Wish list for the General Assembly

 

Virginia State Capitol

Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, which means that local governments have only those powers specifically ceded to them by the General Assembly.  Therefore, it is vital that Goochland County has sound working relationships with those who represent us in Richmond.

Our current representatives in the GA are two delegates, Tom Garrett, 56^th District, and David Owen, 57^th District, and one 10^th District state senator. At this time, we do not know who will represent the 10^th district during the 2025 session. John McGuire, who was elected to that office in 2023, was recently elected to represent Virginia’s 5^th District in the United States Congress. McGuire submitted his letter of resignation from his state senate seat on December 10. The date for the special election should be announced soon.

As time grows short until the start of the 2025 General Assembly Session, political parties are moving forward with candidate selection for this special election. Democrats have chosen Louisa County resident Jack Trammell.

On Friday, December 13, 10^th District republicans will hold a mass meeting in Goochland to select their candidate/ Go tohttps://goochland.gop/ for details.

In October, Goochland officials met with Garrett, Owen, and McGuire for an informal discussion of legislative matters. (See GOMM Sausage Making Preview for details)

The county’s final legislative agenda for the 2025 General Assembly session was included in the supervisors’ consent agenda on December 3, without further discussion. (See pages 64-70 of the December 3 board packet available on the county website https://www.goochlandva.us/ under the “agendas and minutes” tab for details.) Crafted with input from the supervisors, school board, county and school staff, constitutional officers, and the Monacan Soil and Water Conservation District, it is a comprehensive list of issues that Goochland supports and those it opposes. This will be communicated with our General Assembly Delegation, so it can act in the best interests of Goochland.

Some highlights:

Schools

Goochland supports policies that enable full funding for public education, including standards of quality and support for programs that keep new teachers in the profession for the long term. It also supports additional state resources and funding options for school construction and capital projects, including dedicated local sales and use taxes. This includes expanding dedicated local sales and use tax authority first given to select counties by the General Assembly in 2019 as well as continuing to fund the School Construction Grant Program and School Construction Assistance Program.

Opposes any financial policies or regulations that impose a burden on localities. For example, in FY25, the Commonwealth mandated that school divisions provide a three percent salary increase for Standard of Quality instructional and support positions using the local composite index to compute the locality’s share. This unfunded state mandate cost Goochland—our LCI is .8 meaning that we pay 80 percent—$526,332 from local revenue.

Support was expressed for strategies to address the Commonwealth-wide teacher shortage that target instructional areas with critical need.

 

Local control

The agenda opposes erosion of local control over land use decisions, revenue streams, and “other issues of local concern”. These include the location of solar installations, higher density zoning to accommodate affordable housing, or accessory dwelling units.

Protection of local funding decisions and the preservation of local government authority to collect revenues necessary to provide local public services.

Support extending powers currently given to some local governments to all local governments.

Oppose any change in local government’s present defense of qualified and sovereign immunity.

Support legislation to streamline newspaper advertising of public notices, public hearings, and public procurement to give localities the option to use electronic or other forms of notification as an alternative.

Broadband expansion

Goochland supports the removal of all regulatory and other impediments to the provide broadband access. These include increased funding, expanded funding and implementation of new technology to build the infrastructure necessary to deploy universal, affordable access to all areas, especially in underserved rural areas.

Support improvement to existing state law to make it easier for wireless communication providers to use existing tall structures or building towers as long as they do not usurp local land use authority.

Support streamlining broadband infrastructure permitting   in VDOT rights of way, at railroad crossings, and within utility easements.

Second amendment

Goochland opposes “the passage of any state laws that infringe upon the rights of the law-abiding citizens of the Commonwealth under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and under Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution.”

Public safety

In the public safety area, Goochland supports the enhancement of hazardous duty retirement benefits for full-time 911 dispatchers and animal control officers. Recruitment, retention, and funding for fire and EMS providers, especially funding for EMS agencies.

Support for “identification and implementation of new funding sources for Virginia’s fire departments and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) agencies.  In 2023, the General Assembly passed House Bill (HB) 2175 establishing a work group to study existing fire service needs, analyze sustainability of funding, and review alternative funding models.  The HB 2175 Workgroup submitted their report, “Service to Others: A Report on the Commonwealth’s Fire and EMS Service,” to the General Assembly and the Governor in October 2023.  In addition, support the recommendations of the HB 2174 Workgroup and continued study of fire and EMS funding in the Commonwealth.” 

Our delegation to the GA should discuss concerns identified in a report submitted in 2023 on the continued funding of fire and EMS services in the Commonwealth with providers in their districts to ensure that the report reflects actual conditions and challenges “on the ground” and helps rather than harms public safety operations going forward.

Goochland supports “continued local authority and state funding to implement appropriate security, preparedness, and health measures.”  These include dedicated state funding that may include capital and operational costs, including ongoing support for School Resource and School Security Officer positions. The Goochland County Sheriff’s Office, in partnership with Goochland County Public Schools, currently has six trained, qualified, and assigned SROs to cover five schools in Goochland.  The Goochland County Sheriff’s Office has an additional four trained and qualified SROs that are available to serve as back-ups as necessary.

Goochland supports the full funding of all Sheriff’s Office Deputy positions approved through the Compensation Board.  

Goochland opposes “any federal or state regulatory action that hinders the provision of emergency services by increasing costs of operations or deterring recruitment and retention of emergency Services employees.  This includes the Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed rules change to Fire Brigades Standards and the Food and Drug Administration’s proposed rule changes impacting prescription drug box programs.”

Transportation

Support “a robust and sustainable transportation funding framework that effectively addresses the evolving needs of Goochland County and communities across the Commonwealth.”

Support continuing study and action to address the declining growth of transportation revenues and find ways to grow them over time to meet increasing demands. Address the increase in cost of transportation related projects that impact localities, especially VDOT fees for locally managed projects.

Support additional flexibility within the VDOT approval process to be responsive to the needs of an individual locality.  Supports the expansion of authority and discretion of the VDOT Resident Administrator to approve design standard modification, including reduction of speed limits.

Disclosure

Goochland supports the ability of localities to require residential property disclosures related to zoning classification or permitted uses on adjacent parcels. Legislation is requested to establish a standardized disclosure list that includes proffered land use conditions enacted by local government action.

The 2025 session of the Virginia General Assembly will convene on January 9 and meet for 30 days. During that time, thousands of bills will be submitted, some will become law. Go to https://virginiageneralassembly.gov/ to follow the action.

Thanks to our delegation for representing us in Richmond.

 

 

Library Report

 

Goochland Branch Library

At the December 3 meeting of the Goochland Supervisors, our county’s representatives on the Board of Trustees of the Pamunkey Regional Library (PRL), Chair Barbara Young, and Trustee Barbara Slone, presented a quarterly update.

Earlier this year, Young and Slone reported that the PRL director had resigned and outlined changes the Trustees planned to make to the organization. At that time, they introduced Jamie Shoop as the acting library director and Sherida Bradby as acting assistant library director.

Among the issues the PRL board faced were several tardy annual audits. As PRL is funded with tax dollars, accounting for use of that money is vital.

Slone said that the annual PRL audit for FY24, which ended on June 30, was completed early and was clean. PRL was the first of Hanover County’s financial partners to complete its 2024 audit.

She commended Stoops, Bradby, and PRL business operations manager Ken Katron for their work on the project.

Slone said that PRL does not plan to request a budget increase from Goochland County for the next fiscal year. PRL did request additional funds from King William County to increase its weekly library hours from 44 to 52.

PRL has retained the services of an accountant with expertise in public financing to assist with finances and audits. As of October 31, the PRL fund balance is approximately $4.5 million, which had been earmarked for a new administration building, which was never approved. The Trustees believe that money should be used for library capital projects. A minimum balance of $500k will be kept as a rainy-day fund.

Slone said that the trustees are still investigating how the large fund balance was accumulated. She said that PRL has some very generous donors.

Jonathan Lyle, District 5, asked if the large fund balance would affect the amount PRL requested from Goochland. Slone said that it is an entirety of PRL funds, which are managed by Hanover County. Lyle said he wholeheartedly supports PRL and wants to ensure that it is adequately funded.

Stoop explained that the cost of “shared services” provided by PRL is split on a per capita basis, among its member counties. Those services include the purchase of books and other materials; subscriptions; supplies; contractual agreements.  Goochland is responsible for 16 percent of the shared services and 12 percent of $48k cost of hotspots. Hanover pays 72 percent and King William 12 percent. Personnel at library branches are funded by the county where they are located.

Young quashed the “firestorm” rumor that PRL planned to discontinue issuing “hotspots,” devices that provide Wi-Fi to patrons with no access to broadband. When the trustees began to review the PRL budget, the $48k budget for hotspots was discussed to see if that was a service PRL should continue to provide for its patrons. That amount covers maintenance and subscriptions. Trustees decided to talk to their county officials about the matter.

Young said that Goochland County administrator Vic Carpenter reminded her that there are still many places across Goochland not served by broadband making hotspots a vital library service.

At the November meeting of the PRL trustees, hotspots were discussed, Young said. A suggestion that PRL charge for use of hotspots “did not go over well”.  A motion was made and approved at that meeting that the hotspot policy will be continued and revisited in 2027, by which time broadband access may be more widely available. In short, THE PRL HOTSPOT POLICY WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED until at least 2027.

Hotspots may be checked out, one per patron, for fourteen days at a time. They have no data limit and use Verizon and T Mobile signals, which work well in the Goochland service area.

The PRL trustees are working to update policies, which Young said will be a long but necessary process.

At the direction of the Trustees, Stoop met with branch managers to compile a project “wish and needs list”, which includes replacing aging laptops; updating network equipment; purchase of enhanced marketing and outreach materials; museum passes; digital access to local news; new early learning stations; a new delivery van; and AEDs at all branches.

“The disbursement of these funds will be thoughtfully made as we strive to enrich and enhance our libraries for the community,” said Slone.

Goochland is part of a pilot program for library lockers that allow patrons to pick up on hold library materials after hours by retrieving a code on their phone.

Young said that the Trustees decided to look at PRL staffing last September to make sure that there were no holes, or redundancies. Stoop asked the Trustees to hold off until PRL knows if King William will be leaving PRL.  

The was brief discussion about a potential departure from PRL by King William County, which will be decided by that county’s officials. For what are believed to be financial challenges, King and Queen County left PRL earlier this year.

Carpenter said that he has had positive discussions with King William officials, some of whom are new to the job, and said they are not, at this time, going forward with the departure, but that could change. A meeting has been scheduled in January to hopefully “nail” this decision down so PRL can move forward.

Current holders of PRL library cards have received notice that renewals must be done in person showing proof of residence in Goochland. Stoops explained that the procedure will ensure that only those who live in counties belonging to PRL will have active library access.

Go to https://www.pamunkeylibrary.org/ for more information.

West Creek v neighbors round next

 

Broad Branch Drive north of R 288 two lane bridge

The sole public hearing at the December 3 meeting of the Goochland Board of Supervisors was the latest salvo in a decades long battle between the West Creek Business Park and various owners of several parcels totaling approximately 1,000 acres to the west and south.

At issue was a proffer amendment for Mosaic, a 500 home 55+ community in West Creek, to adopt a new conceptual plan for 7.153 acres at the intersection of Mosaic Creek Boulevard and Broad Branch Drive to add three lots for detached single-family dwellings. The language of the amended proffer also precludes any road access through the subject land to the approximately 80-acre parcel to the west, which is designated as prime economic development. The amendment was approved 4-1.

HHHunt, the developer of Mosaic, that requested the proffer amendment, contended that any road access through or near its property onto Broad Branch Drive, a two-lane road that seems to have been built to access the Capital One Campus, and is a private road to the north, would be unsafe. It was odd that Capital One does not seem to have weighed in on the matter.

More than a hundred Mosaic residents turned out for both the supervisors’ meeting and a public hearing held by the planning commission on November 21 to express support for the proffer amendment.

Speakers representing owners of the land to the south and west contended that refusal to permit access to Broad Branch drive landlocked their property denying them access to Rt. 288 and the ability to develop them. They also incorrectly contended that the action would preclude them from connecting to the Tuckahoe Creek Service District utility lines. TCSD trunk lines are required to “stub” at the boundary of new construction to allow the next parcel to connect and have done so in Mosaic. 

There were references to alleged promises made to adjacent landowners by the late C. B, Robertson, who created West Creek, that their land would be able connect to the park. They also labeled the proffer amendment as a “spite strip” created specifically to stifle critical competition with West Creek by denying access to its internal roadways and, perhaps most important, Rt. 288. The proffer amendment was characterized as arbitrary and capricious to prevent development.

Jonathan Lyle, District 5, said that he had spoken at length with representatives of the parcels on the outside as well as those from HHHunt and Mosaic residents. Lyle, a marathoner, said that he often runs through Mosaic and has also walked Broad Branch Drive between Mosaic and the two-lane bridge over Rt. 288. “There may be a worse, less accommodating location for a connector onto Broad Branch Drive, but you’d have to look long and hard to find it,” he said of the two lane downhill blind curve.

Lyle said that he opposed the creation of Mosaic believing that it was inappropriate to put residential use in the middle of a prime economic development area, but that things changed when the community built out.  Lyle said that the parcel to the west has been landlocked for a long time and the proffer amendment will not change that. He contended that the adjoining property owners can find solutions that will let them develop their land other than connecting with West Creek. Lyle pointed out that traffic issues on Broad Branch Drive are already bad and adding access to more land bringing more traffic would exacerbate the situation.

No mention was made of the approximately nine-acre parcel on the east side of Broad Branch Road, which is part of West Creek, or how that might develop. Lyle moved to approve the measure and voted for the amendment on the grounds that it is in the interest of the health, safety, and welfare of county citizens.

Neil Spoonhower, District 2, who cast the lone dissenting vote, had a different take on the case. He said that, had he been a Mosaic resident, he would support the proffer amendment. However, said Spoonhower, his job is to look out for the greater good of the entire Goochland community. Having gone back and “reviewed the tape” of the 2018 meeting that approved the Mosaic rezoning, he had concerns. Hours before the final public hearing for that rezoning, said Spoonhower, documentation mentioning an “east west” connector was presented to the board in hopes of securing approval for a case that was “teetering” on the brink of rejection.

Perhaps “to tip the scales,” Spoonhower contended, Mosaic developers said they would not build homes on a place indicated on one of the several conceptual plans presented and in the case of public necessity, there would be “mechanisms” perhaps to build the connector.

“That’s the east west connector we’re talking about today. It’s been sitting there since 2018 as a potential plan. I find it outrageous that we’re sitting here talking about a negative proffer. In our own proffer policy, it says reasonable proffers, notwithstanding any other provision or law general or special, the county will neither request nor accept any unreasonable proffer in connection with the rezoning or proffer. It is my belief that this is an unreasonable proffer.

“I’m not saying a road should go there, but there is no way in good conscious this board should prevent a road from potentially going there. I’ve seen nothing that tells me there will be an increase in traffic or significant safety concerns and those will be addressed.”

Spoonhower cited the recent day long economic development workshop when the supervisors declared that economic development in appropriate locations, like the area under discussion, would be its focus for the next four years to keep the rest of Goochland rural and pay the bills.

“So, if I vote for this amendment, not only am I signaling that we’re not as much for economic development but saying out of one side of our mouth that we’re in favor of economic development but not doing everything we can to support it. I also think we’re picking winners and losers and that’s not right either.”

Spoonhower referenced the “Hatfields and McCoys” element of the dispute between West Creek and adjunct landowners. “I don’t know anything about that and that’s between y’all,” he said.

If the landowners outside of West Creek can work together to protest this proffer amendment, why can’t they work together to create their own internal roadway with access to both Hockett Road and Rt. 6 that could make their land more attractive to develop, perhaps more than West Creek? It is unclear how being able to connect to Broad Branch Drive would make the landlocked property easier to develop, because more than one access would be required to meet fire and other codes.

This is the latest instance of a developer “kinda sorta” agreeing to provide connectivity during the rezoning phase based on “conceptual plans”, but never quite building the roads. Then, after homes have been sold, they convince new residents, who never bothered to ask how their community would build out, that if the subject road was built, their safety and serenity would be at risk. This happened in the Parke at Saddle Creek, for the connector road parallel to Broad Street Road between Manakin and Hockett Roads that had been in the major transportation plan for years. When residents of Parkside Village realized that a connector road between Pouncey Tract and Ashland Roads, that was pretty much a condition for its approval, would go through their community, they objected to the road and the plan was reworked.

Rezoning applications tend to be based on conceptual plans that get revised in the plan of development stage, after more detailed engineering has been completed. Often, these require revisions because developers are reluctant to spend money on engineering until rezoning has been secured and is handled administratively by planning staff.