CDA Would Consider Sale Of Existing 18-Hole Golf Course Site In PE

By ROB CHAPMAN

PRINCE EDWARD — Could Poplar Hill Community Development Authority sell its 18-hole golf course? "Yes, that is an option...," CDA Chairman Norm Krueger told The Herald Monday, "if we could ever get the right deal, yeah, I mean you have to consider selling it." He added, "The CDA is certainly not... an expert in running golf courses and if we got someone that could bring better expertise, to it or something—there was a cogent reason for doing that—yes, we...would consider that." There is no active pursuit of that at this time, he added. It's been a bumpier than expected start for Poplar Hill Community Development Authority's 18-hole golf course. "Physically, it's in good shape," Krueger said. "Play-wise, it's down from what we had projected because of the inn and the conference center absence and the lack of development out there. So, what we're trying to do is get both of those started to the extent that we can." The CDA may have little control over the development of the inn and conference center site. First Financial Bank purchased the approximately 120 acres for $950,000 in July at a foreclosure sale. Although not directly financially linked to the current golf course any longer, it is an area which had been designated for the inn and conference center and an additional nine homes. Financial Restraints The CDA is keeping a close financial check. Kruger said Monday that they are looking to make sure that the revenue is proportionate with its expenses and is looking to discuss costs with Longwood and Hampden-Sydney College about costs for using the golf course. "It Just seems reasonable that, given the use of those courses by the teams, that...they would expect to pay something for the courses," Krueger said. "And, here at Hampden-Sydney, all the other . . . .

War and Peace?

This editorial appeared in the Farmville Herald on Friday, August 11th.

Can Buckingham's Board Of Supervisors And School Board Write War And Peace?

Dillwyn Elementary School students read more than 7,200 books during the 2005-06 school year, which saw the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors and School Board fail to write the final chapter and close the one "book" they are trying to write together on the school construction issue. Not one of those more than 7,200 books was a story about the Board of Supervisors and School Board writing that success story. You won't even find that story on the shelves of any Barnes and Noble. It hasn't been written by the Board of Supervisors and School Board yet. But it really needs to be written. These two elected boards have so far written what might be described as War And Not Peace, a seemingly endless debate/battle saga that hasn't produced the school construction which Buckingham children need.

Some people think Leo Tolstoy's epic War And Peace was way too long. The novel had war, however, but it also had peace. It had a beginning and an end. It told a complete story. It finished somewhere. It didn't just go on and on with the same words and chapters over and over again. Now, a new school year is about to begin and Buckingham children will go off to school while the Board of Supervisors and the School Board ponder their inability to make the grade when it comes to agreeing on a school construction plan. The children will be meeting new teachers, taking new classes and, as they do so, the Board of Supervisors and School Board appear set to go on arguing and arguing about the same thing and not getting anything done about it. War and not peace.

Thankfully, that petition drive failed to get enough signatures to put the elected School Board issue on the ballot in November. There is no need for Buckingham County residents to give up their election of School Board members and if enough signatures had been collected to put that question on the ballot it would have certainly created additional delay in settling the school construction issue. You can bet no decision would have been made until after the November election. The Board of Supervisors and School Board don't need any excuses for not making a decision together. There seems little reason to think they'll agree on a decision before November anyway but they don't need any help creating further delays. Perhaps there is still hope for some miracle to occur before the children entering Kindergarten this fall graduate from high school. Maybe a school construction decision will be made by then. Who knows? That's pure speculation. But there remain three facts still clearly visible on the table. The people of Buckingham elected the Board of Supervisors. The people of Buckingham elected the School Board. The people of Buckingham should certainly expect their elected Supervisors and School Board members to get the job done they were elected to do. Or retire from that elected office and let somebody else get the job done. This saga needs sagacity. Enough war between the Board of Supervisors and School Board. Write the peace.
-JKW-

School Board Petition Effort Falls Short

This Article Appeared in the Farmville Herald on Friday, August 4, 2006

School Board Petition Effort Falls Short

By TANA KNOTT BUCKINGHAM —

A drive to gather signatures for a petition supporting a local referendum to question whether the County should change from the direct election of school board members to an appointment process has failed. Brian Bates, who spearheaded the effort, said that 512 signatures were acquired. In order for the referendum to be placed on the November ballot, the petition needed signatures from at least ten percent, 865, of the county's 8,649 registered voters. Bates launched the petition drive during the first week of July and faced an August 9 deadline for filing the certified petition—meaning that at least 865 of the signatures had to be collected and verified as those of qualified Buckingham voters before that deadline. Bates said that he was not terribly surprised given the time-frame and added that he should have initiated the effort earlier so that he would have had 60 to 90 days to collect signatures. Noting that over 500 signatures were gathered in just a few weeks, he offered, "That's pretty respectable." "This was a democratic exercise," said Bates. "We went through the process to see if we could put it before the people." Taking offense to comments that he was trying to "take away the citizen's right to vote," Bates called those criticisms "dubious at best" and explained that he was utilizing another . . . . .

Buckingham: Keep Electing School Board

This Editorial Appeared in the Farmville Herald on July 12, 2006

Buckingham: Keep Electing School Board

Editor, The Herald:

I am writing in response to the Buckingham Board of Supervisor's proposed referendum which reads as follows: "Shall the method of selecting the School Board be changed from direct election by the voters to appointment by the Board of Supervisors." I am a resident of Prince Edward County, so I have no vested interest in this matter beyond the precedent that it sets. Prior to the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, U.S. Senators were elected by state legislators. This made it easy for city bosses to control the government. Corruption was rampant.

In 1917, the Seventeenth Amendment changed this by placing the power in the hands of the people - where it rightfully belongs. I'm not suggesting that the Buckingham Board of Supervisors is corrupt, but too much power consolidated in the hands of the few is dangerous. I believe only friends of the Board of Supervisors would be selected to the School Board - a virtual rubber stamp of their agenda - no checks or balances - no new ideas. A person that is alien to the Board would never have an opportunity to serve his/her community even though they may possess qualities more suited for the position than the "friend" of the Board. The Seventeenth Amendment put the power in the hands of the people.

The Board is asking you to rescind the most basic right in a representative democracy - the right to vote. Are the people of Buckingham County so lazy or disinterested in the education of their children that they are willing to submit their natural rights to a few Board of Supervisors, who don't like the fact that other people have an opinion that is not their own? The letter to the editor also said, "In Prince Edward County they have an appointed School Board and have a pretty good relationship." I have a pretty good relationship with my friends too, but that doesn't mean they would qualify as good School Board members. I have had contact with a couple of school board members. One does an exceptional job for the school system and, if given the opportunity, I would campaign for him. There is another that I'm not nearly as endeared to. I resent the fact that as a citizen of Prince Edward County and a father of two children that I don't have more say in my children's education; that I don't have the power to change my school board by the democratic process.

The School Board hires superintendents, approves contracts of administration and faculty, and makes critical decisions that have a direct impact on our children and the future of our community. We cannot be so lazy, so uninformed. so disinterested to allow a few to take the power from the people. This is the time of the year we celebrate our Independence, our inalienable rights, and honor those who sacrificed everything so that we can live in freedom. They sacrificed so that successive generations could maintain their rights, not give them away. Residents of Buckingham County, this is your decision to make or maybe the Board of Supervisors should make it for you. What do you know? What do you care? It's only your county too. Happy Independence Day!

Brian Lee
Pamplin

"Nuclear Option" Chosen in War of Words

Published Date: Wednesday 12th July 2006, The Farmville Herald

‘Nuclear Option’ Chosen In War Of Words, But It's Not The Best Referendum For Buckingham

The war of words between the Buckingham County Board of Supervisors and the Buckingham County School Board has escalated into the political slugfest equivalent of the 'nuclear option.' Supervisors and School Board members have been fussing and fighting without agreement over how to proceed with school construction for the children of Buckingham and now a member of the Board of Supervisors has begun action to wipe elected School Boards off the face of Buckingham County. A referendum to let voters decide the school construction issue, that I could understand, not the referendum urged by a member of the Board of Supervisors to end elected School Boards. Though Brian Bates stresses his campaign to end elected School Boards in Buckingham is solely in his capacity as a private citizen and taxpayer in the county, it is impossible to erase the fact that Mr. Bates is vice-chairman of the Board of Supervisors.

Particularly because the subject of the referendum directly relates to County business. And it is extremely doubtful that School Board members will be able to see Mr. Bates' action as that of a private citizen, rather than Vice-Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Bates is circulating a petition he hopes will put the elected vs. appointed School Board question on the ballot in November as a referendum for Buckingham voters, who overwhelmingly embraced elected School Boards in a November, 1992 referendum by a vote of 3,630 to 800. And Mr. Bates personally hopes voters choose to get entirely rid of elected School Boards and return to the appointed variety.

What's next, a retaliatory petition from the other side of this war of words trying to have Mr. Bates removed from office for refusing to support School Board construction plans and wishes? And how does all of this help the children of Buckingham County? A far better referendum would be one allowing the voters and taxpayers of Buckingham to decide, finally, how to proceed with school construction for the children of Buckingham County. This war of words between the Supervisors and the School Board continues to leave Buckingham County children in no-man's land, caught in the crossfire. Is anyone counting the casualties? Shelton Foster certainly is. Mr. Foster is one of the longest-serving School Board members in the state of Virginia. Mr. Foster has been appointed and he has been elected.

Though he supports elected School Boards as the best option, Mr. Foster said, "Regardless of what direction we go or what happens between the Board of Supervisors and the School Board there has to be one common ground, one thing to put first and that's the children of Buckingham. When we as the School Board and them as Supervisors started putting personal feelings and personal grudges in it, Buckingham will never get off the ground—it is dragging us down from one end to the other." Well spoken by Mr. Foster, whose words on the issue are consistently filled with wisdom. In the end, Buckingham County will rise as high as it lifts its children.

-JKW-

PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES JANUARY 10, 2006

EXCERPTSPRINCE EDWARD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES
JANUARY 10, 2006

In Re: Personnel Matter

A motion was made by Mrs. Gilfillan to ask Mrs. Mildred B. Hampton, County Administrator to seriously consider resigning or retiring within 30 days or the Board will meet again in closed session to consider her termination.

This motion was followed by a substitute motion made by Mr. Moore, to permit Supervisors to view Mrs. Hampton’s personnel record within a week before voting on the issue. There was discussion on both motions until Chairman Fore reminded the Board that it had to determine the main motion for recorded vote.

The substitute motion of Mr. Moore was voted on first to determine the main motion. It was defeated three to five:

Aye: Sally W. Gilfillan, Pattie Cooper-Jones, Lacy B. Ward Nay: Charles W. McKay, William G. Fore, Jr., James C. Moore, Robert M. Jones, Howard F. Simpson


This resulted in the motion of Mrs. Gilfillan as the main motion. A vote was taken and the motion failed three to five:

Aye: Pattie Cooper-Jones, Sally W. Gillifan, Lacy B. Ward Nay: William G Fore, Robert M. Jones Charles W. McKay , James C. Moore , Howard F. Simpson

An Important Step, Yes, But PE Should Ensure Farmville ResidentsDon't Score Mute Points

This Editorial appeared in the Farmville Herald on Feb. 22, 2006

The Prince Edward County Board of Supervisors has taken a big step in the right direction. Adopting a resolution asking Farmville's Town Council and Planning Commission to hold joint public hearings with the County on development issues located inside the 460-Bypass is a very positive development itself.

The Town should say, 'Yes.'

And inviting the Town to submit input to the Board of Supervisors into planning issues inside the bypass also promises to be a productive decision—if the input is seriously considered—for Prince Edward residents who live in Farmville. The Town should say, 'Yes.' Just as it is good news for Prince Edward residents who don't live in Farmville. What's good for Farmville is good for all of Prince Edward County. But Prince Edward County residents living in Farmville deserve more than a voice in their county planning decisions; they also deserve a vote—as other county residents are represented—during the planning process. Just as they have votes on the Board of Supervisors and School Board. A voice without a vote can be like the volume button on a television—easily muted. Farmville's voice needs someone to push the ASAP button to create its vote on planning commission decisions.

What has particularly upset many residents of Prince Edward County living in Farmville, as well as Town officials, is the County's premeditated decision to formally exclude Farmville residents from their county's planning commission. Three cheers to Jack Leatherwood. of Farmville, for expressing his determination to retain his seat on the Prince Edward Planning Commission. Mr. Leatherwood's admirable stand has resulted in the Board of Supervisors voting to allow the lone Farmville resident on the planning commission to continue serving through 2006.

Many Farmville residents feel as if the County doesn't regard them as the Prince Edward County taxpaying citizens they are. For them, it is a real slap in the face. Some are so upset that the word "city" has begun to crop up among residents, as in, 'Why doesn't Farmville become a city?" There is no excuse for the County and Town not work effectively together on the vital issues of the day, which includes planning and growth. Work on the Sandy River Reservoir pipeline project has so far proceeded smoothly. So it can, and should, happen. The offer of joint public hearings by the County and Town planning commissions on projects within the bypass is a positive step because it shows the County acknowledging Farmville deserves a voice in decisions that impact the town. But allowing Farmville's planning commission to make a recommendation without having a vote in the decision-making process is somewhat akin to inviting them to speak at the public hearing.

Clearly, the most logical solution remains having representation on the county planning commission mirror the Board of Supervisors and School Board, district by district. The County seems steadfastly opposed to that proposal, however, for reasons that are best known to County officials. Any kind of vote would be better than none and there are ways to bring Farmville residents to the county planning commission with a vote, beyond Mr. Leatherwood's remaining 10 months, along with their voice: —Allow one member of the Farmville Planning Commission to sit on the county planning commission as a voting member and/or —Allow the Town of Farmville to submit for appointment by the County one or both of their at-large Town Council members; at-large council members represent all town residents. Mute points don't often count as vital decision-making statistics.

Commission Still Intact?

This article appeared in the Farmville Herald on Feb. 10th, 2006

PE Weighs December Action

By ROB CHAPMAN

PRINCE EDWARD — Does Prince Edward have a planning Commission? Apparently no and yes. County supervisors approved a list of reorganizational measures for the Commission recommended by a board committee in their December 14 meeting. And those recommendations included, in part, that "all terms end as of December 31, 2005."

A second part of the approved new policy, however, also stipulates that they "have all existing positions drawn as to remaining lengths of terms with two positions to end during the 2006 year, one position to end during the 2007 year (along with the representative of the Board of Supervisor term), two positions to end during 2008, and two positions to end during 2009." With that date having now passed for the terms to end, it was a bit unclear whether the County still has a planning commission.

After some discussion in Wednesday night's work session, County supervisors sought County Attorney Jill Dickerson's opinion on the issue. "They still continue as planning commission members, it's just . . trying to determine when each individual planning commission member's term ends, other than (Lockett District Supervisor Robert "Bobby" Jones who serves as the board's representative on the Commission) which is set by his position as a board member," she clarified.

Meanwhile, the County's planning commission, which serves an advisory capacity on zoning and conditional use request matters, has not met nor taken any votes since the end of the calendar year. "...If you follow the resolution, we don't have a functioning board," contended Prospect Supervisor Lacy Ward. "Yes we do," differed Jones. "It's Just the terms of the board members haven't been established. The same people will be there. It's just that their terms aren't established, but it's a functioning board." And that. Ms. Dickerson said, needs to be . . . .