Attached for your consideration please find copies of the ... AGENDA - JUNE 2016...Attached for your consideration please find copies of the Board of Supervisor’s ... public hearings

SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Regular Session i June 27, 2016

ACTION REQUIRED: Unless corrections or additions to the minutes are noted, they will be considered approved as presented by unanimous consent.

5. MEETING MINUTES

Attached for your consideration please find copies of the Board of Supervisor’s meeting minutes for the:

1) Planning Retreat, March 9, 2016; 2) Budget Workshop, April 20, 2016; and 3) Regular Session, May 23, 2016.

March 9, 2016

At a retreat of the Southampton County Board of Supervisors held in Room 204/206 at the Workforce Development Center, 100 N. College Drive, Franklin, Virginia on March 9, 2016 at 1:00 PM.

SUPERVISORS PRESENT

Dallas O. Jones, Chairman (Drewryville) Ronald M. West, Vice Chairman (Berlin-Ivor)

Dr. Alan W. Edwards (Jerusalem) R. Randolph Cook (Newsoms)

Carl J. Faison (Boykins-Branchville) Barry T. Porter (Franklin) S. Bruce Phillips (Capron)

SUPERVISORS ABSENT

OTHERS PRESENT Michael W. Johnson, County Administrator (Clerk)

Lynette C. Lowe, Deputy County Administrator/Chief Financial Officer June W. Steele, Finance Manager

Richard E. Railey, Jr., County Attorney Amanda N. Smith, Administrative Secretary

OTHERS ABSENT

Mr. Michael Johnson states we have reached the appointed hour. Hopefully, everybody has in front of you a copy of today’s agenda. I want to make note that dinner will arrive at 5:30 p.m. along with the School Board and its Administrative Staff. They will be joining us for dinner. Afterwards, we will hear their budget presentation, and we will follow-up with Carl Garner and the Fire and Rescue Association. Hopefully, we will wrap up about 8:30 p.m. We use the term retreat and that is a little bit of a misnomer for what we have going on today. We have some elements of a retreat. We are away from our normal business environment. We are all dressed comfortably and casually. We don’t have a full agenda with public hearings and public comments. So, in that sense it is a retreat; but, realistically a retreat would be a time when you all would spend the entire time thinking strategically about the future, and trying to set the course for the future. We are going to spend the first hour focusing on that, but what we have after the first hour today is what I call workshops. They are more educational in nature to better inform you all of the current issues that are on your plate, and they really are not retreat kind of issues. I don’t want you to lose focus on the bigger picture. It may be you want to follow up with a daylong strategic planning retreat sometime in the near future, but we will talk about that. The first session is what I call the next four years. Last November, the voters of Southampton County elected the seven of you all to represent their interest for the next four years. That is a tremendous privilege, a tremendous opportunity, and a tremendous responsibility. I want to spend the first few minutes talking a little bit about that. If you had to define the role of government, what do you all think it is? Supervisor West states the opposite way that the City of Portsmouth City Council is going. Chairman Jones states the servants of the people. Supervisor Phillips states the vision for the future. Mr. Michael Johnson states if I had to come up with a tagline for the role of government I think it would be to make people lives better. That is really why government exists. It is to make people’s lives better. Two centuries ago when people had horses and carts, and they wanted to get to town they got stuck in the mud. So, they needed something bigger than the individual property owners to come together and deal with transportation; likewise with education. There used to be one room school houses here and one room school houses there. There was no central education facility. So, the role of government is to try and make people’s lives better. How are you all going to do that over the next four years? What is it that you intend to do to make their lives better? I mentioned that you all have been given tremendous power along with tremendous responsibility. You have all

March 9, 2016

the power given to you under the constitution of Virginia. The Code of Virginia lays out an entire series of things you are responsible for and you need to take action on. You have the power of the County’s strengths which is the way we accomplish things. Where a man’s treasure is there his heart is also. Isn’t that what scripture says? Supervisor West states I always remember what you said at a meeting not too long ago from the book of Proverbs; where there is no vision you will die. You have to have a vision. Without that, there is no leadership. You have to step up, you have to lead, and you have to show that it will work for everyone involved. It is our responsibility to have a vision and to get people on board. Otherwise, society as we know it goes down; Proverbs 28:18. Mr. Michael Johnson states when there is no vision people perish. So, what is it that you would realistically like to accomplish in the next four years? There are a couple of tracks you could take. One is you could simply deal with the issues that come before you. Basically respond to the world around you. Or, you could try to be much more proactive and try to influence the things around you; and, the things that are not working well you have to change. That is really up to you all how proactive you want to be. If you want things to just remain the same for the next four years, we can do that. That is not a problem. But, if there is something bigger or better; something you want your staff to be focused on that is what we are talking about today; the big picture over the next four years. I put together a brief presentation. I have copies of it so don’t feel like you have to make any notes. Mr. Michael Johnson gave a presentation on ten habits of highly effective boards and the importance of working together.

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states that was the purpose of this first hour of what we call a retreat; think about these things. You have 48 months to make people’s lives better. How are you going to use it? What are you going to do? Questions or comments? Supervisor Porter states we have a responsibility in these values and to have a vision. We have so many things we need to do, especially with education, the courthouse, Public Safety. On the Sheriff side, we need more than one detective running around the County at night. We are definitely looking at challenges in the EMS area this year and in the future. Especially, since our volunteers don’t have the certification to do the work. So, how do we grow the purse? We can always raise taxes, but the board is going to have to look at alternative ways. One way is to find better utilization of our assets, like the water and sewer treatment plant. We have to find some way to get some value out of it. Second of all, we have to grow our tax base so we don’t hit our residents with huge tax increases. I have made it clear often in my vision for the future that if you don’t bring businesses in you will see taxes double in the next ten years. That is scary, so we need to concentrate on ways to make the purse bigger without putting additional burden on the taxpayers. Mr. Michael Johnson states we could spend a whole day on just that and maybe that is what we need to do. Supervisor Edwards states we need to spend a lot more time educating the public. What percentage of our registered voters in this county vote? It is pretty low isn’t it? Supervisor Phillips states about 30%. Supervisor Edwards states 30%; so we have at the most 30% of people who really care about anything who vote. So, you see what we are up against. Mr. Michael Johnson states so what about the other 70%? Supervisor Edwards states they are the silent majority who don’t care or who never shows up. We are dealing with, realistically, about 30% to 35% of the people. Supervisor Porter states I don’t think that gives us an excuse not to grow the county more efficient. I agree that I would like to see more people involved in voting and giving feedback. We are here because 30% elected us but we still have a responsibility to do the best job that we can, and provide the service without placing majority of the burden on the taxpayers. Mr. Michael Johnson states we have reached the end of this first session. I hope you enjoyed it. I hope we went over some things to get you thinking a little bit. Let us know how you would like to

March 9, 2016

follow up with some of the things you heard today if you would like to move forward and follow-up with action. We can put it on the regular agenda where we can talk about it and act on it. With that, we are going to turn it over to Jerry Kee to talk about secondary roads plan. Mr. Jerry Kee states I appreciate Mike putting me on the agenda today to go over our work session of the six-year plan. The sheet that I gave you I compiled the projects and priority the way that they are on the six-year plan now. The first thing I want to do is point out priority number six. I wrote the wrong project number on it. It is Route 617 not 646. If you look at the first priority, which is Rose Valley Road, everybody knows that job is complete. Basically, what we are doing now is financially pulling it out. That project will come out of the plan once we pay it off. The second one up there is Guy Place. That is the one we talked about last year to move up; the unpaved road, Route 728. We talked last year about making it a regular project because of the subbase issues we had. I had our material engineer go out and do an analysis of it last month. The road actually held up pretty good through the winter with those cold days we had and it was wet. He recommended that we could go back to a rural rustic. If we do that, the $1.3 million estimate we have for reconstruction would probably go down to about 400,000. That is something to think about. If you have any questions, you can ask me about it. He went out there and did a couple of bourns in places where we had all of those problems and the places seem to be holding up pretty good. We also did some drainage improvements out there, and the drainage improvements made a huge difference in the problem that we had. This will be the quickest way to get it paved. Supervisor Cook states do we have to wait until 2021 now? Mr. Jerry Kee states the 2021 is based off of funding; having enough money to do the project. Supervisor Cook states now that it has been moved. Supervisor West states to rural rustic. Supervisor Cook states when will it be? Mr. Jerry Kee states it will probably be 2018. We are getting an average of $175,000 to $180,000 in unpaved road funds. Supervisor Cook states so you cut three years. Mr. Jerry Kee states yes, we cut three years off by doing that. Basically, what we would do is pave what is there. We have already done some of the drainage improvements and will still have to do a few more. The Route 743 job is one that we took out of the plan because of the lumber mill shutting down. That money was transferred to the Rose Valley project to pay off the debts; that money has been transferred, and that project will be taken out of the plan altogether. Number four is Rawlings Road which has been at the top of the unpaved list. We do have enough funding to do that and we plan on starting construction in June. Hopefully, by the end we will be improving that roadway. We are going to do that with our maintenance crew. They will go in and surface treat it, and do all of the work. We are getting it done for about ¼ of the cost of hiring a contractor. Number five is Governor Darden, and actually has about $816,000 on it right now. So, they are in the process of beginning preliminary engineering on it. You may see some guys out there surveying and doing some other things unless you all want to change priorities. Supervisor Edwards states how are you going to address the problem at the bridge. The bridge is not wide enough to accept the wider lanes. Mr. Jerry Kee states it is not and what we are looking at doing is probably replacing it with a box culvert. The first project that you see on here is actually the first section. That would be in the next section. That is not even in the plan right now because there is no money on it. We are doing the first 2.5 miles. Supervisor Cook states that is from Courtland back, through the swamp. Mr. Jerry Kee states yes that is through the swamp which is probably the worst section when it comes to environmental because we are going to have to raise the roadway. They have been doing some preliminary work and they will start the preliminary engineering pretty quickly on that,

March 9, 2016

because we have $800,000 on that right now. Warrique is the next unpaved road on there. Supervisor West states before you continue, 200 yards of it needs to be extended off of Broadwater Road so when you come off of Broadwater it will cover those last houses. I realize it is expensive, but 200 yards is not $600,000. Mr. Jerry Kee states we may be able to do that. We have to go in and do some repairs at the beginning where we paved before. We have that in the plan to do this summer. All of the unpaved roads where they have that last 200 – 300 feet where we paved, we are going to go in and repair all of those this summer. That is in our action plan. The next unpaved road on the list is Delaware. As you can see, both of those have no funding on them. Delaware did have about $5,000 on it that was put in there just to have it in the plan, but they won’t let us do that anymore. So, that money was transferred to Guy Place because that is the first priority. In summary, that is what we have and I can take any questions? Supervisor Phillips states thank you for your comments and thank you for what you have done on Guy Place Road. I am sure the people that live there appreciate it. You said you had done some drainage work… Mr. Jerry Kee states it made a huge difference in what the issue was that we had. Supervisor Phillips states right and I agree. I rode out there and you have all these ditches after the timber was cut that have grown up. Is there anything else that can be done? Mr. Jerry Kee states yes; we are planning on when we do the project or maybe before the project, going in and cleaning out at least the ditch that’s the closest to Route 628. That is the one that carries a lot of the water. If you noticed, it is clean for a ways, but if you walk in the woods about 75ft it needs to be cleaned out. It really needs to be cleaned out about 400 feet. Supervisor Phillips states okay; excellent. Supervisor West states Mr. Kee, I submitted to you that cleaning the ditches would do more good than cleaning any top surfaces. You have so much water and it sits there and saturates. It builds up under the road and deteriorates the road on a regular basis because it can’t run off. I have no idea, but just for the sake of argument, 50% or more of every culvert under every secondary highway is deteriorating. It was put in so long ago there are so many holes now that are leaking through. This is going to be a worsening problem and not a bettering problem for you guys. Mr. Jerry Kee states we do have a plan in place right now to start replacing a lot of these culverts. What we are going to do is try to replace some in every district because we have them in every district. We are assessing them now. A lot of them we are going to replace ourselves and some of them we may need contractors to do them. Supervisor West states you guys have opened that old office building over in Berlin for whatever reason. Mr. Jerry Kee states our construction people work out there. Supervisor West states with that being said, I was kind of nosey the other day and I said something about the water standing halfway across the road, but if you go 100 feet up it goes off into a swamp. Mr. Jerry Kee states but they are out there to cut the ditches, but sometimes we have a problem with the farmers going out there and plowing up the ditches. We go out there and cut the ditch and then the farmer goes out there and plows up the ditch. It is a never-ending battle. Chairman Jones states what about Ivy Tract Road? Have you seen where that road is covered every time it rains? Mr. Jerry Kee states yes and part of the problem with that Mr. Jones is we have beaver problems back there. We have a lady that does beaver trapping and she already has it on her list to do; now, how quickly she will get in there I don’t know. It is a level of dams back there; about four or five

March 9, 2016

levels back there. Supervisor West states did you say you had about $175,000; what did you say? Mr. Jerry Kee states roughly $175,000 for unpaved roads. It is only going to be in the $50,000 - $60,000 range to put on paved roads. They are basically telling us we are only getting the funds that we get from telecommunications; the money from the telephone companies. There are no state funds… Supervisor West states why all of this cutting back? All of these excess taxes, and the government bragging on the big pot he has. The federal government taxes everything. What is going on? Supervisor Cook states the bottom line is the politicians have a lot more power than we do. The roads had no money in the original budget this year. The Transportation Board made them go back, and like Jerry said they are only getting money off of the telecommunication rent fees. Mr. Jerry Kee states the unpaved road money was additional money out there and Mike and I talked about it; if you had an unpaved road that had 400 vehicle trips per day on it we could have gotten extra money. But guess what, Southampton County doesn’t have one. The closet one you have is Warrique Road and that is 340. We didn’t have one that reached that 400 limit so we didn’t get the extra money. Supervisor Cook states just for my knowledge is 50 still the minimum to pave a road? Mr. Jerry Kee states yes 50 is still the minimum to pave a road. We do traffic counts on them every year. Actually, I went in and checked the traffic counts this morning and some of traffic counts on these roads have gone up. Also, I have had request from a couple of property owners and people that live on Buckhorn Quarter Road to add that to the list. It is on the list, but it is way down the list. It was at the top of the list 20 years ago. The traffic count on that road is 95. Supervisor Phillips states and it needs to be what? Mr. Jerry Kee states it needs to be 50. Supervisor West states Jerry, on Route 635 Railroad Bridge, just before you get to Route 460; you did some checking, walking on, and marking a little bit and then it all died. Mr. Jerry Kee states actually they are still working on it. Supervisor West states if you go across that bridge it sounds like it is going to fall down. Mr. Jerry Kee states we are getting ready to do some maintenance to it. Go in and tighten the boards up, etc. The problem is when you are dealing with a wooden bridge like that once you go across it they began to loosen up real quick. The bridge is actually our bridge now it is not the railroads anymore. Supervisor West states where is it in the plan? Mr. Jerry Kee states it is still in the plan but it is a funding issue. We had some bridges to be replaced where the funding came in above what the estimates were. Route 671 is just like it. The one we had the public hearing on. Originally, Route 671 was scheduled to be done in 2018 and now we are looking at 2020 or 2021 because of the funding. We will know more when we get the funding scenarios for the bridges and the primary roads in the next couple of months, because I haven’t got the final numbers yet. Supervisor West states well it is a sound nuisance for the neighbors that live right by it. It sounds like you have been hit by a truck. Mr. Jerry Kee states yes it does, but I did talk to the bridge engineer and they are getting ready to go in and tighten the boards. Like I said, the only one I have had any calls about is Buckhorn Quarter Road as far as adding. Mr. Michael Johnson states thank you Jerry. What I am going to share with you now is not my

March 9, 2016

presentation. It was the presentation that was made to the SPSA Board of Directors at a special meeting last Friday. That is why you see the March 4th date. This was the presentation made by the SPSA staff to the SPSA Board of Directors in response to the request for proposals for the post- 2018 disposal services contract. I am sure you all saw in the paper what the action of the SPSA board was, but I am going to share with you a ton of details because everybody wants to know what the real deal is moving forward with SPSA. You all know I made a presentation at your meeting last month to bring you up to date on where we are on the proposed Use and Support Agreement. Now that we know which option SPSA will be aggressively pursuing, we have a good idea of what the cost will be with SPSA moving forward. They are going to be asking for your consideration of that Use and Support agreement quickly. I mentioned last month it could be as early as this month. They would like to have your response by the end of March. They absolutely have to have your response by the end of April. At this time, Mr. Michael Johnson gave a presentation on SPSA.

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states I know that was a long presentation. I see Randy Martin made it in the room; Randy welcome. Randy is also a member of the SPSA board and was at the presentation. Randy did I miss anything? Any questions or comments? Mr. Randy Martin states Taylor Williams who is the Chairman of the committee working on the host agreement and met all day yesterday. There is a lot happening and they are trying to narrow down any outstanding issues. They have made progress in this process but I haven’t seen any specifics. The host agreement good neighbor committee will meet again before the end of the month. Mr. Michael Johnson states we have a regional subcommittee that’s been meeting periodically between Franklin, Southampton, and Isle of Wight. Mr. West and Mr. Porter are on that committee for Southampton. The Vice-Mayor and a council member, Isle of Wight Chairman and they will appoint another board member, is scheduled to meet on the 16th of this month to go over this with the regional subcommittee. I think Franklin is intending to put it on their agenda at the end of the month for action. Mr. Randy Martin states we actually are meeting Monday to go over what you just went over and to have public comment. We will meet on the 28th for action. Isle of Wight is going to consider it on the 17th and I heard today Mr. Taylor in Chesapeake will consider action on the 22nd. There are four communities scheduled this month that I have heard about. Supervisor West states I will state it in a more simple term then all of that legal terminology. We pay $125 a ton. Repower is proposing $56; it goes to $72 with Republic, and $78 with Wheelabrator. We have nothing to lose except from $125 down to a minimum of $78, $72, or $56. If Repower doesn’t get started, we have no investment in it. We have facilities that can take on our trash now up through the year 2027. We have nothing to lose. That is carrying everything there and we are in place for it. The only thing would be negotiation for Cell 7 to be up and running by 2027. Mr. Michael Johnson states the plan is to get that negotiated and done sooner rather than later. Supervisor West states and we have the same voting power, one of eight, as Virginia Beach, Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, etc. We can’t lose on this deal. The $125 is going to drop. In my mind, let’s get on with Repower. They have the risk and every guarantee in place and we don’t have to put any money out. We can save a lot of money between $56 and $125. I want to point out as well that Mr. Johnson has been in this thing from day one. He has been behind the scenes along with Mr. Taylor Williams, is that correct? Mr. Randy Martin states we have been very fortunate to have the Chairman of both Committees

March 9, 2016

from Franklin and Southampton. Supervisor West states right, Franklin and Southampton both have representatives in this thing. I think it is great. What do you think? Supervisor Porter states I think we have looked at a lot of things and the results came out much better than we expected. I had said to Mike back then you have to get me $60 a ton. That was the number I threw out there as a goal. When the numbers came back…even when we take the proposal that SPSA got for disposal we could get that but we wouldn’t have any drivers. We still couldn’t achieve the same net cost on this deal. When we take the additional transportation cost and the additional trucks we would have to buy to get the trash to a landfill, we can’t come close to $56 a ton. Chairman Jones states to me it is a win-win situation. Supervisor West states yes and one of the questions that will be ask is regarding the $200 solid waste fee that is assessed to every home. If you calculate the difference between $125 and $56, it is around $630,000 and that is new revenue to us that we are not spending whether we use it towards that $200 annual fee or not will be a choice. But, it will certainly free up the budget by .04 cents. Supervisor Porter states I think that the proposals throughout the process have been as good as it can get. I think the negative that some people have is the word called SPSA. What we have to get over is SPSA today is not the same organization that got us in trouble the last time. Before, we had no input in what happened, but we have had significant input in this process. We have had more input in all of the contracts and deals. All parties have done extensive reviews on the contracts to make sure there are no surprises and no opportunities to go astray like the old SPSA went astray. That is what we have to remember. We have to get over the fact the name of the organization is SPSA but none of the people that got us in trouble are there. None of the agreements that got us in trouble are in affect. It is a new process. Supervisor West states and if you want to go with Republic we would have to buy the Route 671 site. Supervisor Porter states if we could get Republic to give us the deal that they gave SPSA which they will not because we don’t have the bodies and the staff, and we still have to get it to their landfill. In order to do that, we have to buy the transfer station that SPSA owns now and we would have to buy the trucks. Supervisor Phillips states we own a share. Supervisor Porter states no we don’t. Mr. Michael Johnson states SPSA owns it. Supervisor Porter states we own a share of SPSA, but if we leave SPSA we leave our investment in SPSA. Supervisor West states we are the small players; Isle of Wight, Franklin, and Southampton County together is 8% of the disposal waste that goes to SPSA and we all have one vote just like Virginia Beach. Mr. Michael Johnson states you carry 8% of the trash and you have 37.5% of the vote. Supervisor Cook states if we took 100% of our trash to Republic which is a landfill, we look a lot less responsible as a county because we are not recycling. It is all going to a landfill which everybody frowns on. Mr. Michael Johnson states in that hierarchy that was at the very bottom of the inverted triangle. Supervisor Cook states that was a very good hierarchy. SPSA has a very good analysis. Everybody is looking at that. When I say everybody I am talking about federal agencies and state agencies.

March 9, 2016

So, responsibly this makes sense. Supervisor West states like Dallas said, it is a win-win for us. Mr. Michael Johnson states the plan moving forward is to put that Use & Support Agreement on your agenda for action in March. It will be there and if you act that is great, but you will absolutely have to act by April. Chairman Jones states I don’t see any loss for anybody in this agreement. We don’t stand to lose anything. If we were to go with Wheelabrator we would lose the transfer station. Supervisor Porter states we have tied agreements that protect us. SPSA is restricted with what they can do. SPSA can’t go out and borrow money anymore. SPSA can’t go out and build an inefficient waste energy facility anymore. That is what got us in trouble the last time. Mr. Michael Johnson states for SPSA to issue debt by statute today they have to have a super majority of 2/3 votes, a 16 member board, eight whom are appointed by the Governor and eight whom are appointed by the respected local governing bodies. So, you have to have 2/3 out of 16. The plan is for SPSA not to issue any debt in the future. The plan is to set aside the funds up front as part of the tipping fee so the revenues are accrued and ready when they need to be distributed. Mr. John Burchett states how about the big boys. Are they in? Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. If we need this 350,000. Mr. Michael Johnson states without them it won’t work. Mr. John Burchett states okay, but do we have an eye on that. Mr. Michael Johnson states then we would never be in it. SPSA won’t sign the agreement until they have the Use & Support Agreements from the communities. Mr. Randy Martin states SPSA is also looking at a contingency plan just in case someone doesn’t sign the Use & Support Agreement. They are looking at private ways to be able to fill the gap. Supervisor Porter states say Virginia Beach doesn’t sign on then Repower goes away. That also extends the new landfill we have by 20 years. We would just put it in the landfill at the other $56 cost instead of paying somebody else $78 or $72. It may benefit us if a big boy doesn’t sign because all of a sudden we have a great big landfill we can use for the rest of our lives. They can’t say we want to be out of Repower, but be in SPSA. If you turn this down, you are out of SPSA. Supervisor Phillips states where is the contracted waste going right now? Mr. Michael Johnson states Wheelabrator takes it. Actually, Wheelabrator is dependent on it right now. Supervisor Phillips states so what you are saying is if any member of the eight localities fail to make the number we may fall below that 350,000. Mr. Michael Johnson states depend on which locality. If Franklin, Southampton, and Isle of Wight didn’t sign they still could produce the 350,000. If Virginia Beach doesn’t sign up, they are 35% of that 350,000 and that is a problem. Supervisor Phillips states we are looking at a 15 year contract with a consumer price index increase built in for the life of that 15 year contract. What could that potentially be; 2-3% a year. Mr. Michael Johnson states some years the rate has been flat; like the last few years. Chairman Jones states but if we don’t get them we still will reduce the rate by half. We cannot lose. Mr. Michael Johnson states moving along, does anyone else have any questions about SPSA? Alright, let’s move on to the Courthouse.

March 9, 2016

At this time, Mr. Michael Johnson gave a presentation on the Courthouse.

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states are there any questions or comments? Chairman Jones states the first thing we need to do is educate the public. We need to let them know what is going on. Mr. Michael Johnson states how do you want to do that? Supervisor West states the Tidewater News; but, we will need a new facility whether it is renovation or whether it is a brand new facility. The public will decide whether it is a new site or if it is the old one fixed. Supervisor Edwards states the board needs to push which ever one we think we need. You have to be out of your mind to renovate that thing. Supervisor West states and to repurpose is an important thing to remember. You said $2-$3.5 million. I have already had a call on what to do with it. What asset is it to the county? We are going to have to clean it up, tear it down, or renovate it. Even if you put $16.5 million one way or the other way, someone has an asset to use for historical value. Supervisor Edwards states you know that asset has a price tag. You have to find somebody who

March 9, 2016

has the money to keep it up. What does it cost to keep that building up a year; $500,000 Mike? Mr. Michael Johnson states I don’t know right off but it is substantial. Supervisor West states well do you think the Historical Society could get the money? Supervisor Edwards states I don’t think you can give it to the Historical Society. They don’t have the money to do that. I don’t think they could get that kind of money. It would be great if somebody would take it and do it. Supervisor West states well it would make no sense to be forced into the decision by the judges, and it also makes no sense to renovate the present facility. So, the only option is to go with a new facility. A new facility will then carry us 30 – 40 years down the road. Supervisor Porter states the first thing I would like to say is we have already been forced into the decision. It is not that we don’t want to be but we are forced to move forward. If we decide to defy the judges this time, that could make it worse as we move forward. Mr. Michael Johnson states I am keeping Judge Eason well informed. He knows you are talking about it today. He knows you are going to be talking about it the end of this month because I told him. I don’t want him getting anxious thinking we are dragging our feet. Supervisor Cook states Richard, Judge Eason has 60 days after construction to review it. How long does it take to get on the ballot? Mr. Richard Railey states no, that is down the road once the building is completed. After the building is completed there is still a 60 day period. You can’t move right in. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is to make sure all of the systems have been commissioned and they are working like they supposed to be. Supervisor Cook states so what is your time frame to get it on the ballot. Mr. Michael Johnson states the reality of that is I don’t know the answer but the judge can order a special election. For any reason we didn’t get the petition in until October, he can order a special election. Mr. Richard Railey states there is something else that you have to remember too; the Supreme Court hasn’t ordered us to do anything yet, but the Supreme Court has the power to do it. The important thing to remember is without an adequate security system; God forbid if somebody gets hurt. They would have a suit against Southampton County. All they would have to do is go in the court before the jury and talk about the standards that we haven’t met. That is negligence first hand. Do we have enough… they gave the lady yesterday $55 million; I don’t think we have that much coverage. Supervisor Edwards states well if we ignore that then we are setting ourselves up for anything. Supervisor West states like the paper said, we are already under the gun. Barry is correct; we have a definite problem. We have something showing us that we have a need that has to be taken care of. A prudent and wise individual is going to move forward. Supervisor Edwards states the public would vote to have it renovated. That scares me to death. Supervisor Faison states well that is the roll of the Board of Supervisors; to educate people. Mr. John Burchett states so, where would you find 20 acres? Mr. Michael Johnson states there are several sites. The criteria for the site would be a site that is served by public water and public sewer. It doesn’t have to be in the Town of Courtland. It could go anywhere our utility system runs. That is from Camp Parkway to Ivor Road and back to Southampton High School. There are probably five or six sites along those corridors that have water and sewer that would work.

March 9, 2016

Supervisor Faison states does the Judge indicate whether he has a preference. Mr. Michael Johnson states no and he is not going to. He is not going to tell you I want a new building or I want a renovated building. He is going to tell you I want a building that meets the standards. Supervisor Phillips states when they say 20 acres is that potentially to move the jail. Supervisor Edwards states you have to have stormwater, parking, … Mr. Michael Johnson states you may need to consider 30 acres Bruce if you decide to accommodate for a future jail. Supervisor Phillips states we are talking a two-story building at 32,000 square feet. Mr. Michael Johnson states you have setbacks and other things you have to adhere to. You have to accommodate for stormwater, parking, etc. Supervisor Phillips states there is a big difference in parking with what you said and what Jeff said. He said 2.5 acres for parking. Mr. Michael Johnson states the facility guidelines say anywhere from 2-4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. Supervisor Edwards states well we have to proactively get this going and do it without breaking the county. Mr. Michael Johnson states in the interest of time we need to move on. At this time, Mr. Michael Johnson gave a presentation on the preliminary look at FY 2017 budget.

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states that concludes the presentation; any questions or comments? Supervisor West states it adds up. Mr. Michael Johnson states next we will have Dr. Alvera Parrish, Superintendent of Southampton County Public Schools. At this time, Dr. Alvera Parrish gave the presentation for Southampton County Public Schools.

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Supervisor West states do you have any kind of maintenance program. Does anyone check the roof; walk on it? Is there anyone in the county capable of doing this? Is anyone looking at all. When I see this deterioration, that is a neglect, because that did not occur last year. Is there a person in the school system that does building maintenance. Dr. Alvera Parrish states we have a building maintenance department and we have a Supervisor over building maintenance. It is not neglect because they have repaired this over time as these issues have presented themselves. More work was probably needed and the roof should have been replaced a long time ago, and it hasn’t been done. We do not have a roof specialist. We are working with an energy group now, ADM, who has been up there and have tried to do what they can within the contract to take care of the areas that affect the energy contract part of it to prevent some of this from happening. Our people are very persistent with getting up there and trying to patch it. That is why you see all of this tar and other things that they have been trying to do to patch these leaks over time. Some of this was with the initial construction of the building that needed to be addressed as well. I can tell you that Mr. Blunt and his team are consistent. We have work orders and documentation that the work has been done in response to the work order everytime a request comes in. He has been up there. Mr. Brown was up there last week. I have even been on the roof of the Middle School just to see what was happening. That has been a focus

March 9, 2016

because I have been saying what is going on with these leaks. The leaks have gotten worse over time as anything would. That basically concludes the presentation, and I added the piece in there about the roofs because we have had a discussion about capital improvments. A few of us had discussed about bringing more information forward. I will be glad to give you the book from TREMCO. Supervisor West states do you get state funding for pre-k. Dr. Alvera Parrish states no, not for pre-k. Supervisor West states I know when you do your projections you state K-12 so I didn’t know whether you receive funding for it. So, what do you do with pre-k numbers; that is 140 kids here. Dr. Alvera Parrish states I pull pre-k numbers out because it is a different funding. We get federal funding for pre-k. Ms. Joy Carr states and we also get the 4-year old program funding from the state. It is not part of the local operating budget and it is not included as part of the ADM that we get regular state funding on, but we do get some state funding for the federal programs for the special needs pre-k. Supervisor West states I didn’t know whether pre-k was part of your ADM and you received funding for that. Ms. Joy Carr states right, but no we don’t. We do get pre-k funding from the state but it is a separate funding for special needs in the 4-year program. Dr. Alvera Parrish states and that ends our presentation. Any questions? Chairman Jones states thank you Dr. Parrish for your time and all that you have done. We all see it and now we have to decide what to do. Does anybody have any questions or comments? Supervisor Faison states I see the situation and the need and I hope we will do the best for the schools. Supervisor Edwards states I think it is self-explanatory. We are behind in salaries and technology. A lot of teachers stay here because they have roots here. They could easily go to Isle of Wight and make more money. They grew up here in the county and that is one of the reasons they stay. Dr. Alvera Parrish states I would like to thank the board for giving us this opportunity and we look forward to talking some more in the future; thank you.

March 9, 2016

Mr. Carl Garner addressed the board with concerns regarding contractual EMS services with Medical Transport and the need for 24/7 coverage. Next, Gary Cross addressed the board with concerns of managing and taking care of horses. It was discussed what the zoning ordinance states today in regards to horses and the possiblity of the Board of Supervisors refering to the Planning Commission for additional study. Lastly, Mr. Johnson addressed the board in regards to starting thecv process where we recognize the Board of Supervisors. Chairman Jones suggested a plaque with the names and years of service. Mr. Michael Johnson states does anybody have anything else for the good of the group? Chairman Jones thanked everyone for coming out. There being no further discussion the retreat adjourned at 8:38 p.m. _____________________________ Dallas O. Jones, Chairman _____________________________ Michael W. Johnson, Clerk

March 9, 2016

****THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK*****

April 20, 2016

At a budget workshop meeting of the Southampton County Board of Supervisors held in the Board Room of the Southampton County Office Center, 26022 Administration Center Drive, Courtland, Virginia on April 20, 2016 at 6:30 PM.

SUPERVISORS PRESENT

Dallas O. Jones, Chairman (Drewryville) Ronald M. West, Vice Chairman (Berlin-Ivor)

Dr. Alan W. Edwards (Jerusalem) Carl J. Faison (Boykins-Branchville)

R. Randolph Cook (Newsoms) Barry T. Porter (Franklin)

SUPERVISORS ABSENT S. Bruce Phillips (Capron)

OTHERS PRESENT Michael W. Johnson, County Administrator (Clerk)

Lynette C. Lowe, Deputy Administrator/ Chief Financial Officer Amanda N. Smith, Administrative Assistant

OTHERS ABSENT

Julien W. Johnson, Jr. Public Utilities Director Richard E. Railey, Jr., County Attorney

Chairman Jones called the meeting to order. After the Pledge of Allegiance, Supervisor Faison gave the invocation. Chairman Jones states good evening everyone. At this time, I call on you Vice-Chairman. What do you have to say about the budget? Supervisor West states I am going to go to page seven. I am going to read part of it. The last sentence is pretty important. To accomplish these things, all of which the Board has previously indicated are important, the real estate tax rate, vehicle license tax and water and sewer fees are proposed to increase as highlighted above. I take that message as if that is indeed what I want to represent and what we have spoken to our management team that we want then I will proposed tonight that we adopt the .05 cent increase on real estate from .77 cents to .82 cents, the additional increase on license tax for vehicles, water fees and sewer fees as presented. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Faison. Supervisor Faison states before I start I just want to commend Mike and Lynette, and everybody whoever put this budget together. Looking through it in terms of the funds that we have, I think it was distributed very responsibly, very wisely, and fairly. So, I wouldn’t recommend any change in terms of the funds we have. I remain concerned about the school system. Even with the increase in taxes and everything, the school system still remains $571,000 less than they requested. That is a lot for them to make up. I certainly don’t see how we could raise it the three or four cents to take care of that, but I would want us to raise it .01 cent to .06 cents and provide all of that to the school system. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Porter. Supervisor Porter states I echo the comments that Mr. Faison had. I think the staff did an outstanding job going through the budget, and I think funds are allocated as fairly as we can do it. Looking through it, there are a lot of things that concerns me, and it scares me about the direction we are headed and the road that we are headed down. I agree with Mr. Faison that the schools are

April 20, 2016

not funded to the level that is ideal or that we should strive to do. On the other hand, based on the help of our residents, I feel like the .82 cents is pushing what we can go. I would like to give the schools more money. Hopefully they will have some left over from this year’s budget that can go into next year’s budget. If they do have any left over, we would automatically agree to authorize that for their next year’s budget. I know they are supposed to get some more money from state that we have not appropriated yet because of the increased ADM. My feeling would be, I would like to see that roll over into next year’s budget which would be equivalent to a .01 cent tax increase. On top of that, I look at next year. I don’t see anything in this budget that is not ongoing. I see things that are coming up next year that are probably going to add another .05 cents or .06 cents to it unless we can find other sources of revenue. Number one, we have the salary study that we are trying to phase in over three years. We need to really face up and work with the schools and try to give them some more money. We need to fully fund EMS services. Our worst nightmare is if someone has a stroke or heart attack and it takes an hour for EMS to get there because we don’t have qualified people on duty at all of the stations. Maybe there is a better way they can organize to do that but based on the increased requirements to be certified, it is really tough for volunteers to acquire the certification and to do the job for EMTs and paramedics. I know that many of our volunteer EMTs are getting old and there are not younger ones coming in to replace them. So, we are going to have to face up and fully fund EMS services. That is another .02 cents on the tax rate to do that fully next year. The future looks challenging for us and we have to do everything we can to broaden our tax basis because our taxes… we don’t have a lot of rich citizens and we are really putting a burden on them by raising the tax rate. I will bring something else up too. It may be controversial, but I know we have not given our County Administrator a raise since I have been on the board. When I look at his compensation versus the ones around here he is at least 30% less than Franklin and Isle of Wight, and Suffolk makes 70% more than he does. Supervisor West states I am going to Amen to that. Supervisor Porter states we need to recognize the value he has brought to it and consider that. So, this is not a budget that does what we need to do. But, I don’t know if it is a budget we can stretch to do. I don’t think we can do more than .82 cents right now. Hopefully, we will find some more revenue next year and we won’t have to raise it. Right now, my calculations are if we are not aggressive in broadening the tax basis and get something in here within the next year, our tax rate next year will be .90 cents. So, we have to work hard in that direction. I know two years or three years down the road if it ever gets approved, the pipeline will bring a little bit of money in. If we ever get the utility study done that will bring a little bit of money in, but that won’t be enough. We have to continually bring in new businesses, and I think this board for the most part understands that. We have to be aggressive and active. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Cook. Supervisor Cook states I can’t disagree with anything Mr. Faison and Mr. Porter have said. I do think regarding utilities, whatever we can work out with the City of Franklin; it just looms out there more important every day that goes along. Hopefully, that will move forward and the Economic Development piece also. Given everything, I am sticking with what is proposed. I am not trying to add anything else to it. I do think next year we will be sitting right back here with maybe larger challenges if we don’t get some other income. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Edwards. Supervisor Edwards states I echo that. I thank the staff for putting together an excellent budget. I think I have gotten a lot of public input on the tax increase and not very many negative inputs. People have said to me I knew you would have to do it sooner or later. I am happy that the majority of this budget went to the schools because that is our primary responsibility. I think 71% is going to the schools. We have shown the schools that we really care and we care about education. The schools really need it. I believe that the schools have cut as much fat off as they can. If they cut anymore, education is going to suffer. The thing that worries me like Barry says is next year and the year after. The reality of next year and maybe the year after is we are not going to get a quick fix from anybody I don’t think. There is not going to be any quick industry that comes here. Caterpillar is not going to drop out of the sky and all of a sudden start paying $3 to $4 million a year. I think we are going to be faced with another tough year next year. Everything you raised has to be paid next year also. I think it is a very fair budget. I think it is the best we can do. I certainly would vote for it.

April 20, 2016

Chairman Jones states I would also like to thank the people who did the budget. Our staff is outstanding. If our County Administrator didn’t live here and had his family here, I don’t think he would be here. We are just lucky to have him. We have some good people here that work for us, and they keep us straight. You see what they have done for us. This is really outstanding, and all I have to say is good things about them. I have to agree with everything that has been said. We have to do what we have to do. I would like to raise it more but we can’t right now so we will do what we can with what we have. Mr. Johnson, do you have anything you would like to say? Mr. Michael Johnson states no sir. Thank you all for your kind comments. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen; I need a motion to accept or reject this budget. Supervisor Porter made a motion to advertise this budget for public comment on May 16th. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which carried unanimously . There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. __________________________________ Dallas O. Jones, Chairman __________________________________ Michael W. Johnson, Clerk

April 20, 2016

*****THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK*****

May 23, 2016

At a regular meeting of the Southampton County Board of Supervisors held in the Board Room of the Southampton County Office Center, 26022 Administration Center Drive, Courtland, Virginia on May 23, 2016 at 6:00 PM.

SUPERVISORS PRESENT

Dallas O. Jones, Chairman (Drewryville) Ronald M. West, Vice Chairman (Berlin-Ivor)

Dr. Alan W. Edwards (Jerusalem) R. Randolph Cook (Newsoms)

Carl J. Faison (Boykins-Branchville) Barry T. Porter (Franklin) S. Bruce Phillips (Capron)

SUPERVISORS ABSENT

OTHERS PRESENT Michael W. Johnson, County Administrator (Clerk)

Lynette C. Lowe, Deputy County Administrator/Chief Financial Officer Beth Lewis, Community Development Deputy Director

Julien W. Johnson, Jr. Public Utilities Director Richard E. Railey, Jr., County Attorney

Amanda N. Smith, Administrative Assistant

OTHERS ABSENT

Chairman Jones called the meeting to order. After the Pledge of Allegiance, Supervisor Faison gave the invocation. Chairman Jones stated that the first item on the agenda is a closed session. Mr. Michael Johnson stated it is necessary for this Board to now conduct a closed meeting in accordance with the provisions set out in the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, for the following purpose:

1) In accordance with Section 2.2-3711 (A) (5), Discussion with the staff from FSEDI concerning prospective businesses or industries or the expansion of existing businesses or industries where no previous announcement has been made of the business’ or industry’s interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the community; and

2) In accordance with Section 2.2-3711 (A) (7), Consultation with legal counsel employed

or retained by the public body regarding specific legal matters associated with removal of construction and demolition debris from the former H.P. Beale Packing Plant.

A motion is required to convene a closed meeting for the purposes described above. Chairman Jones asked if he could get a motion to go into closed session. Supervisor West made a motion to go into closed session. Supervisor Phillips seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones called the meeting back to order and stated at this time we will have the certification resolution.

May 23, 2016

Supervisor West read the certification resolution to go back into open session.

RESOLUTION OF CLOSED MEETING

WHEREAS, the Southampton County Board of Supervisors had convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and

WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 (D) of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Southampton County Board of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each member’s knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed and considered by the Southampton County Board of Supervisors.

Supervisor West made a motion to adopt the certification resolution. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states there was no action taken in the closed session. We only did what was on the agenda. At this time, we will have citizen comment period. Jane Riddick-Fries addressed the board. Hello, my name is Jane Riddick-Fries and I live at 30319 Camp Parkway Courtland, Virginia. I attended the Planning Commission public hearing on April 14, 2016 and their meeting on May 12, 2016 in regards to their application submitted by Hampton Roads Development to rezone the 439 acres along Camp Parkway and Delaware Road from Residential and Agricultural to Industrial. As you know, the vote was nearly unanimous in opposition to the proposal. I was pleased by that outcome but bothered by remarks I have since heard from some individuals that the Planning Commission actions mean nothing; that this is a done deal and they see no reason to get involve because their opinion does not matter. I want to believe that this is the farthest thing from the truth and by no means that a decision about this rezoning would already be made when the public hearings have not been completed and the process has not played out. I think you as leaders of the community should be extremely concerned when there is apathy because some of your constituents think their representatives are just going through the motions. That is not good for any community. Voters should be able to trust that those we place in office do indeed listen and are open to learning more and even having their minds changed. I respectfully request, therefore, that you do not make any final decision until the last person has spoken at the public hearing on this matter; that all of the facts have been revealed and all of the questions have been answered. If our children and our grandchildren are to believe that this is the best country in the world. They need to see that all citizens are heard on all issues like this and are included in the process. Thank you for your time and your leadership. Mr. Bobby Tyler addressed the board. Good evening, my name is Bobby Tyler and I live at 112 Queens Lane Franklin, Virginia. I also own property and pay taxes in this county. I come to you tonight to share something with you because I have heard a number of people say, and I often wonder where these people come from, but one after another say that residential housing does not pay for itself. I am before you tonight to offer some information and suggestions that dispel this perception. Moreover, I will offer this information to anyone as an opportunity to review it, discuss it, or debate it. First, let me share something from the Center of Economic Development from the University of Massachusetts. They found that, and I quote, “home building generates substantial local economic activity including income, jobs, revenue for state and local governments, that far exceed the school cost to property tax ratio.” The National Consortium for

May 23, 2016

Housing Research Center began in 1988 with thirteen university members. Now, there are over twenty universities and research centers and housing research groups including Virginia Tech. I offer these as a very small sampling of housing research that has conclusive evidence that residential housing not only pays for itself, but is consistent with an ongoing revenue stream into the future. The Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing at the University of Florida established that the real estate taxes paid year after year are the most obvious long-term economic benefits to a community. Probably the second most obvious long-term economic benefit is the purchases made by the families occupying the completed homes. The Illinois Department of Development Authority determined that the new construction activity in single-family and multi-family housing resulted in the creation of 4256 full-time jobs in construction and construction-related industries. The authority also used an impact model to determine the federal, state, and local taxes and fees generated from new construction and substantial rehabilitation activities. The National Association of Home Builders uses a model to assess the immediate economic impacts of affordable housing by phase including the construction effect, the construction ripple, and the ongoing impacts. These were done to show that permanent affordable and geographically assessable housing provide numerous benefits to both the individual families and to the broader community. Those are all quotes. There are a number of ways that housing benefits a community. I am going to offer only three of the quantifiable benefits here. Moreover, I am only going to present single family housing; primarily because single family housing is one of the largest components when you look at the land use in this community. The first and most important one that you all will recognize is called the construction phase. Everyone knows what that is when you are building houses. This is a local benefit that generates jobs, wages, and local taxes including permits, utility connections, and so on. These are generated by the actual development, construction, and sale of the homes. These jobs include on-site and off-site construction work as well as jobs generated in retail, wholesale, sale of components, transportation to the sites, and professional services required to build the homes. As a sidebar, in the City of Franklin, the water connections are $3,500 and the sewer connections are $4,500. That is $8,000 and I am using this as a 100 unit component. That is $800,000 that you receive that cost you nothing. The developer puts it in and the builders have to connect to the water and sewer taps. So, that is $800,000 immediately. The estimated one-year first impact of building 100 single family homes is $28.7 million in local income. It is $3.6 million in taxes and other revenue for local governments and it generates 394 local jobs. I don’t know about you, but as you drive around this community you will find a lot of people with ladders in the back of their trucks looking for something to do. These impacts are local impacts representing income from jobs, residence, and other sources of income. The next phase is called the ripple phase. This is the money that local residents made and spend in our community. This is money that people earned during the construction period and spent locally on other goods and services. This generates additional income for other local residents which are spent on more locally produced goods and services and so on. The continuing recycling event comes back into the community. It is usually called the multiplier of ripple effect. The last one is an ongoing annual effect. This is year after year after year. It generates about $4.1 million in local income and $1 million in taxes and other revenue, and local governments can produce 69 jobs. These are ongoing, annual local impacts that results from new homes becoming occupied and the occupant paying taxes and otherwise participating in a local economy year after year. The ongoing impacts also includes the effects of increased property taxes based on the difference between the value of the raw land and the value of the completed house and units on the finished lots. I also have additional studies that give you the long-term effects. The first year 100 homes are built typically result in an estimated $4 million in taxes and other revenue from local governments. It cost about $332,000 in current expenditures by local government to provide public services to new households at current levels, and $2.4 million in capital investments for new structures and equipment undertaken by local government. This analysis assumes that local government finances the capital investment by borrowing at the current municipal bond rate. In a typical year after the first year after 100 houses, result in $1 million in taxes and other revenue for local governments and $664,000 in government expenditures needed to continue to provide services at current levels. The difference between the government revenue and the current expenditures provides an operating surplus. The first year single family operating surplus is large enough to service and pay off all of the debt incurred by investing in structures and equipment at the beginning of the first year by the end of the first year. With that, the operating surplus will be available to finance projects or reduce taxes. After 15 years, these 100 houses will generate an accumulative $18.1 million in revenue compared to $12.2 million including annual current expenses, capital investments, and interest. That is a $6 million benefit to the community. We all know that vibrant communities in our state, both urban and rural, typically share common traits. Citizens are engaged, communities are safe, and schools are

May 23, 2016

thriving. There is one constant in the heart of every vibrant community, and that is a healthy housing market. We must embrace housing that covers a wide range of housing income, demographics, and cultural conditions. We must change/adjust to remove exclusionary zoning practices that are currently holding us back. We must develop a mindset to commit community resources to inform and promote long-term sustainable housing. We must establish future practices and policies regarding housing affordability plus strengthening the community’s commitment to affordable and sustainable housing. Lastly, I want to leave this with you. We must always remember that housing supports industry. Housing is where industry sleeps at night. Thank you all. Mr. Jim Hart addressed the board. Good evening, my name is Jim Hart and I live at 24576 Delaware Road Courtland, Virginia. I have a couple of points I want to mention to you. One, is I ask that you consider to stay the course and follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission. They are people that were selected, interviewed, and appointed by this board. Demonstrate the confidence that you have in them and support them in their efforts. That will demonstrate unity to all of our citizens and also to our neighbors. I also ask you tonight to take necessary actions that will enable you to advertise the public hearing on the Camp Parkway project and vote on the same evening. Citizens that come out look forward to and anticipate action on this matter. Unless something is brought forward to you that warrants for a lot of deliberation, a vote would be greatly appreciated. People who come out go through a lot of trouble. I hear a lot of people getting babysitters in order to come to these meetings and then to have to come back to another one to see the vote is inconvenient for them. Unless something is really brought before you all that warrants it, a vote would greatly be appreciated that evening. Thank you very much for your time. Chairman Jones states nothing else will be with that public hearing except Camp Parkway. Mr. Jim Hart states okay, thank you. Mr. Glenn Updike addressed the board. I am Glenn Updike from Newsoms. First of all, I would like to thank the Planning Commission. They set up standards that are going to be hard to live up to. They listened to every citizen and they responded. They didn’t cut anybody off. They listened and studied and came up with a fair agreement. They didn’t play politics with it. They came straight forward, answered the questions, and did what was proper. That is a standard that this whole community need to look up to. I thank them from the bottom of my heart for the morals and standards that they set for the county. Alright, so much for the good news, and now for the bad news. I will say you all don’t have to feel bad when you call me a redneck bigot. I am from the mountains and us old mountaineers have our own set of values, morals, and understanding of common decency. This past week these directive statements to the schools, if you don’t listen to me I am going to blackmail you; I am going to hold money. That is completely beyond anybody’s comprehension of common decency. I have little grandchildren eight and under. They don’t even want us in the room when they are changing clothes. So, what do you think about these children at school, at the recreation centers, and things where they have to dress a child, you might as well say open to the public. I can’t fathom… how can this be beneficial to the county. If you allow molestation to my grandchildren from this reaction or laws and mandates, you will have to build at least one more jail cell in the county because I will be looking for a home. The main thing I wanted to say is this is something we can’t sit back and say nothing. If you sit back and say nothing, you are agreeing with it. I can’t see us as citizens with moral values not standing up on the roof top and yelling at high levels this is wrong for our children, grandchildren, and future generations. Even animals have common decency. When a cow gives birth to her calf, she is not going to lie down in the middle of the herd. She goes and gets a private place to have her calf. So, animals even have some respect for society and their development. So, what I am asking is it is time for every citizen, even this board, to send letters to every elected official in the state and nationally. Tell them to get off their butts and make some common decency decisions on this proposition. This is beyond all comprehension that this will take place, and to be blackmailed on top of it is just beyond anybody’s common decency. I would like to recommend that we as a county go on record, and take this old redneck bigot from the mountains; I have been fascinated by the city type of values. I recommend you all consider writing a letter of recommendation to our representatives to get off their butts and make corrections on this situation. I will cut out right there. I will say some more later.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Bradshaw addressed the board. Good evening gentlemen; my name is Michael Bradshaw and I live on Willis Road in the Hunterdale District. I also own property in the Newsoms district. I will be brief as possible, but I will tell you a little bit about myself first. I am 48 years old and I have been here all of my life; either in Franklin or Southampton County. I have lived in Southampton County just as much as I have lived in the City. I have given the last 20 years of my life as a public servant throughout the City or the County as a Volunteer Fire Fighter and an EMT. I also coach football with the Franklin Mustang Youth Organization. I am a member of the Courtland Youth Athletic Association and was involved in building the baseball fields and softball fields in Sebrell. So, I am here and I am not going anywhere. I love this community and I appreciate you gentlemen giving your time back to the community the same way I try to. All I want to say is the Camp Parkway project is not a good idea. They don’t have any solid plan that is proof that it will help the county with industry. If they come back tomorrow with something that has a low impact on the community and will bring instant jobs and instant income to the county, I will be standing here supporting them. But, right now all they have given us is a dream. Right now, as Mr. Tyler pointed out, is a perfect place to have medium income homes which certainly matches the income of most of our residents. Instead of building homes that are $350,000, we can build $150,000 homes or less there and get young families in. That is what our county needs to make us survive and strive. I hope you guys understand we have enough industrial zoned land in the county that is not being utilized. We don’t need to take a prime piece of real estate and put it in industrial zoning with just a dream. I hope you guys can see it my way. You have a good night and thanks again. Mr. Jason Fowler addressed the board. Good evening; my name is Jason Fowler and I live in Courtland. I want to change gears a little bit and bring up the courthouse project. I know there is a committee that is looking into this, but I just wanted to make sure that committee is being open. I would like to see presentations on what the committee is discussing, and see what we can get out to the public before it gets too far along; part location and what is going to be done with that courthouse. Chairman Jones states anyone else? There was no response and comment period was closed. Chairman Jones states we will go to number five, the approval of the minutes. Does anyone have any problems with the minutes? If not, minutes stand approved. We will go to number six, highway matters. Mr. Michael Johnson states item A, Mr. Chairman, as we discussed last month, the Commonwealth Transportation Board hosted a public meeting in Thursday, May 12th in the Regional Building in Chesapeake to solicit input on its Draft Six-Year Improvement Program. Supervisors Cook and Supervisor Porter joined me in attending, and you have a copy of remarks offered on your behalf. Chairman Jones states does anyone have any questions? Alright, item B. Mr. Michael Johnson states I was contacted in mid-March by Tommy Catlett, P.E., VDOT’s Area Land Use Engineer regarding some housekeeping measures associated with Agri-Park Drive and Mill Creek Drive. Despite the fact that VDOT had been maintaining both of these roadways since their respective construction warranties expired, they had never officially been accepted into VDOT’s secondary system. The matter was quickly resolved and we subsequently received confirmation that both roadways have now been officially added to the secondary system. The net change in the County’s overall secondary mileage is +0.53 miles. We are also working on some loose ends associated with Enviva Way. I am waiting receipt of the final plat establishing the metes and bounds of the right-of-way. I hope to have that along with an official resolution for your consideration next month. Chairman Jones states alright sir. Mr. Michael Johnson states item C, for your reference, you will find a copy of the Draft Secondary Six-Year Improvement Plan. This will be advertised for public comment next month. It provides only $227,313 in new funds for FY 2017. The plan sets aside an additional $168,173 towards the

May 23, 2016

paving of Guy Place Road. That means another $432,000 will still be necessary before that project can be completed. The plan also sets aside an additional $56,598 towards widening and improving Governor Darden Road. There is still another $1.15 million necessary before that project moves forward. Finally, it sets aside $2,542 for safety improvements. You can see with only $227,000 a year in funding it takes a long time to accrue enough funding to move these projects forward. Chairman Jones states alright, we will go to item D. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor West. Supervisor West states not at this time. I am glad to see mowing taking place along the shoulders. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Faison. Supervisor Faison states not at this time. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Porter. Supervisor Porter states not at this time. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Cook. Supervisor Cook states not at this time. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Edwards. Supervisor Edwards states nothing new at this time. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Phillips. Supervisor Phillips states I would just like to ask Mike to thank the highway department. At least in my district, they are doing some trimming along the side of the roads where the tree limbs were hitting the car antennas. It is welcomed improvement. For those of us that farm and try to move equipment down the road, they are taking trees that are leaning across the road and cutting them down before they fall. I would suggest if people have comments or concerns to make your Supervisor aware of these so they can be pointed out to VDOT. Chairman Jones states Mr. Johnson can you check with the state in regards to Pleasant Grove Church having a marquee out front. They want to know how close to the highway can they put that marquee. Mr. Michael Johnson states that would be a function of the zoning ordinance. Mrs. Lewis can answer that for you. Chairman Jones states Mrs. Lewis how close can it be? Mrs. Beth Lewis states there is not a specific setback for ground signs. The permit application just needs to include the site distance triangle so we can make sure that cars can pull in and out of the driveway safely after the fact. The setback for a building is 50 feet, but signs don’t need to be that far. Chairman Jones states I also have a complaint at Jones Drive. When you are coming out of Jones Drive to the north, you can’t see east. There are some trees in the yard and you can’t see down the road at that curve. The trees need to be trimmed up. Mr. Michael Johnson states so if I am coming out of Jones Drive and look east, my site distance is obstructed. Chairman Jones states your site distance is obstructed because of trees hanging out onto the highway. Also, I am still getting complaints about the abandoned house on Tennessee Road. The grass needs cutting again. Alright, we will go to number seven, appointments.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states item A, Mr. Chairman, is appointments to the Department of Social Services Administrative Board. We have three member’s term on that board that is set to expire June 30th. That includes the terms for Moses Wyche, Carl Faison who represents the Board of Supervisors, as well as Barbara Ellsworth. All three are eligible for reappointment and have agreed to serve if appointed. Just for reference, the other two members of the Department of Social Services Administrative Board are Ms. Marcia Garriss who term expires June 30, 2018 and Ms. Anita Felts who term expires June 30, 2019. Chairman Jones states okay, we need a separate motion for each individual. Supervisor Phillips made a motion to reappoint Mr. Moses Wyche to the Department of Social Services Administrative Board. Supervisor West seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Supervisor West made a motion to reappoint Mr. Carl Faison as the Board of Supervisors representative to the Department of Social Services Administrative Board. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Supervisor West made a motion on behalf of Chairman Jones to reappoint Mrs. Barbara Ellsworth to the Department of Social Services Administrative Board. Supervisor Porter seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to item B. Mr. Michael Johnson states item B is the appointment to the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC) and Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO). Mr. Porter’s term on HRPDC as well as his appointment as the county representative with certain voting rights under our Memorandum of Agreement with HRTPO are both set to expire on June 30th. Mr. Porter is eligible for reappointment to vote. Chairman Jones states Mr. Porter are you accepting that again. Supervisor Porter states I am willing to do it but I am not opposed to someone else doing it, but I will be happy to do it again. Supervisor West made a motion to reappoint Mr. Porter to the HRPDC for another two-year term and further authorize him to exercise voting rights with the HRTPO in accordance with the terms of our Memorandum of Agreement. Supervisor Cook seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states we will go to number eight, reports; Sheriff’s Office, Animal Control, Litter Control, Building Permits, Solid Waste Quantities, Personnel Mr. Johnson. Mr. Michael Johnson states a few personnel items to report. We had two employees hired during the month. Effective May 2nd in the Department of Public Utilities, Aaron C. Fisher, hired at $30,418 and Delbert E. Blythe hired effective May 9th in the Department of Public Utilities at $30,418. We will have one retirement at the end of this month effective May 31st. Keith Jackson also in the Department of Public Utilities will be retiring with more than 30 years of service to the County. Chairman Jones states okay, Shared Services Committee. Supervisor Porter states we really don’t have anything new tonight. We can say that SPSA has worked out their operating agreements and their Use and Support Agreements; as you know because you have already signed the agreement in accordance with our resolution we did a couple of months ago. We are still trying to push the Utility Project ahead, and we have another meeting Wednesday night.

May 23, 2016

Supervisor West states speaking of the Utility Project, the funding that is needed for evaluating the two systems will be in July 1st budget. We are waiting on that funding so the City of Franklin funds and Southampton County funds can come together and establish a value for the system, and then we will be able to determine if there will be an Authority or see what the situation may be. Chairman Jones states alright, are there any other questions? If not, we will go to number nine, financial matters. Mr. Michael Johnson states item A, Mr. Chairman, is consideration of the FY 2017 Annual Budget. You have a copy of the final budget that was advertised in the Tidewater News on May 1st included in your agenda packages. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen, any comments on the budget. We have been through this a lot of times. Supervisor West states when we had a public hearing at Southampton High School and I specifically counted, there were 27 people present and 5 or 7 spoke. With that being said, the proposed budget does have increases as far as real estate taxes, the fees for water and sewage, and the fees for automobile licensing fee. With the input that we received there was no real objections, but I am sure no one cares to pay more taxes, but the county has bought what it could to each request. The increase is 5 cents on the real estate. With that being said, we have to move forward. Tonight I am ready to vote on this and move forward. Chairman Jones states any other discussion. Supervisor Porter states I would love to make some changes but I am afraid at this time there are no changes we can afford and we can’t afford to make any changes in the other direction either. I think this is a minimal budget. We need more money. We need lower taxes, but I think this is the best we can do right now. Chairman Jones states alright, any other comments. Supervisor Edwards states I think everybody should know that the school system did receive the line share of the increase which they needed. Nothing was wasted here and I think it was an extremely good budget. It was the best we could do. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Phillips. Supervisor Phillips states to follow up on what Dr. Edwards said the newspaper article said that 71% of the increase will go to help fund the schools. I would like to recap what we are doing. It is our job as a Supervisor to provide the residents of Southampton County with the best education possible and public safety with the available resources. I would like to thank the school board for its cooperation as we have worked together to create a workable budget for FY 2017. We are making an effort to address some of the budget shortfalls in the past with our current budget. We have also added another five school buses to the fleet again this year. This year we are addressing several things that we have been putting off; not to mention we are faced with a state mandate of reassessment which will take between 18 – 24 months and that will began here shortly. The county classification and compensation study which has been ongoing will be implemented over the next three years. The plan is to give fair evaluation for the work that the county employees are asked to perform. Third, the county will began a fixed asset evaluation as Supervisor West commented on which is the next step in determining whether or not the proposed creation of a joint water and sewer Service Authority is in the best interest of both Southampton and the City of Franklin. I would echo what Mr. Porter said; we have a flat budget and we refunded an individual $40,000 that was left over from a tax sale. That was about how much increase we had in our operating budget this year. So, we are pretty much at a zero. With that said, I am not in favor of raising taxes except there comes a point when we have to. We thank you for your input and your comments. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Cook. Supervisor Cook states I am good with the comments. I know what we have gone through and talked about so I am good.

May 23, 2016

Supervisor Faison states I would like to say that the county faces stern amounts of responsibilities. It would be nice to fund everybody for their request. Even with what we have done, we have increased the tax rate on real estate by 5 cents and I don’t see how we could do any more than that. I am certainly satisfied with what we have done. Chairman Jones states everybody has spoken and we are ready for a motion. Supervisor West made a motion to adopt the FY 2017 annual budget as attached. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to B, consideration of the FY 2017 annual tax rates. Supervisor West states in order to adopt the budget we have to adopt the tax rates. Supervisor West made a motion to adopt the attached ordinances establishing FY 2017 annual tax levy and increase the motor vehicle license tax to $28 for private passenger motor vehicles. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states we will go to item C. Supervisor West states I had already made reference that the water and sewer rates would go up. I think they are moderate in increase. Mr. Johnson, $1 to $2? Mr. Michael Johnson states it is $1 on the base rate and $1 on the incremental rate per 1,000. Supervisor West states so that was held to the minimum. At this time, I will make a motion to adopt the attached ordinance establishing the water, sewer, and solid waste fees for FY 2017. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states now we will pay the bills. Supervisor West made a motion to authorize payment of the monthly bills. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion to pay the bills in the amount of $1,917,221.77 to be paid by check numbers 147235 through 147592. The motion carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number ten, public hearings. Mr. Michael Johnson states our first public hearing tonight, Mr. Chairman, is held pursuant to Sections(s) 15.2-1427 and 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended to consider a request by Daniel and Jocelyn Jenkins, owners, for a zoning map amendment form CR-2, Conditional Residential, to A-1, Agricultural, to permit the construction of a manufactured home. The property is 1.09 acres in size, is known as Tax Parcel 67-51K, and is located on the west side of Tennessee Road (SR 722) approximately 1,060’ south of its intersection with Southampton Parkway (US 58). The property is in the Drewryville Voting and Magisterial District. The notice of public hearing was published in the Tidewater News on May 8 and May 15, 2016 and all adjacent property owners were notified as required by law. Following its public hearing on April 14, 2016 the Southampton County Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the zoning map amendment. After conclusion of the public hearing, the Board of Supervisors will consider the comments offered this evening and will proceed to approve, deny, or defer action on the request. Mrs. Beth Lewis, Secretary to the Planning Commission, will provide introductory remarks after which all interested parties are invited to come forward and express their views. Mrs. Beth Lewis states good evening. Until 2006, this property had A-1 zoning. In 2006, Mr. Jenkins requested a zoning map amendment to Conditional Residential-2 to build a triplex on the property. He was planning to build some affordable housing on this piece of property. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors approved that request. That development

May 23, 2016

didn’t take place, and now Mr. Jenkins would like to be able to permit his daughter to install a residence on this property. In the CR-2 zoning district, manufactured homes are not permitted. The only zoning districts manufactured homes are permitted housing type is the A-1 and A-2 zoning district. Mr. Jenkins has requested to amend the zoning back to the A-1 zoning district to permit the installation of one manufactured home on this property for his daughter. It is a one acre piece of property. It has plenty of road frontage. He turned in a survey in 2006 that showed a structure fitting within the setbacks with the appropriate drain field. This request for a one single family residence is much more in keeping with the area on Tennessee Road than a triplex would have been. Mr. Jenkins is here if you have any questions. Chairman Jones states this is a public hearing; is there anyone here for or against this application? There was no response and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Jones states this is in my district and I am glad to see a house come there instead of what has been there. It is a good change and I am for it. Mr. Jenkins is here if anyone has any questions for him. Supervisor West made a motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendation and approve the zoning map amendment. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to B. Mr. Michael Johnson states, Mr. Chairman, the second public hearing tonight is held pursuit to Section 15.2-1427 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to consider an ordinance amending Article II, Chapter 2 of the Southampton County Code by adding Section 2-26 establishing biennial elections and staggered terms for the Board of Supervisors beginning with the General Election of 2019. The notice of public hearing was published in the Tidewater News on May 8 and May 15, 2016 as required by law. After conclusion of the public hearing, the Board of Supervisors will consider the comments offered this evening and will proceed to approve, deny, or defer action on the proposed ordinance. Chairman Jones states this is a public hearing. Is there anyone for or against this ordinance amendment? Mr. Glenn Updike addressed the board. I am Glenn Updike. I really don’t think the public has had the opportunity to really think about what this proposal really means. I reject the idea on the basis that new board members cannot understand and function as well as the members that have been on the board for quite a few years. I just want to remind you, I remember years ago we had a big line up out here in the audience begging and pleading the county not to overbuild the sewage system but it ended up on deaf ears. Those that were on the board at that time, there wasn’t a single new member on it. If we had new members from the audience we would at least have had a voice on this decision. New members are not the only ones that can make bad decisions. That was a huge gigantic failure. You can put it any way you want to, but it was a failure in overbuilding the sewer system to a tune of about $30 million. We are paying for it right now. So, to imply that we need to change the system because of new members will make wrong decisions; everybody make wrong decisions. It is not just new members. People run a business and have families out here in the county all the time. The only difference between that and the Board of Supervisors is they have to live within their budget; when they run out of money that is it. People who come on the board; to say they can’t make proper decisions, that doesn’t make any sense. We can just raise taxes, and that happens year after year after year; raise the real estate, personal property, or fees. So, to change it for the simple purpose of stating that the new members can’t make proper decisions is wrong. If you place them on alternate years, one group will be running at the same time as the Governor. You will become the face of the party. The citizens will not be concerned about the local election. They will be concerned about the state and will vote state party lines whether it is Democratic or Republicans to accommodate the parties. So, you are losing the independence of these three or four members. They will be dictated by the state. The turnout for local elections versus state elections is close to a 15% difference in voter turnout; now, I haven’t looked that up exactly. I think you need to look at the outside influence on local elections. You know what

May 23, 2016

happens in state elections. This could come all the way down to local elections. So, take the time to really think about it and evaluate it; just to change it so you can only get three or four new members on the board at any one time… to say you have to have two or three years of training. To be honest with you, that doesn’t pass the smell test to me. Supervisor West states in your opinion. Mr. Glenn Updike states certainly in my opinion it doesn’t pass the smell test. It is not appropriate. Chairman Jones states anyone else. If not, the public hearing is closed. Alright board members, what do you say? Supervisor Edwards states I say it has much to do about nothing. I don’t really understand what the problem is. I have looked at it and listened to it. So what if most of the board got wiped out if that is what the people would want? We had four new members that came on several years ago and the county didn’t suffer. I just wonder what is really behind this because the county has operated like this for a long time without any problems. To tell you the truth, if all of us dropped dead tonight Mike Johnson could still handle it. So, I really don’t understand why we are doing this. I don’t think it is fair to whoever runs for election and I don’t think it is fair to the voters. I have said if you want to do this I would be very happy to vote for it if we have four volunteers, but I haven’t heard any volunteers who want to do this, unless I am going to hear them tonight. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Phillips. Supervisor Phillips states I would say prior to coming on this board I stood before this board and urged the board to consider staggered elections. I have seen what has happened in Isle of Wight County and I do disagree with Mr. Updike. I think anything that you do there is a period of time as you begin to do it you adjust and learn better how to do it I don’t care what it is. I feel that it would be in the County’s best interest if three are replaced or four are replaced, to have some experience whether it is a Chairman or whatever. We need to maintain some experienced Supervisors on the board, and that is why I was in favor of it and still am in favor of it. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Faison. Supervisor Faison states I am in favor of it because even though it doesn’t seem likely that there could be a total turnover I think if we put it in place that we have staggered elections it eliminates that possibility. I think it is good that there are some persons on the board when a new person comes on. There are some things that seem a certain way until you are in that position. I think it would benefit the county by having staggered elections. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor West. Supervisor West states I am going to say that I am in favor of staggered elections for the simple reason it will be announced before the election by draw from the Registrar’s Office which districts will be running for two years and which districts will be running for four. So, you will know that up front. Contrary to what I just heard from the public, you do not pick up on this job. You come with preconceived ideas that are quite different when you get and sit in this position, and it is not automatic. It is not that you know it. You have a lot of good ideas and you bring those ideas and I respect those ideas. To answer another question tonight, and whoever the rumor mongering is which people seem to enjoy in Southampton County these days, there are no preconceived, preset, no need to have a public hearing, or anything else for that reason. Whether it is Camp Parkway or something else, these things are not done. For anyone that has a preconceived idea that we get together and we make up our minds and we do these things. That does not happen. Laugh at this please; I am not that smart. I wish I was, but I am not able to do that. With that being said, I feel that you will know who the two year term is and you will know who the four year term is. Three will be and four will be, and that is the way that it is. I am in favor of it. It gives longevity to the board with experience at the same time. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Porter. Supervisor Porter states I have always been concerned about this problem since I have been on the

May 23, 2016

board. It is not about four new board members it is about seven new board members. I think seven new board members at one time can paralyze the board. You would probably have a year that you wouldn’t get anything done, and I don’t think it is Mr. Johnson’s job to run the county. It is Mr. Johnson’s job to run the county with the oversight of the board based on the policies and procedures the board approves and instructs him to do. If there is no one to do that, the county doesn’t move no matter how good the person is in the Administration job. I proposed this two years ago and the board turned it down. I think some people have thought about it since then, and they see the merit to it. We talk about it is not fair to the person that is running for two years, but personally I don’t care about the person running. I care more about the county. It’s about looking out for what is best for the county. It is not necessarily what is good for the candidate. The candidate will know ahead of time whether they are running for two years or four years. As far as volunteers, the law doesn’t allow us to volunteer so that is a moot point. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Cook. Supervisor Cook states I have heard all of the comments and I agree with the staggered elections. I have talked to some other communities and a couple has had problems. Some do have staggered elections and they like them for the things that we have talked about tonight; that you don’t have the entire board running at the same time. They think it is in the best interest of their community to have it staggered so you have some new members along with old members coming on. So, I am in favor of it. Chairman Jones states alright, are there any other comments or questions? If not, I need a motion. Supervisor Porter made a motion to approve the attached ordinance in regards to biennial elections and staggered terms. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion. Supervisor Porter, Supervisor Faison, Supervisor Cook, Supervisor West, and Supervisor Phillips voted in favor of the motion. Supervisor Edwards voted against the motion. The motion passed. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number eleven. Mr. Michael Johnson states since the advert development of our Geographic Information System (GIS), we’ve periodically received requests from private companies for certain geographic data (road centerlines, municipal/county boundaries, building footprints, address points, tax parcels, voting districts, etc.). We’ve historically considered this a public service and provided the data free of charge despite the fact that there is expense associated with maintaining this data and staff time associated with processing the request. The number of requests has continued to grow to the point where we receive approximately 20 requests per year. In order to recover our costs, Mrs. Wright has developed the attached policy for your consideration. The policy provides that all requests must be in writing (email is sufficient). There will be no more customized requests. We will provide a standardized set of data that includes 11 different shape files, which should sufficiently address all requests we typically receive. The cost of the data set is a flat $300 which must be paid in advance. The fees are expected to generate approximately $6,000 - $12,000 annually, depending upon the number of request, which should sufficiently cover our costs in maintaining/updating the data and processing these requests. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen; you heard what Mr. Johnson said. Supervisor Porter states I think we need to do it. I make a motion to adopt and implement the attached GIS Digital Distribution Policy. Supervisor West seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number twelve.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states item number twelve, Mr. Chairman, our Department of Utilities was recently contacted by T-Mobile with an interest in leasing space on the Newsoms elevated water tank to install an antenna for wireless communication. Attached for your consideration is their boilerplate lease agreement which includes their standard terms and conditions. The agreement provides that they have a 1-year option in which to exercise their rights to install the antenna. If they exercise that option, the initial term of the lease is 5 years with five (5) automatic renewals of 5 years each unless they provide written notice prior to expiration of the term. So, you are looking at an initial term of 5 years and then 5 successor automatic 5-year renewals; you are really talking about a 30 year lease here. After 30 years, the agreement transitions to a year-to-year lease. They are proposing an initial rental rate of $1200 per month ($14,400 annually) with a 10% increase at each 5-year renewal followed by a 2% annual escalation once the lease transitions to year-to-year. This is an opportunity to capitalize on an existing asset, generate cash for our Enterprise Fund and improve communications in the Newsoms area. Accordingly, from the staff level we’re recommending that you authorize us to execute the agreement in substantially the form presented here tonight in accordance with the terms I just outlined. Supervisor Cook states I am pleased with the opportunity to get any help on cell phone coverage in Newsoms. It looks like a great opportunity to use an existing water tower. There is not a lot of work to get this thing going, and I think they will jump at the opportunity to exercise the agreement. I make a motion to authorize staff to execute the agreement in substantially the form presented herewith in accordance with the terms outlined. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number thirteen. Mr. Michael Johnson states item thirteen, Mr. Chairman, as you recall, legislation approved by the General Assembly in 2013 established the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF) imposing an additional 0.7% sales tax and 2.1% state tax on wholesale distributors of motor fuels in all localities that comprised Planning District 23, including Southampton County; that actually started July 1, 2013. These special revenues are paid into the state treasury and credited to the HRTF, along with any interest earned on them and used solely for new construction projects on new or existing roads, bridges, and tunnels in the localities in Planning District 23. The fund is managed by the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC), created by the legislature in 2014. HRTAC is responsible for determining how the new regional money will be invested in transportation projects in Hampton Roads. The HRTAC is currently comprised of the chief elected officer of each of the 14 Counties and Cities embraced by the Commission, three State Delegates and two State Senators, and four nonvoting Ex-Officio members. In counties, chief elected officer is defined as the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. Chairman Jones has represented Southampton County since July 1, 2014. Recently adopted legislation (SB 476) provides that beginning July 1, 2016, any member of the governing body from the four counties embraced by the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (the Commission) may represent the county on the Commission provided that he/she is appointed by resolution of the governing body. Accordingly, HRTAC has requested that each of the four counties confirm their appointee by resolution of the governing body. I have it on your agenda tonight, and I assume our counterparts in Isle of Wight, York County, and James City County are doing likewise. Chairman Jones states Mr. Porter already has a meeting earlier that day. He is on the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission. This is right after that and they are both combined and he can handle both of them. I have to sit there for three hours. We get there at 9:30 and my meeting starts at 12:30. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Porter have to wait for me and I have to wait for them. I would like to nominate Mr. Porter to be appointed to the HRTAC for a term ending December 31, 2019 by adopting the attached resolution. Can I get a second? Supervisor West seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number fourteen, First Reading. Mr. Michael Johnson states Mr. Chairman, establishment of local no wake zones is authorized pursuant to Section 29.1-744 of the Code of Virginia. As you may be aware, the Southampton County Code currently establishes four (4) separate “No-Wake” zones on the Nottoway River east

May 23, 2016

of the General Vaughan Bridge. The first is located at the public boat landing and extends 300 feet in each direction. Another is located near the former Dockside restaurant in the Nottoway Shores subdivision and extends 1,200 linear feet north of the marina and 900 linear feet south. There are two other no-wake zones established in-between these two near the sharp bend in the river and extending to a point where the Blackwater and Nottoway River(s) nearly meet, and sometimes do meet during flood events. Currently, there is a 1,000 foot “gap” between these two no-wake zones. This gap actually exacerbates shoreline erosion on the southern end of zone E and the northern end of zone F with boaters waiting to throttle back until they near the buoy markers. It has been suggested that combining these two existing no-wake zones, thereby eliminating the 1,000 feet gap, would resolve the issue with shoreline erosion. It also reduces the number of buoys that must be maintained. Included in your agenda packages tonight is a first reading ordinance for your consideration that combines these two no-wake zones and eliminates that 1,000 foot gap between the two. If you think this concept has merit, you will need to advertise this for public comment next month before considering it. Just so you will know the total length of that zone in the center will now be 3,650 linear feet. It will be a long no-wake zone.

Supervisor West states it sounds okay to me. Supervisor Faison states it sounds like it makes sense but I don’t boat out there so I would like to hear from the public and get their opinion.

May 23, 2016

Supervisor Edwards states does anyone know how many dwellings are in that section? Mr. Michael Johnson states there are a group of dwellings located at the end of Forks of the River Road. There is a group of dwellings at the Old Smith’s Ferry. The area through here is pretty much undeveloped. A lot of people refer to this as Atkinson Beach. The Atkinson family owns a fairly long stretch through there with some cottages and recreational areas. Supervisor West states who has to maintain the buoys? Mr. Michael Johnson states the buoys are maintained by Southampton County so certainly that is an added benefit. You would be doing away with four buoys. The life of the buoys really depend on river conditions, but on average we get six to seven years of life out of a buoy before we have to… it is a fairly extensive process. You have to send a diver in the water with stainless steel hardware to get it anchored like it needs to be. It is not something easy to do and the Sheriff’s Office installs those, maintains them, and enforces the no-wake zones. Supervisor West states well I want to ask a question. That area there from A-E, why isn’t that being considered as well for no-wake? You go into a bend, and I know how boaters do; they gun it until they get there, they back off of it, and then they gun it again. That does tear away at the shoreline. Mr. Michael Johnson states I suspect the reason is there is absolutely no development between those two zones. The area in that 1,000 foot gap we are talking about there is development along the river where the property owners are concerned about shoreline erosion. Supervisor West states are there a number of piers, lights, and boathouses? Mr. Michael Johnson states in these two areas yes. Supervisor West states it comes across to me as a need. I see it as a good thing. Chairman Jones states so let’s at least have a public hearing on it and see what people have to say. Any other comments? Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Cook? Supervisor Cook states no. I agree that we should get the public’s input. I don’t know anything about boating either. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Porter. Supervisor Porter states I think we need to listen to the public on this one. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Phillips. Supervisor Phillips states I would be in favor of a public hearing. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Edwards. Supervisor Edwards states likewise; I would like to hear from the people who use the river there. Chairman Jones states alright, I need a motion. Supervisor West made a motion to advertise the draft ordinance for public comment next month. Supervisor Faison seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to number fifteen. Mr. Michael Johnson states as you all are aware the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Camp Parkway Commerce Center drew more than 25 public speakers and lasted almost 3.5 hours.

May 23, 2016

I would anticipate similar public participation at your public hearing. Accordingly, I believe it is prudent to consider scheduling this public hearing on some evening other than your regular monthly meeting. Subject to your approval, I’m seeking your consideration in scheduling the public hearing at Southampton High School. I had suggested sometime during the week of June 20-23. Subsequently, I have learned that Supervisor West will be out of town that week. Subject to your discussion, you may want to reconsider that time. It is certainly up to you all when you would like to act on the application. I know one of the public speakers tonight requested that you consider acting on it the same night that you receive public comment. That is certainly from a legal standpoint appropriate. Once the public hearing is closed, you certainly can go ahead and act on it if you are prepared to act on it at that time. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen, let’s have some dates. I would like for everybody to be there. I don’t want part of the board missing that night. I want everybody, if possible, to be at the public hearing. Supervisor West states in the interest of public input I do want to be there and I have had an opportunity to speak with Mr. Faison and others on dates they can and cannot go. I am not saying this is the date but July 5th seems to work. That would be a Tuesday evening, but again, I would like input from you guys. I want to be there and I want input myself. Chairman Jones states is that good for everyone. Supervisor Edwards states I think July 5th would be appropriate at 7:00 p.m. Supervisor West states and advertise for the High School if it is available. Mr. Michael Johnson states I will need to check with the High School to make sure the auditorium is available. If it is agreeable with this board, your motion should be to schedule the public hearing on Tuesday, July 5th at 7:00 p.m. at Southampton High School if it is available. If it is unavailable, it would be here. We would know before we advertise the public hearing whether that venue is available or not, and the ad will specifically say where the public hearing is held. Supervisor West states and we will vote it up or down at that time? Mr. Michael Johnson states that is up to you. Chairman Jones states that is up to the board. Okay, board members what do you think? Okay, I need a motion? Supervisor West made a motion to schedule the public hearing for Camp Parkway on Tuesday, July 5th at 7 p.m. at Southampton High School Auditorium. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman Jones states let’s go to miscellaneous. Mr. Michael Johnson states there are a couple of things for your reference. You will see a notice in there from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources that they’ve received a completed nomination for the Courtland Rosenwald School to the National Historic Register. The nomination will officially be presented to the Virginia State Review Board and Virginia Board of Historic Resources on June 16. Preservation of the building and preparation of the nomination form has been a true labor of love for Mrs. Maxine Nowlin and her fellow board members at the Courtland Community Center. You may recall their efforts last fall in obtaining a historic highway marker at the site. That is for your information. There are also a number of public notices related to ground water withdrawal permits, wastewater discharge permits, environmental violations, notices of foreclosure, and SCC notices. All of those things are included in your package and I will be glad to answer any questions if you have any about those. There are also correspondence in here from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regarding comments on environmental issues for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Finally, there are a couple of newspaper articles for your reading pleasure. Chairman Jones states okay, number seventeen late arriving matters.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states there is one late arriving Mr. Chairman. The Courthouse Planning Committee has met twice in the past three weeks for approximately 90 minutes each time. The discussion has been good. There have been some dissenting opinions expressed. At the May 18 meeting, on a vote 9-2 with 2 members absent that night, the committee did vote to recommend that the Board proceed in developing a request to the circuit court for an election on the question of the removal of the courthouse to a new location, and put the question to the people of the County and the City. Of course prior to actually submitting the request for a writ of election, it is necessary to determine exactly where the courthouse will be removed to, and how much it will cost to acquire the property and construct the new facility. If you all are inclined to accept the Committee’s recommendation, you may wish to refer the tasks of site(s) evaluation and procurement of the architectural services back to the Courthouse Planning Committee. The Committee further approved a second motion on a vote of 11-0 to recommend that any new Courthouse facilities be sufficiently sized to accommodate the Circuit Court and the General District and J&DR Court(s) of both the City and County under one roof. As you know the City currently maintains a separate General District and J& DR Court in their own building. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen you have heard this. We need to let them know where they can go from here. Supervisor Edwards states we need to go ahead and move on this. Time is of the essence in order to get everything set up. As you know, we need to have a voter referendum on this. I recommend that we go ahead and push ahead with this. We have to have most of these things in place by early August or so… Mr. Michael Johnson states if we are trying to make a November election. Supervisor Edwards states as you know, if we move it to a new site, we have to go through the voter referendum process. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor Phillips. Supervisor Phillips states I have two questions. Currently, part of the General District Court is in Franklin. If we kept it the same, there would be a share. Would this make them a 50/50 share in the building of the courthouse? Mr. Michael Johnson states that is a good question. The way the funding reimbursement works, it is based on the proportion of population between the County and the City. To keep the numbers rounded, it is 30% and 70%. The County covers 70% of the cost and the City 30% of the cost. However, for the actual courthouse building cost, because we don’t share 100% of the space, we share the Circuit Court space, the Commonwealth Attorney Office space, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, and the Records Room. However our General District Court and J&DR Court and Combined District Court Clerk’s Office is exclusively Southampton and Franklin has their own facilities in the City. So, when we take that space factor into account, we share roughly 71% of the building. When we figure the cost of operating and maintaining the building, Franklin’s actual share is about 21-22% which is 30% of that 71%. I hope I didn’t confuse you too much. Supervisor Porter states effectively this would actually be favorable to us because it will increase their share of the total cost. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is right. It would move their cost of operating and maintaining the building to the same formula we currently use for the cost of operating the Commonwealth’s Attorney Office and the Clerk’s Office at that full 30% rate. Supervisor Porter states and it would be beneficial to them because they wouldn’t have to maintain separate facilities. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is correct. Supervisor Porter states so everybody wins.

May 23, 2016

Supervisor Edwards states right and in order to have them on board we are going to need to go with this. Supervisor Porter states I think it makes sense. I think the suggestion Mr. Johnson made about having the committee evaluate these critical milestones is important too. I don’t think we have any other people really capable of doing that. I think they are the people that should do it and I would endorse that approach. Mr. Richard Railey states aren’t you going to have to have the General Assembly act to an effect to do away with the City of Franklin General District Court? Mr. Michael Johnson states that is a process Mr. Railey. We have not fully gone down that road. My thought was to call the Supreme Court and have that discussion with them about what that legal process is. I don’t know the answer to that. You may, but I don’t. Mr. Richard Railey states I am not saying I completely know but I know that the Code of Virginia set’s up the City of Franklin General District Court. Mr. Michael Johnson states interesting enough, Franklin when it was created in the early 1960s was called a City of the Second Class under the Code of Virginia. By definition a City of the Second Class maintain its own courts that are not of record which are basically your General District and J&DR Courts. During the latest recodification and the latest adoption of the constitution of Virginia there is no longer a City of the Second Class. That is why we really need to call the people at the Supreme Court to figure out exactly what that legal process might be to put those courts together. Chairman Jones called on Supervisor West. Supervisor West states Mr. Johnson, reading this again; the removal of the courthouse to a new location. Where did I understand that we have to get together and maybe with Franklin, I am not sure? If it is a new location, we have to establish the geotechnical of that area before this new location can be identified; so, you have to expend a certain amount of money up front? Mr. Michael Johnson states the question that will be placed on the ballot is a very simple question and it is framed by the statute. You don’t get to word the question on the ballot. Basically, there are two blanks that we have to fill in. One is where the courthouse will be removed to so the location has to be in the question on the referendum. The second blank that we will have to fill in is the actual cost of construction. Now, you have an order of magnitude cost that is in your planning study that PMA Architect has already completed for you and that in round numbers is $14 million. But, that is the order of magnitude cost that simply looks at the number of square feet that is needed and industry averages for cost of construction of this building type. To get specific cost information, you are going to need to (a) nail down your option on your preferred site so you know what the cost of the property is going to be and (B) there are certain geo technical evaluations that need to be done so you know what degree of site preparation may be necessary on the particular site you are choosing. Will there need to be substantial fill material brought into the site or will the nature of the material on the site be suitable to be able to support the foundation of the building to be done? In addition to that, about 50-60% of the design will need to be done so you know exactly what you are constructing, exactly how it all fits together, and exactly what type of material we are talking about so you will spend several hundred thousands of dollars on options and architectural design just to get the question on the ballot. Supervisor West states with this 9-2 vote we have already started the process… Mr. Michael Johnson states this is an advisory committee. They made a recommendation to you and you have to decide. Supervisor Edwards states the committee is asking for support. Supervisor West states I understand you but still we are going down a slippery slope now. If we do this, and a 9-2 vote agree with this, we will expend, and I quote, “several hundred thousands of dollars.” Then, the voter referendum may come up and say no move.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states this vote doesn’t commit you to that. This vote commits you to procuring the architectural services and find out what the architect is going to charge. Then, you have to authorize that after you know the figure. Let’s figure out where the site is and let’s negotiate the price for the site. Let’s obtain an option and then you know what the price of the property is. Then, you can vote on whether or not to entertain that option, but this is what the committee is recommending. Supervisor West states but the voters can turn it down. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is correct. Supervisor West states and we have expended a substantial amount of money at that point. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is correct. Supervisor Edwards states that is why we have to do a lot of public relations work and inform everybody. We really don’t have a choice. Supervisor Faison states I don’t see how we can go without doing this because then we don’t have anything to present to the public for them to look at to make a decision. Supervisor Phillips states the slippery slope seems to be part of it but basically don’t we have to take a step back because if we combine the two courts, the estimates that Mr. Stodghill gave us were based on the current configuration of the courts. Mr. Michael Johnson states remember what he gave you were a separation of our Combined District Court… Supervisor Phillips states but he was going to add a J&DR Court. Mr. Michael Johnson states that is correct. So, you had under both option three courtrooms and three Clerk’s Offices which would be sufficient for the case load of both localities. Supervisor Phillips states what about the office space…with the Commonwealth’s Attorney being shared between the two localities… Supervisor Porter states we already do. Supervisor Edwards states you may be asking about things we haven’t gotten to yet. Supervisor Porter states Bruce remember right now our J&DR Courts is shared facilities. What will happen is now there will be one J&DR Court, and one General District Court which will have separate facilities instead of Franklin having their own J&DR Court and General District Court. What we are looking at is the design of the new courthouse that was presented to us assumed there would be a separation of those courts already. Supervisor Phillips states I understand. It was going to be included that Southampton has a separate J&DR Court if we had chosen to continue at this location. Supervisor Porter states but our case load does not require us to have separate courts today. The numbers we have incorporate this already. One of the questions I have for Mr. Johnson is we issue financing for the security project which we have sitting in the banking account. Can we use those funds for this preliminary information? Mr. Michael Johnson states that question will have to be posed to the lender, and whether the lender will allow us to use the funds that were borrowed specifically for security improvements for the architectural design for a new facility. But, that is a question for the lender. Supervisor Porter states one of the things too is it doesn’t matter whether we build it off site. If we get turned down, much of the architectural design work should be applicable to rebuilding in the existing location. That means it will cost more money. Unfortunately, you can’t put it on the ballot

May 23, 2016

saying do we spend $12 million to build a new courthouse or $16 million to renovate the existing courthouse. That is probably the magnitude that we are talking about; between $2- $3 million more to renovate the existing courthouse. Supervisor Edwards states the other thing to remember is whatever we do Franklin is going to be in for their fair share. Supervisor Porter states they are going to be in for a full 30%. Supervisor Edwards states so we are not going to be losing anything by doing that. The only thing to me that is a little bit frightening is the referendum. Like Mike said, we are going to have to do that and we will have to do a lot of public relations work. We will have to keep everybody informed of what is at stake here. If we have to go back and renovate that building it will cost us a lot more and then we will have a renovated piece of junk that is still in a flood plain. The people who work there don’t even want to think about the horror of what would happen to the court schedule if we went to renovate that building. Can you imagine trying to hold court over there while trying to tear some of those walls down? Supervisor West states one of the bigger issues is the distance between the ceilings and floors and installing the HVAC along with the materials that go with it. There is some structural impossibility that you will still end up with an inferior product. Chairman Jones states and no parking. Mr. Richard Railey states do all of you understand that putting Franklin and Southampton together makes sense because Franklin only has court on Monday and Southampton on Tuesday. On Wednesday, Franklin has J&DR and on Thursday Southampton has J&DR. Friday is the only duplication and both courts alternate on having civil cases. So, consequently there is a lot of courtroom over here that is not used and you are taking the same judges back and forth. It would be an economies of scale involved. Supervisor Porter states I think the judges are the ones that are pushing the consolidation anyway aren’t they? Mr. Michael Johnson states Judge Brewbaker and Judge Councill are very strong proponents. Supervisor West states is it advisable to say who the two were that voted against it. Mr. Michael Johnson states it is public record. Rick Francis voted against it on the grounds that he preferred a second architectural planning opinion, and Danny Williams voted against it as well. Supervisor Edwards states tell if I got this wrong Mike, but looking at the cost of it is about $75 per year per family. Mr. Michael Johnson states that question came up and we talked about how the project would be financed. We would be looking at 20-25 year financing on the project. We would look at incorporating some of the money we have already identified; Enviva principle payment that will be coming at the tail end of this fiscal year. In round numbers, it is a little bit less than a million dollars. It could be plugged into this project to buy down the initial cost. There are some bond proceeds that are left from the development of the Turner Tract. That basically could be used to pay debt service and free up funds that you are currently appropriating from your General Fund that could now be plugged in to buy down the cost. We could also look at the revenue stream that would be created by your savings from SPSA beginning January 2018. In round numbers, it wouldn’t be any more than a .05 cent increase on the real estate tax rate. So, when you look at .05 cents on an average cost of $150,000 home, you are looking in round numbers at $75 a year. Now we have to flesh all of those numbers out. I am giving you back of the lunch bag math here but we are in the ballpark with it. Supervisor Porter states I don’t think we are at the critical point of financing. At this point, we just need to determine which way we want to go.

May 23, 2016

Mr. Michael Johnson states for all intent and purposes, the two options are fairly close. You are right that there is a $2 million dollar difference, but if you repurpose the existing courthouse they are pretty much even. From a committee standpoint, the discussion was we are going to assume the cost of either way is pretty much even. Which alternative gives us the best long-term solution, and I think the committee felt like asking the people whether or not the new location, new building did that. Chairman Jones states alright gentlemen; we need to let the committee move on. Supervisor West made a motion to accept the Committee recommendation and refer the task of site(s) evaluation and procurement of architectural services back to the Courthouse Planning Committee. Supervisor Porter seconded which carried unanimously. Supervisor Edwards states you all have to realize that everything this committee does is going to come back here. Chairman Jones states I understand that but they still have to do what we ask them to do. Is there anything else to come before us tonight? Mr. Michael Johnson states there is one other item Mr. Chairman. At your places this evening is a copy of the semi-annual Statement of Economic Interest Form which must be completed and returned to me no later than June 15th. This form is filing for all of your economic activity between November 1, 2015 and April 30, 2016. There has been one significant change to the Conflict of Interest Act. That change is I am now required by statute to report any late filings to the Commonwealth Attorney who in turn is required by statute to assess a $250 penalty on anybody who fails to submit this form on time. Please, for your pocketbooks, return the form to me no later than June 15th. Supervisor West states I have to say Mr. Johnson that for the benefit of everybody else that the Governor can do multiple of things and hide millions of dollars and a poor citizen of Southampton County has to fill out a report of this magnitude and prepare it with penalties and everything else. Something is wrong in this country. Mr. Updike, something stinks, do you understand that and it is not the toilets. Chairman Jones states is there anything else to come before us? Supervisor West made a motion to adjourn. Supervisor Edwards seconded the motion which passed unanimously. There being no further business for tonight the meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. ______________________________ Dallas O. Jones, Chairman _____________________________ Michael W. Johnson, Clerk

May 23, 2016

*****THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK*****