2012-02-08 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
February 8, 2012
Supervisors in Attendance: Staff in Attendance:
Mr. Daniel A. Gecker, Chairman Mr. Mike Bacile, Dir.,
Ms. Dorothy A. Jaeckle, Vice Chrm. Purchasing
Mr. Arthur S. Warren Dr. Sheryl Bailey, Dep.
Ms. James M. Holland County Administrator,
Mr. Stephen A. Elswick Management Services
Ms. Janice Blakley,
Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier Clerk to the Board
County Administrator Mr. Allan Carmody, Dir.,
Budget and Management
Mr. Barry Condrey, Chief
Information Officer
Mr. Roy Covington, Dir.,
Utilities
Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Dir.,
Intergovtl. Relations
Mr. Jonathan Davis, Dir.,
Real Estate Assessments
Mr. Will Davis, Dir.,
Economic Development
Mr. William Dupler, Dep.
County Administrator,
Community Development
Mr. Michael Golden, Dir.,
Parks and Recreation
Mr. John W. Harmon,
Real Property Manager
Mr. Donald Kappel, Dir.,
Public Affairs
Mr. Rob Key, Director,
General Services
Mr. Louis Lassiter, Asst.
County Administrator
Mr. Mike Mabe, Director,
Libraries
Ms. Mary Martin Selby,
Dir., Human Resource
Services
Mr. Jeffrey L. Mincks,
County Attorney
Chief Edward L. Senter,
Fire Department
Ms. Sarah Snead, Dep.
County Administrator,
Human Services
Mr. Kirk Turner, Dir.,
Planning
Mr. Rick Witt,
Building Official
Mr. Scott Zaremba, Dir.,
Human Resource Programs
11-71
Mr. Gecker called the scheduled Work Session to order at 1:00
p.m.
1. WORK SESSION REGARDING THE DRAFT COUNTYWIDE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Mr. Turner presented a summary of the draft Comprehensive
Plan. He reviewed the process stating staff has been working
on the plan since May 2009 and has met with numerous
stakeholders and groups and received much input. He further
stated the Board-appointed Steering Committee has invested 18
months in the plan process by providing input. He stated the
Planning Commission reviewed the plan over 10 months
including holding district meetings, public meetings and
public hearings. He noted citizen input relative to the draft
plan included being too vague; not providing enough
specifics; no data/analysis included in the document; too
much planning jargon; land use categories are too difficult
to understand/implement; densities too high; wrong approach
to revitalization; and too voluminous. He also summarized
ways to redraft the plan, which include using the previous
area plan format for the plan; using clear, concise and
simple terms (no glossary); common sense, easy to understand
land use categories; removing the vision, recognizing that
Chesterfield is a suburban county; keeping higher density
away from city line; limiting mixed use and higher densities;
separating revitalization from Economic Development; focusing
on maintaining public facilities in older communities;
recognizing the need for detailed planning in certain areas
(special area plans - villages, centers, corridors, etc.);
encourage residential development along the Appomattox River
frontage; using infrastructure and public faculties
investments to encouraging revitalization of neighborhoods,
including community schools concept; indentifying specific
road improvements in the near-term and supporting with data;
identifying specific utility improvements and constraints to
development; identifying long-term water supply, management
and capacity issues; identifying specific key actions
necessary to implement the plan (removing action matrix). He
further stated the Board is asked to take action today to
remand the draft plan back to the Planning Commission or deny
so staff can undertake the drafting of a new plan based
around the concepts explained. He stated in the time
allotted, staff will create a plan with the Board of
Supervisors and Planning Commission input and review. He
stated staff will send the revisions to the Planning
Commission the week of July 24, 2012, and the Planning
Commission will make a recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors on August 21, 2012. He further stated Board
action will be anticipated for October 10, 2012. In closing,
he stated the recommendation to the Board includes remanding
the plan to the Planning Commission; providing staff and the
Planning Commission clear direction for building the new
plan; and staying involved in the development of the plan to
keep staff on target.
Mr. Gecker stated action will not be taken until the
regularly scheduled meeting at 3:00 p.m. He expressed his
appreciation to Mr. Turner for a thorough presentation. He
stated the purpose of the work session is to make specific
changes; however it is apparent that a more substantial
rewrite is necessary.
J
J
J
11-72
Ms. Jaeckle requested a copy of Mr. Turner's presentation.
In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Mincks stated the
plan can be updated at any time but has to be reviewed every
five years.
Mr. Elswick expressed his appreciation to Mr. Turner for the
summary.
Ms. Jaeckle stated the plan was due to the Board in July and
the Planning Commission asked for more time. She noted the
input by the citizenry was extremely helpful. She stated
based on the input she has received, she believes the draft
plan should be rewritten.
In response to Mr. Warren's question regarding the process to
draft a new plan, Mr. Mincks stated the Board is not required
to remand or reject the proposal to be considered to develop
a new plan. He further stated the Planning Commission can be
directed to create a new plan in either fashion.
Mr. Warren expressed concerns relative to a disconnection
between citizen participation and the final product, stating
the consultant did not reflect committee members' thoughts
into the draft plan. He further stated the county currently
has very effective area plans in effect that are supported by
business and citizens. He stated his opinion of the draft
plan is that it is fundamentally flawed; lacks clarity; it is
too restrictive; contains words .that do not have specific
meaning; is not protective of neighborhood property rights
and values; has a disconnect between citizen views; it is
difficult to follow and too wordy; and includes a disconnect
between the draft plan and area plans. He stressed the
importance of revitalization to the county. He expressed
concerns regarding existing neighborhoods and diminishing
property values, stating there should be a balanced bond
referendum for all districts in the county. He further stated
the plan needs to focus on a long-term water supply approach.
In closing, he expressed concerns relative to the draft plan
and the Matoaca District.
Mr. Holland expressed his appreciation to Mr. Turner and
staff for an outstanding summary. He stated there have been
numerous meetings regarding the process of the draft plan. He
further stated he has supported the process to allow his
constituents an opportunity to voice their concerns. He
expressed concerns relative to revitalization, density at
county and city lines, transportation and transit nodes,
equity in public facilities between newer and older areas
throughout the county, and vacant commercial corridors. He
stated the plan should be remanded distinctly with the idea
of what is expected with regards to direction and timing. He
further stated the potential for savings and the best way to
utilize all resources should not be overlooked.
Mr. Elswick stated he has spoken with numerous citizens, land
owners and business owners regarding the draft plan. He
further stated the majority of citizens who attended his
community meeting were not in favor of the proposal and
stated the Board plans to reject the proposal as it is
written. He further stated he looks forward to seeing the
revised product.
11-73
Ms. Jaeckle stated this is an opportunity to make the process
better with the information and data that was received as a
result of citizens' input.
Mr. Gecker stated there was a mandate after the last election
to begin to look at growth management in the county. He
further stated there is a lot of zoning that is not expected
to be built out for the next two decades, which eliminates
the county's ability to plan as the need arises as opposed to
rezoning way too early. He stated this continuing process is
vital to implementing a plan for the county. He noted Board
members appointed many citizens to the Steering Committee to
depoliticize the process. He stated when drafting the plan,
originally significant areas of disagreement to resolve were
an east/west road, development in countryside, density in
certain portions of the county and a revitalization section
into the economic development portion of the plan. He further
stated the draft plan lacks clarity and doesn't reflect that
the county is a suburban jurisdiction, noting that the plan
should set out reasonable expectations of what to expect in
the community. He further stated he would like to see the
east/west road left in the plan to provide a marker.
Regarding development of countryside, he stated there should
be some development as a matter of right, assuming the
infrastructure is there to support it and to preserve rural
character; it should be combined with some aggressive program
of acquisition of development rights if a land owner decides
to take that route. He stated there is no need to convert the
eastern portion of the county into higher density and he
expressed concerns relative to revitalization of eastern
neighborhoods. He further stated revitalization should stand
alone and should include the idea of parity between public
facilities. He stated there are schools in parts of the
county that are in desperate need of complete rehabilitation
in order to make certain areas of the county more attractive.
He noted the 2004 Comprehensive Plan is a better model to
start with than the countywide approach. He stated the plan
should include fewer centers; however, there are places where
higher density is appropriate. In closing, he stated smaller
neighborhood schools are good for the community and the plan
should reflect that notion.
Discussion ensued relative to including the expansion of
Virginia State University into the proposal and forming a
plan relative to Chesterfield's riverfronts.
Mr. Gecker stated this process is important to develop the
most advantageous plan for the county.
It was generally agreed that the Board recess until 3:00 p.m.
for the regularly scheduled meeting in the Public Meeting
Room.
Reconvening:
Mr. Gecker called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at
3:00 p.m.
J
J
J
11-74
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 25, 2012
On motion of Ms. Jaeckle, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
approved the minutes from January 25, 2012, as submitted.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS
2.A. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
• Mr. Stegmaier was pleased to report that earlier this week
the Governor announced that Honeywell, a Fortune 100
manufacturing and technology company, will invest $27.5
million to add to its Advanced Fibers and Composites
(AF&C) operation in Chesterfield County. He recognized Mr.
Will Davis and his staff and thanked the Virginia Economic
Development Partnership for working with the county, the
Greater Richmond Partnership and Virginia's Gateway Region
to secure the project for Chesterfield and Virginia.
• Mr. Stegmaier announced that Chesterfield County Police
hosted a Drug Take Back Day on Saturday, January 28t'', in
the Hull Street Station parking lot. He stated 675 pounds
of unused, unwanted and potentially harmful drugs were
collected.
• Mr. Stegmaier was very pleased to report some good news
regarding the issue of unsafe generator installations in
the county. He stated an arrangement has been reached that
will enable a company, separate from those who did the
unsafe installations, to correct and complete the
generator installations on at least 44 jobs at no cost to
the customers. He thanked the Building Inspection
Department staff for collaborating with the County
Attorney's office as they worked to discover installations
for which permits were not obtained.
• Ms. Mary Ann Curtin presented a brief update to the Board
of Supervisors on the status of several bills before the
General Assembly and from the county's legislative
program. She stated House Bill 107, changing the
composition of the board of directors of the Richmond
Metropolitan Authority, was carried over to next year in
Counties, Cities and Towns Committee. She stated House
Bill 155, which was to get less interference from VDOT in
locally administered revenue sharing road projects, was
laid on the table in subcommittee at the request of the
patron, the county, and VDOT. She further stated VDOT
adamantly opposed the bill, and after several hours of
discussion and negotiation with VDOT staff, they agreed
that the Commissioner would send a letter to the county
basically committing to eliminating obstacles from VDOT
for these projects. She stated the legislative session
will reach crossover on February 14, 2012, February 19 is
the day the House and Senate release their amendments to
the state budget, and adjourn on March 10th
11-75
3. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Holland reported that he attended a ribbon cutting at
BFPE International on February 3rd. He also briefly mentioned
the opening of the new Aquatics Center coming soon in 2012.
4. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS,
DELETIONS OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION
There were no Requests to Postpone Agenda Items and
Additions, Deletions or Changes in the Order of Presentation.
5. RESOLUTIONS
5.A. RECOGNIZING MR. F. WAYNE BASS FOR HIS SERVICE AS A
MEMBER OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Turner introduced Mr. Wayne Bass, who was present to
receive the resolution.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. F. Wayne Bass diligently and effectively
served Chesterfield County as the Planning Commissioner from
Matoaca District from January 2004 to December 2011; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass served the current and future planning
interests of a vast and diverse district encompassing 214
square miles and 26,000 properties, consisting of rural
areas, farms, villages, waterfront properties, subdivisions,
and commercial development; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass provided leadership to the Planning
Commission by serving as Chairman during the Planning
Commission review of the draft Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass provided leadership in efforts to
shape the growth, development, and improvement of the Matoaca
District and the entire county during these eight years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass guided Planning Commission review of
the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment, addressing concerns
about the environment and quality of life in the Matoaca
District; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass participated in public projects that
will significantly affect and improve the quality of life for
Matoaca District residents and the citizens of Chesterfield
County, including the new Cosby High School, Horner Park, and
the expansion of Virginia State University; and
WHEREAS, Mr..Bass actively negotiated hundreds of zoning
cases, site plans, and subdivision appeals, which set a
quality standard for the entire Matoaca District; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass helped develop numerous planning
projects promoting quality of life for all county citizens;
J
J
J
11-76
among these were ordinances for Chesapeake Bay Preservation
Act implementation; communications towers; electronic message
center signs; home occupations; planning fee reductions; sign
ordinance standards; Traditional Neighborhood Development
zoning; Upper Swift Creek water quality standards; and wind
energy systems; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bass excelled at working with citizens,
developers, and county staff towards the development of high
quality projects for the benefit of present and future
residents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors, this 8th day of February 2012,
publicly recognizes Mr. F. Wayne Bass and expresses
appreciation for his outstanding contributions to the
citizens of Chesterfield County.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this
resolution be presented to Mr. Bass and that this resolution
be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Mr. Gecker presented the executed resolution to Mr. Bass and
commended him on his accomplishments on the development of
high quality projects for the benefit of present and future
residents.
Mr. Elswick expressed his thanks to Mr. Bass for his
outstanding contributions to the citizens of Chesterfield
County.
Mr. Bass expressed his appreciation for the special
recognition from the Board of Supervisors.
6. WORK SESSIONS
There were no Work Sessions at this time.
7. DEFERRED ITEMS
7.A. CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT COUNTYWIDE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Mr. Holland made a motion as follows: "I would like to make a
motion to send this draft Comprehensive Plan back to the
Planning Commission for the purpose of continuing the process
we began in 2009. This is not, however, a motion requiring
the Planning Commission to retain this draft plan or any
portion of the plan. In fact, as part of my motion, I want to
direct the Planning Commission to seriously consider our
existing Comprehensive Plan as a foundation for a new draft
plan.
Also, as part of my motion, the Planning Commission is
directed to consider the issues as outlined on a list
11-77
provided to all Board members by staff when the Commission
develops the new plan.
Finally, as part of my motion, I am directing the Planning
Commission to return a new draft plan to the Board no later
than August 21, 2012. That is my motion."
Mr. Warren made a substitute motion as follows: "I would like
to make a motion to send this draft Comprehensive Plan back
to the Planning Commission for the purpose of continuing the
process we began in 2009. This is not, however, a motion
requiring the Planning Commission to retain this draft plan
or any portion of the plan. In fact, as part of my motion,
this motion redirects the Planning Commission to use our
existing Comprehensive Plan as the foundation for the new
draft plan based on existing adopted plans and capturing
input provided by citizens, committees and business groups
during the public process.
Also, as part of my motion, the Planning Commission is
directed to consider the following issues when the Commission
develops the new plan. Those issues were discussed in our
meeting this afternoon and are provided to all Board members.
Finally, as part of my motion, I am directing the Planning
Commission to return a new draft plan to the Board no later
than August 21, 2012. That is my motion"
In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question regarding the
difference between the two motions, Mr. Warren stated the
focal point of his motion is to redirect the Planning
Commission to use the existing Comprehensive Plan.
In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Warren stated the
focus is on making sure that the Planning Commission uses the
existing Comprehensive Plan as the foundation, instead of the
draft Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Warren's motion failed due to lack of a second.
Mr. Gecker seconded the original motion.
Mr. Gecker asked that the full scope of the motion be made
public.
Mr. Turner stated the revised plan should emphasize the
following:
• A plan document with clarity, simplicity, and brevity;
• Acknowledge the strong foundation of the county's area
plans and build off of that foundation;
• Land use recommendations should recognize the county's
existing suburban land use pattern, emphasize the
importance of Chesterfield's villages, identify higher
density nodes on Route 288, identify fewer mixed use
centers, and limited mixed use along corridors;
• A coordinated water demand and supply management
strategy;
• Include the East/West Freeway for long-range planning
purposes;
• A separate revitalization chapter focusing on parity of
public facilities and services, especially schools, with
J
J
11-78
promoting of higher density not a goal of revitalization
efforts, and the need to revitalize commercial
corridors;
• Accommodate transit nodes;
• The importance of our rural areas with the understanding
that rural areas should have some development as a
matter of right, and if maintained as rural, bring
forward an acquisition of development rights program;
• Parity among public facilities, especially in schools,
identifying specific schools to completely rehabilitate,
as well as promoting neighborhood schools concepts
(smaller), and using the public facilities plan as a
model for the Capital Improvement Program;
• Recognize and support the expansion of Virginia State
University;
• Acknowledge the importance of Chesterfield's riverfronts
through focused planning efforts.
In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question regarding transit
nodes, Mr. Turner stated a suggestion was made for the plan
to promote higher density nodes in certain areas with the
threshold that would support limited mass transit.
Mr. Holland stated the plan would accommodate mass transit
buses primarily and other modes of transportation.
Mr. Warren clarified his substitute motion.
Mr. Gecker called for a vote on the motion of Mr. Holland,
seconded by Mr. Gecker, for the Board to send the draft
Comprehensive Plan back to the Planning Commission for the
purpose of continuing the process begun in 2009; not require
the Planning Commission to retain the draft plan or any
portion of the plan; and direct the Planning Commission to
seriously consider the county's existing Comprehensive Plan
as a foundation for a new draft plan.
And, further, the Planning Commission was directed to
consider the following issues when developing the new plan:
• A plan document with clarity, simplicity, and brevity;
• Acknowledge the strong foundation of the county's area
plans and build off of that foundation;
• Land use recommendations should recognize the county's
existing suburban land use pattern, emphasize the
importance of Chesterfield's villages, identify higher
density nodes on Route 288, identify fewer mixed use
centers, and limited mixed use along corridors;
• A coordinated water demand and supply management
strategy;
• Include the East/West Freeway for long-range planning
purposes;
• A separate revitalization chapter focusing on parity of
public facilities and services, especially schools, with
promoting of higher density not a goal of revitalization
efforts, and the need to revitalize commercial
corridors;
• Accommodate transit nodes;
• The importance of our rural areas with the understanding
that rural areas should have some development as a
11-79
matter of right, and if maintained as rural, bring
forward an acquisition of development rights program;
• Parity among public facilities, especially in schools,
identifying specific schools to completely rehabilitate,
as well as promoting neighborhood schools concepts
(smaller), and using the public facilities plan as a
model for the Capital Improvement Program;
• Recognize and support the expansion of Virginia State
University;
• Acknowledge the importance of Chesterfield's riverfronts
through focused planning efforts.
And, further, the Planning Commission was directed to return
a new draft plan to the Board no later than August 21, 2012.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: Warren.
Mr. Gecker excused himself from the meeting.
8. NEW BUSINESS
8.A. CONSENT ITEMS
8.A.1. AUTHORIZE THE RECEIPT AND APPROPRIATION OF GRANT
FUNDS FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY FOR CHESTERFIELD FIRE AND EMS AS THE
SPONSORING AGENCY OF THE VIRGINIA DIVISION 1 -
REGIONAL TECHNICAL RESCUE TEAM
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
authorized the Fire and EMS Department, Emergency Management
Division, to receive and appropriate $100,000.00 in grant
funds from the United States Department of Homeland Security
for heavy tactical rescue team equipment, exercises and
training for the Virginia Division 1 - Regional Technical
Rescue Team.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
8.A.2. SET DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.A.2.a. TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE COUNTY CODE
RELATING TO STORM WATER AND BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES FACILITIES IN BUFFERS
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
set March 7, 2012, as the date for a public hearing to
consider an amendment to the County Code relating to storm
water and best management practices facilities in buffers.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
J
J
J
11-80
8.A.2.b. TO CONSIDER LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY AT HENRICUS
HISTORICAL PARK TO THE HENRICUS FOUNDATION
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
set February 22, 2012, as the date for a public hearing to
consider lease of real property at Henricus Historical Park
to the Henricus Foundation.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
8.A.3. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM VARIOUS EASEMENTS ACROSS THE
PROPERTY OF 13531 HULL STREET ROAD, LLC
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a
20', SWM/BMP access easement, a variable width SWM/BMP
easement and a 16' drainage easement (Private) across the
property of 13531 Hull Street Road, LLC.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
8.A.4. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS RECOGNIZING COUNTY EMPLOYEES
UPON THEIR RETIREMENT
8.A.4.a. MS. SHEILA R. LARD, PURCHASING DEPARTMENT
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Ms. Sheila R. Ladd will retire on March 2,
2012, after providing thirty-one years of dedicated and
faithful full-time service to Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd first began her service on a part-time
basis in June of 1979, as a Clerk Typist, and was hired full-
time in the position of Data Entry Operator I in the
Purchasing Department on March 2, 1981; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd has been promoted and her position
reclassified over the years, and she has currently been
serving in the position of Contract Officer since August 4,
2001; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd was a member of professional
procurement organizations including the National Institute of
Governmental Purchasing (NIGP), the Virginia Association of
Governmental Purchasing (VAGP), and the Capital Area
Purchasing Association (CAPA) and actively participated in
training opportunities from these organizations; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd successfully completed the TQI Advisor
Certification requirements in August 1999 and also
successfully completed the Employee Certificate from
Chesterfield University's School of Leadership and Personal
11-81
Effectiveness and attended the Employee Leadership Institute
in 2007; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd has established and administered
requirements contracts during her tenure, which have
successfully met the needs of county and school departments
through effective, efficient, and cost saving procurement
techniques; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd was instrumental in the development of
the matching exception process used for over $5000 purchase
orders in IFAS; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd worked effectively with Accounting and
Purchasing staff to develop a method of tracking and
reporting operational leases each fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd provided continuous and relentless
support daily to both county and schools ensuring that change
orders for over $5000 purchase orders were processed timely
and correctly in IFAS; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd delivered timely and accurate monthly
purchase order volume statistics to Purchasing Department
management; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd has always remained calm in her
dealings with her customers and vendors; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd was always willing to take on any
challenge presented to her with a positive "can-do" attitude;
and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd was active in volunteering within the
Purchasing Department as well as other county-sponsored
organizations such as CCHASM and United Way; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd has faithfully and effectively
discharged her duties in each and every capacity with
proficiency, dedication, and an unwavering commitment to
provide excellent customer service to the many customers that
the Purchasing Department serves in both county and school
operations; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd displayed a commitment to duty along
with an unwavering commitment to the highest ethical and
moral standards while continually seeking to obtain the best
value for the taxpayers of Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Ladd will be tremendously missed for the
quality and caliber of her commitment and performance in the
Purchasing Department and to its many customers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Sheila R. Ladd and
extends its appreciation for her thirty-one years of
dedicated service to the county, congratulates her upon her
retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Decker.
J
J
J
11-82
8.A.4.b. MR. KENNETH R. BREITENBACH, PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. Kenneth R. Breitenbach will retire from the
Chesterfield County Department of Parks and Recreation
effective March 1, 2012; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Breitenbach began his public service with
Chesterfield County in April 1988, with the Parks and
Recreation Department, as a part-time County Maintenance
Worker; and
WHEREAS, on January 29, 1990, Mr. Breitenbach was hired
as a full-time Parks Groundskeeper; and
WHEREAS, effective December 31, 1994, Mr. Breitenbach
advanced to the position of Principal County Maintenance
Worker and has continued his service as a Principal County
Maintenance Worker within several park districts; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Breitenbach has provided excellent customer
service, integrity and knowledge in the maintenance and
development of Chesterfield County parks and school
facilities; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Breitenbach has been an invaluable asset
and mainstay for the Parks and Recreation Department for the
past 24 years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Breitenbach has been dedicated, productive
and dependable in fulfillment of his position
responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Breitenbach will be missed by his co-
workers, supervisors, and the citizens of Chesterfield
County, whom he has served.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding
contributions of Mr. Kenneth R. Breitenbach, expresses the
appreciation of all residents for his 24 years of service to
Chesterfield County, and extends appreciation for his
dedicated service to the county and congratulations upon his
retirement, as well as best wishes for a long and happy
retirement.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
11-83
8.A.5. ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ALONG LEWIS ROAD AND
BRADLEY BRIDGE ROAD FROM RICHARD G. VANAMBURG AND
NANCY D. VANAMBURG
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land along Lewis Road
and Bradley Bridge Road from Richard G. Vanamburg and Nancy
D. Vanamburg, and authorized the County Administrator to
execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed
with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
9. REPORTS
9.A. REPORT ON DEVELOPER WATER AND SEWER CONTRACTS
9.B. REPORT ON STATUS OF GENERAL FUND BALANCE, RESERVE FOR
FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS, DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUNDS AND
LEASE PURCHASES
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
accepted the following reports: a Report on Developer Water
and Sewer Contracts; and a Report on Status of General Fund
Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District
Improvement Funds and Lease Purchases.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
10. FIFTEEN-MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
Ms. Nancy Woolridge expressed her appreciation to the Board
for their admirable decision to remand the draft
Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Commission.
11. DINNER
On the motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the
Board recessed to Room 502 for dinner.
Ayes: Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Absent: Gecker.
Reconvening:
Mr. Gecker returned to the meeting.
12. INVOCATION
Reverend Dr. Margaret Kutz, Chester United Methodist Church,
gave the invocation.
J
J
J
11-84
13. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA
Eagle Scout Ian Westbrook led the Pledge of Allegiance.
14. RESOLUTIONS
14.A. RECOGNIZING BOY SCOUTS UPON ATTAINING THE RANK OF
EAGLE SCOUT MR. IAN PATRICK WESTBROOK, MIDLOTHIAN
DISTRICT AND MR. AUSTIN CHARLES GRINDLE, BERMUDA
TITCTRTC'T
Mr. Kappel introduced Mr. Ian Westbrook and Mr. Austin
Grindle, who were present to receive the resolutions.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Jaeckle, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was incorporated by
Mr. William D. Boyce on February 8, 1910, and was chartered
by Congress in 1916; and
WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was founded to build
character, provide citizenship training and promote physical
fitness; and
WHEREAS, after earning at least twenty-one merit badges
in a wide variety of skills including leadership, service and
outdoor life, serving in a leadership position in a troop,
carrying out a service project beneficial to his community,
being active in the troop, demonstrating Scout spirit, and
living up to the Scout Oath and Law, Mr. Ian Patrick
Westbrook, Troop 1891, sponsored by Son Air United Methodist
Church, and Mr. Austin Charles Grindle, Troop 2837, sponsored
by Chester Baptist Church, have accomplished those high
standards of commitment and have reached the long-sought goal
of Eagle Scout, which is received by only four percent of
those individuals entering the Scouting movement; and
WHEREAS, growing through their experiences in Scouting,
learning the lessons of responsible citizenship, and
endeavoring to prepare themselves for a role as leaders in
society, Ian and Austin have distinguished themselves as
members of a new generation of prepared young citizens of
whom we can all be very proud.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors, this 8th day of February 2012,
publicly recognizes Mr. Ian Patrick Westbrook and Mr. Austin
Charles Grindle, extends congratulations on their attainment
of Eagle Scout, and acknowledges the good fortune of the
county to have such outstanding young men as its citizens.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Ms. Jaeckle and Mr. Gecker presented the executed resolutions
and patches to Mr. Westbrook and Mr. Grindle, accompanied by
their families, congratulated them on their outstanding
achievements, and wished them well in future endeavors.
11-85
Mr. Westbrook and Mr. Grindle provided details of their Eagle
Scout projects and expressed appreciation to their families
and others for their support.
14.B. RECOGNIZING FEBRUARY 2012, AS "CHILDREN'S DENTAL
HEALTH MONTH" IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
Mr. Kappel introduced Dr. Samuel W. Galstan, Dr. C. Sharone
Ward, and Dr. Frank Farrington, who were present to receive
the resolution.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the tenth annual "Give Kids a Smile! Access to
Dental Care Day" was conducted in a number of Chesterfield
County dental offices and schools on February 3, 2012; and
WHEREAS, numerous children's dental health outreach
activities and education will take place in Chesterfield
County Schools throughout February 2012; and
WHEREAS, through the joint efforts of the Southside
Dental Society, the Virginia Dental Association, the Virginia
Department of Health, Division of Dentistry, the Medical
College of Virginia School of Dentistry, the Alliance of the
Southside Dental Society, local dentists and dental
healthcare providers who volunteer their time, and the school
district of Chesterfield County, this program was established
to foster the improvement of children's dental health; and
WHEREAS, since inception of the "Give Kids a Smile!
Access to Dental Care" program in 2003, the Southside Dental
Society, along with many dental partners, have delivered more
than $600,000 in free dental care to more than 5,600 patients
utilizing more than 710 volunteers, a tremendous example of
community partners and stakeholders working together to
decrease barriers to accessing dental care for at-risk
children in the community; and
WHEREAS, these dental volunteers have provided
educational materials and programs and stress the importance
of regular dental examinations, daily brushing and flossing,
proper nutrition, sealants and the use of mouth guards during
athletic activities; and
WHEREAS, several local dental offices volunteered their
services on "Give Kids a Smile! Access to Dental Care Day,"
to provide treatment and education to ,local underprivileged
children.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors, this 8t'' day of February 2012,
publicly recognizes February 3, 2012, as "Give Kids a Smile!
Access to Dental Care Day" and February 2012, as "National
Children's Dental Health Month" in Chesterfield County,
expresses gratitude, on behalf of all Chesterfield County
residents, and commends those organizations responsible for
their proactive approach to dental health and also commends
Dr. Samuel W. Galstan, Dr. C. Sharone Ward, Dr. Frank
Farrington, Dr. James Keeton and Jo Anne Wells, RDH, for
helping to protect our children's dental health.
J
J
J
11-86
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
Ms. Jaeckle presented the executed resolutions to Dr.
Galston, Dr. Ward, and Dr. Farrington and expressed
appreciation for their dedication to protecting children's
dental health.
Dr. Galstan expressed his appreciation for the Board's
continued support.
15. FIFTEEN-MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
Mr. Bob Herndon addressed the Board relative to public
transit in Chesterfield County.
Mr. Ralph Carter expressed his appreciation for the Board's
diligence and efforts relative to the draft Comprehensive
Plan.
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS
16.A. TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTY CODE TO REQUIRE
CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR CERTAIN VOLUNTEERS AND
FOR CERTAIN COUNTY EMPLOYEES WITH NEW JOB ASSIGNMENTS
Ms. Mary Martin Selby stated this date and time has been
advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider
amendments to the County Code to require criminal background
checks for certain volunteers and for certain county
employees with new job assignments.
Mr. Gecker called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the issue.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Elswick, the Board
adopted the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING
AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 2-79 RELATING TO BACKGROUND CHECKS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield
County:
(1) That Section 2-79 of the Code of the County of
Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re-enacted to
read as follows:
Sec. 2-79. Personnel background searches.
(a) This section is enacted pursuant to §§ 19.2-389 and
15.2-1503.1 of the Code of Virginia. In the interest of
public welfare and safety it is necessary to determine
whether the past criminal and/or child protective
services conduct of each person described in subsections
(b), (c) and (d) is compatible with the nature of each
person's employment.
11-87
(b) In addition to other background searches authorized by
local, state, or federal law, the county administrator
and his designees within county government shall conduct
(1) criminal history record searches and (2) sex
offender and crimes against minors registry searches for
all applicants for full-time or part-time employment. who
are offered a conditional offer of employment with the
county, all employees who are being promoted to a
position in their own or another department or applying
for a transfer to a position in another department, and
all employees whose terms and conditions of employment
change such that they have new responsibilities
involving (i) providing services to juveniles, the
elderly or disabled, (ii) access to confidential or
personal information as defined in Code of Virginia
section 2.2-3801, (iii) collection of or routine access
to public funds, (iv) entry into county buildings
outside of work hours, or (v) service with either the
police department, fire and EMS department, sheriff's
office, the emergency communications center, or
volunteer rescue squads and who have not had a
background check within three (3) years of such change
in job responsibilities.
(c) In addition to other background searches authorized by
local, state or federal law, the county administrator or
his designees within county government shall conduct (1)
criminal history record searches (2) sex offender and
crimes against minors registry searches and (3) child
protective services central registry searches on full-
time and part-time county employees who provide services
to juveniles or who provide maintenance services at
county schools, and applicants for county employment,
both full-time and part-time, who will hold such
positions and who have received a conditional offer of
employment.
(d) In addition to other background searches authorized by
local, state or federal law, the county administrator or
his designees within county government shall conduct (1)
criminal history record searches and (2) sex offender
and crimes against minors registry searches on
volunteers for county departments whose anticipated
duties or responsibilities involve (i) providing
services to juveniles, the elderly or disabled, (ii)
access to confidential or personal information as
defined in Code of Virginia § 2.2-3801, (iii) collection
of or routine access to public funds, (iv) entry into
county buildings outside of work hours, or (v) service
with either the police department, fire and EMS
department, sheriff's office, the emergency
communications center, or volunteer rescue squads.
(e) The county administrator is authorized to identify
employee and volunteer positions which meet the criteria
of subsections (c) and (d) and to incorporate such list
into an administrative policy which implements the
provisions of this section. Such administrative policy
shall indicate whether such searches shall be universal
J
J
J
11-88
or random and shall identify consequences for past
behavior.
(f) All employees, volunteers and applicants identified in
subsections (b), (c), or (d) shall execute, as a
condition of employment or service, the necessary
documents to permit the searches described in this
section and shall cooperate with all agencies providing
information. In addition, all applicants for employment
given a conditional offer of employment shall submit ~
to fingerprinting for processing a nationwide background
check.
(g) Any employee disciplined as a result of a background
search may grieve such discipline in accordance with the
county grievance procedure.
(2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately
upon adoption.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
17. FIFTEEN-MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
Mr. Douglas Barker expressed his appreciation to the Board
for their commendable decision to remand the draft
Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Commission.
18. ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Jaeckle, the Board
adjourned at 6:58 p.m. until February 22, 2012 at 3:00 p.m.
Ayes: Gecker, Jaeckle, Warren, Holland and Elswick.
Nays: None.
mes teg ier
County Administrator
~ ~„~P C~- ~~-~~
Daniel A. Gecker
Chairman
11-89
J
J
J