08-29-90 MinutesAUGUST 29, 1990
Su~rvi~or~ in Attendance:
Mr. C. F. Currin, Jr., Chairman
Mr. M. B. Sullivan, Vice Chairman
Mr. G. H. Applegate
Mr. Harry G. Daniel
Mr. Je~ J. Mayas
Mr. Lane B. Ramsey
M~. Anny Davis, ~×ec.
Asst. to Co. Admin.
Legit. Svcs. and
Intergcvern. Affair~
Mr. William Diggs, Real
Chief Robert =aries,
~r. ~radford S. Hamm=r,
Dir., Gen. $~rvice$
DJ=. of Planning
Human Services
Transp. Director
Mrs. Penlin~ Mitchell,
Dir. of ~ews/Info,
Services
Dr. Willia~ ~elscn,
Mr. Richard Sale,
Deputy Co. Admin.,
Social Services
Mr, Jay Steg~aier,
Dir. of Budge~
Dt~. of Utiliei~s
Mr. Frederick willis,
Audit
Mr. Currin called the regularly scheduled meetinq to order at
t2:45 p.m. (DST} in %h% Clover Hill High ~ohool auditorium and
weluomed ~hos~ ~resent. He presented a brief hi~to~y of events
90-641 ~129190
which had occurred from the inception of the Growth Committee,
the Committee on the Fute~e, the development of ceztain issues
pertinent to ~rowth issues and financing infrastructure,
e~tablish~ent of the Reserve for Future Capital Projects
Account in the budget; effort~ through the County Legislative
Delegation to obtain impact fees for the Court%y, etc., and
ultimately to %hi~ meeting. Ne reference a conference in
Portland, Oregon regarding the financing of infrastructure
which he, Mr. Sullivan and others in the County attended from
whioh evolved %he concept of conducting an informational work
session for those individuals in Chesterfi~Id County interested
in this matter.
Mr, Ramsay referenced a Commission, established approximately
two years ago by the ~n~ral A~$emJOly, ~bose purpose was
study the ability of local governments to pay for infra~truc-
ture needs. He stated Chesterfield County staff wag asked
recently to make a presentation tO that Commission~ a short
synopsis of which will be presented at this time by Mr. Jay
stagmaier~ Director of B~dget and ~anagement, to provide those
present with an understandin~ of the County's ability to
£inance infrastructure and outline some of the issues that the
County has addressed, as well as issues chat the County will
need to addree~ in the future.
Mr. Steglnaier presented an overview of the Chesterfield
keard of Supervisors Testimony to tke Cemmis~Lecal
and Stat= Infrastructure and Revenue Resources~ outlining and
econo, is te~s. Be addressed aspects relative %o the County'~
rapid growth b~inq experienced in ~he County; he,sing affor~-
ability~ ~plo~en= opportunities; =he needs and financing for
capital facilities; how and who pays for needed facilities;
fi~e stations, parks, libraries, etc., for Chesterfield
supporting ~nterprin~ activiti~ u~r fees support operations
and costs; the innouative use~ ~f revenue options; tax
in=rea~e~ to generat~ revenue~ tax supported outstanding debt~
bond rating stat~s: etc. ~e concluded =he presentation by
s~arizing that:
1. Ches~erfi=ld's rapid growth in popuia~ioa, housing and
employmen% is a major factor ~upporting economic qrowth in
school age children and thi~ affects ~e cO~
devoted to meeting the infrastructure needs 0f a growing
co~unity~ and
5. that %h~ County has r~auhp~ [h~ limit of its ability to
financ~ construction ~ntirely wi~ General Obliqation
options. [It is noted a copy of an info~ational handout
is filed wink th~ papers of thi~ Board.]
Mr. Ramsay ~ntr~uced Mr. Frank ~lechman o~ the ConIllct Canter
of George Mason University; Ms. Sue Robinson of ~he
i
i
i
B
the process of financing community infras%~uctnre.
Mr. ~ike Shibley summarized the group's quallfi~ation~ and
exDe~ience and explained how their professional backgrounds
interacted~ outlined the his%cry of tho project; exhibited e
copy of a workbook which had been distributed to the ~Qar~ as a
guideline toward achieving their goals through the r~commenda-
tion of the workshop; explained the process and how it wcrke~
why it i~ important to communities, identifying and explaining
the process of convening =he working group, determining the
choices and developing a plan, the development/implementation
of a plan, and getting the public involved.
M~. Frank Blschman conducted a q~estion a~d answer session
addressfn~ues on how and why is it necessary to get the
public involved in the process, when the public should be
involved; the procedures to use in order to obtain
participation (who, how, when, etc.); rules; level
the b~nufit of ~h~ level uf expertise involved: etc.
Mr. Mayas excused Aimself from ehe
There was further discussion relative to ~e methodology used
to determine financing n=ed~ the need for real public partici-
pation from ~he beginning of the process; being eden to various
modes to make a collaborative process work; the representation
of different view; ooK~i~nt =o the issue; etc. Mr. Sullivan
stated that, although he agreed with tko concep~ Of a collabo-
rative working process an~ inten~a~ to learn ~ore and
responsibili:y for the ~inal decision-making in these matters
as he was elected to do. (It i~ noted a copy of
info~ational handout is fil~ with the papers of this Doard.)
The Board generally agreed that the meeting had been very
beneficial and productive; that b~tter decisions could b~
f~om the receipt o~ mor~ input; and that ~ey would ~upport
proceeding with directing st~ff to father the data,
how to proceed with the infrastructure financing process. Mr.
Currin asked that, subsmquP~% ~o the compilation uf this
ma~eriat and staff's reco~enda~ion, ell ~hose conc~rne~
possibly a future meeting could bm scheduled to discum~
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, thm Board
adjourned a~ 4~1~ p.m. (DST) un=il 2:60 p.m. on September
1990.
Ayes: Mr. Ceftin, Mr. Sntlivan, Mr. Applsgate and ~r. Daniel.
~a~e B. R~sey ~ ~ C.F. Currin, Jr.
County Administr a%o~ Chairman
90-643 8729/90