cameron.

or authority that would bring some efficiencies to our processes.

I mean maybe that's kind of a whack request but I'm just curious.

with the county executive type government, is that correct?

Yes, in Prince William County.

Do they have this problem?

Lori is from our Department of Finance and Budget.

So we were just really asking for the authority to be able to do it.

or how to find a way to get the problem solved.

That would be outstanding.

I mean, only two governments in the Commonwealth, but it's a good bill.

And my one is a general comment, but if you already have a spot for this bill, that's wonderful.

But it's definitely one that's, I'd say, in the top three of running for that last spot.

I hear you.

Thank you.

Good decision.

Any way to combine those?

I don't know and I'm not an attorney so I'm very hesitant to answer that question because as you know bills have to be of one specific content so I don't know if they're of like content enough that where you could you know put them together.

Perhaps a delegate bill could answer that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So there's other ways, even when we get into the session of being on the lookout for tacking things on to something else.

Any other reactions to the content of this one?

So those are the two points of this priority.

We didn't need an amendment.

It's restricted to, you know, the county can only apply its ordinances to its own public facilities.

Is that right?

Yes, that's correct.

So maybe that's one we can take care of here locally.

I think it is prone to extensive litigation and expense when an easier fix is simply to modify the legislation.

Is there a way that we could get an opinion around this?

Thank you.

Hey, did we all hear that?

Well, when I submit an opinion request to the Attorney General, I have to give the Attorney General my opinion.

What do you think?

All right, any other comments, remarks on this one?

We just learned about that a couple of days ago.

Any remarks, questions, comments on this one?

Greg, who's introducing that bill?

It is, it is a, well, David, do you know, David Blunt?

Okay.

And if it doesn't look like that's going to happen, we ought to come up with language to try to stick in the budget.

So, you know, maybe that gets tweaked along with a bill so that, you know, we make sure everything's moving together.

That's why I was thinking we could solve this problem if we had to, by just working with that budget language.

Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?

to be held virtually because I found out that our participation rate is a lot better with doing it virtually, besides saving a lot of money in transportation, traveling.

Fantastic.

And just to follow up, so that would include the board appointed advisory committees.

All right, Mr. Kim.

As the senators and the delegates are aware of those structures, even though they may have a significant number of members of the public in them, they are not required to be constructed according to the minimum standards in the Uniform Statewide Building Code.

Supervisor Mallek?

Thank you.

Is it what Ann's referencing?

Maybe Delicate Runyon could answer that because Ann and I did have a conversation with him about this particular deal and or this particular problem I should say and I know he's aware and has some information so I don't know if he has had any pushback.

I had just heard some pushback already happening and I just wasn't sure what it was.

and where we could move to if there are things that need to be moved to.

If I'm correct, also, I think that Rockingham already adopted a full building code requirement for their buildings, did they not?

Oh, you've surprised me, Ann.

So we thought this was a pretty minor compromise in comparison to that.

I did not think that there were local restrictions on relating to the life safety code to agricultural structures, but I may be mistaken.

Thank you.

The one thing that would give me some doubt as to whether they did it, I haven't heard about any lawsuits.

But again, I thought all that kind of got put to the side, but I will follow up on that with the Rockingham folks and get back to you.

So I have to ask Delegate Runyon, do you have all your slots full?

But how about if we get through the next several days, and then we can look on this and go from there?

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

That's all I have Mr. Chair.

And so it's really causing a lot of concerns to have these sunset clauses just continue to be extended.

You're muted there, Supervisor Price.

So this is sort of the end of the session comments.

Thanks, ma'am.

Senator Deeds?

It will be a busy session, whether it's 30 days or 45, 46 days, it will be a busy session.

I'm going to give, if it's all right with everyone, her the opportunity to speak and then we can follow up with any questions with Senator Deeds as needed.

So I would say those are my top three things.

It looked like there may have been some reaction or questions for either Senator Deeds or Delegate Hudson.

Mine was more of a comment, so I'm good.

The next on the list we had Mr. Snyder representing Mr. Bryce, Senator Bryce Reeves.

So any questions for me, though?

Just give us some idea about the top things, if you could.

But those will be filed soon.

Delegate Bell.

I would be happy to hear whatever you have to say.

for you and I'll send it out to the rest of the board because I can't remember if I sent it out to the rest of the board or not quite frankly.

Sorry Liz did you have another item there?

No I just wanted to answer Delegate Bell saying I would get what RIT which is a really specific things which may help him.

Are we looking at bills or do we need to just tell them, hey this is not necessary, you're making this harder than it has to be?

It's actually too many things for me to remember too far back so I can't really answer that unless Chris can chime in on that or maybe Supervisor Malek can.

Supervisor Malek, you were?

Thank you.

They're going to get back together the first or second week in December, and I would expect a recommendation from them perhaps coming out of that meeting.

Very good.

So thank you all.

Any questions, comments here?

We really appreciate it.

I believe you're... Yes sir, good afternoon.

How y'all doing today?

Good, how are you?

But I appreciate y'all spending time this afternoon, and that's just a little bit of my thoughts for now.

Any questions, comments here?

I guess I have one.

Yes, ma'am.

And we thank you for your help.

Any final comments or thoughts from the legislators?

There's some holes in that system right now too, but of course if they knew they had long-term ability, it would be easier to talk them into beefing those systems up.

Supervisor Mallek, any other thoughts or comments?

We'll see you in Richmond.

And thank you for your assistance and participation today.

Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley?

So I say keep up the good work and thank you very much for listening and participating.

Supervisor Palmer?

and I hope that there are other communities in the Commonwealth who are continuing to move forward to try to get mental health courts funded does really seem to help and I'll just say thank you to everybody and move on.

Supervisor McKeel.

So with that, thank you very much.

So we appreciate your patience and openness to letting us send feedback to you all along the way.

I have to ask Delegate Bell if he was being sarcastic in the beginning when he said thank you for having this on a Friday afternoon or was that legitimate?

I don't know, just literally got that 30 seconds ago.

So the news improved, right?

And Liz, I did get your email, thank you.

That's better than five.

Mr. Richardson, do you have any final thoughts or comments here you'd like to make?

I wanted to jump on Delegate Bell's comment that since it went from five to seven while we're all on the phone, we'd like to claim those two extra ones with your permission, sir.

It's how you get volunteered for things when you're not.

Thank you so much for being here.

David from TJPDC, any final thoughts there?

I'm used to seeing them in committee meetings and seeing them in the halls and in their offices, and it's all just going to be a lot different this year, but we will get through it.

No, Mr. Chair.

Thank you everyone.

Y'all stay safe.

Be safe, be well.