Loading...
12-16-2014 Adjourned MeetingAdjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors Monday, December 16, 2014 Adjourned Meeting VIRGINIA: The Adjourned Meeting of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors was held on Monday, December 16, 2014 in the General District Courtroom of the Edwin R. Shields Addition in Chatham, Virginia. Jessie L. Barksdale, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Tim R. Barber Tunstall District James H. Snead Dan River District Brenda H. Bowman Chatham-Blairs District Jerry A. Hagerman Callands-Gretna District Elton W. Blackstock Staunton River District Coy E. Harville Westover District Mr. Clarence C. Monday, County Administrator, Mr. Greg L. Sides, Assistant County Administrator for Planning & Development, Mr. J. Vaden Hunt, County Attorney, Mr. Odie H. Shelton, Jr., Director of Code Compliance, and Ms. Rebecca D. Flippen, Deputy Clerk to the Board were also present. Mr. Barksdale led the Pledge of Alliance. Approval of Agenda Motion was made by Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, to approve the agenda, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Hearing of the Citizens Matthew Speck of the Staunton River District thanked the Board for continuing their fight in the prayer case and then offered a word of prayer. Jerry Dooley, Interim CEO for Danville Regional Medical Center, updated the Board on the status of DRMC’s search for a permanent CEO for both Martinsville-Henry County Memorial Hospital and DRMC. This concluded the Hearing of the Citizens. Public Hearings Rezoning Cases Case 1: Jerry T. Shelton & Vickie C. Shelton- Banister Election District; R-14-045 A-1, Agricultural District to R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District B-2, Business District, General to A-1, Agricultural District Mr. Barksdale opened the public hearing at 7:11pm. Mr. Shelton explained that Jerry & Vickie Shelton had petitioned to rezone a total of 2.678 acres (three parcels) of land, located on SR 904/Burke Road and SR 634/Blue Ridge Drive, in the Banister Election District. The Sheltons wanted to rezone 0.97 acre from A-1, Agricultural District to R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District; to rezone 0.718 acre from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District; and 0.99 acres from B-2, Business District, General to A-1, Agricultural District (to combine with the adjacent parcels of land). The Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Jerry Shelton was present to represent the petition. No one signed up to speak and Mr. Barksdale closed the hearing at 7:13pm. Motion was made by Mr. Barksdale, seconded by Mr. Snead, to approve the petitioners’ request to rezone Case R-14-045 as follows: from A-1, Agricultural District to R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District (0.97 acre); from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District (0.718 acre); and from B-2, Business District, General to A-1, Agricultural District (0.99 acre). The following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Barksdale’s motion to approve the petitioners’ request to rezone Case R-14-045 was unanimously approved. Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 Case 2: Michael R. Jones & Kristy E. Jones – Dan River Election District; R-14-046 R-1 Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District Mr. Barksdale opened the public hearing at 7:15pm. Mr. Shelton explained that Michael & Kristy Jones had petitioned to rezone a total of 24.77 acres, two (2) parcels of land, located on SR 717/Hunters Lane, in the Dan River Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District (to allow for construction of a garage for storage of their personal vehicles on a vacant parcel of land). The Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Mr. Jones was present to represent the case. No one signed up to speak and Mr. Barksdale closed the hearing at 7:15pm. Motion was made by Mr. Snead, seconded by Mr. Barber, to approve granting the petitioners’ request to rezone Case R-14-046 from R-1 to A-1 and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Snead’s motion to approve the petitioners’ request to rezone Case R-14-046 was unanimously approved. Case 3: Shirley Adams Daniel – Chatham/Blairs Election District; R-14-047 R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to B-2, Business District, General Mr. Barksdale opened the public hearing at 7:15pm. Mr. Shelton explained that Shirley Adams Daniel had petitioned to rezone a total of 3.33 acres, four (4) parcels of land, located on U.S. Highway 29 and SR 946/Georges Lane, in the Chatham/Blairs Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to B-2, Business District, General (for future sale of the properties). The Planning Commission, with opposition, recommended denying the petitioner’s request. No one was present to represent the petition. The following citizens signed up to speak in opposition of the rezoning request: George Giles, 293 George Lane, (adjoining property owner) stated it was a quiet and peaceful community place to live; didn’t want the traffic a business would bring in; and felt a crossover there would be dangerous. Willie Bullington, 200 Georges Lane, lives across from the property and didn’t want a business across from his home. Alice Greene, 265 Georges Lane, has lived there for 20 years, stating it was a peaceful neighborhood and didn’t want to see a business coming into it. No one else signed up to speak and Mr. Barksdale closed the hearing at 7:20pm. Motion was made by Ms. Bowman, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, to deny the petitioner’s request to rezone Case R-14-047 from R-1 to B-2 and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale- Yes. Ms. Bowman’s motion to deny the petitioners’ request to rezone Case R-14-047 was unanimously approved. Case 5: Lucas Robert Owen (Continued from November Cycle) – Banister Election District: R-14-044 R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District Mr. Barksdale opened the public hearing at 7:21pm. Mr. Shelton explained that Lucas Owen had petitioned to rezone a total of 45.59 acres, three (3) parcels of land, located on SR 691/Mill Creek Road, in the Banister Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District (to allow for a construction of a storage building for equipment). The Planning Commission, with opposition, had recommended denying the petitioner’s request. The Board of Supervisors had continued this case from their November 18, 2014 adjourned meeting until their December 16, 2014 adjourned meeting. Mr. Owen, who was present to represent his petition, voluntarily submitted a proffer to deed restrict the property to the following conditions: (1) No biosolids shall be spread on the parcels of lands; and (2) No intensive livestock facility shall be placed on the parcels of land. The County Attorney confirmed that as it was filed as deed restrictive, the proffer with stated restrictions would remain with the property regardless of Mr. Owen sold it; the restrictive conditions would still remain in place. Furthermore, setback restrictions left relatively no other agricultural sue for the property other than the petitioner’s intention to construct a storage building. The following citizens signed up to speak in opposition of rezoning the property: Ivan J. Minter, 856 Mill Creek Road; Lester L. Terry, Jr., 756 Mill Creek Road; and Charles L. Minter, Jr., 856 Mill Creek Road. All 3 citizens were concerned that in the future if the property would be used for biosolids or intensive agricultural industry. No one else signed up to speak. Mr. Owen stated that all he wanted the rezoning granted for was to erect a building to store agricultural equipment in and that he voluntarily offered the deed restrictive proffer to help ease the concerns of the surrounding property owners. Mr. Barksdale closed the public hearing at 7:34pm. Motion was made by Mr. Barksdale, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, to approve the petitioner’s request to rezone Case R-14-044 from R-1 to A-1 and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Barksdale’s motion to approve the petitioner’s request to rezone Case R-14-044 was unanimously approved. Public Hearing Public Hearing to solicit comments regarding Pittsylvania County’s application for an amendment to the County’s Enterprise Zone #24. The amendment application proposes to add a total of approximately 176 acres to the area of the current Enterprise Zone. The area to be added consists of approximately 43 acres located in Pittsylvania County and the Town of Gretna, adjacent to Route 40 and U.S. Highway 29, and approximately 133 acres located in the Town of Hurt, encompassing a portion of the former Klopman Mills site on U.S. Route 29 Business. Mr. Monday explained that the County has two Enterprise Zones and that Enterprise Zone 24 was currently before the Board. He further explained the current boundary for Zone 24 encompasses the Berry Hill Industrial Park. This Zone was approved in 2010. The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) regulations governing Enterprise Zone administration stipulate that a Zone will be deactivated if no local or state incentives have been used within a five year period. Zone 57 has been active, but there has been no incentive utilization in Zone 24, the Berry Hill zone. Mr. Monday further commented that the Board was aware that development activity in the Berry Hill Park has been greatly delayed by permitting issues. This year is the end of the five year period. The County has been advised that Zone 24 can be maintained if the County amends the zone boundary before the end of the year to include a project that is eligible for incentive benefits. The County can amend its zone boundaries to include the area around and incorporating the Centra project in the Town of Gretna. The Centra facility qualifies for enterprise zone incentives and the surrounding area also has additional future development potential. It is proposed that Capps Shoes be included in the amended zone. The total area proposed to be added is approximately 43 acres. A locality with an Enterprise Zone has the ability to amend the Zone’s boundaries once per year. Mr. Monday concluded with requesting the Chairman to open the public hearing for comments, and that staff recommendations were that after holding the public hearing, to approve Resolution 2014-12-05 that authorizes the submittal of an application to the DHCD to amend Enterprise Zone 24 as advertised, and authorize staff to sign all necessary documentation. Mr. Barksdale opened the public hearing at 7:42pm. The only person to speak was Bill McBride of Gretna, Virginia, opened by thanking the Board for considering Gretna when amending Enterprise Zone 24. Mr. McBride noted that some of his properties and his partner’s properties were in the enterprise zone and it would help them greatly. Mr. McBride stated that most of the properties in Gretna were going down from McBride Lane going into the hospital, all the hospital property plus property of Capps Shoe Company and the land Mr. McBride lives on. And Mr. McBride likes that. However, he and Mr. Young, his partner, have developed property down U.S. Hwy 40, acquiring lots and houses that would make a great enterprise zone, and didn’t know anything about a proposed amendment to Enterprise Zone 24 until a week prior to the public hearing. He understands the additional land can’t be added presently, but wanted it on recorded that if an amendment cut be done a year from now, it hoped it would be possible to include the property he and his partner are developing. Mr. McBride further added there is 2.3 acres going down between the hotel and the hospital in Gretna, where only ½ of the lot will be in the proposed enterprise zone. In order to attract a business, Mr. McBride, the entire lot would be needed, and he didn’t know what could be done about only ½ of the lot being in the enterprise zone. If someone (a business) acquires the property, can they use the enterprise zone? Or not use? Mr. McBride would also like it on record that if an amendment to Enterprise Zone 24 is filed a year from now, he would like all the land from the nursing home to U.S. Highway 40 included; it has already been rezoned as commercial property and he would love to see it included in the enterprise zone. He concluded with his appreciation that the County was including northern Pittsylvania County in Enterprise Zone 24. Mr. Barksdale thanked Mr. McBride for his comments and asked the Board of they had any questions. Ms. Bowman asked, based on Mr. McBride’s comments, if the application would be amended at this time or would the County have to wait. Mr. Greg Sides, Assistant County Administrator for Planning & Development, stated the application could not be amended at this time without going through a new public hearing process. And that causes an issue in having this application submitted before the end of the year. Mr. Sides stated existing property lines were followed at the time of Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 advertising, but as Mr. McBride stated, staff did not know about some business plans that were in the works. Mr. Sides stated that he did talk to Gretna’s Town Council and found out they had recently rezoned some property. Mr. Sides stated that once the County gets the amendments to the Enterprise Zone currently advertised, the County would be able to amend the zone to include some properties in future amendments. Mr. Blackstock addressed Mr. McBride, stated he too was from the northern end of the County and would help in any way he could to get Mr. McBride’s proposed amendments included in the enterprise zone. Mr. Hagerman told Mr. Sides that he would like to see Mr. McBride’s amendments included during the current Board meeting and was there any reason why it could not be done. Mr. Barksdale told Mr. Hagerman the public hearing was still open and he needed to make sure no one else in the audience wanted to speak on the matter, and then he needed to close the public hearing before there could be discussion by the Board. Mr. Barksdale asked the audience if anyone else wanted to speak; hearing none; he closed the public hearing at 7:49pm. Mr. Barksdale asked what the pleasure of the Board was. Motion was made by Mr. Blackstock, seconded by Mr. Snead, to approve Resolution 2014-12-05 authorizing the submittal of an application to the DHCD to amend Enterprise Zone 24 as advertised, and authorize the County Administrator to sign all necessary documentation. Mr. Hagerman said he didn’t have any problem approving Mr. Blackstock’s motion but he didn’t see any reason why Mr. McBride’s request couldn’t be included in the current application. Mr. Harville stated that question should be referred to Mr. Hunt, the County Attorney. Mr. Hunt stated the application could not include amendments to the enterprise zone that had not been advertised; that there was a deadline of December 31, 2014 this application had to meet; the Board would not be meeting again before the deadline; and that only 1 application for amendments to an enterprise zone per year. Mr. Sides stated the boundary line in the Board’s packet had been advertised and pre-approved by DHCH. If any changes were made, the entire process would have to start from the beginning and would miss the calendar year-end deadline. Mr. Hagerman stated that he understood but he wanted it understood that he wanted an application to amend the enterprise zone to include the property discussed by Mr. McBride submitted as soon as allowed. Ms. Bowman asked would another public hearing be required. Mr. Sides said yes, it would be required as part of the next amendment cycle. Mr. Blackstock stated that at that cycle he would like staff to take a close look at the surrounding properties at the Klopman site to see if the boundaries there also need to be expanded. Mr. Sides pointed out that when the County does an amendment, it is retro-active for the previous year, so any project that occurs during the same calendar year as the enterprise amendment, it the project that has taken place is included. There was no further discussion and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Blackstock’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors RESOLUTION 2014-12-05 VIRGINIA: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Pittsylvania County, Virginia, held on Tuesday, December 16, 2014, the following resolution was presented and adopted: WHEREAS, Pittsylvania County has a designated Enterprise Zone, identified as Zone #24, that provides a combination of State and Local incentives to promote economic development, and WHEREAS, there is a current need to amend the existing Enterprise Zone #24 in Pittsylvania County to incorporate additional properties in and around the Towns of Gretna and Hurt to increase economic growth opportunities, and WHEREAS, this proposed expansion will serve to benefit economic and industrial expansion of Pittsylvania County to meet the goals and objectives of the Virginia Enterprise Zone Program, then Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors authorizes the County Administrator to submit the necessary Enterprise Zone amendment package and sign all necessary documentation on behalf of Pittsylvania County for this proposed Enterprise Zone amendment, and to meet other program administrative and reporting requirements, as defined by the Enterprise Zone Regulations throughout the life of the zone. This concluded the public hearing. Unfinished Business At their December 1, 2014 meeting, motion was made by for the reappropriation of $16,331.37 as follows: $25.79 to County Attorney-Office Supplies (100-4-012210-6001), $1,073.40 to Commissioner of Revenue-Salary (100-4-012310-1100), $199.67 to Clerk of Courts-Copier Lease (100-4-021600-60051), $825.00 to Sheriff-Parts (100-4-031200-6030), $595.80 to Sheriff-Labor (100-4-031200-6031), $100.00 to Fire Marshal-Training & Education (100-4-031700-5540), $61.10 to VFD-United Way Contribution (100-4-032200-5667), $1,307.26 to VFD-Communication Equipment (100-4-032200-6004), $71.50 to Extradition (100-4-033100-5550), $10.00 to Animal Control-Donations (100-4-035100-5883), $100.00 to Youth Commission-Donations (100-4-081200-5696), $180.00 to Ag Economic Development- Marketing (100-4-082500-5656), $80.00 to Awards & Certificates (100-4-091200-5840), $62.50 to VPA-Salaries & Wages (201-4-053100-1100), $7,181.35 to WIA-Other Operating (251-4- 353853-6014), $4,458.00 to Landfill-Repairs & Maintenance (520-4-042300-3310). Mr. Snead’s motion required a 10-Day Layover that had now been met and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Snead’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. At their December 1, 2014 meeting, motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, to authorize appropriation of $24,811.03 to the PCCA line item (100-4-081200- 5641) from unappropriated surplus so that a total of $33,811.03 can be repaid to the VCCA on the behalf of Pittsylvania County Community Action (PCCA) that required a 10-Day Layover, which has now been met. Recently, County Staff was informed that the payback amount is less due to more complete documentation now on file. Therefore, the actual expenditure was reduced in the Repayment Agreement to the revised amount of $31,693.62, which also reduced the appropriation amount required to $22,693.62. Since the appropriation amount was a reduced amount, no further layover was needed and Mr. Harville amended his motion, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, for the appropriation amount to be $22,693.62. The following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Harville’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. At their December 1, 2014 meeting, a motion was made by Mr. Blackstock, seconded by Ms. Bowman, to appropriate $20,000 to the Treasurer’s budget under Line Item #100-4-012410- 3150 Legal, to pay upfront costs for legal services with Taxing Authority Consulting Services, PC (“TAC”). Mr. Blackstock’s motion required a 10-Day Layover, which had now been met and the following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead- Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Blackstock’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. This concluded Unfinished Business. New Business Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Snead, to award the proposal for Property & Casualty Accident & Health Insurance for Pittsylvania County Fire & Rescue to Chesterfield Insurers for 18 months with optional four (4) one-year renewals, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Harville, to approve the appropriation of a $25,000 Danville Regional Foundation Grant received through the Parks & Recreation Department as part of the Make More Happen! Initiative and is to be used for the creation of a walking trail around the Brosville Elementary School ball field, which does not require a local Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 match nor a 10-Day Layover. The following Roll Call Vote was recorded: Mr. Harville-Yes; Mr. Barber-Yes; Mr. Snead-Yes; Mr. Blackstock-Yes; Ms. Bowman-Yes; Mr. Hagerman-Yes; and Mr. Barksdale-Yes. Mr. Barber’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Ms. Bowman, to appropriate $4,677 for the software for the check scanning equipment needed by the Treasurer’s Office to the Capital Improvements Fund (310-4-094100-8118) and $4,823, needs to be placed in the Treasurer’s operating budget in order to pay for the additional amount required for the new letter opener (100-4-012410-3320-Svc Contracts-Office Equipment (497.00) and 100-4-012410-6003- Furniture & Fixtures, for a total appropriation of $9,500.00. Mr. Harville’s motion required a 10-Day Layover. Motion was made by Mr. Snead, seconded by Mr. Harville, to elect to have state reimbursements held in the amount of $181,610 as presented by Kim Van Der Hyde, Director of Finance, summarized as follows: $81,789 from affected departments who offered submitted reductions to various budget lines, and the remainder, $99,821, coming from county fund balance, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Ms. Bowman, to approve the Repayment Agreement between Pittsylvania County Community Action and the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors as follows: (1) Authorize appropriation of $24,811.03 to the PCCA line item (100-4-081200-5641) from unappropriated surplus so that a total of $33,811.03 can be repaid to the VCCS on their behalf; (2) Deduct $3,000 per quarter from PCCA’s County contribution until the County has recovered the entire $33,811.03. A total of $9,000 will come from the FY2015 contribution, $12,000 from the FY2016 contribution, $12,000 from the FY2017 contribution, and the remaining $811.03 from the FY2018 contribution; (3) Terms to include the Board’s condition of no reoccurrences in the four (4) year repayment period. Mr. Harville’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board. REPAYMENT AGREEMENT This REPAYMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made the ___ day of ______, 201_, between the County of Pittsylvania, Virginia (the "County"), a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Pittsylvania County Community Action, Inc. (the “PCCA”), collectively the Parties, individually the Party. RECITALS A. The PCCA provided services to the West Piedmont Workforce Investment Board (“WIB”) as a contracted service provider; and B. During compliance monitoring by WIB staff, documentation deficiencies were noted and reported to the Virginia Community College System (the “VCCS”), as required by the Workforce Investment Act (“WIA”), and included in the VCCS Annual Compliance Report for Program Year 2013; and C. Said document deficiencies were never remedied by the PCCA, resulting in a total of $31,693.62 in provider disallowed services being rendered through the WIA Youth Program for Program Year 2013 by PCCA, and therefore due and owing the VCCS; and D. Pursuant to the Grant Recipient Agreement (“GRA”) with the VCCS, the County is the representative jurisdiction acting on behalf of the West Piedmont Workforce Investment Area, and has the legal responsibility for ensuring the appropriate expenditure of WIA funds by contracted service providers, and is legally required to repay the VCCS for any and all disallowed costs; and E. Accordingly, following a meeting on October 14, 2014, between Party representatives, the PCCA’s Executive Board of Directors fully acknowledged the debt due and owing the VCCS, and authorized the PCCA and the County to enter into a Repayment Agreement, whereby the PCCA would fully repay the County the $31,693.62 it is required under the GRA to repay to the VCCS for the disallowed services rendered. Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I. 1.1. VCCS Repayment by the County. As required by law, following an affirmative majority vote by the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors, the County shall repay the VCCS the total amount of $31,693.62. 1.2. PCCA Repayment to the County. The PCCA shall repay the County the total amount of $31,693.62 for the County’s repayment of the same amount to the VCCS. 1.3. Method of PCCA Repayment. The County shall deduct up to $3,000.00 per quarter from the PCCA’s County contribution, until the County has recovered the entire $31,693.62 due and owing by the PCCA. A total of $9,000.00 will come from the FY2015 contribution, $12,000.00 from the FY2016 contribution, $10,000.00 from the FY2017 contribution, and the remaining $693.12 from the FY2018 contribution. 1.4. Acceleration of Debt Repayment. During the repayment period described in Section 1.3. above, the PCCA shall repay the County the total current repayment amount due the County for the County’s repayment to the VCCS within ten (10) days of a written demand/notice, per Section 2.1., by the County, if, the PCCA, in any formal audit, is found to have any additional document deficiencies, material financial weakness, or material lack of institutional financial controls. 1.5. No Reduction in PCCA’s Core Services. The PCCA shall not reduce or eliminate any core services provided to its clients to offset the deductions in County financial contributions detailed in Section 1.3. The PCCA will offset any deductions in County financial contributions by administrative or personnel reductions or changes. ARTICLE II. 2.1. Notices. Any notice provided or permitted to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and may be served by (i) depositing the same in the United States mail, addressed to the Party to be notified, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or (ii) by delivering the same in person to such party, or (iii) by overnight courier or messenger service that retains regular records of delivery and receipt. All notices shall be effective on the date of receipt or refusal of service. The initial addresses of the Parties for the purpose of notice in the manner described-above under this Agreement shall be as follows: If to the County: Clarence C. Monday Pittsylvania County Administrator 1 Center Street P.O. Box 426 Chatham, Virginia 24531 If to the PCCA: Everlena Ross PCCA Interim-Director 348 North Main Street P.O. Box 119 Chatham, Virginia 24531 Each Party hereto, its successors and assigns, shall have the right from time-to-time by giving written notice to the other Party hereto, to change its address for notices hereunder. 2.2. Recitals. The Parties agree that the Recitals set forth above in this Agreement are true and correct, and the representations, covenants, and recitations set forth therein are made a part hereof for all purposes. 2.3. Authority of the County. The County hereby represents and warrants to the PCCA that the County has full lawful right, power, and authority to execute and deliver and perform the terms and obligations of this Agreement, and all of the foregoing have been or will Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 be duly and validly authorized and approved by all necessary actions of the County. Accordingly, this Agreement constitutes the legal, valid, and binding obligation of the County, and is enforceable in accordance with its terms and provisions. 2.4. Authority of the PCCA. The PCCA hereby represents and warrants to the County that PCCA has full lawful right, power, and authority to execute and deliver and perform the terms and obligations of this Agreement, and all of the foregoing have been or will be duly and validly authorized and approved by all necessary actions of the PCCA. Accordingly, this Agreement constitutes the legal, valid, and binding obligation of the PCCA, and is enforceable in accordance with its terms and provisions. 2.5. Amendment; Waiver. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and executed with the some formality as this Agreement by authorized representatives of the Parties hereto or the Parties themselves. Neither the failure of a party to enforce any provision in this Agreement, nor any breach or default hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of any right herein. 2.6. Consent. Unless otherwise specifically provided herein, no consent or approval by the County or the PCCA permitted or required under the terms of this Agreement shall be valid or be of any validity whatsoever, unless the same shall be in writing, signed by the party by or on whose behalf such consent is given. 2.7. Severability. If any article, section, subsection, term, or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any Party or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the article, section, subsection, term, or provision of this Agreement or the application of same to Parties or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby and each remaining article, section, subsection, term, or provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law, provided that no such severance shall serve to deprive either Party of the enjoyment of its substantial benefits under this Agreement. 2.8. Binding Effect. This Agreement, and each of the provisions hereof, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto, and their respective permitted successors and assigns. Neither party may assign or otherwise transfer its rights or delegate its obligations under this Agreement without written consent of the other party. Any attempted assignment, transfer, or delegation without such consent is void. 2.9. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed, governed, and interpreted in accordance with laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2.10. Venue. All disputes arising under this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate Court of the County of Pittsylvania, Virginia. 2.11. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be a legally binding agreement, in full force and effect, as of the date set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. 2.12. Third-Party Beneficiary. The provisions of this Agreement are for the exclusive benefit of the Parties hereto and not for the benefit of any other third person, nor shall this Agreement be deemed to have conferred any rights, express or implied, upon any third person, unless otherwise expressly provided for herein. 2.13. Non-Exclusive Remedies. Except as otherwise provided herein, no remedy herein conferred or reserved is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every such remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. 2.14. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event it becomes necessary for the County to initiate legal action to enforce its rights and the PCCA obligations hereunder, the County shall be entitled to recover from the PCCA any and all court costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, and all expenses allowed by law, in addition to sums reimbursable or due hereunder. 2.15. Exhibits, Titles of Articles, Sections, and Subsections. The exhibits, if any, attached to this Agreement are incorporated herein and shall be considered a part of this Agreement for the purposes stated herein, except that in the event of any conflict between any of Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 the provisions of such exhibits and the provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. All titles or headings are only for convenience of the Parties and shall not be construed to have any effect or meaning as to the Agreement between the Parties hereto. Any reference herein to an exhibit shall be considered a reference to the applicable exhibit attached hereto, unless otherwise stated. 2.16. Entire Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes the sole agreement in this matter, that it supersedes any prior oral or written agreements, and that any modifications may only be affected by a writing signed by all parties to this Agreement. 2.17. Interpretation. This Agreement has been jointly negotiated by the Parties hereunder and shall not be construed against a party hereunder, because that party may have assumed primary responsibility for the drafting of this Agreement. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first hereinabove written. COUNTY OF PITTSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA By:_______________________________________ Chairman; Board of Supervisors ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________ _________________________ County Administrator County Attorney PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION, INC.: By:___________________________________________________ Name:________________________________________________ Title:_________________________________________________ ATTEST:________________ Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Barber, to award the Invitation For Bid (IFB) for Food Services for the Jail to Dan Valley Foods for a contract estimated at $271,594.52 per year, terms being for a six (6) months fixed price on supplying food and supplies for the jail. After July 1, 2015, the awarded vendor will be allowed to adjust fixed pricing, if necessary, for the next six (6) months with prior approval of the Purchasing Manager; additionally, the County reserves the right to negotiate and extend the Contract with awarded vendor, if determined in advance that it is beneficial to the County, for an additional eight (8) 6- month contracts ending on December 31, 2019, for a total estimated cost for the life of the contract being $1,087,8960.00 for five (5) years, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was mad by Mr. Blackstock, seconded by Mr. Harville, to approve Resolution 2014-12-04, supporting the application for an AFID Grant Community Based Local Foods System Study in the amount of $15,000, and that Pittsylvania County would agree to match that $15,000 grant with $5,000 of in-kind services and $10,000 in cash funding; and authorize the County Administrator to sign all necessary documentation required in the grant application process, which was unanimously approved by the Board. The Board of Supervisors advised Staff they wanted community meetings/citizen surveys included in the RFP for this study. Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors RESOLUTION 2014-12-04 VIRGINIA: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Pittsylvania County, Virginia, held on Tuesday, December 16, 2014, the following resolution was presented and adopted: WHEREAS, the Governor’s Agriculture and Forestry Industries Development Fund (AFID) is designed to encourage efforts by local governments to support their agriculture and forestry based businesses; and Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 WHEREAS, the AFID program provides matching funds to local governments to fund feasibility studies, business plans and other pre-development work for projects that will have a significant and lasting positive impact on the local agriculture sector; and WHEREAS, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors created and appointed a Pittsylvania County Agriculture Development Board to promote and support the agriculture and forestry industry in the County; and WHEREAS, the Pittsylvania County Agriculture Development Board has identified the growing interest in local food systems as an agribusiness development opportunity for the County; and WHEREAS, the Agriculture Development Board has determined that an in-depth and independent feasibility study that will evaluate the community interest, CAPEX, budgets, location, and future expansion needs for a local food system in our county is a critical first step in pursuing this agribusiness opportunity; then BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors supports an application to the Agriculture and Forestry Industries Development Fund for a Community Based Local Foods System Feasibility Study grant in the amount of $15,000 and that the County agrees to match these funds with $5,000 of in-kind services and $10,000 in cash funding; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors supports the application and commits required funds for the success of the feasibility study. Appointments Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Blackstock, to approve appointments to the Agricultural Development Board as recommended, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Crops – Danny Adams Equine – Bruce Griffin Dairy – Roger Jefferson Farm Bureau – Hank Maxey Tobacco- Bob Harris Viticulture-Rusty East Horticulture-Dana Peters Aquaculture-Jay Calhoun Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Hagerman, to approve appointing Sherwood Zimmerman as the Leesville Lake Association’s representative to the Tri-Lakes Administrative Commission for a 1-year term beginning February 1, 2015 until January 31, 2016, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Snead, seconded by Mr. Barber, to approve re-appointing Donald Sparks as the Dan River Representative to the Pittsylvania County Building Code Board of Appeals for a four (4) year term immediately until December 31, 2018, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Snead, to approve re-appointing Frankie Womack as the Westover Representative and John Daniel as the Tunstall Representative to the Pittsylvania County Building Code Board of Appeals, each for a four (4) year term immediately until December 31, 2018, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Snead, to recommend to the Circuit Court Judge the appointment of Leon Griffith for a vacancy on the Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals created with the resignation of Larry Estes, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Snead, seconded by Mr. Harville, to direct the County Attorney to inform the Circuit Court Judge that Ron Merricks was willing to continue serving on the Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals, which was unanimously approved by the Board. Adjourned Meeting December 16, 2014 Closed Session Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Barber, to enter into Closed Session for the following: (a) Legal Authority: §2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended Subject: Animal Shelter Purpose: Discussion or consideration of acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. (b) Legal Authority: §2.2-3711(A)(5) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended Subject: Project Co-Op Purpose: Discussion of potential incentive package concerning a prospective business interested in locating in the County. (c) Legal Authority: §2.2-3711(A)(5) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended Subject: Project Einstein Purpose: Discussion of potential incentive package concerning a prospective business interested in locating in the County. Mr. Harville’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board and they entered into Closed Session at 8:45pm. Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Barber, to re-enter into Open Session. PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CERTIFY CLOSED MEETING BE IT RESOLVED that at a Adjourned Meeting of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors on Monday, December 16, 2014, the Board hereby certifies by a recorded vote that to the best of each board member’s knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered in the closed meeting. If any member believes that there was a departure from the requirements of the Code, he shall so state prior to the vote indicating the substance of the departure. The statement shall be recorded in the minutes of the Board. Vote Coy E. Harville Yes Tim R. Barber Yes James H. Snead Yes Brenda Bowman Yes Elton W. Blackstock Yes Jerry A. Hagerman Yes Jessie L. Barksdale Yes Mr. Harville’s motion was unanimously approved by the Board and they re-entered Open Session at 9:30pm. Adjournment Motion was made by Mr. Harville, seconded by Mr. Barber, to adjourn, which was unanimously approved by the Board. The meeting ended at 9:30 pm. _______________________________________ Jessie L. Barksdale, Chairman Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors _______________________________________ Clarence C. Monday, Clerk Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors