On the agenda: Campbell County meeting — data center (Mar 3)

Board of Supervisors Meeting
March 3, 2026
AGENDA
Click HERE for ZOOM link.

6:00 PM - Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman Lawton, followed by a Moment of
Silence
1. Approval Of Minutes
Documents:
REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 6, 2025.PDF
REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 2, 2025.PDF
BUDGET REVENUES WORK SESSION - DECEMBER 9, 2025.PDF
REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 6, 2026.PDF
JOINT MEETING WITH SCHOOL BOARD - JANUARY 13, 2026.PDF
2. Appearances
Public Comment Period
The Campbell County Board of Supervisors provides the opportunity for general public
comment at a public meeting at least once per quarter, pursuant to Virginia Code Section
15.2-1416. At this time, the Board invites any citizen who would like to address the
Board to come forward and speak on any topic of concern. Speakers are asked to limit
their remarks to no more than three (3) minutes.

Melissa Lucy - Horizon Behavioral Health
Melissa Lucy, CEO of Horizon Behavioral Health, would like to provide an update to the
Board regarding the organization’s impact on the community.

Melissa Lucy - Horizon Behavioral Health
Melissa Lucy, CEO of Horizon Behavioral Health, would like to provide an update to the
Board regarding the organization’s impact on the community.
3. Administrator's Items
3.I. Brookville High School - Assigned Fund Balance Request
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator

For the past several years, the County has assigned locally appropriated, but unspent
funds for Education to a category for School needs. To date, $7,168,316 has accrued
in that category. Examples of projects funded with these dollars are boiler
replacements, sinkhole repairs, and field lighting.

At the Joint Schools Committee meeting on February 23, 2026, the Committee
endorsed a request to utilize $1,250,000 of this available fund balance for the
Brookville High School project. Specifically, this appropriation will be used to
purchase furniture, fixtures, and equipment totaling $750,000, and necessary
upgrades to wiring and audio/visual equipment in the renovated auditorium totaling
$500,000. These expenses are outside of the renovation project scope and are
beyond the School Division’s ability to fund through ongoing operational dollars.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the appropriation
of $1,250,000 from Assigned for Future School Capital to the Brookville High
School project to purchase furniture, fixtures, and equipment, and to
complete necessary upgrades to the auditorium.
Documents:
3 - ROGERS - SCHOOL FUND BALANCE REQUEST FOR BHS.PDF
3.II. Request For Opioid Abatement Project Funds
Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator

Campbell County receives funds from legal settlements resulting from litigation
against various drug manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of opioids nationwide.
These funds are distributed to political subdivisions based on the terms of the
settlements and can only be used for opioid abatement efforts. To date, we have
received over $318,000 and have held those funds in anticipation of requests from
local service providers. In July 2025, the Board of Supervisors allocated up to $50,000
for two pilot projects with Social Services and Campbell County Public Schools. The
remaining funds can be allocated to eligible projects at the Board’s discretion.

Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority is proposing a substance use jail and reentry
program utilizing state grant funds from the Virginia Opioid Abatement Authority, with
the required match provided by each participating locality. The program is intended to
provide clinical care, recovery support, and reentry planning for inmates to reduce
recidivism through structured intervention. The cost to Campbell County is estimated
to be less than $18,000 per year for five years, assuming five localities participate. A
financial benefit to the County would be realized when inmates who would otherwise
become repeat offenders returning to the regional jail avoid that outcome through
successful intervention. It currently costs approximately $45,625 per year ($125 per
day) for each inmate we send to the regional jail. Our total annual payments to the
regional jail are approximately $3,000,000. A more detailed summary of the proposal

provide clinical care, recovery support, and reentry planning for inmates to reduce
recidivism through structured intervention. The cost to Campbell County is estimated
to be less than $18,000 per year for five years, assuming five localities participate. A
financial benefit to the County would be realized when inmates who would otherwise
become repeat offenders returning to the regional jail avoid that outcome through
successful intervention. It currently costs approximately $45,625 per year ($125 per
day) for each inmate we send to the regional jail. Our total annual payments to the
regional jail are approximately $3,000,000. A more detailed summary of the proposal
is attached for reference. The County Attorney reviewed the proposal and confirmed it
is eligible under the settlement terms.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board consider the request and, if
approved, authorize funding for the project for up to five years at a total cost
not to exceed $85,000, utilizing local opioid settlement funds, and including
authorization for the County Administrator to finalize any necessary
agreements with Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority and Virginia Opioid
Abatement Authority.
Documents:
3 - HARVEY - BRRJ SUD PROGRAMMING OVERVIEW.PDF
3 - HARVEY - OPIOID ABATEMENT PROJECT FUNDS REQUEST BRRJ.PDF
3.III. Waste Hauling Contract Renegotiation
Brian Stokes, Director of Community Development & Public Works

Elite Recycling is currently engaged in a multi-year waste-hauling contract with the
County. At the January Board of Supervisors meeting, Elite requested a 3% increase
of the total contract price in the sum of $19,338.48. Staff was directed to renegotiate
the terms of the current contract to include a possible extension and to address future
contract price increase(s).

In September 2025, Elite requested a 3% increase in the total contract price. During
the Board’s consideration of this request, discussions focused on the contract’s
Period of Performance, which does not mention price increase(s). The contract was
signed by all parties in November 2023, and the Board did not award the 3%
increase.

Currently, as stated in the Period of Performance, this waste hauling contract is
scheduled to end on November 30, 2027. Based upon Virginia procurement laws, the
contract cannot be extended beyond the original expiration date unless the contract is
re-advertised and placed out for bid. Because the contract cannot be extended, staff
believes any additional negotiations of contract conditions would not be favorable to
both parties without the possibility of an extension

This process of contract renegotiation has brought to light our vulnerabilities of being
dependent on contractors providing critical services such as waste management. Staff
has prepared the following option that would allow the County to be less reliant on
contracted services, while offering a greater level of control and long-term cost savings
for our waste hauling solutions. This option calls for the purchase of 16 3-yard trash
compactors with appropriately sized hoppers, 22 40-yard receiving containers, and five
(5) 40-yard open top containers. Acquiring these waste collection assets would make
the County less vulnerable to potential contract negotiations and could potentially
broaden the solicitation in hopes of attracting multiple waste haulers.

RECOMMENDATION: In recognition of Elite’s continued service, staff
recommends approving Elite’s request for a 3% increase in the total contract

the County less vulnerable to potential contract negotiations and could potentially
broaden the solicitation in hopes of attracting multiple waste haulers.

RECOMMENDATION: In recognition of Elite’s continued service, staff
recommends approving Elite’s request for a 3% increase in the total contract
price of $19,338.48. Staff recommends the Board authorize staff to proceed
with procuring waste collection assets with an estimated cost of $475,000,
utilizing funding available in the Solid Waste Fund fund balance.

Documents:
3 - STOKES - WASTE HAULING CONTRACT RE-NEGOTIATION.PDF
4. Highway Matters
Clif M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
l
l
l

Status of Outstanding Highway Matters: See memorandum
Highway Matters Action Items: None
Time is scheduled each month for Supervisors to voice any questions or concerns
regarding highway matters.

RECOMMENDATION: Please provide staff with any highway matters the Board
has or that need to be passed along to VDOT.
Documents:
3 - TWEEDY - HIGHWAY MATTERS.PDF
5. Consent Agenda
5.I. Appropriations
Attached is an appropriation listing for the Board’s consideration.
Documents:
4 - APPROPRIATIONS.XLSX
5.II. County Attorney Invoice
Attached is an invoice for $10,467.52 from the County Attorney for services provided
from January 21, 2026 through February 17, 2026.

Services
General Representation:

$6,149.00

Real Estate Tax Collection:

$3,977.45

Personal Property Tax Collection:

$64.50

Miscellaneous Matters:

$150.50

Personal Property Tax Collection:

$64.50

Miscellaneous Matters:

$150.50

Expenses Paid
General Representation:

$22.47

Real Estate Tax Collection:

$103.60

RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the Board:

1.

Approve the appropriations as presented;

2.

Approve the County Attorney invoice of $10,467.52.

Documents:
4 - COUNTY ATTORNEY INVOICE.PDF
6. Appointments
Attached for your review is a list of appointments.
Documents:
5 - APPOINTMENTS.PDF
7. Matters From The Board
A few minutes are scheduled at each meeting to discuss matters from the Board.
Documents:
6 - MATTERS FROM THE BOARD.PDF
8. Closed Meeting
None
9. 7:00 PM - Public Hearings
Information for the following Public Hearing can be found HERE.
l

PUBLIC NOTICE

10. Special Use Permit Request - 5766 Wards Road
Kate N. Reusch, Planner
#PL-25-277 – This request is from Massi Saunders of Saunders Surveys, Inc., agent for

10. Special Use Permit Request - 5766 Wards Road
Kate N. Reusch, Planner
#PL-25-277 – This request is from Massi Saunders of Saunders Surveys, Inc., agent for
Central Virginia Services, Inc., doing business as Firefly Broadband, for a special use
permit for the property located at New Chapel Road and further identified as tax map
parcel 37-5-5 to allow for a public utility structure. The property is located in the
Rustburg Election District. As per the Comprehensive Plan, the property is located in an
area designated as rural.

The applicant is seeking to construct a 10’ x 20’ prefab masonry building on the property
to serve as a fiber facility communication hut. Electrical and fiber connections to the
parcel would be underground, and the structure would be unoccupied. A generator and
propane tank would be located on site to serve as an emergency backup in the event of a
power outage.

RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
request with the staff-recommended condition that the applicant utilizes the site
in conformance with the use described in the narrative and shown on the survey
submitted with the request by a vote of 6-0.
Documents:
8 - REUSCH - BOARD AD.PDF
8 - REUSCH - BOARD PACKET.PDF
11. Agency Minutes & Reports
Documents:
DSS BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 20, 2026.PDF
LIBRARY BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 2026.PDF
DSS BOARD MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2025.PDF
12. Informational Items
Documents:
2025 ATTENDANCE RECORDS.PDF
2025 VIRGINIA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION ANNUAL REPORT.PDF
BACON STREET BAGELS.PDF
NEW EMPLOYEE REPORT - FEBRUARY 2026.PDF
SCHOOL APPROPRIATIONS FEBRUARY 2026.PDF

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
November 6, 2025
The regular meeting of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors was held on the 6th day
of November 2025 in the Board of Supervisors meeting room of the Walter J. Haberer Building,
Rustburg, Virginia. The members present were:
Justin A. Carwile, Chairman, Presiding
Matt W. Cline
Paul E. Dowdy
Jon R. Hardie
Tom K. Lawton
Charlie A. Watts, II
Absent was:
Kenneth R. Brown

Timberlake Election District
Concord Election District
Sunburst Election District
Rustburg Election District
Altavista Election District
Brookneal Election District

Spring Hill Election District

Also present were:
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator
F.E. “Tripp” Isenhour, III, County Attorney
Brooke S. Wright, Office Manager
Chairman Carwile called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Following the Pledge of
Allegiance, Chairman Carwile offered a prayer.
//

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors dispenses with
the reading and approves the minutes of the August 5, 2025, regular meeting and the September 2,
2025, regular meeting, as presented.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

APPEARANCE – DR. CLAYTON STANLEY

Clayton Stanley, Superintendent of Campbell County Public Schools, provided the Board
with an overview of the programs offered by Central Virginia Community College (CVCC). He
noted that he was one of the Board’s appointees to the CVCC Advisory Board. CVCC wanted the
surrounding localities to know that the college was working hard to prepare for the future by
serving thousands of central Virginians through workforce training and academic programs.
CVCC was helping high school students jump-start their college journeys and graduate debt-free.
They were also helping adult learners retrain, veterans transition, and first-generation students
change their financial trajectory. CVCC offered over 100 career pathways and easy credit transfers
to four-year colleges and universities in Virginia. They partnered with manufacturers, hospitals,
and small businesses to design programs that meet real workforce needs in areas like industrial
maintenance, healthcare, cybersecurity, and logistics. Dr. Stanley noted that training local talent
often meant that workers stayed in the area, fueling the county’s economic engine. CVCC
classrooms were filled with the Board’s constituents, and the college’s mission was deeply tied to
the success of Campbell County.
//

APPEARANCE – EVERETT SPARROW

Administrator Rogers reminded the Board that Mr. Sparrow owned and operated an
entertainment venue on Town Fork Road. Mr. Sparrow indicated that the Board granted a special
use permit for The Sparrow Estate about two years ago. Before that, he had obtained special
entertainment permits for each event held at the venue. He understood there had been recent
complaints about things happening on his property. He provided the Board with a printout of calls

from Cheryl Moore to the Sheriff’s Office, lodging complaints against him. Mr. Sparrow believed
her complaints were retaliation for not being allowed to visit the property after Mr. Sparrow bought
it, not about events at The Sparrow Estate. He thought the complaints were unfounded and had
started to affect his family and business.
Mr. Sparrow stated that of the 16 events held this past year, only one ended at 9:00 p.m.,
with the others ending by 6:00 p.m. He had the same decibel readers as the Sheriff’s Office to
ensure the noise level did not exceed the limit. Additionally, the Board had required an evergreen
buffer around the property. Mr. Sparrow stated that he had installed over 90 trees that cost
approximately $90 each. He found it interesting that he had replaced the trees on Ms. Moore’s
property line twice, while all the other trees were thriving. He wanted to install a 6-foot fence to
mitigate the issue. He added that Ms. Moore’s allegations against him, such as shooting at a school
bus and drawing obscene pictures in her yard with a drone, were untrue. He thought that because
the Sheriff’s Office had stopped responding to her complaints, she had decided that complaining
to the Board was the next course of action.
Supervisor Dowdy commented that Mr. Sparrow’s handout showed calls for service late at
night. He asked Mr. Sparrow to explain why, if all but one of his events ended around 6:00 p.m.
Mr. Sparrow stated that those calls were not regarding events; they were random calls made by
Ms. Moore complaining about him. Supervisor Dowdy read aloud the deputy’s note from a call
that came in around midnight on May 11, which stated Mr. Sparrow agreed to turn down the music.
Mr. Sparrow could not recall if an event was held that night, but he always obeyed the deputies’
direction to lower the volume. Chairman Carwile added that he thought the installation of a fence
was an excellent idea.
//

APPEARANCE – LIZ MELCHER

Liz Melcher, a Campbell County resident, was the president of the Lynchburg Chapter of
the Virginia Council of Nurse Practitioners. Administrator Rogers read the following
proclamation into the record for the Board’s consideration to recognize November 9 – 15, 2025,
as Nurse Practitioners Week:
NURSE PRACTITIONERS WEEK NOVEMBER 9-15, 2025
WHEREAS, nurse practitioners (NPs) are advanced practice registered nurses who have
master’s, and often doctorate, degrees and extensive clinical training in the diagnosis and
management of common and complex medical conditions; and
WHEREAS, NPs have served a critical role as trusted health care providers, educators,
researchers, entrepreneurs, advocates and health care leaders for decades; and
WHEREAS, NPs work to expand health care access in communities across Virginia,
promote health equity in care and improve health outcomes for all; and
WHEREAS, NPs provide high-quality primary, acute and specialty health care services
while emphasizing health promotion, disease prevention, health education and counseling,
partnering with patients to improve their health; and
WHEREAS, the confidence that patients have in NP-delivered health care is evidenced by
the more than 1 billion visits made annually to NPs across the country; and
WHEREAS, there are more than 431,000 licensed NPs in the United States, including
nearly 20,000 licensed NPs in Virginia; and
WHEREAS, more than 4,625 NPs in Virginia are practicing with autonomous licenses,
thereby increasing access to patient care in the Commonwealth; and
WHEREAS, more than five decades of research demonstrates the high quality of care
provided by NPs; and

WHEREAS, better utilization of NPs through modernized state laws and improved policies
creates better health through a more accessible, efficient, cost-effective and higher quality health
care system;
WHEREAS, the Campbell County Board of Supervisors is proud to recognize and honor
the service of NPs to our Commonwealth.
Be It Resolved, therefore, that the Campbell County Board of Supervisors declares
November 9-15, 2025, as Nurse Practitioner Week in Campbell County in recognition of the
countless contributions NPs have made over the past half century and will continue to make to the
health and well-being of citizens in the Commonwealth.
//

DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW: PUBLIC SAFETY – TRACY FAIRCHILD, DIRECTOR

Tracy Fairchild, Director of Public Safety, provided an overview of her department’s
operations. She indicated that she has worked for the County for 32 years, then introduced her
command staff. Myra Simpson, Deputy Director of Communications, has served the County for
29 years; Michelle Turner, Deputy Director of EMS, for 19 years; Randall Johnson, Deputy
Director/Fire Marshal, for 16 years; and Benny David, Animal Control Officer, for 25 years. She
was proud of their tenure and appreciated their support. Public Safety had five (5) core operations:
911 Communications/Call Center Services; Animal Control; Fire Suppression, Investigation, and
Education; EMS Services; and Emergency Management and Preparedness. Campbell County
provides an all-hazards approach to emergency preparedness education through a 24/7
preparedness website and social media/County website messaging. The County maintains an
Emergency Alert System and a comprehensive Emergency Operations Plan for emergency
coordination in the event of a local disaster.
Public Safety’s Emergency Communications Center (ECC) consists of a Deputy Director,
Communications Training Officer/Supervisor, Communications Technician, four (4)
Communications Shift Supervisors, four (4) Communications Assistant Shift Supervisors, 12
full-time Communications Officers, and seven (7) part-time Communications Officers. The ECC
is a 24/7 operation with six (6) CAD/Radio consoles. All ECC staff are APCO-certified for
emergency medical, fire, and law dispatch. Mrs. Fairchild advised that the ECC struggled with
recruitment and retention. During the first three quarters of 2025, the ECC answered
approximately 65,000 calls, with 36% of those calls being for 911 services. Of the 65,000 calls
received so far this year, Public Safety has responded to approximately 40,000. She was proud to
report that 77% of 911 calls were answered in under three (3) seconds.
Animal Control consists of a part-time Animal Control Officer, three (3) full-time Deputy
Animal Control Officers, and a full-time Animal Shelter Manager. Their primary function was to
enforce State and County laws regarding all domestic animals. They maintain the Campbell
County Animal Care and Control Facility located behind Yellow Branch Elementary School. The
facility has 17 dog runs, four (4) large quarantine cages, 19 cat cages, and one (1) isolation area.
Mrs. Fairchild emphasized that Campbell County was blessed to have two volunteer groups that
were dedicated to the care of shelter animals. Friends of Campbell County Animal Control
(FOAC) advocated for animal adoptions, provided essential supplies, and supported County
employees with ongoing care and fostering for sheltered animals. Bringing Animal Renovations
to Campbell County (BARCC) was dedicated to the construction of a new animal shelter and had
raised approximately $800,000 for this cause. She reminded the Board that the current shelter was
built to residential standards about 40 years ago, and she was very thankful for BARCC’s efforts
to bring awareness to the need for a new shelter.
The Fire Suppression, Prevention, and Investigation unit of Public Safety coordinates
response to fire, hazmat, and other emergencies. They are responsible for all fire, explosive, and
hazardous materials investigations, in cooperation with volunteer fire departments, to determine
origin, cause, and, if a criminal investigation is warranted. They enforce the statewide fire
prevention code, investigate complaints or newly discovered fire code violations, and coordinate
fire service training and administrative needs for volunteer agencies. From January – September
2025, the Fire Marshal’s office had received 286 calls for service. Recently, four (4) career
Fire/EMS personnel received training in investigations and inspections, and they work part-time
with the Fire Marshal when they are not on their regular EMS shifts. While this was currently
working well, Mrs. Fairchild emphasized that the volume of calls warranted a full-time Assistant

Fire Marshal. She then provided a chart showing each volunteer fire department’s calls for service
from January – September 2025.
Mrs. Fairchild reminded the Board that about 10 years ago, there were six (6) volunteer
rescue squads in the county, but today there were only two (2). She shared a map of the primary
response areas, as well as calls for service data from the volunteer rescue squads from January –
September 2025. The Career EMS Division of Public Safety was responsible for emergency
response, patient care and transport, community support, and training and education. All staff in
this division respond to both fire and EMS calls. Career EMS staff includes a Deputy Director,
four (4) Captains; three (3) Lieutenants; 42 full-time (24-hour), two (2) full-time (40-hour), 15
part-time basic and advanced EMTs and Paramedics; one (1) Data Quality QA/QI employee; and
one (1) Therapy/Stress Management K-9. Mrs. Fairchild provided a map showing the locations of
the Career EMS stations and noted that there were six (6) 24/7 medic units in operation. She also
showed a map that tracked the calls for service throughout the county. This map helped inform
staff’s recommendation for the Board to consider a future public safety facility at the intersection
of Route 29 and Route 24.
Mrs. Fairchild closed by highlighting some challenges her department faced. Insufficient
staffing levels, recruitment and retention, and mental health issues for first responders were major
concerns. With the help of a grant, all first responders, including volunteers, were eligible for six
(6) free counseling sessions to help them cope with the trauma of the job. She also advocated for
a new animal shelter and an additional EMS/Fire station. The department was also negatively
impacted by the increased costs and continued delays for equipment and apparatus.
Chairman Carwile thanked Mrs. Fairchild for her thorough presentation and all of the
essential services her department provides for the citizens.
Supervisor Watts asked Mrs. Fairchild to expand on why it was difficult to retain staff.
She believed it was a combination of the stresses of the job and salary inadequacies. For example,
a dispatcher’s starting salary was $39,000, and several employees had left to take jobs at fast food
restaurants, making more money and not working holidays. The call volume was steadily
increasing, and citizens were expecting a much higher level of service from Public Safety staff
than they did in the past.
Supervisor Hardie asked Mrs. Fairchild to speak to the reduction of volunteer agencies.
She stated the decline in volunteers was not unique to Campbell County, but rather a national issue.
People generally did not have the time anymore to serve with volunteer agencies, and the required
training to keep certifications current was extensive. The popularity of socializing at local
firehouses and rescue squads was a thing of the past.
//

CONSENT AGENDA

Administrator Rogers explained that there were several items on the Consent Agenda for
the Board’s consideration.
On motion of Supervisor Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors approves the
following under the Consent Agenda:
a)

Appropriations –

1.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, deleting $6,732 from Gas, Oil, Grease and
appropriating $2,571 to General Fund, DMV Select Enf Grnt-Pol Traf Svc, Employer Cost
– FICA, $1,143 to Workers Compensation, $2,089 to General Fund, DMV Selective Enf
Grant-Alcohol, Employer Cost – FICA, and $929 to Workers Compensation; the Sheriff’s
Office was awarded these federal grants for overtime reimbursement only. FICA and
Workers Comp will not be reimbursed for these grants. Grant period is 10/01/25 through
09/30/26;

2.

Capital Improvement Fund, Public Safety, appropriating $187,823.50 to EMS
Apparatus/Facility Replace Prog; increases Insurance Recoveries revenue by $187,823.50;
insurance payment for total loss of the 2020 Ram 550 ambulance (VIN 8676);

3.

General Fund, Concord Fire Company, appropriating $4,337.73 to Maint/Repair Vehicles; increases Insurance Recoveries revenue by $4,337.73; insurance payment (minus
deductible) for repairs on damaged swift water rescue boat motors;

4.

General Fund, E-911 System, appropriating $1,628.98 to Maint/Repair – Communications
Equip; increases VITA Educational Grant revenue by $1,628.98; grant funds for costs
associated with E911 phone replacement;

5.

General Fund, E-911 System, appropriating $65 to Maint/Repair – Communications Equip;
increases VITA Educational Grant revenue by $65; grant funds for costs associated with
E911 phone replacement;

6.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $10,000 to VA State Police – Heat
Equipment; increases VA State Police – Heat Equipment revenue by $10,000; the Sheriff’s
Office was awarded a Virginia State Police Heat Grant. With these funds, the Sheriff’s
Office will pay for four (4) Flock cameras maintenance;

7.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $117.18 to J Saunders Memorial;
increases Gifts & Donations – Sheriff’s Office revenue by $117.18; funds received from
Jason Saunders Memorial Car Show as donations for hats;

8.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $30,140 to Cash Held in Evidence;
increases Cash Held in Evidence – Sheriff revenue by $30,140; revenue received as
evidence that is deposited and moved over to an expenditure line to be returned to the
rightful owner, sent to unclaimed property, or DCJS as a forfeiture;

9.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $1,200 to Animal Care Supplies and
$400 to Police Supplies; increases Gifts & Donations – Sheriff’s Office revenue by $1,600;
funds were received as donations from citizens for animal care and police supplies;

10.

General Fund, DMV Selective Enforcement Grant-Alcohol, appropriating $27,300 to
Comp – Overtime; increases DMV 402 Grant-Selctv Enfrcm Alcohol revenue by $27,300;
the Sheriff’s Office was awarded a federal pass-through state DMV grant entitled Selective
Enforcement – Alcohol. This is a reimbursable grant that requires a 50% in-kind match of
$6,825. Grant period is 10/01/25 through 9/30/26;

11.

General Fund, DMV Select Enf Grant – Pol Traf Svc, appropriating $33,600 to Comp –
Overtime and $4,103 to Police Supplies; increases DMV-Police Traffic Services revenue
by $37,703; the Sheriff’s Office was awarded a federal pass-through state DMV grant
entitled Selective Enforcement – Police Traffic Services. This is a reimbursable grant
requiring an in-kind match of $18,851.50. Grant period is 10/01/25 through 9/30/26;

12.

General Fund, Non-Departmental, deleting $892,018 from Comp & Fringes Salary
Increases, deleting $1,983,683 from various other line items, and appropriating $2,875,701
to various line items for compensation and fringe benefits as set forth on a memo dated
October 27, 2025, to true up Comp & Fringes and other operating lines prior to year-end.

b)

County Attorney Invoice –
Approves payment to the County Attorney in the amount of $19,182.02 for services
provided from September 16, 2025, through October 21, 2025.

c)

Long Island Park Lease Agreement –
Authorizes the County Administrator to sign the following lease agreement with the
Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources for Long Island Park:

This Agreement entered into this _____ day of _____, 2025 by the County of Campbell,
hereinafter called the “County,” and the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources, hereinafter
called the “Department.”
WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, The Department has acquired and owns in Campbell County, a tract of land,
recorded in Campbell County Courthouse, Deed Book 511, page 251, consisting of approximately
sixty and one third (60-1/3) acres on the Roanoke River for the purpose of maintaining a public
river access point in the form of a boat launching facility, being defined as the concrete slab and
any hardware attached thereto, and hereinafter referred to as the “Landing”;
WHEREAS, the Department and the County entered an agreement dated September 17,
2020 in order to maintain an area to be used by the public for outdoor recreational purposes, this
portion of land being defined as any portion of the Department owned land improved and utilized
by the County for public access, excluding the Landing, and hereinafter referred to as the
“Property”; and
WHEREAS, the Department deems this use a portion of its land on the Roanoke River
for such outdoor recreational purposes to be consistent with the public boat launching access point;
and
WHEREAS, the Department and the County desire to renew the aforementioned
agreement, to provide an area to be used by the public for outdoor recreational purposes and
boating access for the benefit of the public, located at the Long Island Access Site, pursuant to this
Cooperative Agreement, hereinafter referred to herein as the “Agreement”:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration thereof, and of the premises, terms and covenants
herein, the Department does hereby grant permission to the County the use of some 60-1/3 acres
of the tract of land located at Long Island in Campbell County generally bounded as described
detailed in the attached survey drawn by Douglas D. Hall, dated March 23, 1976; attached hereto
as Exhibit A and made part of this Agreement; the Department and County agree as follows:
1)

PRIOR REPRESENTATIONS AND AGREEMENTS: Any Agreements written or
verbal shall be superseded in their entirety by this Agreement.

2)

TERM OF AGREEMENT: To begin on the date this Agreement is signed by both
parties and will be in effect for five years. The Agreement will automatically renew every
five years thereafter.

3)

USE OF DEPARTMENT FUNDS: The Department’s funds shall only be used for the
purposes and activities covered in the Agreement.

4)

APPLICABLE LAWS: This Agreement shall be governed in all respects, whether as to
validity, construction, capacity, performance or otherwise, by the laws of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.

5)

SEVERABILITY: Each paragraph and provision of this Agreement is severable from
the entire Agreement; and if any provision is declared invalid, the remaining provisions
shall nevertheless remain in effect.

6)

INTEGRATION AND MODIFICATION: This Agreement constitutes the entire
Agreement between the Department and the County. No alteration, amendment or
modification to the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is reduced to
writing, signed by the parties and attached hereto.

7)

DISCLAIMER: Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as authority for either party
to make commitments, which will bind the other party beyond the project contained herein.
Furthermore, the County shall not assign this Agreement, or any interest herein, sublet
the Property in whole or in part, or subcontract any work related to this Agreement
without the prior written consent of the Department.

8)

TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated at any time by either party by
notifying the other in writing at least one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the
terminating date.

9)

ABANDONED COUNTY IMPROVEMENTS: Should any County improvement
within the Property, be out of operation for a period of one (1) year, such improvements
shall no longer be considered operable under the terms of this Agreement, and, upon
written notice by the Department, the County shall demolish and remove such
improvements and restore the Property, as necessary, at County’s expense, to the
Department’s satisfaction. Department’s written notice will set forth a reasonable time
frame for demolition and removal as well as the terms and conditions for site restoration.

10)

REMOVAL: Within ninety (90) days following the termination of this Agreement,
County shall remove all of the County improvements and shall restore the Property to
the satisfaction of the Department, including without limitation. During the ninety (90)
day removal period, County shall have the right to access the Property for purposes of
compliance with the paragraph and County shall maintain the insurance required under
the following paragraph.

11)

INSURANCE: From and after the Agreement date until County has fulfilled all of its
obligations under this Agreement following termination of this Agreement, no person or
entity, whether County or a general contractor or a maintenance contractor engaged by
County with respect to matters related to this Agreement, shall enter upon Department’s
real property, unless and until such person or entity has obtained all the insurance required
hereunder, and such insurance is in effect and remains in effect so long as such person or
entity is entering the Property until the same types of insurance, in an appropriate amount,
have been obtained by the subcontractor and approved by County or County’s contractor.
Approval of insurance by Department shall not relieve or decrease the liability of County
of County’s contractor or the subcontractors under this Agreement, or otherwise. The
following insurance, in a form reasonably acceptable to Department, are the required
types of insurance that shall be primary to all other insurance coverage the Commonwealth
may possess:
(i)

The Certificate of Insurance attached to this Agreement will henceforth be referred
to as Exhibit A. To the extent required by the Code of Virginia and other applicable
Virginia laws and regulations, Worker’s Compensation and Employers’ Liability
Insurance covering County’s employees engaged in activity on Department’s real
property, limits of liability will remain in the amounts the same as or higher than
the limits of liability stated on Exhibit A.

(ii)

General Liability occurrence-based (not claims-made) insurance to include bodily
injury and Personal Injury.

(iii)

Business Automobile Liability insurance, to include Auto Physical Damage
coverage, in the amount stated on Exhibit A or higher combined single limit
covering all owned, non-owned borrowed, or rented motor vehicles operated by
the County. In addition, all motorized equipment both licensed and not licensed
for road use, operated or used by County will be insured under either a standard
Automobile Liability policy, or a Comprehensive General Liability policy. County
warrants and represents that all such County vehicles brought onto Department’s
real property will be covered under said automobile liability policy, and County
will not permit any such County vehicle or motorized equipment that is not covered
pursuant to this provision to enter Department’s real property. The foregoing
provisions relating to automobile insurance shall not apply to privately-owned or
motor vehicles of County’s employees or business invitees.
Liability insurance may be arranged by General Liability and Automobile Liability
policies for the full limits required or by a combination of underlying liability
policies for lesser limits with the remaining limits combination of underlying
liability policies for lesser limits with the remaining limits provided by an Excess
or Umbrella Liability policy.
No change, cancellation, or non-renewal shall be made in any insurance coverage
without a forty-five (45) day prior written notice to Department, which notice shall
be made by both the insurer and County. The insurer and County shall give prompt
written notice to Department of any lapse in any insurance coverage. County shall

give prompt written notice to Department of any notice received by County from
an insurer that the insurer is changing, cancelling, or declining to renew any
insurance coverage.
The following terms shall be applicable to the policies of insurance:

12)

(i)

The insurance shall be issued by companies admitted within the
Commonwealth of Virginia, with Best’s Key Rating of at least A: VI.
Foreign markets, including those based in London, and the domestic surplus
lines markets that operate on a non-admitted basis, are exempt from this
requirement provided that County provides financial data to establish that
a market is equal to or exceeds the financial strengths associated with Best’s
Key Rating of A or better.

(ii)

Before County or its employees, agents, contractors, or invitees enter upon
Department’s real property, County shall deliver to Department one or
more valid Certificates of Insurance which show the foregoing insurance
coverage to be in force and effect at the time the contract is agreed to. The
Certificate of Insurance shall provide that the insurer shall give prompt
written notice to Department of any lapse in County’s insurance coverage
and that the insurer shall give written notice of any change, cancellation, or
non-renewal of County’s insurance coverage to Department at least
forty-five (45) days prior to such change, cancellation, or non-renewal.
County shall furnish a new certificate annually and prior to any change in
coverage or insurer, or any cancelation date. Individual insurance policy
declarations sheets or pages, and/or a specimen copy of individual policies
shall be provided upon request. This term does not alleviate the County’s
responsibility for maintaining the coverage otherwise set forth in paragraph
11 of this Agreement.

(iii)

The Commonwealth, Department, and their employees and officers shall
be named as an additional insured in the Commercial General Liability and
Business Automobile Liability policies, which shall be reflected on
Automobile Liability policies for the full limits required or by a
combination of underlying liability policies for lesser limits with the
remaining limits provided by an Excess or Umbrella Liability policy.

(iv)

If an “ACORD” Certificate of Insurance form is delivered to Department,
the words, “endeavor to” and “but failure to mail such notice shall impose
no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company” in the
“Cancellation” paragraph of such certificate shall be deleted or crossed out
by the insurance broker providing such certificate.

COUNTY AGREEMENT: The County agrees:
a.
To obtain all necessary permits and approvals for the operation of the Property and
associated facilities.
b.
The Property set aside by the Agreement will be used solely for the purposes
established in this Agreement and will not in any way restrict access to the use of
the Landing and associated parking area.
c.
The Landing’s hours of operation will be twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7)
days a week.
d.
The boat launching facilities are strictly for fishing and the launching and retrieval
of watercraft.
e.
The use of alcohol, drugs, and profanity are strictly prohibited on the Property and
Landing.
f.
To erect and maintain signs related to direction and regulations of the Property.
g.
There will be no loud music or noise.
h.
Persons utilizing the Property shall dispose of their trash properly leaving the
property in a consistently clean, safe, and orderly condition.
i.
There will be no swimming or nudity on the Property and Landing.

j.

k.
l.
m.

n.

o.
p.
q.
r.
s.

t.
u.

v.

w.

No vessels will be moored near the Landing or any other object on the Property
other than for the purposes of unloading or loading a vessel. Overnight mooring is
strictly prohibited.
Fires are only allowed in grills and fireplaces on the Property.
To charge no fees for the use of the Property and Landing.
Establish standards, rules and regulations for appropriate public usage, vehicular
access, litter control, sanitation and public conduct for use of the Property and
Landing.
To maintain the facility, its improvements and grounds for the term of this
Agreement. Such maintenance shall include cutting weeds and brush, trimming
limbs, mowing the grass at established public access points, lawn mowing of all
fields, maintaining the access road and parking lot surfaces including parking
barriers and bollards, hiking trails, bridges, picnic pavilions, tables, recreational
fields, collection and removal of trash and garbage as often as is required as to
prevent the accumulation of litter and trash in and around the receptacles,
maintaining drainage ditches, removal of debris and other routine maintenance
necessary for public use of the Property and Landing. Additional improvements
to the Property or trimming and cutting of trees not within the scope of the above
maintenance requirements must receive prior approval of the Department.
The County will maintain free public toilet amenities in accordance with all
applicable State Health Department regulations.
There shall be no grazing or foraging on the Property.
There will be no loitering on the Property. Persons using this area are strictly
prohibited from trespassing onto adjoining properties.
Primitive camping is allowed by permit issued by the County.
Patrol the Property and Landing as it deems appropriate to enforce local
ordinances, rules and other public safety regulations, and direct traffic during peak
use times.
To prohibit private advertising signage within the boundaries of the Property.
Work proactively to ensure the public safe and functional access to the navigable
water, year-round. Inspections will be conducted as soon as possible following
every “high flow” event when water levels overtop ramps and encroach into upland
parking lots.
Close down the Landing and/or Property with caution tape, cones, and/or barriers
if the Landing or Property becomes unsafe and cannot be immediately remedied.
The County will also immediately contact the Department prior to closing so that
the public can be notified of the temporary closure and collaborate on a path
forward for reopening.
Budget and finance material expenses associated with routine maintenance and
upkeep of the Property to include gravel, hardware, and other supplies and
materials.

13)

DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT: The Department, subject to available funding and
appropriation by the General Assembly, agrees to:
a.
Patrol Property and Landing as it deems appropriate to enforce game, inland fish
and boat laws as well as local regulations related to the public use of the Landing
pursuant to its authority.
b.
Erect and maintain signs related to direction, regulations of the public boat
Landing, and public fishing rights and access.
c.
To maintain and make necessary improvements to the Landing as needed and be
responsible for costs associated with those improvements. The necessity for
improvements shall be at the sole discretion of the Department.
d.
The Department has the authority to close the Landing for maintenance,
emergencies, and public safety concerns.
e.
To identify and mark the boundary of the Property and Landing.
f.
To prohibit private advertising signage within the boundaries of the Property.
g.
To manage timber resources on the Property.

14)

THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS: There are no third-party beneficiaries to this
Agreement.

15)

NOTICES: All notices hereunder must be in writing and shall be deemed valid if sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested or overnight delivery service. Notices shall be
addressed as follows (or to any other address the parties may designate by like notice):
Department: Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources
ATTN: Real Property Manager
7870 Villa Park Drive Suite 400
Henrico, Virginia 23228-0778
Telephone No.: 804-367-1000
County:

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

County of Campbell
ATTN: Director of Citizen Engagement and Quality of Life
681 Village Highway
Rustburg, Virginia 24588
Telephone No.: 434-332-9657
Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

//

Chairman Carwile called for a recess at 6:55 p.m.

//

Chairman Carwile called the meeting back to order at 7:03 p.m.

//

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING AT COLONIAL HIGHWAY

PL-25-197

Request by Frank Rogers, agent for Campbell County, to rezone the property
located at Colonial Highway and further identified as tax map parcel 32A-65-B
from Agricultural to Business – General Commercial to allow for a Public Safety
Station and EMT Facility. The property is located in an area designated as medium
to high density commercial per the current Comprehensive Plan.

Paul Harvey, Assistant County Administrator, explained the County was requesting to
rezone 3.00 +/- acres located on the corner of Colonial Highway and Dennis Riddle Drive to
Business – General Commercial in order to construct a public safety station and EMT facility with
a proposed 8,400 square foot facility and a 5,000 square foot bay. The property would be screened
from the adjoining parcel zoned residential with a proposed landscape buffer consisting of Leyland
Cypress trees. The site was currently vacant. Mr. Harvey added that three sides of the surrounding
area were already commercially zoned Business – General Commercial, and the Comprehensive
Plan contemplated this area becoming more medium to high density commercial. Therefore, the
agricultural zoning of this parcel no longer fits with the long-term plans, nor does it match the
other zoning surrounding the property.
The area was mixed use in nature. Zoning in the vicinity was Business – General
Commercial, Residential – Multi Family, and Agricultural. The property would be accessed by
one proposed entrance on Dennis Riddle Drive. There is a secondary proposed access through the
Augusta Springs Development that would be accessible only to staff via a traffic control gate.
The property would be served by public water and public sewer. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the request by a vote of 5-0.
Clifton Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator, was representing the County. Mr.
Tweedy designed a site plan for this property, which included an approximate size of a facility
and bay. He indicated that normally, a public safety facility would have access directly onto a
main road. In this case, there was a transition lane in place for the adjacent residential
development, and VDOT would not allow for another road to be constructed so close to that
intersection. VDOT suggested Dennis Riddle Drive be used as the public safety facility access
since it was a state-maintained road. The site plan included all the radiuses showing that public
safety vehicles would have room to turn around. It also showed the required buffers, a sediment
pond, and the possibility for a helicopter pad, generator, and additional storage.

Chairman Carwile had heard concerns about Dennis Riddle Drive being used in
conjunction with school traffic. He understood there were many future decisions to be made for
this project.
In answer to a question from Supervisor Hardie, Administrator Rogers commented that
this public safety facility was a concept that had not been formalized. This station would be an
additional facility and would provide an opportunity to move a public safety crew out of an already
crowded facility, most likely Rustburg. He did not anticipate this site accommodating other areas
of public safety, such as dispatch and command staff. Supervisor Hardie also asked about the
advantages of this location versus the property across the road that he recalled being purchased for
a potential public safety facility. Administrator Rogers reminded the Board that they acquired 25
acres across from this site for future public use. After discussions fell through about possibly
constructing a new animal shelter on the 25 acres, the plan reverted to building the new shelter on
the site of the current one. He noted that the 25 acres were a great commercial retail space, and
staff recommended rezoning the 3-acre parcel for a potential public safety facility to preserve the
larger parcel for future development. In answer to Supervisor Hardie’s question about future
expansion, Mr. Tweedy stated that the site plan design maximized the site and was sufficient for
the current need. Supervisor Hardie was concerned that the site did not have direct access to Route
24. It was very close to the stoplight at the intersection of Route 29 and Route 24, and the Augusta
Springs development that could potentially have 400 homes. Mr. Tweedy commented that
Colonial Highway was long and straight, which provided good sight distance in both directions.
Also, the time distance at the intersection of Route 29 and Route 24 was sufficient because traffic
typically had to stop at the stoplight, then accelerate to reach 45 MPH. Supervisor Hardie asked
if there was a plan for emergency lighting along Route 24 to allow for public safety vehicles to
enter traffic safely. Mr. Tweedy did not know of any plans at this time.
Chairman Carwile opened the public hearing at 7:21 p.m.
No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the proposed rezoning request, and the public
hearing was closed at 7:22 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Hardie, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors accepts the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVES Request #PL-25-197 by Frank
Rogers, agent for Campbell County, to rezone the property located at Colonial Highway and
further identified as tax map parcel 32A-65-B from Agricultural to Business – General
Commercial to allow for a Public Safety Station and EMT Facility.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING & SPECIAL USE PERMIT AT CREWS SHOP
ROAD

Mr. Harvey advised the Board that the applicant had requested an additional month's delay
in opening the public hearing, to have time to modify their request and change their site plan in
response to some concerns they had heard from the neighborhood. Mr. Harvey stated that the
public hearing would be readvertised for the December 2nd Board meeting, new letters would be
mailed to the adjoining property owners, and the applicant would pay the County the additional
advertising costs. It was the consensus of the Board to grant the applicant’s request.
//

PUBLIC HEARING – ORDINANCE OF VACATION REQUEST: LAKE COURT
AVENUE

PL-25-206

Request by Stephen Dudley, agent for David Dudley, for Campbell County to
approve an ordinance of vacation and to vacate and release any County held
interests or rights that may exist in the 50’ Outlet Road along the northwest border
and the 30’ Outlet Road along the southern portion of Tract C, and the 30’ Outlet
Road along the border of Tract C and Tract B as shown on the plat recorded in Plat
Book 17, page 43 and further identified as tax map parcels 20D-4-C and 20D-4-B.
Not to include the Campbell County Utilities and Service Authority water main

easement as recorded in Plat Book 592, page 727-728 and the sanitary sewer
easement as recorded in Plat Cabinet C, Slide 303, page 3028.
Tripp Isenhour, County Attorney, indicated that the area subject to vacation only provided
access to parcels 20D-4-C and 20D-4B, and the owners of both parcels have agreed to the vacation.
The area to the south of the parcels was fully developed, and all of the properties that would have
used the rights of way, as shown, have direct access to other public roadways. County staff
believed that the right-of-way did not currently serve any public purpose. Campbell County
Utilities and Service Authority (CCUSA) was notified of the request and had no objections.
In order for the Board to consider vacating any interest in public property, the Board was
required to hold a public hearing to allow for citizen feedback on the issue. An ordinance of
vacation, if approved, could be recorded in the clerk’s office after a 30-day appeal period. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the request by a vote of 5-0.
Chairman Carwile opened the public hearing at 7:25 p.m.
Hearing no public comment, the public hearing was closed at 7:26 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Dowdy, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors accepts the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVES Request #PL-25-206 by Stephen
Dudley, agent for David Dudley, for Campbell County to approve an ordinance of vacation and to
vacate and release any County held interests or rights that may exist in the 50’ Outlet Road along
the northwest border and the 30’ Outlet Road along the southern portion of Tract C, and the 30’
Outlet Road along the border of Tract C and Tract B as shown on the plat recorded in Plat Book
17, page 43 and further identified as tax map parcels 20D-4-C and 20D-4-B. Not to include the
Campbell County Utilities and Service Authority water main easement as recorded in Plat Book
592, page 727-728 and the sanitary sewer easement as recorded in Plat Cabinet C, Slide 303, page
3028.
AT A MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
HELD AT RUSTBURG, VIRGINIA ON NOVEMBER 6, 2025
AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE ROADWAY DESIGNATED AS 50’ OUTLET ROAD
AND 30’ OUTLET ROAD AS SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 17, PAGE 43
WHEREAS, by plat recorded in the Office of Clerk of the Circuit Court for Campbell
County, Virginia in Plat Book 17, page 43 two sections of roadway bordering Tract “C” as
designated thereon shown thereon as “50’ Outlet Road” and “30’ Outlet Road” were dedicated to
the County of Campbell for roadway purposes; and
WHEREAS, the Outlet Roads were never constructed and have never been used for
roadway purposes, and it is the desire of the County and the adjoining owners that the Outlet Roads
be vacated; and
WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of this order the County both posted notice of such intent
to abandon its interests in this portion of road, and advertised such intent in a newspaper of public
circulation as required by state law; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors, after due investigation and consideration, including
a public hearing, has determined that no public necessity exists for the continuance of the section
of road described herein, and that the public’s interest would best be served by abandoning these
Outlet Roads.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Campbell, Virginia that the portion of “50’ Outlet Road” and “30’ Outlet Road” to the Northwest
and South of Tract C as shown on said plat recorded in Plat Book 17, page 43 be vacated, such
that title to the roadway of the “50’ Outlet Road” be vested in the current owner of Tract C, and
such that title to the “30’ Outlet Road” between tracts C and B be vested to the owners of said
Tracts C and B, each side to the center of the roadway.

And be it FURTHER ORDERED That the County Attorney shall submit a certified copy
of this adopted Ordinance of Vacation to the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Campbell County so
that it may be recorded and indexed in the land records in the name of the County as grantor.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

PUBLIC HEARING – CODE UPDATE CHAPTER 22

Mr. Isenhour advised that the Board of Supervisors had tasked him to investigate and
propose draft changes to the Code of Campbell County for a number of matters involving zoning.
Because the solar changes in particular were requested ahead of the normal biannual update, all
changes to Chapter 22 of the Code related to zoning were prepared to be presented as a package.
Changes to the definition section, as well as adding new sections § 22-17.23 through § 2217.28, relate to modernizing the Code’s treatment of solar applications. These changes provide
significantly more nuance and detail than was present in the Code previously. Changes to the
definition section, as well as to the Business zoning districts, work together to limit the siting of
“Vape” shops at or near schools. Finally, one change was proposed based upon staff
recommendations related to the bulk storage and sale of mulch, gravel, rock, sand, soil, and other
similar landscaping materials. The use was allowed as a special use only in Agricultural districts,
while general county practice has seen that use clustered in Business-General Commercial or
Industrial districts, where such use was not mentioned. The Planning Commission held a public
hearing on the proposed changes to Chapter 22. There were no comments from the public, and the
Commission recommended approval by a vote of 5-0.
In answer to a question from Supervisor Watts regarding the allowable distance between a
school and a Vape shop, Mr. Isenhour indicated the Board could choose to be more restrictive
than the proposed 1,000 linear feet from the property line of a daycare center or school. He advised
that if the Board wanted to make a Code update that was more restrictive than what was advertised,
it should be readvertised and heard at a subsequent public hearing. He further clarified that any
Vape shops currently open near schools would have vested rights and could not be removed if the
Code update was approved. Supervisor Watts asked Mr. Isenhour to explain the classification of a
Vape shop. He stated that a shop that was primarily selling vaping products would be considered
a Vape shop. There was a difference between a Vape shop and a gas station that also sold vaping
products. Supervisor Watts asked the Board to consider increasing the distance that a Vape shop
can operate near a school from 1,000 linear feet to 10 miles. He also wanted any business whose
vaping products made up 10% or more of its entire retail sales to be considered a Vape shop.
Administrator Rogers asked if it made sense to strike the proposed Code language related to Vape
shops and add it to the advertisement for the regular semi-annual Code update public hearing.
Supervisor Watts agreed to the suggestion, adding that he would like to see the current Code
language.
In response to a question from Supervisor Watts about the proposed Code updates related
to solar projects, Administrator Rogers noted that an entity had applied for a solar facility and had
attempted to put forth a solid project that exceeded the County’s current solar requirements. They
requested that their project be allowed to proceed through the public hearing process under the
current guidelines before the Code was updated, which would cause them to have to redesign their
project. The Board could honor their request by adopting the new solar rules, but delaying the
implementation date. He added that this option still did not guarantee a positive outcome for the
applicant; it just meant that their project would be reviewed against the current solar ordinance.
Chairman Carwile opened the public hearing at 7:39 p.m.
George Jamerson and Morgan Vickery were representing Dominion Energy. They were
not in favor of or in opposition to the proposed Code updates. They had submitted a special use
permit application for a 3-megawatt solar facility on approximately 13 acres in Gladys. Mr.
Jamerson believed that the proposal was strong and that they had communicated sufficiently with
elected officials, County staff, and the community. The new solar ordinance would create certain
vegetative buffers and setbacks that would create great uncertainty about how they would move
forward with their proposed project. Dominion would like to proceed with their proposal under

the current ordinance. Mr. Jamerson understood that this did not mean guaranteed approval of the
project. Mr. Vickery added that Dominion was respectfully requesting that if the Board voted to
approve the new solar ordinances, they delay the implementation date to March 1, 2026.
Supervisor Hardie asked them to elaborate on what changes would have to be made to their
proposal if the solar ordinances were effective immediately upon approval. Mr. Jamerson
indicated that the increased distance requirement for vegetative buffers and setbacks in the
proposed Code updates would make their current proposal unfeasible. Mr. Vickery added that
Dominion acquired the real estate agreement between the property owners and another developer
last year, and the initial agreement was about five (5) years old.
Hearing no further comment, the public hearing was closed at 7:51 p.m.
Supervisor Lawton understood that Code updates were intended to better protect the
county, and he did not fully understand what Dominion was trying to dodge with their current
proposal. He was concerned about approving Code updates but delaying the implementation date.
Supervisor Hardie added that he knew nothing about Dominion’s project and agreed with
Supervisor Lawton’s remarks.
Supervisor Watts had met with Dominion about their proposal and was pleased with the
modifications that were made. He also attended a community meeting held by Dominion, and no
one objected to the project. While he did not claim to be solar-friendly, he believed the project
suited the area.
Chairman Carwile recalled a previous discussion in which the Board was adamant that
Code changes regarding solar projects needed to happen before the regularly scheduled semiannual Code update. Now it seemed that there was some interest in approving the changes but
delaying their implementation date to March 2026. In response to a question from Supervisor
Watts, Administrator Rogers stated that no other solar project applications had been submitted to
date. Another entity had expressed interest in a solar project in Concord, but if the County received
an application, the project would not fall within the delayed implementation date of March 1.
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors strikes the
following sections of Chapter 22 of the Campbell County Code of 1988 from consideration of
amendment:
 Section 22-2(B)(97)
 Section 22-2(B)(117)
 Section 22-2(B)(118)
 Section 22-2(B)(119)
 Section 22-2(B)(123)
 Section 22-12(A)(19), (29) & (30)
 Section 22-12.1(A)(32), (50) & (51)
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was ORDAINED the Board of Supervisors adopts a
new ordinance and amendment to the Campbell County Code of 1988 as follows:
CHAPTER 22 – Zoning
§22-12.1(A)(33)
Allows Bulk storage and sale of mulch, gravel, rock, sand, soil, and other
similar landscaping materials by right in Business – General Commercial.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was ORDAINED the Board of Supervisors adopts the
new ordinances and amendments to the Campbell County Code of 1988 as follows, with a delayed
effective date of March 1, 2026:

CHAPTER 22 – Zoning
§22-2(B)(140)
Amends the defined term of “Solar Energy Projects” to read “Solar Energy
Facilities” to correspond more closely with the usage of the term “facility”
throughout the Code; and deletes language exempting certain small solar
installations from the term. Term is updated throughout Code.
§22-17.23

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, provides a statement of the
purpose, intent, and definitions appliable to the Solar Energy Facilities
Division.

§22-17.24

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, defines the required
components of an application for a Solar Energy Facility.

§22-17.25

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, describes siting restrictions
and the required appearance and operational requirements for Solar Energy
Facilities.

§22-17.26

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, describes considerations
applicants should expect the Board to consider for potential conditions upon
Solar Energy Facilities.

§22-17.27

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, describes required
decommissioning plan and bond, what to be done with inoperable facilities.

§22-17.28

New section related to Solar Energy Facilities, enacts a revenue sharing
condition upon all newly approved Solar Energy Facilities.

§22-32(B)(17) & (18) Deletes formerly applicable language related to Solar Energy Facility
application, references new sections in their stead.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Watts
Hardie, Lawton
Brown

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE – CODE UPDATE

Mr. Isenhour provided the Board with a list of proposed amendments to the County Code
for the regular fall update. Some of the proposed amendments were mandated changes to mirror
state law changes that were effective July 1. Others were discretionary changes requested by staff
or were minor amendments clarifying certain aspects of the Code. A large portion of the changes
related to bringing the plat review sections of Chapter 21 into conformity with recent changes to
State Code requiring administrative rather than planning commission review for subdivision plats.
Supervisor Cline thought the Board made a mistake when data centers were moved from a
special use to a by-right use in Industrial-Heavy zones in a previous Code update.
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors includes in the
advertisement of the necessary public hearing an amendment to Chapter 22-15(A)(17) of the
County Code to remove the use “Data Center” from being a by-right use in Industrial-Heavy zones,
and move the same use to be a special use permit only use in Industrial-Heavy zones.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Watts
Lawton
Brown

A proposed amendment to Chapter 9-14.6 of the County Code would allow for the
exemption of taxes upon the property of a surviving spouse of a law enforcement officer, search
and rescue personnel, or emergency medical services personnel killed in the line of duty. The
Board agreed to Supervisor Hardie’s request that the language be clarified to include public safety
volunteers.

Supervisor Watts asked that the proposed Code language related to Vape shops that was
struck from the Chapter 22 Code Update public hearing be added to the advertisement for the
regular semi-annual Code update public hearing.
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors includes in the
advertisement of the necessary public hearing the following amendments to the County Code
related to Vape shops:
 Section 22-2(B)(97)
Adds the definition of “Nicotine Vapor Products”


Section 22-2(B)(117)



Section 22-2(B)(118) Adds the definition of a zoning use named “Recreational
substances retail, off-site use,” commonly known as “Vape Shops”



Section 22-2(B)(119) Adds the definition of a zoning use named “Recreational
substances retail, on-site use,” commonly known as “Vape Shops”



Section 22-2(B)(123)



Section 22-12(A)(28) Allows Vape Shops as a special use in Business – Limited
Commercial when greater than 10 miles from the property line of any child day care
center or public, private, or parochial school



Section 22-12.1(A)(51) Allows Vape Shops as a special use in Business – General
Commercial when greater than 10 miles from the property line of any child day care
center or public, private, or parochial school



Section 22-12.2(A)(28) Allows Vape Shops as a special use in Business – Heavy
Commercial when greater than 10 miles from the property line of any child day care
center or public, private, or parochial school

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Adds the definition of “Recreational Substances”

Adds the definition of “Retail Tobacco Product”

Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
Carwile
Brown

Supervisor Dowdy asked the Board to consider amending the defined minimum lot size to
one-half acre for lots not served by public sewer in Residential zones. After further discussion,
Supervisor Dowdy amended his motion to add Business zones as well as Residential.
On motion of Supervisor Dowdy, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors includes in the
advertisement of the necessary public hearing an amendment to the County Code that defines the
minimum lot size to one-half acre for lots not served by both public water and public sewer in
Residential and Business zones.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton
Carwile, Watts
Brown

On motion of Chairman Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes the
advertisement of the necessary public hearing required to take action on the list of proposed
changes to the County Code submitted with the Board packet to be heard at the December 2, 2025,
regular business meeting, with the clarification as requested by Supervisor Hardie to Chapter 914.6.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

HIGHWAY MATTERS

Mr. Tweedy indicated that Robert Brown, VDOT Residency Administrator, was present to
answer questions from Board members. Mr. Tweedy updated the Board on highway matters.

In a report on previous highway matters, Mr. Tweedy stated the following:









Supervisor Cline had requested VDOT reinstall the sign at the intersection of Village
Terrace with Village Highway that had been knocked down. VDOT had reinstalled the
sign.
Supervisor Dowdy had asked about the availability of funding to install flashing speed
limit signs along Charldon Road. Two signs cost approximately $7,000. The County
currently has $23,300 allocated for these types of expenditures.
Chairman Carwile had requested an update on the possibility of flashing warning signs on
Enterprise Drive in the vicinity of Bee Drive. VDOT had approved installing the flashing
school zone signs 600’ from Bee Drive in each direction. The cost of the signs is estimated
to be approximately $33,000.
Mr. Brown noted that VDOT had initiated the all-way stop at the intersection of Lawyers
Road, Lynbrook Road, and Waterlick Road.
Mr. Brown stated that VDOT hoped to have the results of the study on the intersection of
Doss Road and Route 460 by Christmas.

Mr. Tweedy indicated that staff had received a request from a citizen about installing
streetlights along English Tavern Road, Sunnymeade Road, and Southern Drive. AEP required a
resolution from the Board supporting this effort before they would evaluate the project and provide
cost estimates. Mr. Tweedy had provided the Board with a memo reviewing the history of the
current streetlights in Concord and Rustburg. He added that VDOT’s preliminary data indicated
the vehicle crashes on these roads did not happen at night. There were also ongoing studies for
improvements to English Tavern Road, and the Board may want to wait for those to be completed
before addressing the need for streetlights. Mr. Brown advised that public involvement was
important when deciding where to install streetlights, because some residents may be opposed to
having one close to their house.
From the Board:




Supervisor Lawton requested VDOT review the traffic control measures for the
intersection improvement project at Gladys Road and Wards Road. There have been three
accidents at this location recently. VDOT agreed to review the traffic control measures for
this project, and County staff will reach out to the Sheriff’s office to request some speed
enforcement in the area to improve safety.
Supervisor Hardie requested improvements to the intersection of Routes 24 and 501 in
Rustburg by adding turn lanes. VDOT indicated there is a current study to determine how
this intersection could be improved. It should be ready for consideration for the next Smart
Scale project application process, which starts in March.

On motion of Chairman Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes the
purchase of two (2) flashing warning signs on Enterprise Drive in the vicinity of Bee Drive, not to
exceed $33,000.00, utilizing funds from the Assigned for School Maintenance fund.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

APPOINTMENTS
One appointment was made at this meeting.

Economic Development Commission
On motion of Supervisor Dowdy, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors appoints Steve
Shockley to the remainder of a four-year term until December 31, 2027, on the Economic
Development Commission for the Sunburst Election District.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

//

MATTERS FROM THE BOARD

Supervisor Lawton had learned from the CVPDC that DEQ required the regional water
plan to be updated. Grant opportunities were being pursued to offset the impact, as it was an
unfunded mandate on the localities.
Chairman Carwile congratulated Supervisor Hardie and Supervisor Watts on being
reelected to the Board.
Supervisor Hardie congratulated Supervisor Watts and Supervisor Carwile on their
reelection.
Supervisor Hardie encouraged people to attend the Holiday Market tomorrow night at the
Historic Courthouse.
Supervisor Watts congratulated Supervisor Carwile and Supervisor Hardie on their
reelection.
//

CLOSED MEETING

On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors enters into a
closed meeting at 9:04 p.m. to discuss or consider the investment of public funds where
competition or bargaining is involved, where, if made public initially, the financial interest of the
government unit would be adversely affected, in accordance with §2.2-3711 (A)(6) of the Code of
Virginia, as amended.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

//
The Campbell County Board of Supervisors entered into a closed meeting on this 6th day
of November, 2025 at 9:04 p.m. to discuss or consider the investment of public funds where
competition or bargaining is involved, where, if made public initially, the financial interest of the
government unit would be adversely affected, in accordance with §2.2-3711 (A)(6) of the Code of
Virginia, as amended.
//
p.m.

On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the meeting return to open session at 9:43

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown

On motion of Supervisor Cline, the following resolution was adopted:
CERTIFICATE OF CLOSED MEETING

WHEREAS, the Campbell County Board of Supervisors had convened a closed meeting on the 6th
day of November, 2025 pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the
provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, §2.2-3711 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Campbell County
Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Campbell County Board of Supervisors hereby
certifies that, to the best of each member’s knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully
exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting
to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were
identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the
Campbell County Board of Supervisors.

The roll call vote was:

Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Nay:
Absent During Meeting:
Absent During Vote:

//

Carwile
Cline
Dowdy
Hardie
Lawton
Watts
None
Brown
Brown

ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Supervisor Lawton, the meeting was adjourned at 9:44 p.m.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
Brown
____________________________________
JUSTIN A. CARWILE, CHAIRMAN
Approved: _________________

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
December 2, 2025
The regular meeting of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors was held on the 2nd day
of December 2025 in the Board of Supervisors meeting room of the Walter J. Haberer Building,
Rustburg, Virginia. The members present were:
Justin A. Carwile, Chairman, Presiding
Kenneth R. Brown
Matt W. Cline
Paul E. Dowdy
Jon R. Hardie
Tom K. Lawton
Charlie A. Watts II

Timberlake Election District
Spring Hill Election District
Concord Election District
Sunburst Election District
Rustburg Election District
Altavista Election District
Brookneal Election District

Also present were:
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator
F. E. “Tripp” Isenhour, III, County Attorney
Catherine H. Moore, Clerk

Chairman Carwile called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and opened the meeting with
the Pledge of Allegiance and prayer.
//

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

On motion of Supervisor Brown, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors dispenses with
the reading and approves the minutes of the September 16, 2025 meeting as presented.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

The Board of Supervisors provides the opportunity for general public comment at a public
meeting at least once per quarter, pursuant to Section 15.2-1416 of the Code of Virginia. The
Board invited any citizen who would like to address the Board to come forward and speak on any
topic of concern. Speakers were asked to limit their remarks to three (3) minutes.
Bill Carson, 720 Cabin Field Road, Lynchburg, spoke in favor of requiring a special use
permit for data centers. He believed the Board should also require a special use permit for the two
data centers that had been discussed since the permitting and construction had not begun.
Merritt Reagan, 235 Solitude Lane, Rustburg, spoke in favor of requiring a special use
permit for data centers. He asked why would the Board allow data centers as a by-right use when
they were large and required a significant number of resources. Mr. Reagan also cautioned the
Board against the idea of future ownership of the Region 2000 Regional Landfill. The financial
obligation may be detrimental to the County.
Brandy Hatcher, 136 Bison Drive, Evington, just moved to the County from Rockbridge
County. She commented that data centers were increasing the costs of electricity and causing issues
with aquifers. The demands for technology were increasing daily, but so was the need for clean
air, clean water and suitable water pressure. Virginia, Texas and California had the most data
centers in the United States, but the Board had a right to say no to protect the residents of Campbell
County against higher electric bills, higher water bills, and noise pollution. Data Centers may
provide a few permanent jobs and increased tax revenues, but they hurt the citizens in the long
run.

Lori Leonard, Concord, expressed concern that a data center could be constructed on
Cabin Field Road and there was nothing the citizens could do to change that. Dr. Leonard
researched Mesh Capital and found it difficult to determine an address or leadership of the
company. She was concerned about the drain on infrastructure such as water and electricity and
what would happen to the property when the data center was decommissioned. According to her
research, data centers were operational for about 15-20 years.
Toy Eagle, 250 Kiowa Road, also spoke in support of requiring a special use permit for
data centers due to the strain on the electrical grid, excessive water consumption, heavy
construction traffic, long-term environmental disruption and reduced property values for nearby
homeowners. A data center operates 24 hours a day and the proposed area was not suitable for this
type of development. Voices should matter in decisions that impact neighborhoods, property
values and daily lives.
Sandy Glass, Evington, spoke regarding the code changes that allowed data centers as a
by-right use in heavy industrial zones. Through a FOIA request and her research, it became known
that data centers developers had been interested in Campbell County since 2023. This interest may
have influenced changes in the County Code. In 2024 the Board approved a change in the County
Code to allow data centers as a by-right use in heavy industrial zones. There were currently two
areas proposed for a data center, one on Cabin Field Road and one on Mt. Athos Road. If the
emergency ordinance had not been adopted, there would likely be numerous requests for data
centers. Mrs. Glass asked the Board to support the change to the County Code to require a special
use permit for data centers.
Ashby Smith, Concord, supported the code change to require a special use request for data
centers. He and his neighbors obtained over 600 signatures opposing data centers which spoke to
the strong opposition to the location of any data centers in the County. Data centers were generally
not welcomed in localities, and companies sought out localities where they would not be
challenged. Mr. Smith believed staff wanted to bring in data centers, and the change in the County
Code to allow data centers as a by-right use was “slipped in”. Without a special use permit the
Board would be allowing this type of development with zero control. He added that only
Supervisor Hardie questioned the code change. Mr. Smith also pointed out that AEP and CCUSA
had raised concerns about data centers due to the electric and water usage. In conclusion, he asked
the Board to reinstate the special use permit requirement.
Cheryl Moore, 65 Fowler Street, spoke to the Board on October 7, 2025 and was back
before the Board to express concerns about the concerts being held on the Sparrow Estate. Her
complaints included noise, alcohol, music with foul language and smoking. She believed some of
the events exceeded the time limit and cap on attendees. Ms. Moore asked the Board to reconsider
suspending the special use permit as it was taking a toll on the neighborhood.
Chairman Carwile indicated he and Supervisor Dowdy would follow up on her complaints.
Ann Parker, 615 Collington Drive, appreciated Dr. Leonard’s research on the company
proposing to build a data center in Campbell County and shared the concern that it was difficult to
determine ownership or leadership in these companies. She was opposed to data centers and
supported a code change to require a special use permit for data centers or other types of
development that was intrusive or had negative impacts. In other matters, Mrs. Parker supported a
salary increase for the Deputy Registrar and an additional full-time employee in the Registrar’s
Office. She also thanked everyone involved in the installation of new signage on Enterprise Drive
to improve school safety.
David Eldridge, 237 Rhage Lane, was a property owner off Cabin Field Road, the site of
a proposed data center. He believed if this data center was outside the front door of any of the
Board members, we would not be having this conversation. For him, it would be right outside one
of his bedroom windows. Mr. Eldridge did not understand why a governing body would make
data centers a by-right use and give up the right to govern. It was better to be proactive than
reactive. He served 25 years in the United States Marine Corp, served in nearly 30 countries and
fought in two wars. There were a lot of bad people in the world who wanted to operate under the
radar. Mr. Eldridge understood there may be more appropriate areas in the County for a data center
such as on the southern side of the County on a parcel with more acreage.

Robert Wright, 27 Cabin Field Road, commented the proposed data center would be in
his front yard, and he did not have the means to buy another place to live. This data center did not
need to be at this location.
James Clark, 301 Cedarwood Drive, asked if anyone had seen if the data center company
had the ability to perform, such as looking at balance sheets. Do they have a line of credit or a
secured loan?
Lisa Whorley, 506 Alum Springs Road, commented that her community was really
stressed out about the concerts being held on the Sparrow Estate. Mr. Sparrow spoke to the Board
a few weeks ago; she indicated there were a lot of untruths. He indicated if there was a concert, it
ended by 6 p.m. Mrs. Whorley indicated one of his concerts in September ended after midnight,
was very loud and included strobe lights. She added the venue was beautiful and would be
appropriate for birthdays, weddings, church events or fishing, but it was not a concert venue. She
and her neighbors deserved to live in their homes with peace and quiet. In addition, if they
complained to Mr. Sparrow, he would retaliate with bullying.
Pamela Richards, 516 Alum Springs Road, also shared her concerns about events being
held on the Sparrow Estates venue. She and her neighbors had endured a lot over the past two
years with the noise from the events and events lasting past the permit time limit. They had not
been able to work with Mr. Sparrow as he would become confrontational. Ms. Richards asked the
Board to hear their plea to discontinue Mr. Sparrow’s permit. Some of the neighbors worked as
EMS, fire fighters and nurses and needed their rest. At times the music was so loud they could not
hear their televisions and the walls would shake. She and the neighbors had endured not just loud
music into the night, but also gun fire, people wandering around in the dark, and drug and alcohol
use.
Nathan Hills, 119 Southern Drive, agreed with previous comments on the proposed data
center. He did not see a great benefit to the County as data centers did not typically provide a lot
of jobs. Another type of manufacturing business could bring more jobs and be a better neighbor in
the community.
Chairman Carwile closed the public comment period.
//

SUPPORT FOR RED HILL

Dexter Gilliam, Chairman of the Patrick Henry Memorial Foundation, and Hope Marstin,
Chief Executive Officer at Red Hill, provided an update on the many activities and events held at
Red Hill.
Red Hill was the home of Patrick Henry, the first Governor of Virginia, and the place where
he died and was buried. Red Hill is very much the same as when Patrick Henry lived there. Patrick
Henry’s family lived at Red Hill from 1799 to 1944. In 1944, it was turned over to the Red Hill
Foundation. Red Hill was designated by Congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan as the
National Memorial to Patrick Henry.
Some of the events that were held at Red Hill included an annual Naturalization Ceremony
for new citizens, Patrick Henry’s Birthday celebration, Juneteenth, July 4th, Quarter Place Tribute
and a Christmas Open House. In 2025, 29 schools came for field trips, mostly 4th grade, to learn
about Virginia history. They also host homeschool students and preschoolers. They did not charge
admission for the events or the field trips. Free admission was also provided to Campbell County
library card holders and active military and families from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Discounted
admission was provided for Seniors, National Park members and retired and active military
members. Red Hill also partners with the library system to host several events including star gazing
parties and lantern tours.
Red Hill has reacquired the property known as “Quarter Place” and the Patrick Henry
Family Services property which allowed them to provide housing for the community and several
employees as well as hosting college students for a field school. The Virginia Outdoor Foundation
provided a Conservation Easement on 600 of their 1000 acres. In 2024 Red Hill received the
Governor’s Environmental Excellence Award, and in 2025 Red Hill was recognized as a Virginia
Treasured View by Scenic Virginia.

Red Hill brings in 10,000 visitors annually, from an average of 48 states and 28 countries.
They were open 362 days a year. Staff were asked daily to recommend places to eat, stay and
visit, and they consistently promoted Campbell County. In 2026 the United States would celebrate
the 250th anniversary of American Independence. Red Hill was preparing for increased visitation
by expanding the parking area, upgrading sidewalks, entrance and directional signs.
Mr. Gilliam commented that Red Hill was a national treasure that bordered Campbell and
Charlotte County, but they received $0 from the federal or state government. Every penny they
earned was raised from grants or private funds. If the Board saw fit, any contribution would be
helpful for their funding next year.
//

RECESS

Chairman Carwile called for a short recess at 7:00 p.m. prior to the public hearings. The
meeting was resumed at 7:09 p.m.
//

PUBLIC HEARING - SEMI-ANNUAL CODE UPDATE

Semi-annually the Board of Supervisors updates the Campbell County Code with
mandated changes from action of the General Assembly and discretionary changes initiated by
either the Board or staff during the year. The Board had requested a special use permit be required
for data centers. However, the change was not advertised in the newspaper publication. Because
there was not enough time to readvertise the code amendment for this meeting, the Board could
adopt an emergency ordinance under §15.2-1427 of the Code of Virginia. The amendment could
then be properly advertised and readopted within sixty (60) days.
In answer to several questions by the Board, the code amendment would be effective
immediately to remove data centers as a by-right use in heavy industrial areas, and a special use
permit would be required. The amendment would lapse unless the Board took action within 60
days. If the emergency ordinance was adopted, it would not impact any projects that had vested
rights which occurs when there has been a significant affirmed governmental act. This could occur
by several ways such as if a property was zoned a certain way, a variance or zoning permit had
been granted or other approvals such as a site plan or proffers. Vested rights or “being
grandfathered in” would not change should a new code amendment be adopted. Those vested rights
would remain as long as the property owner was actively pursuing property development.
Supervisor Hardie asked if there was a pathway to change those two prior projects. Mr.
Isenhour indicated there was a right of appeal to a determination. An appeal of the site plan
approval was currently pending for the Cabin Field Road property. The only other recourse is if
the project became stale or otherwise was not being actively pursued by the property owner for
two years. Being active could include soil studies, applications to other regulatory agencies, and
wetland studies.
Supervisor Hardie asked if there was a way to undo a determination by the Zoning
Administrator when a data center was approved under manufacturing believing this was not an
appropriate designation. Supervisor Hardie added that staff later requested a discretionary code
amendment to include data centers as a by-right use in industrial zones. Mr. Isenhour did not know
of a method, but would research that question and bring it back to the Board. Supervisor Hardie
would also like to explore a similar path for the Cabin Field Road project. He believed there had
not been any subsequent work on that project. Mr. Isenhour responded there was a pending appeal
related to the Cabin Field Road project as defined by State Code. Mr. Isenhour could not speak to
the outcome of the appeal prior to the hearing.
Supervisor Cline offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board adopts an emergency ordinance
to the Campbell County Code to no longer allow data centers as a by-right use in industrial zones
and require a special use permit for data centers, which amendment would be advertised for a
subsequent Board meeting for additional action.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie
Lawton, Watts

Absent:

None

Mr. Isenhour reviewed the remaining code amendments including two changes in Chapter
9, one to clarify the method to calculate the penalty upon the tax amount due prior to the application
of tax relief and two, exemption of taxes on property of a surviving spouse of a full-time or
volunteer law enforcement officer and other Public Safety personnel killed in the line of duty.
Chapter 10 includes an amendment to clarify the distance of any open fire from combustibles.
There were a number of mandatory changes to Chapter 21 including removing Planning
Commission review of subdivision plats. Chapter 22 includes amendments related to vape shops
and to require a minimum one-half acre lot size for lots in Residential – Single Family, Residential
– Multifamily, Residential – Manufactured Housing and Business-Limited Commercial not served
by public sewer.
Chairman Carwile opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
Russ Nixon, Nixon Land Surveying, commented on the proposed minimum lot sizes for
lots not served by public sewer, and the impact on infrastructure costs. This was part of the
discussion on the recent Calohan Road development that was before the Board. As a designer, he
was required to adhere to State requirements, and he realized the Board was working to have a lot
size that made sense for the builders and was still affordable for the buyer. He cautioned the Board
when they looked at lot sizes. A 7,500 square foot lot was postage size and could only be approved
if public water and sewer were available. This was similar to the development being built behind
Yellow Branch. Mr. Nixon recommended a drain field lot size of no larger than .55 acre for
Residential – Single Family. Currently you could have a lot size of 15,000 square feet or less than
½ acre with just public water. He recommended the Board not go below the ½ acre minimum lot
size or above the ½ acre minimum lot size when both water and sewer were available. Going larger
would increase infrastructure costs and stem growth in the County. Mr. Nixon added it cost
approximately $1 million to run 500 feet of sewer line.
Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed at 7:31 p.m.
Chairman Carwile commented on §22-12-(A)(28) that was advertised “to allow vape shops
as a special use in Business-Limited Commercial when greater than 10 miles from the property
line of any child day care center or public, private or parochial school.” He suggested 3 miles
instead of 10 miles. He appreciated the Board’s intent to limit exposure of these products to
children; however, 10 miles could appear as an outright ban. Supervisor Hardie believed it was
important to keep the products from the kids and asked if existing businesses were already
grandfathered in. Mr. Isenhour indicated they would be referring to the earlier conversation
regarding vested rights. Supervisor Lawton commented the Board was not barring the current vape
shops, but the intent was to not have any more in the school and day care areas. He supported 10
miles. Supervisor Hardie also supported 10 miles, but he would like to see if the vape shops could
be “unwound” where it impacts certain situations.
Chairman Carwile commented on the minimum lot sizes. At the last meeting Supervisor
Dowdy shared information about what Bedford County was currently doing. He personally
supported leaving the lot sizes as is currently.
Supervisor Hardie appreciated Supervisor Dowdy bringing this forward. He thought the
proposed minimum lot sizes were reasonable and would protect future homeowners 20 or 30 years
into the future when the current septic failed. The proposed minimum lot requirements were also
consistent with adjacent counties.
Supervisor Watts commented there were protections and requirements in place by State
agencies to protect property owners in case of a failed septic. He added the proposed minimum lot
requirements would place a burden on developers and property owners and increase the cost of
housing. Supervisor Watts added the properties Supervisor Dowdy brought forward were built in
the 1960’s before state regulations were in place.
Regarding the distance for vape shops, Supervisor Watts would be willing to consider less
than 10 miles, but believed three (3) miles was less than he would like.

Chairman Carwile suggested the Board look at the proposed amendments separately.
Supervisor Cline offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was ORDAINED the Board of Supervisors adopts the
following amendments to the Campbell County Code as advertised:
§9-1.3

§9-14.6

§10-41

Chapter 21

§21-7(C)(2)
§21-8(B)(3)
§22-2(B)(97)
§22-2(B)(117)
§22-2(B)(118)
§22-2(B)(119)
§22-2(B)(123)

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Clarifies in Code that penalty shall be calculated upon the tax amount due prior to the application
of tax relief. This change is declarative of current law and simply codifies long-term practice
derived from 2005 tax relief legislation. This is a request from the Treasurer.
Adds a new section allowing for the exemption of taxes upon the property of a surviving spouse
of a full time or volunteer law enforcement officer, search and rescue personnel, firefighter, or
emergency medical services personnel killed in the line of duty. This is a request from the Public
Safety Director.
Clarifies that the distance of any open fire from any combustibles must be no less than 300 feet.
Prior law allowed 150 feet in certain circumstances and 300 in others, leading to confusion in
application. This is a request from the Fire Marshal.
Chapter 21 has been updated throughout to reflect the statutory change removing Planning
Commission review of subdivision plats and transferring the same authority to the Designated
Agent of the County. Changes are mandatory to conform to State Code.
Reduces approval time allowed from 45 to 30 days. Mandatory to conform to State Code.
Added new subsection related to timing of plat approval following state agency review. Mandatory
to conform to State Code.
Adds the definition of “Nicotine Vapor Products”.
Adds the definition of “Recreational Substances”.
Adds the definition of a zoning use named “Recreational substances retail, off-site use”, commonly
known as “Vape Shops”.
Adds the definition of a zoning use named “Recreational substances retail, on-site use”, commonly
known as “Vape Shops”.
Adds the definition of “Retail Tobacco Product”.

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

§22-12-(A)(28) Distance required for vape shops
Following additional discussion, Mr. Isenhour indicated you had to be at least 21 to
purchase from a vape shop. Three (3) miles would limit exposure of the products to children
without being considered as an outright ban. Supervisor Watts offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was ORDAINED the Board of Supervisors adopts §2212-(A)(28) as an amendment to the Campbell County Code that allows Vape Shops as a special
use in Business-Limited Commercial when greater than 3 (three) miles from the property line of
any child day care center or public, private, or parochial school.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

Minimum Lot Sizes for Lots Not Served by Public Sewer
Supervisor Dowdy indicated that in his business he works with failed septic systems every
day. Some did not even last 10 years. He believed the minimum lot sizes would protect
homeowners when they did not have access to public sewer from having a failed septic system
and not enough room to install a new one. He offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Dowdy, it was ORDAINED that the Board of Supervisors adopts
the following amendments to the Campbell County Code as advertised:
§22-9(B)(1)
§22-10(B)(1)
§22-11(B)(1)
§22-12(B)(1)

Amends the defined minimum lot size to one-half acre for lots not served by public sewer in
Residential – Single Family.
Amends the defined minimum lot size to one-half acre for lots not served by public sewer in
Residential – Multifamily.
Amends the defined minimum lot size to one-half acre for lots not served by public sewer in
Residential – Manufactured Housing.
Amends the defined minimum lot size to one-half acre for lots not served by public sewer in
Business-Limited Commercial.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton
Brown, Carwile, Watts
None

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON CREWS SHOP
ROAD FOR TRACTOR-TRAILER STORAGE

PL-25-204

Request by Norm Walton, agent for B & M Trucking, to rezone the property located
at Crews Shop Road and further identified as tax map parcel 17-B-2A from
Agricultural to Industrial Heavy Conditional with a concurrent request for a Special
Use Permit to allow for tractor trailer storage. The property is located in an area
designated as medium to high density residential and medium to high density
commercial per the current Comprehensive Plan. This request was continued from
the November 6, 2025 Board of Supervisors meeting.

Kate Reusch, Planner, presented the request to rezone 11.13 ± acres from Agricultural to
Industrial – Heavy Conditional with a concurrent request for a Special Use Permit in order to allow
for a trucking yard. The request was continued from the November 6, 2025 Board of Supervisors
meeting prior to the public hearing at the request of the applicant.
The property was located on Crews Shop Road in the Concord Election District. The
applicant was seeking to rezone the parcel to Industrial – Heavy Conditional with a concurrent
special use permit in order to allow for a trucking yard for tractor trailer storage. This would be an
expansion of the existing trucking terminal on parcel 17-B-3 (approved by the Board on December
4, 2018) and parcel 17-A-54A (approved by the Board on December 6, 2016). If approved, the
area to be rezoned would be used for additional tractor trailer parking. Buffers would be required
to be maintained or installed between the industrial use and adjacent parcels zoned Agricultural.
The area was mixed use in nature. The zoning in the vicinity was Agricultural, Industrial –
Heavy, and Business – General Commercial. The parcel would be accessed through parcel 17-B3 which has two existing entrances, one off of Crews Shop Road and the other off Monkeywrench
Drive, a private road off of Richmond Highway (Route 460). No occupied structure was proposed;
therefore, water and sewer facilities were not applicable. The applicant submitted proffers to limit
the permitted uses of the property. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
request by a vote of 5-0.
In answer to questions by the Board, the proffers had not been updated, and the applicant
just that day had finalized a new site plan to be presented during the public hearing. Landscape
buffering had not been addressed on the prior site plan. The new site plan provides for landscape
buffering on the boundary adjoining the parcel zoned Agricultural as required by the Zoning
Ordinance. Mrs. Reusch added that even without the notation for landscape buffering on the prior
site plan, it would still have been required.
Todd Moore, owns B & M Trucking as well as F. L. Moore Trucking, which adjoins the
subject property. He was requesting the rezoning to add additional parking as they had outgrown
their current space. The subject property would be sparsely used and would be used to park
equipment that was used seasonally. No lighting was proposed for the site and access would be
during the day only. Mr. Moore indicated he needed the additional space as his current space was
congested.
Norm Walton, of Perkins & Orrison, 317 Brook Park Place, Forest, was the agent for B &
M Trucking. The site plan presented to the Board at this hearing did not change their proposal, but
provided clarification on the required vegetative buffer on the southern and eastern lines of the
property and showed how far the storage area was from the property line. The property was owned
by B & M Trucking, but would be used by F. L. Moore Trucking to store trailers that contained
equipment that F. L. Moore Trucking hauls. No new entrances were being proposed, and there
would be no lighting on the site. They looked at moving the storage area further north away from
the Hawkins property, but were limited by a conservation easement based off of soil water
requirements on a previous plan. Mr. Walton noted the gravel parking area was 80 feet from the
southern property line. They did not anticipate numerous trucks accessing the lot daily; the number

of trucks in and out would vary daily or weekly. Mr. Walton requested time for rebuttal after the
Board heard public comment.
Supervisor Cline asked if lighting was included in the proffers. Mr. Walton indicated it
was not proffered, but he was sharing the plans for the site. Because this would be a gravel lot,
Supervisor Cline asked if there was a dust mitigation plan. Mr. Walton advised it would be handled
the same as Mr. Moore’s other parking areas that were primarily gravel.
Supervisor Hardie asked what type of items would be stored on the trailers. Mr. Walton
indicated the trailers would contain items such as building materials and raw steel for clients
including W. A. Stratton and BWXT. In answer to a question about tankers, Mr. Moore responded
if any tankers were stored, they would be empty.
In answer to a question by Chairman Carwile as to his storage needs, Mr. Moore indicated
he had over 350 trailers, but they were scattered all across the country. He anticipated using onequarter to one-half of the new site, but that need would fluctuate as trailers were coming in and out
all the time. In a follow-up question by Supervisor Cline regarding radioactive material, Mr. Moore
said yes, they do haul radioactive material, but it could not be stored there. It had to be stored at a
radioactive facility.
The public hearing was opened at 8:03 p.m.
Ross Hawkins, 2056 Crews Shop Road, Lynchburg, owns the adjoining property to the
proposed storage lot, but was not provided the updated site plan that was presented that evening.
Mr. Hawkins spoke against the proposed rezoning application due to the lack of significant
proffers. Industrial-Heavy zoning was the least restrictive zoning in the County and would allow
many different uses and without proffers, there would be no limit to what could be built on the
property by right. That would be too much unrestrictive freedom for any business operating within
a residential area.
Mr. Hawkins asked B & M Trucking to consider adding proffers that would eliminate all
other uses except the one in the special use permit. This would give peace of mind that nothing
more intrusive would come in the future for him and his neighbors. He also suggested B & M
Trucking proffer that no utilities would be constructed on the property, specifically lighting.
Without a proffer, there would be nothing to prevent lighting from being added in the future.
Another proffer suggested was to maintain a 200-foot buffer between any structure and the parking
lot on their property and all adjacent properties or roads with current trees and foliage remaining.
This would give much needed privacy until the County-mandated tree buffer fully matured. The
suggested proffers would still give B & M Trucking the ability to build the storage parking lot and
provide he and his wife as well as the neighborhood a degree of security going forward. When he
suggested these proffers to B & M Trucking, he did not receive a response.
Mr. Hawkins indicated he also had concerns about the size of the site plan being discussed
that could store 100 trailers or more and would be disruptive in a residential neighborhood. The
noise and the dust from the movement of the trailers was concerning, but the greatest concern was
the additional traffic from Crews Shop Road to Route 460. This year there had been two (2) deaths
at the intersection, and the proposed industrial growth would add to that risk. While he
congratulated B & M Trucking on their ability to grow, history showed they have had to grow and
move at least once. Since B & M Trucking was projecting to use half of the subject parcel, Mr.
Hawkins was concerned that future growth would continue to encroach on their border. Based on
all of these concerns, Mr. Hawkins requested the Board deny the request.
Dena Doverspike, 2056 Crews Shop Road, Lynchburg indicated she and her husband live
next to the property proposed to be rezoned. She requested the Board vote no to the proposed
rezoning. She and her husband found their dream home right across from her retired father. Before
making an offer, they asked their real estate agent to find out more about the trucking company’s
plans for the lot being discussed. This was a major concern because the adjacent property line was
10 feet from their mailbox, and they were on a hill and would be able to see everything on the lot.
After conferring with the trucking company, the seller’s agent called their realtor, and all three of
them listened on speaker phone as the seller’s agent told them that the trucking company assured
them the property would remain undeveloped. Mrs. Doverspike took them at their word, and she

and her husband purchased the property this past January. She had a letter from their realtor that
verified these statements.
Crews Shop Road was a two-lane road and 95% of the lots were zoned residential or
agricultural. The trucking company was the only industrial – heavy use on the road. Mrs.
Doverspike believed there were other places in the County more suitable for this use such as
Seneca Commerce Park. If this rezoning was approved, the trucking company would be 1/3 of the
size of that entire original industrial park right in the middle of residential Concord. The declaration
of legislative intent in the Code of Virginia for zoning states “that residential areas be provided
with healthy surroundings for family life; that agriculture and forested lands be preserved.” Many
of the residential parcels in the community had homes that were built more than 20 years before
the trucking company was established. This was not a matter of homes popping up around an
industrial park, but rather a heavy industrial business encroaching on residential development.
Currently, the noise and lights from the trucking company were noticeable, but manageable
because of the buffer the vacant parcel afforded them. But if the parcel was rezoned, it would
impact their quality of life and property values. A rezoning of this property would allow the
trucking company or a future owner to operate a number of industrial-heavy uses by-right without
Board approval. It was not how the property would be used now, but what the impact could be in
the future from lighting, noise and gravel dust. She asked the Board to deny the request.
Dennis Doverspike, 1989 Crews Shop Road, Lynchburg, lives across the road from the
subject property. He relocated to Crews Shop Road in 2022 after 20 years in Orlando, Florida to
be with his children. He was a retired international project manager. At 72 years old, he now
wanted to enjoy peace and quiet in his golden years. That peace and his family were the most
important things to him. Mr. Doverspike was concerned that if the rezoning was approved, his
peace and quiet would not happen. He really enjoyed sitting on his front porch on his five acres of
land, enjoying the birds and the view. Part of his view was the subject property, and if the rezoning
was approved, that view may become traffic and “stacked-up” trailers. He believed it would be a
matter of time before security issues would arise and lighting would be installed. It would also be
difficult to work in the dark. Mr. Doverspike had lived in subdivisions for most of his life which
was why he really enjoyed his current country setting. He was opposed to the rezoning.
Sadie Bailey, 1890 Crews Shop Road, agreed with the speakers before her and believed
the development would have negative effects on the community and family as well as negative
impacts on the environment from the changes in the land, soil and wildlife. She was also concerned
about the truck traffic, especially in light of the recent accidents at the intersection with Route
460. Mrs. Bailey believed the use of this property would change their agricultural identify and
impact property values as prospective buyers would not want to live near heavy industrial use.
She herself had considered moving. It was good to grow a business, but the area was residential.
Businesses should be focused on serving others and meeting the general need rather than being
driven by greed or self-interest. Mrs. Bailey has watched the business grow commenting that she
spoke at the public hearing when he bought the land for F. L. Moore Trucking. The rezoning would
not help them as a community.
Ashby Smith, 390 Cabin Field Road, used to travel Crews Shop Road every day when he
was driving to Rustburg High School. He observed that everything was starting to move industrial,
and he did not understand that. Was it the County’s goal to be an industrial park with sparsely
rationed homes here and there? He made his living as a plumbing contractor and had jobs for a lot
of people. Many people with means lived away from anything that might be adverse, but people
like him had to live where they lived. When things like this was put in around them, they did not
have the opportunity to do anything about it. Mr. Smith really felt for the four neighbors who were
trying to save their piece of paradise. The citizens look to the Board of Supervisors to protect them.
Administrator Rogers read into the record a letter that was received addressed to the Board
of Supervisors dated November 6, 2025. Carol Williamson, 2081 Crews Shop Road, indicated
she was an elderly resident that lived across the road from the subject property. She could not
attend the meeting due to a respiratory condition. Mrs. Williamson was opposed to the
development and expressed concerns related to safety crossing the road to get to her mailbox. A
dumpster in front of her property had already been hit and had to be replaced. She was opposed to
the rezoning.
Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed at 8:23 p.m.

At the request of Supervisor Watts, Dena Doverspike presented her letter from the realtor
as shared in her remarks. While the letter was being circulated, Chairman Carwile invited Mr.
Walton to return to the podium to share any rebuttal comments.
Mr. Walton addressed the concerns regarding lighting. Mr. Moore had been at his current
location for eight (8) years. There were wall packs on the building and lights in the parking lot, but
the lights did not shine outward. Mr. Walton stated there had been no highway accidents by F. L.
Moore trucks at the Crews Shop Road/Route 460 intersection. Most of the trucks exit through
Monkeywrench and come in through Crews Shop Road. He added this was a mixed-use area with
other businesses in close proximity, such as WEL and Thompson Trucking. In the heart of
Concord, there was Sheetz and the Concord Fire Department as well as agricultural and residential.
Mr. Moore also had his realtor present, and he never indicated that he would not use the
subject property. He would not have kept it if he was not going to use it. Mr. Moore sold 24 acres
to Ross Hawkins, but kept 11 acres.
Supervisor Lawton indicated he had talked with Mr. Moore about talking with his
neighbors. Mr. Moore indicated he had attempted to meet with Mr. Hawkins several times, but
there were scheduling issues. Because Mr. Hawkins was a teacher, he had difficulty getting a
substitute. Ultimately, they were not able to meet, but Mr. Moore assured the Board he wanted to
be a good neighbor. He restated that he wanted to store some of the very expensive trailers to get
them out of the high traffic area so they would not get damaged. He did not anticipate using the
entire lot. Mr. Moore agreed with no lighting on the site, but he was not sure the 200-foot buffer
was even doable due to the conservation easement.
Supervisor Watts asked to hear from Mr. Moore’s realtor.
Nikki Burrington, EXP Realty, assisted Mr. Moore with the sale of 2056 Crews Shop
Road, and confirmed that Mr. and Mrs. Doverspike wanted to know Mr. Moore’s intentions for
the remaining property. She believed it came up before they put in an offer. Ms. Burrington advised
that Mr. Moore at that time indicated he had no immediate plans for the property, unless there was
a need. Mr. Moore also added that if his business grew, and there was a need, the land was there.
Mrs. Burrington was certain they knew Mr. Moore retained the property in case his business grew
and there was a need for it. Mr. Moore did not lie to them or intend to mislead them because they
knew he had purchased the property for his business and only sold them part of it. Mr. Moore
never had any intention of keeping the house that was on the other parcel.
Supervisor Hardie directed a question to Mrs. Burrington as to why Mr. Moore did not
pursue a rezoning after he purchased the property. She indicated that he had no plans for the
property at the time. Mr. Moore interjected that he did not think about rezoning the property at
that time.
Supervisor Hardie thanked Mr. Moore for having him out to the site and thanked Mr.
Hawkins and his family for letting him come out and look at things from their perspective. When
he met with Mr. Walton and Mr. Moore, he mentioned that noise and lighting would bother him.
Mr. Moore chose not to proffer lighting. Mr. Walton explained that rather than encumber the
property, they preferred to work with the adjacent property owner in a civil manner. They wanted
to work something out without adding a legal burden on the property because 25 years down the
road, situations may change. The Hawkins family may not even live in their house; there may be
another opportunity for expansion or there may be an opportunity for Mr. Moore to sell to someone
else. So, any type of proffer on the property could impact a future sale.
Supervisor Cline would have liked the application to include proffers for lighting and
limiting the use of the property for a trailer lot. While he understood proffers were an encumbrance
on the future use of a property, proffers also protected a surrounding community from a future
use. This was a unique situation where you had a piece of property between an industrial use and
agricultural use. Much of the surrounding community was agricultural and residential. While the
industrial use was not out of place along Route 460, it was out of place along Crews Shop Road
and Doss Road. Supervisor Cline added the site plan was not proffered and may not look exactly
as presented in the future.

Based on those comments, Supervisor Cline offered the following motion to deny the
request.
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Campbell County Board of Supervisors
DENIES Request #PL-25-204 by Norm Walton, agent for B & M Trucking, to rezone the property
located at Crews Shop Road and further identified as tax map parcel 17-B-2A from Agricultural
to Industrial Heavy Conditional with a concurrent request for a Special Use Permit to allow for
tractor trailer storage.
Supervisor Watts commented it was not the Board’s responsibility to resolve issues
between neighbors. He also pointed out the trailer lot was 80 feet from the property line. He was
disappointed the Board would deny a long-standing business the opportunity to expand when the
neighbor realized when he purchased the property that an expansion could be a possibility.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton
Brown, Carwile, Watts
None

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING ON OLD RUSTBURG ROAD AND LONE JACK
ROAD FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PARK

PL-25-219

Request by Bruce Bunnell, agent for BRI Properties, LLC, to rezone properties
located on Old Rustburg Road and Lone Jack Road and further identified as tax
map parcels 15B-A-1 and 15-3-2 from Residential – Multi Family to Residential –
Manufactured Housing to allow for the continued use as a manufactured home park.
The property is located in an area designated as medium to high density residential
per the current Comprehensive Plan.

Mrs. Reusch reviewed the staff report indicating the request was to rezone 15.13 ± acres
from Residential – Multi Family to Residential – Manufactured Housing in order to allow for the
continued use of a manufactured home park known as Bennie’s Rentals. The property was located
on Lone Jack Road and Brightside Drive in the Concord Election District. The applicant would
like to replace some manufactured homes that had been previously removed; however, because it
had been two (2) years since their removal, the new manufactured homes must conform to the
zoning ordinance.
The area was residential in nature. The zoning in the vicinity was Residential – Multi
Family, Residential-Manufactured Housing, Agricultural and Business – General Commercial.
The property was served by two existing entrances on Spruce Lane, a private road that connected
to Lone Jack Road (Route 699) and Brightside Drive, a private road that connected to Old Rustburg
Road (Route 664). The property was served by private water and a private sewage treatment
facility. No proffers were submitted with the request. The Planning Commission recommended
approval of the request by a vote of 5-0.
Bruce Bunnell, BRI Properties LLC, 6080 Campbell Highway, indicated this property had
been in his family over 60 years, and he was the 3rd generation to manage the 150 lots. The property
to the north and to the south of the subject property were zoned appropriately, but this parcel was
not. When the other manufactured homes were removed, they waited too long to replace them.
This necessitated them to request a rezoning of the property. Approval of the request would allow
them to replace the homes and correct the zoning.
In answer to questions by Supervisor Cline, the last few replacement homes they installed
were new. It usually took 3 to 6 months to receive a home and another 3 or 4 months to complete
the installation.
Supervisor Watts supported the request commenting the manufactured home lots had been
in existence a long time.
The public hearing was opened at 8:49 p.m. Chairman Carwile called for comments in
favor of or in opposition to the request.

Brandy Hatcher, 136 Bison Drive, Evington lives in a mobile home park and used to work
in the office of a mobile home park in Waynesboro. She agreed with Mr. Bunnell that a mobile
home park was very involved and time consuming as well as expensive. She supported his request
as this would continue the existing use of the property.
Dr. Lori Leonard, Concord, asked if there was a way to just rezone the two parcels and
leave the other property as existing since Mr. Bunnell was only replacing homes on two lots. This
way there would not be more lots.
Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed at 8:52 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Campbell County Board of Supervisors
accepts the recommendation of the Campbell County Planning Commission and APPROVES
Request #Pl-25-219 by Bruce Bunnell, agent for BRI Properties, LLC, to rezone properties located
on Old Rustburg Road and Lone Jack Road and further identified as tax map parcels 15B-A-1 and
15-3-2 from Residential – Multi Family to Residential – Manufactured Housing to allow for the
continued use as a manufactured home park.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING AT 365 MOORMAN MILL ROAD

PL-25-224

Request by John Payne, agent for Gdansk Land & Realty, LLC, to rezone the
property located at 365 Moorman Mill Road and further identified as tax map parcel
32-8-4A from Agricultural to Residential – Single Family to allow for the property
to be subdivided and an accessory dwelling unit, that is currently under construction
to be converted into a standalone single-family dwelling. The property is located in
an area designated as medium to high density residential per the current
Comprehensive Plan.

Mrs. Reusch indicated this request was to rezone 1.39 ± acres from Agricultural (A-1) to
Residential – Single Family (R-SF) in order to allow for the property to be divided into two (2)
0.695-acre parcels and convert an under-construction Accessory Dwelling Unit to a stand-alone
single-family dwelling. The property was located at 365 Moorman Mill Road in the Spring Hill
Election District. The parcel was currently 1.39 acres which would not allow the parcel to be
divided under the current Agricultural zoning district minimum lot size requirements.
The area was residential in nature. The zoning in the vicinity was Agricultural, Industrial
– General, Conditional and Business – General Commercial. The property is accessed by two
private driveways on Moorman Mill Road, and one driveway on Patterson Road. The property
would be served by private water and a private septic system. No proffers were submitted with the
rezoning request. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request by a vote of 50.
The public hearing was opened at 8:53 p.m.
John Payne, Agent for Gdansk Land & Realty LLC), Rustburg, requested approval of the
request in order to sell the properties. The accessory dwelling unit was essentially completed and
contained two bedrooms and two bathrooms.
No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the rezoning request. The public hearing was
closed at 8:56 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Brown, it was resolved the Campbell County Board of
Supervisors accepts the recommendation of the Campbell County Planning Commission and
APPROVES Request #PL-25-224 by John Payne, agent for Gdansk Land & Realty, LLC, to
rezone the property located at 365 Moorman Mill Road and further identified as tax map parcel
32-8-4A from Agricultural to Residential – Single Family to allow for the property to be
subdivided and an accessory dwelling unit, that is currently under construction to be converted
into a standalone single-family dwelling.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

AGREEMENT WITH VIRGINIA TECH FOR RECREATION ASSESSMENT

Nina Rezai, Director of Economic Development, reviewed the activity in Seneca
Commerce Park in 2025. This included:


March 2025 – a groundbreaking for a 100,000 square foot shell building on lots J, K and
L. The sitework on lots J & K received grant funding from the Southeast Crescent
Commission (SCRC) and the Tobacco Revitalization Commission (TRRC). A contract
would be awarded at the January 6, 2026 meeting to award the bid on Phase 1 construction.



March 2025 – The Board approved rezoning 136 acres adjoining Ewing Drive in order to
pursue grant funding from the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP) to
extend water and sewer into the park. The recreation community was assured there would
be consideration for future investments in the park to maintain recreational attractions on
the property.



April 2025 – Building construction kickoff for a 45,000 square foot shell building at 293
Ewing Drive. Coleman Adams was selected to construct the building and Cornerstone
Bank provided financing for the construction. The entire project would be paid with IDA
funds.



While the VEDP denied the County’s request for a grant, the County was awarded a
$300,000 grant to conduct a master plan and a due diligence report on the property. The
due diligence engineering report would return an engineer’s assessment of the
environmental conditions, geotechnical engineering report, examination of the presence
of historic sites (if any) and provide an estimated cost for road, water, power and making
a pad-ready site on the 136 acres. Upon learning the request for funding to assist with the
water and sewer extension was declined, staff submitted the same request to the TRRC
and the SCRC, and in September the TRRC approved a $439,275 grant for the project. A
decision by SCRC has not been received to date.



In addition, the Board approved the sale of 14 acres to Blue Ridge Beverage and approved
funding the utility extension to assist the development. Soon after that announcement,
Integrity Mechanical announced its intention to develop a 35,000 square foot warehouse
on Lots M & N.

In light of the Board’s commitment to support recreation within Seneca Commerce Park,
the Economic Development office reached out for services to incorporate recreational amenities
in the master plan of Seneca Commerce Park. A 40-acre parcel owned by the County that extends
from Lot F to Gough Road would also be included in the assessment. This approach would provide
the recreation community an opportunity to work with representatives of Economic Development,
the Recreation Advisory Council and the Board of Supervisors to begin this next planning phase
with buy-in from all invested parties.
The Virginia Tech Center for Economic and Community Engagement prepared an outline
for the recommended approach. Their Recreation Opportunity Assessment covered a 2.5-month
time frame to assist with project kick-off, case studies, stakeholder interviews as well as facilitate
workshops and deliver recommendations. The cost of the contract was $14,590 and would be paid
from funds set aside for Seneca Commerce Park. This line item had funds received from various
sources such as telecommunications fees and sign maintenance fees.
The Virginia Tech Center for Economic Development is an economic development partner
and administers other grant funds for economic development. Virginia Tech was recommended
by the regional economic development organization and Ms. Rezai believed Virginia Tech was
included on a cooperative agreement for procurement services. Ms. Rezai indicated that if they
were required to receive three (3) quotes before proceeding with the agreement, they would do
that in line with procurement requirements.

On motion of Chairman Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes staff
to execute an agreement with Virginia Tech to conduct the Recreation Opportunity Assessment as
presented.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

NEW FORMAT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT

Kate Reusch reviewed the new format for presentation of the staff’s report for public
hearings as approved by the Planning Commission. The Board of Supervisors approved and
appreciated the new format.
//

HIGHWAY MATTERS

Mr. Tweedy reviewed previously submitted items on the list of road concerns. Robert
Brown, Residency Administrator for VDOT, was present. Several updates were presented as
follows:


Mr. Brown advised the consultant has nearly completed the traffic study on Doss Road
and Route 460. He has reviewed the preliminary recommendations which include a traffic
warning system.



Mr. Brown reported VDOT’s litter contractor collected 1,733 bags of trash in October and
November.



VDOT was doing maintenance work along Route 460 including shoulders and ditching.

From the Board:

//



Supervisor Cline appreciated Mr. Brown and VDOT continuing to review the Doss Road
and Route 460 intersection.



Supervisor Lawton requested updates of recent accidents related to the improvement
project at the intersection of Gladys Road and Wards Road from Public Safety. He also
asked about speed enforcement efforts at that location.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE – LYN-DAN HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT

Tracy Fairchild, Director of Public Safety, indicated that Lyn-Dan Heights Volunteer Fire
Department was seeking a tax-exempt loan for the purchase of new extrication tools. The new
extrication tools were being purchased to equip a truck purchased through CIP funds last year.
The loan would be in the principal amount of $58,731.62. There would be no obligation for
payments by Campbell County. To complete the application, a public hearing was required.
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes staff
to advertise a public hearing for the January 6, 2026 Board of Supervisors meeting to consider
adoption of a resolution to allow Lyn-Dan Heights Volunteer Fire Department to seek a tax-exempt
loan for the purchase of new extrication tools.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

CONSENT AGENDA

On motion of Supervisor Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors approves the
following under the Consent Agenda:
a)

Appropriations –

1.

General Fund, Public Safety, appropriating $100 to Food Supplies, and increase Gifts &
Donations – Public Safety by $100, donation from Mt. Pisgah Church;

2.

General Fund, E-911 System, appropriating $6,631 to E911 Phone Replacement, and
increase VITA Educational Grant revenue by $6,631, grant funds for E911 Phone
Replacement;

3.

Capital Improvement Fund, Community Development Projects, appropriating $40,246 to
GIS Maintenance & Upgrades, and decrease Beginning Fund Balance by $40,246, to
purchase 6-inch resolution Orthoimagery used in County’s online parcel viewer;

4.

Capital Improvement Fund, Community Development Projects, appropriating $685,000
to CCUSA – Yellow Branch Wastewater, and decrease Beginning Fund Balance by
$685,000, final payment for Yellow Branch Waste Water Project; and

b)

County Attorney invoice –

Approves payment to the County Attorney in the amount of $18,706.37 for services
rendered from October 22, 2025 through November 18, 2025;
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

APPOINTMENTS
One appointment was made to the Recreation Advisory Council.

On motion of Supervisor Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors reappoints
Eddie Fielder, 1100 Bedford Avenue, Altavista, to a three-year term until December 31, 2028 on
the Recreation Advisory Council representing the Altavista Election District.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

MATTERS FROM THE BOARD


The Board expressed appreciation to staff for the Christmas lights in the Village of
Rustburg and the events recently hosted by the Library and Historic Courthouse.



Supervisor Lawton indicated the Central Virginia Planning District Commission would not
increase fees for the next fiscal year.



Supervisor Lawton requested a comprehensive list of the buildings the County owned
including building uses, last renovation and any future improvement projects.



Supervisor Lawton would like to include another discussion concerning the lodging tax at
the budget revenues meeting on Tuesday, December 9th.



Chairman Carwile commented that it had been his pleasure to serve as Chair of the Board.
He had enjoyed working with the Board and appreciated their professionalism especially
during the discussions of several impactful decisions this past year.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Supervisor Brown, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

____________________________________
JUSTIN A. CARWILE, CHAIRMAN
Approved: _____________________________

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
December 9, 2025
A meeting of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors was held on the 9th day of
December 2025 in the Multi-Use Room of the Walter J. Haberer Building, Rustburg, Virginia.
The members present were:
Justin A. Carwile, Chairman, Presiding
Kenneth R. Brown
Matt W. Cline
Paul E. Dowdy
Jon R. Hardie
Tom K. Lawton
Charlie A. Watts II

Timberlake Election District
Spring Hill Election District
Concord Election District
Sunburst Election District
Rustburg Election District
Altavista Election District
Brookneal Election District

Also present were:
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator
Anne Blair, Director of Management Services
Brooke S. Wright, Office Manager/Budget Committee

Chairman Carwile called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
//

PRELIMINARY LOCAL REVENUE PROJECTIONS FY27

Administrator Rogers opened the meeting by stating that the purpose was to review the
initial revenue projections for the upcoming fiscal year. Doing so this early in the process was
intended to allow time for Board members to review the information being shared and to offer any
questions or observations they may have early in the development of the budget. He reminded the
Board that the Budget Public Forum would be held at the January 6, 2026 regular meeting and a
joint meeting with the School Board was scheduled for January 13, 2026. The budget adoption
was scheduled for April 7, 2026. Administrator Rogers reminded the Board this deadline was
necessary to allow sufficient time for tax rates to be adopted and communicated to the
Commissioner of the Revenue and Treasurer to enable the timely mailing of tax bills.
Administrator Rogers highlighted the Board’s continued commitment to reducing taxes
during the past several fiscal years. He summarized the Board’s tax reduction actions from FY20
through FY26, including an exemption for logging equipment and increased eligibility for elderly
& disabled tax relief. In addition, due to the increased values of used and new vehicles, the Board
reduced the personal property tax assessment ratio from 100% to 80% in FY 2023, FY 2024, and
FY 2025. The Commissioner of the Revenue taxes vehicles at 50% of the retail value; with the
reduction, the Commissioner was taxing vehicles at 80% of 50% of the retail value. In FY 2026,
the personal property tax assessment ratio was returned to 100%, and personal property taxes were
reduced by 10 cents.
Administrator Rogers reviewed the current property tax rates and provided information on
the tax rates of neighboring localities, pointing out that it was difficult to compare apples to apples
as localities valued properties differently, thus each penny generates a different amount of revenue
per category for each locality.
General Fund revenues come from local, state, and federal sources. This meeting would
focus was on local revenues. It was not yet known how much would be received from State and
Federal revenues. Local revenues include general property taxes; Other Local Revenue—largely
consisting of sales and meals taxes; Permits, Fees and Licenses—which reflects building permit
activity; Fines and Forfeitures; Use of Money; Charges for Services –which includes EMS Billing
revenue; Miscellaneous Revenues; and Recovered Costs, which are funds that were paid out and
then repaid to the County to offset specific personnel expenditures.

Administrator Rogers reminded the Board that local government is fund-based accounting,
and he illustrated the flow of funds from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund, the
Solid Waste Fund, the Debt Service Fund, the Health Insurance Fund and to the School Division.
From FY26 to FY27, general property taxes were estimated to increase by approximately
$2.4 million. The majority of those revenues were attributed to increased real estate and personal
property taxes. Other Local Taxes that come from sales, transient occupancy, meals, BPOL, and
a variety of other taxes were projected to increase by approximately $1.2 million. This category
was largely driven by sales taxes. Because the trend in sales tax growth has continued steadily
over the past several years, staff felt comfortable increasing the revenue projections in that
category. Administrator Rogers reminded the Board that, as a matter of practice, every penny of
Meals Tax revenue was directed into the Debt Service Fund to pay for large-scale capital needs
such as School facilities.
EMS billing was the largest driver in the category Charges for Services, and the overall
category was projected to decrease by about $14,000 in FY27. Administrator Rogers noted Fines
and Forfeitures was a relatively small revenue projected to be $102,000 for FY27. The Revenue
from Use of Money was projected downward by $85,000 for FY27 as staff remained guarded on
anticipating the interest earnings to remain steady.
Miscellaneous Revenue was projected to increase by approximately $21,000, and Permits,
Fees, and Licenses were projected to increase by a little more than $60,000. Recovered Costs
were projected to increase by about $145,000 and would be level-funded to actual expenditures.
Administrator Rogers summarized that local revenues were projected to increase 5%, or
$3,731,924. As additional local revenues were received during the current fiscal year, staff would
include the actual revenues in the current totals. Staff had just received the draft audit, and the FY
2025 actuals would be added to the budget information.
Chairman Carwile asked about large expenses that the Board needed to be aware of when
contemplating the FY27 budget. Administrator Rogers indicated the current draft of the Capital
Improvement Plan was about $2.5 million out of balance. He would likely recommend an increase
to the Revenue from Use of Money projection to help offset capital costs in FY27. The Sheriff
had requested increased compensation consideration for law enforcement. Administrator Rogers
also anticipated incorporating a State compensation increase, as had been done in years past. The
salary increase would not be known until work has been completed by the General Assembly. At
the joint meeting on January 13, the Board would also learn of any additional needs from the
Schools.
In answer to a question from Supervisor Hardie, Administrator Rogers noted that
department heads would be reviewing their budget requests with the budget committee on
Monday, January 26, and Board members were welcome to attend.
//

ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Supervisor Brown, the meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None
____________________________________
JUSTIN A. CARWILE, CHAIRMAN

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
January 6, 2026
The regular meeting of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors was held on the 6th day
of January 2026 in the Board of Supervisors meeting room of the Walter J. Haberer Building,
Rustburg, Virginia. The members present were:
Tom K. Lawton, Chairman, Presiding
Kenneth R. Brown
Justin A. Carwile
Matt W. Cline
Paul E. Dowdy
Jon R. Hardie
Charlie A. Watts II

Altavista Election District
Spring Hill Election District
Timberlake Election District
Concord Election District
Sunburst Election District
Rustburg Election District
Brookneal Election District

Also present were:
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
F. E. “Tripp” Isenhour, III, County Attorney
Catherine H. Moore, Clerk

Administrator Rogers called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to
the organizational meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Following the Pledge of Allegiance, a
moment of silence was observed.
//

ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR

Nominations were called for 2026 Chairman. Supervisor Carwile nominated Supervisor
Tom Lawton of the Altavista Election District for 2026 Chairman.
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors closes the
nominations for Chairman and affirms the election of Supervisor Tom Lawton as 2026 Chairman.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

Supervisor Lawton assumed the seat of Chair and opened the floor for nominations for
Vice-Chairman. Supervisor Cline nominated Supervisor Charlie A. Watts II of the Brookneal
Election District for 2026 Vice-Chairman.
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors closes the
nominations for Vice-Chairman and affirms the election of Supervisor Charlie A. Watts II as 2026
Vice-Chairman.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

TIME AND PLACE OF MEETINGS

On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors establishes the
regular meeting schedule for 2026 as follows:
The first and third Tuesday of each month beginning at 6:00 p.m. in the Board Meeting
Room, Walter J. Haberer Building, Rustburg, Virginia. The second meeting of the month is
reserved for special meetings as needed.
If the Chairman acts, finds and declares that weather or other conditions are such that it
is hazardous for members to attend the regular meeting, the meeting shall be continued to the

following Thursday of that week at 6:00 p.m. and all hearings and other matters previously
advertised shall be conducted at the continued meeting and no further advertisement is required
per authority of Section 15.2-1416 of the Code of Virginia.
The Board confirms the policy adopted on June 12, 2018 that establishes a written policy
for participation in Board meetings through electronic communication as set forth in Virginia
Code §2.2-3708.1.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS

On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors adopts the
following Committee Assignments for 2026.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 2026/2027
COMMITTEE
SUPERVISOR (need 2 Board BOARD
members per
Committee)

OTHER

Hardie

Workforce
Development

Recreation
Advisory
Council

Watts

Planning
Commission

Airport
Authority

Horizon
Social Services
Board
CCUSA
Library Board

Brown

Cline

Carwile

EMSAC/FAC
Joint School

Dowdy

EMSAC/FAC
Joint School

Lawton

CVPDC

TLAC
Fray Family
Trust

//

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors dispenses with
the reading and approves the minutes of the October 7, 2025 regular meeting and the November
18, 2025 work session as presented.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

BARCC

Katie Lane, Co-Founder, of Bring Animal Renovations to Campbell County (BARCC),
thanked the Board for their commitment to fund $2.5 million towards a new animal shelter. Ms.
Lane recognized the numerous community groups and businesses that had donated and sponsored
fundraisers. She also thanked the Friends of Animal Control, Animal Control Officers and Public
Safety for their strong support of BARCC over the years. Ms. Lane recognized the members of the
BARCC Board that were present at the meeting – Janice Spitzer, Jeannie Clay and Janet McQuain
along with a host of volunteers also present.
Ms. Lane recalled that she and Jeannie Isaacs, friend and co-worker, saw a need eight years
ago and decided to do everything they could to improve conditions at the shelter for the animals,
the employees, and the citizens. Jeannie remained passionate to the cause all the way up to her
death in April, 2025. Ms. Lane added that Jeannie would forever be the Co-Founder and Executive
Director of BARCC “just from a slightly higher location.”
The Board had given BARCC until the end of December, 2025 to fundraise. Then the
County and BARCC funds would be coupled to determine the size and scope of the new shelter.
Ms. Lane announced that BARCC had raised $1.2 million dollars as of that day.
The members of the Board thanked Ms. Lane and the BARCC community for their passion,
hard work and dedication to do something that was for the good of the County. Raising $1.2 million
was a monumental achievement, and now it was time for the Board to step up and move this project
forward.
//

FY 2025 AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT

Zach Hypes of Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates presented the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2025. He indicated they encountered no difficulties
in working with staff and all records were made available to them. There were no disagreements
with management in applying accounting principles and no significant audit findings for fiscal
year 2025.
Mr. Hypes indicated the General Fund year-end balance on June 30, 2025 was $85.8
million. The Unassigned General Fund Balance was just over $49.7 million. In conclusion, the
County’s audit was deemed a clean opinion on all financial statements with no deficiencies or
material weaknesses found.
Chairman Lawton commented the County’s finances were strong. He confirmed there were
no contingencies, and the County still maintained a strong AA rating.
//

ELITE RECYCLING CONTRACT INCREASE CONSIDERATION

Michael Monroe of Elite Recycling presented a request to the Board to consider a 3% cost
of living increase to the solid waste management contract Elite Recycling had with the County.
Mr. Monroe indicated they were starting their third year without an increase. Elite was able to
save the County $350,000 at the beginning of the contract. Over the past two years, they had
worked with Campbell County Public Works to improve the recycling program and upgraded the
equipment at the recycling locations at no charge to the County. This saved the County around
$150,000. Elite was awarded a 3-year contract, but accepted a 4-year contract with the anticipation
they would receive increases like all other haulers.

In answer to a question by Supervisor Cline, a 3% increase would translate to $19,500. At
the suggestion of Supervisor Watts, the Board agreed to revisit this question at the February Board
meeting. Meanwhile, staff was directed to work with Elite Recycling on an extension of the
contract through 2029 with mutually agreed upon increases.
Supervisor Hardie thanked Elite for the services they provide in the County and thought the
ask was a modest one. He appreciated them bringing this to the attention of the Board.
//

BUDGET PUBLIC FORUM

Citizens were invited to share recommendations on planning priorities for the upcoming
Fiscal Year 2027 Budget.
Christine Pickett, 1249 Wisecarver Road, Rustburg asked the Board for its continued
support of the Campbell County Historical Society (CCHS) and the Campbell County Museum.
Mrs. Pickett spoke to the history of the Historic Courthouse and the progress made by the CCHS
in preserving and promoting the building that was made possible by the Board’s support over the
last two decades and generous donations from the community and local organizations. That
support has allowed the Museum to be open to the public and citizens free of charge.
Ann Parker, 615 Collington Drive, Lynchburg offered support for a salary increase for
the Deputy Registrar who had taken on additional responsibilities and advocated for a third fulltime person in that office.
//

DESTINATION MARKETING ORGANIZATION (DMO) DESIGNATION

Nina Rezai, Director of Economic Development, along with Molly Eden, Economic
Development Specialist, presented a recommendation to allow the Campbell County Economic
Development Department to be named as the County’s Destination Marketing Organization
(DMO). Each locality in Virginia could designate one DMO to be the main point of contact with
the Virginia Tourism Corporation (VTC), the statewide organization responsible for marketing
Virginia as a premier tourism destination.
Campbell County Economic Development has been acting in the capacity of a DMO, but
due to the current lack of designated status, was excluded from certain DMO-Only opportunities
that would allow for more robust and cost-efficient promotion of Campbell County. This would
include registered DMO-only grant funding, discounted advertising rates, free access to expensive,
but valuable, visitor spending habit data and large tourism project gap financing through the
Commonwealth of Virginia Tourism Development Financing Program. As the designated DMO,
Campbell County Economic Development would be included in planning regional visits from
travel writers, social media influencers, and bus tour operator familiarization tours.
Petitioning for DMO Designation was a multi-step process that included the development
of a marketing plan and resolutions from the Board of Supervisors and Town Councils for Altavista
and Brookneal supporting the designation. There were no fees or costs involved in petitioning for
recognition aside from staff time. Unless directed by the Board, it would not require additional
budget considerations for tourism.
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors directs staff to
begin the process to petition the Virginia Tourism Corporation to name Campbell County
Economic Development Department as the designated Destination Marketing Organization for the
County.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

HIGHWAY MATTERS

Mr. Tweedy requested any new items from the Board. Robert Brown, VDOT Residency
Administrator, was not able to attend the meeting.






//

Supervisor Cline indicated the study of the Doss Road/Route 460 intersection was near
competition. He was anticipating that would be shared with the Board soon.
Supervisor Dowdy requested an update on the school lights at Brookville Middle School.
Mr. Tweedy indicated a contract had been awarded, and VDOT was currently reviewing
the drawings. As soon as that was finalized, the lights would be ordered and installed.
Mr. Tweedy indicated the speed data at Route 29/Route 699/Perky’s Restaurant was shared
with the Chairman prior to the meeting. A copy would be e-mailed to the Board the next
day.
CONSENT AGENDA

One of the items under the Consent Agenda was to award a contract to Coleman-Adams in
the amount of $5,675,000 for construction of the Seneca Commerce Park 100,000 square foot shell
building. Supervisor Cline requested clarification as this was significantly lower than the $11
million budget for the building.
Administrator Rogers explained this was for Phase 1 of the construction, but he was pleased
at the strong bids received. Phase 1 was anticipated to cost around $7 million. When a tenant is
identified for the building, the remaining funds would be used to complete interior improvements,
consistent with the dark shell delivery strategy approved by the Board. He also brought the Board’s
attention to an information item from Economic Development that strong bids were also received
for the utility extension into Seneca Commerce Park.
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors approves the
following under the Consent Agenda:
a)

Appropriations –

1.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $2,930 to Cash Held in Evidence, and
Increases Cash Held in Evidence – Sheriff Revenue by $2,930, revenue received as
evidence to be returned to the rightful owner, sent to unclaimed property or DCJS as a
forfeiture;

2.

General Fund, Sheriff’s Department, appropriating $10,000 to Animal Care Supplies, and
Increases Gifts & Donations – Sheriff’s Office Revenue by $10,000, funds received as
donations from the Foster Foundation to purchase an emotional support/therapy animal, a
Golden Retriever from Michigan at a cost of $10,000;

3.

General Fund, Public Safety, appropriating $100 to Food Supplies, and Increases Gifts &
Donations – Public Safety revenue by $100, donations received from Wanda Ashby in
memory of Mike & Helen of $100;

b)

County Attorney invoice –

Approves payment to the County Attorney in the amount of $14,268.31 for services
rendered from November 18,2025 through December 24, 2025;
c)

Recordation of Abstract of Votes –

The Registrar has provided an Abstract of Votes from the November 4, 2025 General
Election. Section 24.2-675 of the Code of Virginia requires the Electoral Board to forward a
certified copy f each abstract of votes to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to be recorded in its
minute book.
Governor
Abigail D. Spanberger – Democratic
Winsome Earle-Sears, Republican
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office
Lieutenant Governor
Ghazala F. Hashmi – Democratic

6130
16,878
34
4

5805

John J. Reid, II – Republican
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

16975
105
4

Attorney General
Jay C. Jones – Democratic
Jason S. Miyares – Republican
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

5410
17470
52
4

Member, House of Delegates (52nd District)
Rise Marie Hayes – Democratic
Wendell S. Walker – Republican
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

878
2396
4
0

Member, House of Delegates (51st District)
Joy A. Powers – Democratic
Eric R. Zehr – Republican
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

4910
14696
36
2

Member, Board of Supervisors (Timberlake District)
Justin A. Carwile
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

2968
73
0

Member, Board of Supervisors (Rustburg District)
S. Scott Worley
Jon R. Hardie
Russell E. Nixon
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

1126
1420
1157
15
1

Member, Board of Supervisors (Brookneal District)
Charlie G. Watts II
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

2654
82
1

Member, School Board (Timberlake District)
Ryan J. Hartman
Ann M. Parker
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

1588
1671
39
2

Member, School Board (Rustburg District)
David W. Phillips
Beverly J. Jones
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

2472
1169
27
0

Member, School Board (Brookneal District)
Jamie S. Adams
Maurice C. Peerman
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

1369
1456
44
4

Member, Town Council – Special - Altavista)
J. Scott Lowman
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office

987
34
0

Member, Town Council – Special – Town of Brookneal
Joseph A. Naples, Jr.
Joseph B. “Benny” David
Total Write-in votes
Total Number of Overvotes for Office
d)

53
206
6
0

Contract Award – Seneca Park 100,000 square foot Building

Authorizes staff to award a contract to Coleman-Adams Construction, Inc. in the amount
of $5,675,000 for construction of Phase 1 of the Seneca Commerce Park 100,000 square foot shell
building, and authorizes staff to execute any required documents associated with the contract.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

APPOINTMENTS
Several appointments were made at this meeting.

TLAC
Community Criminal Justice Board
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors reappoints
Richard Grabowski, 1154 Runaway Bay Road, Lynch Station, Virginia; Frank J. Rogers, County
Administrator; and Supervisor Tom Lawton, to a one-year term until January 31, 2027 on the
Tri-County Lakes Administrative Commission (TLAC), and appoints Frank J. Rogers and Paul E.
Harvey (alternate) to the Community Criminal Justice Board.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

Building Code Board of Appeals
Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals
On motion of Chairman Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors appoints Robert
Lee III, 880 Leewood Road, Lynch Station, Virginia to the remainder of a five-year term until
May 5, 2029 on the Building Code Board of Appeals and Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals,
as the builder representative and appoints Landon Elder, 270 Three C Place, Altavista, Virginia,
to the remainder of a five-year term until May 5, 2027 and a consecutive five-year term until May
5, 2032, on the Building Code Board of Appeals and Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals, as
the plumbing/mechanical representative.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

Recreation Advisory Council
Economic Development Commission
On motion of Supervisor Hardie, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors reappoints J. P.
Coates, 147 Branderwood Drive, Rustburg, to a three-year term until December 31, 2028 on the
Recreation Advisory Council representing the Rustburg Election District, and reappoints Scott
Blankinship, 566 Stone Road, Rustburg, to a four-year term until December 31, 2029 on the
Economic Development Commission representing the Rustburg Election District.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

MATTERS FROM THE BOARD

//



Supervisor Hardie thanked everyone with the Campbell County Library System and the
Historical Society for the Christmas event held in the Village of Rustburg.



Supervisor Carwile wanted to reaffirm the County as a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary. Staff
would bring a resolution back to the Board for consideration.



Supervisor Watts commented that former Supervisor J. D. Puckett passed away on
December 10, 2025 at the age of 83. Mr. Puckett was a teacher for 33 years, served 20
years on the Board of Supervisors as well as numerous other boards and committees. He
served the County well.
PUBLIC HEARING – EMERGENCY ORDINANCE DATA CENTER

The first public hearing was advertised to consider the full adoption of an emergency
ordinance amending Chapter 22-15(A)(17) of the Campbell County Code of 1988 pursuant to Va.
Code Ann. §§15.2-1427 and 15.2-2204. The summary of such change is the removal of “data
centers” as a by-right use in Industrial-Heavy Zones and moving the same to Chapter 22-15(A)(28)
as a special use only use in Industrial-Heavy Zones.
The Board of Supervisors adopted an emergency ordinance at its December 2, 2025
meeting amending Chapter 22-15(A)(17) of the Campbell County Code of 1988 pursuant to Va.
Code Ann. §15.2-1427. This amendment removed the use “Data Center” from being a by-right
use in Industrial-Heavy zones to a special use permit only use in Industrial-Heavy zones. Because
the change was adopted as an emergency ordinance without prior publication, the ordinance must
be reviewed and re-adopted by the Board of Supervisors at a public hearing within 60 days of the
initial emergency adoption. Further, because the change affects the zoning of land, the change
must be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Notice was published for a public hearing before
the Planning Commission on January 5, 2026, and before the Board of Supervisors on January 6,
2026.
The Planning Commission at its meeting on January 5, 2026 voted 5-2 to allow the
emergency ordinance to expire to revert “data centers” as a by-right use in Industrial-Heavy zones.
The Planning Commission also recommended the Board adopt a guidance similar to solar farms.
Chairman Lawton opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m.
Scott Worley, 290 Barringer Drive, Rustburg, highlighted benefits of data centers such as
an expanded tax base for decades without a population increase and no impact on housing, schools,
traffic and minimal impact on public services. The additional revenue could support schools,
teacher’s pay, parks, Public Safety and the rising cost of County operations.
Ross Hawkins, 2056 Crews Shop Road, advocated for proper oversight of data centers
through the special use permit process. Data centers was technology that was here to stay, and the
special use permit process would allow the County an opportunity to fully review a request. Having
a special use permit was not telling anyone “no”, but was allowing growth at the proper level with
the appropriate regulations.
Sandy Glass, 455 Runner Stone Drive, Evington, asked the Board to keep the special use
permit process in place to ensure oversight of water consumption, utility usage, noise, air and light
pollution. The small modular reactor project by AEP was being built to supply data centers with
power. The revenue estimates may be overstated and lowered by state tax exemptions. There was
no guaranteed tax revenue.
Ann Parker, 615 Collington Drive, Lynchburg, supported the special use permit process.
She spoke to the environmental concerns of data centers and its impact on EMF radiation and heat
generation. She witnessed a “snow hole” in Ashburn, Virginia where the heat from the data centers
prevented precipitation. Mrs. Parker had recently learned there was property zoned Industrial –
Heavy less than 2 miles from her home.
Toy Eagle, 250 Kiowa Road, Lynchburg, presented the Board with two digital petitions
with over 518 signatures opposing a data center on Cabin Field Road and requiring a special use

permit for proposed data centers. Mrs. Eagle asked the Board to require a special use permit to
ensure transparency in County processes and allowing citizen input. She was opposed to County
employees entering into non-disclosure agreements without the knowledge of citizens. Her
concerns related to data centers was water and power consumption that may impact the availability
and costs of resources to County citizens.
Dawn Berrigan, 212 Galloway Drive, Rustburg, understood the need for increased
revenues having served as an elected official in the past. She moved here nine (9) years ago and
thought the County was pristine and beautiful and asked the Board to do the right thing to protect
the County. She had concerns about water and power resources and who would get it first in case
of shortages. Mrs. Berrigan asked if the Board did not vote no to data centers, at least place heavy
restrictions on its development.
Ashby Smith, 426 Cabin Field Road, commented the vote at this meeting was pivotal in
the building of history’s largest consumer of water and power to date, and if the citizens and the
Board would have a voice in the process. Campbell County was the only locality in the region that
did not require a special use permit. Mr. Smith grew up on the land where he lived and planned to
live there the rest of his life. He wore a suit to this meeting that was reserved for weddings and
funerals. If the Board did not vote to approve a special use permit for data centers, the Board would
be killing the soul of Campbell County, and it might as well be a “funeral for Campbell County.”
Bill Carson, 720 Cabin Field Road, commended the Board for its wisdom at the December
meeting by adopting an emergency ordinance to establish a special use requirement for data
centers. He asked the Board to vote this evening to keep the special use permit on data centers. He
asked if the Board voted to keep the special use permit, would it apply to the data centers already
proposed on Cabin Field Road and Mt. Athos. Mr. Carson continued to be opposed to a data center
on Cabin Field Road and knowing the lay of that land, he thought it was the worst place in
Campbell County to build a data center.
Esther Tamling-Seffrood, 8499 Brookneal Highway, Gladys, was originally from
Wisconsin; she has lived in Campbell County since 2018. She witnessed the growth of solar farms
and wind turbines that changed the landscape in Wisconsin taking farm land that was available to
grow food. She asked the Board to prevent that from happening in Campbell County.
Jeremiah Melvin, 206 Village Terrace, Concord commented that he supported data
centers, but believed they should stay in Ashburn or city centers. People lived in the County for its
rural setting and bringing in solar farms and data centers defeated the reasons people moved here.
Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed at 7:43 p.m.
Supervisor Cline made the motion for the emergency ordinance in December and still
agreed that data centers should not be a by-right use. A special use permit process would allow the
Board to place reasonable restrictions for the site. There were industrial areas in the County that
would not be suitable for this use. He made the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors amends Chapter
22-15(A)(17) of the Campbell County Code of 1988 to remove “data centers” as a by-right use in
Industrial-Heavy zones and moving the same use to Chapter 22-15(A)(28) as a special use only
use in Industrial-Heavy zones.
Supervisor Hardie agreed adding the Board needed to be cautious to protect land and
resources. A special use permit was a way for the citizens to have a voice and force the Board to
make tough decisions. Referring to Bill Carson’s comments, he asked if this action would unwind
the two pending data center projects. Mr. Isenhour indicated the property owners had vested rights,
and this action would not impact the projects. Supervisor Hardie referred to a project that was
approved by staff under manufacturing and no special use permit was required. The County did
not have code on data centers at that time. Would this be considered vested rights when the code
did not exist and staff labeled it as manufacturing for a facility that did not manufacture anything?
Mr. Isenhour responded the Zoning Administrator made a determination based on the code
as it was currently written. Supervisor Hardie added the Zoning Administrator then made a code
change request related to that topic, and he did not think this was a proper decision by staff. That

staff member was no longer with the County. Supervisor Hardie believed the Board had the right
to undo that staff approval. Administrator Rogers spoke on behalf of the former Zoning
Administrator indicating it was impossible for a Zoning Ordinance to address every use. The
categories were usually broad. The category of “manufacturing” may include processing,
compounding, assembling or treatment, etc. It was fair to assume that a data center is where
processing happens. It was also normal for staff to request the Board to define and clarify new
uses in the County Code as situations arose. When you look at the definition of “manufacturing”,
the former Zoning Administrator was within the bounds of the definition. In answer to a subsequent
question by Supervisor Hardie, Administrator Rogers believed the Zoning Administrator conferred
with legal and Administration staff.
Chairman Lawton offered an amendment to keep the emergency ordinance in place for
120 days to allow the Board and staff time to review the JLARC study dated December 9, 2024
and then have a more fully informed conversation on the merits of a by-right use with conditions
or the special use permit process.
Supervisor Cline did not disagree that there was a lot to learn about data centers, and he
would welcome staff to review the JLARC study with the Board and learn what other localities
were doing. However, he did not view the 120 day sunset on the motion to be a viable option.
Supervisor Cline did not want to put time constraints on the process; he just wanted to get it right
and take the time needed to do so. He rejected the amendment.
In answer to a question by Supervisor Hardie, Mr. Isenhour advised the Board has up to
one year to act on any rezoning or special use permit request. Supervisor Hardie added this would
give the Board time to study any application that came before the Board.
Supervisor Brown agreed the decision needed to be postponed and to take the time to
consider additional information. He suggested a work session be scheduled to discuss the issues
further.
Chairman Lawton offered a substitute motion:
On substitute motion of Chairman Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors
amends Chapter 22-15(A)(17) of the Campbell County Code of 1988 to remove “data centers” as
a by-right use in Industrial-Heavy zones and moving the same use to Chapter 22-15(A)(28) as a
special use only use in Industrial-Heavy zones, with such re-adoption being in effect for 120 days
from the date of re-adoption to allow the Board time to review the JLARC study dated December
9, 2025 and to allow staff and the Board to consider the study and the included recommendations
to discuss the merits of a by-right use with restrictions or a special use permit process.
Supervisor Cline did not see the need to place a time restriction in the motion. The special
use permit could be put into place and meanwhile staff and the Board could continue to review the
processes to prevent the issues experienced by other localities.
Supervisor Carwile appreciated the intent of Chairman Lawton’s motion, but commented
that he could get a PhD in data centers over the next 120 days and no one in this room would care.
They just wanted a special use permit process in place. Most likely a large portion of the County
felt the same way.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Dowdy, Lawton, Watts
Carwile, Cline, Hardie
None

The substitute motion passed; no vote was taken on the original motion.
//

PUBLIC HEARING – SUP FOR FLAGPOLE ON WARDS ROAD

PL-25-236

Request by Tony Wood, agent for Wood Family Investments LLC, for a special
use permit to allow for a 250 ft. flagpole on property zoned Business – General
Commercial. The property is located at 5766 Wards Road and further identified as
tax map parcel 43-A-57 in an area designated as medium to high density
commercial per the current Comprehensive Plan.

Kate Reusch, Planner, reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant was asking for a
special use permit to allow for a 250-foot flagpole at 5766 Wards Road on a parcel containing
2.795 acres in the Spring Hill Election District. The maximum permitted height is 70 feet in the
B-GC zoning district. The applicant submitted the request to the FAA, and it was determined the
structure would pose no hazard to aircraft. The structure’s current wind speed rating with a flag
did not meet building code requirements. If the special use permit was approved, the applicant
would need to provide engineering drawings and inspections through a third party to ensure
compliance.
The applicant had originally indicated that a manufactured home sales center would be
located on the property, but stated to the Planning Commission that he may lease a portion of the
property to another business. The applicant was aware the flagpole was an accessory use and the
primary intended use must be on the property before any building permits were issued.
The Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of 7-0 with the conditions the
applicant utilize the site in conformance with the use described in the narrative and shown on the
survey submitted with the request.
The public hearing was opened at 8:10 p.m.
Tony Wood, agent for Wood Family Investments LLC, lives at 1785 Dearborn Road,
Evington. Mr. Wood was planning to start a non-profit organization that was associated with The
Ultimate Sacrifice Flag Foundation. He purchased the property for this use. He was a mobile home
dealer and had intended to locate a mobile home business at this location, but that may not be
feasible. He may lease the property to another business as well as using the property as the home
base for the foundation. Mr. Wood was currently working on the costs and specifications of the
flagpole that could range from $300,000 to $600,000. He would be working with Hurt & Proffitt
on the installation. The structure for such a flagpole would be about 6.5 feet in diameter and weigh
over 100,000 pounds. The footers may be as deep as 30 feet. The flagpole would be placed at the
back of the 3-acre parcel so that if it fell forward, it would not reach Route 29. However, the parcel
was not wide enough for it to fall left or right and remain on the property. Mr. Wood has mailed
letters to adjacent property owners to ask if they would be willing to sell land for this project. He
had not received a response from the neighbors. He has started to work with other non-profits for
assistance as it would take over 100 people to put the flagpole up. If this project was successful, it
would be the second tallest flag in the United States.
In answer to questions by Supervisor Dowdy, the flag would be lit, but the FAA did not
require a flashing light. He has received FAA approval. If the flagpole were to fall, it would not
harm any structures.
No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the special use permit. The public hearing
was closed at 8:16 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Brown, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors accepts the
recommendation of the Campbell County Planning Commission and APPROVES Request #PL25-236 by Tony Wood, agent for Wood Family Investments LLC, for a special use permit to allow
for a 250 ft. flagpole on property zoned Business – General Commercial located at 5766 Wards
Road and further identified as tax map parcel 43-A-57 in an area designated as medium to high
density commercial per the current Comprehensive Plan, with the conditions the applicant utilize
the site in conformance with the use described in the narrative and shown on the survey submitted
with the request.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

PUBLIC HEARING – SUP 20635 TIMBERLAKE ROAD

Pl-25-238

Request by Tim Geisland of Veritas Building Co., agent for Timberlake Corner,
LLC, for a special use permit to allow for a 11,424 sq. ft. mixed use residential
structure on property zoned Business – General Commercial. The property is

located at 20635 Timberlake Road and further identified as tax map parcel 12J11-11A in an area designated as medium to high density commercial per the current
Comprehensive Plan.
Mrs. Reusch presented this request from Tim Geisland for a special use permit in the BGC district to allow for a mixed-use residential structure at 20635 Timberlake Road on a parcel
0.38 ± acres. The applicant was planning to construct a 3-story structure with approximately
11,424 square feet. The first floor would contain 3,688 square feet of retail space with six (6)
residential units on the second and third floors. The Planning Commission recommended approval
by a vote of 7-0 with staff recommended conditions.
The property would be served by two existing entrances, one on Timberlake Road and one
on Tanzalon Drive (Route 796). The parcel was served by public water and sewer.
Norm Walton of Perkins & Orrison was representing the applicant. There was currently a
dilapidated house on the property that would be torn down. As indicated, there would be retail
space on the first floor and six apartments on the second and third floors. Due to the size of the
parcel, an underground detention system would be needed for stormwater. The arrangements of
the entrances were in accordance with VDOT’s traffic study.
Supervisor Carwile noted there were 14 bedrooms proposed and questioned if there were
sufficient parking spaces. Mr. Walton indicated they were anticipating spaces would be available
for the retail space during the day when residents were away and available to the residents in the
evening. The number of spaces outlined would comply with the County’s requirement of two
spaces per unit with extra spaces for the retail tenant. Supervisor Carwile commented there may
be times there would be limited parking. Mr. Walton agreed adding this retail space would not be
conducive to uses such as a restaurant, but more likely office-type businesses. Mr. Walton also
indicated they would follow the County’s requirements for screening along the back lot line where
it adjoins a residential property. Supervisor Carwile commented there was existing vegetation that
he would like not to be disturbed. Supervisor Carwile appreciated that the old house would be
removed, and the property would be improved with better entrances.
Supervisor Hardie also expressed his concerns about the limited parking with 14 bedrooms.
You could realistically expect 14 vehicles. While there was a County ordinance that limited the
number of unrelated people living in a rental, the enforcement was by complaint only. Supervisor
Hardie was concerned that it may result in overflow parking along Tanzalon Drive in front of other
homes. Mr. Walton indicated the property owner also owned the property next door where
additional parking would be available.
Chairman Lawton opened the public hearing at 8:26 p.m. No one spoke in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed special use permit. The public hearing was closed at 8:26 p.m.
While Supervisor Carwile did have concerns about the parking, he believed any parking
issues could be resolved. He appreciated the investment on Timberlake Road and revitalizing this
property. He offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors accepts the
recommendation of the Campbell County Planning Commission and APPROVES Request #PL25-238 by Tim Geisland of Veritas Building Co., agent for Timberlake Corner, LLC, for a special
use permit to allow for a 11,424 square foot mixed use residential structure on property zoned
Business – General Commercial located at 20635 Timberlake Road and further identified as tax
map parcel 12J-11-11A in an area designated as medium to high density commercial per the
current Comprehensive Plan, with the conditions the applicant utilizes the site in conformance
with the use described in the narrative and shown on the survey submitted with the request
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

PUBLIC HEARING – REZONE 659 COVERED BRIDGE ROAD

PL-25-243

Request by Ed Willman of Accupoint Surveying & Design, agent for Betty Bailey,
to rezone the property located at 659 Covered Bridge Road and further identified
as tax map parcel 88-A-1C from Agricultural to Residential – Manufactured
Housing to allow for the parcel to be subdivided and a manufactured home to be
placed on the property. This property is located in an area designated as rural per
the current Comprehensive Plan.

Mrs. Ruesch explained this application was to rezone 1.5 ± acres from A-1 Agricultural to
Residential – Manufactured Housing at 659 Covered Bridge Road to allow for a family division
to place a manufactured home on the property. The existing single-family residence would have
0.822 acres, and the new proposed lot would have 0.678 acres. If approved, a mobile home would
be placed on the new parcel for the owner’s son. The lot did not have sufficient size to place a
second dwelling or be subdivided without a rezoning. This property is located in the Brookneal
Election District.
The request was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and could be found to be an
illegal spot zoning. There would need to be a determination that there is a public necessity for
increased density in this area for this to be considered a legal rezoning. This would typically
necessitate a corresponding change to the land use map to realign the Comprehensive Plan with
the zoning change. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request by a vote of 70.
The area was agricultural in nature. The zoning in the vicinity was A-1 (Agricultural). A
private driveway on Covered Bridge Road would serve the property. The parcel was served by a
private well and a private septic.
The public hearing was opened at 8:29 p.m.
Ed Willman of Accupoint Surveying & Design was representing the property owner, Betty
Bailey. He prepared the land survey and performed a perk test on the property. He was able to find
a perk site for the second home and prepared a survey showing a proposed division of the property.
The homeowner wanted to create a parcel so that her son could live close to her in a separate
dwelling.
In answer to a question by Supervisor Watts, Mr. Willman did look at a family division,
but the County’s ordinance required one (1) acre of land which could not be met with the current
set-up of the lot and the location of the drain fields. Mr. Willman also looked into creating an
accessory dwelling, but a manufactured home did not qualify as an accessory dwelling unit. An
accessory dwelling unit was limited to 1,000 square feet with no more than two bedrooms. After
working with the County, this rezoning was the only option.
Betty Bailey, 659 Covered Bridge Road, currently lives in her home with six people (three
adults/3 children). She really needed more space, and the best option was to purchase a singlewide trailer for her son that would be located behind her. She had worked with a mobile home
dealer, paid for the perk fee and received a loan. Mrs. Bailey talked with her neighbors who were
in support of her request. She submitted signatures of neighbors in support of her request.
There was a discussion of a second parcel adjacent to the subject property that Mrs. Bailey
co-owned. There was a dwelling on that property where Barbara Bailey lived (sister of Betty
Bailey). Because that parcel was a similar size, the same limitations existed.
Chairman Lawton called for comments in favor of the request.
Michael Layne, 272 Covered Bridge Road, has been neighbors with Mrs. Bailey for over
40 years. She was between “a rock and a hard place” and was trying to better her son and her son
was trying to better himself. She was a good neighbor, and he supported her request.
Maurice Peerman, 3602 Long Island Road, was a close neighbor. Covered Bridge Road
was a small road that connected Marysville Road and Gladys and was mostly farmland. Mr.
Peerman supported the request for spot zoning commenting that Mrs. Bailey’s son worked in the
manufacturing industry and was a coach at a neighboring school. This was an opportunity for him
to have home ownership. He realized that the lot was small but pointed out the road had very

limited traffic, and they would be utilizing a shared driveway to the back lot. Mrs. Bailey’s sister
lived next door, and even if the two lots were combined, it would be difficult to place a home
between them. Mr. Peerman asked the Board to make an exception and approve this request.
Russ Nixon, 272 Jumping Creek Road, commented that he counted eight (8) mobile homes
between Goat Island Road and Long Island Road. He supported the request for Mrs. Bailey and
her family noting that her neighbors were also in support. He has been before the Board a number
of times with similar requests.
Scott Miller, 125 Hudson Hallow, Rustburg did not know Mrs. Bailey and her family, but
believed there was public interest for her request to be approved.
No one spoke in opposition to the request for rezoning. The public hearing was closed at
8:45 p.m.
Supervisor Watts indicated there were lots of situation like this that already existed before
zoning was adopted. The current zoning calls for a minimum 1.5 acres in an agricultural zone, but
there were many one-acre lots currently existing in A-1. While it may be considered spot zoning,
he asked the Board for their support to look for ways to improve family divisions to help situations
like this. Supervisor Watts supported the request, but if the request was denied, he would like to
ask that Mrs. Bailey be reimbursed the fees she had paid associated with the request. Mr. Isenhour
indicated a public necessity would have to be stated to approve the request.
Supervisor Hardie asked if there would be a shared well. Mr. Willman indicated the intent
was to have a shared well, but there was room to drill a new one if the Board so desired. Supervisor
Watts commented that he was not concerned about a shared well.
Supervisor Watts offered the following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors APPROVES
Request #PL-25-243 by Ed Willman of Accupoint Surveying & Design, agent for Betty Bailey, to
rezone the property located at 659 Covered Bridge Road and further identified as tax map parcel
88-A-1C from Agricultural to Residential – Manufactured Housing to allow for the parcel to be
subdivided and a manufactured home to be placed on the property finding there was a public need
for additional residential density.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

PUBLIC HEARING – SUP FOR SOLAR FACILITY ON BROOKNEAL HIGHWAY

PL-25-248

Request by Morgan Vickery of Virginia Electric and Power Company doing
business as Dominion Energy Virginia, agent for Sandra Carr, for a special use
permit to allow for a solar facility on property zoned Agricultural. The property is
located at Brookneal Highway and further identified as tax map parcel 74-A-68 in
an area designated as transitional and rural per the current Comprehensive Plan.

Mrs. Reusch indicated this public hearing was advertised for a special use permit in the
A-1 District to allow for a 3 MW solar facility on approximately 13.4 acres. The facility would be
interconnected to Dominion Energy distribution system. The site plan shows a 20-foot wide
landscape buffer along the fence line. The Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote
of 7-0 with conditions the applicant utilizes the site in conformance with the use described in the
narrative and shown on the site plan submitted with the request, and that the landscape buffer along
Brookneal Highway (Route 501) be planted prior to the start of construction.
The public hearing was opened at 8:54 p.m.
Morgan Vickery, Richmond, Virginia Senior Generation Development Manager at
Dominion Energy Virginia, reviewed the request to develop a 3 MW solar facility identified as
Bluegrass Solar on property owned by the Carr family in Gladys. The project would encompass
approximately 13.4 acres within a fenced area of the 59.814 ± acre tract. The project was

approximately 1.5 miles from the Brookneal-Campbell County Airport. Solar projects were
permissible in an A-1 District with a special use permit.
Dominion Energy partnered with local engineering students to optimize and maximize
efficiency of the Bluegrass Solar layout as well as providing hands-on training to students at
Liberty University and engagement efforts with Central Virginia Community College. A
community meeting was held for the project, and all adjacent landowners were invited. No adjacent
property owners spoke in opposition at the Planning Commission meeting on December 1st.
Bluegrass Solar would contribute approximately $40,000 in economic benefits through
revenue share to the County over 35 years, in addition to other tax revenue. Additional tax revenue
would be generated during the construction phase and through ongoing maintenance of the project.
Dominion Energy proposed an additional payment condition to the special use permit that would
provide $80,000 over three milestones beginning with approval of the special use permit.
The project was setback at least 50 feet from all property boundaries and would be accessed
from Route 501 by a 16-foot-wide road. Dominion Energy proposes a 20-foot-wide landscape
buffer along the fence line, comprised of existing and planted vegetation where needed. Along
Route 501, the width of the combined vegetative and enhanced buffer would vary from 75 feet to
155 feet. Per the Planning Commission conditions, the landscape buffer along Route 501 would
be planted prior to construction. The solar project has been sited to minimize the amount of tree
clearing by locating on already cleared portions of the property. At the end of the project’s useful
life, a decommissioning plan was submitted to return the property to its prior use. Mr. Vickery
added there were no streams or wetlands within the fenced area of the project.
There were several questions from the Board regarding the decommissioning plan. The
cost of decommissioning was estimated at more than $364,000; the salvage value of materials over
$137,000. Dominion Energy would provide a bond for the cost to perform the decommissioning
project. Mr. Vickery could not speculate if Dominion would sell its solar projects. During further
discussion of the decommissioning plan and costs, Mr. Isenhour reminded the Board that
conditions could be placed on the special use permit to clarify expectations.
Supervisor Hardie asked if the project could be expanded? Mr. Vickery indicated there
were no plans to expand beyond the 13-acre project site. This project would be limited to 3MW
for interconnection. In a follow-up question, what were the main benefits of this project for the
citizens of Campbell County? Mr. Vickery indicated the main benefit was to provide clean energy
to clean energy customers. In addition, the revenues could help the County’s budget.
Chairman Lawton asked why Dominion chose to provide cash payments as a condition
rather than a siting agreement. Mr. Vickery was of the understanding that siting agreements could
only be used for projects of 5 MW and above. Scott Adams, attorney with McGuire Woods,
Tysons, Virginia, confirmed that was their interpretation in the State Code as to siting agreements.
Chairman Lawton called for comments in favor of the special use permit.
Jane Henderson, 2151 Plum Branch Road, supported the careful development of solar
installations for clean energy. It also affords small farmers additional income in order to keep land
in agricultural use.
Douglas Bray, Forest, Virginia, manages the property adjacent to the Carr property. He
fully supported what the Carr family was doing and commended them for their forward thinking.
He was appreciative of the tree buffer along Route 501 to help maintain the rural feel and the
opportunity to provide renewable energy to meet future demands.
Chairman Lawton called for comments in opposition to the request.
Barney Riddle, 9767 Brookneal Highway, did not believe Campbell County needed
another solar farm. He opposed the solar farm based on the impact to home values, does not lower
electric bills or provide an economic benefit to the County. The construction of the solar farm
would increase the traffic on Route 501 that was already dangerous. Mr. Riddle also believed the
solar panels were hazardous materials and there was a creek less than ½ mile from the site.

Esther Tamling-Seffrood, 8499 Brookneal Highway, Gladys, was concerned where the
solar panels were coming from. She added that solar panels were not attractive and may be toxic.
Julia Baker, 436 Marshall Mill Road, owns property directly across the road from the Carr
family, but did not receive an invitation to the community meeting. She also missed the Planning
Commission meeting because she misunderstood the date. She was opposed to the solar farm; it
grieved her to see farm land being used that way. Mrs. Baker asked if anyone had ever seen a
former solar farm being returned to a farm to grow food or house grazing animals. She also pointed
to how many cloudy days there were in Gladys. She thought the area where she currently lives
was the prettiest place she had ever lived. Mrs. Baker also believed the panels were toxic.
Sandy Glass, 455 Runner Stone Drive, Evington, compared data centers to solar farms.
Solar farms had no water consumption, no cooling method needed, little wastewater runoff, no
gas generators, no noise pollution and guaranteed tax revenue. Solar farms require a special use
permit while there was debate around requiring a special use permit for data centers.
Hearing no further comment, the public hearing was closed at 9:42 p.m.
Supervisor Watts commented he used to support solar farms until the County experienced
negative impacts from several projects in the County. He believed solar farms do impact nearby
property values. He often pondered what the perfect solar farm would look like. For this project,
he met with Dominion Energy a number of times and had cooperated with the community and
with many of Supervisor Watts’ requests such as buffers along the front boundary.
Responding to a comment made during the public hearing, Supervisor Watts did not
believe farm land was going away as he has seen many younger farmers starting businesses. Also,
what farmers wanted to do with their land was their right. Supervisor Watts offered the following
motion:
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors accepts the
recommendation of the Campbell County Planning Commission and APPROVES Request #PL25-248 by Morgan Vickery of Virginia Electric and Power Company doing business as Dominion
Energy Virginia, agent for Sandra Carr, for a special use permit to allow for a solar facility on
property zoned Agricultural located on Brookneal Highway, further identified as tax map parcel
74-A-68 in the Brookneal Election District, with the following conditions:
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.

The applicant utilizes the site in conformance with the use described in the narrative
and shown on the site plan submitted with the request for a 3 MW solar facility on 13.4
acres;
A minimum of a 6-foot-tall fence would enclose the property with a 20-foot-wide
landscape buffer along the fence line;
The landscape buffer along Route 501 would be planted prior to construction;
Accepts the $80,000 financial payment as presented: $40,000 due within 30 days of
the issuance of the Special Use Permit; $20,000 due prior to the issuance of an erosion
and sediment control permit for the facility; and $20,000 due on or before the date that
is 90 days following the commencement of commercial operation of the solar facility;
and
Meets the current requirements of Section 22-17.24 (d) to be effective March 1, 2026
as it relates to decommissioning of the project.

During the discussion that followed, Supervisor Hardie indicated he could not support the
motion due to the negative impacts the County had experienced from past projects. The County
already had hundreds of acres in solar projects and has not seen community benefits. He was
concerned the County was becoming an industrial/electric complex.
Chairman Lawton understood the community has struggled with solar for a long time due
to prior projects being approved with very little guidance. The Board spent a great deal of time
crafting a new solar ordinance for future projects. Dominion submitted its project under the prior
ordinance that caused the Board to consider a number of conditions on the project. He offered the
following substitute motion:

On motion of Chairman Lawton, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors delays Request
#PL-25-248 by Morgan Vickery of Virginia Electric and Power Company doing business as
Dominion Energy Virginia, agent for Sandra Carr, for a special use permit to allow for a solar
facility on property zoned Agricultural located on Brookneal Highway for thirty (30) days to allow
Dominion Energy time to evaluate its proposal and time for the Board of Supervisors to further
consider the application and conditions.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Lawton
Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Watts
None

The substitute motion failed. A vote was taken on the original motion:
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Carwile, Cline, Watts
Brown, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton
None

Request #PL-25-248 was denied.
//

PUBLIC HEARING – TAX-EXEMPT LOAN BY LYN-DAN HEIGHTS FIRE DEPT

Tracy Fairchild, Director of Public Safety, advised Lyn-Dan Heights Volunteer Fire
Department (LDHVFD) was seeking a tax-exempt loan for the purchase of new extrication tools.
The new tools was needed to equip a truck purchased through CIP funds last year. The loan through
First National Bank to finance the purchase would be in the amount of $58,731.62. The LDHVFD
would be responsible for the payment of the loan; Campbell County would not be obligated.
A public hearing was required before consideration of a resolution of approval.
The public hearing was opened at 10:03 p.m. No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to
the request. The public hearing was closed at 10:03 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Brown, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors adopts the
following resolution:
CERTIFICATE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RE APPROVAL OF TAX-EXEMPT
LOAN TO VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT BY CAMPBELL COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS
The undersigned, being the duly qualified County Administrator of Campbell County,
Virginia, does hereby certify that the following is a true and accurate copy of a Resolution passed
by the Campbell County Board of Supervisors at its regular meeting on the 6th day of January,
2026, which Resolution was duly introduced and approved, and is effective as of the meeting at
which it was approved, and that said Resolution remains in full force and effect:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of
Campbell County, Virginia, does hereby approve (within the scope of the qualifying language set
forth below) a tax-exempt loan to the Lyn-Dan Heights Volunteer Fire Department (the “VFD”)
from First National Bank of Altavista in the approximately principal amount of $58,731.62 which
loan is for the purchase of Holmatro extrication tools.
RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the approval of the loan to the VFD set forth above is
given solely for purposes of the public approval requirements for tax-exempt financing applicable
to the VFD because of Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and
such approval does not obligate Campbell County or its Board of Supervisors in any way regarding
repayment of the debt.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Campbell County Board
of Supervisors hereby does approve a written agreement requiring the provision of fire fighting
services to the County by the VFD in the form of the written agreement attached hereto as an
exhibit and incorporated by reference herein.

RESOLVE, FURTHER, that Frank Rogers, County Administrator of the Campbell
County Board of Supervisors hereby is authorized to execute on behalf of the County a written
agreement with the VFD in the form of the written agreement attached hereto as an exhibit and
incorporated by reference herein.
The vote was: Aye: Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
Nay: None
Absent: None
//

CLOSED MEETING

On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors enters into a
closed meeting at 10:04 p.m. to discuss legal matters related to a public nuisance, in accordance
with the legal exemption §2.2-3711 (A)(7) of the Code of Virginia, as amended.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

//
The Campbell County Board of Supervisors entered into a closed meeting on this 6th day
of February, 2026 at 10:04 p.m. to discuss legal matters related to a public nuisance, in accordance
with the legal exemption §2.2-3711 (A)(7) of the Code of Virginia, as amended.
//
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, it was resolved the meeting return to open session at
10:27 p.m.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

On motion of Supervisor Carwile, the following resolution was adopted:
CERTIFICATE OF CLOSED MEETING

WHEREAS, the Campbell County Board of Supervisors had convened a closed meeting on the 6th
day of January, 2026 pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the
provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, §2.2-3711 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Campbell County
Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Campbell County Board of Supervisors hereby
certifies that, to the best of each member’s knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully
exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting
to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were
identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the
Campbell County Board of Supervisors.
The roll call vote was:

Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Aye:
Nay:
Absent During Meeting:
Absent During Vote:

//

Brown
Carwile
Cline
Dowdy
Hardie
Lawton
Watts
None
None
None

ACTIONS FOLLOWING CLOSED MEETING

On motion of Supervisor Brown, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes legal
proceedings to abate a potential public nuisance at 22022 Timberlake Road.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

On motion of Supervisor Dowdy, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes legal
proceedings to abate a potential public nuisance at 179 Lisa Place.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

On motion of Supervisor Cline, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors authorizes legal
proceedings to abate a potential public nuisance at 136 Bellewood Drive.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton
Watts
None

ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Supervisor Brown, the meeting was adjourned at 10:29 p.m.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None
____________________________________
TOM K. LAWTON, CHAIRMAN
Approved: ______________________________

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
January 13, 2026
The regular meeting of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors was held on the 13th
day of January 2026 in the Multi-Use Room of the Walter J. Haberer Building, Rustburg, Virginia.
The members present were:
Tom K. Lawton, Chairman, Presiding
Kenneth R. Brown
Justin A. Carwile
Matt W. Cline
Paul E. Dowdy
Jon R. Hardie
Charlie A. Watts, II

Altavista Election District
Spring Hill Election District
Timberlake Election District
Concord Election District
Sunburst Election District
Rustburg Election District
Brookneal Election District

Present from the Campbell County School Board were:
David Phillips, Chairman, Presiding
Barry Jones
Gary Mattox
Ann Parker
Maurice Peerman
Karen Tanner
Kristen Vaughan

Rustburg Election District
Concord Election District
Altavista Election District
Timberlake Election District
Brookneal Election District
Sunburst Election District
Spring Hill Election District

Also present were:
Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator
Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator
Brooke S. Wright, Office Manager
Dr. Clay Stanley, Superintendent of Schools
Dr. Amy Hale, Assistant Superintendent of Schools
Michelle McClanahan, Clerk to the School Board
Chairman Lawton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Phillips called the
meeting of the School Board to order at 7:00 p.m.
//

FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 BUDGET REVIEW

Administrator Rogers took this opportunity to review revenue projections for the upcoming
budget process with the School Board. This was the same information provided at the December
9, 2025, Board of Supervisors meeting.
Administrator Rogers first reviewed the budget calendar, indicating the Board of
Supervisors would receive the recommended budget on February 17, and the budget public hearing
would be held on Tuesday, March 24, with adoption planned for April 7. This was a condensed
schedule necessary for twice-a-year tax billing. He noted that for several years, the Board has
been committed to reducing the tax burden on citizens. The county’s current tax rates were
competitive with the rates of neighboring localities.
General Fund revenues come from local, state, and federal sources. The County expected
to receive approximately $20 million in combined state and federal revenues for various programs.
Looking at local revenues, from FY26 to FY27, general property taxes were estimated to increase
by approximately $2.4 million. Administrator Rogers noted that Other Local Taxes that come
from sales, meals, and a variety of other taxes were projected to increase by approximately $1.2
million. He added that every penny of Meals Tax revenue was directed into the Debt Service
Fund to pay for large-scale capital needs.
The largest revenue source under Charges for Services was EMS billing, accounting for
approximately $3 million. Charges for Services revenue was projected to decrease by $13,570.
Revenue from Use of Money was projected to be $750,000 in FY27. The category of Fines and

Forfeitures and Revenue from Use of Money was projected to decrease by $67,000 from FY26 to
FY27. Administrator Rogers indicated that in FY23, interest earnings on County funds exceeded
the revenue projection by over $2 million, and over $3 million in FY24. It appeared to be a similar
circumstance in FY25. He cautioned against relying on interest earnings when building a budget
because interest rates could change. Miscellaneous Revenue was projected to increase by $21,400,
and Permits, Fees, and Licenses revenue by approximately $60,000. Recovered Costs would be
level-funded to actual expenditures.
In summary, Administrator Rogers stated that local revenues were projected to increase
5% or $3,731,924 from FY26 to FY27.
//

SCHOOL MATTERS

Dr. Clay Stanley was proud that all the County schools were fully accredited. On-time
graduation rates were very good at all four high schools, and last year, 636 graduates were awarded
over $7.8 million in scholarships. The State had moved to a new performance and support
framework accreditation model, and Brookville High and Rustburg High were rated as
“distinguished;” Brookneal Elementary, Concord Elementary, Rustburg Elementary, Yellow
Branch Elementary, and William Campbell Combined were rated as “on track;” and Altavista
Elementary, Leesville Road Elementary, Tomahawk Elementary, and Altavista Combined were
rated as “off track.”
Dr. Stanley reviewed the areas of focus for the current school year, with the first being
safety and security. Security infrastructure was being upgraded throughout the schools, and the
division was hoping to purchase ballistic film for the schools’ windows and doors facing the road.
The school system had implemented new High Quality Instructional Materials (HQIM) for
elementary schools. Also, a new program called STEM + M was introduced in the middle schools
to expose 8th graders to different fields they could pursue post-graduation. Diversified Educational
Systems, Inc., with a grant from the Department of Defense, built a lab in each middle school, and
staff had been trained on how to implement the STEM + M curriculum. He was proud that
Campbell County was the first school division in the nation to pilot this program. Dr. Stanley
reported that Brookville High School was still under renovation, and he hoped that the project
would be completed by this time next year. The school division recently engaged with RRMM
Architects to begin a feasibility study of Altavista Combined School.
Dr. Stanley spent considerable time discussing the shift and decline in school enrollment
over the past 10 years. From the 2016-2017 school year to the current school year, enrollment has
decreased by approximately 400 students. This decrease could be attributed to declining birth
rates and an increase in homeschooling. A little over 800 children were homeschooled in Campbell
County. Over the years, homeschooling curriculum has become more attainable for parents, and
many of them liked the flexibility that homeschooling offered. Dr. Stanley noted that enrollment
had declined in every school, except for Tomahawk Elementary. He also showed a chart of each
elementary building's capacity, noting that Tomahawk Elementary was the closest to reaching
100% capacity. Dr. Stanley advised that if school enrollment grew, especially in the Timberlake
area, the division would have to address the issue of inadequate instructional space in order to meet
the needs of every student.
Dr. Stanley highlighted the Schools’ FY27 budget priorities. As it was likely that the State
would propose a 2% raise for all employees, that would be a local cost of $700,000. The second
priority was to add an administrative assistant at Tomahawk Elementary; four (4) special education
aides, one (1) each at Altavista Elementary, Concord Elementary, Leesville Road Elementary, and
Tomahawk Elementary; and an adaptive special education classroom at Concord Elementary.
Finally, he wanted to keep up with health insurance costs. A 10% increase equaled approximately
$1 million. Due to potential shifts in local and state revenue responsibilities, Dr. Stanley
anticipated an increase in local costs of $3.7 million next fiscal year.
Mr. Jones noted that while the elementary building capacity chart showed Concord
Elementary as having ample room, that did not mean that classrooms were sitting empty. Dr.
Stanley commented that the numbers indicated that, based on the current enrollment and the
number of instructional spaces, Concord had the capacity for more students. Mr. Jones added that
there may be some special education classrooms that have a small number of students.

Mrs. Parker expressed her concerns about building capacity in the Timberlake-area schools
and the effects that rising enrollment numbers could have, including larger class sizes and teacher
retention issues. Supervisor Dowdy wondered if an additional elementary school could be built in
the future to address the capacity issue in that area of the county. Mrs. Parker would like for future
school needs to be considered when updating the Comprehensive Plan, so the School Board would
be more aware of where potential growth may happen. Administrator Rogers commented that
staff was providing quarterly updates to Dr. Stanley regarding subdivision and other residential
plans. Supervisor Hardie added that Tomahawk Elementary had been near or at capacity for many
years, and while shifting students to different schools may be a short-term solution, the residential
growth in the Tomahawk attendance zone would probably cause the enrollment numbers to quickly
rise again.
In answer to a question from Chairman Lawton about grant funding, Dr. Stanley stated
that $15 million of the funding for renovations to Brookville High was from a grant. If renovations
to Altavista Combined School became a reality, the division would apply for additional grant
funding to help mitigate the cost. He added that the next major school project would not start until
the Brookville High project was finished, but it was time to start discussing a potential timeline.
Mr. Jones asked Dr. Stanley and Supervisor Hardie if they could predict what effect the
STEM + M program would have on the Campbell County Technical Center (CCTC). Supervisor
Hardie stated he could see where STEM + M would feed into various programs at CCTC,
particularly related to manufacturing.
Supervisor Dowdy asked Dr. Stanley to explain the online learning opportunities offered
by the Schools. Virtual Virginia was a state program in which children could enroll and still be
allowed to participate in school sports. The Schools paid their tuition and the students were counted
in the Schools’ enrollment numbers. During COVID, approximately 1,500 students used the
program, but that number drastically decreased post-pandemic.
In response to a question from Supervisor Watts, Supervisor Hardie indicated that
approximately 700 students applied to CCTC this school year, and just over 300 were accepted.
Enrollment capacity was dictated by safety, student-to-teacher ratio, and other State standards.
Supervisor Watts wondered why the School Board had not taken the initiative to expand technical
education classes since they seemed to be in such high demand. Dr. Stanley stated this problem
was not unique to Campbell County, and the Regional CTE Academy was created at CVCC to
help mitigate the issue. Supervisor Hardie added that even if additional classes were created, it
would be challenging to find qualified instructors for the various trades that were interested in
teaching young people.
//

ADJOURNMENT OF SCHOOL BOARD

On motion of Mr. Mattox, seconded by Mr. Jones, the meeting of the School Board was
adjourned at 8:16 p.m.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Jones, Mattox, Parker, Peerman, Phillips, Tanner, Vaughan
None
None

SUBSTITUTE MOTION RECONSIDERATION – DOMINION SOLAR PROJECT

Supervisor Watts understood that if a supervisor was on the prevailing side of a previous
vote, they could bring up the matter again for reconsideration and request that a new vote be taken.
At the January 6, 2026, regular meeting, Chairman Lawton made a substitute motion to delay
Request #PL-25-248 by Morgan Vickery of Virginia Electric and Power Company doing business
as Dominion Energy Virginia, agent for Sandra Carr, for a special use permit to allow for a solar
facility on property zoned Agricultural located on Brookneal Highway for thirty (30) days to allow
Dominion Energy time to evaluate its proposal and time for the Board of Supervisors to further
consider the application and conditions. The motion failed 6-1. Supervisor Watts asked to
reconsider the matter, which Chairman Lawton ruled in order, and the conversation continued.
Administrator Rogers stated that the 30 days would be backdated to January 6, which
was the date of Chairman Lawton’s substitute motion. Supervisor Cline believed that Chairman

Lawton intended to allow Dominion to have until the next regular meeting date of February 3 to
evaluate its proposal. Administrator Rogers asked if Supervisor Watts was attempting to make a
motion to reconsider the substitute motion that allowed Dominion a 30-day review period, and
Supervisor Watts indicated that was his intent. Supervisor Watts stated that Dominion had
submitted a good proposal, and he wanted to allow them another opportunity to meet the Board’s
conditions. Supervisor Carwile questioned whether it was proper to reconsider the proposal, given
that the project was ultimately denied on January 6. Supervisor Hardie understood that if a
proposal was denied, the applicant could reapply after six (6) months, and he did not know why
the process would be different for Dominion. Supervisor Cline suggested that the process was not
different for the applicant, and Supervisor Watts had the right to ask the Board to reconsider the
matter. Supervisor Hardie preferred to see the Code language that allowed Supervisor Watts to
take this action, but would take Administrator Rogers’s word that it was legal. Administrator
Rogers indicated that he could not cite the Code, but it was his understanding that a member of a
prevailing vote could recall the question.
In answer to Supervisor Hardie’s question about reinforming the public, Administrator
Rogers stated that revisiting the substitute motion did not trigger another public hearing. The
public hearing was already held and closed, so additional advertisement would be at the Board’s
discretion. It would be added to the February 3 meeting agenda, which was public information.
Supervisor Hardie suggested that if Dominion reevaluated and changed its proposal, that would
not be the same proposal that the Board voted on at the January 6 meeting. Supervisor Watts
understood his point, and Administrator Rogers agreed that the contents of the proposal could not
change. Chairman Lawton stated the intent of his substitute motion was to allow the Board time
to reflect on Dominion’s proposal, and to allow Dominion time to reflect on the Board’s proposed
conditions. In response to a question from Supervisor Watts, Administrator Rogers advised that
the public hearing had been held and closed on a specific proposal, which could not be changed
without triggering another public hearing. However, he presumed that the Board could add more
conditions to the original proposal. Following additional discussion, Supervisor Watts offered the
following motion:
On motion of Supervisor Watts, it was resolved the Board of Supervisors reconsiders
Chairman Lawton’s substitute motion from the January 6, 2026, regular meeting to delay Request
#PL-25-248 by Morgan Vickery of Virginia Electric and Power Company doing business as
Dominion Energy Virginia, agent for Sandra Carr, for a special use permit to allow for a solar
facility on property zoned Agricultural located on Brookneal Highway for thirty (30) days to allow
Dominion Energy time to evaluate its proposal and time for the Board of Supervisors to further
consider the application and conditions.
Supervisor Watts asked for confirmation that Dominion could not change its original
proposal. Paul Harvey, Assistant County Administrator, indicated that the public hearing was held
on a specific plan, so at a minimum, the proposal would have to be on the same piece of property,
the same size and scope of the project, and the same site plan. If the plan was changed, the
argument could be made that the original public hearing was not on the project that it was turning
out to be. If all of those elements stayed the same and the Board only discussed the conditions
they wanted to impose on the same plan, an additional public hearing would not be necessary.
Supervisor Cline thought the applicants should be prepared to speak to any conditions they
would like the Board to consider that were not part of the original conversation. Mr. Harvey
thought that was fair, but advised that the County Attorney should confirm if that was proper.
The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:
//

Brown, Cline, Dowdy, Lawton, Watts
Carwile, Hardie
None

ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Supervisor Carwile, the meeting was adjourned at 8:42 p.m.

The vote was: Aye:
Nay:
Absent:

Brown, Carwile, Cline, Dowdy, Hardie, Lawton, Watts
None
None

____________________________________
TOM K. LAWTON, CHAIRMAN
Approved: _________________

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR

DATE:

February 24, 2026

SUBJECT: Brookville High School - Assigned Fund Balance Request
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
For the past several years, the County has assigned locally appropriated, but unspent funds for
Education to a category for School needs. To date $7,168,316 has accrued in that category.
Examples of projects funded with these dollars are boiler replacements; sink hole repairs; and field
lighting.
DISCUSSION:
At the February 23, 2026, meeting of the Joint Schools Committee, the Committee endorsed a
request to utilize $1,250,000 of this available fund balance for the Brookville High School project.
Specifically, this appropriation will be used to purchase furniture, fixtures and equipment totaling
$750,000 and $500,000 of needed upgrades in wiring and audio/visual equipment in the renovated
auditorium. These expenses are outside of the renovation project scope and are beyond the School
Division’s ability to fund through on-going operational dollars.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board approve the appropriation of $1,250,000 from Assigned for Future
School Capital to the Brookville High School project to purchase furniture, fixtures and equipment
and to complete necessary upgrades to the auditorium.

Blue Ridge Regional Jail
Substance Use Jail and Reentry Program
Program Overview
The proposed Substance Use Jail and Reentry Program is designed to strengthen public
safety while improving outcomes for individuals whose substance use contributes to
repeated involvement in the justice system. Many people entering jail struggle with
substance use and co-occurring disorders, yet few receive coordinated treatment or
structured support during incarceration and as they transition back into the community.
Through a regional partnership, this program establishes clinical care, recovery support,
and reentry planning to address substance use both during incarceration and after release.
By aligning correctional staff with behavioral health professionals, programming creates a
more effective response that reduces recidivism, supports recovery, and helps individuals
return to their communities better prepared for stability.
The budget supports a multidisciplinary team that includes deputies, licensed clinicians, a
clinical coordinator, a reentry case manager, and a peer recovery specialist, ensuring that
participants receive evidence-based treatment, medication assistance, and practical
supports such as housing and transportation.
In-Jail Programming
The in-custody component of the program would provide structured, evidence-based
substance use treatment within the jail setting, ensuring that individuals begin addressing
addiction while they are in a controlled and supportive environment. Programming would
likely include clinical assessments, individualized treatment planning, cognitive-behavioral
interventions, group therapy, recovery education, relapse prevention, and medication
support, when appropriate.
Reentry Transition
Participants would also work with staff to develop practical reentry plans that address
housing, employment, transportation, and ongoing treatment needs prior to release. This
intentional preparation reduces the likelihood that individuals will return to the same
destabilizing conditions that contributed to their incarceration. Reentry services will be
prioritized for individuals enrolled in the substance use program to support continuity of
care as they transition back into the community. When capacity allows, these services will
also be extended to other inmates with identified reentry needs, ensuring that available
resources are used efficiently and responsively to address demand across the facility.
Once fully implemented, the in-jail program is projected to serve approximately 80
individuals annually across participating localities, targeting those most likely to benefit
from structured intervention.

Investing in a coordinated jail and reentry strategy not only addresses a critical treatment
gap but also helps jurisdictions manage costs associated with repeated incarceration,
emergency services, and untreated behavioral health needs.
BUDGET SUMMARY
Year 1 Total – Planning and Implementation Year (9 of 12 months = 75%)
Personnel (75%)
Operational (75%)
Training (100%)
TOTAL
Year 2 - 5 Total – Programming (full year)

Personnel
Operational
Training
TOTAL

$567,203
$142,500
$25,000
$734,703

$756,271
$190,000
$15,000
$961,271

LOCAL MATCH CALCULATIONS
YEAR 1 ($734,703)
Locality

BRRJ Usage

Lynchburg
Campbell
Halifax
Bedford
Amherst
Appomattox

41.81%
15.53%
13.56%
13.48%
9.51%
6.12%

10%
Match
$30,718
$11,410
$9,963
$9,904
$6,987
$4,496

BRRJ Usage
Less Halifax
48.36%
17.96%

10%
Match
$35,530
$13,195

15.60%
11.00%
7.08%

$11,461
$8,082
$5,202

10%
Match
$40,191
$14,929
$13,035
$12,958
$9,142
$5,883

BRRJ Usage
Less Halifax
48.36%
17.96%

10%
Match
$46,487
$17,264

15.60%
11.00%
7.08%

$14,996
$10,574
$6,806

YEARS 2 – 5 ($961,271)
Locality

BRRJ Usage

Lynchburg
Campbell
Halifax
Bedford
Amherst
Appomattox

Projected Clients to Serve

41.81%
15.53%
13.56%
13.48%
9.51%
6.12%

Locality
Lynchburg
Campbell
Halifax
Bedford
Amherst
Appomattox
TOTAL

BRRJ Usage

Avg Inmate
Distribution

BRRJ Usage
Less Halifax

41.81%
15.53%
13.56%
13.48%
9.51%
6.12%
100%

389
144
126
125
88
58
930

48.36%
17.96%

Projection
Served (80
per yr) est.
39
14

15.60%
11.00%
7.08%
100%

12
9
6
80

Opioid Abatement Authority - Regional Application
•
•
•

Application Process – Opens October and due March 16, 2026
Must have two participating counties in the same BH region, and one must be the
fiscal agent
Funding cycle is July 1 to June 30, with funding up to five years

BUDGET DETAIL
YEAR 1 BUDGET –PLANNING/IMPLEMENTATION
(9 of 12 months = 75% of full budget)

PERSONNEL (Salary + Benefits)
Title
Deputy (BRRJ)
Deputy (BRRJ)
Program Administrator (BRRJ)
Clinical Coordinator (HBH)
LCSW/LPC (HBH)
LSSW/LPC (HBH)
Reentry Case Manager (HBH)
Peer Recovery Specialist (HBH)

Annual
Salary
$ 80,000
$80,000
$120,000
$127,257
$102,495
$102,495
$80,000
$64,024

Rate

FTE

Amount

yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly

75%
75%
75%
75%
75%
75%
75%
75%
TOTAL

$60,000
$60,000
$90,000
$95,443
$76,871
$76,871
$60,000
$48,018
$ 567,203

BRRJ – Blue Ridge Regional Jail
HBH – Horizon Behavioral Health
Year 1 is a planning and implementation year. It is anticipated that administrative tasks and
hiring will take approximately three months, and full personnel engagement will not be
expensed until month four. The Clinical Coordinator position could be part-time or full-time
and could provide partial hours to direct service to inmates, alleviating the LCSW's time
commitment. Additionally, the Reentry Case Manager and Peer Recovery Specialist would
prioritize the inmates enrolled in the substance use programming, but would be available
to other inmates with substance use issues as time allowed.
OPERATIONAL EXPENSES
Housing
Transportation
Medication
Program Materials

Annual
Expense
$ 80,000
$40,000
$60,000
$10,000

Rate

%

Amount

yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly

75%
75%
75%
75%
TOTAL

$60,000
$30,000
$45,000
$7,500
$ 142,500

A fully functional regional program providing in-custody and reentry services will require
support for housing and transportation. In addition, program materials such as educational
materials, workbooks, therapy supplies, and computers will be needed to set up and
operate the program. Medication assistance at reentry will be supported for an established
period of time.

TRAINING EXPENSES
Training

Annual
Expense
$25,000

Rate

%

yearly

Amount

100%
TOTAL

$25,000
$ 25,000

Professional staff will require training and development in areas such as motivational
interviewing, crisis intervention, peer support certification, and trauma-informed care. This
is not reduced in year one because all hired staff would be engaged in training at the
beginning of employment.
Year 1 Total

Personnel (75%)
Operational (75%)
Training (100%)
TOTAL

$567,203
$142,500
$25,000
$734,703

YEAR 2 - 5 BUDGET - PROGRAMMING
(12-month Budget)

PERSONNEL (Salary + Benefits)
Title
Deputy (BRRJ)
Deputy (BRRJ)
Program Administrator (BRRJ)
Clinical Coordinator (HBH)
LCSW/LPC (HBH)
LSSW/LPC (HBH)
Reentry Case Manager (HBH)
Peer Recovery Specialist (HBH)

OPERATIONAL EXPENSES
Housing
Transportation
Medication
Program Materials

TRAINING EXPENSES

Annual
Salary
$ 80,000
$80,000
$120,000
$127,257
$102,495
$102,495
$80,000
$64,024

Annual
Expense
$ 80,000
$40,000
$60,000
$10,000

Rate

FTE

Amount

yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly

100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
TOTAL

$80,000
$80,000
$120,000
$127,257
$102,495
$102,495
$80,000
$64,024
$756,271

%

Amount

Rate
yearly
yearly
yearly
yearly

100%
100%
100%
100%
TOTAL

$80,000
$40,000
$60,000
$10,000
$190,000

Training

Year 2 - 5 Total

Annual
Expense
$15,000

Rate
yearly

Personnel
Operational
Training
TOTAL

%
100%
TOTAL

Amount
$15,000
$ 15,000

$756,271
$190,000
$15,000
$961,271

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

THROUGH: Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR
FROM:

Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator PEH

DATE:

February 16, 2026

SUBJECT: Agenda Item – Request for Opioid Abatement Project Funds
________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
Campbell County receives funds from legal settlements resulting from litigation against various
drug manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of opioids nationwide. These funds are distributed
to political subdivisions based on the terms of the settlements and can only be used for opioid
abatement efforts. To date, we have received over $318,000 and have held those funds in
anticipation of requests from local service providers. In July 2025, the Board of Supervisors
allocated up to $50,000 for two pilot projects with Social Services and Campbell County Public
Schools. The remaining funds can be allocated to eligible projects at the Board’s discretion.
DISCUSSION:
Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority is proposing a substance use jail and reentry program utilizing
state grant funds from the Virginia Opioid Abatement Authority, with the required match provided
by each participating locality. The program is intended to provide clinical care, recovery support,
and reentry planning for inmates to reduce recidivism through structured intervention. The cost to
Campbell County is estimated to be less than $18,000 per year for five years, assuming five
localities participate. A financial benefit to the County would be realized when inmates who would
otherwise become repeat offenders returning to the regional jail avoid that outcome through
successful intervention. It currently costs approximately $45,625 per year ($125 per day) for each
inmate we send to the regional jail. Our total annual payments to the regional jail are approximately
$3,000,000. A more detailed summary of the proposal is attached for reference. The County
Attorney reviewed the proposal and confirmed it is eligible under the settlement terms.

RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board consider the request and, if approved, authorize funding for the
project for up to five years at a total cost not to exceed $85,000, utilizing local opioid settlement
funds, and including authorization for the County Administrator to finalize any necessary
agreements with Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority and Virginia Opioid Abatement Authority.

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

THROUGH: Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR
FROM:

Brian R. Stokes, Director of Public Works BRS

DATE:

February 17, 2026

SUBJECT: Waste Hauling Contract Renegotiation
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
Elite Recycling is currently engaged in a multi-year waste-hauling contract with the County. At
the January Board of Supervisors meeting, Elite requested a 3% increase of the total contract price
in the sum of $19,338.48. Staff was directed to renegotiate the terms of the current contract to
include a possible extension and to address future contract price increase(s).
In September 2025, Elite requested a 3% increase in the total contract price. During the Board’s
consideration of this request, discussions focused on the contract’s Period of Performance, which
does not mention price increase(s). The contract was signed by all parties in November 2023, and
the Board did not award the 3% increase.
DISCUSSION:
Currently, as stated in the Period of Performance, this waste hauling contract is scheduled to end
on November 30, 2027. Based upon Virginia procurement laws, the contract cannot be extended
beyond the original expiration date unless the contract is re-advertised and placed out for bid.
Because the contract cannot be extended, staff believes any additional negotiations of contract
conditions would not be favorable to both parties without the possibility of an extension. In
consideration of Elite’s request and in efforts to achieve a favorable outcome for the County, staff
requested Elite to provide eight additional containers, at no additional cost, for the remainder of
the contract, accounting for the anticipated volume of bulk material collected at the Livestock Rd.
convenience center. However, Elite was unwilling to provide any contractual concessions without
additional compensation, and we are expecting to see another year with significant cost increases.
This process of contract renegotiation has brought to light our vulnerabilities of being dependent
on contractors providing critical services such as waste management. Staff has prepared the
following option that would allow the County to be less reliant on contracted services, while
offering a greater level of control and long-term cost savings for our waste hauling solutions. This
option calls for the purchase of 16 3-yard trash compactors with appropriately sized hoppers, 22
40-yard receiving containers, and five (5) 40-yard open top containers. Acquiring these waste

collection assets would make the County less vulnerable to potential contract negotiations and
could potentially broaden the solicitation in hopes of attracting multiple waste haulers.
RECOMMENDATION:
In recognition of Elite’s continued service, staff recommends approving Elite’s request for a 3%
increase in the total contract price of $19,338.48.
Staff is also requesting authorization from the Board for procuring waste collection assets with
an estimated cost of $475,000.

MEMORANDUM
TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

THROUGH: Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
FROM:

Clifton M. Tweedy, Deputy County Administrator

DATE:

February 24, 2026

SUBJECT: Agenda Item – Highway Matters
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
Each month, staff will prepare this report to update the Board on the status of previously identified
highway issues. Items requiring Board action will be identified in a separate agenda item under
Highway Matters.
DISCUSSION:
Board Matters:
Supervisor Lawton
- Requested follow-up on traffic enforcement near the intersection of Route 29 and
Gladys Road. The data showed particular times when there were higher numbers of
excessive speeders. Staff will contact the Sheriff’s Office to request enforcement.
Supervisor Dowdy
- Requested follow-up on traffic enforcement on New London Drive near the entrance
to Wildwood Subdivision. The data showed particular times when there were higher
numbers of excessive speeders. Staff will contact the Sheriff’s Office to request
enforcement.
Pending Matters:
Supervisor Carwile
- Requested an update on the possibility of flashing warning signs on Enterprise Drive
in the vicinity of Bee Drive. VDOT has approved installing the flashing school zone
signs 600’ from Bee Drive in each direction. County staff secured pricing and awarded
a contract. VDOT is reviewing the shop drawings and will issue a work permit shortly.
- Requests VDOT to do a more detailed speed study on Rainbow Forest Drive to gather
the raw data needed to determine if the road is eligible for traffic calming consideration.
VDOT indicated, based on recently collected speed data, that the road does qualify
for traffic calming. VDOT continues to evaluate and suggests that the Board review
the VDOT Traffic Calming Manual. It is an involved process, with the next step being

gathering signatures from citizens in the area. A memo has been provided to the Board
outlining the process.
Supervisor Hardie
- Requested improvements to the intersection of Routes 24 and 501 in Rustburg by
adding turn lanes. VDOT indicated there is a current study to determine how this
intersection could be improved. It should be ready for consideration for the next Smart

-

Scale project application process, which starts in March.
There was a serious wreck near the bottom of the hill just west of the “S” curves on
Route 24, approximately ½ mile west of Calohan Road. Can VDOT review the
roadway in this area to determine what safety improvements could be made? VDOT
reports they only have a prescriptive right-of-way in this area; therefore, they do not
own the property beyond the ditch line. This complicates and delays their ability to
make safety improvements since they would need to work with the property owners
before any work can start. VDOT will continue to explore their options to improve
safety features in this area.

Supervisor Cline
- Requested a study to determine drainage improvements that can be made to Route 460
in the vicinity of Moore’s store to reduce flooding. One of VDOT’s on-call consultants
has begun the study. They believe they can make improvements as soon as the study is
complete and funds are available.
- Requested VDOT provide the results of the study being performed to determine
additional improvements that can be made to the intersection of Route 460 and Doss
Road. VDOT’s consultant is finalizing their recommendations, and the report should
be available by the next Board meeting.
Supervisor Dowdy
- Depending on the results gathered from the new speed limit signs recently installed
along the entrance road into Wildwood Subdivision, installation of a similar sign along
Sherbrooke Drive may be requested. The Sheriff’s Office has provided the raw data,
and County Staff is evaluating it.
- Asked about the availability of funding to possibly install flashing speed limit signs
along Charldon Road. A pair of these signs costs approximately $7,000. The County
currently has $23,300 in the line for these types of expenditures.
Supervisor Lawton
- Requested VDOT review the traffic control measures for the intersection improvement
project at the intersection of Gladys Road and Wards Road. There have been three
accidents at this location recently. VDOT agreed to review the traffic control measures
for this project, and County staff will reach out to the Sheriff’s office to request some
speed enforcement in the area to improve safety.

MEMORANDUM
To:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR

From:

Callie Dombrowski, Finance/Budget Manager, Management Services CMD

Subject:

Consent Agenda – Request for Supplemental and Transfers of Appropriations

Date:

March 3, 2026
___________________________________________________________________________________________

BACKGROUND:
REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Nina Rezai, Economic Development Director NRR
February 16, 2026

#20250303-01

The following Transfer of Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Line Item
Economic Development Projects, Capital Improvement Fund
Simon's Run Special Service Dist
4-302-094800-0010

Category
Economic Development, General Fund
Lynchburg - Annual Service Fee

Add
Amount
$

62,135.11 $
Delete
Amount

Line Item
4-100-081500-5891

Appropriation
New Total

$

464,901.18
Appropriation
New Total

62,135.11 $

113,704.89

COMMENTS: The remainder of the Lynchburg Annual Service Fee for FY25 needs to be placed in the Capital Improvement
Projects - Simon's Run Special Service District for future projects.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Tracy Fairchild, Director, Public Safety
January 28, 2026

#20260303-02

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
E-911 System, General Fund
Maint/Repair Communications Equip
E911 Phone Replacement

Line Item
4-100-031400-3314
4-100-031400-9010

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$
$

65.00 $
5,703.75 $

38,279.98
81,613.88

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase VITA Educational Grant revenue, 3-100-024050-0145-033, by $5,768.75.
COMMENTS: Grant funds for costs associated with E911 Phone Replacement.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Nina Rezai, Economic Development Manager NR
January 28, 2026

#20260303-03

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Economic Development, General Fund
Seneca Park Maintenance

Line Item
4-100-081500-5906

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

15,000.00 $

110,654.24

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Seneca Maintenance revenue, 3-100-024060-0092-082, by $15,000.00.
COMMENTS: Funds represent the proceeds from the sale of Seneca Commerce Park Parcel A .61 acres.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Brian R. Stokes, Director, Public Works
January 29, 2026

#20260303-04

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Line Item
Recycling/Litter Commission, Solid Waste Fund
Recycling Costs
4-515-042700-3181

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

15,346.93 $

54,546.93

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Litter Control Grant revenue, 3-515-024040-0007-043, by $15,346.93.
COMMENTS: This is the FY26 grant funded by the Department of Environmental Quality. The grant funding can only be used
for recycling expenses.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Brian R. Stokes, Director, Public Works
February 2, 2026

#20260303-05

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Line Item
Category
Maintenance of BLDGS & GRNDS, General Fund
Maint/Repair - Vehicles
4-100-043400-3315

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

2,610.00 $

7,610.00

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Insurance Recoveries revenue, 3-100-018990-0013-012, by $2,610.00.
COMMENTS: A maintenance truck, F-250, was involved in an auto collision with a mail box on 12/29/25. This recovery will offset
the cost of repairing the vehicle.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Nina Rezai, Economic Development Manager NR
February 2, 2026

#20260303-06

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

$

371,200.00 $

371,200.00

Economic Development, General Fund
Seneca Maintenance

$

1,500.00 $

97,154.24

4-100-081500-5906

Add

Appropriation
New Total

Category
Line Item
Economic Development Projects, Captial Improvement Projects Fund
Ewing Drive Sewer & Water - Phase III
4-302-094800-0095

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Seneca Comm Park - Sewer revenue, 3-302-024040-0010-083, by $372,700.00.
COMMENTS: Funds represent the proceeds from the sale of Seneca Commerce Park Parcels M and N approzimately 7.1 acres
and reimbursement of line marking fees.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

#20260303-07

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Tracy Fairchild, Director, Public Safety
February 4, 2026

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Public Safety, General Fund
Food Supplies

Line Item
4-100-035500-6002

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

200.00 $

1,415.73

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Gifts & Donations - Public Safety, 3-100-018990-0024-012, by $200.00.
COMMENTS: Donations received from Charles Schwab on behalf of Patricia Blackburn.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Tracy Fairchild, Director, Public Safety
February 12, 2026

#20260303-08

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
EMS Services, General Fund
Maint/Repair - Vehicles

Line Item
4-100-032500-3315

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

29,349.14 $

150,149.14

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Decrease Beginning Fund Balance, 0-100-000300-0100, by $29,349.14.
COMMENTS: Insurance payment received in January 2025 for damaged EMS unit.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

#20260303-09

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Public Works, Capital Improvement Fund
County Vehicle Replacement

Line Item
4-302-094400-0042

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

47,393.00 $

789,289.83

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Insurance Recoveries revenue, 3-100-018990-0013-012, by $47,393.00.
COMMENTS: To help purchase a replacement vehicle that was totaled in an accident. These funds were received from Insurance
Companies for reimbursement on Vehicle accidents during FY26.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

#20260303-10

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Sheriff's Department, General Fund
Cash Held in Evidence

Line Item
4-100-031200-8121

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

44,230.05 $

84,232.05

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Cash Held in Evidence - Sheriff, 3-100-018990-0032-032, by $44,230.05.
COMMENTS: This is revenue received as Evidence that is deposited and moved over to an expenditure line to be returned to the
rightful owner, sent to unclaimed property, or DCJS as a forfeiture.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

#20260303-11

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Sheriff's Department, General Fund
Special Investigation Fees

Line Item
4-100-031200-3860

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

2,951.77 $

71,658.64

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Special Investigations Restitution revenue, 3-100-018990-0043-012, by $2,951.77.
COMMENTS: Defendents are ordered through Circuit Court to reimburse the Sheriff's Office for the narcotic funds used by the
Sheriff's Office in their case.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

#20260303-12

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Sheriff's Department, General Fund
Animal Care Supplies
Uniforms, Wearing Apparel
Project Lifesaver Supplies

Line Item
4-100-031200-6003
4-100-031200-6011
4-100-031200-6017

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$
$
$

900.00 $
5,000.00 $
1,000.00 $

36,037.85
43,480.00
8,255.91

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Gifts & Donations - Sheriff's Offic revenue, 3-100-018990-0020-032, by $6,900.00.
COMMENTS: Funds were received as donations from citizens for animal care, Project Lifesaver, and uniforms.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

#20260303-13

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Line Item
Violence Against Women Grant, General Fund
Comp - P/T Help
4-100-031745-1300
Employer Cost - FICA
4-100-031745-2100

Add
$
$

25,860.00 $
2,215.00 $

Appropriation
New Total
66,637.50
5,299.95

Workers Compensation

4-100-031745-2720

$

785.00 $

2,312.22

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase VSTOP Violence Against Women Grant revenue, 3-100-033010-0007-034,
by $28,860.00. No impact on Undesignated Fund Balance.
COMMENTS: This is a continuation of the Federal Grant - VSTOP Violence Against Women - to fund a part-time investigator who
will be investigating domestic violence calls that the Sheriff's Office or the Commonwealth Attorney receives either directly or
by review. These funds are for the CY26 grant.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

#20260303-14

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Category
Operation Ceasefire Grant, General Fund
Forensic Technology Equipment
Forensic Technology Supplies

Line Item
4-100-031775-8118
4-100-031775-6010

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$
$

182,933.00 $
4,606.00 $

182,933.00
4,606.00

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Operation Ceasefire Grant revenue, 3-100-024043-0030-023, by $187,539.00.
COMMENTS: The Sheriff's Office was awarded a State Special Grant for $187,539.00. This is to purchase Forensic and Technology
Equipment. Grant period is 1/1/26 through 12/31/2027.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

#20260303-15

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Line Item
Category
Unmanned Aircraft Replacement Grant, General Fund
Law Enforcement Equipment
4-100-031765-8118

Appropriation
New Total

Add
$

25,000.00 $

25,000.00

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Unmanned Aircraft Replacement Grant revenue, 3-100-024043-0020-023,
by $25,000.00.
COMMENTS: The Sheriff's Office was awarded a State Grant for $25,000.00. This is to purchase a replacement drone. Grant period
is 1/1/26 through 12/31/2026.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TO:
FROM:
DATE:

#20260303-16

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
Whit Clark, Sheriff
February 17, 2026

The following Supplemental Appropriation is requested for FY26:

Line Item
Category
Combating Hate Crimes Grant, General Fund
Law Enforcement Equipment
4-100-031770-8118

Add
$

14,127.00 $

Appropriation
New Total
14,127.00

SOURCE OF FUNDING: Increase Combating Hate Crimes Grant revenue, 3-100-024043-0010-023, by $14,127.00.
COMMENTS: The Sheriff's Office was awarded a State Grant for $14,127.00. This is to purchase a surveillance system for Second

Saint Paul Baptist Church. Grant period is 7/1/2025 through 6/30/2026.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

APPOINTMENTS
BOARD/COMMISSION

TERM

STIPEND

STAFF CONTACT

MEETING FREQUENCY

Building Code Board of Appeals
Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals

5 years

$50

Brian Stokes

As Needed

Vacancy
Vacancy
Matt Holley

(need experienced property manager) Term expired 5/5/2020
(need professional engineer or architect) Term expired 5/5/2021
construction
Term expires 5/5/2026

Board of Zoning Appeals

5 years

$85

Brian Stokes (judge appointed)

As Needed on 4th Tuesdays at 7:00 PM

Vacancy

Timberlake District

Term expired 6/30/2023

Social Services Board

4 years (limit 2 terms)

$150

Lisa Linthicum

3rd Wednesdays at 3:30 PM

Vacancy

Brookneal District

Term expired 6/30/2021

Economic Development Commission

4 years

$85

Nina Rezai

3rd Thursday of March & September at 12:00 PM

Vacancy
Richard Carroll
Vacancy
Willie Jones

Spring Hill District
Concord District
At Large - Planning Commission
Brookneal District

Term expired 12/31/2023
Term expired 12/31/2023
Term expires 12/31/2026
Term expired 12/31/2025

CCUSA

4 years

$150

Jeff Wells

4th Tuesdays at 6:30 PM

Joseph Kirkland

Spring Hill District

Term expired 12/31/2024

Charlie Droog

Timberlake District

Term expired 12/31/2024

*Per Board action on 2/7/2023, representatives from Brookneal, Rustburg, &
Timberlake will be reappointed until 12/31/2026, then every 4 years moving forward.

Brookneal/Campbell Co. Airport Authority

4 years

$85

Nina Rezai

3rd Wednesdays at 6:30 PM

Jordan Welborn

3rd Mondays at 5:30 PM

Carter Elliott
John Barksdale

Term expired 1/31/2025
Term expired 1/31/2026

Library Board of Trustees

4 years (2 term limit)

$85

Vacancy
William Van Opstal (not eligible)

Rustburg District
Brookneal District

Term expired 12/31/2025
Term expired 12/31/2025

Recreation Advisory Council

3 years

Vacancy
Maurice Peerman

Spring Hill District
Brookneal District

Industrial Development Authority

4 years

Vance Driskill
Thomas Vaughan

Timberlake District
Sunburst District

Jordan Welborn
Term expired 12/31/2025
Term expired 12/31/2025
Nina Rezai

Term expires 3/17/2026
Term expires 3/17/2026

MEMORANDUM

To:

Members, Board of Supervisors

From:

Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR

Subject:
MATTERS FROM THE BOARD
________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
At each meeting, time will be scheduled to address matters from the Board that have not
been scheduled on the agenda. This time is typically used to share information or request
information from staff and not to take action on items that are not on the agenda. Items
requiring action are typically requested in advance so that the appropriate information
gathering and notice can be provided.
The Board’s policy is that any citizen may request time on the agenda by contacting the
Clerk of the Board. These requests, with supporting background materials, should be made
in writing two weeks prior to a scheduled meeting so requests can be researched and
included on the agenda for action as needed.

RECOMMENDATION:
Please share any information or requests with the Board and/or staff as appropriate.

Public Notice
CAMPBELL COUNTY CITIZENS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Campbell County Board of Supervisors will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on Tuesday, March 3, 2026 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Board of
Supervisors Meeting Room, Haberer Building, Rustburg, Virginia on the
following ZONING matter:
PL-25-277 – Request by Massi Saunders of Saunders Surveys, Inc, agent
for Central Virginia Services, Inc. doing business as Firefly Broadband,
for a special use permit for the property located at New Chapel Road
and further identified as tax map parcel 37-5-5 to allow for a public utility
structure. The property is located in an area designated as rural per the
current Comprehensive Plan.
During the public hearings, concerns from interested citizens supporting
or opposing these zoning matters will be solicited. The application is on
file and can be viewed in the Campbell County Community Development
Department, Citizen Services Building, Rustburg. For additional information call the Planning Office at 434-332-9780.
######

CAMPBELL COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION REPORT
MARCH 3, 2026

CAMPBELL COUNTY GOVERNMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
Commission Member

District

David Gough

Altavista

Dean Monroe
Chair

Brookneal

Megan Witt

Concord

Michael Condrey

Rustburg

Robert Otero

Spring Hill

John Thilking

Sunburst

Trish Hedges
Vice Chair

Timberlake

Charlie Watts

Board of Supervisors Representative

Staff

Kate Reusch

Planner

Brian Stokes

Community Development Director

Paul Harvey

Assistant County Administrator

MEETING AGENDA
Case

Applicant

Request

Recommendation

PL-25-277

Massie Saunders

Special Use Permit
Public Utility

TBD

Please note that decisions made by the Planning Commission are not final until after the
Board of Supervisors confirms the recommendations on March 3, 2026.

CAMPBELL COUNTY
ZONING DISTRICTS
Agricultural Districts
A-1

Agricultural
Residential Districts

R-SF Single Family
R-MF Multi Family
R-MH Manufactured housing
Commercial Districts
B-LC Limited Commercial
B-GC General Commercial
B-HC Heavy Commercial
Industrial Districts
I-G Industrial Heavy
I-H Industrial General

EXCERPTS FROM CODE OF VIRGINIA
ZONING
§ 15.2-2200. Declaration of legislative intent.
This chapter is intended to encourage localities to improve the public health, safety, convenience
and welfare of its citizens and to plan for the future development of communities to the end that
transportation systems be carefully planned; that new community centers be developed with
adequate highway, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities; that the need for mineral
resources and the needs of agriculture, industry and business be recognized in future growth; that
residential areas be provided with healthy surroundings for family life; that agricultural and
forestal land be preserved; and that the growth of the community be consonant with the efficient
and economical use of public funds.
§ 15.2-2283. Purpose of zoning ordinances.
Zoning ordinances shall be for the general purpose of promoting the health, safety or general
welfare of the public and of further accomplishing the objectives of § 15.2-2200. To these ends,
such ordinances shall be designed to give reasonable consideration to each of the following
purposes, where applicable: (i) to provide for adequate light, air, convenience of access, and safety
from fire, flood, crime and other dangers; (ii) to reduce or prevent congestion in the public streets;
(iii) to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; (iv) to
facilitate the provision of adequate police and fire protection, disaster evacuation, civil defense,
transportation, water, sewerage, flood protection, schools, parks, forests, playgrounds, recreational
facilities, airports and other public requirements; (v) to protect against destruction of or
encroachment upon historic areas; (vi) to protect against one or more of the following:
overcrowding of land, undue density of population in relation to the community facilities existing
or available, obstruction of light and air, danger and congestion in travel and transportation, or loss
of life, health, or property from fire, flood, panic or other dangers; (vii) to encourage economic
development activities that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base; (viii) to
provide for the preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and other lands of significance for
the protection of the natural environment; (ix) to protect approach slopes and other safety areas of
licensed airports, including United States government and military air facilities; (x) to promote the
creation and preservation of affordable housing suitable for meeting the current and future needs
of the locality as well as a reasonable proportion of the current and future needs of the planning
district within which the locality is situated; and (xi) to provide reasonable protection against
encroachment upon military bases, military installations, and military airports and their adjacent
safety areas, excluding armories operated by the Virginia National Guard. Such ordinance may
also include reasonable provisions, not inconsistent with applicable state water quality standards,
to protect surface water and ground water as defined in § 62.1-255.

MEMORANDUM
To:

Board of Supervisors

From:

Kate N. Reusch, Planner KNR

CC:

Paul E. Harvey, Assistant County Administrator PEH

Subject:

Special Use Permit #PL-25-277 (New Chapel Road)

Date:
February 23, 2026
_________________________________________________________________________________

General Information
Applicant: Massie Saunders of Saunders Surveys, Inc, agent for Central
Virginia Services, Inc. doing business as Firefly Broadband
Owner: Glover H. Jones III & Emily G. Jones
Request: Special Use Permit in the A-1 district to allow for a public utility
structure for fiber broadband
Location: New Chapel Road and Plum Branch Road
Election District: Rustburg
Tax Map Number(s): 37-5-5
Acreage: 0.230+/- acres
Magisterial District: Long Mountain (2020 population 10,478)
Subject Property Analysis
The applicant is seeking to construct a 10’ x 20’ prefab masonry building on the property to serve
as a fiber facility communication hut. Electrical and fiber connecting to the parcel would be
underground and the structure would be unoccupied. A generator and propane tank would be
located on site to serve as an emergency backup in the event of a power outage.
Land Use Compatibility
This request can be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan if the Commission finds
that there is a public need or convenience provided by the facility. If the Commission chooses to
recommend approval, the motion should include a determination that the development of the
project is substantially in accord with the Comprehensive Plan under Section 15.2-2232 of the
Code of Virginia.
Conditions
The Planning Commission may recommend, and the Board of Supervisors may impose any
reasonable conditions upon approval of the permit. Staff recommends the following conditions:

the applicant utilizes the site in conformance with the use described in the narrative and shown on
the survey submitted with this request.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request with staff recommended
conditions by a vote of 6-0.
Site Data
Surrounding Zoning: The area is agricultural in nature. Zoning in the vicinity is A-1 (Agricultural).
Land Use/Floodplain: The property does not lie within any FEMA 100-year flood zones.
Access and Traffic: The parcel would be accessed by a proposed entrance on New Chapel Road
Route 606 (average daily traffic 420 vehicles).
Utilities: No occupied structure is proposed; therefore, water and sewer facilities are not
applicable.
Comprehensive Plan: The property is located in an area designated as rural.
Comprehensive Plan Map

Zoning Map

Aerial Map

Public Notification
In accordance with Section 15.2-2204, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, all adjoining
property owners and those located immediately across the street of the subject parcel were notified
by mail of the rezoning request. At the time of this report, no comments in support or opposition
of the request have been received.

Site Plan / Survey

Applicant Statement

Community Development
85 Carden Lane, Suite A
Rustburg, VA 24588
(434) 332-9780
[email protected]

Campbell County Public Library Board of Trustees Meeting
January 19th, 2026

The regular meeting of the Library Board of Trustees was held on Monday, January 19th, 2026 at
the Main Branch of the Campbell County Public Library System in Rustburg, Virginia at 5:30
p.m.

Present:

Tanita Anthony, Chair
Donna Roberts, Vice Chair
Christel Coman
Susan Jevitt
Kim Martin
Matt Cline- Board of Supervisors Representative

Library staff present: (non-voting)
Jordan Welborn
Kimberly Vitale

Call to Order
Tanita Anthony called the meeting to order at 5:27 p.m.
Action Items
On a motion by Kim Martin, seconded by Christel Coman, the minutes from the November 2025
meeting were approved.
Aye: K. Martin, T. Anthony, D. Roberts, C. Coman, S. Jevitt,
Nay: None
Library & Literacy Expenditures
On a motion by Donna Roberts, seconded by Kim Martin, the November and December 2025
expenditures were approved.
Aye: K. Martin, T. Anthony, D. Roberts, C. Coman, S. Jevitt,
Nay: None

Director’s Items
Jordan informed the Board of Trustees about the 3 Book Hunt programs in the county offered by
the library.
As a follow up from a previous meeting, Jordan provided the Board of Trustees with example
exhibit policies from several other libraries for comparison. They discussed the various options
and provided Jordan with direction to move forward. The consensus was that the Bedford policy
was the best to work off of, along with the application form from Amherst.
Trustee’s Items
The Board of Trustees reviewed the current bylaws. There were no changes suggested.
Jordan was asked about the two vacancies on the Library Board. She stated that there were no
new appointees in the last Board of Supervisors meeting and asked for suggestions that she could
pass along to the respective Board of Supervisors members.
For January’s continuing education, Jordan presented a short video on board ethics, along with
an ethics statement to sign.
Matters From The Board
N/A
Informational Items
Jordan reviewed the Departmental Reports for November and December with the Board of
Trustees.
Jordan also handed out the Winter Campbell County Event Guide and offered additional copies
for Trustees that wish to distribute them in the community.
Adjournment
On a motion made by Donna Roberts, seconded by Christel Coman, the meeting was adjourned
at 6:02 p.m.
Next Meeting
The next meeting will be Monday, February 16th, 2026 at the Timbrook Library in Lynchburg,
Va.
Respectfully submitted,
Jordan Welborn, Director
Kimberly Vitale, Admin. Assistant

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

THROUGH: Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator
FROM:

Catherine H. Moore, Clerk

DATE:

February 12, 2026

Catherine H. Moore

SUBJECT: Informational Item – 2025 Meeting Attendance Records
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
At the Board’s request, staff has been providing the attendance records of several of the Boards
and Commissions to which they appoint members.
Attached are the 2025 attendance records for the Board of Zoning Appeals, Campbell County
Utilities and Service Authority, Economic Development Commission, Industrial Development
Authority, Brookneal-Campbell County Airport Authority, Planning Commission, Social Services
Board, Library Board, and the Recreation Advisory Council.
_____________________________________________________________________________
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
In 2025, no meetings were held.
Ralph Hagner
James Laughlin
David Gough
Henry McClanahan
Russell Nixon
Ted Vassar

0
0
0
0
0
0

BROOKNEAL CAMPBELL COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY
In 2025, there were nine (9) regular meetings.
Benny David, Chairman
Richard Adams, Vice-Chairman
Carter Elliott, Secretary-Treasurer
John Barksdale
C.P. Elliott
Ken Jennings

9
2
4
9
7
6

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
In 2025 there were two (2) meetings and one (1) called meeting.
William Anderson
Robert Layne
Dean Monroe
Andrew Moore
George Rosser
Jeff Wells

0
0
0
1
3
2

Willie Jones
Scott Blankinship
Hugh Bragg
Richard Carroll
Kevin Davis
Trish Hedges

2
2
0 (deceased)
2
0
2

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
In 2025 there were 4 regular meetings, 1 called meeting, and 1 Joint Work Session.
D. Vance Driskill, Chairman
Dennis Rosser, Vice-Chairman
George Rosser, Secretary-Treasurer
Jack Dean
Brad Hall
Thomas Vaughan III
Don Wooldridge

6
6
5
6
6
2
4

LIBRARY BOARD
In 2025, there were eleven (11) regular meetings.
6 – Stepped down as of June 17th, 2025
9
11
9
8
9
9

Rachel Cartwright
Kimberly Martin
Donna Roberts
William van Opstal
Christal Comen
Tanita Anthony
Susan Jevitt

PLANNING COMMISSION
In 2025, there were eleven (11) regular meetings. No meeting in November.
Mike Condrey
John Thilking
Trish Hedges
Megan Witt
David Gough
Robert Otero
Dean Monroe

10
9
7
8
9
10
11

RECREATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
In 2025, there were eleven (11) regular meetings.
Clyde Dixon
Eddie Fielder
Maurice Peerman
David Phillips
J. P. Coates III
James Enoch
Zach Horsley
Jim Tipton

10
8
9
7
9
6
4
7

SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD
In 2025, there were twelve (12) regular meetings.
Shameka Davenport
Morris Dews
Caitlyn Enoch
Linda Grubba
Kevin Keys
David Smith

11
12
11
11
11
11

CAMPBELL COUNTY UTILITIES AND SERVICE AUTHORITY
In 2025, there were 11 regular meetings, and one (1) special meeting.
Don Austin
Robert Lee
Charlie Droog
Carter Elliott
Joseph Kirkland
James Marstin
Daniel Richardson

11
11 + 1 Budget Committee meeting
12 + 1 Budget Committee meeting
12
11
12
12

MEMORANDUM
TO:

Members, Board of Supervisors

THROUGH: Frank J. Rogers, County Administrator FJR
FROM:

Nina R. Rezai, Director of Economic Development

DATE:

February 18, 2026

SUBJECT: Restaurants that Rent - Bacon Street Bagels
______________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
Bacon Street Bagel, a well-established regional bagel and breakfast shop, has confirmed plans to
expand operations into Campbell County. Their new storefront is currently under renovation at
14339 Wards Road, with an anticipated opening later this spring. The business model, scale of
operations, and projected use of leased commercial space align with the parameters outlined in the
Restaurants that Rent Program.
Staff reviewed the application and supporting documentation. Bacon Street Bagel meets all
program criteria, including:

Operating as a food-service establishment

Proof of an executed lease for at least 3 years

Utilizing commercial space under 3,500 square feet
Bacon Street Bagel will receive rental reimbursement benefits for a period of six months, covering
approximately half of their rent and not exceeding the $15,000 threshold. The reimbursement
period will begin upon their official opening date, which will be confirmed once the business
completes final inspections and receives its occupancy approvals.
Staff will continue coordinating with the business owner to ensure a smooth onboarding process
into the program. Once an opening date is finalized, we will notify the appropriate parties and
initiate the reimbursement schedule. Bacon Street Bagels is the second business to utilize the
Restaurants that Rent Program.

Department of Public and Employee Relations

Recruitment Report for
February 2026
Campbell County is pleased to welcome
the following full-time employee to our team

Kensey Jones
Family Services Specialist II
Social Services

Be Welcomed. Be Successful. Be Home.