RESPONSE TO SUPERVISOR CARSON TUCKER'S COMMENTARY
Supervisor Carson Tucker, an outspoken advocate for civility in politics and government, certainly doesn't practice it himself. In his September 16 commentary in Powhatan Today, he devotes five full paragraphs to an attack on the motives and character of those citizens who have questioned the decision of the Board of Supervisors to defer the decision on the WalMart rezoning application.
Mr. Tucker is not a student of history or he would lecture citizens of the County that they should not complain about the Board's actions or inaction, but must only bring forward constructive recommendations. In 1765, the Speaker of the Virginia House of Burgesses and other powerful members accused Patrick Henry of treason when he introduced the Virginia Resolves that challenged the British Parliament's imposition of the Stamp Act on Virginians. The Speaker insisted that Henry defer to the leadership's constructive approach to the King and Parliament. Fortunately for us, Henry pressed ahead even though the adoption of the Virginia Resolves led to a revolution.
When Mr. Tucker finally gets around to addressing the concerns of opposing citizens, he argues that it would have been a mistake to vote on the WalMart application this summer because more time and study were needed. This stands in sharp contrast to the position he took on the first major rezoning he faced as a supervisor. At that time, he urged hasty approval, perceiving no need for a traffic impact study or the careful review contemplated by the County's Comprehensive Plan. To put it charitably, his record on dealing with rezoning applications as a supervisor and previously as a member of the Planning Commission is one of inconsistency.
The deeper concern is that Mr. Tucker and the rest of the Board have put the County in a poor position by failing to anticipate issues raised by rezoning requests such as the WalMart application. In a letter to Powhatan Today several months ago, former Planning Commissioner David Williams wrote that the matter of "big boxes" had been discussed for years and that the Board had simply failed to prepare a position on the subject, as good planning required. In fact, the County has no settled policy on whether it wants "big boxes" or, if so, under what conditions. The failure to make that and other important policy decisions has hurt the County.
The Board's practice has been to sit back and react to individual rezoning applications. Whether the majority of citizens want to retain the County's rural character or whether they prefer to sacrifice some of that rural character to expand the tax base, this reactionary, case-by-case approach has not worked and will not work.
If the board continues to ignore the need for thoughtful planning and clear policies regarding growth and economic development, it risks the double whammy of losing out to other counties on economic development while simultaneously experiencing burdensome, haphazard growth that will further strain the County's ability to provide services and infrastructure. The vagueness of the new Comprehensive Plan and the Board's position that it is merely a guide that can be interpreted in any fashion members choose is not the kind of planning the County needs.
The fact is that we are already losing ground to other counties because we have no effective plan or policies regarding growth, no well-developed answers for businesses considering locating here, no clear-cut position on whether we want them or not and what they can expect to pay. Instead, they face the uncertainty of zoning approval and the unseemly case-by-case proffer ordeal . This not only discourages some businesses from attempting to locate here, but also invites favoritism and unequal treatment. Big corporations may be able to survive the process, but few small businesses will be willing to risk it.
This is no way for the County to do business. Mr. Tucker and his colleagues on the Board have a responsibility to make tough policy choices, develop broad rules and standards to implement its policies and apply those policies, rules and standards evenly. They are not meeting that responsibility by reacting to individual rezoning applications and in effect making policy on a case-by-case basisi.
It's time for Mr. Tucker to stop hectoring citizens and provide some leadership on the Board on growth and development.
Patrick McSweeney
Todd M Rojcewicz
There are many challenges facing Powhatan that each citizen of Powhatan County should be interested in. I am writing today to address one of the more pressing issues.
We are all aware that the nation’s largest retailer and employer, Walmart, has chosen Powhatan County to be one of its next markets for expansion. The County Planning Commission has approved the request to rezone the site that Walmart has an interest in. This site is located within the designated area for economic development, as defined by the comprehensive plan. The County Board of Supervisors has recently shelved the request indefinitely due inadequate time to assess late proffers submitted by Walmart, although I believe that there are other political motives behind their decision other than late proffers.
I once heard my Father say to my Mom that she has “champagne taste and a Budweiser budget” when she suggested an extravagant spending plan. Unfortunately, our county government has the same problem; they have an appetite for lavish spending projects. They have identified, via the comprehensive plan, projects totaling hundreds of millions of dollars. Unfortunately, the county does not have revenue to fund the vast majority of them due, in part, to the terrible economic conditions being prolonged by an irresponsible Federal government.
Powhatan County has two sources of new revenue: Property tax increases or increased economic development. If the Board of Supervisors were to suggest another property tax increase after the one passed for FY11, it would be political suicide going into next year’s elections. One would assume that they wouldn’t be as fool hardy to follow that path.
That leaves us with increased economic development. When I look at the decision made recently in regards to Walmart, I am thoroughly confused. I completely agree that Walmart isn’t the silver bullet to the county’s financial challenges, and we need to be prudent in the development of the site, but it would be a good start. Walmart would bring hundreds of new jobs, hundreds of thousands of dollars in new revenue that we can use for schools, law enforcement, Fire and Rescue, lower prices for our citizens and increased competition for the other county retailers. These are all very good things and fundamental to the free market system that our nation was founded on.
We need to promote Powhatan County as business friendly and encourage new businesses to move here, not discourage them by turning the approval process into political theater.
I laugh every time I pass the banner on route 60 stating “Plastic bags in trees, the cost of lower prices” just down the road from the multimillion dollar sewer/ water expansion that will never have a return on investment if we don’t promote our county as the place for new business.
I don’t see any plastic bags in the trees, but I do see dollars flying out of our pockets if we continue to discourage economic development in Powhatan.
Powhatan resident Todd M Rojcewicz is the founder of the Powhatan Taxpayers Alliance.
Powhatan Taxpayers Alliance response to the 2011 Powhatan County Budget
It is unfortunate that the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors chose to raise the tax rate 6 cents rather than to live within its means. The Board of Supervisors chose to increase the tax burden on an already financially stretched citizenry. Senator John Watkins stated that FY2011 will be hard, but FY 2012 will be worse and that was acknowledged by Mr. Tucker in his prepared statement. We have simply kicked the can farther down the road by using cash reserves and tax increases and not creating the budget using existing revenues at the current tax rate of .71 cents. The time for deep cuts and increased efficiencies is now. Citizens and businesses nationwide have experienced deep revenue shortfalls. They have cut spending, reduced staff, reduced employee compensation to bridge these difficult gaps in revenue and must live within their means; we expect nothing less from our government. These are difficult decisions to make and we are empathetic to our county employees, but fiscal responsibility and accountability to the taxpayer must be the first priority.
CORRECTION: Budget article contained misinformation
Published: April 14, 2010
By Michael Copley
Staff Writer
There were serious errors in a story- published by the Richmond Times-Dispatch- that was posted to this web site, about the budget Powhatan Supervisors adopted Monday.
Supervisors adopted a balanced budget- $68,285,721- and set the real estate tax rate at 77 cents, three cents below the revenue neutral level. That will mean a lower actual real estate tax bill next year for most county homeowners than the one they received this year, said District 5 Supervisor Carson Tucker.
Tucker showed examples of four properties in varying price brackets and noted that in three out of the four cases, taxes owed under the new rate would go down.
The schools received $19,074,657 in county funding, plus an additional $872,000 in one-time revenues.
To be clear, the county adopted a balanced budget and the schools received enough additional money from the county to balance the school board’s budget. The school board has not yet adopted a budget.
The Powhatan Today apologizes that it allowed an article with factual errors to be posted to its web site and staff sincerely regret misinformation that went out because of it.
Powhatan raises real estate tax; layoffs avoided
JUAN ANTONIO LIZAMA TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
Powhatan supervisors last night voted unanimously to increase the real estate tax by 6 cents but avoid layoffs and pay cuts for county employees the next fiscal year.
The new real estate tax rate will be 77 cents per $100 of assessed value, effective July 1. However, residents' tax bills should remain about the same because of a 13.8 percent decline in real estate values from last year.
For example, Supervisor Carson Tucker said, a home valued at $139,200 last year is now valued at $123,700. Even with the higher tax rate, the owner will pay $35.83 less in taxes, he said.
The county still faces a $1.5 million shortfall in the budget, and it has already cut more than $500,000 in one-time expenses, which include six vacant positions, replacement of sheriff's vehicles and computer equipment. The remaining $1 million difference will have to come from other savings, officials said.
The $68.3 million budget the board of supervisors passed for fiscal 2011 is 7 percent less than the current $73.3 million plan.
The school system's shortfall was larger: a $3.1 million gap in its spending plan, which the supervisors approved as part of last night's package.
Powhatan schools are reducing some services, cutting six teaching positions through attrition and reducing salaries by 3 percent for the superintendent and assistant directors; 2 percent for teachers, supervisors and principals; and 1 percent for support staff.
Even with those cuts, the school budget was still short about $700,000, which supervisors covered with an additional $872,000 allocation for schools.
Tucker said the board hopes the extra funds will prevent the 1 percent pay cuts teachers and staff were facing.
"We implore the school board to use this $872,000 to eliminate the need for these school board proposed salary reductions," he said, adding that supervisors recognize the school board makes the final decision where the money goes.
Tucker said he would be taking a 25 percent supervisor's pay cut for the 2011 budget cycle. The other supervisors did not say they were taking reduced pay. The board opposed reducing county employee salaries because they are already earning less than competing localities.
He said that the approved budget relies on unknowns. It is hard to say if the economy will worsen or if it will improve or if the state will further reduce funding. If that's the case, they'll be back next year and make deep cuts again, he said.
"Personally, I believe we're going to see further cuts in state aid to counties, most specifically schools," Tucker said.
"If the economy deteriorates further and if the commonwealth cuts funding again next year, we are facing layoffs next year."
County Leaders Abuse Travel and Waste Taxpayers Dollars Letter to the Editor in Powhatan Today, March 10, 2010 by Nelson L. Batterson
The recent editorial in the Richmond Times Dispatch was correct - Delegate Lee Ware’s bill impairing Freedom of Information (FOI) requests should be “killed and buried in an unmarked grave.” Was the bill really targeted to curb harassment from one individual or was the Board of Supervisors looking for a way to chill requests from county residents? I believe the latter.
I recently did two requests, one seeking the questionable expenses of county officials, and a second seeking information about the county’s wasteful $25,000 option to purchase land for an industrial park on Genito Road. In both cases based on what I received did not believe I was provided complete information. Again, based on what I received, I believe some county employees and elected officials have personal motivations for chilling FOIA requests from residents like me.
For example, last summer Carolyn Bishop – county administrator, Bob Cosby - BOS Chairman, and Joe Walton - member of the BOS traveled to Opryland in Nashville, Tennessee at taxpayer’s expense. Their spouses accompanied them. The stated purpose of the trip was to pick-up a plaque that could have been easily mailed.
Expenses show rooms were upgraded from traditional rooms to more expensive garden terrace rooms. Additionally, travel was not done in the most economical manner. Records show Mr. Cosby drove his personal vehicle and was reimbursed $641.30 for mileage while Mr. Walton flew roundtrip for $237.39.
Information I received regarding the proposed Industrial Park was equally shocking and also incomplete. Without any input from residents, the county elected to spend $25,000 for an option to purchase land on Genito Road - land currently zoned agricultural. Additional monies were wasted on studies that should have been considered in advance of the option. I have been unable to obtain under FOIA copies of all studies and their associated costs. What taxpayers know today is that the BOS wasted at least $25,000 on a non-refundable option.
Goochland County currently posts all county expenditures on their website. Powhatan County should do the same and go a step further by posting all FOIA requests and county responses as well.
As a former sheriff of Powhatan County, I have always believed an informed citizenry makes for good government. I don’t believe it is any coincidence that the BOS allegedly requested Delegate Ware to introduce his bill after my second FOIA request.
