Docstoc

February 18

Document Sample
February 18 Powered By Docstoc
					AT A CONTINUED MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF GLOUCESTER

COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2003, AT 4:00 P.M., IN THE

BOARD ROOM OF THE COLONIAL COURTHOUSE, 6504 MAIN STREET, GLOUCESTER,

VIRGINIA:

THERE WERE PRESENT:

                            Burton M. Bland, Chairman
                            Teresa L. Altemus, Vice Chairman
                            John J. Adams, Sr.
                            Charles R. Allen, Jr.
                            Graham C. Blake
                            Ross M. Hines,
                            Louise D. Theberge
                            William H. Whitley, County Administrator
                            Daniel Stuck, Interim County Attorney

              The Chairman, Mr. Bland, called the meeting to order.

              After an invocation by Mr. Hines, all in attendance recited the Pledge of

Allegiance.

              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:        CONSIDERATION OF STATE PARK LOCATION – RESOLUTION

              Mr. Whitley reminded the Board that the voters of Virginia had passed a

referendum last November approving the authority for the state to issue bonds to purchase

new park land, and that the state had indicated they were looking for a site on the Middle

Peninsula.     Mr. Whitley further told the Board that staff had been working to locate

properties that would meet the state criteria for a park, which is 600 to 1,000 acres, and

with water access. He noted further that the state had requested that the County notify

them by the end of the month of specific properties.

              Mr. Whitley further indicated that sites had not been publicly identified, as

owners may not be willing to sell the properties.

              Mr. Whitley then asked the Board to consider the resolution to the state

advising them of the County’s interest and intent.

              Mr. Allen then moved, seconded by Mr. Hines, that the resolution regarding the

County’s interest in hosting a state park be adopted.

              After a brief discussion, the following resolution was adopted by the following

vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Ms. Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Ms.

Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

              WHEREAS. The citizens of Virginia have passed a referendum to purchase

three new state parks in Virginia; and
                                 Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                             2


            WHEREAS, The Department of Conservation and Recreation has indicated that

one of the parks is slated to be located on the Middle Peninsula, and is therefore seeking

suggestions relative to a suitable site on the Middle Peninsula; and

            WHEREAS, The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors has become more

aware than ever of the important role of state parks and leisure activities in the future of all

citizens and their children; and

            WHEREAS, The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors firmly believes that

having a state park located in Gloucester County will provide for the preservation of

additional open space, and the establishment of meaningful outdoor recreational facilities

that will produce economic benefits to local business through the attraction of tourists to

Gloucester County and the surrounding areas.

            NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Gloucester County Board of

Supervisors wishes to make it known that they are very interested in having a state park in

Gloucester County, and will forward suggested sites which meet the established criteria to

the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:      NO WAKE SIGNS – SARAH’S CREEK

            Mr. Adams advised that he had received a request from Dan Bacot, Jr., to

restore No Wake signs in Sarah’s Creek.

            After a brief discussion, Mr. Whitley advised that he would discuss this matter

with Mr. Bacot, as the placement of signs could not be done by an individual, but only by

the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, or an authorized state agency.

            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:      COX COMMUNICATIONS PRESENTATION

            Mr. Whitley reminded the Board that they had requested that representatives

from Cox Communications attend the Board’s meeting of February 18th to discuss their

plans to upgrade their system to digital, and expand Cox Communications to include

internet services and additional channels.

            Mr.    Thom       Prevette,     Vice     President      of   Government         Affairs,   Cox

Communications, addressed the Board and introduced Mr. Mike Whitcomb, Vice President

of Operations, and advised they would answer any questions the Board may have.
                            Tuesday, February 18, 2003                         3
            Mr. Prevette then advised that Cox Communications had acquired First

Commonwealth Communications three years ago, and since then, had been upgrading the

entire system across the Hampton Roads area and had invested 400 million dollars. He

indicated that the Gloucester upgrade would begin this month and would continue for

about 6 months. He noted that they would be contacting customers soon and notifying

them of the opportunity to receive enhanced services.     He further told the Board that they

would also be “door hanging” notices for areas that will be affected that day. Mr. Prevette

noted that services might have brief interruptions during construction of the upgrade.

            Mr. Prevette then explained that once the upgrade is complete, Cox will have

an 860 megahertz system which will provide an analogue system of television with about 74

channels. Additionally, Cox Communications will have the ability to offer 240 channels of

digital services including music. He further indicated that pay per view on several channels

would be available at different times during the day or evening.

            Mr. Prevette noted that the most exciting service would be the high-speed

digital Internet service that is 50 times faster than a 56k dial up connection and needs no

phone to access the Internet. The cost for this service would be $39.95. He indicated that

they guaranteed a data speed of no less than 1.5 megabits down speed. Mr. Prevette also

told the Board that the important aspect is rebuilding the system to a hybrid-fiber coax

distribution network system.

            Mr. Prevette further indicated that the upgrade would benefit customers by

providing a high grade of reliability and dependability in services.

            Mr. Prevette noted that there are changes in the channels provided and noted

that the Richmond station WWBT will be added to the system. Mr. Prevette noted that he

would answer questions the Board may have.

            Mr. Prevette noted that those who have the “set top box” first used with cable,

will have to change to a new box so that the signal can be converted from digital to

analogue.    Mr. Prevette noted that there are changes at the national level with the FCC

(Federal Communications Commission), which mandates that after 2007 only digital

transmissions may be allowed. He further indicated that these changes may have to be

dealt with on an individual basis sometime in the near future.

            Mr. Prevette clarified that the basic cable rate will be $38.15 and the rate for

Internet service will be $39.95.
                              Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                4
              He further noted that technical ambassadors may begin visiting homes by the

end of April or first of May to talk about the changes which will take place.

              Ms. Altemus noted that channels 1 – 78 will be basic cable and if you want

another tier that is extra. Mr. Prevette agreed.

              Mr. Prevette noted that federal requirements include that both PBS stations be

included if the footprints cover the area.

              Mr. Prevette explained the various tiers of cable service offered.

              Mr. Prevette advised that the County would be getting three new public access

channels, and that Cox is preparing to allow the County to determine what they wished to

televise on their access channels. He indicated that the County would have to be prepared

to determine how much of their resources they were willing to commit for additional items

other than what is already provided by Cox to the County.

              Mr. Prevette noted that the upgrade will be a little complex as the channels will

go up to 99; however, Cox’s technical ambassadors will be available to help with the

changes.

              Ms. Altemus noted that most people who move into the County look for cable

service without having to pay for putting in the cable.

              Mr. Prevette noted that should a customer choose to live a half mile off the

main road, they did expect some cost sharing.

              Ms. Theberge noted that some areas near her did not include the availability of

cable yet, and where it was available, service was very poor.

              Mr. Prevette noted that what is being paid for now, should be working

adequately.

              During more discussion, Mr. Hines noted that there are some areas where the

wires are hanging down low from the poles and causing a problem with large vehicles

getting caught in them and pulling them down.

              Mr. Prevette noted that with the upgrade, digital Internet service will be

available and with regard to advertising, the insertion of ads will be enhanced.

              Ms. Helen Healy, citizen, told Mr. Prevette that realtors had advertised real-

estate on an advertising channel, and that it had been eliminated when Cox took over. She

asked if this would be possible again with the enhancement.

              Mr. Prevette noted that advertising would be available, and that a technical

representative will be available to talk with Ms. Healy regarding this matter.
                              Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                           5
              Mr. Whitley asked how long it would take for the upgrade to be completed.

              Mr. Prevette indicated that it would be six to eight weeks for completion.

              Mr. Prevette noted that they had about 7,000 residential customers out of

about 11,000 available.

              Mr. Whitley noted that there are about 12,000 to 13,000 households in the

County.

              Mr. Whitley requested that the County Administrator’s Office be kept informed

as to where the Cox Cable workers will be working in the County so that concerned citizens

may also be informed.

              Mr. Prevette noted that service areas are becoming very competitive and can

now dictate as to what channels Cable must carry in their service area. He further

indicated that they would carry WWBT as Gloucester is more closely associated with the

Richmond viewing area in terms of weather and other factors.

              Mr. Whitley questioned the changes in basic cable fees.

              Mr. Prevette indicated that the increase is due to programming acquisition

which makes up 35% of their budget. He indicated that these costs continue to escalate.

He noted that ESPN now charges cable companies, and they pay, $2.50 per subscriber in

the County.

              Mr. Allen asked for clarification for public use channels.

              Mr. Prevette noted that channels 46,47, and 48 are for public access, and that

the schools will have a dedicated feed to program one of those channels to be used for

educational purposes.

              Mr. Whitley noted that the County would be in the process soon of talking to

Cox Cable about the renewal of the franchise.

              There being no further questions for Cox Cable representatives, Mr. Bland

thanked Mr. Prevette for his presentation.

              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:        RECESS

              The dinner hour having arrived, the Board recessed its meeting to be continued

at the Gloucester High School Library, 6680 Short Lane, Gloucester, VA at 7:00 P.M.

              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                         6
IN RE:       RECONVENTION OF BOARD MEETING

             The Chairman, Mr. Bland, called the meeting back to order at 7:00 P.M. on

February 18, 2003, in the Library at Gloucester High School, 6680 Short Lane, Gloucester,

VA.

             The School Board Chair, Ms. Ronnie Cohen, called the School Board to order.

             Upon roll call, the following members were present:

             Mr. E. Stanley Belvin, Jr.

             Ms. Reba B. Bolden

             Mr. George R. “Randy” Burak

             Ms. Ronnie Cohen

             Mr. Michael D. Jenkins

             Mr. Alvin J. McGlohn, Jr.

             and Dr. Jean Pugh

             Mr. Bland advised that the purpose of the meeting was to continue discussion

from the joint meeting of October 15th, with the School Board, on the County’s Long Range

Capital Improvement Plan. He noted that the February meeting had been suggested at the

joint meeting of October 15th.

             Ms. Cohen advised that the first item on their agenda was the request to the

Board of Supervisors to allow unspent funds in the amount of           $206,199, originally

intended for use by the School Board to be used for the purchase of a site for a new school.

             Mr. Victor Hellman, Director of Financial Services for the Schools, addressed

the Board and explained that the $206,199 would be put in the budget in their Land

Acquisition Fund, and that an additional $100,000 would revert to the County.

             Mr. Allen then moved, seconded by Mr. Hines, that the Board approve the

additional appropriation in the amount of $206,199 to be put in the Schools Land

Acquisition Fund.

             Ms. Theberge expressed concern that at the present moment, the Board was

unsure as to what funds would be forthcoming from the state and what revenue sources

would be available for the 2003-2004 County Budget.        She indicated however, that her

vote did not mean that they would not reconsider if the budget situation became more

favorable.
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                              7
            Ms. Altemus then offered a substitute motion to table the School Board’s

request until May 1st    which would allow the Board a little more time to hear what the

General Assembly will do regarding the state budget and how it will affect the County’s

budget.

            The Board was polled on the motion by Ms. Altemus, and the vote was recorded

as follows: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mr. Allen, no; Ms. Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines,

no; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

            Mr. Hellman addressed the Board and reviewed the 1997 Facilities study by

Rancorn, Wildman, Krause and Brezenski.

            Mr. Hellman noted that the study had pointed out that grade levels should be

preserved at all levels as are currently (K – 5 elementary) (6-8 middle) and (9-12 high

school). The School Board reaffirmed that the school enrollment figures should be 550 to

750 for the elementary school range, and at a middle school range the figure should be 750

– 950, at a maximum, and the ultimate high school would have no more than 1500. The

study also recommended neighborhood schools, and brought out the need for repairs and

renovations at Achilles and Botetourt Elementary Schools.

            Mr. Hellman then discussed enrollment figures and noted projected figures. He

pointed out however, that these figures were based on historical data and did not take into

consideration what might happen at a local level concerning unexpected growth.

            Mr. Hellman further noted that from 1997 forward, Achilles Elementary

enrollment has gone from 392 to 320 for the last two years; Botetourt Elementary has gone

from 1997 at 510 to 542 currently.

            Mr. Hellman noted that desired pupil teacher ratio is 18:1 in K – 3; 20:1 in 4 –

5; and 22 – 1 in grades 6 – 8.

            Mr. Hellman also told the Board that the program capacity for Achilles is 336

students, and with the figure of 320 it makes it close to program capacity.

            Program capacity for Botetourt is 458 and the current enrollment figure is 536,

Mr. Hellman noted.

            The average class size for Botetourt for K – through 5 is 19:1 which is slightly

over the desired teacher pupil ratio.

            Mr. Bernard Robins, Principal at Achilles Elementary, addressed the Board and

described the major needs at Achilles as a Library Media Center, a gymnasium, an art room

(currently located on a stage) a music room – now taught in a trailer, a guidance office,
                             Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                8
adequate kitchen facilities and storage areas. Mr. Robins described in detail each need,

and presented photos as a visual backup of each need. Additionally, Mr. Robins noted that

there is only one serving line in the cafeteria and that one line is inadequate. Mr. Robins

further indicated that with the current growth in the Achilles area, he was concerned for

the future of Achilles Elementary School.       He noted that currently they had 45 new

students.

              Mr. Hellman reported that the needs at Botetourt included a Library/Media

Center as the current one is too small; new kitchen facilities as the current one is too small;

the elimination of five portable units; bathrooms which are ADA compliant; unsafe traffic

pattern for pickup and drop off of students; and roof problems.

              Ms. Michelle Cagnon, Principal of Botetourt Elementary School, addressed the

Board and introduced Ms. Davis who is President of the PTA and a substitute teacher, and

Ms. Brandy who is a parent of a student at Botetourt.

              Ms. Cagnon noted that the bus loop is unsafe at the current time, and the

parent drop off area causes traffic to backup and blocks the view of those crossing the

street in front of the school.

              She further noted that the lobby and front counter is congested and crowded in

the morning and afternoon when the school day commences and ends, and all this activity

takes place in front of a busy bookkeeper who has no separate office.

              Ms. Cagnon presented photos as a depiction of inadequate facilities.

              Ms Cagnon advised that they had lost their stage last year to provide for

storage space.

              Ms. Cagnon noted a drainage problem in that water lays under the mobile

classrooms.

              Ms. Lisa Brandy addressed the Board and advised that she is a volunteer and a

coordinator for the PTA at Botetourt, and also the gifted parent advisory representative for

Botetourt.    She indicated that currently there are 29 asthmatic children at Botetourt. Ms.

Brandy described a particular child who had developed asthma and her experiences at

Botetourt Elementary School.

              Ms. Brandy advised that it was obvious that Botetourt needed healthy and

adequate buildings in which to teach the children.
                            Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                    9
            Ms. Cagnon advised that there is a great safety concern regarding the condition

of the roof as it is leaking; thereby causing the ceiling tiles to fall down which affects the

wiring and electrical devices and appliances.

            Mr. Dwayne Harver, of Rodriguez, Ripley, Maddux and Motley, addressed the

Board and presented a power point presentation with information regarding the Achilles

and Botetourt Elementary schools renovations and additions.

            Regarding the Achilles Elementary School, Mr. Harver advised that the

custodial area is too small; needs upgrade on wiring and new addition electrical service;

needs reorganization of dry storage area; needs kitchen manager’s office; the cooler is too

small, needs 2 expanded serving lines for cafeteria; convert cafeteria only, not a gym; a

conference room is needed, remove art from stage; media center is too small; teachers

dining and lounge area too small; the courtyard must stay; and arrangement is poor for

combined subjects.

            Mr. Harver presented the new concept plan and noted the addition to the

existing plan. The plan indicates that in the new addition, there will be a new gymnasium,

with separate bathrooms, storage area, music room, three LD classes, four first grade

rooms, four kindergarten classes, an art room, a new media center with a work room, all

surrounding a courtyard.

            Mr. Harver next described the needs and corrections that should take place at

Botetourt; noting that the administration area is too small; the kitchen needs expansion

and additional serving lines; dry storage; custodial office and storage, reclaim the stage;

enlarge the media center, convert kindergarten back to art.

            Mr. Harver described the new concept for the floor plan, and noted that the

new additions will be on the right.

            He noted a separate parent drop off area; new bus loading zone on the left area

near the gym which separates it from the parent drop off area.

            Mr. Harver reviewed the following estimates for probable costs for the two

elementary schools.

            Achilles Elementary School

            Description                                            Probable Cost
            Site Work                                                 $54,000
            Canopy Extension                                            8,700
            New Building Addition (29,424 sq. ft. @$85.00 sq. ft.   2,501,040
            Heavy Renovation – 4,711 sq. ft. @$55.00 sq. ft.          259,105
            Light renovation 1,682 sq. ft. @ $25.00 sq. ft.            42,050
            Achilles Subtotal                                     $2,864,895
            Achilles Budget                                       $2,710,270
                              Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                 10


             Botetourt Elementary School

             Description                                             Probable Cost

             Site Work                                               $163,000
             New Canopy +Extension                                      75,000
             New Building Addition (28,933 sq. ft. @$85.00 sq. ft.  2,459,305
             Heavy Renovation – 4,782 sq. ft. @$55.00 sq. ft.          263,010
             Light renovation 3,364 sq. ft. @ $25.00 sq. ft.            84,100
             Roof Replacement 41,314 at $7.00 sq. ft.                  290,000
             Botetourt Subtotal                                   $3,334,415
             Botetourt Budget                                      $2,803,730
             Construction Total                                    $6,199,310
                                                                ($685,310 over)
             Project Soft Costs and Construction Contingencies*       $844,754
             Project Cost – Total…………………………………………….$7,044,065

             Mr. Hellman advised that before anything can take place, the Board of

Supervisors must approve the submittal of the application for funding, then a public

hearing must be conducted and a separate resolution to incur the debt must be adopted.

             Mr. Hellman requested the Board to consider the resolution that would

authorize the submittal of an application to the Virginia Public School Authority for

$7,050,000 and to schedule a public hearing.

             Ms. Theberge again expressed concern that the Board had little information as

to what the state would do with its budget and what revenues would be forthcoming. She

indicated that she was very pro looking at the fall bond issue.

             In answer to an inquiry by Mr. Adams, Mr. Harver noted that the contingency

cost was 5% of the total which is standard.

             Mr. Blake advised that he would agree with Ms. Theberge, and would prefer to

wait until the fall.

             Mr. Bland advised that he totally supported schools, but since October, the

price had gone up 20% and this concerned him.

             During discussion that followed, Ms. Pugh noted that there was never enough

money for maintenance and a new roof. She indicated that a new roof and a safer ingress

and egress had added to the cost; however, she felt it was necessary for the safety of the

children.

             After more discussion, Mr. Blake noted that it was not the cost so much, but

the timing of the request.

             Ms. Pugh noted that the School Board had left the October meeting with the

impression that funding the renovations of Achilles and Botetourt had not been a big

problem.
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                              11
            Mr. McGlohn advised that it seemed there would never be enough money, and

because the schools seem always to be funded at a minimum, they never are caught up,

and the situation only gets worse.

            Mr. Burak indicated that it was his impression that the Board had asked the

School Board to wait until the Board had reviewed the budget, which would have been after

January. Mr. Burak noted that the majority of people would support taxes for education.

            Mr. Blake advised that citizens would support education if it did not mean a

tax increase.

            Ms. Bolden advised that schools and education should be the most important

asset the County could have.

            Mr. Whitley advised that funding the Achilles and Botetourt additions and

renovations would impact the budget by $696,000 per year, and that this would represent

about three cents on the tax rate. He noted that funds had to come from somewhere which

meant that the budget would have be reduced by that amount in some other departments

or agencies, or that the tax rate would have to be increased to generate that amount of

revenue.

            Ms. Theberge noted that last October the Board did not know that the

Governor would cut 7% to 10% from the constitutional offices’ budgets, but they knew now

they would not get as much money next year. She noted that all things are not equal now,

and that the budget impact would be greater. She suggested that the matter be put on the

Board’s agenda again in time to get the matter in line for the fall sale of bonds.

            Mr. Blake advised that he also had a problem with making application before

the public hearing. He indicated that the hearing should be ahead of time and go from

there.

            Mr. Allen noted that this is the first time he had seen the plans or received any

information concerning the proposal. He suggested that the Board and School Board get

the public behind the projects.

            Ms. Altemus advised that school needs are important, and she knew what the

needs were, however, at this point in time, she was not sure that the County would not

have to cut services.

            Mr. Adams asked that the School Board wait for a short while and they would

seriously consider the Board’s needs at a time in the very near future.
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                 12
            Ms. Cohen noted that the delay will make the projects more expensive and the

problems would just be greater. She noted that the future is now, and these needs should

be considered now.

            Mr. Bland requested that the matter be put on the August agenda for

discussion and for a public hearing in late August.

            After more discussion on the schedule and the time it would take to implement

the process, Mr. Allen moved, seconded by Ms. Theberge, that the matter be put on the

Board’s July agenda, and a public hearing be advertised to be held in August. The motion

was then carried by the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Ms.

Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

            A discussion was then held on the combined capital improvements priority list.

            Mr. Hellman discussed the proposals made by the Wiley and Wilson study

regarding using the current high school for community services such as a senior center, a

library, or something other than that.

            Dr. Hoover discussed educational models regarding the additional combined

high school.   He noted that in the education arena the magnet schools were being

discussed. He indicated that rather than dividing the school population by area, he would

suggest that the educational programs offered divide the school population. He indicated

that one school should focus on a technical type of curriculum and one school would focus

on humanities or performing arts, so that the programs would sort and select the

youngsters rather than them being selected by the area in which they live.

            After more discussion, Ms. Theberge suggested that the high school/middle

school concept be discussed after Phase I and Phase II for the elementary schools have

been completed, and she would suggest that the library be dropped from the list, leave the

community center and senior center where it is; to be considered later regarding how it

might fit in sometime in the future.

            Regarding setting goals and dates, Mr. Jenkins noted that he had put dates on

the goals to be met; and if the goals cannot be met, then they could reevaluate.

            Ms. Theberge indicated that there is no way to know if the community center

and senior center can be incorporated into the high school/middle school concept.
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                           13
             Ms. Cohen advised that they had held public hearings and had on-going

community communications and commitment regarding the high school/middle school

concept and they were asking the Board of Supervisors to put the high school/middle

school concept up a little higher on the list.

             Mr. McGlohn advised that he did not have any children in the school system

anymore, however he still supported the schools and he would do what is necessary to

educate the children of the County.

             Ms. Bolden advised that she would agree, and that folks in the ommunity

would like to hear from the Board whether they would be committed to building a new high

school. She indicated that the community would like to hear a commitment from the Board

of Supervisors.

             Mr. Bland advised that he felt a high school was much more important than

some other things on the list, however he didn’t feel the timeline would hold.

             During discussion that followed, Mr. Whitley suggested that the county land

purchase be taken out, and that items 3 and 4 move up one notch; let items 6 and 7 be

combined.

             Mr. Burak noted that previously there had been two county projects; water and

the new courthouse, which are now off the list. He indicated that he felt the middle/high

schools should be bumped up above the County projects.

             Mr. Blake noted that the seniors had money in the pot toward the senior

project and assets on Main Street.

             After more discussion, Mr. McGlohn moved, seconded by Ms. Theberge that the

list be amended to eliminate the land purchase for the County, consolidate 6 and 7 and

leave everything else as is.

             A point of order having been raised that the motion was not acceptable in its

current form, Ms. Theberge moved, seconded by Mr. Hines, that the following resolution be

adopted.    The motion was then carried by the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams,

yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Ms. Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

             WHEREAS, The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors, meeting jointly with

the Gloucester County School Board, has approved a Long Range Capital Improvements

Plan for Gloucester County; and

             WHEREAS, The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors has been requested to

amend this Plan by the School Board; and
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                           14
              WHEREAS, The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the

Plan, discussed it with the School Board and feels that it should be amended.

              NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: By the Gloucester County Board of

Supervisors that the 2002 Combined Capital Priority List is hereby amended and approved

as follows:

1.            Land Purchase – Schools

2.            Elementary Schools – Phase I

3.            Elementary Schools – Phase II

4.            Construction of Combined Facility – Community and Senior Center

5.            Build Combined Middle/High School – Improve Page Middle School

              Mr. McGlohn then moved that the Capital Improvements List as amended by

the Board, with the elimination of the library, be adopted. The motion was seconded by Mr.

Jenkins and carried by the following vote: Mr. E. Stanley Belvin, Jr., yes; Ms. Reba B.

Bolden, yes; Mr. George R. “Randy” Burak, no; Ms. Ronnie Cohen, no; Mr. Michael D.

Jenkins, yes; Mr. Alvin J. McGlohn, Jr., no; and Dr. Jean Pugh, yes.

              There being no further business to come before the School Board, the meeting

was adjourned upon a motion by Dr. Pugh, seconded by Mr. McGlohn, and carried by

unanimous voice vote.

              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:        CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION OF DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS
              GRANT APPLICATION – SHERIFF’S OFFICE

              Mr. Whitley requested that the Board consider a resolution effecting the

certification and authorization of grant applications for the years 1999 through 2003.

              Ms. Theberge then moved, seconded by Mr. Allen, that the resolution certifying

the domestic preparedness grant application be added to the agenda for Board

consideration.

              The motion was then carried by the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams,

yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Ms. Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

              On a motion by Mr. Allen, seconded by Mr. Hines, the following resolution was

adopted upon the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Ms.

Theberge, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes.

              BE IT RESOLVED: By the Board of Supervisors of Gloucester County, Virginia,

that Robin P. Stanaway, Sheriff, is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of the

County of Gloucester, a public entity established under the laws of the State of Virginia,
                                 Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                   15
this application to file it in the appropriate State Office for the purpose of obtaining certain

federal financial assistance under the OJP, National Domestic Preparedness Office Grant

Program(s) administered by the Commonwealth of Virginia; and

             That the County of Gloucester, a public entity established under the laws of the

Commonwealth of Virginia, hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the Commonwealth

and to the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) for all matters pertaining to such federal

financial assistance any and all information pertaining to these grants as may be

requested.

             Passed and approved this 18th day of February 2003.

             Signed by Burton M. Bland, Chairman, Teresa L. Altemus, Vice Chair, and

Graham C. Blake, Member at Large, Gloucester County Board of Supervisors, and certified

by Mary Sue Sparks, duly appointed Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.

             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:       CLOSED MEETING

             On a motion by Ms. Theberge, seconded by Mr. Adams, the following resolution

was adopted upon the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mrs.

Altemus, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Mr. Bland, yes; Mrs. Theberge, yes.

             WHEREAS, the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors desires to discuss

particular subjects in Closed Meeting during the course of its Work Session of February 18,

2003; and,

             WHEREAS, the nature of the subject is the discussion of a personnel matter

involving the employment of a specific public appointee, the discussion of same in Closed

Meeting is expressly permitted by Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as

amended.

             NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Gloucester County Board of

Supervisors does hereby convene in Closed Meeting for the purposes herein expressed

pursuant to the legal authorities herein recited.

             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:       RETURN TO OPEN SESSION

             On a motion by Ms. Theberge, seconded by Mr. Allen, the following resolution

was adopted upon the following polled vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Allen, yes; Mr. Adams, yes;

Mrs. Altemus, absent; Mr. Hines, yes; Mr. Bland, yes; Mrs. Theberge, yes.
                         Tuesday, February 18, 2003                           16
            WHEREAS, the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors has completed its
discussion in Closed Meeting, and now desires to continue its Work Session in Open
Session; and
            WHEREAS, each and every member of this said Board who votes affirmatively

for the adoption of this Resolution does thereby certify that, to the best of his/her

knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from Open Session were heard,

discussed, or considered during the Closed Meeting, and that the only subjects heard,

discussed, or considered in said Closed Meeting were the matters identified in the

Resolution by which it was convened.

            NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Gloucester County Board of

Supervisors does hereby reconvene in Open Session at its Work Session of February 18,

2003, hereby certifying its compliance with Section 2.2-3711 of the Code of Virginia, 1950,

as amended.

            Upon return to open session, Ms. Altemus read the following statement:

            It is with great concern that I have left the closed session of the Gloucester

County Board of Supervisors on February 18, 2003.

            My concerns were that of ethics. It is my opinion that the Board of Supervisors

did not follow through with the hiring process that had been set forth by the Board to hire

for the position of County Attorney.

            It is apparent to me that to stay in closed session and participate in a process

that has become flawed would be unethical at least.

            I feel that it is incumbent upon me to distance myself from any conduct that

would be deemed inappropriate by the citizens that I represent.

            Signed and typed Teresa L. Altemus, Vice Chair – Gloucester County Board of

Supervisors.

            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN RE:      ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED MEETING

            The Chairman, Mr. Bland, announced that no action had been taken while in

Closed Meeting.

            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN RE:      ADJOURNMENT

            There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was

adjourned upon a motion by Mr. Adams and seconded by Mr. Blake.
                           Tuesday, February 18, 2003                                 17
            The motion was then carried by the following vote: Mr. Blake, yes; Mr. Allen,

yes; Mr. Adams, yes; Mrs. Altemus, yes; Mr. Hines, yes; Mr. Bland, yes; Mrs. Theberge, yes.

            The next meeting of the Board of Supervisors is scheduled for March 4, 2003 at

7: 00 P.M. in the Board Room in the old Courthouse, Court Circle, Gloucester, VA 23061.

____________________________        _________________________________________
Burton M. Bland, Chairman           William H. Whitley, County Administrator

				
Fighting Yank Fighting Yank
About These documents were primarily taken from government websites as part of a personal project to archive political and governmental documents on Docstoc. Please email gov.archive.project@gmail.com for prompt removal if you discover a copyrighted document. Thank you!