Loading...
05-08-2018 Legislative Committee Meeting MinutesLegislative Committee May 8, 2018 Legislative Committee Tuesday, May 8, 2018, Meeting VIRGINIA: The Legislative Committee of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors was held on Tuesday, May 8, 2018, in the Main Conference Room of the County Administration Building in Chatham, Virginia 24531. Ronald S. Scearce, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. The following Committee Members were present: Ronald S. Scearce Joe B. Davis Ben L. Farmer The following Board of Supervisors Member was also present: Robert W. Warren Mr. David M. Smitherman, County Administrator/Clerk of the Board; Mr. J. Vaden Hunt Esq., County Attorney; Mr. Greg L. Sides, Assistant County Administrator for Planning & Administration; Mr. Richard Hicks, Assistant County Administrator for Operations; the Honorable Vincent E. Shorter, Treasurer; the Honorable Shirley Y. Hammock, Commissioner of the Revenue; Mrs. Kimberly G. Van Der Hyde, Director of Finance; and Mrs. Kaylyn M. McCluster, Deputy Clerk, were also present. Approval of Agenda Motion was made by Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Farmer, to approve the Agenda, which was unanimously approved by the Legislative Committee. New Business Mr. Hunt stated that all items on the Legislative Committee Meeting Agenda except 4(e) and 4(f) are on the next Business Meeting Agenda as Public Hearings. Mr. Hunt went over Pittsylvania County Code (“PCC”) Chapter 17 Revisions (Solid Waste Disposal). There were changes made to mirror the State DEQ License determining the tonnage rate. Article Three (3) is the new Section that implements the Solid Waste Disposal Fee. Instead of a twice a year due date, there will only be one (1) due date in December. The vacancy affidavit has also been removed. Section 17-18c was added to replace the Vacancy Affidavit Section to allow some exemptions. This Section states that if a house is inhabitable, regardless if it is vacant or not, it will have the Fee attached to it. Mr. Warren asked if he owned a house, but did not want to live in it or rent it, if he turned the water and power off to the house, would he qualify for that exemption. Mr. Hunt stated that he would qualify and a Building Official would go out to the property after an application had been filed to determine if the power and water was cut off; then in order to get the water or power turned back on, a Building Official would have to come back out and issue a permit to allow that to take place. This method will cut down on the abuse of the exemptions. Motion was made by Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Farmer, that the Legislative Committee recommend the Chapter 17 Revisions to the full Board, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Legislative Committee May 8, 2018 Mr. Hunt went over the PCC Chapter 9 Revisions (Vehicle License). Mr. Hunt stated the old fees were listed in the PCC, so instead of having to revise the Code every time the Budget changed, the statement was put in there that the Fee be set annually by the Board of Supervisors via the County Budget Resolution. There were also new dates added for the due date of the fees. The new due dates are June twentieth (20th) and December twentieth (20th). Motion was made by Mr. Farmer, seconded by Mr. Davis, that the Legislative Committee recommend the PCC Chapter 9 Revisions (Vehicle License) to the full Board, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Mr. Hunt went over the PCC Chapter 25 Revisions (Procurement Procedures). Mr. Hunt stated that the County’s auditors made them aware recently that in order to accept Federal Grant money and negotiate Federal Contracts, the new Procurement Standards had to be adopted at the local level. Doing this will satisfy the auditors and allow the County to accept Federal Grants. Motion was made by Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Farmer, that the Legislative Committee recommend the PCC Chapter 25 Revisions (Procurement Procedures) to the full Board, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Mr. Hunt explained the PCC Chapter 9 Revisions (Courthouse Assessment Fee). The State recently certified that the County’s Courthouse was not in compliance with the current safety and security guidelines and is generally not in noncompliance. This means that the County can charge an additional two dollars ($2) that is tacked on to the current three dollars ($3), to make a total of five dollars ($5) that gets put into a pot to be used for reconstruction purposes for the Courthouse Complex. The County already has this in place, but this is to bring the wording up to the Supreme Court Standards. Motion was made by Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Farmer, that the Legislative Committee recommend the PCC Chapter 9 Revisions (Courthouse Assessment Fee) to the full Board, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Mr. Hunt went over the County-owned Equipment Policy. The Executive Team, along with the Leadership Team, were able to come up with two (2) options. Option “A” included requirements such as the County employees that have at least ten (10) years of service, that voluntarily separate from the County, and may request to purchase for $1.00 per item the following types of County- issued equipment used in their job duties: cell phones, tablets or handheld computers, laptop computers, and they must have a value of no more than two hundred dollars ($200.00). This would not affect the Sheriff Department employees. Option “B” states that no County employee or elected official shall be able to purchase County-issued property used in their job duties. This policy does not apply to the Sheriff Department employees. Mr. Warren stated his concerns with security in allowing an employee to purchase County-issued property and stated that he preferred Option “B”. Mr. Farmer also agreed with Mr. Warren. Motion was made by Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Farmer, to send this matter to a future Work Session for the full Board to review, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Mr. Sides explained the PCC Section 35-50 (Exemptions). He stated that he wanted to get a feel of how the Board feels. Recently, working with the situation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, there is some confusion about the easements. There was a suggestion made that the statement be made under exemptions that “Projects for which Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) determines that the construction and operation are in the public interest, and for which FERC issues a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.” Mr. Warren stated that he would like to see this presented to the Planning Commission for clarity. Motion was made by Mr. Famer, seconded by Mr. Legislative Committee May 8, 2018 Davis, that the Legislative Committee send this to the Planning Commission, which was unanimously approved by the Committee. Adjournment Mr. Scearce adjourned the meeting at 5:46 PM.