9-12min.07

Document Sample
9-12min.07 Powered By Docstoc
					Regular Meeting, Wednesday, September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. Government Center,
Verona, VA

PRESENT:      Nancy Taylor Sorrells, Chairwoman
              David R. Beyeler, Vice-Chairman
              F. James Bailey, Jr.
              Wendell L. Coleman
              Kay D. Frye
              Larry C. Howdyshell
              Tracy C. Pyles, Jr.
              Dale L. Cobb, Director of Community Development
              Joseph W. Davis, Director of Finance
              John C. McGehee, Assistant County Administrator
              Patrick J. Coffield, County Administrator
              Rita R. Austin, CMC, Executive Secretary




                     VIRGINIA:     At a regular meeting of the Augusta County Board of
                                   Supervisors held on Wednesday, September 12, 2007,
                                   at 7:00 p.m., at the Government Center, Verona,
                                   Virginia, and in the 232nd year of the Commonwealth....


                           * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Chairwoman Sorrells welcomed the citizens present for the meeting and reviewed meeting
protocols.
                            * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Tommy Dillard, a Senior at Buffalo Gap High School, led us with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Tommy plays soccer and runs cross country. He is considering Wake Forest, Davidson,
or William and Mary next year.

F. James Bailey, Jr., Supervisor of Beverley Manor District, delivered the invocation.

                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MIDDLEBROOK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT – ORDINANCE

This being the day and time advertised to consider an ordinance to amend Article III, of
Chapter 3 (Agricultural and Forestal Districts) of the Code of the County of Augusta,
Virginia, to continue and modify the Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District.

Dale L. Cobb, Director of Community Development, advised that the proposed renewal
of the Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District was discussed at the August 22nd
meeting. The Board recommended that the County Attorney prepare an ordinance to
continue. The district was established December 9, 1998 with 5620 acres; this
proposed modification consists of 3950 acres and is recommended to continue for
another eight-year period to expire December 9, 2014. The following modifications
were made:

   1.   Under § 3-23.A., the term “subdivision” shall not include boundary line
        adjustments in the Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District.
   2.   Eliminates the requirement that all tracts included in the district shall be shown
        as separate tax map parcels.

The Chairman declared the public hearing open.

There being no one present to speak for or against, the Chairwoman declared the
public hearing closed.
                                                                                    59



      September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


MIDDLEBROOK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT – ORDINANCE (cont’d)

Chairwoman Sorrells advised that this was the second part of a two-part process to get
this renewal in place and noted that she and the Board are supportive of Ag Forestal
Districts in this county.

Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded by Mr. Pyles, that the Board adopt the following
ordinance retroactive to December 6, 2006:
               AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE AND MODIFY THE MIDDLEBROOK
               AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT IN AUGUSTA COUNTY

      WHEREAS, pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-4311 and § 3-4 of The Code of
the County of Augusta, Virginia (the “County Code”), the Board of Supervisors
of Augusta County, Virginia, determined to review the Middlebrook
Agricultural and Forestal District, previously established and approved by
ordinance adopted on December 9, 1998.
      WHEREAS, Augusta County has completed its review of the Middlebrook
Agricultural and Forestal District.
      WHEREAS, in accordance with Virginia Code § 15.2-4311, owners of land
within the Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District have been notified,
a public meeting has been conducted, a public hearing has been advertised,
and a public hearing has been conducted concerning the continuation of
Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District.

      WHEREAS, the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee, at
its meeting conducted on May 16, 2007, recommended the continuation of the
Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District, subject to the conditions to
creation of the district, as set forth in § 3-23 of the County Code.
      WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its meeting conducted on July 10,
2007, recommended the continuation of the Middlebrook Agricultural and
Forestal District, subject to the conditions to creation of the district, as
set forth in § 3-23 of the County Code.

      NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Augusta
County, Virginia, that:

      1.    The Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District is hereby
continued for a period of eight years effective retroactively to December 9,
2006, in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Agricultural and
Forestal District Act, Virginia Code §§ 15.2-4300 through 15.2-4314.
      2.    Section 3-22 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia, be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§   3-22.   District described.

      The Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District shall generally
consist of the following territory:
5,620Approximately 3,949.75 acres of land lying on the south side of the
intersection of Middlebrook Road (Route 252) and Dutch Hollow Road (Route
726) and as far south as the Rockbridge County line and including parcels
shown on County Real Estate maps as of the effective date of this Article as
parcels numbered 80-24, 80-27, 80-30, 80-30B, 80-53, 80-63, 80-64 (portion
only), 80-65, 80-66, 80-66A, 80-67, 80-68, 80-71, 81-1, 81-1A, 81-2, 81-3,
81-3A, 81-4 (portion only), 81-5, 81-5A, 81-8, 81-11, 81-15, 81-18, 81-19,
81-22, 81-23, 87-3A, 87-5, 87-5A, 87-8B, 87-8C, 87-23, 87-24, 87-24A, 87-26,
87-26A, 87-29, 87-30, 87-30A, and 87-30B, and 88-2.

      The specific boundaries of the Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal
District are established as shown on a map entitled “Middlebrook Agr &
Forestal District,” revised August 20, 2007. Such map, together with all
explanatory matter thereon, is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be
part of this article. A copy of the map, properly attested, shall be filed
in the office of the Director of the Community Development Department and
shall be available for inspection by the public.

      3.    Section 3-23 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia, be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 3-23.     Conditions to creation of the district.
60

        September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


MIDDLEBROOK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT – ORDINANCE (cont’d)
      The Middlebrook Agricultural and Forestal District is created subject
to the following conditions:

      A.    Subdivision of land should only be permitted in accordance with
the current zoning and subdivision ordinance provisions for family members.
Only lots that are solely for the purpose of gift from a member or members of
the immediate family of the grantee or grantees, as defined in such
ordinance, shall be permitted. As used in this subsection, the term
“subdivision” shall not include boundary line adjustments, which shall also
be permitted.
      B.    No new non-agricultural or non-forestal buildings, and/or uses
including dwellings, shall be permitted except that the construction of a
dwelling for persons who earn a substantial part of their livelihood from
agricultural or forestal operation on the same property, or for members of
the immediate family of the owner is permitted.
      C.    All included tracts shall be shown as separate parcels on the
County Real Estate records.
      D.    A corporation consisting of family members shall be considered
the same as a family property owner under the following circumstances:
            1.    The membership or ownership of the corporation consists of
only “one family.”
            2.    The corporation is the grantor and not the grantee of the
purchase or gift of the lot.
            3.    For purposes of this provision only, the members of “one
family” shall be limited to husband, wife, their children and grandchildren
and their spouses.
            4.    The grantee may be any eligible grantee (as defined by the
zoning ordinance) of a member of the corporation, and the deed or other
instrument or conveyance shall indicate which member of the corporation is
the “deemed” grantor for purposes of this provision.

      4.    Section 3-24 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia, be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 3-24.      Period before the review of district.

      The period before the review of the District shall be eight years (8)
and shall expire on December 9, 20062014.
        5.      This ordinance shall be effective retroactively to December 6,
2006.

Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                  Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                            Nays: None

Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DOG LICENSURE – ORDINANCE

This being the day and time advertised to consider an ordinance to amend the Code of
the County of Augusta, Virginia, to change provisions concerning the licensure of dogs.
The proposed ordinance (a) permits the presentation of evidence of inoculation or
vaccination of a dog against rabies by a licensed veterinary technician, in addition to a
licensed veterinarian, (b) requires that a license receipt issued by the treasurer or
other officer include whether a dog is male or female, or spayed or neutered, or issued
to a kennel, and (c) modifies the provisions concerning payment of the license tax, and
other miscellaneous provisions, to conform with the applicable provisions of the state
code.
                                                                                    61



      September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


DOG LICENSURE – ORDINANCE (cont’d)

Patrick J. Coffield, County Administrator, advised that the Augusta County Code needs
to be amended to conform with the requirements of the state code.

Mr. Beyeler questioned § 5-13.B. and asked if the State Code required it to be due on
January 1st or not later than January 31st or was it required under the County Code.
Mr. Coffield said he thought it to be required by State Code, but would check with the
County Attorney. Mr. Beyeler reminded the Board that the veterinarians are now
submitting rabies vaccination certificates and hoped that the County would go to a
three-year license. Mr. Coffield confirmed that the Treasurer is considering a three-
year license as well as other modifications to the current program.

The Chairman declared the public hearing open.

There being no one present to speak for or against, the Chairwoman declared the
public hearing closed.

Mr. Pyles moved, seconded by Mr. Coleman, that the Board adopt the following
ordinance:
             AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF AUGUSTA COUNTY,
             VIRGINIA,   TO  CHANGE PROVISIONS CONCERNING  THE
             LICENSURE OF DOGS

      WHEREAS, pursuant to authority set forth in § 3.1-796.94 of the Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended, Augusta County, Virginia has previously enacted
ordinances concerning the licensure of dogs.

      WHEREAS, it is necessary for the County to amend such ordinances to
conform to the requirements of the Code of Virginia.

      NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Augusta
County, Virginia, that:
      1.    Section 5-12 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-12. Evidence showing inoculation for rabies prerequisite to obtaining
dog license.

      No license tag shall be issued for any dog unless there is presented,
to the treasurer or other duly authorized issuing agencyofficer of the
county, or other agent charged by law with the duty of issuing license tags
for dogs, satisfactory evidence satisfactory to him showing that such dog has
been inoculated or vaccinated against rabies by a currently licensed
veterinarian or currently licensed veterinary technician who was under the
immediate and direct supervision of a licensed veterinarian on the premises.

      2.    Section 5-13 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-13.   How to obtain license.

      A. Any person may obtain a dog license by making oral or written
application to the treasurer of the county, accompanied by the amount of the
license tax and current certificate of vaccination as required by this
article or satisfactory evidence that such certificate has been obtained.

      B. Upon receipt of proper application and current certificate of
vaccination as required by this article or satisfactory evidence that such
certificate has been obtained, the treasurer or other officer charged with
the duty of issuing dog licenses shall issue a license receipt for the amount
on which he shall record the name and address of the owner or custodian, the
date of payment, the year or years for which issued, and the serial number of
the tag, whether male or female, whether spayed or neutered or whether a
kennel, and deliver the metal license tags or plates provided for in this
article.
62

      September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


DOG LICENSURE – ORDINANCE (cont’d)
      C. The treasurer may establish substations in convenient locations in
the county and appoint agents for the collection of the license tax and
issuance of such licenses.

      3.    Section 5-14 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-14.   Amount of license tax.

      A. There is hereby imposed a license tax on the ownership of dogs
within the county, unless otherwise exempted by law.
      B. The annual license tax on a fertilean intact dog not in a licensed
kennel shall be Five Dollars ($5.00).
      C. The annual license tax on a spayed or neutered or infertile dog
shall be Three Dollars ($3.00). Any person who applies for a license tag for
a spayed or neutered or infertile dog shall present at the time of
application certification from a licensed veterinarian attesting the spaying
or neutering or infertility of the dog. If such certification is not so
presented, the dog shall be taxed the fee levied on fertileintact dogs.
      D. The tax for each kennel shall be calculated at the rate of Twenty-
Five Dollars ($25.00) for each block of up to twenty dogs.

      E. For purposes of this chapter, "kennel" means an enclosure with five
or more dogs.
      4.    Section 5-15 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-15.   When license tax payable.

      A. On January 1 and not later than January 31 of each year a license
tax is due, the owner of any dog four months old or older shall pay a license
tax as prescribed in section 5-14 of this articleThe license tax as
prescribed in § 5-14 of this article is due not later than 30 days after a
dog has reached the age of four months, or not later than 30 days after an
owner acquires a dog four months of age or older and each year thereafter.

      B. If a dog becomes four months of age or comes into the possession of
any person between January 1 and November 1 of any year, the license tax for
the current calendar year shall be paid by the ownerAny license tax
prescribed pursuant to § 5-14 shall be due on January 1 and not later than
January 31 of each year.

      C. If a dog becomes four months of age or comes into the possession of
any person between October 31 and December 31 of any year, the license tax
for the succeeding calendar year shall be paid by the owner and this license
shall be valid from the date the license is purchased.
      5.    Section 5-16 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-16.   Effect of dog not bearing tag as evidence.

      Any dog not wearing a collar    bearing a valid license tag of the proper
calendar year shall prima facie be    deemed to be unlicensed, and in any
proceedings under this article the    burden of proof of the fact that such dog
has been licensed, or is otherwise    not required to bear a tag at the time,
shall be on the owner of the dog.
      6.    Section 5-15 of The Code of the County of Augusta, Virginia be,
and hereby is, amended to read as follows:
§ 5-19.   Displaying receipts; dogs to wear tags.

      A. Dog and kennel license receipts shall be carefully preserved by the
licensees and exhibited promptly on request for inspection by any animal
wardencontrol officer or other officer.

      B. Dog license tags shall be securely fastened to a substantial collar
by the owner or custodian and worn by the licensed dog.
      C. It shall be unlawful for the owner to permit any licensed dog four
months old or older to run or roam at large at any time without a license
tag.
                                                                                             63



       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


DOG LICENSURE – ORDINANCE (cont’d)

      D. The owner or custodian of the dog may remove the collar and license
tag required by this section when (i) the dog is engaged in lawful hunting,
(ii) the dog is competing in a dog show, (iii) the dog has a skin condition
which would be exacerbated by the wearing of a collar, (iv) the dog is
confined, or (v) the dog is under the immediate control of the owner or
custodian.
      E. A kennel dog shall not be permitted to stray beyond the limits of
the enclosure but this shall not prohibit removing dogs therefrom temporarily
while under the immediate control of the owner or custodian.
       7.     This ordinance shall be effective retroactively to July 1, 2007.

Vote was as follows:         Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                   Bailey, Pyles and Coleman
                             Nays: None
Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                             (END OF PUBLIC HEARINGS)
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC
Jody Marion, South River representative on the Parks and Recreation Commission, and
Chairman, introduced other members present Carl Lind, Doug Layman, and Larry Curry
and stressed the importance of proceeding with the construction of the Verona Recreation
Center. She noted that it was one of four recreation centers in the Master Plan and felt
that it is needed in the community.

Mr. Pyles asked if the Parks and Recreation Director has responded to the Board’s
request to look into other revenue sources. Mr. Coffield stated that following the Board’s
July 23rd meeting, the Board directed staff to look at funding scenarios other than bonds.
The Director and Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation and Mr. Coffield met to
discuss a number of scenarios and submitted that information to the Parks and Recreation
Commission. Those notes were distributed to the Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Pyles noted that Becky Corns, the Pastures representative of the Parks and
Recreation Commission, was also present.

Chairwoman Sorrells felt that the Parks and Recreation Commission is an “un-sung group
of heroes”. “We take for granted that we are going to have parks, little leagues, and things
like that. I don’t think very many people that little group know that we have this appointed
body that is taking care of the people of Augusta County. Thanks for the work that you
do!”

Mr. Coleman also expressed gratitude for the Commission’s dedication.

Mr. Howdyshell appreciated the Parks and Recreation Commission and emphasized the
need for recreation for baby boomers and the elderly. Chairwoman Sorrells reported that
the Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission has given some age projections for
the next twenty-five years: a higher percentage of over 65 population than under 19.

Mr. Bailey felt that even though the recreation center would be located in Beverley Manor
District, it would be serving many residents in other districts. He noted that $900,000 has
been tentatively earmarked out of the Beverley Manor Infrastructure Account. He echoed
the Board’s comments that members of the Parks and Recreation Commission members
have been visionaries and have not focused on just one aspect of trying to provide some
form of recreation or relaxation but activities for the enjoyment for all of the citizens of the
County. “It is not all little league baseball and basketball, it’s some parks and walking trails
and meeting rooms
64

       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC (cont’d)

and crafts and field trips. It’s just an overall good program. Without you, folks, providing
the guidance and support and direction, I don’t know what we would do. Again, thank
you!”

Mr. Beyeler said that he has not seen the new ballfields behind Verona Elementary
School and suggested that the Board view this complex. Mr. Coleman agreed.

Mr. Coffield distributed a report of the operation of the pool to the Board and noted that in
2006, the pool met 52% of the operating costs; this year, it met 83% of the direct costs.

                               * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE BOARD

The Board discussed the following:

Mr. Coleman:
      1. Verizon Telecom Pioneers and the Woodrow Wilson District Ruritan Club have
         been presenting dictionaries for the past three years to Third graders in
         Augusta County, Highland County, and Nelson County schools. He stated that
         the students were very appreciative.
      2. Attended Leadership Training Program – sponsored by Augusta Regional
         Chamber of Commerce on September 6th at the Artisans Center.
      3. Attended Fire and Rescue Emergency Services Volunteer Appreciation Day at
         KOA Campground – “An excellent event!” Specifically recognized Minday
         Craun, Volunteer Coordinator, for organizing the event.

Ms. Frye: Noted that Mr. Coffield also attended the Volunteer Appreciation Day. “It was a
nice event and it was impressive seeing a lot of the Fire and Rescue equipment. It’s a
really big business that is run by the volunteers in the County and we certainly do
appreciate their efforts.”

                                           * * *

MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE BOARD (cont’d)

Mr. Howdyshell: North River House Project (Virginia Mays) –Building permits waiver
request –

Mr. Howdyshell moved, seconded by Mr. Pyles, that the Board reimburse building permit
fees incurred through the Sangerville Towers Ruritan Club to be appropriated from the
North River Infrastructure Account #80000-8013-22 in the amount totaling $751.42.

              Building Permits             $501.42
              Community Development Fees    250.00
                                           $751.42

Mr. Pyles agreed that we should support such groups as this similar to Habitat for
Humanity.
                                                                                     65



       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE BOARD (cont’d)

Vote was as follows:         Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                   Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                             Nays: None

Motion carried.
                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE BOARD (cont’d)

Mr. Pyles: Recognized that some of the cross country team is in the audience.

Mr. Beyeler: Boards and Commissions Picnic – Next Tuesday, September 18th, at 5:30
p.m. on the dock.

Chw. Sorrells:
      1. Riverheads Parks and Recreation representative also present – Sally Williams.
      2. Hurricane Season – Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission Project
         Impact (Disaster Mitigation Group) – a Hurricane Awareness Guide is available.

                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CALDWELL LANE – TRAFFIC CONTROL

The Board considered request of Caldwell Lane residents to erect “Watch for Children”
signage. Estimated cost $300 (Wayne District).

       Funding Source: Wayne Infrastructure Account #80000-8017-53

Mr. Coffield advised that the guidelines have been met.

Mr. Coleman moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey, that the Board approve the request.

Vote was as follows:         Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                   Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                             Nays: None

Motion carried.

                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

GART/TOURISM BOARD

The Board considered draft Regional Tourism Agreement/Enabling Ordinance and
authorize staff to advertise.

John C. McGehee, Assistant County Administrator, reported that this agreement has been
revised according to the Board’s requests. He noted that the Board will consist only of
three members, including the Chief Administrative Officer of each jurisdiction, or such
Chief Administrative Officer’s designee. Meetings will be open to the public. The
agreement is a three-year term with an automatic renewal of three-year terms. Mr.
McGehee introduced Leanne Crookshanks who is the Tourist Director for the City of
66

       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


GART/TOURISM BOARD (cont’d)

Waynesboro and has been the Chairman of the “unofficial” GART Board for the last two
years. Mr. McGehee and Ms. Crookshanks were available to answer questions. Mr.
McGehee noted that the Board is only to consider the agreement tonight and authorize
advertisement of the ordinance.

Mr. Beyeler expressed concern that the Board consisted of three jurisdictional
administrative members. He felt there needed to be more citizens involved. Mr.
McGehee said that, in July, there was a Chamber representative. Some of the other
jurisdictions felt that if the three jurisdictions were going to provide the funding, they should
have a vote and if the Chamber wanted to provide funding, then they could also have a
vote. He pointed out that this has been an informal group and open to the public. It did
not mean that others could not participate at the meetings; it only meant there would only
be three votes. If the cost is over $1,000, it would have to be unanimous. Mr. Beyeler
mentioned that at one time, there was a nine-member board. Mr. McGehee reminded him
that some of the Board members expressed a concern that that was too many people.
Mr. McGehee reiterated that the Board could invite others from tourism-related industries
to attend the meetings for their input. Chairwoman Sorrells stated that the “informal”
Board consisted of Mr. McGehee, Ms. Crookshanks, and Mr. Troubetzkoy.

Mr. Coffield stated that about fourteen years ago, there was a regional board – citizen-
directed. Each jurisdiction decided to go their own way when Staunton withdrew. It was
through the “informal” group that we re-established regional initiatives. In the beginning,
they discussed the radio system, marketing, pamphlets and brochures. They felt that if
they were providing the funding, they should have the control.

Mr. Pyles expressed that the $20,000 for each jurisdiction needed to be controlled. He
pointed out that there had always been a struggle to get regional cooperation. He felt that
administration would be more open-minded; whereas, citizens would present special
interests that would not always be as broad-based as administration would be.

Mr. Beyeler also expressed concerns of it being an automatic renewal and suggested that
the Board should be informed when it is time to renew the agreement.

Mr. Pyles reiterated that he did not have a problem with the three staff people on the
Board.

Mr. Coleman stated that he and Chairwoman Sorrells have been actively involved with
GART for quite a while. Because they did not have any formal agreement, they found
themselves in a situation of not having a level of commitment and cooperation that should
have been. It was determined that an agreement needed to be formalized with a
marketing plan as a part of the agreement. He pointed out that Augusta County does not
have a Tourism Director; Waynesboro and Staunton does.

Mr. Beyeler felt that a larger board would not be stagnant; there would be more ideas and
more public input. He said that was why Mr. Coleman and Chairwoman Sorrells was
asked to attend those meetings. Chairwoman Sorrells said it did not have anything to do
with stagnation of the board. It came out at the budget process and Mr. Coleman and
Chairwoman Sorrells had a curiosity about tourism and they wanted to see what was
being done. She stated that they have always been informal members. It was her
expectation that if this agreement was formalized, they would continue to have this core of
interested people from each locality who would have a vested interest in “seeing this
process blossom”.
                                                                                         67



       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


GART/TOURISM BOARD (cont’d)

Mr. Howdyshell was unsure of the complete support from all jurisdictions and felt that they
should have some citizen support.

Mr. Coleman moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey, that the Board approve the Regional
Tourism Agreement/Enabling ordinance and authorize staff to advertise.

Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                  Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                            Nays: None

Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

GARAGE BUILDING ROOF BIDS

The Board considered bids for roof project on the garage building at the Government
Center.

Funding Source:

CIP Account #80000-8198     $194,800
Contingency 5%                 9,740
                            $204,540

Mr. McGehee reported that five bids were received and was pleased with the low bid
from Sunrise Roofing in Stoneville, North Carolina (30 miles south of Danville on Route
220). Sunrise is licensed to do business in Virginia. Mike Nickell, Building Official,
called the Richmond Contractors’ Board asking if there had been any complaints about
the company; there had been none. He also called the Danville Chief Building Official
and learned that they have had no problem with their work. Mr. McGehee felt
comfortable with the bid and noted that it was for a new rubber roof on the high part of
the garage building. There is also some asbestos abatement and insulation with this
contract.

Mr. Howdyshell asked how close this came with the County Engineer’s estimate. Mr.
McGehee said it was lower than the figure in the depreciating account.

Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded by Mr. Howdyshell that the Board award bid to Sunrise
Roofing in an amount not to exceed $204,540.

Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                  Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                            Nays: None

Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

FISHERSVILLE SMALL AREA PLAN

The Board received a presentation by staff of project scope of work and schedule.

Jeremy Sharp, Associate Planner, gave a presentation with the following highlights:
68

       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


FISHERSVILLE SMALL AREA PLAN (cont’d)
Background Data/Existing Conditions
This would be modeled after the Existing Conditions Analysis from the Comprehensive
Plan, though focused on Fishersville and therefore much more brief. Since the Small
Area Plan is a supplement to the Comprehensive Plan, effort will be taken to not repeat
information, so County-wide data will be considered but not necessarily included in this
plan.

Issues (strengths and weaknesses)
The strengths and weaknesses of the Fishersville area, in terms of available facilities
and infrastructure, land uses, community identity, and any other topics will be
discussed here. This information will be key to developing the vision and the policy
recommendations.

Vision Statement
The vision statement will take a prominent role in the plan and will be based on the
public input that is received at the advisory committee level as well as at the public
workshop level. It will also be based on the vision established by the Comprehensive
Plan. The vision is the centerpiece of the plan, as the remaining sections of the plan
will be designed to work towards implementing it.

Future Land Use Map
This will be a more detailed breakdown of the future land uses that were established for
the Fishersville area by the Comprehensive Plan. New land use categories, beyond
those in place now, are expected. This will be based directly on the Comprehensive
Plan and significant departures (particularly in terms of the Planning Policy Areas) will
not be made.

Development Design Suggestions
This will include pictures, diagrams, and detailed text descriptions of the suggested
design context for each portion of the small area. The Better Models report will form
the basis of this process but it will go beyond architectural style and include
recommendations on lot layouts, neighborhood design, and the mixing of uses. The
level of detail will likely vary by future land use category and will be based on the public
input that is received.

Goals, Objectives, and Policies
These will be based on the goals, objectives, and policies in the Comprehensive Plan
and will be designed to be incorporated into it. Specific policies will likely be suggested
for each topic area as they relate to the Fishersville area.

Facilities Plan (parks, schools, fire and rescue, etc.)
This document could either be a very significant part of the small area plan or a minor
one, depending on the amount of new facilities that are needed and desired in
Fishersville. It will be based on the needs identified by the different service providers
as well as public input. It will include proposed locations for new or improved facilities
within the small area as well as improvements that may be needed at locations outside
the small area.

Transportation/Thoroughfare Plan
This document will make recommendations on the locations of new and improved
roads and bike/pedestrian paths throughout the small area. This will be based on the
Thoroughfare Plan that was included in the Comprehensive Plan. Proposed cross-
sections for all major roads, new and existing, and their intersections will form the basis
of this plan. Additionally, limited access management strategies, suggestions on transit
needs, and suggestions on the locations of greenways will also be included.

This section will need to be prepared, at least in part, by an outside transportation
consultant.
                                                                                  69



       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


FISHERSVILLE SMALL AREA PLAN (cont’d)

Implementation Strategy
This will be based on the implementation strategy found in the Comprehensive Plan
and will provide guidance on the steps that need to be taken to implement the small
area plan.

Timeframe
- September through May/June

Transportation Section
- Consulting assistance (approximately $10,000 - $15,000)

Public Workshops
- 3 Informal Workshops

Advisory Committee
- 4-5 meetings

Chairwoman Sorrells clarified that the Board needed to consider the following three
items:

   1. Move forward with the scope of work
   2. Transportation
   3. Appoint Advisory Committee

Mr. Coleman moved, seconded by Mr. Beyeler, that the Board approve the project
scope of work and project timeline.

Vote was as follows:      Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                          Nays: None

Motion carried.
                                       * * *

Mr. Coleman moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey, that the Board approve the
Transportation scope of work not to exceed $15,000.

Vote was as follows:      Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                          Nays: None

Motion carried.
                                       * * *

Mr. Coleman moved, seconded by Mr. Beyeler, that the Board appoint the following for
the Fishersville Small Area Plan Advisory Committee:

Wayne District
Kevin Lacy
Tom Shumate
Kathleen Heatwole
Dr. Allen White
70

         September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


FISHERSVILLE SMALL AREA PLAN (cont’d)

Mike Hatfield
Bill Johnson

Beverley Manor
David Gauldlin
Tom Sheets

South River
Jody Marion
Theron Via

Vote was as follows:                 Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                           Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                                     Nays: None

Motion carried.
                                      * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

WILSON MEMORIAL AND STUARTS DRAFT HIGH SCHOOLS BONDS

The Board considered resolution authorizing the issuance of not to exceed
$15,000,000 General Obligation School Bonds of the County of Augusta, Virginia,
Series 2007A, to be sold to the Virginia Public School Authority and providing for the
form and details thereof.

Joseph W. Davis, Director of Finance, advised that before the Board is the final bond
resolutions with attachments. Also included is an amortization schedule. This is to
borrow $15 million at 3% and will go to market by October 17th ; money will be available
to Augusta County November 8th.

Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded by Mr. Coleman, that the Board adopt the following
resolution:

                   RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED
                         $15,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS
                       OF THE COUNTY OF AUGUSTA, VIRGINIA, SERIES 2007A,
                    TO BE SOLD TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY
                      AND PROVIDING FOR THE FORM AND DETAILS THEREOF.

         WHEREAS, in March, 2006, the Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Education (the “Board of Education”)
placed, on the First Priority Waiting List, the applications (collectively, the “Application”) of the School Board of
Augusta County, Virginia (the “School Board”), for two loans in the aggregate amount of $15,000,000 (collectively, the
“Literary Fund Loan”) from the Literary Fund, a permanent trust fund established by the Constitution of Virginia (the
“Literary Fund”), for the renovation of Wilson Memorial High School and Stuarts Draft High School (collectively, the
“Project”) in Augusta County, Virginia (the “County”);

         WHEREAS, the Board of Education was to have approved the release of Literary Fund moneys to the School
Board and made a commitment to loan such moneys to the School Board (the “Commitment”) within one (1) year of
placement of the Application on the First Priority Waiting List upon receipt of the Literary Fund of an unencumbered
sum available at least equal to the amount of the Application and the approval, by the Board of Education, of the
Application as having met all conditions for a loan from the Literary Fund;

          WHEREAS, the Board of Education was thereafter to have given advances on the amount of the Commitment
for the Literary Fund Loan to the School Board, as construction or renovation of the Project progressed, in exchange for
temporary notes from the School Board to the Literary Fund (the “Temporary Notes”) for the amounts so advanced;
                                                                                                                       71



         September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


WILSON MEMORIAL AND STUARTS DRAFT HIGH SCHOOLS BONDS (cont’d)

          WHEREAS, after the completion of the Project and the advance of the total amount of the Commitment, the
Temporary Notes were to have been consolidated into a permanent loan note of the School Board to the Literary Fund
(the “Literary Fund Obligation”) which was to evidence the obligation of the School Board to repay the Literary Fund
Loan;

         WHEREAS, the Literary Fund Obligation was to have borne interest at three percent (3%) per annum and
mature in annual installments for a period of twenty (20) years;

          WHEREAS, in connection with the 2007 Interest Rate Subsidy Program (the “Program”), the Virginia Public
School Authority (the “VPSA”) has offered to purchase general obligation school bonds of the County, and the Board
of Education has offered to pay, to the County, a lump sum cash payment (the “Lump Sum Cash Payment”) equal to the
sum of (i) net present value difference, determined on the date on which the VPSA sells its bonds, between the weighted
average interest rate that the general obligation school bonds of the County will bear upon sale to the VPSA and the
interest rate that the Literary Fund Obligation would have borne plus (ii) an allowance for the costs of issuing such
bonds of the County (the “Issuance Expense Allowance”);

         WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the “Board”) of the County of Augusta, Virginia (the “County”), has
determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow not to exceed $15,000,000 and to issue its general obligation
school bonds for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for school purposes; and

        WHEREAS, the County held a public hearing, duly noticed, on September 13, 2006, on the issuance of the
Bonds (as defined below) in accordance with the requirements of Section 15.2-2606, Code of Virginia 1950, as
amended (the “Virginia Code”); and

         WHEREAS, the School Board of the County has, by resolution, requested the Board to authorize the issuance
of the Bonds (as hereinafter defined) and, consented to the issuance of the Bonds;

      NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY
OF AUGUSTA, VIRGINIA:

          1. Authorization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to
contract a debt and issue and sell its general obligation school bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$15,000,000 (the “Bonds”) for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for school purposes, namely, the
renovation of Wilson Memorial High School and Stuarts Draft High School. The Board hereby authorizes the issuance
and sale of the Bonds in the form and upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution.

          2. Sale of the Bonds. It is determined to be in the best interest of the County to accept the offer of the VPSA
to purchase from the County, and to sell to the VPSA, the Bonds at a price, determined by the VPSA to be fair and
accepted by the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and the Director of Finance,
any of whom may act. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator, the Director of
Finance and such officer or officers of the County as any of them may designate, any of whom may act, are each hereby
authorized and directed to enter into a Bond Sale Agreement dated as of September 28, 2007, with the VPSA providing
for the sale of the Bonds to the VPSA in substantially the form submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is
hereby approved (the “Bond Sale Agreement”).

           3. Details of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be issuable in fully registered form; shall be dated the date of
issuance and delivery of the Bonds; shall be designated “General Obligation School Bonds, Series 2007A”; shall bear
interest from the date of delivery thereof payable semi-annually on each January 15 and July 15 beginning July 15, 2008
(each an “Interest Payment Date”), at the rates established in accordance with Section 4 of this Resolution; and shall
mature on July 15 in the years (each a “Principal Payment Date”) and in the amounts set forth on Schedule I attached
hereto (the “Principal Installments”), subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Resolution.

          4. Interest Rates and Principal Installments. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board, the County
Administrator and the Finance Director, any of whom may act, are each hereby authorized and directed to accept the
interest rates on the Bonds established by the VPSA, provided that each interest rate shall be ten one-hundredths of one
percent (0.10%) over the interest rate to be paid by the VPSA for the corresponding principal payment date of the bonds
to be issued by the VPSA (the “VPSA Bonds”), a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bonds,
and provided further, that the true interest cost of the Bonds does not exceed five and fifty one-hundredths percent (5.50
%) per annum. The Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments are subject to change at the request of the
VPSA. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and the Finance Director, any of
whom may act, are each hereby authorized and directed to accept changes in the Interest Payment Dates and the
Principal Installments at the request of the VPSA, provided that the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds shall not
exceed the amount authorized by this Resolution. The execution and delivery of the Bonds as described in Section 8
hereof shall conclusively evidence such interest rates established by the VPSA and Interest
72

         September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


WILSON MEMORIAL AND STUARTS DRAFT HIGH SCHOOLS BONDS (cont’d)
Payment Dates and the Principal Installments requested by the VPSA as having been so accepted as authorized by this
Resolution.

         5. Form of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be initially in the form of a single, temporary typewritten bond
substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

         6. Payment; Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. The following provisions shall apply to the Bonds:

         (a)       For as long as the VPSA is the registered owner of the Bonds, all payments of principal, premium, if
any, and interest on the Bonds shall be made in immediately available funds to the VPSA at, or before 11:00 a.m. on the
applicable Interest Payment Date or Principal Payment Date, or if such date is not a business day for Virginia banks or
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then at or before 11:00 a.m. on the business day next succeeding such Interest
Payment Date or Principal Payment Date.

         (b) All overdue payments of principal and, to the extent permitted by law, interest shall bear interest at the
applicable interest rate or rates on the Bonds.

         (c) U.S. Bank National Association, Richmond, Virginia, is designated as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent
for the Bonds.

        7. No Redemption or Prepayment. The Principal Installments of the Bonds shall not be subject to
redemption or prepayment. Furthermore, the Board covenants, on behalf of the County, not to refund or refinance the
Bonds without first obtaining the written consent of the VPSA or the registered owner of the Bonds.

         8. Execution of the Bonds. The Chairman or Vice Chairman and the Clerk or any Deputy Clerk of the Board
are each authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Bonds and to affix the seal of the County thereto.

          9. Pledge of Full Faith and Credit. For the prompt payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and the
interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due, the full faith and credit of the County are hereby irrevocably
pledged, and in each year while any of the Bonds shall be outstanding there shall be levied and collected in accordance
with law an annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation sufficient in amount
to provide for the payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds as such principal,
premium, if any, and interest shall become due, which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and in addition
to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available
and appropriated for such purpose.

          10. Use of Proceeds Certificate and Certificate as to Arbitrage. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the
Board, the County Administrator, the Director of Finance and such officer or officers of the County as any of them may
designate, any of whom may act, are each hereby authorized and directed to execute a Non-Arbitrage Certificate and a
Use of Proceeds Certificate each setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds and
containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and applicable regulations relating to the exclusion from gross income of
interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds. The Board covenants on behalf of the County that (i) the proceeds from
the issuance and sale of the Bonds will be invested and expended as set forth in such Non-Arbitrage Certificate and such
Use of Proceeds Certificate and that the County shall comply with the other covenants and representations contained
therein and (ii) the County shall comply with the provisions of the Code so that interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA
Bonds will remain excludable from gross income for Federal income tax purposes.

          11. State Non-Arbitrage Program; Proceeds Agreement. The Board hereby determines that it is in the best
interests of the County to authorize and direct the County Administrator, the County Treasurer and Director of Finance
to participate in the State Non-Arbitrage Program in connection with the Bonds. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of
the Board, the County Administrator, the Director of Finance and such officer or officers of the County as any of them
may designate, any of whom may act, are each hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a Proceeds
Agreement with respect to the deposit and investment of proceeds of the Bonds by and among the County, the other
participants in the sale of the VPSA Bonds, the VPSA, the investment manager and the depository.

         12. Continuing Disclosure Agreement. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board, the County
Administrator, the Director of Finance and such officer or officers of the County as any of them may designate, any of
whom may act, are each hereby authorized and directed to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement, as set forth in
Appendix F to the Bond Sale Agreement, setting forth the reports and notices to be filed by the County and containing
such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Securities and Exchange
Commission Rule 15c2-12 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and directed to make all filings
required by Section 3 of the Bond Sale Agreement should the County be determined by the VPSA to be a MOP (as
defined in the Continuing Disclosure Agreement).

          13. Filing of Resolution. The appropriate officers or agents of the County are hereby authorized and directed
to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the Circuit Court of the County.
                                                                                                                    73



         September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


WILSON MEMORIAL AND STUARTS DRAFT HIGH SCHOOLS BONDS (cont’d)

          14. Further Actions. The members of the Board and all officers, employees and agents of the County are
hereby authorized to take such action as they or any one of them may consider necessary or desirable in connection with
the issuance and sale of the Bonds and any such action previously taken is hereby ratified and confirmed.

         15. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.

Vote was as follows:                Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                          Bailey, Pyles and Coleman
                                    Nays: None
Motion carried.
                                      * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

LIGHTING ORDINANCE WAIVER

The Board considered request of School Board to grant lighting ordinance waiver for
new tennis courts at Stuarts Draft Middle School.

John Wilkinson, Zoning Administrator, spoke on the waiver request from the
requirements of § 25-63 of the Lighting Ordinance in order to install lights on the tennis
courts at Stuarts Draft Middle School. Back in June, 2005, the Board adopted the
Lighting Ordinance for the purposes of protecting the dark skies and control spillover of
lighting and glare on to adjacent properties. The School Board hired services of a
professional lighting engineer to design the facility. In doing so, they have to meet the
requirements of the Illumination Engineering Society of North America for athletic
facilities in order to provide adequate lighting for children when they are playing sports
for their safety. In designing this facility, the close proximity of the court to the street
caused a problem when they did spillover studies. Our ordinance requires that there
be no more than 0.5 foot candle spillover onto properties that are zoned Agricultural or
Residential, or onto the public streets. We meet the requirements for the adjacent
properties, which are Business; however, according to the lighting manufacturer’s
study, they average 0.85 instead of 0.5; therefore, they are over the minimum
requirements by the ordinance. A letter from the manufacturer was attached to the
agenda package noting that the lights had been readjusted to get the best possible
illumination to meet the standards and brought it down as low as they could. Because
they cannot meet the minimum standards and still provide the adequate lighting for the
students, as required of the Illumination Engineering Society of North America, the
School Board has asked for a waiver of that section for the athletic facility lighting.

Mr. Bailey said he has looked at the lighting and concurs that there is shielding. He
wanted to provide a safe and secure place for the athletic events, He opined that it
was such a small spillover that he did not think there would be any adverse effects with
the lighting as they are currently shielded and presented.

Mr. Bailey moved, seconded by Ms. Frye, that the Board approve waiver request.

Chairwoman Sorrells felt that this was a good example of using commonsense and
having the flexibility to have the lighting ordinance but also provide for the safety. Mr.
Beyeler concurred with Chairwoman Sorrells. He said that this was going to be a
typical problem. “Whenever we add restrictions, these are the types of things that
would occur.” Mr. Coleman pointed out that the reason for this type of ordinance is for
such places as Ivy Ridge. Nothing could be done with the trucking company where you
could see the lights at Riverheads. “Hopefully, we can find at the appropriate
opportunities to use commonsense and good judgment.” Mr. Howdyshell remembered
when the lighting ordinance was adopted and said, “When we moved in that direction,
we need to lead by example.” He felt that the Board needed to use the same
commonsense when other issues arise.
74

       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


LIGHTING ORDINANCE WAIVER (cont’d)

Vote was as follows:          Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                    Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                              Nays: None

Motion carried.
                               * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SCHOOL BOARD CAPITAL REQUEST

The Board considered transferring the Augusta County School Board FY06-07 fund
balance in the amount of $1,594,153.46 to the School Capital Account (#80000-8134).

Dr. Gary D. McQuain, Superintendent for the Augusta County Schools, reported that
because of a mild winter, the year-end fund balance was $1,594,153.46 (1.7% of the
budget). About $600,000 of this money is savings in heating. He asked that this
money be placed in the School Capital Account (#80000-8134) for future emergency
items as well as future capital projects.

Mr. Davis distributed an interim financial report of June 30th to the Board. He noted an
unexpended School Board balance in the School Operating Fund of approximately
$1,775,000 was only 1.9% of the budget. Historically, when you hit 98% or better of
the allowed amount, you are close. The revenue was $180,000 short. (Numbers are
indicated on Pages 7 and 17.) Approximately $389,000 was left in the County’s
General Operating Fund (1.5% under budget). The County collected $663,000 (more
than what was budgeted). The Welfare Fund had a surplus of $26,520. He noted that
$1,052,208 surplus and $26,520 will be available at the next budget process. Mr.
Coffield mentioned that a question had been asked of what amount of the County’s
fund balance was from interest earnings. He said that this past year interest earnings
were higher than what was originally projected in March 2006. On Page 20, interest on
bank deposits reflected an increase over budget of $288,000.

Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded by Mr. Pyles, that the Board approve the request.

Vote was as follows:          Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                    Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                              Nays: None

Motion carried.
                    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RIVERHEADS WATER TANK

The Board considered proceeding to Phase II of project (final design). Estimated cost
$59,800.

Funding Sources:
       Riverheads Infrastructure Account   #80000-8015-35      $29,900
       County ACSA Account                 #80000-8149         $29,900
                                                               $59,800

Mr. Coffield advised that one page of the preliminary engineering study was attached
to the Agenda package.
                                                                                        75



       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


RIVERHEADS WATER TANK (cont’d)

The Advanced Agenda package showed a total of $38,100; it was revised to include
pump station design. Mr. Coffield noted that several people would benefit from this
project: 1) Citizens; 2) Pending developments; and 3) School complex. He expressed
appreciation to Ken Fanfoni and William Monroe (ACSA) and Becky Earhart
(Community Development) for their assistance in presenting a proposal for
consideration.

Chairwoman Sorrells added that this project supports the Comp Plan and is necessary
to get the fire flow and water pressure and will be essential for a middle school. “It has
been a positive experience for everybody involved in it.”

Mr. Pyles suggested that the preliminary engineering study of $27,000 should also be
50-50.

Mr. Pyles moved, seconded by Mr. Beyeler, that the Board approve the request and
include the $27,000 to also be allocated through the Riverheads Infrastructure account
and the County Service Authority Account as follows:

Funding Sources:

       Final Design
       Riverheads Infrastructure        #80000-8015-35     $29,900
       ACSA                             #80000-8149        $29,900
                                                                      $59,800

       Preliminary Engineering Study
       Riverheads Infrastructure    #80000-8015-35         $13,500
       ACSA                         #80000-8149            $13,500
                                                                      $27,000
                                                                      $86,800

Vote was as follows:          Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                    Bailey, Pyles and Coleman
                              Nays: None

Motion carried.
                                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NON-CONVENTIONAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

The Board considered approval of two non-conventional systems in Shannon Lea
Subdivision as provided for in § 11-13 (D) of the County Code.

Mr. Coffield advised that back in October 2004, the Board approved zoning for
Shannon Lea; on November 8, 2005, the Board approved the plat; on December 13,
2006, the Board approved a non-conventional system on Lot 3. He noted that the
remaining lots would be determined on a case-by-case basis. He pointed out that the
soils, size of the home (number of square footage and number of bedrooms and
bathrooms) would be considered. Lots 24 and 31 are to be considered tonight.
Reports were included in the Agenda package indicating the concurrence of the Health
Department. If approved tonight, an agreement will be executed and filed with the
Court.

Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded by Mr. Howdyshell, that the Board approve the request.
 76

        September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


 NON-CONVENTIONAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS (cont’d)

 Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                   Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                             Nays: None

 Motion carried.
                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 CONSENT AGENDA

 Mr. Howdyshell moved, seconded by Mr. Pyles that the Board approve the following
 consent agenda:

 MINUTES
 Approved minutes of the following meetings:
    • Staff Briefing Meeting, Monday, August 20, 2007
    • Regular Meeting, Wednesday, August 22, 2007, as amended

 CLAIMS
 Approved claims paid since August 8, 2007

 Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                   Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                             Nays: None

 Motion carried.
                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                             (END OF CONSENT AGENDA)
                               * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 Mr. Beyeler noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission is present tonight and
 mentioned that Mr. Bailey wanted his money to go to Parks and Recreation. Mr. Beyeler
 asked Mr. Coffield and/or Mr. Davis if the Beverley Manor Infrastructure money could be
 designated for that purpose. Mr. Coffield stated that Mr. Bailey is evaluating all his
 Magisterial needs. Mr. Coffield reminded the Board that the FY07-08 CIP earmarked
 $750,000 for the Recreation Center. When Mr. Bailey and other participating Board
 members are ready to come forward, funds can be transferred from that CIP account to
 the Recreation Center Account (#80000-8073). Mr. Bailey plans to do this before
 December 31st. Mr. Bailey said that he would not spend the account down to what levels
 were four years ago. “There will be sufficient funds to operate the first six months of 2008
 within Beverley Manor.”

                              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY STAFF

 The following was discussed by Staff:

1. Robinson Hollow Tour – Money well spent! At briefing, State DCR representative spoke
   about the pending legislation on building in breach zones. VACo’s Draft Legislation
   regarding Dam Break Inundation Zones was distributed to the Board.
2. Building Address Press Release distributed to Board.
                                                                                          77



        September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY STAFF (cont’d)

3. Newspaper Advertisements – Soliciting pricing quotes for legal ads. Board suggested
   that advertisements should be shortened. It was the consensus of the Board that
   location of certain items needed to be considered when choosing a newspaper.
4. Community Foundation – Training Event for Board Chairs, Board Members, CEOs and
   other Community Leaders – Tuesday, October 30th, at 8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m., at the
   Best Western Waynesboro Inn and Suites Conference Center. Department Heads will
   be notified. Registration fee: $75. Will encourage Boards and Commissions members
   to attend.
5. VDOT – FY2008-2013 Six-Year Improvement Program – October 15th at the
   Government Center.          Public Official Discussion:     5-6:00 p.m.; General Public
   Discussion: 6:30 p.m. Mr. Beyeler asked for a copy of the FY07-08 primary and
   interstate Six-Year Plan.
6. Mount Sidney School Lane Improvement – Three bids have been received, with the low
   bid of $27,623.        The balance in the Mount Sidney account is $35,214.19.
   Improvements include paving Mount Sidney School Lane from Route 11 to Seawright
   Springs Road (Route 626).
7. Department of Social Services Lease – Out to bid. Will keep Board posted. A number
   of people have expressed interest in space if State Department of Social Services
   leaves.
8. Health Insurance – John C. McGehee, Assistant County Administrator, stated that
   Augusta County has been in a consortium for 10 years. Three proposals have been
   evaluated, interviewed and negotiated. Southern Health had the best proposal – 0%
   increase for consortium – 2.6% decrease (based on claims).
9. Construction updates given by John C. McGehee, Assistant County Administrator:
              a. Library – “Out of ground!” Will pour slab on Friday and steel on Monday.
                  Have already paid Nielson $81,000. There are some elevator issues –
                  starting to work on the elevator on Monday.
              b. Courts Building – paid out 31% of project. Employees are doing a great
                  job during renovations! They have to move twice – once on a temporary
                  basis, and then back to a permanent position. Very complicated project!
                  Chiller unit will be installed on Veterans Day weekend.
              c. Fire Training Center – Classroom area 95% complete - $65,000 spent.
                  Middle River Regional Jail did most of the work. There are two
                  classrooms and offices for training personnel.
              d. Burn Building – complete except for punch list. Pavement bids are out.
                  Restrooms will be done by Middle River Regional Jail.

       Mr. McGehee said that tours would be available whenever the Board wished.
       Chairwoman Sorrells suggested that it be placed on the viewings at the next Staff
       Briefing (September 24th).

10. Shenandoah Valley Disability Employment Awareness Committee - Annual Awards
    Luncheon and Silent Auction – Thursday, October 25th, Holiday Inn Conference Center,
    Staunton, Virginia, at 12:00 p.m.
11. Sheriff’s Department Government Security Audit – Committee working diligently.
12. Fence Ordinance (fences, walls and hedges) – County Attorney is drafting but has
    asked if this includes accessory buildings and pools. Board responded that it would like
    included.
13. Shenandoah Valley Railroad – October 10th VIP train ride – Six slots are available.
14. Disaster Relief Status – Governor has received application and declaration for Augusta
    County will hopefully be made soon.

                               * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
78

       September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


CLOSED SESSION
On motion of Mr. Beyeler, seconded by Mr. Howdyshell, the Board went into closed
session pursuant to:

(1)    the personnel exemption under Virginia Code § 2.2-3711(A)(1)
       [discussion, consideration or interviews of (a) prospective candidates for
       employment, or (b) assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion,
       salaries, disciplining or resignation of specific employees]:

       A)   Boards and commissions

(2)    economic development exemption under Virginia Code § 2.2-3711(A)(5)
       [discussion concerning a prospective business or industry or the expansion of an
       existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of
       its interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the county]:

       A) Pending industrial and economic development prospect(s)

Vote was as follows:       Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                 Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                           Nays: None

Motion carried.
                            * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CLOSED SESSION (cont’d)

On motion of Mr. Beyeler, seconded by Mr. Bailey, the Board came out of Closed Session.

Vote was as follows:       Yeas:    Frye, Beyeler, Howdyshell, Bailey, Pyles, Sorrells
                                   and Coleman
                           Nays:    None

Motion carried.

                            * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CLOSED SESSION (cont’d)

The Chairman advised that each member is required to certify that to the best of their
knowledge during the closed session only the following was discussed:

       1.     Public business matters lawfully exempted from statutory open meeting
              requirements, and

       2.     Only such public business matters identified in the motion to convene the
              executive session.

The Chairman asked if there is any Board member who cannot so certify.

Hearing none, the Chairman called upon the County Administrator/Clerk of the Board to
call the roll noting members of the Board who approve the certification shall answer AYE
and those who cannot shall answer NAY.
                                                                                      79



         September 12, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.


CLOSED SESSION (cont’d)

Roll Call Vote was as follows:

                  AYE:   Frye, Coleman, Howdyshell, Bailey, Pyles, Sorrells and
                         Beyeler
                  NAY:    None


The Chairman authorized the County Administrator/Clerk of the Board to record this
certification in the minutes.

NOTE: Mr. Coleman left Closed Session last item.
                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RECYCLING COMMITTEE REAPPOINTMENT

Ms. Frye moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey, that the Board reappoint Wesley B.
Wampler, to serve another four-year term on the Recycling committee, effective,
September 25, 2007, to expire September 24, 2011.

Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                  Bailey, Pyles and Coleman

                            Nays: None

Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business to come before the Board, Mr. Beyeler moved, seconded
by Mr. Howdyshell, that the Board adjourn subject to call of the Chairman.

Vote was as follows:        Yeas: Howdyshell, Sorrells, Frye, Beyeler,
                                  Bailey, Pyles and Coleman
                            Nays: None
Motion carried.
                             * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *




_________________________            ___________________________
      Chairman                             County Administrator




H:/minutes9-12min.07