Agricultural District dropped

Grayson County Planning Commission draft zoning revision 3.24.2014

By Amy Boucher

 

INDEPENDENCE – A proposed new agriculture zoning district was dropped from the draft revision of the Grayson County Zoning Ordinance on Tuesday night, as members of the county Planning Commission agreed that the county doesn’t need such a designation as long as it does not have use-value taxation.

Use-value taxation allows land to be taxed on the value of its use, which generally leads to higher taxes on developed land and lower taxes on farmland. Grayson has a single tax rate for all taxable properties.

The Agriculture District would have delineated “those areas of the county with contiguous acreage, prime soils and existing infrastructure conducive to agricultural operations.”

Zoning Administrator Elaine Holeton said other localities’ zoning ordinances include Agriculture Districts because they don’t allow as much agricultural activity in their other zoning districts as Grayson does, or because they have use-value taxation.

Most of Grayson is zoned Rural Farm, which allows a broad spectrum of farming activity, and the county does not have use-value taxation.

“I get the sense the planning commission is divided on this issue,” Holeton said.

“Does anybody see a reason to include it?” asked Chairman Lindsey Carico. “Our Rural Farm is lenient enough that it covers everything.”

“When a locality really needs it is when they have use-value taxation…without the one I don’t know if we necessarily need the other,” said Commission Member John Brewer, who also is chairman of the Grayson Board of Supervisors, which mandated the zoning ordinance revision in January.

The commission made a number of other choices, including:

* eliminating the $1,000 zoning permit fee for cell towers, to encourage location of towers in the western part of Grayson.

* adding stockyards and slaughterhouses as a special use in the Rural Farm and Commercial districts.. Holeton told the commission that the ordinance is considered “inclusive,” which means “only those uses listed in the ordinance are allowed.” If someone wants to do something other than what is specifically allowed in any zone district, he must apply for a “zone text amendment” – essentially a change in the zoning ordinance. Holeton said such a change would be similar to seeking a special use permit, with two public hearings and final approval by the supervisors.

Among the permitted uses Holeton has added to this revision of the ordinance are retreat center (day-use), museums, libraries, print shops and flea markets. The commission agreed that bars and nightclubs could be added as a special use for Rural Farm and Commercial districts and that restaurants should be added as a special use in Rural Residential. They decided funeral homes should be added as a special use in Rural Farm.

* postponing a decision on whether to allow hazardous materials and operations such as asphalt plants, chemical manufacturing, hazardous waste disposal, mining and refining and pulp mills as a special use in Industrial and Commercial districts, or whether to omit them from the ordinance and deal with any requests as zoning text amendments.

* declining to act on Member Brian Walls’s suggestion that the Commercial and Industrial classifications be combined to a single zone.

*postponing a decision on how to deal with an old mobile home that is replaced by a new one. Holeton’s draft required the homeowner to remove the old mobile home, but Walls said many people like to keep the old mobile homes as storage buildings.

Holeton suggested requiring that the old mobile home at least be properly set up on a stable foundation.

“I’ve seen ‘em just cocked up on a bank,” said Carico. “They ought to set them for safety reasons.”

Commission Member Don Dudley said he did not want to move too quickly and asked for more time to consider the issue.

The commission will meet at 6 p.m. April 8 in the board room of the Grayson Courthouse to continue its zoning ordinance revision work. Among the items to be considered are junk cars and Shoreline Recreation District regulations.

The devil is in the details

Grayson County Planning Commission zoning draft review 3.25.2014

By Amy Boucher

 

INDEPENDENCE – While the Grayson County Planning Commission is attempting to simplify the county zoning ordinance and cut down on paperwork and procedures, members are finding that it’s not that easy. Case in point: Signs.

After reviewing Zoning Administrator Elaine Holeton’s draft language covering signs Tuesday night, commission members had differing views on what should be allowed, including anything at all as long as it is 40 feet from the centerline of a roadway.

Holeton was concerned about the amount of time the commission devoted to the discussion and said she had only dealt with four zoning permits for signs during her time in the job.

Commission members ultimately agreed that the draft ordinance, which will go before the county Board of Supervisors on May 8 for adoption after an April 15 public hearing, should require that any proposed sign that does not meet the parameters Holeton had set out should be considered through the special use permit process. That means two public hearings, a recommendation for or against approval by the planning commission, and a final decision by the county Board of Supervisors.

“A special use permit is what needs to be done here,” said Commission Member Larry Bartlett, “and it causes a lot of work.”

The planning commission is revising the zoning ordinance to make it more “user-friendly” at the direction of county supervisors, who threatened in January to repeal it altogether. Supervisors’ Chairman John Brewer also serves on the planning commission.

Commission members have struggled to reach agreement on many details of the revision. For example, Tuesday night a meeting attendee suggested that a business run out of a home with 10 employees might be inappropriate in the Rural Residential District, the only zoning designation that is dedicated to protecting homes from undesirable neighboring development: “to create residential communities and to  maintain the character of those communities by allowing uses with minimal nuisance qualities…The general nature is residential with limits on commercial activity,” according to the ordinance.

Members decided the previous week that home occupations could employ up to 10 people; which, in Rural Residential, would have “a lot of impact on neighbors,” in Bartlett’s words.

Holeton suggested three employees; Member Brian Walls wanted five.

Another audience member suggested that a pine roping business might operate out of a Rural Residential subdivision and the commission agreed to allow up to five employees in a Rural Residential home business.

As for the signs, the draft allows any sign, no permit needed, that is 35 feet from the centerline of the road, 24 square feet or less in size and is unlighted. Holeton showed a photo of a sign for Ward Manor Bed and Breakfast as a typical sign that would not need a permit.

Larger signs that could pose visibility problems for motorists due to size, position or lighting would need a zoning permit. All must be at least 25 feet from the centerline of the roadway, except in Commercial and Industrial zones, where they must only be outside the Virginia Department of Transportation right of way. In Rural Farm and Rural Residential districts, they could not be higher than 10 feet.

Rural Farm signs could be a maximum of 32 square feet; Rural Residential and Shoreline Recreation signs a maximum of 24 square feet.

 

Commercial and Industrial district signs could be a maximum of 35 feet high and 100 square feet in size.

Billboards (defined as signs bigger than 32 square feet and not on the premises of the business being advertised) would not be allowed anywhere.

Damaged and derelict signs would have to be removed by landowners.

Commission Member Don Dudley asked who decides when a sign must be removed. The zoning administrator, Holeton said.

Walls was concerned about specifying that signs could not block motorists’ view, but Holeton said the commission is trying to avoid subjective language. He also was concerned that 25 feet from the centerline of the road would not be far enough on Grayson’s four-lane section of U.S. 58, and Holeton agreed to add that signs must also meet Virginia Department of Transportation setback requirements.

Chairman Lindsey Carico asked why people would need to get permits for signs if the ordinance sets out such specific criteria.

It gives the county oversight on the safety of the sign, Holeton said.

“I’ve got to have a permit to put a Texaco sign on the side of my barn if it’s over 32 square feet,” Carico said, clearly disagreeing with the restriction. She said that if a location is far enough from a road, “I don’t care. You can do anything you want to, even if it’s a billboard.”

Holeton offered to let the commission members try rewriting the sign requirements.

Bartlett echoed Carico’s sentiments. “If they want to go 100 feet off the road, they can do anything they want to.”

“Anything past a certain distance, do what you want to,” Carico said.

Commission Member Larry Brannock cautioned that he would rather preserve the scenic beauty of the county.

Holeton said Grayson only has a handful of billboards, which pre-date the 1998 ordinance and thus are “grandfathered.” These are located in Long’s Gap, Mouth of Wilson and on Virginia 89 south of Galax.

Walls suggested changing the draft to read that anything that does not fit the parameters Holeton outlined “must be approved.”

“You’d hate to have rows of billboards,” Brewer said.

“I don’t think we’re going to have to deal with a lot of signs,” said Holeton, who was anxious to move forward to other parts of the zoning ordinance.

The commission will meet at 6 p.m. April 8 in the board room of the Grayson Courthouse to continue its zoning ordinance revision work. Among the items to be considered are junk cars and Shoreline Recreation District regulations. The commission will also review the portion of the ordinance dealing with signs again, to consider the alterations.

Planning Commission slogs through zoning revision

 

Members negotiate on changes

By Amy Boucher

 

INDEPENDENCE – Revision of Grayson County’s zoning ordinance will be the product of arduous negotiations among members of the county planning commission over multiple issues, and some portions, like those dealing with Shoreline Recreation, may be so complex that they are not revised until this summer.

At Tuesday night’s session, members had to resort to voting to determine what number of employees would be allowed in businesses run out of homes in Rural Farm Districts.

Most of Grayson County is zoned Rural Farm.

The present ordinance requires that employees should be family members. It restricts the business to the primary residence, but commission members agreed by consensus Tuesday to allow home occupations in an auxiliary building.

Zoning Administrator Elaine Holeton asked whether such businesses should be allowed to employ people other than family members, and how many.

“I like seven, including family members,” said John Brewer, who is also chairman of the Grayson County Board of Supervisors, which mandated the zoning law revision, and required that it be done by May. That decision came on the heels of an attempted repeal of the ordinance.

“I like seven, plus family members,” said Planning Commission Member Brian Walls.

How about no set limit, said Holeton.

“I like that even better,” said Walls.

Holeton asked what, in that case, would distinguish a home business from any other business, which would need commercial or industrial zoning.

With no restriction, a home business could have 1,000 employees and skirt zoning requirements, said Commission Chairman Lindsey Carico. She suggested seven employees including family members, but longtime Commission Member Palmer Fant said seven is too many under one roof.

A home pine roping business could have a big shed and employ a large number of people, Carico countered. “Why are we going to limit the number of people working?”

While Fant stuck with the number three, the rest of the commission fought it out between seven and ten, ending up with a tie vote. Carico changed her vote to ten, saying she wanted to move on.

One attendee observed it was like watching a bidding war.

The home business issue has been particularly controversial because one of the most vocal opponents of the zoning law, Terry Combs, ran afoul of home occupations restrictions before his business burned. He had not gotten zoning approval for a business in a separate building run by family members.

His business could be allowed under the proposed revision, providing he met building code requirements.

Another contentious issue, setbacks in Rural Farm and Rural Residential districts, was settled at the planning commission’s prior work session. Structures will have to be 35 feet from the centerline of a road, and 10 feet from adjacent property lines.

A second numbers negotiation requiring two votes Tuesday night was over setbacks for high-intensity farming facilities from neighbors’ property lines.

The new high-intensity agricultural designation is being introduced to avoid the special-use permit situation for such operations, essentially to allow them in agricultural areas when they meet certain parameters, which must be set in the zoning revision. Grayson does not currently have any high-intensity farm operations.

 “High intensity” means a feeder-type operation, or a place where animals are confined for 45 days or more per year. The definition is set at 333 lactating dairy cattle; 500 feeder and slaughter cattle; 250 horses; 1,250 swine (larger than 55 pounds); 3,333 sheep; 27,500 turkeys; or 50,000 broilers and laying hens. The law will require a minimum of 50 acres for such an operation and Holeton had suggested a 1,000-foot setback from the property line for any facilities.

Brewer said he was fine with Holeton’s suggestion but Walls wanted the setback reduced “to at least 800 feet.”

Commission Member Lisa Hash wanted even less distance if adjoining landowners didn’t object.

Holeton said the only way to determine that was to make high intensity agriculture a special use, and the intent of the zoning revision is to make more things “allowed” and have fewer special uses. “We have a lot of residential homes in Rural Farm Districts…Let’s be fair about this and really look at it from all sides.”

She said noise and smell from feed lots, big poultry houses or hog operations could be objectionable.

Carico pointed out that the manure would be spread on the fields and neighbors would smell it regardless of setbacks.

Walls then said he preferred a 500-foot setback.

“It’s an environmental issue as well as a smell issue,” said Commission Member Larry Bartlett.

Hash endorsed 500 feet.

Bartlett moved to set the limit at 800 feet and lost on a tie vote. Carico weighed in with the 500 footers and that limit carried on the second vote, 8-1.

The commission meets at 6:30 p.m. next Tuesday to continue its revision work and is hoping to have a public hearing April 15 on the revised zoning ordinance. The revision is intended to simplify and clarify the law and make it more “user-friendly.”

Zipline business gets OK from the Grayson Planning Commission

Could create 12-15 jobs in Whitetop

 

 

By Amy Boucher

 

INDEPENDENCE – A new tourism business that could employ 12-15 people seasonally in Whitetop got a green light from Grayson County’s zoning authorities Tuesday night.

Hawksnest zipline operator Lenny Cottom got unanimous approval from the county planning commission for a zipline operation near the start of the Virginia Creeper Trail on a Christmas tree farm owned by Doyle Hensley.

The special use permit still must be approved by the Grayson Board of Supervisors.

Only Cottom spoke at a public hearing on the matter.

He said he has operated Hawksnest Zipline near Boone for five years. The Whitetop zipline will have four legs and be about .75 mile long, with the ride lasting 20-25 minutes. The platforms for each leg will be staffed with employees who fasten the harnesses. He said the operation will have “minimal impact” on the site. “We’ll maybe take down a few trees,” but trees are part of the attraction. “The views up there are great,” he said.

The businesses will likely operate from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., from May through October. He hopes to capitalize on the estimated 250,000 people who ride the Creeper Trail annually. The cost for the ride will be $30-$35, he said. The zipline will be open to customers 5 years old and older.

Cottom has a 10-year contract with Hensley and said his investment in the zipline will be “in the high five figures.”

Zoning Administrator Elaine Holeton said Cottom would have a utility trailer office and portable toilets and wash stations, but would need to build permanent restrooms after the first year due to health department regulations. She said the business is in accord with Grayson’s Comprehensive Plan, which calls for tourism promotion.

Commission Member Brian Walls was concerned about medical attention for any injuries.

Cottom said he has never had any serious injuries in his five years of operation. He handles 80,000 customers per year in a variety of adventure sports and has injuries requiring an ambulance about once to twice a year. He said his staff has rudimentary first aid training but strives to make an injured person comfortable until professional help arrives. Most injuries result from customers disobeying instructions, he said. “It’s a lot safer than people riding on bicycles, for sure.”

Walls wanted to require the business to have two employees trained in first aid and CPR on duty at all times, but the commission did not make this a requirement of the special use permit. The commission encouraged Cottom to hire employees with first aid training and he said he would make an effort to do so. The site is a mile from the Mount Rogers Volunteer Rescue Squad and Fire Department.

 

 

Grayson School Board asks for increase in local funding

By Amy Boucher

 

INDEPENDENCE – The Grayson County School Board is asking county supervisors for $250,000 above the minimally required funding for 2014-15 to pay for laptop computers for students, a new school bus, and renovations for aging facilities.

County Administrator Jonathan Sweet said that the 2014-15 budget would be tight, but he hopes that his plan for debt retirement could provide some extra funds. Grayson ranks 131 of 136 school divisions in local funding effort this year. “I’d like to get to at least 100 of the 136,” said Schools’ Superintendent Kevin Chalfant. “That would be my long-term goal.”

County supervisors praised the school board for a forward-thinking budget but said providing funding would be difficult. “Our desire to help is there,” said Supervisors’ Chairman John Brewer. But he said that providing educational opportunities for students could not come at the expense of parents who have to support those students.

And Sweet pointed out that the county already will have to shell out approximately $550,000 extra because of a change in the composite index, the rate at which the state reimburses the county for each student. With the change, the state has signaled that Grayson’s economy is strengthening and therefore can afford to pay a greater local share of each student’s educational cost.

Additionally, Grayson will have fewer total students next year, 1,763, which means less state funding. Grayson had 1,772 students at the end of the 2012-13 school year.

The discussion came at a joint meeting of the two boards Monday night.

The school board is proposing a 2 percent raise for all employees plus a step increase and insurance. Grayson ranks 119 of 136 school divisions in the state in teacher pay.

Chalfant presented the school board’s budget priorities. The school board plans to match any extra funding from the county with $250,000 it has set aside from grants and budget savings.

The largest share of the extra funding, $100,000, would go to a technology initiative aimed at providing all students in grades four through 12 with laptop computers for school and home use over a three-year period. Students in grades one through three would have laptops in their classrooms. Additionally, all county schools would have wireless networks for Internet access.

Textbooks would be on the computers and students could work from home on snow days, Chalfant said. One-third of students will get the purchased or leased latptops for three years, when all students will have them.

The technology initiative will help prepare students for the workforce and attract jobs to the county, he said.

The school board wants $90,000 extra to pay for a new school bus, and plans to buy an activity bus with school funds for $110,000. Chalfant said 19 buses have traveled more than 150,000 miles.

Another $60,000 in extra funding will go to school maintenance needs like air conditioning and new cabinets and counters in the CATE center, among others.

The state has not decided on its funding yet, so the school board is still waiting for final budget figures, but using the governor’s funding plan, the school budget will total $21.7 million.

With the changes in total students and the reimbursement rate, the county is already looking at a $750,000 increase from this year, Sweet said. Another $250,000 would bring that total to $1 million more in local funding.

At-large Supervisor David Sexton said that one extra cent on the tax levy brings in $40,000. While he supports the initiatives, “finding the money is the challenge,” he said.

Brewer estimated that more than 50 percent of Grayson’s students do not have access to technology at home. “The question is, how we’re going to pay for it.”

In response to a question from School Board Member Wynn Combs, Chalfant said he did not know how many students in Grayson don’t have access to the Internet at home, but members of both boards agreed that students all seem to have cell phones.

Sweet said the county could not respond to the request immediately, but commended the school board “for looking at something else, other than the status quo.”

“Do you have an Option Two?” asked Wilson District Supervisor Glen Eddie Rosenbaum.

Chalfant said if the school system could not get the extra funding, it would spread the laptop purchases over five years and only buy one bus, and carry out half the maintenance projects.

Oldtown Supervisor Kenneth Belton said he liked the idea of the school board and supervisors putting up matching funds.

Sweet said the county has not determined its bottom line yet, and extended some hope to the school board. “Maybe the numbers will be in our favor.”

“It does look like the county is in a lot better shape than it has been in years,” said School Board Member Gary Burris, referring to a recent audit report.

Supervisors offer coyote bounty 3.13.2014

Amy Boucher

March 14, 2014

 

 

Supervisors offer coyote bounty

3-2 split continues

 

INDEPENDENCE -- With conflicting information over the efficacy of a bounty in reducing the coyote population and in spite of opposition from five county residents and two county supervisors, a trio of Grayson County supervisors on Thursday night approved spending up to $5,000 a year through the end of 2015 for coyote carcasses, at $40 each.

County Administrator Jonathan Sweet said Saturday the ordinance would be effective over three fiscal years, for a total of $15,000.

Supervisors David Sexton, Glen Eddie Rosenbaum and John Brewer, who generally vote as a block on controversial issues, voted for an ordinance that would establish a bounty on coyotes killed in Grayson. Rosenbaum proposed the ordinance in February because he said coyotes are threatening the deer population in Grayson.

Supervisors Brenda Sutherland and Kenneth Belton, who also generally vote together, opposed the measure. Belton read a letter from a state expert who said that bounties do not reduce coyote populations. The vote took place after a public hearing on the matter.

The supervisors devoted more time to the coyote issue than to any other. Rosenbaum was anxious to get the ordinance in place because coyotes are preparing to whelp and he said the county would get more coyote for the dollar during March and April by eliminating potential litters.

Rosenbaum introduced the ordinance by describing how he first came to Grayson County 44 years previously to deer hunt, and met the Roberts family in Roberts Cove, where he now lives. The Robertses told him that the cove could support 185 deer over the winter.

Two years ago, he set out to reduce the coyote population, which had cut the deer herd in the cove to 51, he said, by eating fawns and by causing does to spontaneously abort fetuses. He killed 59 coyotes between March and September, he said, and his deer herd is now up to 79. Rosenbaum said he can count deer at this time of year because there is no food for them in the forest and they must come out into open pastureland to graze.

"Nobody is taking up for the deer....We need to protect our deer herds." Rosenbaum said the first day of hunting season used to bring a solid line of vehicles in the pre-dawn hours from Sugar Grove all the way into Grayson. Hunters spend money in Grayson, he said. "If we don't do anything, we're going to lose our deer herd."

Rosenbaum said nearby counties with bounties have set them between $60 and $70. He wanted to set Grayson's at $40 to reduce the chance of fraud -- of hunters bringing coyotes from other jurisdictions to claim the Grayson bounty.

Sweet said the application for the bounty is an affidavit with a penalty for fraud.

Sweet told the supervisors he received three letters from people who opposed the bounty but could not attend the public hearing. Two others, Evelyn Halsey and Laura George, spoke against the bounty at the hearing.

Halsey said road hunters kill more deer than coyotes do and dump the carcasses along roadsides. Coyotes, at least, "eat the whole damn thing." She said people who use poison to kill coyotes risk poisoning pets or children. Hunters who use traps trespass to set them on private land, and "I'm concerned about road hunters....if you open up this bounty."

Rosenbaum said after the hearing that coyotes can't be hunted from the road and that trappers put their names on their traps and won't put them out without permission.

George tackled Rosenbaum personally in her remarks. She said he claims to want to save the county money but he already has wasted money drafting an ordinance to repeal zoning, currently on hold, and with the coyote bounty. Rosenbaum could have raked in $2,360 for his 59 coyotes, she noted. "I trust the farmers to do it without the need for remuneration."

Belton read letters from two state experts. One was from Chad Fox, district supervisor for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services Office in Christiansburg. Fox said the coyote population in the western part of Virginia is stable and he recommends improved fencing and guard animals to farmers. He says few coyotes are livestock killers and his program will come to a farm and dispose of problem coyotes. Ten to 15 percent of coyotes are transients looking for territory and these will move in to any vacant territory.

Belton's second letter said not enough coyotes are killed through bounty programs to affect overall population. Grayson's bounty program would pay for up to 125 coyotes in its first year. The second expert said unless you kill off 60 percent, the coyote population can recover in one year. He said bounty programs lead to "rampant fraud" and the deaths of domestic dogs who are shot or trapped.

Sexton said hunting coyotes is challenging and will interest young people in hunting. "We're never going to stop crime either," he said, but wanted to give coyote eradication a try.

Brewer said 18 counties in Virginia have bounties, although the Daily Press  reported in January that fewer than a dozen Virginia localities use coyote bounties. Brewer noted that the ordinance would expire at the end of 2015.

Sweet said the supervisors could evaluate the program then and decide whether to continue it, but warned that evaluation would be difficult without a clear measure of success.

He said the county's animal control officer will accept carcasses at the county public works building during set office hours, and the entire carcass must be submitted for disposal to prevent fraud. The county will have to pay something for the disposal, which will come out of the $5,000 annual budget. The county will not accept any carcass over 72 hours old, to protect the health of employees. He's not sure how the bounty will be paid, but it will not be cash.

"I find it hard to take the taxpayers' money for something that has not proven to be effective," Sutherland said. She noted that farmers could take measures against coyotes and the state offers help in removing problem animals.

"Why would 18 localities in the state continue to invest dollars in it?" Brewer responded.

Sexton said it was not a large investment for the experiment.

"I think we can use the $5,000 a little better for the citizens," Belton said.

Dr. James Parkhurst, Virginia Cooperative Extension wildlife specialist, has said that 150 years of removal efforts through bounty programs have failed, but he said a bounty program can have a temporary regional effect.

Mike Fies of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has said that coyotes generally prey on birds and "mid-sized mammal nest predators" such as raccoons, as well as eating mast in the forest. They tend to displace red foxes. Fies said at a Virginia Tech coyote education meeting that coyotes' impact on the deer population is "likely very minimal statewide," and that bears as well as coyotes eat fawns.

In fiscal year 2011, 461 sheep, 59 calves and five goats were verified killed by coyotes in Virginia, according to the state's Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program. The program was started by USDA's Wildlife Services in 1990 to prevent coyote attacks on livestock and remove "problem" coyotes from farms. In 2011, the department removed 487 coyotes from 181 farms, mostly in the western part of the state, Fox told the Daily Press, when Isle of Wight County was considering a bounty in January.

Supervisors adopt nepotism policy 3.13.2014

Amy Boucher

March 14, 2014

 

 

Supervisors adopt nepotism policy, 3-2

Policy proposer votes no; says it is not an anti-nepotism policy

 

INDEPENDENCE -- The rift among members of the Grayson County Board of Supervisors was apparent again Thursday night as they divided over an anti-nepotism policy first proposed at their organizational meeting in January. The board voted 3-2 to adopt a policy that would prohibit the supervisors from hiring family members but would allow them to appoint family members to boards, authorities, committees or commissions. The policy allows only one such family appointment per board, authority or commission and prohibits supervisors from serving on the same board or commission as a family member.

"Family member" includes spouse, parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, brothers, sisters, mothers- and fathers-in-law, brothers- and sisters-in-law, sons- and daughters-in-law, uncles, aunts, nieces, nephews and adopted, half and step members of the immediate family.

The supervisors are responsible for disclosing their familial relationships prior to any consideration of employment or appointment.

"This is not anti-nepotism," said Oldtown Supervisor Kenneth Belton, who asked for a policy in January, explaining his negative vote. This policy would allow supervisors to appoint family members to many different boards, he said.

Elk Creek Supervisor Brenda Sutherland also voted no. She said the draft policy that was defeated by the other three supervisors in February was a "true anti-nepotism policy."

That draft would not have allowed the Grayson supervisors to hire or appoint any "family member."

County Administrator Jonathan Sweet offered another option, which also would have prohibited employment or appointment of family members, but would have omitted aunts and uncles from the definition of family members.

At-large Supervisor David Sexton moved to adopt the more lenient option, which allows family members to serve on boards. Chairman John Brewer told Sweet last month that he thought one family member should be able to serve per board or commission.

When Sutherland objected to the proposal, Sexton said that most anti-nepotism policies refer to employment, and that the proposal clearly excludes hiring of family members. He recalled that Belton did not want supervisors to be able to "stack the deck" on boards or commissions, and said that limiting participation to only one member of a supervisor's family would prevent that.

"We've always got the safety valve of the board," Wilson District Supervisor Glen Eddie Rosenbaum added. The supervisors must approve all appointments and he said he couldn't think of any appointments made by the supervisors leading to a family member doing something "out of line."

He asked the county administrator if he could think of any examples. Appearing non-plussed, Sweet said he was not prepared to offer any examples.

Rosenbaum said the policy gave the supervisors "a little room to move" so that they could appoint a relative if the relative is more qualified than any other candidate.

Brewer said many times it's hard to fill positions and the supervisors sometimes appoint family members "out of desperation."

"I just don't think it's right," Belton said, and reiterated his support for the draft prohibiting family members from employment or appointment.

Following adoption of the policy, the supervisors voted 3-2 (along the same lines) to recommend appointment of Greg Hash to the county Zoning Board of Appeals. The circuit court judge makes this appointment, based on the supervisors' recommendation.

Rosenbaum nominated Hash, with Sexton seconding.

Hash would replace Tony Caudill, who expressed a desire to continue to serve and who was nominated by Belton and seconded by Sutherland.

About Caudill, Rosenbaum said, "I don't know this gentleman and I've got a problem voting for somebody I don't know about....what they stand for." For that reason, he "went out and found somebody."

Greg Hash is the husband of Lisa Hash, whom Rosenbaum nominated in February for the county Planning Commission and who was appointed.

Brewer asked Rosenbaum if he wanted to interview Caudill.

"No, I'm fine with my motion," Rosenbaum said.

After the vote Belton said, "I do know Mr. Hash and he'll be excellent," adding that Caudill had done a fine job.

Supervisors approve mud bog festival

Amy Boucher
March 16, 2014

Grayson supervisors approve mud bog fest proposal

INDEPENDENCE -- Plans for a mud bog festival to be held on land off Cattle Drive near Fries May 9-10 will move ahead after unanimous approval by the Grayson Board of Supervisors last Thursday.
The festival will involve trucks and a mud hole, along with country music and camping. Proceeds will benefit three charitable causes, according to an application by organizer Crystal Leonard, one of which is the owner of the property on which the festival will be held, James Carico.
The Grayson Planning Commission recommended approval, with the condition that Leonard follow guidelines for erosion and sediment control. Zoning Administrator Elaine Holeton said at a public hearing on the matter that if Leonard disturbs less than 10,000 square feet of soil in digging her mud pit and with other festival ground disturbance, she will not need to submit a sediment and erosion control plan.
The mud bog lane is planned to be 18 feet by 200 feet.
Leonard said that she is planning just one festival for now, but could ask for permission to hold future events if the festival is successful.
"What kind of barriers did you run into getting your special use permit?" asked Wilson District Supervisor Glen Eddie Rosenbaum, who is seeking a revision of the county's zoning law to make it more user-friendly.
None so far, said Leonard, who has met not only with the county but also with the Department of Environmental Quality, which cleared the festival because it will not impact waterways or wetlands; the Virginia Department of Transportation; and the state Health Department, which is requiring the festival to supply one portable toilet per 95 attendees.
"It's been quite an adventure," said Leonard.
"We're going to try to make this more user-friendly," said Rosenbaum.
Leonard said clearing the festival with the DEQ was the biggest hurdle. The 73-acre property at 206 Cattle Drive includes the convergence of the two headwaters of Stevens Creek, a federally designated special flood hazard area, and marshy areas with potential wetlands on adjacent properties.
"I think anybody who wants to play in the mud ought to be able to," said Rosenbaum.
Holeton said the planning commission "really enjoyed working with Ms. Leonard."
"I'm glad to see Mr. James Carico be able to do what he wants to with his land," said Oldtown District Supervisor Kenneth Belton, a strong supporter of the county zoning law. He moved to approve the permit, Rosenbaum seconded, and the supervisors wished Leonard good luck.
In her proposal, Leonard says she expects 300-400 out-of-town visitors to the Mothers and Mudders Mudfest. She plans to run shuttles to "other recreational events in the area" in addition to offering activities on site. Campers arrive at 9 a.m. Friday and attendees at 5 p.m.
"Friday night is family night with several local bands, DJ Wolfman Jack and a Mud Queen competition," Leonard wrote. The mud bog takes place Saturday from 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. in six classes of events. Saturday night music begins at 6 and lasts until 11 p.m. The creek banks will be fenced away from participants and will be lined with LED luminaries. The festival will be rescheduled if it rains.
Leonard promised complete cleanup of the site after the festival, including reseeding disturbed areas.
The county received one anonymous email objecting to the festival, predicting a "Stompin' 76” type disturbance. "This is a peaceful, quiet community that will be shattered by loud trucks going day and night, very loud music that also will be blasting, as well as the yelling, cursing and lord knows what else," the individual wrote.
Leonard wrote that she had discussed her plans with neighboring residents who would be affected and they were supportive. She supplied signed statements of support from the residents.
The event will raise money for the Susan G. Komen Foundation, the "Stop the Violence" campaign, and James Carico, "in an effort to save the farm that his family has owned for over 100 years," according to the advertisement sponsorship form submitted with Leonard's application. It says that donations are tax-deductible but it is unclear whether the festival has tax deductible status under the Internal Revenue Service code.
In other action, the supervisors:
*heard from Building Official Jimmy Moss about a stormwater control ordinance that the county must adopt under state law. Moss said the ordinance will meet the minimum requirements established by the state in 2012 and must be implemented by July 1. He said it is designed to be user-friendly and carry as few impacts as possible. The intent of the ordinance is to prevent pollution by stormwater runoff.
"I liked the word you used, 'minimally comply,'" said At-large Supervisor David Sexton.
Moss said he wants to review some recent legislation from the General Assembly before submitting a final draft. "We are going to do the very minimum we can."
County Administrator Jonathan Sweet quoted the county motto, protector of nature, "but with the utmost sensitivity to our citizens."
*unanimously voted to support an application for a grant to build a water line in the Nuckolls Curve area.
*heard from Michelle Pridgen, manager of the Independence Farmers' Market, which is held at the Independence Town Park (formerly the McKnight Lot) from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Fridays, from May 9 to Oct. 31. She said the market is sponsoring a series of workshops and had 70 people attend the March 1 workshop. The next is April 12 and it is free and public.
The market sponsors children's activities from 10 to 11 a.m. with its partners Blue Ridge Discovery Center, the Grayson Public Library and 4-H. It holds a cooking demonstration the first Friday and demonstrations by a fiber guild on the third Friday. Vendor spaces are $10 per day or $30 for the season. Pridgen said the county's Comprehensive Plan says that young people want opportunities to stay in the area and farm, and the market provides such opportunities.
*Did not consider a resolution on "Preserving Our Virginia Way of Life" because it was moot. The resolution would have opposed action by the General Assembly to allow hunting on Sunday. The measure passed overwhelmingly and was signed into law by Gov. Terry McAuliffe. Sunday hunting will be allowed beginning July 1.The Grayson resolution emphasized the county's support for hunting, "a tradition as old as the county itself," but opposed "any additional laws or regulations that would authorize expanded hunting on Sunday."