Critical Board Actions Required
November 16, 2008
The current Giles County Board of Supervisors are about as proactive and willful as a 2-legged dog trying to cross an interstate highway. These are tough times, just as I predicted during my campaign for Central District Supervisor. Tough times require tough decisions, which require a strong will and courage to do the right thing regardless of politics. If our supervisors possessed these needed qualities they would do the following as a minimum:
1. Issue an edict to the county school board to halt any improvements to the two high school football field bleachers.
2. Require the school board to consolidate the two county high schools effective with the start of the 2009-2010 school year. This will require the school board to select which of the two county high schools will serve as the only county high school.
3. Upon completion of the high schools consolidation, determine which football stadium will be used to host the home football games and perform required repairs and improvements to only one football stadium, in lieu of both stadiums.
4. Place an indefinite hold on any plans for additional facilities at the county wellness center and Castle Rock recreational facility.
5. Prioritize the planned renovations and maintenance to Eastern Elementary and the Giles Technology Center. Safety items should be Priority 1 and other items should be prioritized in their order of what is critical to the mission of county education. This would allow a substantial expenditure of taxpayer money to be deferred to a later date when funding and improved financing becomes more attractive and lessens the burden on county taxpayers.
6. Identify non-critical programs which are receiving county financial support and eliminate those which aren’t currently absolutely necessary to providing critical services for county citizens and required operation of county government. Examples include county support of various New River Valley initiatives such as economic development, the NRV airport, etc.
7. Identify any overlapping services currently provided by the county and towns within the county. Negotiate with county towns for consolidation of services that would benefit both the town and the county.
8. Eliminate county government jobs that aren’t absolutely necessary at this time. Example: Assistant County Administrator.
9. Eliminate the current expense fund allocated to the county administrator, which has been reported as being in the range of $200,000 per fiscal year, and requires no prior review and approval by the supervisors before spending of the funds by the county administrator.
10. Reduce the amount of money paid to the supervisors, including such things as health insurance, and eliminate payments to persons serving on various county boards.
These are but a few actions of what could and should be acted upon by our supervisors. The idea that the supervisors should sit in their Board Room chairs and await recommendations from the county administrator is ludicrous at any time, but especially during this time of reduced state funding and economic hardships on county citizens.
In view of the fact that board chairman Eric Gentry doesn’t allow citizens adequate time to submit public comments at BOS meetings, forums such as this web site and the county newspaper are the only alternatives for citizens to express their concerns and recommendations. The disrespect shown by the supervisors, especially Eric Gentry, for citizens that attend BOS meetings is shameful and a slap in the face to any citizen who attempts to convey their concerns to the supervisors.
Citizens will have an opportunity to express their dissatisfaction against the BOS in the November 2009 election when the two at-large county supervisor seats will be on the ballot.
This will involve Rick McCoy and Chappy Baker, should they decide to run for reelection to their office. Pending a drastic change of attitude and supervisor performance, a real possibility exists that these supervisor seats will be contested and Mr. McCoy and Mr. Baker might be replaced by their unhappy constituents.
Board Actions - Required
October 1, 2008
When will our five supervisors start working for all county citizens instead of a select few citizens and businesses?
We need supervisors who think for themselves instead of waiting to be told by the county administartor that he has an issue they must think about and make a decision.
Do they keep up with state politics enough to know that localities are at risk of losing as much as 20% of currently appropriated state funding? If they know this, why haven't they INSTRUCTED the county administrator to initiate budget reduction evaluations and submit his findings to them by a specified date?
How can citizens show respect for elected officials who aren't in tune with the world we live in?
Property reassessments being performed at a significant cost to taxpayers at a time when property values are falling? What is to be gained by this, unless the reassessment figures aren't in tune with market reality and they are artificially inflated to allow the county to play smoke and mirrors with our real estate tax advertised rate and effective rate increase?
Services, capital expenditures, incurred versus existing debt service, personnel costs, and more must be diligently and thoroughly reviewed and adjusted to reflect the impact of a reduction in state funding, as well as the reduction in citizen net income and disposable income.
Wake up elected and appointed officials! We cannot afford to have you asleep at the wheel of this county financial accident waiting to happen.
-----------------------------------------------
December 21, 2007
1. Require a school efficiency review as defined by the State of Virginia prior to authorizing any county budget increase or major expansion of school facilities.
NOTE:
It appears that another budget year will come and go without this review being performed. You can place the primary credit for this decision on the shoulders of school board chairman, J.B. Buckland, who stated that he thinks the schools are operating as efficiently as is possible. With due respect to Mr. Buckland, his subjective opinion about this subject is far less convincing than would be the results of a professional evaluation by a company qualified to perform an independent and unbiased evaluation of all school operations.
2. Create zoning ordinances as necessary to protect county natural resources, our environment, quality of life, and development that is in compliance with the county comprehensive plan. The AEP fly ash scenario is a perfect example of what occurs when a locality has weak or non-existent zoning ordinances. Other situations such as the size of a commercial dog kennel should be properly addressed by county zoning ordinances.
NOTE: Virginia Tech has volunteered the service of graduate students to assist in performance of this effort at no charge to the county. Why would or should the supervisors say no to this offer? Ask your supervisor if they are aware of the Virginia Tech offer. This information was provided to the county administrator in early October, 2007. Why doesn't our county administrator take the lead on this and make an appropriate recommendation to the supervisors; something that should have been done prior to Cumberland Park to protect the citizens of Giles County.
3. Create a specific planning commission for Giles County's 37 miles of the New River. Appoint citizens to this commission that are familiar with the unique qualities of the New River that must be protected from future damage and existing problems that must be corrected to restore the health of the river.
Our New River is one of only 14 rivers in the United States that has been designated as an American Heritage River. This designation comes from the President of the United States and as such, our county Board of Supervisors should act accordingly and become true stewards of the river. It appears that the only participation by the supervisors in efforts to protect our New River occurs when they can have their photograph taken during river cleanup days.
4. Initiate action to implement a seven-member Board of Supervisors. Our county citizens can't be fairly and adequately represented by a board of five supervisors. A five-member board only requires a majority of three supervisors who can control everything that goes on in Giles County. We've seen what this power base can do to our county and we don't need to continue to repeat this scenario time and again.
NOTE TO OUR SUPERVISORS: Don't allow selfish motivations to prevent you from doing this before you leave office.
5. Identify issues which require help from our elected officials, both state and federal. Communicate our needs to these officials on a frequent and continuing basis until our needs are adequately addressed.
6. Campaign for a new Post Office in Pearisburg. The current post office location is a safety hazard, having only six parking spaces in front of the building, with only one of those being reserved for handicap. The building is over 50 years old and in need of upgrading. This is a pathetic facility for the county seat, Pearisburg, which has the most population of any town in the county.
NOTE: Has a single one of our supervisors, or the county administrator, even requested a new Post Office for Pearisburg? Can they point to even one thing that they've done in this area?
7. Stop going through the motions of seeking economic development for Giles County and get serious about getting the most bang for our bucks. County participation in such ventures as the New River Valley Airport and New River Valley Industrial Development should be reviewed to ascertain if county financial support of these initiatives has produced any meaningful employment and financial gain for the county. The Industrial Development Authority has no problem in finding ways to spend taxpayer funds for such things as purchasing the Mason property behind Walmart, paying for infrastructure construction, development of an Industrial Park that they can't occupy with businesses, and assisting existing corporations with expansion at the expense of county taxpayers. All of this is done with no guarantee that by spending substantial taxpayer money the financial payback to the county and it's citizens will be enhanced. Spending in these areas must be justified prior to being authorized and this requires much more upfront work and proof of project value than is currently being provided.
NOTE: It's time to separate the two job titles being held by our county admninistrator and either relieve him of the Economic Development Director position or the position of county administrator. Results in the area of economic development aren't commensurate with the amount of money being spent to encourage such development. It's time for a positive change in leadership.
8. Reduce the top-heavy salary situation that exists with the county administrator and the assistant county administrator. This isn't to say that the county administrator doesn't need an assistant, because I happen to agree that this position requires an intensive effort that demands appropriate assistance. However, the assistant shouldn't be compensated with an executive-level salary, which currently is in excess of $73,000 per year. The county also pays the county administrator in excess of $100,000 per year. In defense of the amount of salary paid to the county administrator I should point out that the county administrator is also performing the duties of the county Economic Development Director, as well as the county administrator. If these two positions were compensated separately for two employees, in lieu of one, the total amount of compensation would probably exceed the $105,000 currently being paid. Compensation of $178,000 per year for these county positions, excluding amenities such as health insurance, retirement, and furnished transportation is excessive and should be appropriately addressed by the supervisors.
9. Require a joint study to be conducted by the county administrator, Commissioner of Revenue, County Treasurer to determine if twice per year collection of personal property taxes will provide increased revenue. This is better than implementing another tax increase.
NOTE: The county administrator's response to this is that the Commissioner of Revenue has stated that it will require more to implement this than will be realized from twice per year collections. This isn't at all true and can be verified by inquiring of other counties and cities that have implemented twice per year personal property tax collections. Granted, someone will have to work a little harder to get it done and we certainly don't want to create more work for any of our county employees, or elected officials. Just increase our real estate taxes, as usual.
10. The recent response of the county administrator about no reason for concern about our county health issues was pathetic. It's shameful that county employees and our elected officials don't have enough self-initiative to protect the health of county citizens. When 3 of the top 20 industrial polluters in the entire state of Virginia are located in Giles County, who in their right mind would just automatically eliminate them as being suspect in the high mortality rates in Giles County? Apparently the only people who can't see this possibility is our county administrator and our five county supervisors. Again, this initiative would require some extra work and we just can't ask anyone affiliated with running our county to work any harder. So how many more people have to die before county leaders admit that a problem exists? How many more people have to die before county leaders place more value on life than economics within the county?
So what does the county administrator have to say about this? His response to this writer was, "there is a protocol for this process and jumping up and pointing the finger at any one industry is not the way to get anything done."
I agree with his statement but does he feel he has exhausted the protocol to be used in determining the facts about our higher than average mortality rates?
One thing is for certain, the supervisors won't initiate any additional inquiry beyond the Dr. Hershey letter that was published in the Virginian Leader, which was totally off the mark and filled with inaccurate and subjective statements about our county and our citizens.
It surprises me that more county citizens don't speak out about this subject. I know from conversations with numerous caring citizens that serious concern exists but unfortunately people just won't take the time to voice their concerns. I attribute this to the apathy that has been created by our elected representatives by way of their lack of action and meaningful response to citizen concerns. People tire of the political rhetoric without appropriate and positive action.