[2:09] I don't think anybody was expecting
[1:05:45] Welcome to our meeting this afternoon. I
[1:05:48] would officially like to call this
[1:05:49] meetingwork session to order today,
[1:05:53] Thursday, August 20th
[1:05:56] uh 2026 at 300 p.m. Uh the meeting is
[1:06:00] officially called to order and we will
[1:06:02] have our invocation delivered by Mr.
[1:06:04] Hatum followed with a pledge by Mr.
[1:06:06] Jamson. So if you please stand.
[1:06:10] >> Good to see everyone here today. Let's
[1:06:12] pray. Our dear heavenly father, we come
[1:06:14] to you at this time, Lord, thanking you
[1:06:16] for the privilege and honor of serving
[1:06:19] uh the citizens of Franklin County.
[1:06:21] Lord, we pray that everything that we do
[1:06:22] and say in this meeting will be
[1:06:24] according to your precious will and
[1:06:27] pleasing in your sight. Lord, we pray
[1:06:28] that everything that we do that we
[1:06:30] always look to you for wisdom and
[1:06:32] guidance in everything that we say and
[1:06:33] do. In Jesus name I pray and ask it all.
[1:06:36] Amen.
[1:06:36] >> Amen.
[1:06:39] >> Pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[1:06:41] United States of America and to the
[1:06:43] republic for which it stands, one nation
[1:06:47] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:06:50] justice for all.
[1:06:54] » Okay. Thank you all very very much. Um
[1:06:57] you will note at your place um that
[1:07:00] we've got uh an amended agenda from the
[1:07:03] one initially sent out um with the um
[1:07:07] the noted change of an item for the
[1:07:10] Boone district vacancy at the end um of
[1:07:13] our workday here. Um but given that are
[1:07:16] there any uh concerns uh any additions
[1:07:19] you'd like to recommend for the agenda?
[1:07:24] Okay. Hearing none. Um I will accept a
[1:07:27] motion to approve the agenda as
[1:07:29] submitted.
[1:07:31] >> So move.
[1:07:32] >> Second.
[1:07:32] >> Thank you. All those in favor, please
[1:07:34] say I.
[1:07:35] >> I.
[1:07:36] Opposed like sign. And that carries.
[1:07:38] Okay. Mr. Sandy, we're going to begin
[1:07:40] our work sessions and I will turn it
[1:07:42] over to you to introduce your staff and
[1:07:46] get us get us moving here.
[1:07:47] >> All right. Thank you. Um yeah, we we did
[1:07:50] want to take this opportunity to provide
[1:07:52] a a little update on the progress and
[1:07:54] activities. We're calling it W Weaver
[1:07:56] Street. So, this is not only the CTE,
[1:07:59] but you know, this is referring to the
[1:08:01] ModCraft, former ModCraft building, uh
[1:08:03] which is located on Weaver Street, which
[1:08:05] we intend to have more of a multi-use
[1:08:08] structure. So, it's not strictly the
[1:08:09] CTE. So, so Brandy's kind of going to
[1:08:11] give a more holistic update. And then I
[1:08:14] know uh Supervisor Quinn had requested
[1:08:15] an opportunity to speak more
[1:08:17] specifically to the CTE portion uh of
[1:08:20] the project. And so following Bry's
[1:08:22] presentation, uh we have another
[1:08:24] presentation that um Mr. Quinn, I don't
[1:08:26] know if you're going to do it from your
[1:08:27] seat or if you're going to go up there.
[1:08:29] Okay.
[1:08:30] um we'll make a presentation and then
[1:08:32] the expectation would maybe be any
[1:08:34] discussion or questions um you know at
[1:08:36] that point that that we can work work on
[1:08:39] to address for you either today or come
[1:08:41] back with further information and then
[1:08:44] um you know once we complete that
[1:08:46] segment then we plan to to move forward
[1:08:48] with you with some planning updates and
[1:08:50] some discussion on a couple plans.
[1:08:52] >> Very good.
[1:08:53] >> Thank you.
[1:08:53] >> We'll let Brandy
[1:08:54] >> Good afternoon Brandy. Uh good
[1:08:56] afternoon. Uh it's my pleasure to be
[1:08:58] here this afternoon to give you guys a
[1:08:59] brief update on the Weaver Street
[1:09:01] property um progress and just very
[1:09:04] quickly to touch on the progress that
[1:09:06] we've had since our last update. Um our
[1:09:09] site cleanup still continues with the
[1:09:10] assistance of the sheriff's office. Uh
[1:09:12] we've removed just over 300 tons of
[1:09:15] material at this point um utilizing um
[1:09:18] labor from their trustees. So we really
[1:09:20] appreciate the partnership with them. Uh
[1:09:22] we have continued communication with our
[1:09:24] industry experts. Um these are the group
[1:09:26] that we interviewed previously when we
[1:09:28] were determining the project delivery
[1:09:29] strategy. Uh they consist of general
[1:09:32] contractors, architects um and owner's
[1:09:35] representatives.
[1:09:36] Um we have drafted a request for
[1:09:38] proposals or an RFP uh for owner's
[1:09:41] representative services which I will
[1:09:43] touch on that um in some future slides.
[1:09:46] We have collected sample RFPs for
[1:09:48] architecture um or architect engineering
[1:09:51] services or A&E services as I'll refer
[1:09:53] to it for the rest of the presentation.
[1:09:55] Uh we've toured additional E911
[1:09:58] facilities um most recently um the
[1:10:01] renovated facility in Pennsylvania
[1:10:02] County last week and we are finalizing
[1:10:06] the disposition of the back parcel. Um
[1:10:08] you guys approved the sale of that
[1:10:09] parcel um and we're going through a
[1:10:12] little bit of due diligence on that now.
[1:10:13] Um we don't have a closing date. um at
[1:10:16] this time.
[1:10:19] So just a reminder, the project delivery
[1:10:21] strategy that was approved by the board
[1:10:23] was their traditional design bid build.
[1:10:25] Um I won't read through the exact
[1:10:27] description of it, but um it it is
[1:10:29] basically uh the process that you see
[1:10:32] most commonly used where you design the
[1:10:34] facility under um an architect engineer,
[1:10:38] then you put it out to bid and then you
[1:10:39] have a general contractor construct it.
[1:10:43] looking at the order of priorities on
[1:10:44] this form of um delivery strategy. Uh
[1:10:48] you typically see cost, time, and then
[1:10:50] quality. Um having quality listed as the
[1:10:52] third priority is not necessarily a bad
[1:10:54] thing. It's just the cost and the timing
[1:10:57] of the building um tend to be the higher
[1:11:00] priority in this type of delivery
[1:11:01] strategy. Uh looking at the process
[1:11:04] under design bid build, we will issue
[1:11:06] that RFP for owner's representative
[1:11:08] services. Uh following that we'll have a
[1:11:11] request for proposals issued for A&E
[1:11:13] services. So our architect engineer
[1:11:16] um an architect will be selected and a
[1:11:19] comprehensive proposal developed which
[1:11:20] will include uh pricing for your
[1:11:23] schematic design development
[1:11:25] construction documents um construction
[1:11:28] administration and so on. Uh we will
[1:11:31] engage the third party cost estimator at
[1:11:33] that point to give us a very detailed
[1:11:34] estimate of what we feel the project is
[1:11:36] going to cost.
[1:11:38] uh we'll pre-qualify general contractors
[1:11:41] that may be interested in the project
[1:11:43] and then issue that invitation for bids
[1:11:45] for general contractor services.
[1:11:48] Uh the contract will be awarded to the
[1:11:50] low bidder and be approved by this
[1:11:52] board. Um and construction will begin
[1:11:54] after that. Um I did want to note um
[1:11:57] that running concurrently with all these
[1:11:59] steps is engagement with our project
[1:12:01] partners. So there'll be constant
[1:12:03] dialogue um with our school system, our
[1:12:05] community colleges, farm college,
[1:12:07] businesses, um economic development,
[1:12:10] everybody that's going to be key players
[1:12:11] in this uh process.
[1:12:15] So kind of touching on what an owner's
[1:12:17] representative is. Um and this is pulled
[1:12:19] out of the RFP. Um an owner's
[1:12:23] representative is a consultant that
[1:12:24] provides pre-construction and um
[1:12:26] construction phase um construction
[1:12:29] related project management. Um it can
[1:12:31] also include building commission
[1:12:33] services and um a variety of other
[1:12:35] services if needed. The consultant acts
[1:12:38] as the owner's project manager and
[1:12:40] provides sufficient administrative
[1:12:42] management and related services um as
[1:12:45] required to fulfill the contract.
[1:12:48] So looking at the preconstruction
[1:12:50] services and I won't read these
[1:12:51] verbatim. Uh they do assist the owner
[1:12:54] with generating the RFP for architecture
[1:12:56] and engineer services. They review
[1:12:58] available programs, plans,
[1:13:00] specifications, cost estimates and so
[1:13:02] on. Um and lead um the kickoff like the
[1:13:05] phase in meeting uh between the county
[1:13:08] and our architect.
[1:13:10] Uh they provide document reviews at
[1:13:12] various phasages phases of design. Uh
[1:13:15] looking at programming,
[1:13:16] constructibility,
[1:13:17] scheduling, construction duration,
[1:13:19] construction cost. Um
[1:13:23] they manage the owner's project and
[1:13:25] construction budget. um compare design
[1:13:28] phase estimates with um budget cost and
[1:13:31] prepare uh an update cash flow analysis.
[1:13:35] They monitor and maintain overall
[1:13:37] project master schedule um including
[1:13:40] major design and pre-construction
[1:13:41] activity, start and finish dates, review
[1:13:44] times, and key milestones.
[1:13:47] um they identify potential owner direct
[1:13:49] procurement strategies um and really
[1:13:52] weigh the the benefits and risk of
[1:13:54] those.
[1:13:56] Excuse [clears throat] me. Um finally,
[1:13:58] they provide contract administration
[1:14:00] support. So they're doing invoice
[1:14:01] review, pay application review, um
[1:14:04] conflict resolution if needed, um they
[1:14:07] do special inspections, direct
[1:14:09] procurement if we decide to do that, um
[1:14:11] and so on.
[1:14:14] And very quickly, um, they also help,
[1:14:16] uh, prepare the potential biders list
[1:14:18] for construction. Um, so they they'll
[1:14:21] start what's considered a bidder's
[1:14:23] interest campaign where they're reaching
[1:14:24] out, um, to contractors that may be
[1:14:27] interested in bidding the project, and
[1:14:28] that'll be coordinated with our
[1:14:30] architect. On behalf of the owner,
[1:14:32] they'll review bid documents prepared by
[1:14:34] the architect, assist the owner in
[1:14:36] preparing and placing advertisements um
[1:14:38] to solicit bids um for owner purchased
[1:14:43] items and also um consultant contracts
[1:14:45] if needed. Uh they represent the owner
[1:14:48] and construction pre-bid conferences
[1:14:50] that'll be led by our architect. uh
[1:14:52] reviewing agenda that are generated
[1:14:54] during that process uh for
[1:14:56] constructibility effect on the project
[1:14:59] um construction budgets and timelines.
[1:15:01] Um and finally, they'll assist um the
[1:15:04] county with bid evaluations and
[1:15:06] selection.
[1:15:08] [snorts]
[1:15:09] Moving to construction services, they
[1:15:11] provide and maintain on-site management
[1:15:12] for the project as an agent of the
[1:15:14] county. They provide and maintain
[1:15:17] on-site records.
[1:15:19] They verify that all required permits,
[1:15:21] bonds, and insurance have been obtained
[1:15:22] by all parties. They monitor
[1:15:25] construction contract administration by
[1:15:27] the architect. Uh they represent the
[1:15:30] owner at progress meetings with the
[1:15:31] architect, the contractor, and any other
[1:15:33] parties needed.
[1:15:35] Uh they establish a program to monitor
[1:15:37] construction quality. Uh really to guard
[1:15:39] the owner against any work that does not
[1:15:41] conform.
[1:15:43] Um
[1:15:46] excuse me, just one second. to the
[1:15:47] construction contract requirements. Um,
[1:15:50] in conjunction with the architect and
[1:15:52] the contractor, they orchestrate a plan
[1:15:53] for successful building occupancy and
[1:15:55] acceptance. Uh, they review and certify
[1:15:58] that contractor's construction schedule
[1:16:00] and schedule of values is prepared in
[1:16:02] accordance with uh contract documents
[1:16:04] and industry practices.
[1:16:07] Um, they provide regular updates to the
[1:16:09] board of supervisors and the school
[1:16:10] board on the construction progress.
[1:16:13] uh provide monthly updates including but
[1:16:15] not limited to a brief description of
[1:16:17] monthly construction activities and
[1:16:19] financial information. And at the
[1:16:21] conclusion of the project, they prepare
[1:16:23] to deliver uh prepare and deliver to the
[1:16:26] owner a final accounting of the project
[1:16:28] budget um and all closeout reports.
[1:16:32] Um so that is my update for you and um I
[1:16:35] can either answer questions now or if
[1:16:37] Mr. Quinn would like to do his
[1:16:38] presentation, we can answer questions
[1:16:40] after that.
[1:16:41] >> Thank you. Does anybody have any
[1:16:42] questions for Brandy before Mr. Quinn
[1:16:44] presents? Please.
[1:16:46] >> I have a couple Brandy. So,
[1:16:48] >> do you envision this owner's
[1:16:50] representative being a person or a
[1:16:52] company? And I just asked that because
[1:16:54] it's a pretty diverse set of
[1:16:56] capabilities. I'm wondering if one
[1:16:57] person can have that or are you looking
[1:16:59] for a a company where when you put all
[1:17:01] the people in that company together,
[1:17:02] they can provide that service.
[1:17:04] >> I've done both. Um, I've done a regional
[1:17:06] jail project where we used um a single
[1:17:08] owner's representative that was very
[1:17:10] specialized in correctional facility
[1:17:12] design. Um, and I've also used um larger
[1:17:15] groups where um if we are looking at
[1:17:17] public safety section of the building,
[1:17:19] it may be one representative from their
[1:17:21] company for that part of it. But if it's
[1:17:22] CTE, it would be somebody that
[1:17:24] specializes in that area. Mhm.
[1:17:26] >> And then I don't see the word quality in
[1:17:30] here anywhere except in the beginning
[1:17:31] where you know it's the third priority.
[1:17:34] And just wondering how we can ensure
[1:17:36] that quality is is an equal equally
[1:17:38] important part of this where it's almost
[1:17:40] these three objectives together and and
[1:17:42] maybe quality is third but but it's a a
[1:17:44] very close third to to the first two.
[1:17:47] Oh,
[1:17:47] >> I would absolutely agree that it ranks
[1:17:49] right up there with it. Um, I would say
[1:17:52] the selection of the the the best
[1:17:55] owner's representative, architect, and
[1:17:57] contractor. They're all going to have to
[1:17:58] work together to ensure that quality.
[1:18:00] But having the owner's representative as
[1:18:02] our boots on the ground every day um
[1:18:04] truly there to represent us. They're not
[1:18:06] there to represent the architect.
[1:18:07] They're not there to represent the
[1:18:08] contractor. Um they're there truly to
[1:18:11] represent us um and the construction of
[1:18:13] that facility. So I think quality would
[1:18:14] be insured through that position. And
[1:18:17] then the the last question, I just
[1:18:18] wondered if you envisioned the contract
[1:18:21] with the owner's representative having
[1:18:23] performance incentives, for example,
[1:18:24] minimizing ECPs in the construction
[1:18:26] process and if if they were able cost
[1:18:29] containment, something around cost, so
[1:18:31] they're they're financially incented to work with us to minimize ECPs.
[1:18:36] >> I had not considered that, but it's
[1:18:37] certainly something that we could work
[1:18:38] into the RFP. Um, if that's the desire
[1:18:41] of the board,
[1:18:43] >> I think it'd be interesting to have a
[1:18:44] variable component with them where they
[1:18:46] were they truly had a financial
[1:18:48] incentive to help us, right? It would
[1:18:50] just align them with us better if they
[1:18:53] knew that to the extent that they keep
[1:18:55] the the cost where it should be and they
[1:18:57] don't have overruns and they don't have
[1:18:59] um ECPs that that were that they're
[1:19:02] rewarded for that too.
[1:19:03] >> Yes, financial incentives always help,
[1:19:05] >> right? [laughter]
[1:19:07] >> Okay, that's it. Thanks.
[1:19:08] >> Thank you, Mr. Quinn. Any other
[1:19:09] questions for Brandy? [clears throat]
[1:19:11] >> Okay. Thank you so much for the update,
[1:19:13] Brandy. We very much appreciate it,
[1:19:15] >> Mr. Quinn. Do you want
[1:19:28] » And as uh Supervisor Quinn is coming, I
[1:19:31] think you all have a handout of at least
[1:19:33] a portion of of what he's going to
[1:19:34] present today that um just to to have in
[1:19:38] front of you. I I don't think it's the
[1:19:40] complete presentation, but it's most of
[1:19:42] it.
[1:19:42] >> Yeah, it it is the whole one actually.
[1:19:44] So,
[1:19:44] >> okay. So anyway, thank you for giving me
[1:19:46] a couple minutes on the agenda today.
[1:19:48] And uh you know, I think back to the
[1:19:51] zoning ordinance and the post-mortem
[1:19:53] that we did on that and I felt that we
[1:19:55] didn't have a leader. We didn't have an
[1:19:57] organization in place and we didn't have
[1:19:59] clear roles and responsibilities. And
[1:20:02] now that's water over the dam, but we're
[1:20:04] facing a much bigger project, much
[1:20:06] bigger risk, much more money at stake.
[1:20:09] And we're going down the same path. and
[1:20:11] we're about a year into the project and it's not at a point where you blame
[1:20:15] anybody. It's a time where we can make a
[1:20:17] midpoint correction and do some things
[1:20:19] that'll really help us assure that the
[1:20:21] project is going very well. And so there
[1:20:26] are a couple things that I I it just
[1:20:28] dawned on me, I guess, is all I can say.
[1:20:30] I wish I had seen this before and I
[1:20:32] didn't, but oh well. But I I begin I've
[1:20:35] started seeing some things that that
[1:20:37] aren't being worked on as quickly as or
[1:20:40] as effectively as Bry's piece. So Bry's
[1:20:42] piece is like the A+ of the effort right
[1:20:45] now. And and but I'm seeing other pieces
[1:20:47] that don't feel like we're getting after
[1:20:50] them. And it could be well we don't have
[1:20:52] a person to do the work or we don't have
[1:20:53] the budget to do the work or or we're
[1:20:55] not aware that we want to do the work.
[1:20:57] But I I'll just give you a couple
[1:20:58] examples. I think back to the
[1:21:00] presentation that I did in January and I suggested that we look at this as an
[1:21:06] educational ecosystem that includes our
[1:21:09] schools but also the surrounding
[1:21:10] schools. So, Patrick and Henry and
[1:21:12] Western Virginia and Rono and and
[1:21:15] looking at all of these as your um your
[1:21:17] educational ecosystem and taking into
[1:21:20] mind what you think you need to do given
[1:21:23] the the capabilities that you already
[1:21:25] have at these schools. And the example I bring up all the time is the welding
[1:21:31] facilities at at Patrick and Henry. And
[1:21:33] so, as you may recall from our tour,
[1:21:35] it's a multi-million dollar complex. And
[1:21:38] so, the question comes up, well, do we
[1:21:41] need welding facilities? And and I don't
[1:21:43] have an opinion on that today. I just
[1:21:45] know it's something that needs to be
[1:21:47] looked at. And upon further thinking, I
[1:21:50] realized it's not black or white. It's
[1:21:52] not yes, we have them or no, we don't. I
[1:21:55] even thought of there could be
[1:21:56] combinations and permutations. For
[1:21:58] example, the first um room they have is
[1:22:01] virtual welding. It's workstations in a
[1:22:04] classroom where you become an excellent
[1:22:05] virtual welder and you must become an
[1:22:08] excellent virtual welder before you move
[1:22:09] on to stick welding and then on to to
[1:22:11] robotic welding. And so it occurred to
[1:22:13] me, wow, one solution might be that you
[1:22:16] only have virtual welding at RCTE
[1:22:19] because it's pretty inexpensive and
[1:22:21] you're getting into the big bucks when
[1:22:22] you have the stick welding and the
[1:22:24] robotic welding. And so the kids could
[1:22:26] go in and they could learn virtual
[1:22:27] welding and decide, is this really for
[1:22:30] me? And if yes, well, they go on to
[1:22:32] Patrick and Henry. So I I'm not
[1:22:34] suggesting that that's the solution. And
[1:22:35] I'm just bringing it up as as an uh to
[1:22:39] help you understand the complexity in
[1:22:40] some of these issues because that's just
[1:22:42] one curriculum uh decision. The other
[1:22:44] one I wanted to mention where again
[1:22:46] where it doesn't seem like we're we're
[1:22:48] getting after this as quickly as we
[1:22:50] should when we talked to Dr. Hajes about
[1:22:53] how they came up with a curriculum. He
[1:22:55] said we interviewed every business
[1:22:57] within 50 miles of the facility and we
[1:22:59] asked them what they need and that
[1:23:01] became the basis for their curriculum.
[1:23:03] And so that's that's a well for me the
[1:23:06] light bulb went on and I thought of
[1:23:08] course that made sense. It was an
[1:23:10] awesome way of thinking about your
[1:23:11] curriculum and with the ven diagram I
[1:23:13] put up. You remember I I foresaw
[1:23:16] businesses being a huge driver of our of
[1:23:20] curriculum here. And you recall his
[1:23:23] degree is J O right he's totally focused
[1:23:26] on on jobs and I even asked him with
[1:23:28] that ven diagram about uh the the over
[1:23:32] on the other side where the students
[1:23:34] want it and the school can give it but
[1:23:37] it's not what businesses need. I
[1:23:38] wondered do you ever do any courses
[1:23:40] there? And he said, "No, we don't do any
[1:23:42] courses there. The community college can
[1:23:43] do that." So, as I think about that, u I have anecdotal examples where u we
[1:23:52] have the biggest IT services company in
[1:23:56] the county that's in my area that's 10
[1:23:58] miles away and they haven't been
[1:24:00] interviewed by about their needs for the
[1:24:03] CTE. And so, it's just an anecdotal
[1:24:05] story, but it's a big company. It's
[1:24:07] somebody that has a lot of a lot of
[1:24:08] professional services need. And so it's giving me the sense that maybe we
[1:24:13] don't have a methodical approach to
[1:24:16] first do an inventory of all the
[1:24:17] businesses and then do a priority of all
[1:24:19] those businesses and then be have an a
[1:24:22] system to interview them either in
[1:24:23] person or or uh with a a paper survey.
[1:24:27] And and so then I think about Bry's way
[1:24:30] out in front and she's going to need
[1:24:31] these feeds about what is it going to be
[1:24:34] in this school. she's going to hit a
[1:24:36] point where if she's hitting a wall and
[1:24:37] she doesn't know the needs. And then the
[1:24:40] last anecdotal story I'll tell you is I
[1:24:42] just happened to run into somebody that
[1:24:44] is from Western Virginia Community
[1:24:46] College and and he is he is the person
[1:24:48] that would be their point of contact for
[1:24:51] this activity and he said nobody had
[1:24:53] reached out to him and I I connected him
[1:24:55] with Dr. seers and and that's great but
[1:24:58] it makes me wonder how many more pieces
[1:24:59] am I missing because I these are just
[1:25:01] like happen stance in my travels that
[1:25:03] I'm finding these so with that you could
[1:25:06] put this up
[1:25:09] [clears throat] so I really I just
[1:25:11] intend to present this one slide but I
[1:25:14] have backup and I'll explain how this
[1:25:15] works so the biggest part of today is
[1:25:18] I'm proposing that we should have a
[1:25:20] project executive that's overseeing all
[1:25:23] of the activities going on with the CT
[1:25:25] and that that person should report into
[1:25:27] Dr. Sears and Steve Sandy. And so this
[1:25:30] gives you a feel for the the boxes of
[1:25:33] activities and and I'm not wedded to
[1:25:35] these boxes. There's no pride of
[1:25:37] authorship in this. This is what I laid
[1:25:39] out, but I would almost envision you put
[1:25:42] a project executive in place and you
[1:25:44] tell that person, what do you want? How do you see this organized? And and
[1:25:48] it could very well be different than
[1:25:49] this. Maybe they combine two boxes.
[1:25:51] Maybe maybe I'm missing a box. Although
[1:25:53] I've I've tested this on enough people
[1:25:55] and nobody's had additions to this, but the I the idea is you can see the
[1:26:01] breadth and scope of all the things that
[1:26:03] have to be going on here and the
[1:26:05] complexity and and there's there's huge
[1:26:08] risks with this project and I I just
[1:26:10] feel that without this person in place
[1:26:13] that we're going to continue down the
[1:26:15] path with various things like Bry's
[1:26:17] piece is going very well, but what's
[1:26:19] going on with the uh business community
[1:26:22] and uh and that the outreach and so how
[1:26:26] can I change the slides because I wanted
[1:26:27] to go down to one more
[1:26:30] oh maybe let me try this oh yeah here it
[1:26:32] is okay so I just wanted to show you so
[1:26:35] if I go back here this the second from
[1:26:38] the left business and and community is one of the most complex because I
[1:26:45] think I see it having a lot of of uh
[1:26:48] school input and a lot of economic
[1:26:51] development input
[1:26:52] But you can see here, I I I wanted to
[1:26:54] show I I wanted to show you that I have
[1:26:56] some depth to these boxes. I actually
[1:26:58] thought about what would go in each of
[1:27:00] these boxes. And I can tell you for sure
[1:27:02] this isn't complete. I've tested it on a
[1:27:05] few people and and nobody's had other
[1:27:07] input to it. So this is what we have
[1:27:09] today. But I I would envision once you
[1:27:11] get into this, you would be tweaking
[1:27:13] some of these. But you can see, you
[1:27:15] know, I have the, you know, that
[1:27:17] inventory and engaging employees within
[1:27:19] the 50-mi radius and the all this work
[1:27:22] with the regional colleges, I think, is
[1:27:24] really important. And the marketing for
[1:27:26] the 1% sales tax referendum, the the
[1:27:29] path we're going down now with that,
[1:27:31] we're not going to get it. It's just a
[1:27:33] shame. We're not going to It's not Dr.
[1:27:35] Sears, it it's not a critique of him. He
[1:27:38] doesn't have enough on there. We have
[1:27:39] three town halls at the schools that
[1:27:41] need HVAC programs and it's not enough.
[1:27:44] You're not going to get people excited
[1:27:46] to go to a town hall and they hear about
[1:27:48] an HVAC system. And so there's there's
[1:27:51] work there that needs to be done. But when I talk about needing a leader,
[1:27:57] it's that project executive. When I talk
[1:27:59] about an organization, it's that
[1:28:01] executive managing those five boxes of
[1:28:03] activities that go on. And when I talk
[1:28:06] about roles and responsibilities, it's looking at each one of these points
[1:28:10] and deciding, well, first, am I going to
[1:28:12] do it or not? Or maybe I tweak the text,
[1:28:15] but who's going to do it? Who who the
[1:28:17] who's the person that's responsible for
[1:28:20] this bullet? That that's what I mean by
[1:28:22] clear roles and responsibilities at the
[1:28:25] end of this. Every one of these has um
[1:28:27] has a person. And I put I the Franklin
[1:28:30] Center is down at the bottom. Not ne
[1:28:32] it's not in order of importance. they
[1:28:34] were part of my original slideshow. I I
[1:28:36] see them as being an incredibly
[1:28:38] important part of this and I'm not sure
[1:28:40] how they fit in. This is where they fit
[1:28:42] in to me, but maybe somebody says,
[1:28:43] "Well, this should be a box all by
[1:28:45] itself reporting into the project
[1:28:46] executive." So, so that's why to me this
[1:28:49] is kind of fluid, but it begins to lay
[1:28:51] out um a leadership model, an
[1:28:54] organization model, and and gives you
[1:28:57] enough content so you can establish
[1:28:58] roles and responsibilities to get the
[1:29:00] work done. So, that was everything I
[1:29:03] have.
[1:29:04] >> Okay, Dan, that's great. Thank you so
[1:29:05] much for all the work you've put into
[1:29:07] this. I'm going to open the floor for
[1:29:09] questions, comments, Mr. Carter.
[1:29:10] >> Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Dan. That
[1:29:12] was a good presentation. I just had a
[1:29:14] couple comments. I was on the board at
[1:29:16] Patrick Henry when we started that
[1:29:18] complex and uh that virtual welding
[1:29:22] training
[1:29:24] piece of the puzzle. I think that's
[1:29:26] perfect for the high school. I don't
[1:29:28] know liabilitywise if they can advance
[1:29:32] to a welding booth and all that. Um was one thing. I think an IT curriculum
[1:29:38] for that school is going to be real
[1:29:40] important for future future jobs. And
[1:29:43] that 1% sales tax
[1:29:46] if if we want that to pass we have got
[1:29:49] to step up some marketing for that
[1:29:51] because people are telling me they are
[1:29:53] not going to vote for that.
[1:29:55] >> Mhm. So, we need to I don't know what we
[1:29:58] need to do, but we need to help the
[1:29:59] school system market that to get that
[1:30:01] through. And that's all I had.
[1:30:04] >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Carter. Mr.
[1:30:05] Jameson,
[1:30:06] >> I agree with Mike. I want to have
[1:30:08] welding virtual welding. I think that
[1:30:10] would work great here for the uh county
[1:30:13] and all this um
[1:30:14] >> you said it would work great in the
[1:30:15] county. I think so.
[1:30:16] >> Yeah. I I had no idea, but it but it
[1:30:19] made me realize it wasn't black or
[1:30:21] white. It's here or not here. There
[1:30:23] various combination and permutations
[1:30:25] that could work
[1:30:26] >> there. Again, you talk to the you talk
[1:30:28] to Virginia Western, Patrick Henry, they
[1:30:31] can give you some guidance on it. Give
[1:30:33] the school or whoever and what they
[1:30:36] think of it. Get their opinion of it.
[1:30:38] >> The the project executive, what do you
[1:30:40] see, Dan, as far as what kind of
[1:30:44] experience do they need? I mean, what do
[1:30:46] you
[1:30:48] management? I understand. How about
[1:30:50] construction? I mean, is this is this
[1:30:52] just the um itinerary of what's going to
[1:30:56] be taught or what you they would be in
[1:30:59] charge of that or are you talking about
[1:31:00] the construction also?
[1:31:02] >> No, I I well it's I I think it's a very
[1:31:04] senior executive. It's not a junior
[1:31:06] person. Their man their management and
[1:31:08] leadership skills would be huge. That
[1:31:11] ability to manage a breath of functions.
[1:31:14] Um here you you can see the diversity of
[1:31:16] the functions. I feel like the
[1:31:18] facilities and construction activity
[1:31:21] that we have going on, especially with
[1:31:23] the construction manager we put here.
[1:31:25] This is excellent. This is I I have no
[1:31:28] change. I mean, I talked about a couple
[1:31:29] questions, but but this is perfect. And
[1:31:31] so now you have a really strong person
[1:31:34] here reporting into the project
[1:31:36] executive. Yes, I I would think that
[1:31:38] person needs some construction
[1:31:41] experience. However, their leadership
[1:31:43] and management capabilities across a a
[1:31:45] wide and very diverse set of activities
[1:31:47] is more important because you have this
[1:31:50] area so well taken care of now.
[1:31:53] >> So, but it's mainly curriculum they're
[1:31:56] looking at, right? Is that what you're
[1:31:57] thinking? That's
[1:31:59] >> No, I got it wrong.
[1:32:00] >> Uh, so, so let's go from the left. You
[1:32:02] have operations and finance, right?
[1:32:04] There's this is a box where where you're
[1:32:07] looking after all of the finances for
[1:32:10] this school. you need a whole separate
[1:32:13] um ledger, if you will, wi with um a
[1:32:17] revenue and income potentially where
[1:32:18] you're managing this. I don't think that
[1:32:20] we right now I don't think that we're
[1:32:22] managing everything under the CTE as a
[1:32:25] separate function and we the board of
[1:32:27] supervisors should want that. We we
[1:32:29] should want to know what is this costing
[1:32:31] us? What have we spent? And so this
[1:32:33] operation operation and finances is all
[1:32:36] about uh that activity. the the I I
[1:32:40] covered business and community, but the
[1:32:41] program and education, the the
[1:32:43] curriculum, the staffing, the program
[1:32:45] development. I see a lot of that being
[1:32:47] managed by Dr. Sears and uh and then uh
[1:32:51] govern governance when you look at it's
[1:32:54] best to just go down through and look at
[1:32:55] each of the backup slides to see what's
[1:32:58] in there to really understand. But the
[1:33:00] other thing that occurred to me as I got
[1:33:02] into this was I realized it's really not
[1:33:06] our role to say Steve and Dr. Sears you
[1:33:10] will have this person right I think it's
[1:33:13] our role to tell them we need a leader a
[1:33:17] clear leader and if if Dr. Ste Sears and
[1:33:20] Steve said we can do that we don't need
[1:33:23] this person okay but but my sense is
[1:33:26] they don't have the bandwidth I I don't
[1:33:28] think Dr. Sears has the bandwidth. I I
[1:33:30] haven't heard from Steve, but I don't
[1:33:32] think they have the bandwidth to be
[1:33:33] overlooking of this whole project. But my sense was it's not our job to say
[1:33:40] this is how the organization should be
[1:33:41] set up, but it it is our job to say you
[1:33:44] need a leader, you need an organization,
[1:33:46] and you need clear roles and
[1:33:48] responsibilities under that so everybody
[1:33:49] knows what they're doing as we we build
[1:33:52] this massive program.
[1:33:55] >> Mr. Tatum.
[1:33:56] >> Dan, thank you for this presentation. I
[1:33:58] know you've put a lot of work and a lot
[1:34:00] of thought into this. Um, the virtual
[1:34:02] welding I think is outstanding uh
[1:34:05] concept, outstanding idea and would be a
[1:34:08] great addition to the pro to their uh
[1:34:10] existing program, but I I also think
[1:34:13] that they currently have a welding uh
[1:34:16] booth setup that they're currently
[1:34:19] using. They're at their current
[1:34:20] location. Now, granted, it is small and
[1:34:23] has its limitations. Um I I think that
[1:34:27] you know the overall setting of of the
[1:34:30] curriculum and everything that's that's
[1:34:34] we can make recommendations but of
[1:34:35] course we know the school they set that
[1:34:39] and uh um you know I don't think that we
[1:34:42] need to necessarily say well all you're
[1:34:46] going to do all we're going to permit is
[1:34:48] virtual activities at the high school
[1:34:51] level. If you want to take stick
[1:34:53] welding, you've got to go to
[1:34:54] [clears throat] Patrick Henry uh when
[1:34:56] they're already offering stick welding
[1:34:58] and in in some capacity. I think we need
[1:35:01] to look at what we currently offer and
[1:35:04] we need to look and and we need to have
[1:35:06] we need to sit down with our partners uh
[1:35:09] on the school board and see what the
[1:35:11] students are requesting
[1:35:13] >> because we can all we can have the Taj
[1:35:15] Mahal out there and if the students
[1:35:16] don't want to take it, they're not going
[1:35:17] to take it. Oh, [clears throat] you
[1:35:18] know, we need to see where their
[1:35:20] interest is and and like you said, uh
[1:35:24] [clears throat] earlier, it doesn't do
[1:35:25] us much good to train them for the skill
[1:35:28] and then not be able to use it for a
[1:35:30] job.
[1:35:31] >> And [clears throat] and that is 100%
[1:35:32] true. But on the other side, if they
[1:35:35] don't have the interest in it, you can't
[1:35:38] force them to take take the the class.
[1:35:41] >> And so, we need to we need to find a
[1:35:43] happy medium somewhere in there. And and
[1:35:46] I think that's going to be all of us
[1:35:48] sitting down,
[1:35:50] putting our heads together, and working
[1:35:52] with the school board with uh and like I
[1:35:56] said, I love the idea of having the
[1:35:58] project executive, someone as a overseer
[1:36:01] of the whole whole program because that
[1:36:04] to me takes a whole lot of pressure off
[1:36:06] of Mr. Sandy and and Dr. seers because
[1:36:09] uh they they have a pretty big uh duty
[1:36:14] as theirself running the county and
[1:36:16] running the school system and uh
[1:36:20] I just applaud what you've put together
[1:36:22] here, but I think we need to make sure
[1:36:23] that we take a look at what we have.
[1:36:26] >> We [clears throat] need to take in
[1:36:27] consideration the
[1:36:29] uh interest of the students and you know
[1:36:33] we it may be as simple doing a poll of
[1:36:36] the students. Hey, what would you what
[1:36:38] would you be like to see offered? Uh you
[1:36:43] we might be surprised [laughter] and it
[1:36:46] may you know you you know I think that's
[1:36:48] where we need to start because that's
[1:36:49] who we're building this for
[1:36:51] >> is our students and uh because I'm not
[1:36:54] taking any classes there. Uh, I already
[1:36:56] know how to stick weld and and not real
[1:36:59] good, but I I can put two pieces of
[1:37:01] metal together. [clears throat] But, uh,
[1:37:03] you know, we need to we need to you make
[1:37:06] sure that we keep our students involved
[1:37:09] in this, too. Uh, because that's who
[1:37:11] we're building it for. But, thank you
[1:37:13] again. You put a lot of hard work into
[1:37:14] this and I know you put a lot of thought
[1:37:16] into it.
[1:37:18] >> A couple points just um for
[1:37:19] clarification. So, I was using the
[1:37:22] welding as just an example. It wasn't I
[1:37:26] wasn't saying we should have a virtual
[1:37:28] facility or not. I was just trying to
[1:37:29] point out wow you look at one this is
[1:37:32] one thing welding right and and it's not
[1:37:35] as easy as black or white yes or no you
[1:37:39] all of a sudden as as you start
[1:37:41] dissecting it you realize wow it could
[1:37:43] be we do virtual welding here and we
[1:37:46] don't do stick and robotic. It could be
[1:37:47] I I don't have a recommendation there.
[1:37:49] So I just want to be clear that's not my
[1:37:50] I'm not making a recommendation. I'm not
[1:37:52] smart enough to make a recommendation in
[1:37:54] that area. I just as I thought about it,
[1:37:56] I I was able to uh do that. The other
[1:37:58] thing uh that I think about. So, I think
[1:38:01] it's fine to interview the students, but
[1:38:04] they don't know what they don't know.
[1:38:06] You know, I think I I came out of school
[1:38:08] and they were history majors and and
[1:38:10] they're bummed out that they don't have
[1:38:11] a job. And I hope nobody here is a
[1:38:13] history major, but but they didn't know
[1:38:15] going into this that's not going to give
[1:38:17] you a job, right? And there in that vin
[1:38:20] diagram I put together where you're
[1:38:21] looking at what the businesses need. If
[1:38:23] a business comes out and they say, "Hey,
[1:38:25] look, I'll pay you $100,000 if you do
[1:38:27] this." Well, suddenly you're going to
[1:38:29] have a lot of students interested in
[1:38:31] doing that, right? They didn't they
[1:38:32] didn't even know about that. A lot of
[1:38:33] the stuff in that over on the business
[1:38:35] side is they don't know what they don't
[1:38:37] know. And so they're only if you if you
[1:38:40] do the survey, they're only going to
[1:38:41] answer
[1:38:43] from their small little sphere. And
[1:38:45] that's why I think it's so important to
[1:38:47] have the businesses and it's very
[1:38:49] unclear to me so far how that's going to
[1:38:51] be done. Is it the school? Is it
[1:38:53] economic development? Is it on the two
[1:38:54] as a partnership? But but I would just
[1:38:57] propose it's it's huge. We have to have
[1:39:00] the business development. If you talk to
[1:39:02] Dr. Hodgeges, he he couldn't even do
[1:39:04] this without the business development or
[1:39:06] the the business.
[1:39:07] >> Yeah, I I completely agree. In fact, I
[1:39:10] recall some numbers that was given to
[1:39:12] this board, and I want to say it was in
[1:39:15] 2017 or 2018 that there was a study
[1:39:18] done, and there were over 10,000
[1:39:21] job openings within a 60-mi radius of
[1:39:24] here for machinists.
[1:39:28] >> And those are good paying jobs.
[1:39:29] >> Yep.
[1:39:30] >> And it's a big demand.
[1:39:32] >> I know. And it makes the other kind of
[1:39:34] crossover I'll talk about just is
[1:39:37] summit. So you have people that are
[1:39:38] looking to bring their business in here
[1:39:40] and they want to know do you have
[1:39:42] workers? In a lot of case we don't have
[1:39:44] the workers. We don't have the
[1:39:45] workforce. They want to they're looking
[1:39:46] for an educated skilled workforce that
[1:39:48] they can drop into this. And and you
[1:39:51] think about what Patrick and Henry uh
[1:39:52] community college was doing. They have
[1:39:54] rooms set up where where the company can
[1:39:56] put in their equipment and be trained on
[1:39:58] their equipment. And so so yes, they
[1:40:00] might not be trained today, but they can
[1:40:01] be trained by the time you open up your
[1:40:03] factory. And so I think it it would make
[1:40:06] some of you in other areas in the county
[1:40:08] much more attractive if we start
[1:40:10] building that base of skills. We have a
[1:40:13] really competent workforce because we
[1:40:15] don't now. They come out of high school
[1:40:16] and and they they're not ready to do
[1:40:18] anything. It's unfortunate. It's not and
[1:40:20] it's not a criticism of the high school.
[1:40:21] That's just how high schools are, right?
[1:40:23] They don't give you that degree J O.
[1:40:26] >> Yeah.
[1:40:27] >> Mr. Mitchell.
[1:40:29] Um, I think the biggest takeaway from
[1:40:31] this and what Dan pointed out is
[1:40:33] [clears throat]
[1:40:35] when you break it down into these
[1:40:36] sections, we want hard clad.
[1:40:39] We want to know who is going to be
[1:40:40] responsible for delivering this section
[1:40:44] and we we want to be able to go to that
[1:40:45] person and we want to be able to see it
[1:40:47] happening. Um, I would be cur and and
[1:40:51] he's also right in saying that it's not
[1:40:53] our place to set that up. staff's place,
[1:40:56] but it is our place to say, well, you
[1:40:57] know, along the way, we want to see
[1:40:59] this. We want to see how this is
[1:41:01] progressing. We want a we want you to
[1:41:03] take these five pieces and we want
[1:41:06] updates on them. I would be curious for
[1:41:08] staff to take this
[1:41:12] cross reference with the school system
[1:41:14] and write in on these things. Who do you
[1:41:16] see doing this? Who do you see hand in
[1:41:19] the the way you're visioning it now? Who
[1:41:21] do you see handling this? Who do
[1:41:23] [clears throat] you see handling this?
[1:41:25] Who do you think you're going to need?
[1:41:26] And you know, at the at the end of the
[1:41:28] day, you're going to run into this wall
[1:41:29] of the schools. They're going to have
[1:41:32] this curriculum. I'm sure it's set by
[1:41:33] the state and stuff and things that have
[1:41:34] to go into the CTE. We can't we can't
[1:41:37] decide that for ourselves, but that'd be
[1:41:38] good information, too. So, you know, you
[1:41:40] go to the pieces of say, "Okay, so
[1:41:41] program education, that's the school
[1:41:43] system side. Who do they see?" And, you
[1:41:45] know, [clears throat] and go down
[1:41:46] through there and show us that who they
[1:41:48] plan on delivering it. And [snorts] if
[1:41:49] they're thinking we need if we need to
[1:41:51] work this project executive into it, we
[1:41:53] need to we need to decide that because I
[1:41:56] can also see where you're looking down
[1:41:58] the line and we get five years down the
[1:42:00] road and like we we missed this. We
[1:42:02] didn't we didn't pay any attention to
[1:42:05] this at all. And maybe if we'd have had
[1:42:08] if we had somebody's name written right
[1:42:10] here, we'd say, "Oh, we missed this
[1:42:11] part. Let's go find this guy and ask him
[1:42:13] what why didn't you do this?"
[1:42:15] >> That's exactly what's going to happen,
[1:42:16] Nick. down the road there's a piece
[1:42:18] missing. We didn't do this.
[1:42:19] >> I can and why didn't we do it? And then
[1:42:21] you're blaming somebody. Right now you
[1:42:23] have a chance midcourse set it up like
[1:42:25] you said who's doing all these pieces.
[1:42:27] It'd be very interesting to look at.
[1:42:29] >> So I I would like to see staff, you
[1:42:31] know, and take the and make the changes
[1:42:32] you think. I I mean Dan's is just a
[1:42:34] template. Take it and go with the school
[1:42:37] systems and and see see how y'all vision
[1:42:40] these things working out.
[1:42:42] >> So thank you. Is that all Mr. Mitchell?
[1:42:44] >> Yes, ma'am.
[1:42:45] >> Um Mr. Mr. Quinn, again, thank you for
[1:42:47] this. Um, I have done, um, two major
[1:42:51] middle school renovation projects in my
[1:42:54] career, and I think what you've laid out
[1:42:57] is precisely, um, the mapping of
[1:43:00] ensuring that we will have a quality,
[1:43:03] wellexecuted
[1:43:04] project. Um, this is a generational
[1:43:07] project for our citizens, businesses,
[1:43:10] and especially our students. Um, and I I
[1:43:13] really do think, you know, I've always
[1:43:15] been a big proponent of a construction
[1:43:17] project manager. This project, as I have
[1:43:21] reviewed it, and when you shared your
[1:43:23] slides with me and so forth, this
[1:43:25] project is is reaching beyond the more
[1:43:29] thought I've given it, beyond the, you
[1:43:31] know, the typical um construction
[1:43:33] manager approach. They're certainly
[1:43:35] inshed in this. Uh but with regard to
[1:43:38] things like curriculum, the schools are
[1:43:40] going to have to be at the table without
[1:43:43] question with Mr. Bumgardner in, you
[1:43:46] know, looking at what we're doing
[1:43:47] curriculum wise. Uh but to me, in
[1:43:50] developing the programmatic phase of
[1:43:52] this project, it's going to have to be
[1:43:55] that we're doing that 50 mile um you
[1:43:58] know, circumference of business
[1:44:00] interviews. it's going to have to be
[1:44:02] that we are trying to caucus our
[1:44:04] families and students at the high school
[1:44:07] level. Um, and looking um, you know,
[1:44:10] looking beyond what we're currently
[1:44:12] doing, what what with what we're doing,
[1:44:14] what's working, where the waiting list,
[1:44:15] etc. But I also think a big piece of
[1:44:18] this because we've we've talked about
[1:44:20] this school and this project being so
[1:44:23] generationally driven. Um, I think that
[1:44:26] we've got to make sure we're we're doing
[1:44:28] this project with vision in mind. Um and
[1:44:31] that is going to come in large part I
[1:44:32] think from seeing what the businesses in
[1:44:34] today's world are demanding and
[1:44:37] expecting out of their employees. um
[1:44:39] from the inception of this discussion,
[1:44:41] you know, gosh, a long time ago, uh we
[1:44:45] talked about this business modeling
[1:44:46] approach, you know, to bring if a
[1:44:49] business wants to partner, you know,
[1:44:51] with Franklin County that we could set
[1:44:53] them up, um and we could bring students
[1:44:55] in on a mentoring basis and then maybe
[1:44:57] somewhere along the way we could ensure
[1:44:59] that student or that company could say
[1:45:01] if you train and you get, you know, you
[1:45:03] get your certification, we want you, you
[1:45:06] know, it it's more intentional, right?
[1:45:08] So, um I think I am in support of the
[1:45:12] project executive position. One question
[1:45:15] I do have is how do you see because I
[1:45:18] I'm I'm thinking are you vision
[1:45:20] envisioning this as a contractual
[1:45:22] position or full-time employee?
[1:45:25] >> I I believe it's a full-time role.
[1:45:27] >> And what do they do after this? Well,
[1:45:30] that so that part I'm not sure about
[1:45:32] because when I think about the person
[1:45:34] that I need to manage the this whole
[1:45:37] project as it is today, that's that's
[1:45:39] one person. But then I see, okay, now
[1:45:42] the school's built, right? We this Bry's
[1:45:45] box is is facilities management. It's a
[1:45:48] Bry's box goes from a massive
[1:45:51] undertaking to a tiny piece. And so I
[1:45:54] see that that person could change over
[1:45:56] time. Or maybe maybe Steve and Dr. Sears
[1:45:59] decide they don't need that person. I
[1:46:01] still think you'll need that person
[1:46:02] going forward, but I do see I do see the
[1:46:05] roles and responsibilities for that
[1:46:06] person changing and so we'd have to see
[1:46:08] if the person you put in there in the
[1:46:10] beginning was able to transition to this
[1:46:12] new role or not. I I can't predict that.
[1:46:15] >> Well, I've seen some localities that
[1:46:17] have a pro a CIP, you know, project
[1:46:21] leader, if you will. um you know
[1:46:24] certainly involved at the project
[1:46:25] construction and development level but
[1:46:28] that person continuing in an oversight
[1:46:31] role all the while I mean if if we get
[1:46:33] this 1% we'll be able to you know
[1:46:37] consecutively work on school projects
[1:46:39] that are going to require you know what
[1:46:41] we feel is an accountable and efficient
[1:46:43] measure. Brandy is excellent. We're so
[1:46:46] blessed to have you. [clears throat] Um
[1:46:48] and Steve has a full plate. Um, and I
[1:46:52] think my message is is we want to make
[1:46:54] sure that the burden on our staff is not
[1:46:57] so great. Um, that, you know, we're all
[1:47:01] human. Um, and I think that this board's
[1:47:03] got a responsibility to make sure that
[1:47:06] the money um that we uh extend on this
[1:47:10] project um is money that's efficiently
[1:47:14] uh scoped out and that it's producing
[1:47:16] the results um that we expect it to be.
[1:47:19] with those expectations being out, you
[1:47:21] know, put out in the front commencement
[1:47:24] of the project. So, um I I like this
[1:47:27] very much. Um I I do think just this is
[1:47:31] very preliminary thinking and I don't
[1:47:33] mean to be redundant, but I do think
[1:47:35] that this position could take some
[1:47:37] roles. I mean, when I think about what's
[1:47:39] going on at the landfill, you know, when
[1:47:42] I think about, you know, the capital
[1:47:44] improvement projects that will be going
[1:47:46] on in public safety, when we think
[1:47:48] about, you know, more uh infrastructure
[1:47:50] type projects at Summit View, um our
[1:47:54] park system and so forth, I think that
[1:47:56] there are roles um that could be
[1:47:59] redefined perhaps um and utilized um
[1:48:02] under the you know the opaces of capital
[1:48:05] improvement planning. So that's kind of
[1:48:08] me just kind of taking a first blush
[1:48:10] look at that that question that I asked
[1:48:12] you. Um but uh
[1:48:14] >> and and I agree I agree with that. Just
[1:48:16] going back for a second like how do you
[1:48:18] see this project executive evolving? One
[1:48:20] thing I would say is I see that person
[1:48:23] always being needed because you have the
[1:48:25] school and the county and lots of stuff
[1:48:27] going on in two places and how do you
[1:48:29] make how do you have somebody at the top
[1:48:31] that's overseeing what's going on?
[1:48:34] >> Yeah. and the curriculum piece, you
[1:48:36] know, the schools and, you know, should
[1:48:38] have a large, you know, play a large
[1:48:41] role in curriculum. This is what they
[1:48:44] do. Um, and then you've got your SOQs,
[1:48:47] um, that have, you know, defined,
[1:48:48] [clears throat]
[1:48:49] um, expectations and eligibilities for
[1:48:52] CTE programs for the students in the
[1:48:54] Commonwealth. So, but there's also those
[1:48:57] other avenues that we're discussing
[1:48:59] which you know that to me the curriculum
[1:49:01] piece the program and education piece
[1:49:02] you articulate to me that really becomes
[1:49:05] a a very collaborative discussion with
[1:49:08] the school system with Curtis with doing
[1:49:12] all of those exercises internally within
[1:49:14] the school division to assess where
[1:49:16] they've been where they are um you know
[1:49:19] the solicitation of of surveys and what
[1:49:22] have you um so I I think you know we
[1:49:25] went into this project saying you know
[1:49:27] the board of supervisors is going to
[1:49:29] manage this project when I think this
[1:49:31] board has been very intentional about
[1:49:34] that. Um and the schools are our partner
[1:49:36] in this without question. And I think
[1:49:39] the schools are going to be able to
[1:49:40] integrate uh and complement the work um
[1:49:44] from a curriculum standpoint and for
[1:49:47] identification of need and to help um
[1:49:50] put that that wide net out um you know
[1:49:53] to work with the county and economic
[1:49:55] development office and with Brandy to
[1:49:58] make you know to ascertain all of those
[1:50:00] more detailed questions. But in a in a
[1:50:02] model that's set up like this, um, to
[1:50:05] me, it gives me confidence that we'll
[1:50:09] get the overview and we'll be able to
[1:50:11] see what's balancing and what's not
[1:50:13] balancing, you know, and we'll have an
[1:50:15] accountability piece built in through
[1:50:17] that project executive. Um, so I like
[1:50:19] this and I appreciate your time in
[1:50:22] putting this together.
[1:50:23] >> Yeah. And the curriculum piece, it's
[1:50:24] incredibly complicated, I think. Um,
[1:50:27] it's where that's where where a lot of
[1:50:29] decisions have to be made and
[1:50:31] >> and you know I I think back to my my
[1:50:34] discussions with Dr. Hodgeges and
[1:50:37] >> and and the comment about we need to
[1:50:38] pull the students. He said you know
[1:50:41] every year they come to me and they say
[1:50:43] they want dental hygienists. They want a
[1:50:45] dental hygienist program. And he said
[1:50:47] we've surveyed the whole area and we
[1:50:49] only need three. Yeah.
[1:50:50] >> And so we need 12 people. We need a
[1:50:54] demand of 12 dental hygienists before we
[1:50:57] will offer a course. Now, maybe our
[1:51:00] rigor isn't exactly what Dr. Hajes does,
[1:51:03] but you can still think about it and
[1:51:05] say, "Wow, do I really want to offer a
[1:51:07] dental hygienist program if we only need
[1:51:09] three? Where are the other nine people
[1:51:11] going to go?" You know, or you're are
[1:51:12] you really going to teach a program for
[1:51:14] three? And and also I the other comment
[1:51:16] I I'm a huge fan of focusing on the
[1:51:20] business needs with the student demands
[1:51:23] almost being secondary and and maybe it
[1:51:26] can't be as strong as that. Maybe you
[1:51:28] have to build some of those student
[1:51:30] needs in but but to the extent you're
[1:51:32] doing that they're coming out of the
[1:51:33] program without a job. Are they okay
[1:51:35] with that? You know that and and but
[1:51:36] that whole the whole curriculum it's
[1:51:38] really in two boxes here. And maybe one box ends up being all about
[1:51:42] curriculum. I'm not really sure. That's
[1:51:43] why I said these five boxes are in my
[1:51:45] mind they're kind of fluid. They're not
[1:51:47] fixed, but that that guy at the top or
[1:51:49] woman at the top is the one that would
[1:51:51] >> Yeah. I mean, we've got to be responsive
[1:51:53] to the needs of Franklin County and
[1:51:56] surrounding areas in terms of that net,
[1:51:58] you know, going out over the business
[1:52:00] communities. Um, and we know things here
[1:52:04] in our county that we do well. and you
[1:52:07] know and I can see that maybe this new
[1:52:10] CTE uh center and the associated
[1:52:12] [clears throat] curriculum could be on a
[1:52:14] continuum with Patrick and Henry um that
[1:52:17] you know that there is clear
[1:52:19] communication and deliberate and
[1:52:20] intentional planning curriculum to build
[1:52:23] to the secondary level. So, I think I
[1:52:25] think the sky's is the limit in terms of
[1:52:27] what we can do, but I don't think and my position is we we need as much
[1:52:32] information, guidance, and oversight as
[1:52:35] we can get. Um, and we'll have an
[1:52:37] outstanding generational project as an
[1:52:40] outcome.
[1:52:41] >> Good.
[1:52:41] >> Anybody else have anything? Mr. Carter,
[1:52:43] I
[1:52:43] >> I don't disagree with a lot of what's
[1:52:45] been said here, but and and I think
[1:52:48] maybe a project executive might be a
[1:52:51] good thing for this, but I personally
[1:52:54] don't see us creating a full-time
[1:52:57] another growing government, highpaying
[1:53:00] county [clears throat] position when
[1:53:01] we've got Brandy, uh the school systems
[1:53:04] got Curtis and Mr. law. I think a
[1:53:08] project executive might be good to get
[1:53:10] us through this, but
[1:53:12] >> I don't see that myself as a long-term
[1:53:16] >> position.
[1:53:17] >> Okay. I think that's a great point. Um,
[1:53:20] that's why I started out by asking if it
[1:53:22] was your opinion that it be
[1:53:23] contractually driven or on a full-time
[1:53:26] employee basis. And, you know, I think
[1:53:28] that there are variables within that decision alone that need to be
[1:53:32] explored. um you know, just so we get
[1:53:34] the outcomes we're looking for.
[1:53:36] >> And I'm not trying to crush it. I just
[1:53:39] think
[1:53:39] >> No, you're fine.
[1:53:40] >> We're [clears throat] growing government
[1:53:42] here and I don't much like that.
[1:53:44] >> So, would you be in favor of a
[1:53:45] contractual
[1:53:46] >> position at this level?
[1:53:48] >> Probably.
[1:53:49] >> I mean, we're just conjecture today.
[1:53:51] We're just in conjecture. Uh and
[1:53:53] >> I for me, it'd be easy to make that
[1:53:54] decision once I see Steve's thoughts on
[1:53:57] going through and seeing what they come
[1:53:59] back and say.
[1:54:00] >> Absolutely. Yeah. just there's another
[1:54:03] burden for you to carry. [laughter]
[1:54:06] >> Um do you have anything to say, Mr.
[1:54:08] Sandy?
[1:54:09] >> Well, I I have a lot of thoughts. I
[1:54:12] mean, I think um you know, we we had
[1:54:15] talked briefly and I think he's hit
[1:54:18] a lot of those highlights and a lot of
[1:54:20] the pillars of what we need to consider
[1:54:22] through the CTE project. I think I I
[1:54:26] appreciate um Mr. Mitchell's comments. I
[1:54:28] think let us let us take this and kind
[1:54:30] of work through it because I think what
[1:54:33] you'll find is we're already doing a
[1:54:34] number of these things,
[1:54:36] >> okay,
[1:54:36] >> that maybe you you just aren't aware of
[1:54:38] that are happening. And so I think but I
[1:54:41] think what we will find is through this
[1:54:43] process, we'll find some of those pieces
[1:54:45] and nuggets that, you know, either we
[1:54:47] didn't think of or we're not spending
[1:54:48] enough attention on. But, you know, we could come back like I could have
[1:54:52] Danny and probably don't want to do it
[1:54:54] today, but I could have her come up and
[1:54:55] speak to all the partnerships that are
[1:54:57] currently in place and how the high
[1:54:59] school is already working with the
[1:55:00] community college on certain programs.
[1:55:02] And so, a lot of those things are, you
[1:55:04] know, already in place. So, I don't want
[1:55:05] it to sound like uh, you know, this work
[1:55:07] session to sound like none of this is
[1:55:10] being considered or is being, you know,
[1:55:13] planned because that's certainly not the
[1:55:15] case here. And so I think great advice
[1:55:18] to take this kind of put put the names
[1:55:21] to and the folks who would be working on
[1:55:23] these types of things and these type of
[1:55:24] activities and kind of be able to report
[1:55:27] back to you guys kind of with some
[1:55:30] additional thoughts of of areas we need
[1:55:32] to spend more attention on and areas
[1:55:33] that maybe weren't considered and then I
[1:55:36] think that can lead us to hey we do need
[1:55:38] some help here or the school needs help
[1:55:41] over here for this particular aspect of
[1:55:43] >> so I think yeah I a lot of great ideas
[1:55:46] and and we probably talked an hour and a
[1:55:48] half when when we first looked at it um
[1:55:51] you know with just kind of thinking
[1:55:53] through all the different things and
[1:55:54] I'll just reiterate it's a a very
[1:55:57] complex project and and this is only the
[1:55:59] CTE part so I don't want us to also lose
[1:56:01] focus of the rest of the building
[1:56:03] >> exactly
[1:56:03] >> that that we're also working on and and
[1:56:06] developing and so there's going to be
[1:56:07] things that we have to decide
[1:56:09] >> in particular with the CTE is this the
[1:56:12] school's facility
[1:56:14] is it owned by the county and the
[1:56:15] schools are leasing it. Is it a
[1:56:17] community college? Is it shared with the
[1:56:18] community college? I mean, all those
[1:56:20] kind of things will have to be part of
[1:56:21] that discussion when it comes to the
[1:56:24] school system project. You know,
[1:56:25] typically those CTE centers, it's a
[1:56:28] school project and it's a school
[1:56:30] facility. This is a little different
[1:56:32] just because of the the makeup of the
[1:56:34] property and the building, you know, and
[1:56:36] when we start talking about having
[1:56:38] spaces for economic development and for
[1:56:40] businesses, that changes that, you know,
[1:56:43] changes that structure a little bit and
[1:56:44] it makes it a little more challenging
[1:56:46] when you have those different
[1:56:48] relationships. And so all those things I
[1:56:50] think we can work through, but those are
[1:56:51] the the things that we'll have to
[1:56:53] consider. And that's where these folks
[1:56:54] are already working on a number of those concepts and and parts
[1:56:59] of the
[1:57:00] >> if you and staff could work on that
[1:57:03] >> um and um I think and then draw a
[1:57:06] comparative model from what you're going
[1:57:08] to provide that we already are doing or
[1:57:11] [clears throat] have scoped out and
[1:57:13] overlay that with uh Dan's um uh you
[1:57:17] know his his u chart here and and his
[1:57:20] vision for this and see where potential
[1:57:23] gaps are.
[1:57:24] >> Um, one thing, um, we in government have
[1:57:28] a really good knack at doing things at a
[1:57:31] snail's pace
[1:57:33] >> and, um, I'm feeling a little bit of a
[1:57:36] sense of urgency um, to get this project
[1:57:39] moving and um, there are things that
[1:57:42] could be done now um, that's more on the
[1:57:45] research oriented side um, you know,
[1:57:49] without coming to some definite hard
[1:57:51] conclusions. Um, but we've got to figure
[1:57:53] out the things that we can start pulling
[1:57:55] the trigger on while we're making these
[1:57:57] decisions because, you know, I'm not
[1:58:00] interested in waiting three or four
[1:58:01] years, um, you know, for this project to
[1:58:04] be built. Um, I think we've got to get
[1:58:06] on it and we've got to be efficient
[1:58:08] about it and we've got to be very
[1:58:09] intentional about it. Do you agree with
[1:58:11] that, Mr. Quinn?
[1:58:12] >> 100%. Okay.
[1:58:14] >> 100%. Because I see I see Brandy getting
[1:58:17] to a point where all of a sudden she
[1:58:19] needs this.
[1:58:20] >> Yeah. Exactly.
[1:58:21] >> Well, who's working on Well, nobody's
[1:58:23] working on that, so we'll start it
[1:58:24] today. Well, now it takes three months
[1:58:26] to do whatever that is.
[1:58:27] >> And Bry's got a job. She does a lot of
[1:58:29] other things, right?
[1:58:31] >> And she's grinning at me. I know she's
[1:58:32] like going, "Yes, somebody said that."
[1:58:35] [laughter] But, uh, so Dan, thank you.
[1:58:36] >> Yeah. So, Steve, in addition to doing
[1:58:38] Nick articulated that piece really well.
[1:58:41] Could you come back and tell us the
[1:58:43] leadership model that you see for this?
[1:58:45] Like, do you agree it's a project
[1:58:47] executive or not? You have another
[1:58:48] alternative. and and that that that if you did agree, what would a job
[1:58:53] description look like for that person in
[1:58:55] your ideal world?
[1:58:56] >> Sure.
[1:58:56] >> Okay. Thanks.
[1:58:57] >> All right. Thank you so much, Dan. We
[1:58:59] appreciate it. Um, any other questions
[1:59:02] or comments before we move on?
[1:59:04] >> I think the biggest I I'm probably just
[1:59:06] repeating myself, but I just want to say
[1:59:07] it again. The biggest takeaway from this
[1:59:09] is set deliverables.
[1:59:12] >> Yes.
[1:59:12] >> For each section. Yes.
[1:59:14] >> And what person is responsible for
[1:59:16] those.
[1:59:17] >> That's right. I think that's the biggest
[1:59:18] takeaway from this
[1:59:20] >> and they make it measurable and we can
[1:59:22] track progress
[1:59:23] >> and we want to know how it h how they
[1:59:25] came to it and who did it.
[1:59:27] >> Correct. Agreed upon. I think the board
[1:59:30] um you all are in agreement with that.
[1:59:32] Mr. Carter.
[1:59:33] >> Yes.
[1:59:34] >> Okay. Very good. All right. We're going
[1:59:36] to move on. Uh the next item on our
[1:59:38] agenda, Mr. Sandy, did that conclude
[1:59:39] your remarks first? I may have cut you
[1:59:42] off.
[1:59:42] >> No.
[1:59:43] >> You you Okay. Okay. Uh the next item on
[1:59:46] our agenda, um we've got Lisa Cooper
[1:59:49] coming up. Um and we're going to uh I
[1:59:52] know Mr. Evans is here, the chair of the
[1:59:54] planning commission. Welcome, uh Mr.
[1:59:56] Evans to the meeting. Um and we're going
[1:59:58] to have I believe an overview or an
[2:00:00] update on the zoning rewrite.
[2:00:03] >> Yep. Let me I'll I'll maybe frame just
[2:00:06] some reference. So, the first thing we
[2:00:08] did want to just touch on is um just I
[2:00:11] think maybe the shorter conversation is
[2:00:14] um the planning commission did a 2232
[2:00:17] review, a comprehensive plan review of a
[2:00:19] cell tower recently and just under state
[2:00:22] code and and Mr. Mr. Da can jump in if I
[2:00:24] misspeak at all, but under state code,
[2:00:26] the planning commission decision whether
[2:00:28] it's in conformance with the plan stands
[2:00:31] and moves forward unless the board uh
[2:00:34] decides they want to hold their own
[2:00:35] public hearing and and review the
[2:00:37] request. And so I think Mr. Dak, I think
[2:00:40] it's a 30-day that the board kind of has
[2:00:43] to decide if they want to take it up or
[2:00:45] not. um you know and so since they just
[2:00:48] took the action uh what last week Lisa
[2:00:50] we just wanted to bring it to the board
[2:00:52] for the board's attention and possible
[2:00:54] direction on moving forward
[2:00:56] >> no statuto deadline absent an appeal
[2:00:58] there's an appeal you have 60 days to
[2:01:00] make a decision on it with no appeal
[2:01:02] there's certainly no deadline but you
[2:01:04] should act if not at this work session
[2:01:06] at the next public meeting at the latest
[2:01:08] would I recommend that y'all
[2:01:09] >> yeah you want to take it [clears throat]
[2:01:11] up
[2:01:11] >> and so really the only action would be
[2:01:13] is if the board wants to do their own
[2:01:15] public hearing directing staff to
[2:01:17] schedule [clears throat]
[2:01:18] a public hearing for that substantial
[2:01:20] conformance review.
[2:01:21] >> So, are the materials um Steve that
[2:01:23] we've seen thus far um is there more
[2:01:26] material that needs to be reviewed at
[2:01:28] the board level?
[2:01:29] >> If if you decided to move forward with
[2:01:30] public hearing, there is some more
[2:01:32] materials. We tried to give you enough
[2:01:33] to give you an idea of of kind of what's
[2:01:36] being requested. So, um, Lisa can maybe
[2:01:39] speak a little bit more to the site, but
[2:01:41] basically, um, it's in the Henry area,
[2:01:43] the county, Blige District, non-zoned
[2:01:45] area, uh, company is looking to build a
[2:01:48] new cellular tower. Um, and because of
[2:01:52] that, it falls under the comp plan
[2:01:54] conformance review um, process. And so,
[2:01:57] Lisa, do you have some slides on this
[2:01:59] one or just want to speak to a couple of
[2:02:00] the details of the project?
[2:02:02] >> It's probably still on here. Maybe if um
[2:02:05] I can just speak. The planning
[2:02:07] commission did hold their public hearing
[2:02:08] on August 11th um for a new tower that
[2:02:13] um it's uh vertical bridge and Celco
[2:02:18] partnership with Verizon Wireless. And
[2:02:21] it's off of Henry Road. It's Cherry
[2:02:24] Lane. It's a private road. It's about
[2:02:27] 21.259
[2:02:29] acres. Um it'll be about 100 by 100
[2:02:32] least area. The tower will be 190 foot
[2:02:36] in height with 4ft lightning rod. Um
[2:02:39] it's not high enough to have to have any
[2:02:41] lighting on the top. Um your planning
[2:02:45] commission did uh come to the conclusion
[2:02:48] that it was consistent with your
[2:02:50] comprehensive plan policies, goals,
[2:02:52] objectives, and strategies that it would
[2:02:55] not be detrimental to the adjacent or
[2:02:57] surrounding area. it was still in
[2:03:00] character with the future land use of
[2:03:03] the community and that such use would be
[2:03:05] in harmony with the purpose and the
[2:03:07] intent of your comprehensive plan and
[2:03:09] the community's public health safety and
[2:03:11] general welfare. I will tell you this
[2:03:13] lot is very wooded. Uh when the planning
[2:03:16] commission did the site visit, they
[2:03:19] basically went on the private road
[2:03:21] really couldn't go any further because
[2:03:23] it is it is so wooded. And of course,
[2:03:26] the company will only cut down the trees
[2:03:28] that they need to get to the least area,
[2:03:31] which was shown in your packet on um I
[2:03:34] think it was number 17. Um I would
[2:03:38] [clears throat] be glad to answer any
[2:03:40] questions. I know I was out of the
[2:03:42] office that day and one of the staff
[2:03:45] members was trying to get a hold of me
[2:03:47] with a Verizon cell phone and it
[2:03:50] wouldn't go through.
[2:03:51] >> [laughter]
[2:03:51] >> Um, so we did have um a couple of um one
[2:03:57] or two people that lived in the area
[2:04:00] against um they didn't think that they
[2:04:01] needed a cell tower. Um they really did
[2:04:04] not want it. They had concerns from the
[2:04:07] health of it to just being there. Um
[2:04:11] there was one gentleman that spoke in
[2:04:13] favor of it. his mother lived close well
[2:04:17] in this area and all she has is a cell
[2:04:19] phone and he's concerned when he's at
[2:04:22] work that if something happens to her
[2:04:24] she wouldn't be able to get anybody
[2:04:25] there. So you kind of had both sides um
[2:04:30] of people talking. So um but the
[2:04:32] planning commission did um decide a 6
[2:04:36] vote. There was one uh planning
[2:04:38] commission member absent.
[2:04:40] >> Okay. All right. Um, does that conclude
[2:04:43] your remarks, Lisa?
[2:04:44] >> Uh, yes, ma'am.
[2:04:45] >> Okay. So, what I'd like to do, yes, open
[2:04:47] up the day, Mr. Tatum.
[2:04:49] >> Okay. I guess my question in in that
[2:04:53] area, there's a cell phone tower on
[2:04:55] Brown Hill, which is the the mountain.
[2:04:57] >> Then you have the tower there at the
[2:04:59] Henry Fire Department, which is 195 ft
[2:05:02] tower that currently has nothing on it.
[2:05:06] >> And then this tower is going to be less
[2:05:08] than a mile from that tower.
[2:05:11] Do we need that many towers within such
[2:05:13] a short span? And could the cell to
[2:05:16] could the tower there at the Henry Fire
[2:05:17] Department be utilized instead of
[2:05:19] building a new tower?
[2:05:20] >> I I do have a map that was um a couple
[2:05:23] of maps that were supplied to me by the
[2:05:26] cell
[2:05:27] and um basically when I asked them the
[2:05:31] question of why they were not
[2:05:33] colllocating on the one at the rescue or
[2:05:36] at the Henry firehouse was um this is
[2:05:39] the explanation they gave me. the one
[2:05:41] that you're talking about that's north
[2:05:43] of the Henry um tower that is owned by
[2:05:48] T-Mobile now and Verizon is already on
[2:05:50] it for them to locate on the tower at
[2:05:56] the firehouse would not give them the
[2:05:58] coverage that they needed. So, they
[2:06:01] wanted a new tower at the location that
[2:06:03] they're posed that they could get more
[2:06:06] individuals
[2:06:08] um because of the two towers of being on
[2:06:10] the one on Brown, then if they had a
[2:06:13] tower a distance away from that one,
[2:06:16] then they could get more coverage. And
[2:06:18] that was the explanation that I got. And
[2:06:20] that was the one that that was given at
[2:06:22] the public hearing
[2:06:23] >> even though it's just a a mile rough.
[2:06:27] >> Yes. And I guess that's up to the board
[2:06:30] of supervisors. If you would like us to
[2:06:32] dig into it more deeply with the
[2:06:35] company, if you want to hold a public
[2:06:37] hearing, then you could do it is your
[2:06:40] right to do the 15.2232
[2:06:44] review. You don't have to accept um
[2:06:47] planning commission's recommendation,
[2:06:50] but I mean, correct me if I'm wrong. um
[2:06:52] if this is in conformance with the comp
[2:06:55] plan um under state law that it should
[2:06:58] be approved if there's alignment. Would
[2:07:00] that be a accurate statement?
[2:07:02] >> Yes. I mean it should be approved but if
[2:07:05] I will say this even though it staff
[2:07:08] supported it that was it in compliance
[2:07:10] and so did the planning commission. If
[2:07:12] there are concerns of the board of
[2:07:14] supervisors I don't think it would hurt
[2:07:18] um if there was some questions that you
[2:07:20] wanted answered.
[2:07:21] >> Okay. or I guess we have a little bit of
[2:07:24] time that we might be able to get
[2:07:26] answers without you having a public
[2:07:28] hearing.
[2:07:29] >> Yeah, I was going to suggest perhaps if
[2:07:31] there were specific questions, we could
[2:07:32] have them maybe provide some more
[2:07:34] information before the board's next
[2:07:35] meeting and then the board could decide
[2:07:37] at that point whether to move forward
[2:07:39] with the public hearing or let it ride.
[2:07:41] >> So, Mr. Tatum, I want to make sure that
[2:07:43] um your questions have been
[2:07:45] >> Yeah, she's she's answering my
[2:07:47] questions. I'm I'm I'm not sure that I'm
[2:07:50] satisfied with the answer, but I would
[2:07:51] like more information if you could get
[2:07:53] it,
[2:07:54] >> Mr. Carter.
[2:07:55] >> Yeah. Thank you, Lisa. I was at the
[2:07:57] planning hearing and there was some
[2:07:59] discussion about [clears throat] an
[2:08:01] emergency module on the tower and I
[2:08:04] didn't exactly understand what all they
[2:08:06] were talking about. Uh the new tower,
[2:08:09] they've got spaces for, I don't know,
[2:08:11] three or four modules and then if
[2:08:13] there's room, they'll let us put an
[2:08:15] emergency thing. But it was sort of like
[2:08:18] they didn't guarantee that. It was like
[2:08:21] if there was space, they would. And and
[2:08:23] for me personally, since we don't have
[2:08:25] that on the Henry Tower,
[2:08:29] I would like for them to agree to give
[2:08:31] us space for an emergency whatever it
[2:08:34] is. Well, we what they what we usually
[2:08:37] or what we have done in the past is we
[2:08:39] have always asked to have space on any
[2:08:41] tower for emergency services and they
[2:08:46] hadn't planned for that. They had just
[2:08:50] planned for other sale companies to be
[2:08:52] on there. So, what we did after the
[2:08:55] meeting is I got with Mr. Sandy and fire
[2:08:59] and em EMS to see if they wanted to
[2:09:02] colllocate on this tower and they didn't
[2:09:05] feel that there was any need for them to
[2:09:08] colllocate on it. So that issue
[2:09:11] I won't say has died but it it doesn't
[2:09:15] seem like the public safety wants to be
[2:09:17] on the tower that we're talking about
[2:09:19] today.
[2:09:20] >> So they don't need it.
[2:09:21] >> Well, I can I can expand. They're on the
[2:09:22] ground tower already. So okay,
[2:09:25] >> which is the one Mr. Tatum was referring
[2:09:27] to. So it's it's too close to need
[2:09:30] another tower basically.
[2:09:31] >> I I didn't understand that exactly, but
[2:09:33] I didn't want to build a new tower and
[2:09:35] then us not having an emergency.
[2:09:37] >> Yeah. So we're comfortable that the fact
[2:09:39] that we have space on that tower and
[2:09:40] then as Mr. Tatum mentioned if for some
[2:09:43] reason that other tower went away, there
[2:09:45] is the tower at Henry that I think would be our kind of our fallback option
[2:09:50] if we if we needed a location in the
[2:09:52] Henry area. But right now we have those
[2:09:54] facilities on the Brown Hill Tower and
[2:09:56] we're satisfied with those.
[2:09:58] >> So any other questions? Mr. Mr.
[2:10:00] >> Y'all say this is Verizon want to do
[2:10:02] this one?
[2:10:03] >> Um it is Verizon I guess will be the top
[2:10:06] one and it the company that would be um
[2:10:09] building it is my understanding would be
[2:10:11] that vertical bridge and um Celco
[2:10:15] uh partnership. So this is a
[2:10:19] tower builder, tower speculator, and and
[2:10:22] they're so [clears throat] they would be
[2:10:23] the ones building the tower. I think Mr.
[2:10:25] Quinn maybe even mentioned it at the
[2:10:26] last meeting that Verizon is kind of
[2:10:28] getting away from building their own
[2:10:29] towers. So this group would build the
[2:10:31] tower for Verizon u in this location.
[2:10:35] >> Is this group comprised of any
[2:10:36] individuals we worked with in the past?
[2:10:40] >> I don't I didn't re the two gentlemen
[2:10:42] that I worked with and staff worked
[2:10:44] with. I had never seen them before.
[2:10:46] >> Verizon's been supposed to come to Snow
[2:10:48] Creek for the last three August.
[2:10:51] So, I'm glad they're coming here.
[2:10:54] [laughter]
[2:10:54] >> You know what I mean? I do.
[2:10:55] >> I I don't have a problem with this at
[2:10:57] all.
[2:10:57] >> If it if it's going to expand service,
[2:10:59] people in Snow Creek would love to have
[2:11:01] >> Yes, I understand
[2:11:01] >> this coming to them. And I'm not
[2:11:03] dabbling in a 2232 conformance review.
[2:11:06] I've done learned my lesson on it. Last
[2:11:08] time I fussed that the planning
[2:11:09] commission didn't take the action they
[2:11:10] were supposed to, they did it this time.
[2:11:12] and I have no interest in a public
[2:11:14] hearing on this.
[2:11:15] >> Okay. Um before I solicit um for you
[2:11:19] know that level of feedback, Mr.
[2:11:21] Jameson, did you have something?
[2:11:23] >> Verizon Eric Callaway about I don't know
[2:11:26] six months ago we we went to with
[2:11:28] Verizon. Great about two months. It
[2:11:31] ain't worth the crap now. We got no
[2:11:33] coverage at all. Drop loans. You you
[2:11:37] call in call me. We'll be sitting there
[2:11:39] talking and all it just got away.
[2:11:42] And I don't know that this is going to
[2:11:44] give us any coverage and all in Callaway
[2:11:46] area, but uh like I said, we it's very
[2:11:49] disappointing with Verizon in that area
[2:11:52] now. And everybody's having the same
[2:11:53] problem in that area.
[2:11:54] >> We had a tough time having a
[2:11:56] conversation what was it yesterday or
[2:11:57] day before yesterday?
[2:11:58] >> Yes, ma'am. It dropped twice, three
[2:12:00] times.
[2:12:01] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[2:12:01] >> You know, within probably two
[2:12:02] [clears throat] minutes.
[2:12:03] >> Yeah. So, um are there any other
[2:12:06] comments on this before we get to the
[2:12:09] question? Okay. So the question before
[2:12:12] us um today unless Steve Lisa if you
[2:12:14] have any uh closing remarks on this
[2:12:17] matter before we kind of give an opinion
[2:12:19] on whether we want to engage in a public
[2:12:21] hearing.
[2:12:22] >> Um I I do not just if if you decide if
[2:12:26] you don't want to decide today if you
[2:12:28] want a public hearing but you want
[2:12:30] additional information just right I I
[2:12:32] would like it to be somewhat specific so
[2:12:34] that I could go back to the company.
[2:12:36] >> That's fair. Okay. So, what is uh your
[2:12:39] desire? Um, let's just kind of poll. Mr.
[2:12:42] Jameson, would you like to get
[2:12:45] additional information or do you want a
[2:12:47] public hearing or I don't think it's
[2:12:49] going to affect us there any more than
[2:12:50] it is now right now. But, uh, you don't
[2:12:53] think I'd ask that we get it in Callaway
[2:12:55] and build one in Callaway further to do
[2:12:56] in Snow Creek. [laughter]
[2:12:59] >> So, you got to answer my question still.
[2:13:02] >> I'm I'm Go ahead and do it. Then he's
[2:13:04] there. Good.
[2:13:05] >> So, you're
[2:13:06] >> I'm pulling.
[2:13:07] >> All right. So, you don't want the board
[2:13:09] to conduct a public hearing?
[2:13:11] >> No.
[2:13:11] >> And Okay.
[2:13:12] >> Good with that.
[2:13:12] >> And so, you're willing I just want to
[2:13:14] reaffirm that the planning commission's
[2:13:16] recommendation stands good with you.
[2:13:18] >> Yes, ma'am.
[2:13:19] >> Okay. Mr. Tatum,
[2:13:21] >> I'm not going to hold it up. There are
[2:13:22] people in that area in the the lower
[2:13:25] part of this map that will benefit from
[2:13:29] this tower. And those people have been
[2:13:32] living there for my whole life. and they
[2:13:35] probably have never had cell phone
[2:13:36] service in their life. I'm not going to
[2:13:38] hold up the project. Let it let it move
[2:13:40] forward.
[2:13:40] >> Well, Mr. Tatum, what I would um suggest
[2:13:44] um is we'll see where we are, but
[2:13:46] there's nothing to keep you from, you
[2:13:48] know, giving Mr. Sandy some questions
[2:13:50] and Lisa um some inquiries just to get
[2:13:53] your questions answered.
[2:13:54] >> Yeah. And and I I will do that. I would
[2:13:57] like to find out, you know, what is the
[2:14:00] status of of the tower at the Henry Fire
[2:14:02] Department since Scient I don't think is
[2:14:05] no longer in existence and they were the
[2:14:07] only ones on that tower.
[2:14:09] >> Um,
[2:14:11] >> you know, right now I've got a 195 ft
[2:14:14] tower sitting in right there in the
[2:14:16] parking lot at the Henry Fire
[2:14:17] Department,
[2:14:17] >> right?
[2:14:18] >> And it's not serving a purpose other
[2:14:21] than eyesore.
[2:14:23] >> Mr. Carter,
[2:14:24] >> I'm good with moving forward
[2:14:25] >> with no public hearing.
[2:14:27] >> Yes, ma'am.
[2:14:27] >> Mr. Mitchell,
[2:14:28] >> good.
[2:14:29] >> Mr. Quinn,
[2:14:30] >> agree.
[2:14:30] >> And I am in agreement as well. Um so the
[2:14:33] conclusion is that the board um supports
[2:14:38] um the planning commission's rendering
[2:14:41] and it is our desire to not have a
[2:14:43] public hearing at our level and we are
[2:14:46] going to leave it that if individual
[2:14:48] supervisors you know have additional
[2:14:50] questions Lisa um hopefully u between
[2:14:53] you and and Steve that they can get
[2:14:55] their questions answered in the interim.
[2:14:58] Does that give you what you need?
[2:15:00] >> I think it does. Are you sure?
[2:15:02] >> I think so. I just want to make sure. Do
[2:15:04] you want me to dive in why they're
[2:15:06] building a new tower or not?
[2:15:11] » I would appreciate an answer.
[2:15:13] >> Okay.
[2:15:14] >> I mean, it doesn't have to be anything
[2:15:15] formal. Just
[2:15:16] >> Do you want to Do you want to hold up
[2:15:18] this cons?
[2:15:20] >> No, don't hold it up.
[2:15:21] >> Are you sure?
[2:15:21] >> Yeah. Move M move forward. But I would
[2:15:23] like to know why why it's more feasible
[2:15:27] for them to build a new tower than it is
[2:15:28] to go on an existing one that's within a
[2:15:30] mile of where they're going to build.
[2:15:32] >> I think that's a reasonable question.
[2:15:34] >> Okay. Well,
[2:15:35] >> I'm not answering for them and Victor,
[2:15:37] he may remember, but there was something
[2:15:39] about the elevations. It is why that
[2:15:45] >> Mr. Evans, if you'd like to comment,
[2:15:47] you're more than welcome to.
[2:15:48] >> Something that I didn't say that would
[2:15:50] be great.
[2:15:52] Madame Chair and County Supervisors, um
[2:15:55] that was a concern. The topography of
[2:15:57] the area is a problem and to truly get
[2:16:00] the coverage as Mr. Cooper had
[2:16:02] mentioned, you have to have it a little
[2:16:04] bit farther out than the proximity to
[2:16:08] Brown Hill tower is too close to make it
[2:16:11] worthwhile. So having it further out,
[2:16:13] then you get the extension because they
[2:16:15] only go about so many miles with line of
[2:16:16] sight. So topography was the big issue
[2:16:19] as to why it wasn't effective to use the
[2:16:22] one at the station.
[2:16:23] >> Okay, that answers my question.
[2:16:25] >> Thank you very much. Okay, so Lisa, are
[2:16:28] you clear or do if you have any
[2:16:29] questions for us or need clarification?
[2:16:31] Um they have actually the company has um
[2:16:35] asked me today if I had heard anything
[2:16:37] because they're they're waiting and so I
[2:16:40] can send them an email asking for some
[2:16:42] more information that maybe we can put
[2:16:44] in a Friday packet
[2:16:47] >> or something like that.
[2:16:48] >> Okay. So you're next up with um Mr.
[2:16:51] Sandy maybe opening remarks on the
[2:16:53] zoning ordinance review.
[2:16:54] >> Yes. Yeah. I'll I'll open with a few
[2:16:56] comments and you kind of already met Mr.
[2:16:59] Um, Mr. Chair of the Planning
[2:17:02] Commission, uh, Victor Evans. And so, we wanted to have an opportunity to to
[2:17:06] provide an update. So, just quick
[2:17:09] historical recap. Of course, uh, in this
[2:17:11] room, I believe it was May 17th, we had
[2:17:14] a joint work session with the planning
[2:17:16] commission to really look at the first
[2:17:18] draft of the zoning ordinance. Um, that
[2:17:21] was prepared by our consultant, the
[2:17:23] Berkeley Group. Uh at that time the the
[2:17:25] planning commission had requested that
[2:17:28] they be allowed to basically take that
[2:17:30] draft back and work on it um some more.
[2:17:32] They weren't comfortable with where it
[2:17:34] was in that current um draft form. And
[2:17:37] the board's direction was to them was
[2:17:40] yes, go ahead and do that. Take as much
[2:17:42] time as you need. Um you know, when
[2:17:45] you're ready, bring it back. And so
[2:17:46] since that time, the planning commission
[2:17:48] has uh been working through what that
[2:17:50] process would look like and how they
[2:17:52] would kind of attack that um that
[2:17:55] revisiting the the document, so to
[2:17:57] speak. I think in the meantime, they had
[2:17:59] uh two members come off and had two new
[2:18:01] members come on and so it's been two or
[2:18:04] three months that they've kind of talked
[2:18:05] through this and worked through a
[2:18:07] possible schedule for uh reviewing and updating the ordinance. And so
[2:18:12] thought it was a a good opportunity and
[2:18:14] they were at a good point um that they
[2:18:16] had come up with some ideas for them to
[2:18:18] come and present um kind of what they've
[2:18:22] discussed and and kind of where they are
[2:18:23] at the moment. Um I think the plan I
[2:18:26] think the intention is that that plan
[2:18:28] can be flexible as they move through it.
[2:18:30] But they wanted to set up a template to follow for uh updating the plan or uh
[2:18:35] updating the ordinance. Um, I think one
[2:18:38] of a probably after uh Victor presents,
[2:18:42] I think one of the key things that he
[2:18:44] and I both would would really love to
[2:18:45] see some interaction from the board is
[2:18:47] what does the update process look like
[2:18:51] with the board? What is the level of
[2:18:53] engagement the board would like to have?
[2:18:55] Does that look like regular updates from the chair in a in a um in a work
[2:19:01] session like this? Is it joint work
[2:19:02] sessions on a quarterly basis between
[2:19:05] the planning commission and board? What
[2:19:07] is the expectation and what is the level
[2:19:09] of kind of interaction um that the board
[2:19:12] would like to have along the way during
[2:19:13] this process? I know there was concerns
[2:19:17] mentioned previously about not being
[2:19:20] updated during the two years that we
[2:19:21] worked on the the with the consultant.
[2:19:24] And so we definitely want to make sure
[2:19:26] that you guys feel like you're you're part of the effort. you're
[2:19:29] understanding where it is in the process
[2:19:31] if that's where you want to be. And so I
[2:19:33] think some that's some direction that I
[2:19:35] think Victor um is is here today to kind
[2:19:38] of seeking how that would fit into the
[2:19:40] schedule and maybe how that would modify
[2:19:42] or adjust the schedule depending on what
[2:19:44] that looks like. So with that, I'm happy
[2:19:48] to turn it over to to Victor to kind of
[2:19:50] outline what their discussions have
[2:19:52] been. and um there's kind of a schedule
[2:19:55] that had been floated around of of some
[2:19:58] things that he had worked through with the planning commission. So,
[2:20:01] unfortunately, Mr. Jefferson, I think,
[2:20:03] is out of town, the vice chair, uh I
[2:20:05] think he probably would have come with
[2:20:07] you and um and and helped you with the
[2:20:09] presentation, but thank you for coming.
[2:20:11] We appreciate you being here today.
[2:20:13] >> Thank you so much.
[2:20:15] >> The floor is yours, sir.
[2:20:16] >> Okay.
[2:20:18] Thank you, Madam Chair and county
[2:20:19] supervisors. I am the new chair for the
[2:20:22] planning commission. So, I'm now on my
[2:20:23] second month. But since there was a a
[2:20:27] joint decision that what was being
[2:20:29] proposed for a zoning ordinance didn't
[2:20:32] really meet the the quality or the
[2:20:36] standards of of what we wanted to be as
[2:20:38] a zoning ordinance. And um we took on
[2:20:42] that task as you requested for us to
[2:20:44] complete a review of the proposed zoning
[2:20:45] ordinance. What you have before you is
[2:20:49] uh what we've determined is our current
[2:20:51] work schedule [laughter] and calendar of
[2:20:54] um we started on the end of June where
[2:20:57] we were trying to develop both action
[2:21:00] plan and then what that schedule should
[2:21:02] be so that um and then to present this
[2:21:06] to you so you're aware of how we want to
[2:21:08] go about doing what you asked us to do.
[2:21:11] The way to read that is we do have
[2:21:14] things in in something of a sequential
[2:21:16] order from articles one through article
[2:21:18] 9 in that we want to make sure as we're
[2:21:20] tackling this and I'll tell you a little
[2:21:22] bit about how that's going. As we're
[2:21:24] tackling the review, we're creating
[2:21:26] we're ensuring we understand what solid
[2:21:28] foundation needs to exist and use those
[2:21:31] as building blocks as we go through the
[2:21:32] rest of the articles to see that the
[2:21:35] fundamentals
[2:21:37] are we adhere to the fundamentals
[2:21:39] throughout the whole zoning ordinance.
[2:21:42] What will happen is with every section
[2:21:45] that we're going to look at, staff will
[2:21:47] be presenting to us pointing out three
[2:21:49] things. First of all, we want to know
[2:21:52] what it is that staff who has to work
[2:21:54] with the zoning ordinance on a routine
[2:21:56] basis to see to it that they have
[2:21:58] consistent guidance and decision- making
[2:22:00] with the citizens.
[2:22:02] Why is it what is it that you really
[2:22:05] wanted in a zoning ordinance? We want to
[2:22:07] know what is it that staff wanted.
[2:22:09] Second thing, what is it that has to be
[2:22:12] in a zoning ordinance to be in
[2:22:13] compliance with code of Virginia? The
[2:22:15] third thing is what is it that was
[2:22:17] carried over from the existing zoning
[2:22:20] ordinance so that we know this is not
[2:22:22] new. This is what we've been working
[2:22:24] with.
[2:22:26] That leads us to the fourth item or
[2:22:28] component of the zoning ordinance and
[2:22:30] that is
[2:22:32] what was proposed as best practices.
[2:22:34] Whether they're really good practice
[2:22:36] worthy of being in Franklin County, we
[2:22:37] don't know yet. But so we'll know what
[2:22:39] it is that staff really wanted, what's
[2:22:41] required by code of Virginia, what's
[2:22:43] carried over from the current zone uh
[2:22:45] zoning ordinance, and then what are best
[2:22:47] practice suggestions.
[2:22:49] In each one of those occasions, the
[2:22:51] planning commission will make decision
[2:22:54] as to whether we like what's being
[2:22:55] presented as written, whether it needs
[2:22:58] to be rewarded to be more appropriate or
[2:23:01] whether should be deleted,
[2:23:03] whether it's a best practice or a
[2:23:05] carryover or whatever. We're going to
[2:23:07] take a look at that. Obviously, if it's
[2:23:09] required by code of Virginia, we have no
[2:23:10] say, but we want to make sure that
[2:23:12] everybody understands those three
[2:23:14] components
[2:23:16] and the fourth being best practices to
[2:23:17] whether we're going to add that.
[2:23:20] The way it's laid out is we decided to
[2:23:23] add two Wednesdays to our one monthly
[2:23:27] meeting. So, there'll be potential for
[2:23:29] total of three meetings a month as we go
[2:23:32] about conducting our work sessions. the
[2:23:35] code there SV
[2:23:37] that's the day that we typically have
[2:23:39] site visits our monthly site visit day
[2:23:41] followed by now we will do these work
[2:23:44] sessions in the boardroom because of
[2:23:46] this live streaming so that'll enable
[2:23:50] our residents to be able to stay
[2:23:52] involved whether they come here
[2:23:53] physically or because of live streaming
[2:23:55] so it's Wednesdays here site visit day
[2:24:00] and we expect our work sessions to be
[2:24:02] about three
[2:24:05] the P/H question mark. Well, that's our
[2:24:08] monthly public hearing meeting. Now,
[2:24:11] there have been times where we only have
[2:24:13] to have a public hearing for one, maybe
[2:24:15] two applications, which leaves plenty of
[2:24:18] time that evening for us to also squeeze
[2:24:20] in another work session. At this point
[2:24:22] in time, it's hard to tell which one of
[2:24:24] our public hearings throughout the year
[2:24:26] are going to be light or heavy. So,
[2:24:28] that's why it's the question mark there.
[2:24:30] So when it's possible, we'll squeeze in
[2:24:32] more. And then the fourth Wednesday of
[2:24:34] every month is that's that X you see
[2:24:38] U will be a dedicated to work sessions.
[2:24:41] When we went through the trying to come
[2:24:44] up with the schedule, we anticipated how
[2:24:47] many work sessions would be appropriate
[2:24:49] given the subject matter. [snorts]
[2:24:52] [clears throat] Built into that is we
[2:24:54] added the our public hearing days. So
[2:24:57] there's a little flexibility in thinking
[2:24:59] that somehow or another this schedule
[2:25:01] could hold up knowing full well that no
[2:25:04] schedule last scheduling for more than a
[2:25:06] month or two is going to hold up. So
[2:25:09] this room has been reserved to the end
[2:25:10] of October 2027. However, if this
[2:25:14] schedule does hold up, we think we'll
[2:25:16] have a we completed all the work
[2:25:18] sessions necessary to be able to conduct
[2:25:20] our own public hearing
[2:25:23] to determine whether it's worthy of
[2:25:26] adoption by the board of supervisors.
[2:25:28] So, thinking that could be done in
[2:25:29] August or September of 2027, we would
[2:25:32] have a complete zoning ordinance ready
[2:25:35] for your
[2:25:37] proposed by us as saying it's no, it's
[2:25:39] adoption worthy for you.
[2:25:42] um
[2:25:44] not included in this work session in
[2:25:46] this calendar
[2:25:48] is the frequency of which you would like
[2:25:52] to be updated. Now when we talked back
[2:25:54] in May at our joint meeting the idea of
[2:25:57] having joint meetings to stay a breast
[2:26:00] of each other's desires and and progress
[2:26:04] so uh or whether it needs to be a
[2:26:06] presentation like this. So two things,
[2:26:09] one you see the calendar before you
[2:26:13] and
[2:26:15] [clears throat] and the other one is
[2:26:17] how would you like to re be updated
[2:26:20] joint meetings which have to be
[2:26:22] scheduled. Our recommendation is we're
[2:26:24] going to do joint meetings is every four
[2:26:26] months. We think that's enough time for
[2:26:27] us to make some real substantive
[2:26:29] progress to have something worthwhile to
[2:26:31] come and present at a joint meeting. But
[2:26:34] if you want them more frequently or
[2:26:35] quarterly or
[2:26:37] six months, whatever. So that's my
[2:26:39] question now.
[2:26:40] >> Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. Evans. You
[2:26:43] want me just to pause here and
[2:26:44] >> and then I'm going to mention something
[2:26:45] else, but yes, I'm going to pause.
[2:26:47] >> Do you want to continue before we
[2:26:48] >> No, I'd like to know what Okay. The
[2:26:50] desire.
[2:26:52] Fair enough. So I think what I hear you
[2:26:54] saying, uh, Mr. Evans, is that you're
[2:26:56] recommending quarterly
[2:26:57] >> four months.
[2:26:58] >> Every four months. Okay. All right.
[2:27:02] So, what I would like to do
[2:27:04] is poll supervisors as to what um
[2:27:08] obviously this is new stuff for us, but
[2:27:10] do you have any initial reactions to
[2:27:13] this, Mr. Jameson?
[2:27:15] >> I have no problem with four months, you
[2:27:17] know.
[2:27:17] >> Okay.
[2:27:19] >> That's what works for the board there.
[2:27:21] >> And would that be a joint session of the
[2:27:23] two bodies?
[2:27:25] >> I don't really know. I don't think so. I think to the board itself would be
[2:27:29] sufficient to me to our board. Just let
[2:27:32] him come and present for an update.
[2:27:34] >> Yeah, we'll see what everybody says. But
[2:27:35] what I'm I'm just kind of looking at
[2:27:37] body language. I'm kind of thinking that
[2:27:40] um these every four month updates could
[2:27:42] be um you and uh and or andor Ron uh
[2:27:48] coming and having um an overview
[2:27:51] presentation uh to the board. Um we'll just stop there for the moment.
[2:27:56] Tim,
[2:27:57] >> I'm good with every four months. And I
[2:27:59] like the idea of either he coming in or
[2:28:02] Ron or Bo both come in and just present
[2:28:05] and that way it doesn't tie up all the
[2:28:08] commissioners on the planning commission
[2:28:09] so often.
[2:28:12] >> Mr. Carter.
[2:28:13] >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm fine with every four
[2:28:14] months, but I think if it would be
[2:28:16] possible
[2:28:18] uh if you all could email us the updates
[2:28:21] like when you go through articles one
[2:28:23] through three and that's complete. if
[2:28:26] you all could email that to us so we
[2:28:28] could see it and you wouldn't
[2:28:30] necessarily have to update it, but I'd
[2:28:32] like to see what's been done. And uh I
[2:28:36] don't disagree with your four parts you
[2:28:38] started off with, but you need a fifth
[2:28:40] part what the citizens want because we
[2:28:43] got a lot of feedback from the citizens
[2:28:46] and I want to make sure that you all get
[2:28:50] that in this rework.
[2:28:53] >> That's all I have.
[2:28:54] >> Thank you, Mr. Carter. Mr. Mitchell,
[2:28:56] >> I'm fine with that him coming every four
[2:28:58] months. I've had some pretty
[2:28:59] constructive conversations with my
[2:29:01] >> Yes.
[2:29:01] >> planning commissioner already. We've had
[2:29:03] some good talks about [clears throat]
[2:29:05] >> how we saw things going forward. Um,
[2:29:09] I agree with uh Mike there about the um
[2:29:12] about the citizen input, but I also I
[2:29:15] asked that the planning commission be
[2:29:16] very wary about not letting
[2:29:19] a few people drag them around to decide
[2:29:22] what the future of of this ordinance
[2:29:26] looks like for the county to be mindful
[2:29:28] of the county as a whole
[2:29:30] >> and not a small piece of it.
[2:29:33] >> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Quinn.
[2:29:36] I think the four months works as a
[2:29:39] >> I think the four months works as a
[2:29:41] placeholder. One thought is I start
[2:29:43] thinking about the updates that you'll
[2:29:46] have and you might find wow there's a
[2:29:47] lot of stuff here and maybe we should do
[2:29:50] it earlier because there's so much stuff
[2:29:52] to work and so yes we we have it
[2:29:54] scheduled for four months but you
[2:29:55] suddenly realize three months is is more
[2:29:57] appropriate. And and then the other
[2:29:59] comment I I'm thinking about is how you
[2:30:02] prep us because I think about, you know,
[2:30:04] when the consultant uh wanted feedback,
[2:30:06] she handed us a 300page book and said,
[2:30:08] "Do you have any questions?" Right. And and that didn't work at all. You
[2:30:12] know, I think you've talked about u I
[2:30:15] always come back to discretionary
[2:30:18] changes and non-discretionary. And so
[2:30:20] the non-discretionary are state mandates
[2:30:23] that you have to do or you found
[2:30:24] mistakes that have to be cleaned up.
[2:30:26] those were um non-discretionary,
[2:30:29] but but we encountered a lot of changes
[2:30:31] that were discretionary like the bees
[2:30:33] and chickens and and subdividing the
[2:30:35] farmland. And I'm sure there are a lot
[2:30:36] more and those those are going to
[2:30:38] require a lot of discussions. And in
[2:30:40] fact, I think it'll be helpful as you
[2:30:42] look out for for you to bring stuff to us like that and almost ask us for a
[2:30:47] vote because I so many of them were
[2:30:50] they're not black and white. They're not
[2:30:52] right or wrong. I think there'll be
[2:30:53] different opinions on them. So, so
[2:30:56] anyway, that's more than you wanted, but
[2:30:57] yes. And I think that one just one last
[2:31:01] change. I I do understand why you're
[2:31:03] using uh the the current draft as
[2:31:07] opposed to going back to our old draft.
[2:31:09] That makes a lot of sense to me.
[2:31:10] However, it's now going to be more
[2:31:13] difficult and more uh for you to tell us
[2:31:15] what changed, right? Because you don't
[2:31:17] have that red line version to go from
[2:31:19] what it was to what it is. You only have
[2:31:21] what it is. And so it's going to be a
[2:31:23] little trickier for you to identify what
[2:31:25] changed and and what what are material
[2:31:28] changes that we really need to focus on.
[2:31:32] >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Quinn. Uh if I may,
[2:31:35] um uh Mr. Evans, I I think my colleagues
[2:31:38] are hitting on some really good points.
[2:31:40] Um, I really do uh I like the um every
[2:31:45] uh four months and um I definitely think
[2:31:50] that uh incremental updates um by
[2:31:53] section would be most helpful. Um so but
[2:31:56] it's a lot for us to just get um you
[2:32:00] know the next draft and and just be
[2:32:03] charged with you know sitting and
[2:32:05] reviewing you know copious pages of of this and we'll be able to you know
[2:32:10] give more direct attention to it in that
[2:32:12] way. Um I could envision depending upon
[2:32:16] the planning commission's progress um we
[2:32:20] might want to have
[2:32:22] I don't know I'm thinking off the cuff
[2:32:24] here. we might want to have a joint
[2:32:25] meeting with the planning commission um
[2:32:27] prior to
[2:32:29] um the planning commission's um
[2:32:33] presentation and recommendation to the
[2:32:35] board of supervisors. U but you all
[2:32:37] that's not anything that I'm saying go
[2:32:39] do. Um I'm just thinking out loud a
[2:32:41] little bit. Um is there my question to
[2:32:43] myself is is there a time where we might
[2:32:46] want to engage both bodies around the
[2:32:48] table uh just to cover thoughts
[2:32:50] questions and at that point we would
[2:32:53] have the benefit of the full draft. Does
[2:32:55] that make sense?
[2:32:57] I um I would recommend that there at
[2:33:00] least be one or two joint sessions
[2:33:02] because in that kind of a meeting
[2:33:05] there's a open discussion and a better
[2:33:07] clear understanding of us and the entire
[2:33:11] board
[2:33:12] >> as to when that should be done. I guess
[2:33:15] as we pro proceed it'll become more
[2:33:18] obvious as to when's a good point to
[2:33:21] request that.
[2:33:22] >> Sure. And we can this is a fluid process
[2:33:24] obviously as you were saying with the
[2:33:26] work sessions and all you know golly if
[2:33:28] we could get done before next fall that
[2:33:30] would be fantastic but nobody wants to
[2:33:32] meet five times a month either um you
[2:33:35] know and your hour your meetings are
[2:33:36] three hours long is what you're
[2:33:38] projecting anyway um I would and I don't
[2:33:41] know what your preparation is going to
[2:33:43] be with regard to illustrating um
[2:33:45] changes over the current draft because
[2:33:48] we're not working on well you tell me um
[2:33:51] the changes are You are you guys looking
[2:33:53] at the changes over the current
[2:33:54] ordinance or the draft?
[2:33:58] >> Mostly we're going to use the format of
[2:34:00] what has been proposed,
[2:34:02] >> but content,
[2:34:03] >> but the content of what's in chapter 25
[2:34:06] of your current zoning ordinance. Um, I
[2:34:10] also like to point out we're not going
[2:34:11] to lose track of that, but we're also
[2:34:15] [clears throat]
[2:34:16] in our work sessions, we came up with a
[2:34:18] four-page action plan to account for the
[2:34:22] fact that there we've received a massive
[2:34:25] amount of input from our residents.
[2:34:29] And we're going [clears throat] to divvy
[2:34:30] those all those questions and concerns
[2:34:31] and comments up amongst all of us to see
[2:34:34] to it for all the time the citizens put
[2:34:36] into giving us feedback. Did we in fact
[2:34:40] look at it, address it? And so as we're
[2:34:43] going through the entire zoning
[2:34:44] ordinance, we're making sure what it is
[2:34:47] that came up in in just I mean truly
[2:34:50] it's a lot of comments that were were
[2:34:52] they addressed and if they weren't,
[2:34:54] we'll know which still needs to be
[2:34:55] addressed. So we're going to take care
[2:34:57] of that. Also the matter of citizen
[2:35:00] participation
[2:35:02] um we [clears throat] have said for our
[2:35:05] work sessions we have two signup sheets
[2:35:08] based on the topic. People selfidentify
[2:35:10] as subject matter experts. They get to
[2:35:12] speak first and then we'll open it up to
[2:35:15] the comments from the uh residents. So
[2:35:19] this like a general uh public comment
[2:35:21] period
[2:35:23] because we re realize that without their
[2:35:26] the citizens support and their genuine
[2:35:29] concern now to move forward without
[2:35:31] their ability to feel comfortable with
[2:35:33] it would would just be
[2:35:34] counterproductive.
[2:35:35] >> Well to Mr. Mitchell's point um I want
[2:35:38] to make sure that there is very very
[2:35:41] good fluid communication across the
[2:35:43] entire county.
[2:35:44] >> Yes.
[2:35:45] um you know making sure our residents
[2:35:47] know from every facet of our county
[2:35:50] footprint what's going on what the dates
[2:35:52] are uh maybe if there is any way to put
[2:35:56] you know some marginal updates on on the
[2:35:59] website I don't know what your
[2:36:00] mechanisms in place are but I want to
[2:36:03] make sure that we have opportunities to
[2:36:05] hear from each and every citizen across
[2:36:08] the county should they wish to do so
[2:36:10] >> Mrs. Cooper and the planning department
[2:36:12] has come up with a new system by which
[2:36:13] to alert the the community.
[2:36:15] >> Yes. Yes. Yes.
[2:36:16] >> Um and they will be seeing this schedule
[2:36:18] now that you've seen it and you agree
[2:36:20] with it.
[2:36:21] >> Now, Victor, I will interrupt you to say
[2:36:23] that that if you're working on the
[2:36:25] emergency alert system or I'm not even
[2:36:27] sure I'm characterizing it. That's for
[2:36:29] people that sign up. If you're not
[2:36:32] signed up, you're not reached, right?
[2:36:34] >> Um yes, ma'am. It is for people that has
[2:36:36] signed up.
[2:36:37] >> So, we're still going to miss people.
[2:36:39] There'll be two methods. I mean, we do
[2:36:41] have a lot of public participation that
[2:36:43] they're aware of what we're doing and
[2:36:45] they're also assisting us with getting
[2:36:47] the word out so that they know that on
[2:36:49] the county website, this schedule will
[2:36:51] be posted with the topic issues. And
[2:36:54] we're working on making sure that in
[2:36:56] preparation for each of these work
[2:36:58] sessions, the uh company documents are
[2:37:01] well identified so people can review
[2:37:03] them too prior to the work sessions.
[2:37:04] >> Yeah. I just don't want to take for
[2:37:05] granted that that system is adequate.
[2:37:10] Um, you know, that was one of the big
[2:37:12] problems we had, lessons learned. Um,
[2:37:14] you know, to make sure that we are
[2:37:16] reaching our public and our citizens.
[2:37:19] This is their, you know, document. It's
[2:37:21] our guiding legal document. Um, so I
[2:37:24] don't think we can do enough um to
[2:37:26] ensure that our citizens are being
[2:37:28] reached. Miss Cooper, did you have
[2:37:29] something?
[2:37:29] >> Yes. And we we're still keeping up the
[2:37:32] page for the zoning ordinance and that
[2:37:34] notifies individuals too when we put
[2:37:36] something new up there. So, we'll be
[2:37:39] using that. Also, I thought about too,
[2:37:42] it doesn't um reach everybody, but we
[2:37:45] still do the planning monthly. Um
[2:37:47] there's always space where we could put
[2:37:50] um something about what because staff
[2:37:52] should know if we're far ahead or if
[2:37:54] we're running a little bit behind um of
[2:37:57] what articles we would be talking about
[2:37:59] or if it's just one article. Um I can
[2:38:03] probably I thought about talking to um
[2:38:06] Mr. Tosh and see if he had any other
[2:38:08] ideas to be able to get the word out. I
[2:38:11] mean, we can put it on our Facebook
[2:38:13] page, have it on our website, have it on
[2:38:16] that site um to try to get out to people
[2:38:20] um to at least get them to look at to
[2:38:23] see what affects them. Yeah. And I think
[2:38:25] the board's in concurrence about the
[2:38:27] communication pieces. Am I uh not
[2:38:30] speaking representative of everyone up
[2:38:32] here? Um so that's great. So, Victor,
[2:38:35] back to my question. you're going to be
[2:38:37] evaluating against
[2:38:40] the draft, keeping in mind what the um
[2:38:43] foundational document looks like. Will
[2:38:46] you be able to redline your changes so
[2:38:49] that we can we don't have to read
[2:38:51] everything and look at footnotes? Can
[2:38:53] you redline your changes? I think given
[2:38:57] what [clears throat]
[2:38:58] that's challenging because the way
[2:39:00] chapter 25 is set up versus the new
[2:39:03] format that we're using to identify via
[2:39:06] redlinining process has been the
[2:39:08] challenge. My expectation is that you'll
[2:39:11] be able to
[2:39:14] my desire is to see to it that it's
[2:39:17] obvious as to what got removed or
[2:39:20] carried over.
[2:39:21] >> I would just ask you keep that in mind
[2:39:23] as a request. That's just me. I don't
[2:39:25] know what the board, you know,
[2:39:26] >> I think everybody wants that.
[2:39:27] >> Okay. Well, I my colleagues can weigh in
[2:39:30] as they wish. Um, for
[2:39:32] >> we support that.
[2:39:33] >> Okay. Anybody else on the board have any
[2:39:36] Mr.
[2:39:36] >> One request, Lisa, if you could, when
[2:39:38] you put this information out, you may
[2:39:40] put an asterk that this pertains to the
[2:39:43] zoned sections of Franklin County and
[2:39:45] not the unzoneed sections of Franklin
[2:39:47] County.
[2:39:47] >> Okay. So that the little lady that
[2:39:50] called me back in the spring was scared
[2:39:53] to death that she was going to have to
[2:39:54] get rid of her chickens.
[2:39:55] >> Yeah.
[2:39:56] >> And I mean she was she was scared,
[2:40:00] >> right?
[2:40:00] >> And because she didn't understand grant,
[2:40:02] you know, she's probably in her early
[2:40:04] 80s and and this really worried her and
[2:40:07] uh I assured her that she did not have
[2:40:09] to get rid of her chicken. So if you
[2:40:11] will put that on there that this is for
[2:40:13] the zoned area, not the unzoned area.
[2:40:17] And my my closing remark if I could. Um
[2:40:19] and of course my colleagues may have
[2:40:21] some closing remarks. Um I think you've
[2:40:25] heard me say numerous times. I think the
[2:40:26] board has even said it. Um my personal
[2:40:30] opinion on the document that that we
[2:40:33] had. Um we want to see a document that
[2:40:37] is Franklin County.
[2:40:40] Um, you know, and I know it it's helpful
[2:40:42] to do other locality comparisons to see
[2:40:45] where we to see where we sit regionally
[2:40:48] perhaps, but you know, the focus on
[2:40:51] making sure that the needs of Franklin
[2:40:52] County are being met through the zoning
[2:40:55] ordinance and with best practices of
[2:40:57] course in place, finding that balance, I
[2:40:59] think, is going to be critical.
[2:41:01] >> I think what um we believe you'll end up
[2:41:04] with is a document that can take on any
[2:41:07] kind of question.
[2:41:08] >> Yes.
[2:41:09] um [clears throat]
[2:41:10] and and have staff be able to provide
[2:41:13] leadership answers and also citizens
[2:41:15] answers because of the way it's going to
[2:41:17] be formatted. You take your specific
[2:41:19] issue or scenario and you know where
[2:41:22] those different aspects align
[2:41:25] >> so that um we're not talking about well
[2:41:28] I don't know let's make a good guess.
[2:41:30] That's what we're trying to make happen.
[2:41:31] >> So
[2:41:32] >> with the new format that's possible. I
[2:41:33] do have one more thing to bring up.
[2:41:34] >> Oh please I'm sorry. Please go ahead.
[2:41:38] Um, so I'm assuming [snorts]
[2:41:40] right now this schedule we can move
[2:41:42] forward with and that we're going to go
[2:41:44] ahead uh analyzing the format that was
[2:41:47] proposed to make sure it is very user
[2:41:50] friendly. That's our objective.
[2:41:51] >> Let's get a quick Okay. Is everybody
[2:41:54] okay with the schedule and the
[2:41:56] formatting that's been discussed?
[2:41:58] >> Okay, there you go. Victor,
[2:42:00] >> I um want to take this opportunity to
[2:42:02] inform the board that our monthly
[2:42:05] meetings um have several public comment
[2:42:08] recommendations
[2:42:10] that we
[2:42:12] focus our initial efforts on simply
[2:42:15] drafting an amendment to the current
[2:42:18] zoning ordinance that addresses all
[2:42:20] conditions and standards related to data
[2:42:23] centers.
[2:42:27] And I thought it was incumbent upon us
[2:42:28] to make you aware, I'm sure you are, but
[2:42:32] that we have been asked by the citizens
[2:42:34] to instead of waiting for the entire
[2:42:37] zoning ordinance to be reviewed and
[2:42:39] proposed as adoption ready
[2:42:43] data centers right now in this format is
[2:42:46] in during the commercial industrial
[2:42:48] section.
[2:42:50] >> So we're talking about March.
[2:42:54] We don't know what the desire is of the
[2:42:56] board right now. What we did is we gave
[2:42:57] you what you asked us to do. This is our
[2:43:00] process. But we don't know if the board
[2:43:02] says you know there are certain things
[2:43:05] that we feel are so important. Let's get
[2:43:08] them done first now
[2:43:10] as you go through the process of
[2:43:12] reviewing. You can get back to that. But
[2:43:14] there's certain things you want done
[2:43:16] now. And obviously data centers are the
[2:43:18] popular thing. So, we just wanted to ask
[2:43:21] if the board wants us to proceed as
[2:43:24] scheduled or is there something you
[2:43:26] think we should do now as a proposed
[2:43:29] amendment to the current zoning
[2:43:31] ordinance?
[2:43:32] >> Okay, that's a great question. Um, let's
[2:43:35] have some feedback, Mr. Tatum.
[2:43:36] >> I I personally I think this needs to be
[2:43:39] a countywide ordinance that we need to
[2:43:41] look at. Not
[2:43:42] >> I'm sorry. [clears throat] This this
[2:43:44] particular item needs to be looked at as
[2:43:46] a countywide ordinance similar to our
[2:43:49] solar farm ordinance that we have that
[2:43:52] limits uh the acreage and sets, you
[2:43:56] know, sets the guidelines as far as
[2:43:57] setbacks and this sort of thing. Um not
[2:44:00] just protection and in the zoned areas.
[2:44:04] This is something that we need
[2:44:06] countywide so that the entire county is
[2:44:08] protected because this is a major
[2:44:11] concern for everybody in Franklin
[2:44:14] County. And uh you know, right now I've
[2:44:17] had I've been explaining to people left
[2:44:21] and right in my district that where
[2:44:23] we're not zoned that we currently have
[2:44:26] no protections against a data center.
[2:44:30] And so that may require some some help
[2:44:34] from our our county attorney as some
[2:44:37] guidance as to where to go with this.
[2:44:39] But I would like to see this expanded
[2:44:42] not just for as a zoning uh ordinance
[2:44:47] plan as part of our county zoning, but a
[2:44:50] ordinance countywide
[2:44:53] that puts some restrictions in place
[2:44:55] that that we can enforce that gives that
[2:44:58] offers some protections.
[2:45:01] >> So, Mr. Mr. Tatum, what I'm hearing with
[2:45:03] the question that's on the table is you
[2:45:06] would like the data center ordinance to
[2:45:08] be pulled to be worked on.
[2:45:09] >> I'd like for it needs to be immediate
[2:45:12] and that's the feedback we need. That's important to the people and we
[2:45:17] need to get those those uh standards in
[2:45:19] place and those protections in place.
[2:45:21] >> All right, Mr. Mitchell. Thank you, Mr.
[2:45:23] Tatum. Okay, Mr. Mitchell.
[2:45:24] >> So [clears throat] So Tatum has brought
[2:45:26] that up several times. So
[2:45:30] Mr. Dadak, would you please give us an
[2:45:32] answer on how an ordinance works in an
[2:45:35] unzoned area and what type of protection
[2:45:37] there is in an unzoned area for these
[2:45:39] type things?
[2:45:40] >> It's going to be hard on data centers on
[2:45:43] the solar farms. The reason the comp
[2:45:45] plan gives protection to the zoned areas
[2:45:47] with 2232 review which gives you that
[2:45:51] enforcement mechanism where you actually
[2:45:52] have to approve a solar farm in
[2:45:54] non-zoned areas. Without that review,
[2:45:58] you could have solar farm
[2:46:01] language in your comp plan, but you have
[2:46:03] no way to enforce it because they would
[2:46:05] never have to come to you for approval.
[2:46:07] Um, as part of this process, I will keep
[2:46:10] looking, but I'll be honest, it's
[2:46:13] you can enforce building code, fire
[2:46:15] code, electrical code, you know, things
[2:46:18] that are countywide and that have
[2:46:21] statutory basis in something other than
[2:46:23] zoning. But the problem is in terms of
[2:46:25] regulating land use, the attorney
[2:46:28] general opinions, the law is pretty
[2:46:30] clear. It's it's zoning where the county
[2:46:33] can use police powers to regulate land
[2:46:35] use. We will look at every possible
[2:46:38] avenue in terms of what other
[2:46:39] enforcement there can be, but it it it's
[2:46:42] going to be hard. We will take a close
[2:46:44] look, but it doesn't have an easy answer
[2:46:46] like the solar farms do where there is a
[2:46:49] comp plan review that requires approval.
[2:46:51] So zoning being the only way to affect
[2:46:54] land use,
[2:46:56] >> that is the only way to regulate land
[2:46:57] use. That's correct. For example, with
[2:46:59] the short-term rentals, there's a
[2:47:01] statute that talks about that you can
[2:47:02] require registration of short-term
[2:47:04] rentals. And that's how we have that in
[2:47:06] non-zoned areas. But for non-zoned
[2:47:08] areas, you have to find a statutory
[2:47:10] authority other than zoning for you to
[2:47:12] do anything in terms of land use in your
[2:47:15] non-zoned areas. Obviously, you got
[2:47:17] building permits, all that. That's
[2:47:19] countywide. That's not zoning. But to
[2:47:21] regulate the land use, to approve a land
[2:47:23] use, that's zoning.
[2:47:25] >> So that's how you have a control over
[2:47:26] short-term rentals, mobile home parks,
[2:47:29] and things like that in a non-zoned
[2:47:31] area. But when it comes to a land use,
[2:47:32] which for these examples would be solar
[2:47:35] farms and data and data centers, there
[2:47:38] is no protection in an unzoneed.
[2:47:41] >> Well, for solar farms, they're they're considered a utility facility.
[2:47:46] So they had the 2232 review process,
[2:47:48] >> but if they come up in conformance,
[2:47:50] >> if they come up in conformance,
[2:47:52] >> yeah,
[2:47:53] >> we're obligated by law.
[2:47:55] >> That's correct. Um, so for example, data
[2:47:58] centers right now, you could add comp
[2:47:59] plan language, but it would never come
[2:48:02] to you as a comp plan approval unless
[2:48:06] the stat unless they make data centers a
[2:48:09] utility facility on 2232, but that's up
[2:48:11] to Richmond, unfortunately. Not. We
[2:48:13] could change that in the comp plan and
[2:48:15] they can still get around it.
[2:48:16] >> That's right. Because there's no
[2:48:18] enforcement mechanism right now under
[2:48:19] the statutory scheme that Richmond's
[2:48:22] given you. Um cuz like with the utility
[2:48:25] solar farms, you know, we've got a 1500
[2:48:27] acre cap and so cuz we questioned this
[2:48:31] fairly recently about the non-zoned
[2:48:33] areas and if their acreage counted
[2:48:36] against the overall county cap of 1500
[2:48:39] acres and I believe if I'm correct that
[2:48:43] it the non-zoned areas are included
[2:48:46] um and added into that number. Am I
[2:48:49] correct in that?
[2:48:49] >> And that's correct and again that's
[2:48:51] because of 2232 review. Right. Okay.
[2:48:53] >> For example, you could have your comp
[2:48:54] plan an acreage limits for anything you
[2:48:56] want, right? But without you having to
[2:48:59] approve it, you could have an acreage
[2:49:00] cap for industrial uh stock farms,
[2:49:03] right? But poultry farms, but industrial
[2:49:06] poultry farms never come to you in in a
[2:49:08] non-zone area for approval. So it it you
[2:49:11] just have no enforcing mechanism. Can
[2:49:14] that excuse me, can that cap be reduced
[2:49:18] and changed
[2:49:21] >> for solar farms? Sure. Um, now the only
[2:49:24] problem you'd run into if you've already
[2:49:26] approved above that cap, you you
[2:49:29] probably can't take away an already
[2:49:31] approved
[2:49:32] >> um I assume for so let's use solar farms
[2:49:36] example. If you lower the cap and you
[2:49:37] already approved a solar farm and the
[2:49:39] acreage cap exceeds that, you're going
[2:49:41] to come into a vested right issue. But
[2:49:43] yeah, you you can change the cap.
[2:49:45] >> I'm outside of that.
[2:49:46] >> I'm going to take it just a step deeper.
[2:49:48] >> If you went in the comp plan and decided
[2:49:52] >> you want to take it down to nothing. Say
[2:49:54] we want to drop it to the the amount of
[2:49:56] acres we have right now.
[2:49:58] >> Mhm.
[2:49:58] >> That we've already approved. I think the
[2:50:00] county is so the other night that makes
[2:50:02] three.
[2:50:02] >> Mhm.
[2:50:03] >> If we want to drop it to where those are
[2:50:05] now, how would that play out? For
[2:50:08] example, let's say there was one that
[2:50:10] already came forward, got denied, and
[2:50:13] wanted to come back and try again like
[2:50:16] the last one did,
[2:50:18] but you dropped the total acreage in
[2:50:20] your comp plan. How would that play out
[2:50:23] in court?
[2:50:24] >> Oh, [snorts] in court, I can't guarantee
[2:50:27] that, right? I mean, I I suppose they challenge the constitutionality and
[2:50:31] whatever arguments they come up with as
[2:50:33] to the cap, but um it would certainly be
[2:50:35] defensible on the 2232 review for denial
[2:50:38] because it be in your comp plan.
[2:50:40] >> Um you know what how that plays out in
[2:50:43] court, I can't guarantee you, but
[2:50:45] certainly you have an enforcement
[2:50:47] mechanism that's defensible. It's your
[2:50:50] 22, it's in your comp plan. Comp plan is
[2:50:52] what you look at for your 2232 review.
[2:50:54] It's it dictates 2232 review. It's not a
[2:50:57] guide like in best use permits. It's the
[2:50:59] end all be all, right? Um, so that would
[2:51:02] give you grounds for denial of another
[2:51:05] solar farm if you already hit your cap.
[2:51:08] >> Okay.
[2:51:09] >> So, does that answer the question about
[2:51:10] the non-zoned areas?
[2:51:12] >> And Mr. We will continue looking at what
[2:51:15] pension enforcement mechanism there are.
[2:51:16] There just is no easy.
[2:51:19] >> Yeah, I think we have to be careful of
[2:51:20] confusing the solar and the data
[2:51:23] centers. They're not treated the same by
[2:51:25] the state legislation.
[2:51:26] >> That's right. State legislation
[2:51:28] specifically considers solar a utility.
[2:51:31] >> Yeah.
[2:51:31] >> Which is why they're why they're
[2:51:33] reviewed under 2232. They do not have
[2:51:35] the same language for data centers,
[2:51:38] >> right, at this time
[2:51:39] >> at correct.
[2:51:40] >> Subject to change.
[2:51:41] >> Yeah.
[2:51:42] >> So, we need to lobby Richmond.
[2:51:45] >> Yes.
[2:51:46] >> Okay.
[2:51:46] >> Yes, sir. And far as the data centers,
[2:51:49] we in the unzone, we have we cannot put
[2:51:52] restrictions on it as far as noise,
[2:51:56] power, water, anything like that. Even
[2:51:58] in the nonzone areas, we cannot
[2:52:00] >> you cannot put any restrictions that
[2:52:01] don't apply to everything, right? You
[2:52:04] can have your noise ordinance can be
[2:52:06] nonzone areas, but it'll have to be a
[2:52:09] countywide noise ordinance, right? You
[2:52:11] can't specify for this use
[2:52:14] >> we have a noise ordinance of X.
[2:52:17] >> But
[2:52:18] if I can just interrupt briefly, Mr.
[2:52:20] Jameson, but to his point, the noise
[2:52:24] piece like if if the planning commission
[2:52:27] is going to um articulate with more
[2:52:30] specificity, then we have a noise
[2:52:32] ordinance.
[2:52:34] Um, so is it implied that the countywide
[2:52:38] noise ordinance is implied in a data
[2:52:42] center in a non-zoned area or does it
[2:52:44] have to be spelled out as such?
[2:52:49] » I think I can speak to that because it's
[2:52:51] really our current noise ordinance is
[2:52:52] really for amplified sound.
[2:52:54] >> Oh, that's noise. So
[2:52:55] >> that's all right.
[2:52:56] >> It really doesn't apply to the zoned
[2:52:58] area to be honest unless it's, you know,
[2:53:00] concert amplified sound, something like
[2:53:02] that.
[2:53:05] power consumption, water. I mean,
[2:53:09] there's no way to we can attach that to
[2:53:11] nonzone.
[2:53:13] >> Not that I'm aware of,
[2:53:14] >> you know, throughout the county.
[2:53:16] >> I think as long as you're conforming
[2:53:18] with the TW uh with 2232
[2:53:21] and you're conforming with the comp
[2:53:23] plan, you're done.
[2:53:25] >> Is that right?
[2:53:25] >> And that's why I was saying you have to
[2:53:27] be careful that mixing the two together.
[2:53:29] The data centers are not subject to 2232
[2:53:32] review. solar is. So that's where
[2:53:35] they're not treated the same when it
[2:53:37] comes to the comprehensive plan. But
[2:53:38] >> could we put together a countywide
[2:53:41] ordinance that limits uh industrial use,
[2:53:46] say puts a limit on water, daily water
[2:53:48] usage and daily power usage
[2:53:52] >> in the zoned areas
[2:53:54] >> in the countywide. I mean it would have
[2:53:56] to be countywide to include the unzoned
[2:53:59] areas.
[2:54:00] >> They going to come county water. my
[2:54:01] cattle are drinking.
[2:54:03] >> You'll have to do that.
[2:54:08] » I mean, that's just I'm throwing out a
[2:54:10] hypothetical. Is that a a possibility?
[2:54:13] >> I will look into it. My initial reaction
[2:54:14] is is is doubtful.
[2:54:16] >> Okay.
[2:54:17] >> Because you're you're going to you're
[2:54:18] trying to tie it to a use, right? You're
[2:54:20] for industrial use. Well, the moment
[2:54:22] you're tying it to land use, you're
[2:54:23] under into trouble in non-zoned areas
[2:54:25] because you're you're regulating land
[2:54:26] use. Um but like I said, we will look
[2:54:29] into all potential avenues given the
[2:54:31] board's um feedback on that.
[2:54:33] >> All right. Thank you.
[2:54:34] >> So, Mr. Jameson, um have you had your
[2:54:36] questions answered, sir?
[2:54:38] >> Mr. Carter,
[2:54:40] >> I would like for them to work on the
[2:54:43] data first, the data centers. And for me
[2:54:47] personally, and I don't know if we can
[2:54:49] do it, I would like to ban them
[2:54:51] everywhere in the county except where
[2:54:53] they're allowed by right at this point.
[2:54:57] That pretty much is what we have,
[2:55:01] >> right?
[2:55:02] >> Well,
[2:55:02] >> they're only they're only allowed in the
[2:55:05] industrial, right?
[2:55:06] >> In the zoned area, but they're allowed
[2:55:07] anywhere in the non-zoned area. Correct.
[2:55:09] >> So,
[2:55:10] >> I think your suggestion was banned
[2:55:13] countywide except for the
[2:55:15] >> Yeah. And I'm not sure not sure we have
[2:55:17] the ability to do that,
[2:55:19] >> Mr. Dick.
[2:55:22] >> Well, until it was challenged.
[2:55:25] Well, so let me rephrase. My legal
[2:55:27] advice is probably not. Obviously, I
[2:55:30] just adise you you could adopt that
[2:55:32] ordinance and wait for it to be
[2:55:34] challenged.
[2:55:37] >> Okay. Mr. Mitchell, did you have
[2:55:39] anything further? Uh any if you want to
[2:55:41] pull the data center orders?
[2:55:43] >> I think the planning commission should
[2:55:44] make that decision itself.
[2:55:45] >> Okay.
[2:55:46] >> I think that um if that's something that
[2:55:48] they feel if that's something they're
[2:55:50] getting feedback on that they need to
[2:55:51] do, that's fine.
[2:55:53] There's nothing we can do unless the
[2:55:56] unzoned areas want to become zoned.
[2:55:58] There's nothing we can do about that
[2:56:00] >> in the unzone.
[2:56:01] >> There's nothing we can do about that. Um
[2:56:04] you can't have you can't you can't have
[2:56:08] your property not zoned but want your
[2:56:09] neighbor zoned. That's just the way it
[2:56:11] is. Um and as far as the zoned areas,
[2:56:14] there's only one spot in the entire
[2:56:16] county that is by right.
[2:56:17] >> That's right.
[2:56:18] >> For it. So, if the if the planning
[2:56:20] commission wishes to pull this and work
[2:56:22] on it separately first, I'm fine with
[2:56:24] that. However, I'm I'm not interested in
[2:56:28] dabbling in any of the rest of it.
[2:56:30] >> Understand, Mr. Quinn.
[2:56:34] >> I I would pretend to let them proceed as
[2:56:37] they've laid out the schedule and not
[2:56:38] pull the data center forward. um myself
[2:56:41] I I do think it's worthwhile to have
[2:56:43] some kind of legal analysis of the
[2:56:45] regional business park designation or
[2:56:48] category for uh summit just because
[2:56:51] there have been so many questions about
[2:56:52] okay what happened back in 2016 and was
[2:56:55] it done properly and is it is it still
[2:56:57] valid and and I believe it is based on
[2:57:00] everything I've looked over however it's
[2:57:02] such a contentious area in such a
[2:57:04] contentious category that it feels like
[2:57:06] it would be worth getting some legal
[2:57:08] input on that one area of legal
[2:57:10] analysis.
[2:57:13] » So
[2:57:15] I've got
[2:57:18] you were for to pull the data center
[2:57:20] out. So three to pull. You were not to
[2:57:23] pull.
[2:57:23] >> Doesn't matter to me. Planning
[2:57:25] commission make that decision.
[2:57:26] >> Okay. And and Dan, you are not to pull.
[2:57:28] >> Yeah. Not to pull.
[2:57:29] >> Not to pull. Okay. Alrighty then. Um
[2:57:34] Nick, come on now.
[2:57:36] >> [laughter]
[2:57:37] >> Um,
[2:57:38] >> I say they stick to their schedule.
[2:57:40] >> You know, when I talked to my planning
[2:57:42] commissioner, uh, Ron Jefferson, uh, and
[2:57:44] we briefly discussed this topic. Um,
[2:57:49] my first, uh, response to him was, "We
[2:57:52] have a planning commission. We need to
[2:57:55] empower the planning commission to do
[2:57:56] its job."
[2:57:58] And if the planning commission feels
[2:58:02] that you need to pull certain ordinances
[2:58:05] to work on in your schedule, um pull
[2:58:08] them out. My initial comment was that's
[2:58:12] under your purview um as a planning
[2:58:15] commission and you're appointed by us.
[2:58:17] Um and I know you all were looking for
[2:58:19] some feedback from the board to make
[2:58:22] sure that we can stay as closely aligned
[2:58:24] as possible. Um and we appreciate that.
[2:58:27] um very much. Um I am okay either way.
[2:58:32] I'm I'm kind of like Nick. I want you
[2:58:33] all empowered to do what you've been
[2:58:35] placed there to do. Um the data center
[2:58:38] issue certainly is something. Um the
[2:58:41] what I worry about um if I worry about
[2:58:44] anything relative to the ordinance
[2:58:46] number one um I think that and I told
[2:58:49] Ron this the ordinance I really
[2:58:52] encourage you guys um to really do some
[2:58:54] due diligence and talking to surrounding
[2:58:56] localities and looking at some of their
[2:58:59] ordinances because as I work around the
[2:59:01] state there's some differences in
[2:59:03] locality ordinances and just to kind of
[2:59:06] get a feel for are there standards or
[2:59:09] are there not and we've got to make it
[2:59:11] fit Franklin County, of course, first
[2:59:13] and foremost. So, I encourage that. Um,
[2:59:17] of course, our citizens feedback is
[2:59:19] critical. Um, but, you know, I really
[2:59:22] want you all empowered to do what we put
[2:59:24] you there to do. Um, I can go either way
[2:59:28] with it. If if the planning commission
[2:59:29] feels that you've got enough um you know
[2:59:32] if there's a a sense of urgency within
[2:59:34] the commission to pull it um I don't
[2:59:37] think anybody on this board I think
[2:59:39] you've got the support to pull it. Um I
[2:59:41] don't hear anybody I mean Mr. Quinn I
[2:59:43] think um you don't want it pulled.
[2:59:49] » Okay then I think we're very close on
[2:59:51] this. So is that helpful to you Victor?
[2:59:53] I think we're
[2:59:54] >> Let me tell you what I think I heard.
[2:59:56] >> Okay. So um and first of all we did this
[3:00:01] in when the data center really just blew
[3:00:04] up. We were seeking to understand
[3:00:08] political will as to desire you're the
[3:00:10] leadership.
[3:00:12] We were comfortable with this schedule.
[3:00:14] We just didn't know whether you were
[3:00:15] comfortable with waiting that long.
[3:00:17] >> No. [laughter]
[3:00:19] But we understand
[3:00:20] >> and I'm not speaking now totally on
[3:00:22] behalf of the of the planning commission
[3:00:24] because I'm going to take this back to
[3:00:26] the planning commission to say okay
[3:00:28] um you have a lot of trust in us and if
[3:00:32] we can adjust this schedule move up the
[3:00:34] data center thing soonest you'd
[3:00:36] appreciate it and that would be welcomed
[3:00:39] and we would get the support to adjust
[3:00:41] the schedule accordingly
[3:00:42] >> and I think what you've heard is we
[3:00:45] believe it's under your purview to make
[3:00:46] that decision and this board will
[3:00:48] support the planning commission's
[3:00:50] decision.
[3:00:51] >> All right. So, um we'll work with staff.
[3:00:54] Also, I've got to tell you, I hope we
[3:00:56] can have a panel discussion for the
[3:00:59] community
[3:01:00] um and seek the subject matter experts
[3:01:03] that can be uh received as unbiased
[3:01:07] so that we are t making decisions about
[3:01:09] what's appropriate. And we will have to
[3:01:12] take a look around uh in other
[3:01:14] localities to find out how they have
[3:01:16] figured out proper conditions and
[3:01:17] standards that are or are not working.
[3:01:20] So
[3:01:20] >> yeah and and Victor just you know um as
[3:01:23] aside um since data centers you know in
[3:01:27] southwest Virginia are now very
[3:01:30] prevalent topic for the localities here.
[3:01:33] Um there's so much rhetoric out there
[3:01:35] and and non-factual information. I
[3:01:39] personally think some of it perhaps
[3:01:41] originated maybe back 10 or 15 years ago
[3:01:45] and as Northern Virginia has increased
[3:01:47] its data center density basically and I
[3:01:50] use loosely a data center on every
[3:01:52] corner and then residential
[3:01:54] neighborhoods have just been built
[3:01:55] around some of these data centers. you
[3:01:57] know, if you've got a conglomeration of
[3:01:59] data centers and my logic tells me that
[3:02:02] if there's any uh adverse consequences,
[3:02:05] they get magnified
[3:02:06] simply by virtue of density.
[3:02:09] >> Um, and I also know from, you know, some
[3:02:12] research that I'm doing and working
[3:02:13] across the state, you know, there are
[3:02:17] things are not the same way today in
[3:02:19] terms of how data centers function,
[3:02:23] their efficiency or lack thereof, etc.
[3:02:25] what are the the consequences, pros and
[3:02:29] cons? And when I talk to Ron, I I
[3:02:32] express that because I think what for me
[3:02:35] and my colleagues can speak for
[3:02:36] themselves, I think we really need to to
[3:02:39] structure our ordinance around what we
[3:02:40] know today. Um, and I think we've got
[3:02:43] to, you know, really take the rhetoric
[3:02:44] out of the picture and we've got to look
[3:02:46] objectively at at what it is. And then
[3:02:49] you'll be able and through your research
[3:02:52] of doing that, you'll be able to craft
[3:02:54] um and adjust that ordinance, I think,
[3:02:56] accordingly. Mr. Carter.
[3:02:58] >> Yes. Uh Steve, could you maybe contact
[3:03:01] Jim Hutsler, the board I serve on at
[3:03:03] Veco, Energy and Agriculture, and get
[3:03:06] some of those PowerPoint presentations
[3:03:08] they've had on data centers, and and get
[3:03:11] it to Victor and the planning
[3:03:13] commission. That's a great idea.
[3:03:14] Certainly. and I've already been in
[3:03:16] conversation with with them and we have
[3:03:18] some information compiled and I think we
[3:03:20] can help with setting up that panel
[3:03:22] you're talking about.
[3:03:24] >> Yeah,
[3:03:25] >> that concludes my comments.
[3:03:26] >> Is this giving you the guidance that you
[3:03:28] need, Mr. Evans?
[3:03:29] >> Thank you.
[3:03:30] >> Well, we appreciate and please convey
[3:03:32] our gratitude um to the planning
[3:03:34] commission. um we know you're going to
[3:03:36] be working really hard and um you all
[3:03:39] are volunteers and you step up and you
[3:03:42] give of your of your time and that does
[3:03:44] not go unnoticed and we are very
[3:03:46] grateful for that.
[3:03:47] >> Appreciate it. Thank you for for your
[3:03:49] support
[3:03:49] >> of course. Okay, our last item on our
[3:03:52] agenda um is to discuss the Boone Mill
[3:03:56] vacancy that we have. Um I have given
[3:03:59] each of you um just uh a version of
[3:04:03] guidance and it's a draft. Uh what you
[3:04:05] have in front of you um Mr. Gwyn and his
[3:04:09] associates um they drafted the second
[3:04:13] document which is in um chart form. They
[3:04:16] have drafted these timelines based upon
[3:04:20] um deadlines. The the piece that I have
[3:04:24] given you is more specific. Um what I
[3:04:27] will say what I will do is just briefly
[3:04:30] run down this and what we're going to
[3:04:31] the outcome of today um we need to set
[3:04:35] some dates given what's on this and um
[3:04:38] so just let me just run down for public
[3:04:40] record um that we've got one month under
[3:04:43] statute um to fill this vacancy.
[3:04:46] >> I I apologize Madam Chairman. It's 45
[3:04:49] days.
[3:04:50] >> It's 45.
[3:04:51] >> Yeah.
[3:04:51] >> Nobody has said that to me.
[3:04:53] >> It's actually 45 to your point. Yes. I
[3:04:55] apologize. I believe Mr. Gwyn's chart is
[3:04:59] assuming you wanted to appoint someone
[3:05:01] by your next meeting. You technically do
[3:05:04] have more time.
[3:05:07] >> Okay.
[3:05:08] >> But
[3:05:09] >> okay,
[3:05:09] >> that that was the assumption was that
[3:05:11] you want to appoint someone by next
[3:05:13] meeting, but you have not much more, a
[3:05:15] little bit more time.
[3:05:16] >> Thank you. Thank you. Okay. 45 days um
[3:05:21] to make the appointment and the timeline
[3:05:24] um began yesterday, Wednesday, August
[3:05:27] 19th. Um and so the uh statutory time
[3:05:32] that Mr. Gwyn has given us is September
[3:05:34] 14th uh for uh the appointment to be
[3:05:38] made. Are you in concurrence with this
[3:05:40] chart, Mr. Dadak?
[3:05:46] » So that's
[3:05:47] >> that's my question. This throws all this
[3:05:49] out of out in
[3:05:51] >> you have 45 days to appoint someone
[3:05:54] under a statute.
[3:05:56] The assumption was I I I apologize it
[3:05:59] wasn't part of conversation but this
[3:06:01] chart is as he described an aggressive
[3:06:03] timeline to appoint someone by your next
[3:06:05] meeting.
[3:06:06] >> Under a statute you have 45 days to
[3:06:08] appoint someone.
[3:06:09] >> But I still think Lori what we should do
[3:06:11] is try to stick to this timeline and
[3:06:13] hope it works out.
[3:06:14] >> I agree.
[3:06:14] >> And just not worry about the 15 days
[3:06:16] unless we have to. I agree.
[3:06:17] >> 15 days.
[3:06:18] >> Yeah, if we got to add 15 days later,
[3:06:20] that's fine, but for the time being,
[3:06:21] let's
[3:06:21] >> I think this is doable. That's what
[3:06:22] we're going to work through today. Mr.
[3:06:24] Datock, thank you for that
[3:06:25] clarification. Um, so, uh, what we are
[3:06:30] going to do is, um, the board of
[3:06:32] supervisors is working with staff to
[3:06:34] post a notice for application submittal.
[3:06:38] Um, and we will do so electronically and
[3:06:40] via print media. Um, and we will have
[3:06:43] that out on or about this Friday,
[3:06:46] tomorrow, August 21st.
[3:06:48] Uh, the notice will announce the vacancy
[3:06:51] and it'll provide application
[3:06:53] instructions.
[3:06:56] [clears throat] Excuse me. U, we are
[3:06:58] going to do our best to make sure that
[3:07:00] um the links are on this announcement,
[3:07:03] [cough]
[3:07:04] excuse me, and places that you can um
[3:07:07] pick up applications and so forth. The
[3:07:10] deadline to apply for the vacancy is
[3:07:12] Wednesday, September 2nd.
[3:07:15] And all of this is going to be in the
[3:07:17] announcement for guidance for potential
[3:07:19] applicants. What we as a board need to
[3:07:21] do today um if you wish to proceed um
[3:07:25] under the the initial assumptions that I
[3:07:27] was working under um the first item and
[3:07:30] let's just work by this um for each
[3:07:33] event and look at our calendars
[3:07:35] concurrently. The first is a special
[3:07:38] called meeting. Um and I am and these
[3:07:41] are just suggestions gentlemen. Um uh
[3:07:44] would be held Thursday, September 3rd.
[3:07:47] Understanding that the deadline is
[3:07:48] September 2nd for submitt. So September
[3:07:51] 3rd um we are required to hold a meeting
[3:07:55] and publicly announce the applicants in
[3:07:58] open session and that we would have
[3:08:01] closed meeting u discussion after that.
[3:08:04] So, I'm going to stop there. Is
[3:08:07] everybody okay for September 3rd for a
[3:08:09] special called meeting?
[3:08:12] >> What's your time?
[3:08:13] >> That's That's for you guys to tell me
[3:08:15] what you would prefer, Mr. I've got your
[3:08:17] note, Mr. Quinn. Thank you. Um, what
[3:08:19] time do you all prefer on the third?
[3:08:21] >> I prefer going around 6:00 p.m.
[3:08:24] >> 6 p.m., Mr. Jameson,
[3:08:27] >> I can make it work.
[3:08:28] >> You don't like six o'clock? I don't
[3:08:30] really like it, but that's that's
[3:08:31] [snorts] fine. Earlier would be better
[3:08:33] for me, but like I said, I'll make it
[3:08:35] work. Come up with
[3:08:37] >> Mr. Carter.
[3:08:38] >> I'm flexible.
[3:08:40] Six is fine.
[3:08:41] >> Okay,
[3:08:43] Mr. Mitchell.
[3:08:44] >> Uh earlier would be better for me, but I
[3:08:46] can make six workers.
[3:08:48] >> You want to find a happy medium of five?
[3:08:49] >> No. If if Tim needs it at 6 for him to
[3:08:51] be here, that's when we need to do it.
[3:08:53] >> Is that with your work schedule?
[3:08:54] >> That that I mean, no. I can be here
[3:08:56] earlier, but my preference would be to
[3:08:58] later on in the evening. So, if we need
[3:09:00] to go earlier to accommodate Marshall, I
[3:09:03] can I can do earlier. That
[3:09:06] >> six works the best, but I'm I'm
[3:09:08] flexible. Like Mike said, I can go
[3:09:10] earlier.
[3:09:11] >> Mr. Jameson, I'm going to make sure if
[3:09:12] we do it at 6 that
[3:09:14] >> that probably better for the public,
[3:09:16] right?
[3:09:16] >> Pardon me.
[3:09:17] >> That would probably be better six.
[3:09:19] >> I think it would absolutely um help the
[3:09:21] public at at any time after 5:00. I
[3:09:25] think would So, do you all want to go
[3:09:26] with six?
[3:09:28] Okay. Um, I'm putting that down. Um,
[3:09:32] my pen would work.
[3:09:35] Okay. Thank you. I think we're okay. So,
[3:09:37] the next item is uh a called meeting to
[3:09:40] be held the next week. uh the week of
[3:09:43] September se 7th through um this says
[3:09:46] the 11th but I would really say as
[3:09:48] you'll see um we need to conduct the
[3:09:51] interviews between the 7th and the 10th
[3:09:55] um and those interviews um would be
[3:09:58] scheduled accordingly after we get the
[3:10:01] applications and to see how many
[3:10:03] applicants we have um the deadline to
[3:10:07] interview is September 11th but as
[3:10:09] you'll see the next item um is that we
[3:10:12] would have another called meeting that
[3:10:14] week where on September 11th um we would
[3:10:20] um
[3:10:21] let's see uh we would go we we have to
[3:10:24] vote on the selected candidate on the
[3:10:26] 11th so we interview that week we have
[3:10:30] discussion that week and we have to vote
[3:10:32] on the candidate by the 11th which is
[3:10:35] that Friday so uh between the dates and
[3:10:38] this is going to be predicated of course
[3:10:40] on the number of applicants we get. You
[3:10:43] know, if we get two applicants, then our
[3:10:45] interview schedule will not be too
[3:10:47] complex. If we have five applicants, six
[3:10:50] applicants, we'll have to work
[3:10:52] accordingly. So, what I would suggest is
[3:10:55] that we consider earlier in the week to
[3:10:59] start the interview schedule in case we
[3:11:01] need extra time after we see how many
[3:11:03] applicants we get. So, with that said,
[3:11:07] um does does anybody have uh avail Well,
[3:11:10] the 7th is Labor Day. Yeah,
[3:11:12] >> let me just say that right off hand.
[3:11:14] >> Um
[3:11:17] what is your pleasure uh for the 8th,
[3:11:19] 9th, and 10th for interviews?
[3:11:23] >> I'll make it work.
[3:11:24] >> I'm good.
[3:11:25] >> Mr. Jameson,
[3:11:30] » I'm good.
[3:11:32] >> Mr. Mitchell?
[3:11:32] >> Yeah.
[3:11:33] >> Okay. Okay. And I've got you covered,
[3:11:35] Mr. Quinn. Thank you. Um Okay. Um I've
[3:11:39] got to be out of town um Tuesday for a
[3:11:43] UVA appointment for my daughter. Um so
[3:11:46] um I would like some grace there if I
[3:11:49] could get some. Um could we start
[3:11:52] interviewing um on the 9th uh starting
[3:11:57] right after lunch? How does that work
[3:12:00] for everybody?
[3:12:04] Mr. Damison,
[3:12:05] >> start on the 9th.
[3:12:09] >> Um, and start maybe at 1:00.
[3:12:12] How's that work for you, Mr. M?
[3:12:15] >> Mr. Carter?
[3:12:16] >> I'm fine with that.
[3:12:17] >> Okay. And then if again, we'll have to
[3:12:20] evaluate how many applicants we get and
[3:12:22] we'll know that very soon. Um and we
[3:12:25] will adjust the interview schedule. If
[3:12:27] we can get the interviews um done in a
[3:12:30] in an orderly manner depending upon
[3:12:32] number, we might be able to complete
[3:12:34] them on the 9th. But if we need extra
[3:12:37] time, uh we've got that cushion day of
[3:12:39] the 10th in there. So I would ask you to
[3:12:42] hold the 10th open if you can if we need
[3:12:46] that. Is everyone okay with that? So
[3:12:49] interviews on the 9th at 1 p.m. Is that
[3:12:53] cool?
[3:12:54] All right. Um, and so that'll move us
[3:12:57] into Friday the 11th, which is when, um,
[3:13:01] you know, as we have those interviews,
[3:13:03] we'll have close session time, you know,
[3:13:05] during this week to deliberate, um, you
[3:13:08] know, after the interviews and so forth
[3:13:10] as a board. Um, and then on Friday the
[3:13:13] 11th, we need to vote on the selected
[3:13:16] candidate in open session. So, what I
[3:13:18] would ask is, what is your pleasure on
[3:13:21] Friday the 11th?
[3:13:23] um to to make the announcement of the
[3:13:26] candidate that we uh would like to see
[3:13:28] voted on
[3:13:31] time.
[3:13:33] >> Can we do it that morning? Cuz I might
[3:13:35] be leaving to go out of town that
[3:13:36] evening
[3:13:36] >> and I know there's a fair anniversary
[3:13:38] water quality monitoring dinner that
[3:13:41] night if anybody's interested in going
[3:13:43] to that. You want to do it in the
[3:13:44] morning?
[3:13:45] >> That would work good for me so we can
[3:13:47] leave that evening.
[3:13:48] >> Okay, Mr. Jameson
[3:13:51] that day. I'm good. But we will vote on
[3:13:53] them that day.
[3:13:54] >> We will be voting. We have to
[3:13:56] >> be gone the next week.
[3:13:57] >> Well, I think the statute lines us up to
[3:13:59] vote by the 14th.
[3:14:00] >> By the 11th.
[3:14:01] >> Yeah. Um Mr. Tatum,
[3:14:03] >> I'm good. Just for whatever time you
[3:14:05] say, be here.
[3:14:06] >> Okay, Mr. Carter.
[3:14:07] >> I'm good, but I would prefer morning.
[3:14:10] >> Okay. And Mr. Mitchell, you said you
[3:14:12] were okay. Correct.
[3:14:12] >> Morning.
[3:14:13] >> All right. So, for the 11th, um, what if
[3:14:16] we set this at, um,
[3:14:20] 11:00 a.m., 10:00 a.m.?
[3:14:23] >> How about 10?
[3:14:23] >> 10.
[3:14:24] Okay.
[3:14:25] >> Seven.
[3:14:25] >> All right. So,
[3:14:27] >> 5:15.
[3:14:27] >> We are not doing seven. Okay. All right.
[3:14:31] So, 10:00 a.m. on the 11th um to have a
[3:14:34] public vote on the selected candidate.
[3:14:37] Um, and if things go according to plan,
[3:14:40] um, you know, this has come on us very
[3:14:42] quickly and, you know, I've been trying
[3:14:46] to throw this stuff together, um, with
[3:14:48] Mr. Gwyn. Um, so again, some grace
[3:14:51] trying to get everything lined up. Um,
[3:14:55] it would be fantastic. Our board meeting
[3:14:57] in September comes early on the 15th,
[3:15:01] the way the calendar lies. So, um it
[3:15:04] would be fantastic to get our candidate
[3:15:07] um awarded on the uh on the 11th and
[3:15:11] then our board meeting is the 15th the
[3:15:13] following Tuesday. So, it would be
[3:15:15] fantastic um I think um moving forward
[3:15:18] unless the board objects. um we could
[3:15:21] possibly maybe get this individual sworn
[3:15:23] in at our board meeting and have uh the
[3:15:27] judge or the circuit court clerk here to
[3:15:29] do so so the applicant's family could be
[3:15:32] here and so forth. Um but that's that
[3:15:34] again is a is a board decision for you
[3:15:36] all to give me guidance on.
[3:15:38] >> So is there anything what we'll do is I
[3:15:41] will get you a memorandum of confirming
[3:15:44] these dates and times. Of course, there
[3:15:46] will be uh public appropriate public
[3:15:49] notice given through Steve and his
[3:15:52] staff, the 3-day uh public notice that
[3:15:54] will go out to the, you know, to the
[3:15:56] citizens and so forth to announce the
[3:15:58] meetings and um the appropriate times
[3:16:02] where we'll have to go into close
[3:16:03] session with those uh code sections uh
[3:16:06] properly announced. uh with that um and
[3:16:10] I think I think if this was uh not as
[3:16:13] painful as I thought it was going to be.
[3:16:14] Thank you all for your um for your
[3:16:17] flexibility and I will get out conf you
[3:16:19] know confirmations on dates and times
[3:16:21] and and what those are for just so you
[3:16:23] can have that information moving
[3:16:25] forward. Do you all have any comments or
[3:16:27] questions?
[3:16:28] >> I have a question Lori. So is this
[3:16:30] appointment will just be for three and a
[3:16:31] half months. Will there be a special
[3:16:33] election in [cough]
[3:16:34] >> this will be on the ballot next
[3:16:36] November?
[3:16:36] >> Oh next November. Oh, so not like the
[3:16:38] school board position that's on this
[3:16:40] November.
[3:16:40] >> No, sir. That Mr. Datak with I know Jim
[3:16:43] and I have talked about that twice.
[3:16:46] >> Next general election. Yes, that would
[3:16:47] be next November. So, um that Thank you
[3:16:51] for bringing that up, Dan. That's a
[3:16:52] really good point. And of course, um the
[3:16:55] applicants the application will go
[3:16:56] through a lot of this, but you know, you
[3:16:58] have to be a resident of the Boone
[3:17:00] District in good standing. Um all of
[3:17:02] that will be articulated for for your
[3:17:04] reference points. And of course, if any
[3:17:07] applicants that you know of or friends
[3:17:10] or neighbors in that district have any
[3:17:11] questions, um please feel free to call
[3:17:14] myself, Mr. Sandy, our clerk Samantha,
[3:17:17] uh and we are happy to help you uh walk
[3:17:19] you through [snorts] uh any information
[3:17:21] that you need. So, am I clear that you
[3:17:24] all are don't have any further questions
[3:17:26] or comments on the process? Mr. Data, do
[3:17:29] you have anything to add?
[3:17:32] >> Not unless someone has questions. No,
[3:17:34] thank you.
[3:17:34] >> Okay, Mr. Sandy.
[3:17:36] Okay. Um, is there any other business to
[3:17:39] come before uh the board this afternoon?
[3:17:42] Anything on your mind?
[3:17:44] >> I have one item, Madame Clerk. I I'd
[3:17:46] like to wish Mr. Sandy a very happy
[3:17:48] birthday.
[3:17:49] >> Are we supposed to sing, Tony?
[3:17:51] [laughter]
[3:17:52] >> Happy birth. Please don't. You don't
[3:17:54] want me singing to you. Um, but happy
[3:17:57] birthday.
[3:17:57] >> Thank you.
[3:17:58] >> Very happy birthday. Okay. So, um, I
[3:18:01] think we're good and, um, I'm going to
[3:18:03] adjourn the meeting. until uh se well I
[3:18:07] guess our our meetings that'll be let's
[3:18:10] see the first one
[3:18:11] >> third you would have to open
[3:18:13] >> yes September 3rd
[3:18:14] >> open a meeting and then go into close
[3:18:15] session
[3:18:16] >> yeah so we're going to adjourn until
[3:18:18] September 3rd so thank you all very much
[3:18:21] for your time and your attention