19 October CCAC Meeting Wrapup

I’ll update this story, but wanted to get the tweet recap out tonight.

Not much of an update.

Highlights from last night’s CCAC meeting:

  • Dave Oberg, White Hall school board member, talked about schools and the upcoming bond referendum
  • Public hearing about the relocated cabin and lot parceling on Crozet Ave (next to Greenhouse)
  • Discussion about proffers and Community Advisory Committees.

There were two handouts, both from the Joint CAC meeting on 10/6, which all of the materials from are posted here.

Strategy for Consideration

Proffer Policy Guidance for CACs

Read the tweets. Really.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 Replies to “19 October CCAC Meeting Wrapup”

  1. *
    The county comes up with some bad ideas now and then and their newest has to be up near the top. The county is saying there may be a problem with holding the required applicant/developer meeting as part the CCAC meeting agenda.

    There is concern over some changes in a new VA law that deals with proffers. Apparently the county is afraid some member of the CCAC may make a statement or in this case make a misstatement that could be taken as asking for a proffer from the developer, which could end the county up in court later if the application is denied.

    So what the county wants to do is to have a separate community meeting, where apparently members of the CCAC can attend and if I understand it, can also make statements. It appears that when it comes to asking for proffers the public can make requests to their heart’s desire.

    The down side of course means that members of the CCAC would have to attend two meetings, one public and then one CCAC, which doesn’t make any sense to me. What the CCAC should do is to ask the developer how much time they need to make their presentation and respond to questions.

    This would meet the suggestion from the county to hold a separate community public meeting. Then schedule the actual CCAC meeting to start after the end of the public meeting. This actually doesn’t change what is already being done, but still meets the county requirements.

    * Jim’s note: edited to add linebreaks.

  2. I think that the County is on the right track with this idea for whatever reason. They need to get more involved since they are the only elected govt. we have. Having ad-hoc committees with their own agendas filter what the citizens have to say is not the reason we have elected government. I think that a substantial
    email campaign on the issues that are important to people is far
    more effective than committee meetings. [email protected]
    might save us yet…

Something to say?