On the agenda: Halifax meeting — Data Center (Apr 6)

Halifax County
Board of Supervisors
Regular Meeting

liali fu
VIRG..IA

LIF~
County Administration Building
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia

Apri I 6, 2026
6:30 p.m.

AGENDA
HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Regular Meeting
County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Meeting Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia
Monday, April 6, 2026 / 6:30 p.m.
A. CALL TO ORDER - Chair Roller
Invocation - Supervisor Oakes
Pledge of Allegiance - Chair Roller

B. ATTENDANCE ROLL CALL

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
1. Adoption of the Agenda

D. APROVAL OF MINUTES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

March 2, 2026
March 10, 2026
March 12, 2026
March 12, 2026
March 13, 2026
March 16, 2026
March 17, 2026

Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
Finance Committee Meeting
Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session
Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
Board of Supervisors Retreat
Airport Committee Meeting
Board of Supervisors and Planning
Commission Joint Meeting

pages 8 - 33
pages 34 - 37
pages 38 - 46
pages 47 - 53
pages 54 - 73
pages 74 -77
pages 78 - 96

E. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL
1.

Warrants a. February 2026

2.

Treasurer's Report
a. January 31 , 2026
b. February 28, 2026

page 98

pages 99 - 100
pages 101 -102

F.

RECOGNITIONS

G. CITIZENS' COMMENTS
Comments will not be heard regarding items on the Agenda for which a public hearing is
scheduled or has already been held .

H. PUBLIC HEARINGS

I.

PRESENTATIONS

J.

COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Finance Committee
a.

pages 104 - 136

High School Track (Tisha Waller)

K. NEW BUSINESS
1. Emergency Operations Plan Update - Jason Johnson

pages 138 - 139

2. Berkley Group to prepare language to existing County Ordinance
to allow Battery Energy Storage System

pages 140 - 142

3. Conditional Use Permit Application ED #2 :
Applicant:
Stephanie Stephens
Business Name:
Quintessence Cove, LLC
13501 ,13500, 13499, 14617, 14540,18224
PRN:
Location :
Mount Laurel Road
Landowner:
Wynona Godwin & Alfred Godwin Trust
Proposed Use:
Construct a new venue event center for
weddings, dance recitals , and corporate
functions.

pages 143 - 173

4. Legal status of plan Virginia Code § 15.2-2232 review for Dominion
Energy Virginia, (Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road) (ED#3)
(3 MW Community/Shared Solar Energy Facility)

pages 174 - 175

5. Conditional Use Permit Application ED #3:
Applicant:
Dominion Energy Virginia
34991 & 20069
PRN :
Location :
Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road
Kenneth and Kevin Hodges
Landowner:
Construct a 3.00 MW Community/Shared
Proposed Use:
Solar Energy Facility

pages 176 - 248

L.

6. Citizen Comment Form - Ron Brade

pages 249 - 250

7. Letter of Support for Joint Commission on Recovery Housing (JCRH)

pages 251 - 257

8. Purchase of Roll Off Containers/Fencing Proposal

pages 258 -262

PENDING MATTERS/UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Formal motion needed to approve contracts with CivicPlus and
ExclusiveTechnologies

page 264

2. Forensic Audit Support

M. SUPERVISOR COMMENTS

N. MOTION TO ENTER CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO VIRGINIA CODE §2.2-3711
Subsection (a)(1) : Discussion, consideration , or interviews of prospective candidates for
employment; assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining, or
resignation of specific public officers, appointees, or employees of any public body; and evaluation of
performance of departments or schools of public institutions of higher education where such
evaluation will necessarily involve discussion of the performance of specific individuals. (Personnel)
(Appointments)
Subsection (a)(5): Discussion concerning a prospective business or industry or the expansion of an
existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business' or
industry's interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the community. (Economic Development)
Subsection (a)(29): Discussion of the award of a public contract involving the expenditure of public
funds, including interviews of bidders or offerers, and discussion of the terms or scope of such contract,
where discussion in an open session would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating
strategy of the public body. (Contracts)

0 . MOTION TO RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION

P. MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
WHEREAS , the Halifax County Board of Supervisors has convened a closed meeting on this date
pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia
Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS , § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by this governing body that
such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that this governing body 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 (i i) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion
convening the closed meeting were heard , discussed or considered by the governing body.

ROLL CALL VOTE

Q. ACTION RESULTING FROM CLOSED SESSION

page 265

1. Appointments
2.

Other

R. CONTINUE MEETING TO TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 2026, AT 6:30 P.M. FOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING

NEXT MEETING(S)
Board of Supervisors & Planning Commission Joint Meeting
Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting

April 21 , 2026 (6 :30 p.m.)
May 4, 2026 (6:30 p.m .)

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Standards of Conduct

Recognizing that persons holding a position of public trust are under constant observation by the media and interested
County residents and recognizing that maintaining the integrity and dignity of the public office is essential for
maintaining high levels of public confidence in our institutions of government, every member of the Halifax County
Board of Supervisors should adhere to the following Standards of Conduct.
1. Avoid during public meetings and during the performance of public duties the use of abusive,
threatening or intimidating language or gestures directed at colleagues, citizens, or personnel.
2. Pay all taxes due to the County, state, or national government.
3. Avoid a private lifestyle that casts public doubt upon the integrity and competence of the County
government.
4. Make a conscientious effort to be well prepared for each meeting .
5. Recognizing the dignity of each individual , the Board shall attempt to avoid offering public criticism of
colleagues or County employees .
6. Work to create a positive environment in public meeting where citizens will feel comfortable in their
roles as observers or participants .
7. Maintain an attitude of courtesy and consideration toward all colleagues and staff during all
discussions and deliberations.
8. Be tolerant. Allow citizens , employees, or colleagues sufficient opportunity to present their views.
9. Be respectful and attentive. Avoid comments , body language or distracting activity that conveys a
message of disrespect for the presentations from citizens, personnel , or colleagues . Be concise.
10. Avoid the practice of taking more time to address an issue before the body than is necessary and
essential for an adequate consideration of those matters being discussed.
Board members should always remember, "There is no right way to do the wrong thing ."

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONDUCT OF THE PUBLIC
The efficient and dignified conduct of public business is an ultimate concern of the Board . Accordingly, it is the policy of the Board
that its meetings be conducted with the highest degree of order and decorum . The Board's integrity and dignity will be established
and maintained at all times during the conduct of public business, and the Board will permit no behavior which is not in keeping
with this policy. Prohibited conduct at meetings shall include:
1.
2.
3.

Campaigning for public office, soliciting of funds , or promoting private business ventures .
Using profanity, vulgar language or gestures.
Language or actions which insult or demean any person or group of persons or which , when directed at a public official or
employee is not related to his official duties.
4. Disruptive behavior.
5. Making non-germane or frivolous statements.
6. Discussions of a sectarian or partisan nature.
7. Smoking or eating in the Board Room .
8. Addressing question or statements to anyone other than the Chairman (Questions shall be presented to the Chairman , who
will, at their discretion , solicit a response from the appropriate board or staff member.)
9. Standing in the back or side isles of the Board Room as long as there are sufficient seats available (except for law enforcement
personnel).
10. Persons in attendance at the meeting addressing the Board while members of the Board are considering any motion,
resolution or ordinance preliminary to a vote on the same, except at the discretion of the Chairman .
11 . Any persons addressing comments or questions to someone other than the Chairman.
12. Wearing hats, caps or other types of headgear.
13. Applause is permitted only during presentations, awards, proclamations and special recognition periods.
The Board of Supervisors welcomes and encourages citizen participation in its meetings. To insure fair and timely participation ,
the following procedures are observed by the Board:
All presenters are asked to state their name
Each speaker on a general matter, whether an individual or a representative for an organization , is limited to three (3)
minutes.
3. Speaker's comments are limited to a presentation on his or her point of view only - questions of clarification may be
entertained only by the board members;
4. All comments are to be directed to the board ;
5. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members or between board members and the speaker is not
permitted;
6. Courtesy between the speaker and audience is expected at all times ;
7. Speakers are requested to leave any written statement and I or comments with the clerk to the board ;
8. Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group are required to file with the clerk written authorization from the
group allowing the individual to represent that group;
9. By applying to speak as a representative for an organization , the individual confirms they are recognized as an official
representative of that organization ; and
10. Presentation to the board by groups should :
a. Obtain prior approval from the chairman of the board;
b. Submit all written materials and data no later than ten days prior to the meeting in time to be included in the
board's agenda packet distributed a week before each regular monthly meeting ;
c. Limit presentations to fifteen minutes; and
d. File with the clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent that group.
11 . A digital , color-coded timer will be displayed in full view of the Board, the speaker, and individuals seated in the gallery.
When two minutes have expired, the timer display will turn yellow indicating the speaker has one minute to conclude
his/her comments. At the end of that one-minute period (completion of the full three-minute period), the timer will display
0:00 in red , indicating the speaker must relinquish the podium to the next speaker. Staff will notify the Chairman that the
speaker's time has expired . Speakers continuing after the time allotted shall be ruled out of order by the Chairman .
1.
2.

The Chairman shall preserve order and decorum at all meetings. The Chairman may order the expulsion of any person for violation
of these rules, disruptive behavior, or any words or action which incite violence or disorder, subject to appeal to the Board . Any
person so expelled shall not be readmitted for the remainder of the meeting from which he was expelled. Any person who has
been so expelled and who at a later meeting again engages in words or actions justifying expulsion may be barred from attendance
at future meetings of the Board for a specified and reasonable period of time not to exceed six months or upon a still subsequent
expulsion , a period not to exceed one year either by the Chairman , subject to appeal to the Board, or by motion passed by the
Board .

MINUTES

P7

HALIFAX BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
REGULAR MEETING
County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Meeting Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia
Monday, March 2, 2026 / 6:30 p.m.

A. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Roller called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Supervisor Riddle gave the invocation.
Chair Roller led the Pledge of Allegiance.

B. ATTENDANCE ROLL CALL
Board of Supervisors members attending were: Mr. P. Riddle, ED1 ; Mr. L. Roller, ED2; Mr. D. J. Oakes, ED3;
Mr. D. Witt, ED4; Mr. R. Smart, EDS; Mr. M. Thompson, ED6; Mr. K. McDowell, ED?; Mr. W.B. Claiborne,
ED8; and Mr. W. Smith, Tie Breaker.
Board of Supervisors absent: None
Staff members attending were: Mr. Verron "Ron" Brade, County Administrator; Mr. Detrick Easley,
Planning/Zoning Administrator; Mr. Jason Johnson, Emergency Services Coordinator; Ms. Nancy Spencer,
Strategic Programs Coordinator; Mrs. Nancy Kamp, Executive Assistant; and Mr. John Montoro, Interim
Finance Director.
County Attorney attending was: F. Jesse Bausch
News reporter attending was : Ms. Miranda Baines, The Gazette-Virginian
Security was provided by: Halifax County Sheriffs Department

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor McDowell, to table the Forensic Audit Report
as the Board has not received the final report; and that the Forensic Audit Report be presented at a
subsequent meeting.
There was discussion that without adequate preparation, meaningful discussion and questions could not
occur. Though a draft and slide deck had been sent at 3:00 p.m . today, it was lengthy and insufficient for
immediate review. The public has a right to hear the final report for transparency. Despite the extensions,
concerns remain as the audit team has yet to deliver a final report. Mr. Brade clarified the delay was partly
due to internal transitions and not solely the auditor's fault. He also added the slide deck summarizing the
report was distributed and the auditors were open to questions. Chair Roller stressed the importance of
completing the forensic audit soon to proceed with the annual audit and finalize the budget. Mr. Montoro
explained that the FY2025 financial statements' audit had been postponed pending completion of the forensic

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

PS

audit, affecting budget carryover calculations. It was also discussed to begin procurement for the annual
audit without waiting for the Forensic Aud it Report's formal presentation. It was suggested to present the
Forensic Audit Report at the upcoming Joint Meeting, allowing more time for review.
Motioned made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor McDowell, to remove Item 1-2, Forensic
Audit Report from the Agenda and have it presented at the March 17, 2026, Joint Meeting.
VOTE

Motion passed 7-1 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K. McDowell, and Mr.
W.B. Claiborne
Mr. D. J. Oakes
Nays:
Abstained :
Noone
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Mr. Brade indicated that the County Attorney was in attendance to respond to questions and concerns
regarding the Solid Waste Disposal Authority meeting, which occurred after the previous Joint Meeting. He
requested that this matter be included as Item 1-3 on the Agenda.
Motion by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Oakes to add the Solid Waste Disposal Authority with
Legal Explanation to the Agenda as Item 1-3.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to adopt the Agenda as presented with
changes.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained :
Noone
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

D. MINUTES CORRECTIONS/ APPROVAL

1. January 5, 2026
2. January 20, 2026
3. February 9, 2026
4. February 11, 2026
5. February 11, 2026
6. February 17, 2026

Board of Supervisors Work Session
Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission
Joint Meeting
Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
Policy and Personnel Committee
Finance Committee
Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission
Joint Meeting
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P9

7.

February 18, 2026

Finance Committee

Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to approve the minutes as presented .

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

E. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL
1. Warrants a. January 2026
2. Treasurer's Report
a. December 31, 2025

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

F. RECOGNITIONS
1.

Freda Holliday Retirement Recognition - The Honorable Judge Joel Cunningham

Judge Cunningham expressed his honor in presenting a Resolution from the Board of Supervisors
recognizing Mrs. Freda Holliday's retirement after 40 years of service. He praised Mrs. Holliday for her
professionalism , compassion, and dedication during his nearly 30 years as a Judge in Halifax County. Since
1997, Judge Cunningham valued Mrs. Holliday's leadership as Director of Halifax/Pittsylvania Court Services
and the Adult Recovery Court. Judge Cunningham and many colleagues will deeply miss her significant
contributions and presence. Judge Cunningham read Resolution 2026-3 and presented it to Mrs. Freda
Holliday.
Following the reading and presentation of Resolution 2026-3 by Judge Cunningham, Mrs. Holliday expressed
her gratitude to the Board of Supervisors and Judge Cunningham .

Motion made by Supervisor McDowell, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to approve Resolution 2026-3.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

PlO

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

HALIFAX COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPER\fISORS
10SO Mn,y Bethuna St1Nt
P. O. Box st

lllA -# f ' l t t ' • ~ . [ Otl

0 ltffJ/£fOMO•ll>CI
OCD1!1 0.lll.1TT•OM
I I C l l l ' f t ~ - lib -

Holif.u, VA24SS9-0990
fA3') 416-.S300
F8lll:{4") 476-,:JJIA

VCffOll.,._Ofl~ lil 9rdl

WWW heHfHcounlYYt A9:Y

C...0,-

ron. bnide(lto.MOfn n..us

, u J N A ~ - 0-1

WPl'AYl'Q.N:OQIMii•'-'•
WATwtllW! rtl•l«tiltlt'Jtt.:t

2026-3
RESOl.tmON

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RECOGNIZE
FREDA HOLllDAY ON THE OCCASION OF HER RETIREMENT
The Boan! of ~ of Hatifax Ccunty. Vifginis (lho "Board"). al i1s m-ng
day of March, 2026, odopts the fo!lowing resolution:

°" 1ho 2"'

WHEREAS, for 1orty years. having b<,gun h<f caroer m Fel>fuary 1986. Freda Holliday has
glv<n not only time and telenl, but 11"8~ and dt,c!iealion .etving as the Ditee'.o, of
Ho!~ax/P<lsf,van!a Ccun SeMoes and to lhe communitieo tt sCMJS; ana
WHEREAS, throughout this dfslioguished c:arur. Freda served on numerou:5 boards,
committees, and pmtner organil.ations. streng!hening relabooSll;>s and advancing tho role
and reputab0:1 of Halirttx/Pittsyivania Cour1 Services within the commundieS ;t ssrvea: and

WHEREAS. lhrough IIIOllgMi.< leadttn;h:p, - n. Ord a g . - desire to make a
diffefence. Freda helped shapa pol,cies, ptO!JT&m>, and parln2rships lhal ..-;11 ban<fl1 our
oommurtty for yeas to come: and
WHEREAS, Freda's semce ha:s be-on~ by professl0:nilf.$tn.. integrity. and a wr'f.ngness
to go boyond \\'Ml wu requ;-cd rn order to better sern:, ~ putfit
WHEREAS , Frcoa has be.en a steady p,esence. 11 tn:sted voit:e. attd a true examp!o of \'Iha!
commitment and s«Yite look Di;e; and

WHEREAS. coontJesa co-NOf'kers. d:e:rts. omd friends have been touched by ·Freda·s
kindness, wO!k ethic, end wf.i;r.gness to atwa,s go thi'! em.a rme ond prov.de ~ 1
to many lhroughoul lhe yoa111;
NOW, THEREFORE. SE IT RE SOL YEO lhal lhe Halda• Co\!nly Boal<! ol SUpeNlti0T!I heleby
extend!I It& appreci..atlon to Freda Holkby on her retirOment ThZ>nk you fof the tong hours..
the quiet aacrifrcea. the ta09tt.cr. the lcuons. ond the tagocy t'OU leave beNnd: and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED UlSI wa \\-1Sh Fre-dii a retirement rited with good heal'th,
hap;jneu. and ah the things th9re was newr enough timtJ lot tefore. \'\ith OCc-p gmlitude for
forty remal'kable years of s.e-rvtoe lhnl wi!J not be rorgotten.
Adoplod !his 2'0 day of ~IDrch. 2026

ATTEST.

[?,..1?1k,,L
Vcm>n •Ron" M. Brade. am
~ ltfax County eoard of Suptl'Wioo;

G. CITIZENS' COMMENTS
Chair Roller stated the following rules prior to opening the floor for citizens' comments.
•
•
•
•
•

Comments will not be heard regarding items on the Agenda for which a Public Hearing is scheduled or
has already been held.
Remove head gear.
Clearly state your name and address .
Questions shall be directed to the Chair.
No applause or comments from the audience.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P11

•
•
•

Shouting, profanity, threats, personal attacks, other similar actions are unacceptable.
Language or actions which insult or demean any person or group of persons or which when directed at
a public official or employee is not related to his official duties.
Citizens have three minutes to speak.

Coleman Speece
Mr. Speece, a resident of 2506 Fernwick Drive, South Boston, spoke about the significance of the Tisha
Waller Track behind the Middle School. He shared personal reflections on how the track contributed to his
health as he approaches 92 years old, and described frequent use of the track by himself, his wife, and many
community members, especially during the COVID pandemic. He mentioned that the track is a valued
community asset and honors local athlete Tisha Waller. Mr. Speece urged the Board to prioritize preserving
this important facility for the benefit of the community.
Detra Carr
Mr. Carr, a resident of 2220 Dudley Road , Halifax, read a letter from Tisha Waller to the Board and provided
copies for each member. He personally inspected the track, noting that aside from a minor issue where
about a quarter inch of the covering is lifted, the track remains in very good condition. The NAACP endorses
the Strategic Core Planning Committee's track report and supports the MOU with Halifax County Public
Schools to address these repairs. This initiative will allow local students to use the track for practice and host
home track meets.
Jennifer Champion
Ms. Champion, a Halifax County District 2 resident, addressed Supervisor Smart's prejudiced social media
posts from September, including sharing Mr. Claiborne's taxes and liking a post made by Supervisor Oakes
suggesting DEi provides unfair advantages . She emphasized that as an elected official, Supervisor Smart
should represent all constituents impartially, and public statements like these are inappropriate and harmful
to community trust. Ms. Champion requested that the Board publicly address the issue, clarify comment
standards for officials, and accept her formal complaint seeking Supervisor Smart's removal for the sake of
the County's integrity.

Vice Chair Smart said he was unaware of the post; that someone shared it. He thinks she was referring to
a post that we shared some time ago, not a post that he created .
Supervisor Oakes apologized to anyone who was offended by his remarks , which may have seemed callous .
As a representative of everyone in the County, Supervisors Oakes stated that he does not discriminate.
Supervisor Oakes stated his comment referenced concerns about hiring based solely on Diversity, Equity,
and Inclusion (DEi), suggesting it can detract from selecting the most qualified candidates. Halifax County
and Virginia's policy is not to hire based on DEi , yet there has been a struggle with this, particularly since
losing key administrative staff since last February and being unable to fill the Finance Director role. This has
led to ongoing difficulties, including delays in a forensic audit and budget preparation . Supervisor Oakes'
opinion is that prioritizing skills and performance over DEi is essential for finding quality employees .
Supervisor Oakes also apologized to Supervisor Claiborne.
Mattie Cowan
Ms. Cowan, a resident of 3121 Dan River Church Road and District 5, accused Supervisor Robert L. Smart
of targeting black individuals for removal from County positions, referencing her own removal from the
Planning Commission, the replacement of a black woman with a white male, and alleged slanderous remarks
made about Ms. Tomeka Morgan (also a black woman) on a podcast. She also claimed Mr. Smart requested
the resignation of a black man from the IDA Board . Ms. Cowan called for Mr. Smart's resignation, asserting
his actions were discriminatory and not in the best interest of Halifax County.

Vice Chair Smart addressed Ms. Cowan's accusations by expressing regret that she perceived his actions
as discriminatory. He explained his support for term limits as the reason for committee changes, clarified he
did not personally ask anyone to resign from the IDA Board-stating the decision about Hitachi employees
was made by the Board itself-and denied making negative comments about Ms. Morgan. Vice Chair Smart
emphasized his commitment to serving alongside Americans of all backgrounds, denied holding any
prejudices, and stated he would not resign due to disagreement with his decisions.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P12

Ms. Cowan added that Mr. Oakes just said to hire the best candidate. She questioned why you would remove
committee members if you already have some of the best people serving.
Clarice Buster
Ms. Buster, a Scottsburg resident, urged the Board to repair the track, sharing that she can no longer use it
herself due to health reasons, but her grandchildren and other local children participate in track. She
emphasized the track's importance for community activity and asked the Board to prioritize its repairs, hoping
future generations can benefit even if she cannot.
Angela Yancey
Ms. Yancey, a resident of 1186 Old Grubby Road in South Boston, and a parent of a Halifax County High
School track athlete, advocated for repairing the local track and park facilities. She emphasized the
importance of having a functional track for students, families, and the wider community, noting that current
conditions require parents and students to travel long distances for competitions and that local events lack
media coverage. Ms. Yancey urged the Board to invest in youth and the community by restoring the track
and maintaining the park, which serves as a vital space for various community gatherings and activities .
Ashley Laganiere
Ms. Laganiere, a District 6 resident, urged the County to make repairs and improvements at Edmunds Park,
highlighting its value for families, children, and especially the growing homeschool community. She
emphasized the park's potential as an educational and wellness resource, noting that many local families
rely on it for outdoor learning and recreation . Improving the park would benefit not only homeschoolers but
all residents by supporting healthy lifestyles and fostering community pride, reducing the need to travel to
other counties for recreation .
Lewis Coleman
Mr. Coleman, an Alton resident, addressed the Board to advocate for repairing the local track. He shared
his personal journey of improved health after regularly walking at the track, including significant weight loss
and recovery from health issues. Mr. Coleman emphasized the track's importance as a source of community
unity, benefiting not only himself but also others recovering from COVID-19, new mothers, students, athletes,
and people of all ages . He urged the Board to allocate fund ing for the track repairs, highlighting its central
role in supporting the community's wellbeing.
Glenn Williamson
Mr. Williamson , a resident from southwestern Halifax County, voiced concerns about upcoming
Congressional Redistricting, questioning its legality and fairness. He argued that Halifax, Pittsylvania, and
Mecklenburg counties have little in common with the areas they are being grouped with and that the new
boundaries seem politically motivated. He recalled past experiences with distant representation and
emphasized that true representative democracy should involve communities with shared interests and
contiguous geography. He urged the Board to stand up against what he sees as poor representation and
questionable redistricting practices.
Betty Furman
Ms. Furman, a resident of 2170 Coleman Drive, Alton, addressed the Board regarding unresolved property
damage caused by Mecklenburg Electric (possibly Empower) during equipment and wiring installation on her
property in November 2024. Despite initial discussions and promises to fix the damage and compensate
her, the issue remains unresolved, with ongoing difficulty in receiving clear communication or action from the
parties responsible. Ms. Furman requested the County's assistance in resolving the matter, as the installation
has interfered with her fencing project and she continues to be given the runaround . Chair Roller
acknowledged the issue and stated that the Board would follow up.
Ryland Clark
Mr. Clark thanked the Board for their service and provided a summary of the ongoing discussion regarding
repairs to the local track. He recapped a May 2025 meeting, initiated by Hitachi Energy leadership, where
the County Administrator identified approximately $1 .3 million from a Dominion Solar Project as a potential
funding source. The plan was for the School Board and County to coordinate, send the item to the Finance
Committee, and execute an MOU, with the school system agreeing to provide security and allow County
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P13

maintenance. However, the process stalled due to lack of coordination, and the track's condition worsened.
Mr. Clark emphasized that the Board is not at fault but asked them to help move the project forward by
referring it back to the Finance Committee to review the previously identified funding . He stressed the
importance of fully restoring the track, urged against lower-quality fixes, and highlighted the broader issue of
deteriorating recreational facilities in the County. He called for collaboration and action to benefit the entire
community.
Jerri White
Ms. White, a resident of 1151 Lower Liberty Road, expressed her support for the removal of Mr. Smart.
Christie Smart Harrell
Ms. Harrell a resident of District 5, stated she came just to pray tonight. She expressed her gratitude to the
Board for their service and all they do for the citizens of Halifax County. Ms. Harrel stated the Lord says,
love your brothers and sisters and recited Matthew 25:40, "The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you
did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."' Ms. Harrell led the Lord's
Prayer and the audience joined in to complete the prayer.
Najeh Abedeljalil
Mr. Abedeljalil a resident District 3, criticized the recent dismissal of Animal Control Chief Warden Allison
Cannon, calling it a poor decision. He praised Mrs. Cannon's honesty and performance, contrasting her
tenure with alleged past misconduct under previous administrations. He urged the Board to reconsider the
decision, expressing doubt that Mrs. Cannon received fair treatment.
Faisal Abedeljalil
Mr. Abedeljalil a resident of Deerview Trail, South Boston, addressed several topics. He expressed
appreciation for the County Administrator's work but criticized the dismissal of Animal Control Chief Warden
Allison Cannon, stating she was honest and effective compared to previous administrations . He referenced
accumulated documentation regarding past issues, commented on the divisive nature of public officials'
remarks on social media, and urged more responsible communication . He also mentioned his personal
background, support for Palestine, and concerns for his grandchildren's future in Halifax, emphasizing the
need for unity and suggesting some Board sanctions.
Erica Debski
Ms. Debski, a resident of 1047 Dudley Road, advocated for the use of short-term funding to quickly repair
the track, noting broad community support for timely action . She also recommended allocating funds for
landscape architecture to redesign Edmunds Park, citing personal experiences with playground flooding and
limited usability. Additionally, she proposed adding a dog park to the redesign, explaining the challenges of
accessing distant facilities and the lack of safe walking areas in the County. She highlighted that a fenced
area without water amenities would suffice, based on her positive experiences with the Danville dog park.
Randy Bailey
Mr. Bailey, a resident of District 6, recounted an interaction with Mr. Brade, describing the meeting as
disrespectful with Mr. Brade failing to acknowledge him and his wife. Mr. Bailey referenced his background,
including experience with the FBI , and noted Mr. Brade's reliance on legal advice. He expressed frustration
over Mr. Brade's behavior during the meeting, mentioning disagreements about religious matters and feeling
disrespected. Chair Roller thanked Mr. Bailey for his comments but stated he found Mr. Brade cordial during
the same meeting, highlighting their differing perspectives . Mr. Bailey responded with appreciation but
remarked that most County Administrators last only four to six years, and in his view, Ron already had three
strikes against him .
Glenn Williamson
Mr. Williamson raised concerns about the safety of Foster Road near VIR, emphasizing its narrowness and
the risks posed by speeding traffic. He recounted a recent incident where a car dangerously passed him and
warned that increased traffic could lead to a serious accident. Mr. Williamson urged that his repeated
warnings be officially recognized as an ongoing issue.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P14

Thurstie Sherman
Ms. Sherman a resident of 4101 Lowery Road, raised several concerns: she criticized the delay in receiving
the Forensic Audit Report, urged County leaders to oppose a confusingly worded referendum scheduled for
April 21 , and highlighted negative online comments about the County from an individual abroad . She also
asked for clarity on the fee policy for Edmunds Park and requested that Tisha Waller's name, honoring the
two-time Olympian and 1988 graduate, remain associated with the track to inspire local youth .

Supervisor Claborne noted for the record that the audit would not be discussed tonight.
Sandy Slayton
Mrs. Slayton a resident of 1031 Carolyn Court, Halifax, and a High School Tennis Assistant Coach,
emphasized the need for more recreational opportunities for adults and families, particularly for pickleball
and tennis. She pointed out the limited pickleball facilities and restricted hours, making it difficult for
working adults to play, despite the sport's popularity among all age groups. Mrs. Slayton also noted the
deteriorating condition of tennis courts at the Middle and High Schools and urged for their refurbishment to
ensure the community has access to safe and healthy recreational activities, similar to neighboring
counties.

With no one else wishing to speak, Chair Roller closed Citizens' Comments .

H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. VDOT Smart Scale Projects
Mr. Detrick Easley announced a Public Hearing on five proposed Smart Scale projects submitted by VDOT.
Mr. Carson Eckhardt will present each project and address questions. The projects include a turning lane
on Highway 58 at Route 751, the Sinai Road Pedestrian Sidewalk Project, intersection improvements with a
dual turning lane at Highway 501 and Greens Folly Road, and two roundabouts: one at Sinai Road and
Mountain Road, and another at Sinai Road and Greens Folly Road. Mr. Eckhardt will provide an overview
of these projects before citizen comments.
Mr. Carson Eckhardt provided an overview and update on the current round of Smart Scale funding, following
up from a previous meeting. He outlined that VDOT recommends submitting five Smart Scale transportation
projects: three located within the Town of South Boston and two in the County. The Smart Scale process
involves a pre-application period (March 1-April 1), followed by full applications (June 1-August 1). All
Smart Scale documentation (including Board Resolution of Support) is due July 15th . Project scoring and
funding decisions are expected by January.
The five proposed projects include: 1) a turn lane improvement at US 58 and Route 751, 2) constructing a
permanent sidewalk on Sinai Road to replace the existing temporary one, 3) intersection improvements at
US 501 and Greens Folly Road (converting it to a dual left turn configuration), 4) a new single-lane
roundabout at Mountain Road and Sinai Road, and 5) a single-lane roundabout at Sinai Road and Greens
Folly Road, which has a higher crash history and would be bundled with the sidewalk project if both are
funded.
Discussion covered project details, safety concerns, and scoring from previous funding rounds. The two
roundabouts are considered to have the greatest safety and operational benefits. Some projects, such as
the Sinai sidewalk, scored low previously due to cost, but efforts are underway to reduce expenses and
improve competitiveness. Questions were raised about alternate funding streams (TAP and revenue sharing)
for projects not funded by Smart Scale, and the need for support resolutions from both the County and Town
Councils . Mr. Eckhardt confirmed there is no negative impact to supporting all five projects, as submitting
them increases the chance for funding .
Chair Roller opened Public Comments on the Virginia Department of Transportation Smart Scale projects.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

PIS

Glenn Williamson
Mr. Williamson inquired about the purpose of the turn lane at Highway 58 and Route 751, specifically
asking whether its construction is related to the nearby water plant.

Chair Roller confirmed it is the water plant.
Anthony Womack
Mr. Womack, a resident of 507 Cathy Sue Lane in District 3, recounted his previous efforts with local officials
to advocate for a sidewalk on a Sinai Road, describing the fear experienced even by officials while walking
there. He highlighted past pedestrian accidents, including fatalities, and questioned why these incidents
were not reflected in official statistics. Mr. Womack explained that a temporary sidewalk was installed after
funding was found, but now the community urgently needs a permanent sidewalk due to ongoing safety
issues, narrow roadways, and increasing traffic from new developments. He emphasized that about 7,000
vehicles travel the road daily, including large trucks, and reiterated his request for the Board and VDOT to
prioritize a permanent sidewalk for community safety.
Avaris Terry Williams
Ms. Williams, a lifelong resident of Sinai Road, currently residing at 2007 Sinai Road, emphasized the urgent
need for a sidewalk in front of Westside Apartments, referencing several pedestrian accidents-including a
fatality-and other vehicle incidents in the area. Ms. Williams expressed gratitude for the recent addition of
double yellow lines between Westside and Casa de Loop, citing the road's dangerous blind spot and heavy
traffic. Ms. Williams suggested extending double lining along the entire road and prioritizing the construction
of the sidewalk to improve safety.
Jennifer Champion
Ms. Champion expressed concerns about installing a roundabout on Sinai Road, noting that it is heavily used
by large commercial trucks from several companies. She argued that the size and maneuverability of these
trucks make navigating a roundabout unsafe and impractical, especially for vehicles like 54-foot log trucks
with significant tail swing. Ms. Champion suggested that installing a traffic light would be a safer and more
cost-effective option. She recommended that VDOT conduct a thorough study comparing commercial,
residential, and pedestrian traffic before proceeding, emphasizing the need to balance residential safety
improvements with the operational needs of growing local businesses.
Jerri White
Ms. White, who grew up in Sinai, highlights the lack of safe pedestrian routes, noting that residents often
walk in ditches to reach local stores. She expressed concern that pedestrian accidents were overlooked in
planning and urged that these incidents be considered when deciding on roundabouts. Ms. White
emphasized prioritizing sidewalks and community safety over roundabouts.
Thurstie Sherman
Ms. Sherman inquired about the costs associated with the proposed projects, expressed skepticism about
the suitability of roundabouts in the County. She emphasized that constructing a sidewalk in the area is a
high priority.

Chair Roller replied that while estimates are available, the funding for the project comes solely from Virginia
Department of Transportation sources, not from the County.
Mattie Cowan
Ms. Cowan questioned whether funding for road and sidewalk improvements near Sinai Road could be
sought from a recently approved solar farm . Supervisor Claiborne noted that VDOT would provide all
necessary funding . Ms. Cowan also warned that the influx of solar farm equipment traffic could damage the
road if improvements are made beforehand. She expressed concern regarding fencing installed in the area
increasing the risk of danger.
Erica Debski
Ms. Debski, a resident of 1047 Dudley Road, has lived in Halifax County for two years. She shared that the
poor and unfinished state of the Sinai Road sidewalk was a major concern for her. She explained that,

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P16

despite wanting to buy a house off Sinai Road, she ultimately decided against it because the sidewalk had
not improved in a year, raising safety concerns for her and her young child . She urged that the sidewalk
issue be given serious consideration .

Martha Ballou
Ms. Ballou , a resident of 1183 Sinai Road , South Boston, opposed the construction of a roundabout, citing
high traffic volume and concerns that many drivers are not familiar with roundabouts. She also noted that
the sidewalk along Sinai Road has been problematic for over a decade. She spoke of safety issues such as
blind spots and forcing school children to get off buses into ditches due to the lack of proper roadside space.
Additional concerns included increased noise and traffic from trucks, four-wheelers , and bikes, especially
with the arrival of a new solar facility. Ms. Ballou feels that the sidewalk would not serve many pedestrians
and urged decision makers to consider the needs of the entire community, including long-term residents, not
just individuals. She also mentioned confusion over responsibility between VDOT and South Boston and
highlighted the issue of rising taxes affecting her family and other residents .
H. L. Chappell, Jr.
Mr. Chappell of Vernon Hill, Virginia, expressed strong concerns about the feasibility of roundabouts on Sinai
Road, especially due to the difficulty large vehicles such as logging trucks face navigating them . He
highlighted the need for wider lanes and better turning lanes, particularly at intersections like Sinai and
Greens Folly Road, as safer and more practical alternatives. He suggested investing in turning lanes and
improving road infrastructure would be more cost-effective and less disruptive than constructing roundabouts,
urging the Board to reconsider their current plans and prioritize these improvements instead.
With no one else wishing to speak, Chair Roller closed Public Comments .

The Board discussed which projects to prioritize for the upcoming Smart Scale applications. Chair Roller
proposed prioritizing the Sinai sidewalk as the top project, followed by Greens Folly Turn Lanes and the
Highway 58 Turn Lane, with two roundabout projects as lower priorities. Board members raised concerns
about the feasibility and safety of the proposed roundabouts, citing land constraints, existing traffic lights, and
the hazardous nature of current sidewalk. Several members recommended focusing on widening Sinai Road,
noting its heavy truck traffic and the need for improved safety. In conclusion , consensus emerged to submit
the Sinai Sidewalk, Greens Folly Turn Lanes, and Highway 58 Turn Lane as Smart Scale projects, while
deferring the roundabouts for future consideration . Widening Sinai Road was also requested, though not as
part of the Smart Scale application.

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor McDowell to prioritize and submit the following
Smart Scale projects in this order: Sinai Sidewalk, Greens Folly Turn Lanes, and Highway 58 Turn Lane.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

I.

PRESENTATIONS
1. Joint Commission on Recovery Housing (JCRH) - The Honorable Judge Joel Cunningham
Judge Cunningham presented a plan for a Residential Recovery Program in Halifax County aimed at tackling
high recidivism rates and substance abuse. Representing the Joint Committee Recovery Housing, Inc., he
proposed a 100-bed center on a 50-acre site to serve nonviolent offenders-primarily from South Central
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P17

Virginia-by providing addiction treatment, workforce development, and transitional housing in a drug-free
environment with regular testing. The facility would offer holistic care, job training for positions resistant to
automation, and family reunification. Judge Cunningham emphasized the cost savings for the County: the
daily cost per person in the recovery center would be less than half that of jail, with substantial annual savings
for each bed used. He cited data showing high recovery rates and low recidivism from similar programs, as
well as a projected return of $8.31 for every dollar invested. The program would also address poor dental
hygiene among participants, which often hampers recovery, and involve partnerships with other counties in
the region . The center would include step-up apartments and a community garden, and plans to collaborate
with local higher education for job training. The anticipated impacts include improved mental health, reduced
illegal drug use, higher employment, fewer arrests, and decreased incarceration rates. The proposed site is
across from West Side Village, with strong community support. Judge Cunningham concluded that this
initiative would break generational cycles of substance abuse, benefit the local workforce and economy, and
be a model for other communities .

2.

Solid Waste Authority Board - F. Jesse Bausch

Mr. Brade explained that after a recent Solid Waste Disposal Authority meeting, some supervisors questioned
the legitimacy and transparency of how the meeting was conducted, suspecting it may not have followed
proper procedures . Because the County Attorney was involved and the process aligned with Board
expectations, Mr. Brade requested the County Attorney's presence to answer any concerns about the
meeting's process and clarify the difference between the Solid Waste Disposal Authority and the Board of
Supervisors' authority.
Mr. Bausch briefly explained that the Solid Waste Disposal Authority is a separate entity, established around
2010-2012, and not a committee of the Board of Supervisors. The Board appoints members to the Authority,
with several Board members currently serving. The Authority conducts its own meetings, which require public
notice and are open for attendance, but only Authority members receive official notifications. The Authority
operates independently, similar to other entities like the EDA or Sanitation Authority.
The discussion centered on clarifying the contractual relationship between the Authority and the Board of
Supervisors regarding the management and collection of solid waste fees. Chair Roller and several
Supervisors debated whether a formal contract exists or if past practices and Ordinances have guided their
cooperation. References were made to agreements from 2012, 2018, and 2019, with some members
requesting to see the actual contract, which was reportedly updated in 2018 but not present at the meeting.
There was also discussion on the method of fee collection-specifically, whether fees should be placed on
personal property or real estate bills.

J.

COMMITTEE REPORTS
1.

Finance Committee
a.

Opioid Settlement Supplemental Appropriation Request

Chair Roller stated the Opioid Settlement money for Opioid Awareness Day in the amount of $284,455.49
was on the floor open for discussion.
The following motion was presented as a recommendation of the Finance Committee for approval.
Motion made by Committee Chair Witt, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to recommend the full Board
approval of the Opioid Settlement money for Opioid Awareness Day. Motion passed 3-0 unanimously.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller

Yes
Yes
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P18

Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0.

b.

Halifax County Circuit Court Supplemental Appropriations

Supervisor Witt stated the motion from the finance committee was to recommend to the Board the
supplemental appropriation for the additional revenue to the Circuit Court in the amount of $10,975.99. A
motion was on the floor open for discussion.
The following motion was presented as a recommendation of the Finance Committee for approval.
Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to recommend to the Board that we
reappropriate this additional revenue to the Circuit Court. Motion passed 3-0 unanimously.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

K. NEW BUSINESS

1. FY2027 Budget Calendar Amendment

Mr. Brade explained that the updated schedule is being presented due to recent changes in the Interim
Finance Director position. After Dr. Bucklew adjusted the initial draft and the Board approved her calendar,
Mr. Montoro, the new Interim Finance Director, reviewed the schedule and provided new dates that
accommodate his availability. The current calendar reflects Mr. Montoro's input rather than adhering to the
previous schedule proposed by Dr. Bucklew.

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Witt to approve the amended FY2027 Budget
Calendar.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P19

2.

VIR IFB Award

Mr. Brade stated five bids were submitted for the VIR Water Interconnection project, ranging from $4.2 million
to $7.1 million. After reviewing the Engineer's analysis, Hurt & Proffitt recommended awarding the contract
to Classic City Mechanical for $4,232,485. The contract is funded entirely by grants, and SPDC is managing
the overall effort.

Motion made by Supervisor Thompson , seconded by Supervisor Riddle to award the contract to Classic City
Mechanical for $4,232,485.
ROLL CALL VOTE:

Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0.

3.

Halifax County 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan Update:
The Board and Commission will receive and consider public input regarding updates and
amendments to the 2037 Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is the County's key policy
document for land use, development, housing, infrastructure, transportation, and related economic
and social issues. The policies defined in the plan will guide the County's future direction and
priorities for growth, services, and land use regulation . This Comprehensive Plan amendments
repeals and replace the adopted Halifax County 2017 plan in its entirety. Content, maps, goals,
objectives, and strategies for all chapters have been revised and/ or replaced in entirety to address
key issues and priorities identified through public outreach and to comply with the Code of Virginia.

Mr. Easley explained that the Board must decide on updates to the Comprehensive Plan, following a Joint
Public Hearing with the Planning Commission where no citizen comments were made. The Planning
Commission has recommended approval , and the Board will make the final decision tonight. The
Comprehensive Plan serves as a guide for Land Use decisions, and once approved, copies will be provided
to Commission members and Board members. Supervisor Witt inquired about the next update, and Mr.
Easley responded that it occurs every five years.

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Claiborne to adopt the updated Halifax County
2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan as presented , having found it consistent with the health, safety, and welfare
of the community.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P20

4.

Amending Article XIII, M-2 Industrial General:
The proposed amendment would increase building height in the M-2, Industrial zoning district from
50ft to 80ft. Buildings located within the Industrial Park recognized by Halifax County or the Industrial
Development Authority shall be allowed to be erected up to 120ft. Any building or structure shall be
constructed, erected, maintained, and be of an approved type in accordance with the provisions of
the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, as amended, and the Fire Prevention Code.

Mr. Easley stated the Planning Commission recently held a Public Hearing and approved a proposed
increase in the allowable building height for M-2 Industrial zoning districts. This change, supported by Mr.
Brian Brown, aims to make the County more attractive for future business development by removing height
restrictions that could deter potential companies . The final step is for the Board to vote on amending the M2 zoning requirements .
Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Vice Chair Smart to approve the amendment to Section 53389 of Halifax County Zoning Ordinance, to permit buildings in the M-2 zoning district to be erected to a
height of up to 80 feet, and up to 120 feet for buildings located within the Industrial Park recognized by Halifax
County and the Industrial Authority.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

5. Conditional Use Permit Application ED # 6:
Applicant:
Demar Ferrell
PRN :
35655
Location :
4226 Lewis Ferrell Road
Landowner:
Demar Ferrell
Proposed Use:
Operate Southernwoods Auto, LLC; car lot to sell cars, trucks, trailers, and
motorcycles.

Mr. Easley stated that Mr. Demar Ferrell applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a used car lot at
4226 Lewis Ferrell Road. The Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit application,
recommending an amendment to Site Condition Nine, setting hours of operation to Monday through
Saturday, 7:00 a.m . to 9:00 p.m. Mr. Ferrell agreed to this change, and Board action is now required with a
favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission.

Motion made by Supervisor McDowell, seconded by Supervisor Thompson to approve the Conditional Use
Permit for Mr. Demar Ferrell to operate Southernwoods Auto, LLC at 4226 Lewis Ferrell Road with the sixteen
site conditions .
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P21

6.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED # 1:
Applicant:
Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless
PRN:
31627
Location:
LP Bailey Memorial Hwy
Landowner:
Aubry Younger or Mary Sue
Proposed Use:
Construct a 199ft Wireless Telecommunication Tower

Mr. Easley explained that the Planning Commission had tabled the application due to concerns about existing
towers near the proposed site. Verizon was asked to provide details about other towers within a five-mile
radius. The proposed site is marked with a red pin on the map, and yellow pins indicate towers that already
have Verizon service; a blue pin represents a tower that cannot be used due to its height and proximity to
Crystal Hill. The Ordinance restricts towers from being within five miles of each other, but State law
discourages denial based solely on business decisions related to tower proximity. Mr. Easley offered to have
Ms. Valerie Long from Verizon answer any questions and noted that the Board had access to Public Hearing
minutes, which include citizen concerns about the tower's location and aesthetics.
Supervisor Claiborne inquired about the Planning Commission's vote, and Mr. Easley confirmed that the
Commission unanimously denied the application with an 8-0 decision.
Supervisor Witt expressed concern about the Planning Commission's unanimous 8-0 decision to deny the
tower application, citing the increasing number of towers along Route 501 and questioning whether an
alternative location might better serve the area. He suggested that, given the Planning Commission's strong
opposition and after hearing Verizon's presentation, the Board should reconsider or further examine the
issue, weighing both current and future technology needs and potential coverage overlaps before making a
final decision.
Supervisor Riddle supported the Planning Commission's unanimous denial of the tower application, citing
the presence of more towers in the area than depicted on the map and the high density of towers along Route
501 . Supervisor Riddle made a motion, seconded by Supervisor McDowell, to deny the application .
Supervisor Riddle suggested that a more suitable location should be considered .
Chair Roller expressed difficulty in deciding on the tower application. He noted that Verizon identified the
proposed site through search ring analysis to address coverage gaps, even though there are existing towers
nearby. He acknowledged firsthand experience with network overloads and questioned how many towers
are too many. Balancing landowner rights with potential visual impact, Chair Roller observed the tower would
be visible but not overly intrusive. Chair Roller emphasized respect for the Planning Commission's
unanimous denial and the area's representative, but stated he is uncertain about the best course of action .
Supervisor Riddle noted there are no connectivity problems at the proposed tower location and suggested
that other areas of the County have a greater need for improved cell service.
Chair Roller referenced a prior tornado event in Liberty, highlighting how emergencies can strain
communication networks and emphasized that, even with weak cell service, text messages often still go
through during such situations.
Ms. Valerie Long, an Attorney representing Verizon Wireless, explained that constructing new towers is very
costly, exceeding one million dollars. She emphasized that Verizon would prefer to co-locate on existing
towers if feasible, as it is more efficient and affordable, but technical constraints such as interference and
coverage gaps prevent this at the proposed site. Radio Frequency Engineers determine tower placement
based on coverage needs and capacity issues, aiming for precise spacing to avoid gaps. The proposed
location is intended to improve coverage reliability along a major corridor and is set back among trees to
minimize its visual impact, with the tower designed to blend into the surroundings.
In response to Chair Roller's question of how Verizon determines lack of coverage, Ms. Long responded that
Verizon determines coverage gaps through a combination of ongoing monitoring by Radio Frequency
Engineers, customer feedback, and equipment performance checks. They assess areas that experience
surges in demand, such as stadiums or public events, and respond to direct reports from customers who
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P22

experience dropped calls or poor service.
Commission standards for coverage quality.

Add itionally, Verizon must meet Federal Communications

Chair Roller noted there have been no complaints about dropped calls in the area, while Ms. Long explained
that Verizon's efforts are focused on anticipating future needs and supporting County growth and tourism by
proactively upgrading infrastructure.
Chair Roller questioned whether new phone models, which use more data, might impact future service
quality. Ms. Long confirmed that as technology advances and more users move in, Verizon must routinely
update antennas to maintain high-quality service. She explained that the system has capacity limits and
requires proactive upgrades to support growth and evolving technology. Additionally, Ms. Long emphasized
that the Federal Telecommunications Act encourages competition among carriers to ensure affordable prices
and high service quality. While other providers like AT&T, US Cellular, and T-Mobile may offer coverage in
the area, Verizon believes the current coverage does not meet their standards, particularly for seamless
service and in-building coverage needed by residents and businesses .
Vice Chair Smart inquired about the impact of 4G versus 5G technology on tower placement. Ms. Long
explained that 5G often requires towers to be spaced more closely together, depending on the frequency
band used. She noted that there are no available towers within the five-mile search area that meet Verizon's
requirements, and if there were, Verizon would prefer to use them due to significant cost savings .
Supervisor McDowell, formerly a Verizon customer, switched to T-Mobile due to poor customer service. He
asked whether T-Mobile or other carriers could use the proposed tower. Ms. Long explained that, if approved
and built, the tower would be owned by a third party and offer co-location space for multiple carriers, including
AT&T and T-Mobile. The tower owner would actively seek additional tenants, enabling better coverage for
variqus providers and incentivizing competition . She noted that co-location helps offset operational costs
and is facilitated by industry databases listing tower locations.
Supervisor McDowell questioned whether service complaints might originate from customers of other carriers
like T-Mobile or Sprint. Ms. Long responded that while Verizon mainly focuses on its own customers, the
company aims to improve service in Halifax County to attract users from other providers. She emphasized
that Federal Telecommunications Regulations require all carriers to offer coverage throughout their licensed
areas, ensuring competition and broad service availability for residents .
Supervisor Claiborne remarked that Verizon 's proposal for infrastructure improvements appears proactive,
as there have been few complaints from the community. Ms. Long confirmed this, explaining that Verizon is
planning ahead to ensure its network remains strong amid growing population and tourism, and increased
reliance on mobile phones for emergencies, telemedicine, and remote learning. Although she does not
directly manage customer complaints, Ms. Long emphasized that Verizon would not pursue this investment
unless it was essential for infrastructure and customer service, based either on some complaints or on
internal assessments of network reliability. Ms. Long noted that maintaining seamless and reliable coverage
along Route 501 is critical for the community's day-to-day needs, and the proposal is intended to address
both current and anticipated future demands.
Ms. Long requested that if the Board is not ready to approve this tonight, instead of denying it, they consider
sending it back to the Planning Commission so more information can be gathered and provided .
Chair Roller expressed concern that the Planning Commission unanimously opposed the proposal (8-0) and
asked if it could be reconsidered. Mr. Easley clarified that the Planning Commission has already made its
recommendation , and the decision now lies with the Board, which may choose to table the matter and request
additional information from Verizon if desired.
Ms. Long stated there was just one member of the public that expressed opposition .
Vice Chair Smart asked Supervisor Riddle to explain the negatives of the proposed tower in his area, since
the positives had already been discussed. Supervisor Riddle responded that the northern part of the County,
particularly along Route 501 , is already heavily populated with towers. He expressed concern that the map

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P23

does not show all existing towers, emphasizing that the area is densely saturated with telecommunications
infrastructure.
Chair Roller noted that the map shows five towers, with Verizon's antennas already placed on those marked
in yellow. Vice Chair Smart clarified that the red pin represents the proposed tower. Ms. Long explained that
Verizon is not present on the blue-pinned SBA tower; although Verizon considered using it, the proximity to
their existing antennas at the Crystal Hill tower would cause interference. Additionally, the SBA tower's lower
elevation and the area's varied terrain would create coverage gaps between it and Verizon's northern handoff
site at Old Road . As a result, co-locating on the SBA tower is not feasible, and Verizon would only pursue
such an option if it met their coverage and operational needs.
Vice Chair Smart asked whether the red circle on the map represented a five-mile radius or diameter, and
Ms. Long clarified that it shows a five-mile diameter, encompassing all towers within five miles of the proposed
site.
Mr. Easley clarified an earlier statement and explained that the Board has the option to send the proposal
back to the Planning Commission for additional review, which could result in the same outcome, but allows
for further consideration before a final decision is made.
Supervisor Witt emphasized that their main responsibility is to serve the public, highlighting the universal
demand for reliable service. He expressed concern about the competitive dynamics among carriers, noting
that each company wants to build towers to gain an advantage and accommodate competitors, which can
lead to a proliferation of towers. Supervisor Witt pointed out that Verizon is not using the blue-pinned SBA
tower, and Ms. Long explained this is due to the tower's unsuitable location, confirming that the decision not
to co-locate was intentional. Ms. Long explained that Verizon would not benefit financially or in terms of
coverage by co-locating on the SBA tower, as it would create interference with their existing antennas and
leave coverage gaps. She noted that while tower owners are motivated to host multiple carriers for increased
rent revenue, Verizon only pursues new locations when co-location is not feasible. In this situation, careful
site selection was made to balance coverage, minimize impact on neighbors, and accommodate a willing
landowner. Ms . Long urged approval of the tower proposal, emphasizing the importance of reliable service
for the community, but stated that Verizon is willing to revisit the Planning Commission if more information is
needed.
Supervisor McDowell questioned whether relocating the proposed tower to the right side of Route 501, rather
than aligning it with existing towers on the left side, would still provide adequate coverage. Ms. Long
explained that the proposed tower location was chosen based on recommendations from Radio Frequency
Engineers to ensure optimal spacing and coverage, considering terrain, road layout, and the availability of a
willing landowner. She emphasized the challenges of meeting zoning requirements, finding well-screened
sites, and securing landowner agreement, all while prioritizing reliable service and minimal visual impact.
Chair Roller announced that the Board had a motion and second to deny the proposal but expressed ongoing
concerns. He personally suggested sending the matter back to the Planning Commission for further review.
Vice Chair Smart introduced a substitute motion, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to send the cell tower proposal
back to the Planning Commission for further review and reconsideration .
Supervisor Claiborne expressed concern about the Board's confusion over the cell tower proposal and
suggested exploring alternative locations within the area before making a final decision, to avoid potential
regret from voting prematurely.
Mr. Easley questioned what specific issues the Planning Commission should review, noting that finding new
tower locations is not within their duties. Supervisor Claiborne suggested considering alternative sites, while
Chair Roller expressed concern about the high number of existing towers and questioned the need for
additional coverage. Despite these uncertainties, Chair Roller emphasized the importance of reliable cell
service for citizens and travelers. Vice Chair Smart proposed that, at minimum, the Planning Commission
could reaffirm its prior negative stance on the proposal.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P24

Chair Roller clarified that the substitute motion is to send the cell tower proposal back to the Planning
Commission for further review and reconsideration . Mr. Easley requested clarification on what the Planning
Commission is expected to do, and Chair Roller explained that he wants them to reexamine and reconsider
the proposal.
Supervisor McDowell asked for Supervisor Riddle's opinion, and Supervisor Riddle reaffirmed his support for
denying the proposal.
In response to Ms. Long's question about the reason for Supervisor Riddle's concerns, Supervisor Riddle
stated that the area is already densely populated with towers and there have been no complaints about cell
service.
Ms. Long emphasized that Verizon would not invest over a million dollars in the proposed cell tower unless
there was a demonstrated need for improved service, comparing the decision to how the Board would only
fund a new school if there was clear evidence of overcrowding.
Chair Roller stated a Roll Call vote would be taken on the substitute motion to send the cell tower proposal
back to the Planning Commission for further review and reconsideration . Chair Roller explained that a "yes"
vote would send the cell tower proposal back to the Planning Comm ission for reconsideration and a "no" vote
would mean the proposal is not referred.

Substitute motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to send the cell tower proposal
back to the Planning Commission for further review and reconsideration.

ROLL CALL VOTE:

Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

No
Yes

No
Yes
Yes

No
No
No

Motion failed 3-5.

Chair Roller stated the Board would now vote on the original motion regarding the Conditional Use Permit;
choosing "yes" means denying the permit, while "no" means not denying it.

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor McDowell, to deny the application .
ROLL CALL VOTE:

Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes

No
Yes
Yes

No
No
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 5-3.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P25

7. Resolution in Opposition to Congressional Redistricting Constitutional Amendment

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor McDowell to approve Resolution 2026-4.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

Motion passed 7-1 .

HAIJFAX COUNTY

\\ HEREAS. along •·itl, llalifa, Count). the 4 C'ungr<>Siunal Di,tri<1 •ould include
Piusyl,:inia. Me.-1<1,-nbu'l!, Br11n;wick. DinQiddic. Grcm>'illc, SUSSc,. Soutluo11p1on, Prince
Gewge, Suny. Ch:,rl •Cit} C'OUJJtie;. =em ('hes1erfield County. cast"1! Henrico ,C>Unty.
mo,i ,,ffames tit)· County. 811d the dties (1fl)anvillc. Emporia. C'oluniul Heights.
Pcttnlturg. llnpewcll. ruul \\1ll1a.'1lSbllJ'l1. as well a.< p.,rts of franklin City. and almo;t all uf
Ridnn1111d City; and.

BOARD OF SUPER\flsoRS
1050 Mary Bethune StrHt

P. O. Box699

llA'tlCt('tt=.Jl.to.i

0-En«(TOI.U.l•to~

Hofifa.K. VA 2'558-0699

C11..aowin . u111

('34)fu:(4.)1)4~

~~-D•

.,,.... n,i;tucounlYYI poy

l((ff'lll&lllti)(l'll:lfU - to.-r
■ mr,-,n~-0•

Cll'l'III Mint . ~

WHER£AS.1hr l'fOl'\"t:'1 4 C'ong,tS iMal District is neither crunpacl oo, c<>,1tigu,1us a.s the
oom:m 5 C'on~i• ! Oi,1ric1; nnd.

2026-I
RESOLUTION

WHEREAS. Halif~ C'tllllll) h;i, ,.,thing in c'"runon "ilh thc('i1y 1.f Richmonrl n,, ,is

RESOLUTION IS OPPOSITIO~ TO CONGRESSIONAi. REDISTRJCTISG
CO:-iSTITL'TIONAL AMENDMElff

<llllllWldtng....,.:llnll.

WHEREAS, in 2020. a Constitvtionll1 Amffldmenl wo.s appro,·cd b)' the\~ of \'itgint11
a-~ifl{t lhe Virginio Rcdistridint Commi~Km.. also known ns Amclc II. S'°ction 6-A of lhe
C'onstltutton of Virginia; and.

WHEREAS. die balloi lsi~'ll.lg< of~ propooed Ct111Slil11ti(lnal Amendmml states that it
woold"allo~ the General A.<Klllblytb tl1npi)IQJ!ly adopt new e<>ngn:s.,iooal distria.s lo
rcslll!e ~ im • in the upc,•nint elections" is anything bul foir l!ld in reality. unfnir 101he
citi7<lll ot'Halifa, <'l'llllty.

Wffl::REAS. lht. Virginio Redistricting Commi~on WAScstoblishcd lO con\·cnt in 2020, IWI
c,·c,y ""1 y.-_,, th<mifter. "for th, purpo,< of csU!b!ishillJ: disuicts for lhe U.S. House of
Rcprcs:ntatl\t:!t, tbt Sene1e of Virg,ini:i. and the Virgin.in House of Deleg.ncs" f)\ffSuatU to
Ankle II. S-mion 6 of the Conilitution of Virginia: ond,

NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT Rl SOI.Vf.D.1lul !he Halifax Count} Boord of Supen·is<~
I Exprcms ii, Sll!'l'llll for the \'ir&inia Rcdi,tricting Commission. and pre!el\'CS
lcgislolivc distriCls ll£1 ~n: cvmpact. contiguous. ond c'1mply with applia!hle !all'.
2. hrrmcs stroni: uppo,itiPn ro th• rroposed r unstitutionol Amm<lmen11ha1
creates anrl pmmot..-s pi!lisan genymandering.
). F.,prmes str~ uppt•>ition 111 early voting heginning on Morch 6. 2016 prior 10
apirJrioo of the ninety-day conslilutional woiting reriod.
Stroogly Uf\.'<S 1hr rnters of Halifax Cout1!) lo oppose lhe Constitutional
Amendment Ill be rnrcd on April 21.

-.nn

\\'Hl:Rl:AS.
pl"OJ)O)Cd. the said amendmcn1 to dJC Constitution of Virgjni.i rtlt:Cl\'1.-d
broad imjorit) S\Jrpoft ecross lht Common...,cnllh of Virginia, with 2.287.091 \'ircim!lnS
\-oting in fuvor of the mca!ure, including 11 .413 Halifax County \-otcrs: and.
WHEREAS, the Virginia Redistrictiny Cornmission ~full)' put :mend t o ~

gM')'m,3Qdcring ohhe Virginia legis1ativc districu for the U.S. Holl$C of Rcprcxnt.:d:i~·es., the
Smote of VUWoia Rnd the Virgini:I: House: of Delegates 1hu.'I cn:.:uing compact ar.d
conti.b'\Wl.t..; l1istricts~ WHEREAS. lhc Virg,n:i3 Grncr.d As.scmbly c:illcd for a Special S~sifln during the tut
wed: of October 202S to pr<>p(.'M' D CcrutiMionaJ Amendment tha1 \4oOuld amend Aniclc II.
Scciion 6·A of th; Colbtilulion of Virginia by allowing the Gcn!.'r.ll As.sml.b!y to Rdrow the
Con~ionol Districts ccmtnu)· 10 the goals of the Virginia Redistricting C'ommlSSion; :ind.

BE n RATHER Rf.SOl.\"Ell tho! • copy of this =~utiun bl! pre,cnted 10 Halifo,
C'oonty's Gernnl A,'leinhly drl gation and 10 GovcmrH Abigail SpJnberger

WHl:Rf.AS, the.· Virginia Gcncr.il MSc.,nbl.> p:tiled HB 1384. which would fonxg ,otc on u
Cons1 i1u1irmal Amcndmcnl lhil1 wouJd ; Uow the Virginia General Asscmbl)' to rtdNI"' the
Congres.sionol Oii-trlcts in W1 ,wcrtly partisan mti:nner thllt is agllins:t the: currc:nt
C'ongres:-}lwl Ois1ricts tha1 ~·ere 2P?f'O'c:d in 2020: ond,

~~
t'l~r.·~
Halifax County Board of SupeMSOn;

WHEREAS, lhc Virginia Gencr.'lJ Assembly~ the: ele<:tioo date 6f the proJIOjC'd
Con5titutionll Amendmenl 1hli would \\!low lhc pMi~ red:rlwini; of the cu.m:nt dC\c:n
CongrcssiunJ.I Districts for April 21 with early voting ~nnine on March 6; and

A'!!£r

,/_ . /
7/1µ,, .. ")?1~

WHl-:RlAS. shoulJ lht Con~wuliorul Amcndmenl be :,pproved on April 21 , Hnlifa..-.:
C,~t)· would be pfac:-td in the q, Congr.::ssion:I Di'1rict; and.

Hlll:tax County Bo:ard of Supervisors

Ven0/1 "RO!I" M. Brode. CIW<

,_ -

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P26

8. Support Agreement for Moral Obligation for the Purchase of 2507 Houghton Avenue

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Vice Chair Smart to approve Resolution 2026-5.
VOTE

Motion passed 7-1 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K. McDowell, and
Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Mr. P. Riddle
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

HALIFAX COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPE.R\llsoRS

·--

Vs,.- • Aaft- ll..,. .

1050 Mary 8citm,nciStrff1
P. 0 . Boxeet
HallflDI:, VA 24SSll-009
, .. ,., 41&-UCO
,._:{"34) 47~

WR !lalfflUiPWl'XYI OOJ

-~-----

· " - - rt.· -

ol princ,p3I .imf Wl lttes.t on th(, Nole The County shall not ha'/e any Sup:por1 Obl:gaeon to,
~ r£p.aymen1 of the Noto un!C"'..G. ond offiy to the extent that. conts dcfiwxt from the Pro;e-ct
are tnsufftclient to limoty PIIY tho pnnc.pol ~nd ll'\1eres1 on the Nole. In tha1 case. tho County'•
Supporl Obl:g.11tion sh.lll. (I) run o~ for th at ~lod of time whtln renb derived Imm the Pr~
are "1!M.11ficilMI to f.mcly poy principal and lntcrcr.r on tho Note . .:,nd (ii) equal the m w,imum
ec,dtt:on,el emount needed to umr&ty pa y principal ond into,esl or'I the Nole aft~r e!; evailsbk>
rent) Nlvo ~en atd,eatod to the payment of auoh prtncip31 41\d io1mtnt

•-1 0 ..

DJ/U l fl;CTo,,.,¢0,(.De,I

ia-ci..-n.a,.

3.
No latsr than ~rn,tµy 15 of eaeh year beg.flfmf) January 1$. 2027. the
Adnl:rnsbal.or of tt-.o Authority (the •A/JminGlnllot"), wor11.1lg in ~borot,on With the F""'1anCe
Oir~o, of the Co,Jnty. ohdl notify the County Mm1nistrat0f of the emount that w,11 be- "8eded
during the County• l'tCX1 i&Muing tccal year to sotl:&ty !?'le County's Soppoc1 ~igat,on,
inlerCtit-001)' p.::ymcntr, oecning In the County's curroo1 fiflcot year and any O(her amounrs
due to b o p:i...,; by the Counly IO the Au1norlty 'Mll"I reg3rd to lhe Protec! during tho eounty·s
r\CIXI cm.wr.g fts2l year (l he •ApprQpfi.ali:H1 Amount"). The Appropriation Amoun1 st111D oot
exccad the Sup;,or, Obligati(in c:i,!a.cl.oled uru!et Section 2 above.

M C ! O ' t ~ •ID ..
~IIA..IICOCWll'..l l - ( Dfl1

IIIOOITJ..lff~•CO.O
"""'ncfGIU111 • l'Clll:CA.a:II

2026-S
RESOLUTION

RESOLUTION OF SUP'PORT AGREEM ENT FOR A MORAL OBUGATION FOR THE
PURCHASE OF 2507 HOUGtfTON AVENUE

4
The Ccunty Admm trotor 1-ha!I M1-C:ude tt'IO Approprmtion Amol.rol in the a ~
bvdGG-t S&d>mitted ~ the Scad to, the County·• neX1 «lSUing fl!IQI ye::ar. Within ten (10) days
eflet the adoption of eaM 15:.rch budge,. but not tater lhan July 15 of each year. the County
Adm:niwator sh:IS d~"1!!f to lhtt Aufhof,ty 8 certifu::altt slating whclhet the Board has
appropria:ed an arnoun\ equal to lho Appm;snmlon Amou~ lo lhe Authority tor such purpt>$e
in tne Coumy'a annual budget adoptl:d for suc:h fiscal year

SUPPORT AGREEMENT
T)tjS SUPPORT AGREEM ENT, made tu; of March 2. 2026, OClt\Yeen tno SOA RD Of
SUPERVISORS 0,:- HALIFAX COUHTY, VIRGtNIA (th8 "Boat<f"), acting n the governing
bOdy of HalJfau· C:liunty, Virgif\la (the 'County"). the INOUSTRlAL DEVELOPM ENT
A UTHORITY OF HAUFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA. ti public body pG~ • nd corporate or the
Co:nmor.wealtil of Vrrg'..roo fthe 'Authority") and FIRST NATIONAL BANK fthe "Bani(').

5
Tho Bc,.ua he-rd,y undeftekr.. a non- ~
obegabon lo appropriate r.uCh
amounts • ~ may be doeermined 10 be neces.sory to s.ati&fy the Pl'oje-ct ooh! &&Mc& lo the!
lu'.fe:.I dqeo and '" $Uch m.3nnet as ia con&t:1.IOnt with the Conct7tution and laWS ol tho
Ccn,.mony.-e::,'.~ o1 Vu-g:ni3. The Soan:J. WMO teoognZng INI It is nol emp(M,'Oted lo make
cn y bmo.ng comm:tmen: to m 3;Xc sud\ .approprbt:ons ,,.. future fiscal )'eiilf$ , horoby &l.K6s Its
intent co mole SU-Ch at,ptopNt:ien1 in Mure (;seal )'Gars. and twreby rocomrn9"ds that f\.-1\lre
8o3rds do l.U.tf!Se

WJTNESSETH
WHEREAS . First Notton.,.I Bank hm. &greed b loan up to $1. 120.COO to the Authority
lo finonc8 tho P,otect; and,

15.
t..'o'3tng he-re.n ~
1n«1 no o r ~ be dccmod to be & lti nd.'f?9 or the cre<trt ol
t~ County ttl ttw AuthOnty. U\a COmpar.y o r nny othor person. ond nothing herein contained
.S o r shat tn ~ to be o pledge of Qkh oncl a e:::ist or the taxing power of tho County
Ntlth:ng he-~ n c0,•ililQned Shall blnd or ol:)l!gate thl! Board to app,oprioto funds 10 satiety the
poyn:c-01 cb!:os\ions ,Tith roopcc1 t :> the Project for the pu<poSCtS dc5enbcd tmrein.

WHEREAS, ttw finat\CY?g for the Project will be secured by an auig:r.mcnl of Ole
Aulhor;ty's base-wJ:h lhe Company, o first ion deed of tn.."SI on the land wtiofcon tho P«Y,eet
...-.:, be tacoted. end the mo,al CbGg!Jlion of ti'\'!,! Board to pay (he dett GCMtlO t;;fl !ho Authority's
~nong with the Sank; ond,
WHEREAS. the B.rnk PfOPOM$ to plO\lida the funds to the Authcri1y IOI' tho CC$! or the
Pmjeel ii 01Q c.ounty will er.18'1" int.O thb ~ed-4c>oppropriat:on support c g ~ c.s
~lbonol aocurify for the Au'lhOrity·s comrn:rc-.ol ncto ts.sued to the Bank in tho i,1r.ount rnn
to exceed s1 . 120.000 (tho *Noto'1: ond,

7
Tn.c Aulhcrity 5hall f&3S(t . null'Ui:lal and Qdmmk~ the Projed ;n acccrdance
with tho g:cncJc)lly ap¢:c:sb!e rVcs g ,m ,egut31~ of tM County. aa lhtt t.fne may bB kl efl'ed
frcm trme" l otimfl
B.
The Boarti ackno\\1otdge$ th;:it ~ ,s entenng into rhzs Agreement on beh3lf of
lhO Coun1y rl consioemtion for the provisk:ln ol ftnancin:g by lh<l Authority ertd rts agreement
lo t ease, m a'. !11a:n and adfl'Uni!.10, thO Pro}e-ct The Board ockn::iwledget that the Author>ty 1:1
undDrt..,.king 1b; c bf~UOr.s Qt the reqUMI of the Boatd to as.slst with lho econorrec
dellOClopmenl cl the Ccunty ~ appro;matcons by O'Ml Board pur$Uent to fhb Suppo-rt
l\~ en! ma1 be eu'9f'I~ to pay t h e ~ debt Ul'Vioo

WHEREAS. 1hl:i Board adopted on J.1areh 2 . 2026. a rescwtion authorizing the
exet:uttem o1 thh Support Agreement p1o vi±ng f01 a ncn-b:ndng obig;at:on of the Ciotm?y to
con:side-1 oenoin epp:oprtatir,ns ki oonnccti:>n with tho Authcrlty's obligatic-o lo the & nk uW.X:r
lhe Nolc
NOW THEREFORE, IOf and tn canCJCef8tion of the fcmi,going and of the mutual
ccvanants herein Gel forth. tMi partiff hftre!o agree an fol!ows

9
The ~ y mid tho A-.:~il y aciln::>wledgo o.' \d Qgl'OO thal (I) the ohl-igalton of
thlt Cct:nly !O r'M''ko ~ payment.t NtQlired ~ thfs Suppott Agteen'l4tf'\f rS c n.,cial to lhO
~ t y for lhe N$.e end (11) th1i Sank wou!d not loon fund~ to tile Aulhon!)' u."\der the Nole
w.thcut the S&Wri-ty end credit enhMccmont p!'D\/leed oy this: Suppcn ~ t .
10
My ncbc95 or rc~:;ts ~ C d 10 be given hercund2t sh3t bo OeOmcd g....c:n
t1 serat ty 1t:iµl1tre<1 er cert:f.ed ma:t. p0$lcll)e p,er,aid, addtnsad (8 ) if 1o the hAhor'.ty.
hdu,ctrial De-veb;i,mt:nt A1.r.ho11ty of Ha:lfox County, VlfVini.:I . &.!d;og One. Suite One. 1100
CCnfrny Drive. Sou:h &31on, Vll'&J:tl!ll 24592 (~nlien Executiw Oirecto:). with a CO?Y to

The AU!hority $han pay the COS.I$ ol trto Pro;ott. inspect and O'te'$8'e ~
1
c;onstruclionof the Prcjecl onef wAI ktasethO Pro,ect to the Ccmpanywhid'lwj! b8 rc$p01'1Sibte
for the prope:-, ~ m c n t. ~ l i o n ond m.a'ntenance or lhe Pf'tl:led
2
T~ Aulho:ity wtli chargtt m arket ra tes for the Project and deetcale a'J r"'1\IS
dftf1Wd fro.'TI Ille PT~
, wh-tltlt'!' pafd by the Company OI' Othof tenant, firsl to the pa)'T"Wnl

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P27

(SIGNATURE PAGE TO f1ALIFAXCOUNT"Y SUPPORT AGREEMENT}
IN WtTHESS WHEREOF. the p::>rtlos here to have e-3Ch caus ed tfl:6 Agreomcnt lo bz
e xecuted i., lhr::tU respective n.omes os of tho dol e fi rsl above written

5-.tndti Andor&On PC, PO Box 1998. Richmond , VA 23218 -1998 lb) If to the County, lo
Halifax ~nty Boatd ol Su;:,e~. 1050 M'11,Y B<lthune Sttt:et, Suite, Halifax , Vlrg.™21
24558 (Ancntion: County Admtn:$tral0t ) Wl!t'I o copy lo Halifu County Attorney. S.ncts
Anderson PC, PO Box 1998. Richmood. VA 23216-1998 or (C} lo lh() Bank ol 622 BtODd
Street Altavista. VA 24517. Any party mey designate any 011M.1r aodro-ss for notk;e-:; or
requffts by ghring notice unclcr Uv.s p.tra~.

v.,,. ...

11

BOARD OF SUPERVISQRS OF

HALIFAX COUNTY, V1RGINIA

By

Thie Agreement 4h:ll! bo governed by the laW!I o l ttte Commonwealth of

~ -M A/z--<Ron Brade.
County Admlo~trator

12
tf any davsc. prov15Cln Of -.ectk>n af thl:S A.greemont shaU bo Mid lllc,goJ or
inv.,hd by ony c.ourt. tho illegelrty or mYaltdity of GUCh dluse, p,DYieioo or sccton shot! nol
affoct thO remainder of lhla A9recment ¥dllCh cnaa oe ~ and enfOf'CGd ai. If 5uch llleoal
01 lnv.ttid
provision Of' section had not been contained in thts Ag:'nmeot

Approved all to Form:

csaus.e.

13.
paidinfuR

Tl1b Agrec-mer.t Ghalt rem&tfl in lul force and effect ,..,Ill the Nohl h:u bocn

County Attorney

14
Th-~ Ag,~
, may be o xecuied In . . ~ (X)U(ltorp¥t:8 cDCh of \llJl\ich uinn
be an ortginal tmd all of Which logothcT ah.iii conslffule bul Ol'lft and !ho some inatrumon l

COMMONWEAL TH OF VIRGINI A

)
)

COUNTY OF HALIFAX

/SIGNATURE AND NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FOLLOW}

10 - w ff .

The tore-gol,ng instrument w as; o dlno-~c, be font me lM £
t.y R or, Brade, Counry Ad~traltX. Halif.Jx Cocnty, V rrgtma

INOUSTIUAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHOfUTY
Of HALIFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA

fJRST NATION.AL BANK

B,

( f~IL,.µ..,

,J{1,fo.,,_,,_

Ronnie F ~~re SV?l U artel LeDdet

Brian K 8.-own. Executive Oitrcto,
CO!A1om', EALTH OF VJRGINIA

COMMONVJEAl TH OF VIRGJMA

)
COUNTY OF HALIFAX

)
)

)
)

COUNTY Cf HAUfAX

to -wit
.•

1);:H

h

The foreg:,ing instrument .-,as ac..kncltAedged bcb"o me rh,s~ <by ol JaAYSty. 2025.
b)' Snan K Bra:m . Executive Otrecto,. Industrial Oovekl:pmcnl lw1honty ol Ha!;t.u Co:urty,
Virginia

10 - WII

l

,i,1

O!r,!! il

The fof-ego!ng 1nstrumtr.1was » ~ be-fole melh's J_;:_ dsy of ~
c -, Rorl.n:fi t.~~
- SVPf ~ I Lc:l:Cef o f F~ Nallonal Bank

. 202fi.

~10NICA t.1CNTGOMERY Pl 1'1i'lftE
NOTARY PUBLIC
Co:"'tr~c,,...t all t: o r V1rs; ll'l•.J

My comrmasion ej(P:res.
My regislrahOn nurrwer -

1..ll""'-Lll>=-

~ c~-....

~;-~•.~:,~_:'ft _J

P.,) .

~"
1:
i.lJ-~
0
. Ch.?tr
H.:.Jifax CouMy Board of ~

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P28

.,J
~M,c..,
day a t ~- 2026.

9.

Data Centers

10. Battery Storage

Mr. Easley noted that the recently approved Comprehensive Plan supports the development of Data Centers
and Battery Energy Storage in the County. He emphasized that Al is increasing the demand for Data Centers,
which could provide significant revenue opportunities, as seen in other localities. With twenty-two Solar Sites
already built, Battery Storage is essential to maximize energy use. Therefore, he requested that the Board
authorize staff to begin drafting an Ordinance for Data Centers and Battery Storage, suggesting they look to
neighboring Mecklenburg County and the Berkeley Group for guidance.
Mr. Brade emphasized the importance of increasing revenue. He observed that, in principle, it would be
preferable to prevent this responsibility from falling on taxpayers. Drawing from examples in places like
Mecklenburg, he pointed out that opportunities such as these can help generate additional funds to address
the community's growing needs. He believed that each Board member could identify at least one significant
upcoming expense. To manage these expenditures, he asserted that it is essential to seek new sources of
revenue in addition to existing streams.
Chair Roller emphasized the importance of considering all possible revenue sources for the County due to
numerous community needs, including parks, recovery housing, EMS services, and radio systems. He
stressed that when drafting Ordinances related to these revenue streams, Conditional Use Permits should
be required to give the Board oversight regarding their placement and appearance. Chair Roller
acknowledged that developing effective Ordinances would be an ongoing process and highlighted the need
for the Board to review and tailor Ordinances to both generate revenue and protect local residents.
The Board members discussed the process for preparing an Ordinance related to Data Centers and Battery
Storage. Supervisor Claiborne emphasized the importance of drafting the Ordinance for review and
suggested involving the County Attorney to ensure compliance and protect the Board. Supervisor Witt
expressed trust in Mr. Easley and his staff's expertise in developing balanced recommendations, while also
supporting the opportunity for the Board to review the Ordinance before any commitments are made. Mr.
Easley clarified that, traditionally, staff drafts the Ordinance with input from the Ordinance Committee before
it goes to the Planning Commission and ultimately to the Board.
The discussion also included concerns about revenue generation. Supervisor Riddle noted manufacturing
provides sustainable long-term revenues. Supervisor Claiborne stated the Ordinance for Data Centers and
Battery Storage could address immediate revenue needs. Supervisor Oakes expressed concern that the
Board should not miss economic opportunities by delaying action. Supervisor Riddle mentioned
environmental impacts were an area requiring careful consideration. Board members recognized the need
for additional staff or support for Mr. Easley as the Ordinance work progresses.

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Riddle to request staff to develop Ordinances for
Data Centers and Battery Storage and comply with Virginia Law regulations.
ROLL CALL VOTE:

Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

Motion passed 7-1 .
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P29

L. PENDING MATTERS/UNFINISHED BUSINESS

None

M. SUPERVISOR COMMENTS

Supervisor Oakes responded to a public accusation made during the January regular meeting, clarifying that
a citizen falsely alleged he solicited two deputies to access her criminal history. He stated the deputies and
sheriffs involved were wrongly implicated and emphasized that such claims were defamatory and exceeded
First Amendment protections. Supervisor Oakes asserted he would not tolerate false statements about
himself, though he welcomed criticism or praise based on truth.
Supervisor McDowell emphasized the need to address upgrades for the track, tennis courts, and football
field, noting all are outdated . Additionally, Supervisor McDowell expressed concern that Animal Control Chief
Warden, Allison Cannon's dismissal was managed inappropriately and may have violated County policy.

N. MOTION TO ENTER CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO VIRGINIA CODE §2.2-3711

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Vice Chair Smart to enter into closed session pursuant
to Virginia Code §2.2-3711 , for the following items:
Subsection (a)(1) : Discussion, consideration, or interviews of prospective candidates for employment;
assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining, or resignation of
specific public officers, appointees, or employees of any public body; and evaluation of performance of
departments or schools of public institutions of higher education where such evaluation will necessarily
involve discussion of the performance of specific individuals. (Appointments) (Personnel)
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting:
The Board entered into Closed Session at 10:33 p.m.

0 . MOTION TO RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, that the Board arise from Closed Session
and return to its Regular Meeting.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson , Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P30

The Board reconvened in Open Session at 11 :30 p.m.

P. MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor Witt, and carried , to adopt the following
certification :
WHEREAS, the Halifax County Board of Supervisors has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant
to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act; and
WHEREAS, § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by this governing body that such closed
meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this governing body 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 governing body.
ROLL CALL VOTE:

Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0.

Q. ACTION RESULTING FROM CLOSED SESSION

1. Appointments

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to reappoint Mr. Ronnie Waller to the
Agriculture Advisory Committee.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Claiborne, to reappoint Mr. Lawrence Wilkerson
to the Board of Zoning Appeals .

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2. 2026

P31

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to appoint Mr. Graham Ramsey, to the
Board of Zoning Appeals to replace Mr. Hunter Ford who resigned .

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
No one
Absent During Meeting:
Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to reappoint Mr. Woody Bane to the
Recreation Committee.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Chair Roller, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to appoint Supervisor Bryant Claiborne to the
Social Services Board as a Board appointee to replace Mr. Hubert Pannell.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to reappoint Mr. Gerald Lovelace to
the Southside Planning District Commission.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P32

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to appoint Supervisor Keith McDowell to
the Tri-County Board as the Board Appointee.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Claiborne, to appoint Mrs. Catherine Ratliff to the
Housing Rehab Board.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to appoint Ms. Linda Shepherd to the IDA
Board .

VOTE
Motion passed 7-1 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, and Mr.
W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Mr. K. McDowell
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

R. ADJOURN
Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to continue the meeting March 17, 2026,
with the Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B . Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone
The meeting recessed at 11 :38 p.m.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting
March 2, 2026

P33

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
County Administration Building
Finance Conference Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia
March 10, 2026 / 3:30 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER

Committee Chair Witt called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

B. ATTENDANCE

Committee members attending were Committee Chair D. Witt, Vice Chair R. Smart, and Supervisor
D. J. Oakes.
Additional Board of Supervisor members attending were Chair L. Roller.
Staff members attending were Mr. Ron Brade, County Administrator; Mr. John Montoro, Interim
Finance Director; Mrs. Nancy Kamp, Executive Assistant; and Ms. Nancy Spencer, Strategic
Programs Coordinator

C. BUSINESS ITEMS

1. FY2027 Budget Update/Discussion
Committee Chair Witt noted the meeting would be an open discussion regarding the FY2027
Budget and welcomed Mr. Montoro to the session.
Opioid Fund Discussion
The Committee discussed the management and allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds, raising
questions about which fund the money is deposited into, who is responsible for appropriating and
spending it, and whether the Board of Supervisors must approve its use. There was uncertainty
about whether the funds are kept in a separate Opioid Fund or within the General Fund, and
clarification was requested . Mrs. Shannon Simpson was identified as leading the local opioid
efforts, working closely with Mrs. Kim Adams of Recovering Hands, while Southside Behavioral
Health also plays a role. The Committee agreed to investigate how the funds are managed, who
received distributions in the previous year, and what guidelines or restrictions exist for their use.
They also questioned whether this funding is a recurring annual allotment or a one-time payment.
Edmunds Park and Track Improvements
Committee Chair Witt verified that a recommendation would be made to the Board that $75,000 be
allocated to improve Edmunds Park, in lieu of an architectural study that was discussed in the
previous Finance Committee meeting. He emphasized the park's value as a quality-of-life resource
for many residents, though the final renovation cost remains uncertain.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Finance Committee Meeting
March 10, 2026

P34

Committee Chair Witt highlighted that repairing the High School track will cost at least $300,000,
with $50,000 pledged by Hitachi and potentially $30,000 from the two towns, leaving about
$220,000 for the County. The repairs would make the track suitable for certified meets, though
major events will not occur for at least three years. The improved track would serve students and
the public year-round . Chair Roller noted the need to consider repairs to both the track and tennis
courts together, as the County currently lacks usable public tennis courts. The Committee agreed
to revisit these expenses during the budgeting process once available funds are clearer.
School System Funding and Maintenance
The discussion centered on School budget allocations, maintenance funding, and facility
management. Mr. Brade highlighted that the School Board receives a lump sum from the County,
which covers various needs, including maintenance, and must make difficult trade-offs between
priorities like athletics (e.g., track repairs) and essential systems (e.g., HVAC). The Board does
not micromanage School spending, but there is concern over deferred maintenance. Vice Chair
Smart and Chair Roller clarified that funds are now distributed by categories, including operations
and maintenance, though maintenance is bundled with other expenses . There was consensus that
a dedicated line item for maintenance would improve accountability and prevent future issues.
Carryover funds are intended for Capital Improvements; some feel carryover funds are being
banked rather than spent on improvements. The Committee also discussed ownership and security
of the new and old track facilities, liability implications, and the need for clear maintenance plans
from the School system to ensure public assets are properly cared for going forward .
FY2027 Budget Discussion
Committee Chair Witt emphasized the need for a clear financial baseline as Board members and
circumstances continually change. Mr. Montoro presented the FY2025 actuals and FY2026
approved budget, though no year-to-date numbers for FY2026 were available. Mr. Montoro
explained that the salary worksheet reflects current employee salaries and allows for adjustments,
such as a 2% pay increase, with updated figures for health insurance (7% increase) and a reduced
VRS rate (now 7.4%, down from 9.6%). The worksheet includes department funds but does not yet
account for requests for new positions . The Board of Supervisors' General Fund reflects the
FY2026 approved budget, with no new budget requests submitted yet. County Administration's
department request figures are preliminary and currently only reflect salaries, with other expenses
pending further information. Requests for additional positions (HR, Procurement, IT) have not been
incorporated and will require further review and discussion with Mr. Brade.

The Committee discussed the County's use of Tyler Munis software for financial operations. While
Munis is considered a high-end system , it is expensive and not especially user-friendly. Other
systems like RDA and Bright were mentioned, but the entire County currently uses Munis. The
discussion revealed challenges with Munis, notably insufficient staff training, underutilization of
available features, and poor responsiveness from Munis' support team . The Committee agreed that
improving training and possibly hiring a staff expert or third-party consultant is necessary for
effective use. There is consensus that internal staff lack the capacity and expertise to address all
operational and reporting issues, so an outside contractor or consultant-such as the Berkley
Group-may be needed to resolve systemic problems and implement recommendations from the
recent Forensic Audit Report.
Committee Chair Witt requested a comprehensive overview of the County's financial status from
Mr. Montoro, who explained that he currently lacks a complete financial picture due to the FY2025
year not being closed and uncertainty about available cash balances . Mr. Montoro plans to consult
Munis software to finalize period adjustments and bring forward accurate balances. He expects to
be able to provide revenue and expense reports by Thursday to assess budget performance. The
Committee discussed the importance of projecting revenues-using fund balances, property
values, and solar installation revenues-to build next year's budget. The only revenues the
committee can adjust are from personal property, real estate, machine and tools, and solar
installations, with new projects like Clover Creek expected to increase revenue.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Finance Committee Meeting
March 10, 2026

P35

Solid Waste Disposal Authority Fee
The Committee discussed the collection and allocation of the Solid Waste Disposal Authority $75
fee. The Commissioner of Revenue is leading efforts to collect the fee using the Tyler Munis
software, but challenges persist due to slow responsiveness from Munis and access issues with
the general billing module. The process involves refining the personal property list to ensure one
bill per address. The revenue collected is intended for the following fiscal year's budget. The
Committee reviewed how funds are managed-money collected by the Authority is transferred to
the Board of Supervisors to cover operational costs, primarily tipping fees paid to Mecklenburg and
expenses related to transport and manpower. Currently, the annual budget includes $1 .2 million
for landfill tipping fees and $490,000 for transportation, but the collected fees do not fully cover
these costs . The Committee also noted that contract renewals and regional cooperation are
ongoing concerns, with Halifax being unique among participating counties in using a third-party
contractor for waste transfer.
Voter Registrar Request
The Committee discussed a request from the Voter Registrar, noting the heavy workload and daily
voting activity leading up to April 21st, including two Saturdays. The Registrar's request for
additional resources, particularly for a certified employee, was considered reasonable and
necessary for retention. Committee members agreed that the Registrar's office is well-managed
and praised Ms. Heather Harding's performance, stating she is regarded as one of the best
Registrars in the State. They also acknowledged the need for $12,000 for the upcoming election,
questioning how much support will come from the State, but agreed the expense is unavoidable.
Social Program Donations
The Committee debated whether local government should fund charitable and nonprofit
organizations, focusing specifically on donations to social programs like Feed Halifax and other
community causes. Members discussed reallocating funds , weighing the merits of supporting
initiatives such as the track at the High School versus continuing contributions to Feed Halifax.
There was concern about the role of government in using taxpayer dollars for donations, with
examples given to illustrate potential controversies. While education-related nonprofits and the
Department of Social Services (DSS) were generally regarded as appropriate recipients, the
Committee questioned the definitions and impact of food insecurity and homelessness in the
County. They noted the effectiveness and sustainability of local food pantries and the importance
of volunteers . Ultimately, the Committee agreed that broader policy discussions about supporting
nonprofits should be addressed at an upcoming retreat.
Upcoming Budget Work Session Discussion
The Committee discussed the upcoming Thursday Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session,
noting that the Agenda is not finalized but will likely address ongoing budget issues, including
funding for Opioid programs, Edmunds Park, and the High School track. There was debate about
which items should be included, with urgency expressed for the track due to timing constraints . Mr.
Montoro explained that detailed financial documents would not be ready for Thursday, though he
aims to provide updated balances and begin reviewing revenues and department requests for
FY2027. The Committee also reviewed the handling of restricted funds , particularly ARPA
allocations and Solar Site Agreement money, and stressed the need to spend committed funds by
the end of the year to avoid loss. They discussed the impact of property reassessment, the process
for approving salary increases-typically aligned with State recommendations but sometimes
adjusted based on performance-and the importance of reviewing significant budget increases line
by line with input from both staff and the Finance Committee. There was consensus on including
Opioid Funding, Edmunds Park, the Track, and Voter Registrar requests in the full Board session,
along with a desire to revisit financial policy after the budget season, especially regarding
performance-based raises.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Finance Committee Meeting
March 10, 2026

P36

D. ADJOURN

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to adjourn the meeting . Motion
passed 3-0 unanimously.

The meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Finance Committee Meeting
March 10, 2026

P37

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
BUDGET WORK SESSION
County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Meeting Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia
March 12, 2026 / 3:00 PM

A. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Roller called the work session to order at 3:00 p.m.

B. ATTENDANCE
Board members attending were: Mr. L. Roller, ED2; Mr. D. J. Oakes, ED3; Mr. D. Witt, ED4; Mr. R.
Smart, EDS; Mr. M. Thompson, ED6 (arrived at 4:06 PM); and Mr. W. Smith, Tie Breaker.
Board members absent: Mr. P. Riddle, ED1 ; Mr. K. McDowell, ED?; Mr. W.B. Claiborne, EDB

Staff members attending were: Mr. Ron Brade, County Administrator; Mr. John Montoro, Interim
Finance Director; Ms. Nancy Spencer, Strategic Programs Coordinator; Mrs. Nancy Kamp, Executive
Assistant.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to adopt the Agenda as presented.

VOTE
Motion passed 4-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. Thompson, Mr. K. McDowell, Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Absent During Meeting:
Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. K. McDowell, Mr. W.B. Claiborne

D. BUSINESS ITEMS
1.

Proposed Budget for HCPS

Dr. Karen Bucklew of Halifax County Public Schools presented the proposed FY2027 school division
budget.
Key points of the presentation included:

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P38

•

The proposed school division budget totals $82,605,815.

•

The budget is based on the Governor's proposed state budget, which may change pending final
adoption by the General Assembly.

•

Personnel and benefits account for approximately 81 % of the school division budget.

•

The school division intends to maintain attrition-based staffing controls and is not proposing
additional staffing positions.

•

Health insurance renewal rates were received and reflected a 6% increase, which required
adjustments to projected expenditures.

Dr. Bucklew explained that the employer contribution percentage toward employee health insurance
premiums remains unchanged. However, employee premiums have been increased by $10 across
the board . Despite this adjustment, the increase does not fully offset the 6% rise in insurance costs.
As a result, staff have increased the carryover request to ensure sufficient funding to cover the
remaining cost increase.
Dr. Hoskins reported that the school division's vehicle fleet has an average 38-year replacement
cycle, exceeding the recommended 10-year replacement cycle for school buses.
The school division currently funds the purchase of three buses annually. A proposal was presented
requesting County assistance to increase annual purchases to six buses per year for five years,
estimated at approximately $870 ,000 annually, in order to modernize the fleet.
Supervisor Smart referenced vehicles in the parking lot and asked whether they belonged to the
school system. Ms. Bucklew clarified that the vehicles in the main parking lot referenced are County
vehicles, not school division vehicles. School division vehicles are kept in a secured, caged area.
Chair Roller asked whether the school system currently utilizes routing software and if it has resulted
in any reduction in bus routes or changes in the number of students per bus, particularly in light of
declining student enrollment. Questions were also raised about whether more students are being
transported to school by parents instead of riding buses . Dr. Bucklew explained that the number of
bus routes remains largely the same as in previous years, although there have been some decreases
compared to five years ago . Dr. Bucklew further explained that when a parent registers a student as a
bus rider, the school division is required to include that stop on the route each morning, regardless of
whether the student actually rides the bus on a given day, which can limit the ability to significantly
adjust routes.
Mr. Brade explained that he and Dr. Bucklew had discussed the upcoming agenda item regarding
track improvements and related funding . He noted that the purpose of the discussion was to provide
the Board with the school system's perspective on how funding provided by the Board of Supervisors
is used for facility maintenance. Mr. Brade indicated that the Board's funding is not limited to specific
items and can support the maintenance and upkeep of school facilities, including buildings, athletic
fields , and other infrastructure. The discussion was intended to help the Board better understand how
the school system prioritizes maintenance needs as it considers whether and to what extent the
County might contribute funding toward refurbishing the track.
Dr. Huskins explained that the project originated from community interest in resurfacing the track and
exploring a partnership related to the tennis courts, primarily because there are no other locations in
the county where residents can play tennis. She noted that the school division had already accounted
for its needs within the $16.6 million renovation project and did not originally plan to include a walking
track, as a professional-grade track is being installed as part of the stadium improvements.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P39

Dr. Huskins stated that Halifax County Public Schools are willing to work with the County to establish
a lease or potentially donate the property associated with the tennis courts. She noted that attorneys
are currently reviewing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that would transfer ownership so the
courts would no longer be school property, with the County assuming primary responsibility. Under
such an arrangement, the school system and the County would develop shared-use and maintenance
agreements to ensure the school's tennis teams would still have access when needed. Dr. Huskins
added that the details of the arrangement are still being developed, but emphasized that if the school
system retained ownership, the courts would have to be secured as school property, whereas County
ownership would allow the courts to remain primarily available for public use.
Dr. Huskins continued by explaining that the original renovation and construction package for the
$16 .6 million athletic complex included nearly $1 million for tennis courts. She noted that the higher
cost reflected requirements needed for school-owned facilities to meet applicable standards and code
requirements for school use. However, if the courts are ultimately transferred to County ownership,
those requirements would be different. As a result, certain elements, such as connecting walkways
and bleachers for spectators, would no longer be necessary. Dr. Huskins added that a revised quote
was provided to the Board reflecting a reduced cost of approximately $800,000, noting that bleachers
were not strongly supported by parents and were not considered essential.
Mr. Brade asked how the school system plans to adjust its maintenance approach for the new
facilities, given the current condition of the walking track and tennis courts, to ensure the new facilities
are properly maintained going forward . Dr. Huskins explained that the school system has a limited
maintenance budget, with most funding coming from carryover funds . She stated that maintenance
projects are prioritized through a 10-year capital improvement plan, but urgent building needs often
take precedence. As a result, projects such as the track resurfacing have been delayed because
critical issues, like replacing boilers or repairing roofs, must be addressed first. She emphasized that
while athletics and wellness are valued, the school system must focus on the most immediate and
essential facility needs due to aging buildings and limited funding .
Supervisor Oakes asked whether the dedication associated with the current track would transfer to
the new track. Dr. Huskins noted that once a facility is dedicated, the recognition typically remains
with that specific location. Therefore, the dedication would likely stay with the existing track rather
than move to the new facility. It was also acknowledged that a final decision would rest with the
School Board, but it was suggested that the new track could potentially be dedicated to someone else
since it would be a separate facility.
Mr. Brade asked whether the school would still use the existing track once the new one is completed .
Dr. Huskins indicated that the school system does not anticipate using the old track once the new
stadium track is available. However, during any short transition period before the new track is ready,
the school system could potentially use the existing track through a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the County if the County becomes the owner.
Supervisor Witt asked for clarification on why the discussion included the tennis courts and what the
County was being asked to consider. Dr. Huskins explained that the conversation arose from
community concerns about maintaining public access to tennis facilities. She noted that the school's
original athletic complex plan included renovating and maintaining the tennis courts as school
property, which would require securing the area and limiting public access. However, community
members who use the courts expressed concern that they would lose a place to play.
Mr. Smith asked whether students would be able to use the tennis courts on weekends if they
remained under School Board control. Dr. Huskins explained that the details had not been fully
determined, but if the courts were located within a secured perimeter, access would likely be limited.
She noted that the athletic complex would be locked and monitored, meaning use of the facilities
would typically require staff oversight and follow the school system's rental or scheduling process . As
a result, it would be difficult to allow open access to just one portion of the complex without potentially
giving access to the entire secured facility.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P40

Vice Chair Smart noted that the middle school tennis courts are in significantly worse condition than
those at the high school. Dr. Huskins confirmed that the middle school courts have not been used for
many years and explained that there is currently no construction contract in place to renovate them .
She stated that if the County or school system chose to move forward with repairs at that site, a new
request for proposals (RFP) and public bidding process would be required . In contrast, renovations to
the high school tennis courts could be completed through a change order under the existing
construction contract with Shockey.
Chair Roller asked whether the high school teams currently compete on the existing tennis courts. Dr.
Huskins confirmed that they do and explained that only minimal repairs have been made to keep the
courts usable. She noted that the courts were originally scheduled for demolition as part of the
construction project, but that work was delayed because the tennis teams would otherwise have no
place in the county to practice or compete. Dr. Huskins also mentioned that the courts' lighting is
currently powered from the old high school, with the school system covering the electricity costs,
including when the public uses the courts at night, which has become more costly as energy prices
have increased.

2.

Opioid Abatement Funds Update

Mr. Montoro gave a report of the amount of funds that have been collected for the past four years .
He noted that only $20,000 had been spent, and there is a request for $50,000. Supervisor Oakes
stated that Mr. Sean Barksdale had requested the funds, and the subject goes back to the discussion
we had about Mrs. Shannon Simpson . He believes she had some reservations about Mr. Barksdale
requesting funds out of her purview, but I don't know what her purview is.
Supervisor Oakes asked to read into the minutes the comment that Ms. Simpson made to him. Ms.
Simpson had said to him , "I had also seen Ms. Morgan recommend paying Sean, but it's not going to
fly with the OAA. And Sean had represented himself as being with the Opioid Awareness Day, asking
for money, which is also not right". Supervisor Oakes stated that Mrs. Simpson was a bit upset. He
explained that he did not know enough to say any more than what Mrs. Simpson had shared with
him .
The Board members asked County staff to gather additional information for the request.

3.

Donations to Social Programs

Mr. Brade reported that staff had been consu lted regarding contributions to external organizations
and related funding practices. He noted that, based on input from Mr. Harris and the department, the
County's local funding contribution to the Department of Social Services (DSS) has been slightly over
$2 million . Mr. Brade further stated that the committee has been discussing whether to continue
providing such contributions in the future. As part of those discussions, he referenced a prior request
presented by Mr. Rylan Clark seeking an additional $100,000. It was suggested that the Board may
consider reprioritizing that funding in the upcoming budget cycle, potentially allocating a portion
toward refurbishing the track.
Supervisor Witt asked if there is a balance in the CARES COVID and Con Edison accounts. Mr.
Montoro said he would update the Board with balances after researching . Chair Roller stated that
fire departments received part of the CARES COVID funds .
Chair Roller emphasized that the County must prioritize its core services, noting that essential
governmental responsibilities should be addressed before considering additional expenditures . He
identified key core services as including support for the school system and recreational needs.
Chair Roller indicated that once those fundamental obligations are met, the Board must then evaluate
how to allocate remaining resources and determine appropriate priorities beyond core services. Mr.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P41

Brade agreed on the need to establish clear funding priorities but expressed concern about the
practicality of implementing a comprehensive prioritization framework within the current FY27 budget
timeline. He suggested categorizing County expenditures into broader themes, noting that education
funding extends beyond the public school system to include contributions to institutions such as
community colleges. Similarly, he highlighted recreation as a key theme, referencing its designation
as a pillar in the Community Strategic Plan and the County's ongoing support for parks and
recreational initiatives. Mr. Brade indicated that while developing a structured, theme-based
approach to budgeting is a worthwhile goal, time constraints associated with preparing the upcoming
budget may limit the County's ability to fully implement this approach in the current cycle.

4.

Edmunds Park Recommendations

Mr. Brade noted that a subset of the Board had previously reviewed the proposal to re-appropriate
$75,000 from Strategic Planning to repairs at Edmonds Park during a Finance Committee meeting.
Supervisor Witt said that the motion passed at the Finance Committee meeting, and Mr. Brade stated
it is on the agenda for the April 6, 2026, Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting.

5.

Recommended Funding for Track Refurbishment

Mr. Brade provided information regarding funding contributions toward the Edmonds Park repairs. It
was reported that Hitachi has committed $50,000, the Town of South Boston has committed $25,000,
and the Town of Halifax has committed $1,000 to $3,000. Based on these contributions, the
remaining balance will need to be addressed by the County. The Board must determine whether to
fully close the funding gap or contribute a portion of the remaining amount. Vice Chair Smart added
that the school system had mentioned that the dedication of the land would be their portion of the
donation.
Mr. Brade asked if a school closes, does it automatically revert back to the County? Chair Roller
stated that the school system would have to declare the property a surplus, and then it would revert to
the County. Mr. Brade said that the Board as a whole will have to decide the value of the track if it is
abandoned, and then revert to the County. Supervisor Witt stated that it is not being turned over as
an asset but more of a liability.
Supervisor Witt asks what the cost to refurbish the track is. Mr. Brade said that a prior estimate of
$300,000 had been provided by Mr. Rylan Clark for the track project. However, updated information
received from the school system's current contractor indicates a revised cost of approximately
$356,000 to resurface the track. If a sealer is included, the total estimated cost would increase to
$414,000. Supervisor Witt noted that, after accounting for pledged contributions, the remaining
funding gap is approximately $278,000. Discussion included the possibility of reallocating up to
$100,000 from other planned contributions, such as funding for food pantries, which would reduce the
County's remaining obligation to approximately $178,000 if the project were fully funded.
Chair Roller suggested that the County engage an independent consultant to evaluate the track,
develop design specifications, and provide detailed options and cost estimates. Following this
assessment, the project would be formally procured through a competitive bidding process in
accordance with standard procedures.
The members continued discussions on the future of the track resurfacing project, focusing on
funding , scope, and next steps. While approximately $75,000 in outside contributions has been
identified, additional County funding will be necessary. Members agreed that the project should be
formally bid through the County's procurement process rather than using an existing contractor, with
the expectation that competitive bidding could yield better pricing.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P42

Due to limited time remaining in the fiscal year, the Board acknowledged that the project will not be
completed this year and should instead be planned for inclusion in the FY2027 budget. Discussion
also centered on determining the appropriate scope-whether to pursue a full competition track or a
more cost-effective community walking track.
The Board expressed interest in exploring an agreement with the school system to transfer ownership
or responsibility of the track to the County, allowing it to serve as a community asset. Moving forward ,
staff will review legal considerations, begin procurement planning, and evaluate funding options .
Overall , the Board conveyed a commitment to the project, with an emphasis on careful planning and
responsible use of funds.

6.

FY2027 Budget Update/Discussion

Chair Roller stated the review of the FY2027 Budget Requests and Information was the next item on
the agenda .
Mr. Montoro, Interim Finance Director, reported that a significant number of budget requests were
recently received , with most now incorporated into the draft, though a few items remain outstanding.
The document is nearing completion, and the purpose of the discussion was to walk through the draft
budget and gather Board input on key areas before finalizing the initial version.
The review began with a section-by-section walkthrough of the expenditures:
•

County Administration - Several new positions were proposed, including: Deputy County
Administrator, Receptionist, IT staff position, and Community Information Officer. Salaries for
these positions are based on the County's most recent pay study. These additions represent
an increase in staffing compared to the prior year.

•

County Attorney - The current year allocation of $50,000 has already been significantly
exceeded, with approximately $227,000 spent to date. Staff compared Halifax County to
neighboring jurisdictions, noting that Mecklenburg and Pittsylvania Counties budget between
$200,000 and $300,000 annually for legal services . Based on current spending trends and
anticipated needs, a proposed increase to approximately $300,000 was discussed.

•

Commissioner of Revenue - Commissioner Brenda Powell proposed a new position within
the Commissioner of Revenue's office due to an increased workload and additional
responsibilities. It was noted that the office is handling expanded duties, including specialized
billing requests, which have added to operational demands.

•

Assessment- There are no changes.

•

Treasurer - Mr. Montoro explained that the DMV funds collected by the Treasurer are related
to DMV transactions . It was clarified that these funds are collected on behalf of the DMV and
are not County revenue. As such, the Treasurer's office is responsible for receiving and
remitting the funds, but they do not represent the revenue or expenses of the County.

•

Central Accounting - Increased salary and wage allocations due to the addition of new
positions, including the anticipated Finance Director role, Procurement Officer, and HR
Manager. Discussion emphasized that an HR Manager could play a key role in supporting a
potential merit-based pay system , improving employee retention and recruitment, and
providing broader HR services and oversight. Mr. Montoro stated there may not be a reason
to budget for financial consulting if the Finance Director position is filled . Board members
asked for more details on the maintenance service contract.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P43

•

Electoral Board - poll officials' salary increases from $60,000 to $130,000.

•

Registrar - Increase in salaries due to request for new position.

•

Circuit Court - no significant changes .

•

General District Court - No significant changes .

•

Courtroom Security- The amount of Worker's Compensation increased from $12,000 to
$18,410 for FY26.

•

Commonwealth Attorney - no significant changes.

•

Drug Prosecutor - need to research the decrease in the budget amount.

•

Sheriff - Mr. Montoro explained how the FY26 actuals were presented . It was clarified that the
"actual" column reflects annualized figures, meaning expenses recorded through February
were projected out for the full fiscal year. This approach was used to provide a more
accurate estimate of year-end spending for comparison against the approved budget. The
Board discussed the transition of animal control enforcement responsibilities to the Sheriff's
Office, noting that the Sheriff is currently performing these duties. If this arrangement
becomes permanent, additional staffing positions may be needed to support the expanded
scope.

•

Emergency Medical Services - no significant changes.

•

Volunteer Fire Department - Discussed possible increase due to potential transition of
additional volunteer fire and rescue squads to paid staffing due to ongoing challenges with
sustaining volunteer personnel. Vice Chair Smart stated that members had discussed
increasing the $100,000 funds that are given to alternating fire departments each year to
$25,000 to each fire department annually.

•

Ambulance & Rescue Services - no significant changes .

•

Forestry Services - There was no change.

•

Corrections - Mr. Montoro explained that W.W . Moore operates the County's financial
arrangement for juvenile detention services . Under the current structure, the County pays for
access to the juvenile detention facility based on allocated bed space rather than a fixed
annual usage. He said that the usage is tracked throughout the year based on the number of
beds actually utilized. At year-end, the County's payment is reconciled against actual usage,
resulting in either a rebate or additional fees owed.

•

Juvenile Crime Control - The Board discussed the need for additional information on the
billing structure, invoicing frequency, and how usage-based costs are tracked and reported to
ensure transparency and budgetary confidence.

•

Juvenile Group Home - Mr. Montoro stated that he had discovered that the Juvenile Group
Home no longer exists; therefore, he would remove the line item .

•

Regional Jail Authority - The Board discussed the Regional Jail Authority budget, noting that
costs are already nearing the annual allocation and may exceed projections. Increased

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P44

inmate usage was identified as a likely factor driving higher expenses. Members expressed
concern that the current budget estimate of approximately $2.4 million may be too low and
emphasized the need to review and adjust projections accordingly.
•

Building Inspections - The amount for salaries went down because they moved the salary for
Planning and Zoning to the Planning and Zoning account.

•

Animal Control - no significant changes. Supervisor Witt asked if the salary line item would
move to the Sheriff's office budget. Mr. Brade explained that it is unlikely staffing needs for
the animal shelter can be fully assessed before finalizing the current budget. He noted that,
once operations stabilize and more information becomes available, the appropriate
leadership over the shelter will reevaluate staffing requirements.

•

Emergency Services - increase in budget due to a salary increase request. Mr. Brade said
that the County may need an independent to look at salaries to see how the County
compares to the region. Supervisor Witt stated that they had completed an independent
analysis in the past, but it had been several years ago. Chair Roller asked what the line item
for the part-time position was for. Mr. Montoro said the line item had been listed for several
years, but no funds had been spent.

•

Public Works - Mr. Brade stated that Mr. Harris is compiling final numbers as he is waiting on
estimates for various items. Vice Chair Smart stated that there was an increase in tipping
fees, but he did not recall the exact number.

•

Buildings and Grounds - Mr. Brade expressed concern that the County's current
maintenance staffing levels are insufficient when compared to the scope of facilities that must
be managed . It was noted that, unlike the school system, which has a larger maintenance
staff relative to its facilities, the County does not have adequate personnel to maintain its
assets effectively.

•

Health Department - Mr. Montoro stated he has not received the budget request.

•

Community Services Board - Southside Behavioral Health requested $337,000. Chair Roller
stated that the County has increased the contribution by $10,000 each year. The Board
members suggested increasing by $10,000 again this year, with a total of $240,000
budgeted.

•

Area Agency on Aging - Increase from $10,000 to $26,198.

•

Community Colleges - Supervisor Witt said that Danville Community College and Southside
Virginia Community College serve local students through programs offered at the Southern
Virginia Higher Education Center. He said in his opinion, it was one of the most significant
organizations in our community for young people and job training. He recommended
considering increasing the County's contribution by $25,000, bringing the total annual funding
to $100,000. Supervisor Witt expressed strong support for the center, highlighting its
effectiveness and continued need for funding . The Board members agreed .

•

Recreation - There was an increase of $95,000 to cover the hiring of additional staff. The
Board asked County staff to provide additional information before a decision is made.

•

Planning and Zoning - Increase due to salary funds being moved from Building and Grounds
to Planning and Zoning.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P45

•

IDA - Supervisor Witt suggested that Mr. Brade analyze the budget request. Mr. Brade said
he would have Mr. Brown speak at a Finance Committee meeting to go over the budget
request.

•

Community Action - Increase in the amount of $20,000.

•

Tourism - Mr. Montoro will review the budget request and amounts listed on the spreadsheet.

•

Southside Planning District Commission - Mr. Brade will research for the budget request.

•

Agricultural Development - There are no changes.

•

Soil and Water - There are no changes .

•

Cooperate Extension Office - The Board asked for an explanation for the increase in
telephone service.

•

Non-Departmental - Mr. Montoro asked the Board if they would like to continue the
contribution to VSAP for $10,000, and the Board said yes . The Board said further research is
needed for the Opioid Expense, and further discussions are needed for the Feed Halifax
request of $100,000.

Supervisor Oakes clarified that the registrar's request of $15,000 was for a salary increase for staff
and not for a new position . Mr. Montoro said he would increase the salary line item and delete the
new position item .
Chair Roller noted that the proposed budget includes six new positions. These positions were
identified as a Procurement Officer, Human Resources Manager, Deputy County Administrator,
Receptionist, IT professional , and Community Information Officer. In addition to the six positions, the
County is also in the process of seeking a Finance Director.

E. ADJOURN

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to adjourn .

VOTE
Motion passed 5-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr.
Nays:
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. K. McDowell, Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Absent During Meeting:
Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. K. McDowell, Mr. W .B. Claiborne

The meeting recessed at 5:46 p.m.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Budget Work Session
March 12, 2026

P46

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CALLED SPECIAL MEETING
County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Meeting Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, Virginia
Thursday, March 12, 2026 / 6:30 p.m.

A. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Roller called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m

B. ATTENDANCE ROLL CALL
Board of Supervisors members attending were: Mr. P. Riddle, ED1 ; Mr. L. Roller, ED2; Mr. D. J. Oakes, ED3;
Mr. D. Witt, ED4; Mr. R. Smart, ED5; Mr. M. Thompson, ED6; Mr. K. McDowell, ED?; Mr. W.B. Claiborne,
ED8; and Mr. W. Smith, Tie Breaker.
Board of Supervisors absent: None
Staff members attending were: Mr. Verron "Ron" Brade, County Administrator; Mrs. Nancy Kamp, Executive
Assistant; Mr. John Montoro, Interim Finance Director; and . Ms. Nancy Spencer, Strategic Programs
Coordinator;
News reporter attending was: Ms. Miranda Baines, The Gazette-Virginian
Security was provided by: Halifax County Sheriff's Department

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor McDowell to add a Citizen Question Period to the
Agenda, as Item D-3 .

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained:
Noone
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting:
Noone
Chair Roller indicated that the guidelines for conduct would follow the same format as those established for
regular public comment.
Motion made by Supervisor McDowell, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to adopt the Agenda as amended.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

P47

VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

D. PRESENTATIONS

1. Forensic Audit Presentation
Ms. Haiyan Qi, Special Project Manager at Premier Group Services, presented the Forensic Audit
online with her teammate Ms. Joye Sistrunk.
Engagement Overview

Haiyan Qi stated Premier Group Services was engaged by Halifax County to perform Forensic
Investigation Services for the five fiscal years ending June 30, 2025. The engagement provided the
County's Board of Supervisors and Administration with an independent, objective assessment of its
financial records and internal control environment, with a focus on verifying fund balances, identifying
financial irregularities or fraud indicators, evaluating compliance with applicable Federal and State
regulations, and assessing the design and operating effectiveness of internal controls .
Objective and Scope

The primary scope of the Forensic Investigation was to:
•
•
•
•
•

Establish/ Verify Fund Balances: Restricted , Committed, Assigned, and Unassigned.
Identify any financial irregularities or discrepancies.
Evaluate compliance with applicable financial regulations and policies .
Assess the adequacy of internal controls and financial management practices .
Provide recommendations for improving financial processes and controls .

Applicable Regulations and Guidance

The audit was conducted under the guidance of several regulations, including:
•
•
•
•
•

GASB Statement No. 54 - Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions
Virginia Code Title 15.2 - County Financial Administration and Audit Requirements
Virginia Public Procurement Act - Contract and Vendor Management Compliance
Commonwealth of Virginia Financial Regulations
Federal Grant Regulations (2 CFR 200), where applicable

Audit Phases

The engagement consisted of three distinct phases:
1) Planning Phase:
a. Sent engagement letter.
b. Held kickoff meeting with prior Interim Financial Director.
c. Sent entrance conference agenda .

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

P48

d. Held entrance conference with County management and staff.
e. Performed comprehensive fraud risk assessment.
f. Reviewed Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes, Agendas, and Resolutions for the
investigation period .
g. Sent inquiry to prior auditor after County authorization.
h. Developed a detailed investigation program tailored to identified risks .
2) Field Work Phase:
a. Reviewed files provided by Halifax County.
b. Sent planned interview name list to Finance Director and later the County Administrator
and updated based on County feedback .
c. Scheduled and conducted interviews with County Staff and Board of Supervisors (former
and current).
d. Selected samples based on interview information.
e. Prepared and followed up with open items.
f. Performed analytical procedures.
g. Selected and tested samples.
h. Reviewed and evaluated sample supporting documents against applicable criteria .
3)

Reporting Phase:

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.

Prepared preliminary findings .
Drafted report for County review.
Prepared pre-exit conference agenda.
Conducted pre-exit conference with County Administrator.
Obtained County management response for inclusion in final report.
Finalized and sent out the report.
Debrief meeting.

Summary of Findings

The investigation identified twelve significant deficiencies and instances of non-compliance. The first
four findings pertain to payroll , with the remaining findings focused on internal controls:
1) Payroll-to-General Ledger Reconciliation Support Unavailable:
From FY2021 to FY2025, management could not provide sufficient General Ledger transaction
details for thirty payroll samples . This prevented completion of tie-out procedures and left payroll
accuracy and completeness unsubstantiated. Recommendations include implementing a
reconciliation package, requiring transaction identification for each payroll posting, establishing
a centralized payroll-close repository, and adding supervisory review and quality assurance
monitoring.
2) Insufficient Time and Attendance Documentation to Support Payroll Disbursements:
Timesheet documentation was missing for five out of thirty payroll samples tested across
FY2021-FY2025. Without timesheet support, compensation recorded in the General Ledger
could not be verified. Recommendations include standardizing documentation requirements,
enforcing completeness gates, centralizing retention , periodic QA reviews, and transitioning to
electronic timekeeping software.
3) Inconsistency Between Timesheet Hours and Payroll Earnings Records:
Hours on employee timesheets did not consistently match payroll earnings documentation
across all five fiscal years . Recommendations include implementing reconciliation and variance

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeti ng
March 12, 2026

P49

logs, requiring documented approval of variances , enhancing reporting, and ongoing QA
monitoring.
4) Insufficient Evidence of Supervisory Approval Over Employee Timesheets:
Four out of thirty payroll transactions from FY2023-FY2025 lacked documented supervisory
approval. Without this approval , hours submitted for compensation could not be confirmed as
reviewed or validated . Recommendations include requiring supervisory approval on all
timesheets, implementing electronic workflows, adding approval verification steps, and periodic
compliance monitoring and training.
5) Lack of Supporting Documentation:
Out of 398 transactions sampled , only seven had full supporting documentation, forty-nine were
partially supported , and 342 lacked documentation entirely. Recommendations include
establishing a formal documentation policy, maximizing digital document management, staff
training, internal review process, and periodic compliance monitoring.
6) Lack of Training to Perform Assigned Duties:
Interviews revealed County staff lacked adequate training in using the Munis financial system .
This gap was widespread and not limited to one individual. Recommendations include
developing a formal training program, mandatory onboarding, engaging vendor support,
designating a System Administrator, competency assessment, tracking training records, and
linking compliance to performance management.
7) Lack of Written Policy and Procedures:
Halifax County does not have formally documented policies and procedures for key financial
management functions . Recommendations include establishing a Comprehensive Policy
framework, adopting a Fund Balance Policy in compliance with GASB 54, assigning
responsibility for policy development, establishing a review cycle, addressing Federal
requirements, communicating, and training on policies, and engaging external expertise as
needed.
8) Lack of Segregation of Duties:
Key financial responsibilities were concentrated in a single individual without adequate oversight
or review. The Planning and Zoning Administrator currently oversees both application review
and revenue negotiation for solar projects . The hiring process for Finance Director created a
conflict of interest, as background checks were performed by staff later reporting to the same
individual. Recommendations include restructuring responsibilities, establishing segregation
policies, implementing compensating controls, strengthening system access controls, audit trail
review, enhancing Board oversight, and revising hiring processes .
9) Retention Policy Inconsistent with Virginia Regulations:
County record retention practices are inconsistent, relying on hard copies and lacking clarity
regarding retention periods. No electronic or cloud-based records management is used .
Recommendations include adopting a formal Retention Policy, transitioning to digital records
management, leveraging Munis functionality, monitoring compliance, training staff, and
communicating requirements to leadership.
10) Fund Balance Outlier:
Restricted and Assigned Fund Balances showed unusually high percentages from FY2021FY2024, not adequately supported or explained . Recommendations include obtaining

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

PSO

supporting documentation, conducting GASS 54 compliance reviews, formalizing Fund Balance
Policy, implementing variance analysis, and strengthening reporting controls .
11) Lack of Competitive Procurement for External Audit Services:
Halifax County retained the same external audit firm for 16 years (FY2009-FY2024) without
competitive re-procurement.
Recommendations include re-procuring audit services,
establishing rotation policies, independence assessment, Federal Award Compliance Review,
and enhancing governing Board oversight.
12) Inadequate Knowledge Transfer and Work Transition Procedures:
High turnover in key financial positions led to gaps and lack of documented transition procedures,
affecting continuity and institutional knowledge. Recommendations include developing formal
transition and succession procedures, maintaining a financial procedures manual, ensuring
continuity in Federal Grant Administration, Board oversight, and training for new personnel.

2.

Board Q & A
Supervisor Claiborne asked if having one person oversee finance tasks without oversight could
cause future issues and whether duties should be divided among several people. Haiyan Qi
recommended multiple individuals perform these functions to ensure proper segregation of duties
like authorization, custody, and approval. When asked about checks and balances found in the audit,
Haiyan Qi stated there were very few due to limited supporting documentation.

3. Citizen Question Period
Mattie Cowan
Ms. Cowan questioned why, despite Halifax County conducting annual audits and incurring
significant costs for auditors over the past 16 years, none of the financial discrepancies or issues
identified in the recent Forensic Audit were previously detected by those auditors. She compared
this to her experience at a local bank, where auditors and regulatory checks typically uncover any
irregularities, and wondered what value the County received from its audits if such problems went
unnoticed.

Chair Roller explained that questions should remain focused on the current Forensic Audit and not
extend to unrelated topics, emphasizing that the meeting's Agenda was strictly about the Forensic
Audit presentation and Board Q&A. Supervisor Claiborne noted that despite having the same auditor
for 16 years, significant deficiencies had not been identified, raising questions about the effectiveness
of past audits. Supervisor Oakes inquired about the difference between forensic and financial audits,
and Haiyan Qi confirmed that the scopes and criteria differ, mentioning the use of Virginia codes and
the Public Procurement Act for the Forensic Audit. Joye Sistrunk highlighted that financial statement
audits typically do not search for fraud unless risk indicators are identified, and recommended audit
team rotation every eight years to prevent complacency. Supervisor Oakes stated that historically,
the County issued RFPs for auditors every three years, but Supervisor Claiborne countered, saying
no RFPs had been issued in the past 16 years. Chair Roller concluded by stressing the importance
of addressing audit recommendations, noting that updating policies and procedures could resolve
most identified issues, and that training was also frequently recommended . The overall theme was
the need for improved policies, procedures, regular audit rotation, and targeted training to address
deficiencies and enhance County operations.
Supervisor McDowell questioned whether bank statements were reviewed as part of the audit
documentation. Haiyan Qi explained that bank statements were requested as supporting evidence,
but they were included among items not received. Supervisor McDowell noted the high rate of
missing documentation-86%-which Haiyan Qi confirmed was unusually high for a County of this
size, stating that ideally there should be no gaps and every transaction should be properly supported.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

PSI

Haiyan Qi further clarified that difficulties in finding documentation were partly due to reliance on
physical storage, but also because staff either did not know whether records existed or could not
locate them . The transition and knowledge gaps following the departure of a long-serving Finance
Director contributed to these challenges. Succession planning were highlighted as necessary
solutions to prevent such issues in the future, with Chair Roller emphasizing the need for updated
policies, procedures, and staff training to address these deficiencies.
Jennifer Champion
Ms. Champion addressed Chair Roller and the Board, urging swift action following Premier Group
Services' presentation that highlighted significant issues with the County's financial recordkeeping,
noting that out of 398 transactions audited, only seven were fully documented, suggesting a lack of
checks and balances . Ms. Champion calls for a formal investigation and recommends involving the
Virginia Auditor of Public Accounts to restore trust and accountability in County governance.
Barbara Coleman Brown
Ms. Brown, a lifelong resident of Scottsburg, Virginia, expressed deep disappointment in the Halifax
County governing body. She criticized the lack of written policies for hiring and retaining employees,
and noted that the Board operates inefficiently, reminiscent of outdated practices. Ms. ColemanBrown urged the Board to develop clear procedures for employee transitions and emphasized that
transparency requires meaningful action, not just words. She feels the current system allows for
unaccountable governance, which undermines trust and pride in the County.

Chair Roller reminded attendees that this segment was intended for questions and answers about
the forensic audit, noting that the previous two speakers had delivered public comments instead. He
expressed disappointment with the current situation and urged participants to focus on asking
questions rather than making statements .
Jennifer Champion
Ms. Champion questioned why the County lacks a purchasing authority and suggested the need for
a VCO or VCA. Chair Roller responded that the County is currently reviewing its organizational
structure and, as part of the budget process, considering the creation of new positions related to
purchasing oversight.
Detra Carr
Mr. Carr asked the presenter whether any discrepancies were found in past audit reports, specifically
referring to findings from previous audits . Haiyan Qi responded that while they had contacted the
prior auditor to ask questions related to the forensic investigation, reviewing the previous auditor's
report was outside the scope of their service, so they did not examine it. Mr. Carr emphasized to the
Board members that public trust has been lost due to the current situation and urged greater
transparency to restore confidence. He reminded the Board that taxpayers expect their money to be
properly managed and called for diligent efforts to address the issues and regain public trust in
Halifax County.

Supervisor Claiborne emphasized that the purpose of the audit was to restore public trust by
exposing longstanding issues. He acknowledged the County's need to modernize and credited the
new County Administrator for recognizing how outdated the County's procedures were. Supervisor
Claiborne asked the public for patience as the Board works to move forward, stating that the audit
revealed the necessary problems and that gaining public confidence would be a gradual process
starting from this point.
Thurstie Sherman
Ms. Sherman asked about the anticipated start, completion timeline, and the plan moving forward
now that the audit findings have been revealed. Chair Roller responded that the immediate priority
is to finish and approve the budget for next year, after which the implementation of new procedures
in response to the audit findings will begin . He expressed confidence in Mr. Brade's leadership and
assured that all options and procedures will be considered and adopted as needed.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

P52

Barbara Coleman Brown
Ms. Brown questioned whether information such as the general payroll ledger and timesheets would
be made available to the Board for scrutiny, expressing concern that past professionals lacked
access to key documentation. Chair Roller responded by acknowledging recommendations for
increased Board oversight, indicating that greater involvement would be considered . He affirmed
that any information currently available will be provided.

Supervisor Oakes explained that the current problems were not caused by the present administration
alone but developed over many years and through multiple leadership changes. He acknowledged
the public's criticism, noting that previous lack of oversight allowed these issues to persist.
Supervisor Oakes emphasized that the Board is now committed to resolving these concerns based
on the forensic report, which will require changes to staff and policies. He stated that new hires may
be necessary and that, when possible, they will adopt practices from other jurisdictions to avoid
unnecessary reinvention . Above all, he stressed their intention to act transparently and cautioned
against assuming these issues happened suddenly.
Mattie Cowan
Ms. Cowan stated she knows, if you have an audit of your financial records, and you had some of
the discrepancies that Premier says you have now, that would have shown up if the auditor did their
job.
Jennifer Wagstaff
Mrs. Wagstaff questioned whether the Forensic Audit team reached out to the Finance Director who
served for 18 years to locate necessary records. Haiyan Qi confirmed they interviewed the previous
Finance Director, who stated the records exist, but current staff may not know how to access them.
Mrs. Wagstaff added that, based on her own experience working for the County, the records should
be in the building, as the prior Finance Director managed them closely.
Carol Tuck
Mrs. Tuck asked the forensic auditor if the information in her report warranted another investigation.
Haiyan Qi responded that before any further audits are done, the County must first establish a solid
foundation for its financial records and written policies. She emphasized that without proper
documentation, additional audits would yield the same results, since documentation is key to the
auditing process.

E. ADJOURN

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to continue the meeting March 17, 2026
with the Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission .
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

The meeting recessed at 7:34 p.m.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Called Special Meeting
March 12, 2026

PS3

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Retreat
March 13, 2026
Pagoda Building, Virginia International Raceway

Halifax County Board of Supervisors Chair Larry Roller called the retreat to order at 8:00 a.m.
In addition to the Chair, Board members Robbie Smart, Jeff Oakes, Monte Thompson, Dennis
Witt, and Wayne Smith (Tiebreaker) were in attendance. Supervisor Bryant Claiborne arrived
about 8:30 a.m. Also present were County Administrator Ron Brade, Executive Assistant Nancy
Kamp, Planning and Zoning Administrator Detrick Easley, Industrial Development Authority
(IDA) Member Joel Medley, and IDA Executive Director Brian Brown. South Boston Town
Manager Matthew Candland was also present for a portion of the retreat. Berkley Group
Executive Manager Kimball Payne served as facilitator.
Notes from the retreat discussion were captured on flip charts. A transcription of the notes, with
clarifying annotations, is attached to these notes.
After calling the meeting to order, Mr. Roller turned the retreat over to the facilitator. Mr. Payne
thanked the Board members for the opportunity to serve as facilitators for the discussion. He
referred to the agenda and reviewed suggested goals for the retreat as follows:
o
o
o
o
o
o

Work as a team and develop consensus
Review County operations
Discuss County mission and values
Discuss a vision for the County's future
Identify major strategic goal areas
Identify objectives and priorities to advance the goals, with assigned
responsibility and timelines in the short, medium, and longer range
o Craft a work plan for the next 18 to 24 months
o Understand constraints to progress and identify means to overcome them
Mr. Payne then pointed out some themes that might run through the day's discussion including,
Board roles and responsibilities, the respective roles of and the relationship between the Board
and the County Administrator, public engagement, and potential limitations that might have to be
overcome to address the Board's priorities.
Mr. Payne also offered some ground rules to guide the Board's discussion:
o Everyone participates; no one dominates
o Engage
o Be honest

1
P54

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Listen to each other
Respect different opinions
No idea is too outlandish
Seek to understand
Ask questions
Seek consensus (formal action at a future Board meeting)
Silence means consent - speak up if you disagree
Use the parking lot for issues that may evade consensus or require more
background
o Have fun; don't take ourselves too seriously
o We will take breaks when it seems appropriate
The Board agreed to the goals for the retreat and accepted the agenda and ground rules.

Video Presentations

To set the tone for the retreat, two videos were shown. The first focused on a Greek proverb that
says, "A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never
sit in." The second video was a scene from the movie Black Panther where T'Challa reunites
with his deceased father T'Chaka who assures him, "A man who has not prepared his children
for his death has failed as a father" [1 :20 mark to 3 :05 mark]. County Administrator Brade
explained to the Board members that the two clips were meant to encourage a focus on the future
of Halifax County and what initiatives the Board could undertake that would benefit future
generations of citizens.

T earn Building Exercise

Mr. Payne led the Board through a team building exercise. He asked the Board members to
provide answers to the following questions:
►
►
►

Tell your colleagues something about yourself that they probably don't know.
What strengths do you bring to the Board ofSupervisors team?
What two things might people find challenging when working with you?

Responses to the last two questions were recorded without individual attribution.
The cumulative strengths identified by Board members were (flip charts #1 & #2):
•
•
•
•
•
•

Very Detail Oriented
Justifying Decisions
Big Picture Guy
Analytical
Sense Of Humor
Good Team Member
2
P55

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Problem Solver
Open Minded
Listens (2)
Managing People
Deals w/ All Equally
Collaborative Decision Making
Sees People As People

It was acknowledged during the discussion that some strengths might become challenges if taken
too far. Furthermore, some strengths might be in conflict with other strengths; for example, an
analytical and detail-oriented approach might be too slow for someone whose strength is to see
the big picture and then act.
With respect to specific challenges that might arise when Board members worked together, the
following were identified (flip chart #3):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Too Detail Oriented
Values Own Opinion
Doesn't Like Surprises
Should Talk Less / Listen More
Very Abrupt
Doesn't Express Views When Should
Naturally Combatant
Wants To Be In Charge
Dreamer

Mr. Payne asked how the potential challenges might be overcome, or compensated for, to help
the Board work together as a team. The following actions or behaviors were suggested (flip
chart #4):
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓

✓
✓
✓

✓

Sugarcoat comments [don't speak harshly]
Consider others' opinions
Accept what you can't change
Respect each other
Listen
Share your feelings
Explain your position
Practice honesty to build trust
Don't criticize publicly

Mr. Payne noted that every team brought together a combination of strengths and challenges and
that the goal was to utilize those strengths and be aware of and compensate for the challenges in
order to work together effectively.

3
PS6

Discussion of County Operations

Mr. Payne then asked the Board to consider County operations by responding to the following
questions:
►
►
►
►
►

What is the mission of the County government? Why does it exist?
What is the County doing well?
What is the County doing not so well?
What is the County not doing that it should be doing?
What is the County doing that it should, or could, stop doing?

The Board members quickly reached consensus that the mission of the County government was
to provide core services such as law enforcement, emergency medical services (EMS),
education, and economic development (flip chart #5).
In response to the question regarding what the County was doing well, Board members identified
the following (flip chart #6):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Law enforcement
Schools facilities
Economic development
Planning & Zoning
Working with the Constitutional Officers
Partnerships with other localities
Customer service (more or less; could be better)
Administration
Board support of appointed boards & commissions
Having tough conversations

With regard to what the County could be doing better, the following areas were identified (flip
charts #7 & #8):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Getting along
Solid waste collection
Financial management
EMS
Community engagement
Transparency
Siloed - infrastructure improvements
Water/sewer service authority
Revenues growth
Agriculture
Being proactive

4
P57

•
•
•
•

Regional collaboration - duplication of effort in areas such as parks &
recreation
Human resource management
Employee development (single point of failure in positions without back-up,
cross-training, or a succession plan)
Retention of youth

Ideas about what the County should be doing, that it was not currently doing, included (flip chart
#8):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Planning for the future
Parks & recreation investment
Shared services
Blue Ridge Innovation Corridor (BRIC) involvement
Address vacant / derelict housing
Explore outsourcing
Town halls

The Board identified the following things that it should stop doing (flip chart #9):
•
•
•
•

Unproductive arguing
Non-profit support
The Board hiring department heads
Governing through Facebook

This led to discussion in two areas; Board and County Administrator roles and responsibilities,
and the Board working together as a team of eight individuals despite differences of opinion.
The discussion regarding roles and responsibilities focused on the County Administrator's
authority to hire and fire employees, particularly department heads. Although the State Code
gives personnel management responsibilities to the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), the
lines of authority have been less clear under the traditional Board of Supervisors/County
Administrator form of government. The facilitator pointed out several challenges of too much
Board engagement in the hiring of department heads. First of all, if the County Administrator is
going to be held responsible for the performance of the organization, then he or she needs to
have the authority to guide and discipline employees. Governing body involvement in, or
making, hiring decisions undermines the administrator's authority since it becomes unclear who
the employee works for. Furthermore, governing body involvement can negatively impact the
stability of the organization and its ability to attract qualified candidates for positions. For
example, if one Board hires a department head, there is nothing to prevent the next Board, after
the next election, from terminating the individual, often without due process or the normal
practices of good personnel management. Best practices suggest that the governing body's CAO
have full personnel management authority, including hiring and firing, and that the CAO be held
accountable to the governing body for the performance of employees. The Board members
acknowledged the validity of the points that had been made and agreed to further consider letting
full personnel management authority rest with the County Administrator.

5
P58

The other area of discussion revolved around the change that had occurred with the most recent
election last November. What had been perceived as a 5-3 split, due to the election of two new
Board members, had flipped, with the 3-member minority plus the two new members becoming
a new 5-member majority and the remaining members of the previous majority becoming a new
3-member minority. The Board members at the retreat wanted to work through the repercussions
of that change and discussed how to go about that. There was disappointment that two members
of the new minority were not at the retreat, however those present talked through some of their
differences and made a commitment to try to work better together as a team that, while
respecting the authority of any majority, was also committed to giving the minority a voice in the
process. This included a commitment to stop speaking in terms of "us" versus "them" and to try
to work together as a team of eight individuals, who might not always agree but who shared
mutual respect for their elected positions and a common goal of working to create a better
community.

Identification of Core Values

Mr. Payne asked the Board to consider core values, or operating principles that would guide how
the County operates in citizen, Board and staff interactions and relationships. He said that while
doing the right things was important, it was arguably more important to do things the right way.
For example, he suggested that honesty should be a core value and that every interaction should
have honesty as its foundation. Regardless of the goal being pursued, there was a right way of
approaching it that fostered good relationships and built trust.
The following values were identified in the ensuing discussion (flip chart #10):
❖

❖
❖

❖
❖
❖

❖
❖

Transparency
Trustworthiness
Open communications
Excellent customer service
Honesty
Responsiveness
Effective / efficient government
Employee support & development

A Vision for the County's Future

To start a discussion on a vision for the County's future, Mr. Payne asked the Board members to
describe what Halifax County could look like in 5, 10, or 20 years as a result of the Board's
initiatives. He asked what "better" might look like. Although there was not enough time on the
agenda to try to craft a vision statement for Halifax County, Mr. Payne suggested that the
Board's thoughts could later be incorporated into such a statement.

6
P59

The Board members identified the following characteristics of a future, better Halifax County
(flip chart #11):
►
►
►

►
►
►

►
►
►

The County would be a host for a data center that would produce a significant
new revenue stream.
New facilities and programs would provide enhanced recreational
opportunities, including a complex of fields, trails, and a swimming pool.
There would be strong regional collaboration in areas such as economic
development and parks and recreation, possibly through the creation of
regional authorities.
Rural & scenic byways would be preserved and enhanced.
Smart growth practices would promote accessible housing and urban-like
service centers in the towns.
There would be a balance of socioeconomic success across all members of the
community.
A new bridge over the Dan River would provide better access to the Virginia
International Raceway.
The County would have a healthy age pyramid, not one dominated by any
particular age group, and especially, one that retained a younger population.
The ranking/rating of the public school system would be at least a seven (7)
on a scale of one to ten ( 1-10).

The retreat recessed for lunch at 11 :45 p.m. and reconvened at 12:30 p.m.

Mr. Payne explained that the remainder of the retreat's agenda would be focused on building a
strategic planning framework of goals, identifying priorities, and developing an action plan for
the next 18-24 months. To start the discussion, he reviewed with the Board common themes that
he had heard during his pre-retreat interviews with individual Supervisors. He defined a
"common theme" as an issue mentioned by more than one Board member and noted that some of
the issues had also been mentioned during the morning's discussion.
Common Themes
•

•
•
•
•

Board of Supervisors
o A desire to work together as a team; personal relationships; building trust
o Processes, roles, and responsibilities
o Committees
o The County Administrator's authority
Capital needs - facilities maintenance, repair, and improvement; new projects; CIP
Staff turnover and staffing needs
Economic development and revenue generation - the potential role of solar, battery
storage, and data centers
Housing - rural land development; Smart Growth

7
P60

•
•
•
•
•
•

Public safety - the radio system; EMS
Recreation - more needed in general; Edmunds Park specifically
Strategic planning - interest, process, ownership
The Hitachi expansion - opportunities and challenges; housing
Finances - budget, director, revenues, CIP, solid waste fees, Treasurer
Dealing with social media

The review of the common themes led directly into a discussion about the purpose and utility of
various Board of Supervisors' committees, estimated to be somewhere between thirteen (13) and
thirty (30). Mr. Payne shared his views on governing body committees, suggesting that the
fewer, the better. He expressed the following concerns:
■

■
■

■
■

Committees may subvert the principle that all governing body members receive the same
information at the same time and that no member(s) have information that is not available
at the same time to all members of the governing body.
They may subvert the principle that the Board operates as a body, by majority vote, and
that no minority of the governing body can assume that authority.
They impose an administrative burden on staff, preparing agendas, keeping minutes or
notes, complying with the FOIA, and attending multiple meetings.
Committees may stray into matters of daily operations that are the responsibility of the
CAO.
Some matters may be of such complexity that multiple committees might be involved, or
some matters, such as the budget, may be of broad concern to the entire governing body;
in such cases, they are better addressed by the full Board.

Mr. Payne suggested that if the Board found certain committees to be of value they should have
charters that specify the purpose, scope, roles, responsibilities, and authority of each committee.
In general, a committee should only have the responsibility to make recommendations to the full
Board.
At the end of the discussion, the Board identified an action item to revisit, review, and revise its
committee structure by October 1, 2026 (flip chart #12).

Before getting further into the development of the strategic planning framework Mr. Payne asked
the Board to consider the context of how strategic planning fits into the day-to-day operations of
County government. He drew a pie chart (a circle) on a flip chart (un-numbered) arid asked
the Board for its thoughts on how much of the pie, representing resources of time, money, and
staff, was taken up with the routine and required day-to-day activities of local government. The
consensus estimate was about 90%, which Mr. Payne remarked was much more than the 75%
estimate that was a more common response. Mr. Payne then asked how much of the pie was
taken up by the unexpected and unplanned for, for crises and other unanticipated issues. The
consensus was about 5%. Mr. Payne pointed out that this left about 5% of the available
resources to address new strategic initiatives and noted the concern, previously expressed by
Board members, that staff capacity was limited and already stretched thin. He said that a

8
P61

challenge was to incorporate new initiatives into daily operations in the hope of improving
service delivery.
Work Breakdown
other

Day-to-Day

Identification of Strategic Goal Areas
The facilitator discussed with the Board possible strategic goal areas to include in the strategic
plan framework. The following were identified and short descriptors are offered for
consideration (flip chart #13):
►

Housing - Provide an environment that supports the development of safe, affordable,
and diverse housing options to accommodate growth and enhance quality of life.

►

Public safety - Protect life and property, plan for emergency management, mitigate
risks, and respond to individual and community-wide crises.

►

Government performance - Continually work to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and
equity in service delivery with an appropriate organizational structure and through the
adoption and revision of appropriate policies, procedures, and practices; adapt and
implement best practices.

►

Recreation & Quality of Life - Improve Halifax County's quality of life by providing
opportunities for structured and unstructured outdoor activities for all age groups.

9
P62

►

Economic Development - Support business development and expansion that increases
the tax base, provides gainful employment, and enhances quality of life. Agriculture and
tourism are important components.

►

Infrastructure - Develop and maintain adequate utilities and facilities to sustain quality
of life and support appropriate new development.

►

Education -Support life-long learning and training/or all residents and businesses.

►

Land use - Through appropriate land use planning and regulation, promote quality of
life, protect the natural beauty of the County, support agricultural production, and
accommodate reasonable residential, commercial, and industrial growth,· follow Smart
Growth principles.

Identification of Objectives, Priorities, and Timelines Under Strategic Goal Areas

The Board then considered specific priorities for action under the strategic goal areas. The
facilitator encouraged the Board, to the extent possible, to craft SMART (specific, measurable,
achievable/attainable, relevant/realistic, and time-bound) objectives or action items. Action
items were captured on flip charts # 12, and # 14 - # 17.
Government Performance

* Revisit, review, and revise the committee structure by October 1, 2026.
* Dissolve the Board's strategic planning committee and assign one (or more) Board
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

member to serve on the Chamber of Commerce's Strategic Plan Implementation
Committee - at the April 6 Board meeting.
Modify, revise, and update the County's human resources policies by September 1,
2026.
Conduct an assessment of County buildings and facilities as a first step in developing
an asset management plan- by January 1, 2027.
Develop a fleet management plan - by January 2028.
Adopt revised financial management policies - by July 1, 2026.
Immediately address financial management and accounting practices.
Conduct an assessment of information technology assets and develop a plan for
upgrading- by January 2027.
Convene a joint meeting of the governing bodies of the County and the two towns in the next twelve months.

Public Safety

* Replace the public safety radio system ($15 million estimated cost). The first step is
to hire a consultant to help guide the process of reviewing need, system design, and
procurement- by August 1, 2026.

10
P63

* Develop a Fire and Emergency Medical Services Plan for the County - by March
2027.
Recreation and Quality of Life

* Adopt a master plan for the development of Edmunds Park; procure engineering and
architectural services for plan development; include water & sewer service planningin Fiscal Year 2027.
* Utilizing $75,000 set aside for the purpose, immediately implement repairs to
facilities in Edmunds Park.
* Resurface the track at the high school to provide a walking track for residents Summer 2026.
Infrastructure

* Define the County's relationship with the Service Authority; find and review the
governing documents of the organization and meet with the Executive Director- by
May 1, 2026.
Economic Development

* Explore the potential and develop a plan to utilize the fairgrounds site for a business
tenant - Fiscal Year 2027.

* Identify potential sites for data centers and battery energy storage; amend the Zoning
Ordinance to address data centers by October 1, 2026 and to accommodate BESS
(Battery Energy Storage Systems) by July 1, 2026.
* Explore Regional Industrial Facility Authority (RIFA) opportunities with other
localities - over the next twelve months.
Education

* Hold a joint meeting with the School Board - within twelve months.
Land Use

* Include Smart Growth provisions in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances -2028.
With time running out because Board members had other commitments, Mr. Payne asked that
the closing minutes be used for reflection on how to build on the day's activities, to work
together as a team of eight Supervisors, and to engage the two members who were not present.
Board members shared their thoughts and a prayer was offered for the success of their initiatives.
Mr. Payne thanked the Board members for their active engagement and for the opportunity for
him and the Berkley Group to be of service.

11
P64

Chair Roller declared the retreat adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

Addenda:

Transcription of Flip Chart Notes
Chronological Work Plan

12
P65

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RETREAT
MARCH 13, 2026
TRANSCRIPTION OF FLIP CHART NOTES
(WITH ANNOTATIONS FOR CLARITY)

Flip Chart #1
HALIFAX CO. BOS 3/13/26
STRENGTHS
V. DETAIL ORIENTED
JUSTIFY DECISIONS
BIG PICTURE GUY
ANALYTICAL
SENSE OF HUMOR
GOOD TEAM MEMBER
PROBLEM SOLVER
OPEN MINDED
LISTEN
MANAGING PEOPLE

Flip Chart #2
STRENGTHS CONT.
DEALS WI ALL EQUALLY
LISTEN
COLLABORATIVE DECISION MAKING
SEE PEOPLE AS PEOPLE

Flip Chart #3
CHALLENGES
TOO DETAIL ORIENTED
VALUE OWN OPINION
DON'T LIKE SURPRISES
TALK LESS / LISTEN MORE
V.ABRUPT
DON'T EXPRESS VIEWS WHEN SHOULD

13
P66

NATURALLY COMBATANT
WANTS TO BE IN CHARGE
DREAMER

Flip Chart #4

TO OVERCOME & ACCOMPLISH AS A TEAM
SUGARCOAT
CONSIDER OTHERS' OPINIONS
ACCEPT WHAT YOU CAN'T CHANGE
RESPECT EACH OTHER
LISTEN
SHARE FEELINGS
EXPLAIN POSITION
HONESTY=> TRUST
DON'T CRITICIZE PUBLICLY

Flip Chart #5

MISSION
PROVIDE CORE SERVICES
LAW ENFORCEMENT
EMS
EDUCATION
ECON.DEV.

Flip Chart #6

DOING WELL
LAW ENFORCEMENT
SCHOOLS FACULTIES
ECON.DEV.
PLANNING & ZONING
CONST. OFFICERS
PARTNERSHIPS WI LOCALITIES
CUSTOMER SERVICE
ADMIN.
BOS SUPPORT OF BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
TOUGH CONVERSATIONS

14
P67

Flip Chart #7

NOT SOWELL
GETTING ALONG
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
FINANCIAL MGMT.
EMS
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
TRANSPARENCY
SILOED - INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
W/S SERVICE AUTHORITY
REVENUES GROWTH
AGRICULTURE
BEING PROACTIVE
REGIONAL COLLABORATION-DUPLICATION [of efforts; e.g., parks & recreation]

Flip Chart #8

HUMAN RESOURCE MGMT.
EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT (SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE)
RETENTION OF YOUTH
START DOING
PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE
PARKS & RECREATION INVESTMENT
SHARED SERVICES
BRIC INVOLVEMENT
ADDRESS VACANT/ DERELICT HOUSING
EXPLORE OUTSOURCING
TOWN HALLS

Flip Chart #9

STOP DOING
UNPRODUCTIVE ARGUING
NON-PROFIT SUPPORT
BOS HIRING DEPARTMENT HEADS
GOVERNING THRU FACEBOOK

15
P68

Flip Chart #10

VALUES
TRANSPARENCY
TRUSTWORTHY
OPEN COMMUNICATIONS
EXCELLENT CUSTOMER SERVICE
TRUST MODEL
HONESTY
RESPONSIVE
EFFECTIVE I EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEE SUPPORT & DEV.

Flip Chart #11

VISION
DATA CENTER => CASH
RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
FACILITIES & PROGRAMS (COMPLEX), SWIMMING POOL
REGIONAL COLLABORATION
AUTHORITIES - REC., ETC.
RURAL & SCENIC BYWAYS
SMART GROWTH
* ACCESSIBLE HOUSING
* "URBAN" SERVICE CENTERS
SOCIOECONOMIC SUCCESS I BALANCE
BRIDGE OVER DAN RIVER TO VIR
HEAL THY AGE PYRAMID
~ 7/10 EDUCATION SYSTEM

Flip Chart #12

ACTIONS

* REVIEW, REVISIT, REVISE COMMITTEE STRUCTURE - OCT 1
* REPLACE RADIO SYSTEM ($15M)
*

*

HIRE CONSULTANT-AUGUST 1

MODIFY HR POLICIES -

SEP 1

16
P69

* DIS SOLVE STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
ASSIGN A MBR TO CHAMBER IMP. COMM. -APRIL 6

* BUILDINGS /FACILITIES ASSESSMENT- JAN 31, 2027
Flip Chart # 13

STRATEGIC GOAL AREAS
►

►
►

►
►
►

►
►

HOUSING
PUBLIC SAFETY
GOVERNMENTPERFORMANCE
RECREATION & QUALITY OF LIFE
ECON.DEV.
INFRASTRUCTURE
EDUCATION
LANDUSE

Flip Chart #14

* FLEET MANAGEMENT PLAN - JAN 2028
FIRE & EMS PLAN - MAR 2027
* FIN. MGMT. POLICIES - JUL 1
* FIN./ACCOUNTING PRACTICES-NOW
* IT ASSESSMENT & PLAN - JAN '27

Flip Chart #15

REC.
►

►

MASTER PLAN EDMUNDS PARK - FY27
ARCH. SVCS INC. W/S
REP AIRS - $75K NOW
WALKING TRACK @H.S- SUMMER 2026

INFRASTRUCTURE
DEFINE RELATIONSHIP W/ SERVICE AUTHORITY
FIND GOVERNING DOCUMENTS
MEET WI EXEC. DIR - MAY 1

17
P70

Flip Chart # 16

ECON.DEV.
►

►

►

►
►

FAIRGROUNDS SITE - FY27
FUTURE SITES FOR DATA CENTERS, BESS
(IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SITES)
ZONING ORD. AMENDMENT- OCT. 1
JULY 1 FOR BESS
EXPLORE RIFA OPPS - OVER NEXT 12 MOS.
JOINT MTG. W/ SCHOOL BOARD- 12 MOS.
JOINT MTG OF GOVERNING BODIES - 12 MOS.

Flip Chart #17

*

SMART GROWTH PROVISIONS IN ZONING ORD & SUB. ORD. - 2028

18
P71

Halifax County
Strategic Action Plan for 2026-2028
In Chronological Order

Immediate Action

* Dissolve the Board's strategic planning committee and assign one (or more) Board
member to serve on the Chamber of Commerce' s Strategic Plan Implementation
Committee - at the April 6 Board meeting.
* Address financial management and accounting practices.
* Utilizing $75,000 set aside for the purpose, implement repairs to facilities in
Edmunds Park.

Within Six Months

* Define the County's relationship with the Service Authority; find and review the
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

governing documents of the organization and meet with the Executive Director - by
May 1, 2026.
Resurface the track at the high school to provide a walking track for residents Summer 2026.
Adopt revised financial management policies - by July 1, 2026.
Amend the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate BESS (Battery Energy Storage
Systems) - by July 1, 2026
Replace the public safety radio system ($15 million estimated cost). The first step is
to hire a consultant to help guide the process of reviewing need, system design, and
procurement - by August 1, 2026.
Modify, revise, and update the County' s human resources policies - by September 1,
2026.
Revisit, review, and revise the Board committee structure - by October 1, 2026.
Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address data centers - by October 1, 2026.

Within One Year

* Conduct an assessment of information technology assets and develop a plan for
upgrading - by January 2027.
* Conduct an assessment of County buildings and facilities as a first step in developing
an asset management plan - by January 1, 2027.
* Develop a Fire and Emergency Medical Services Plan for the County - by March
2027.
* Convene a joint meeting of the governing bodies of the County and the two towns in the next twelve months.

19
P72

* Explore Regional Industrial Facility Authority (RIFA) opportunities with other
localities - over the next twelve months.
* Hold a joint meeting with the School Board - within twelve months.
* Identify potential sites for data centers and battery energy storage systems.

Longer Term

* Adopt a master plan for the development of Edmunds Park; procure engineering and
architectural services for plan development; include water & sewer service planningin Fiscal Year 2027.
* Explore the potential and develop a plan to utilize the fairgrounds site for a business
tenant-Fiscal Year 2027.
* Develop a fleet management plan - by January 2028.
* Include Smart Growth provisions in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances - 2028.

20
P73

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Tuck Airport
Dix Aviation Hangar
1145 Tuck Airport Road
South Boston, VA 24589
Monday, March 16, 2026 / 7:00 P.M.

CALL TO ORDER

Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm .
Mr. Coleman Speece gave the invocation

ATTENDANCE
Committee members present: Supervisor Robbie Smart, Mr. Coleman Speece, Mr. Mark
Stevens, Mr. Will Solomon, Mr. Ivan Mast, and Mr. Ronnie Vaughan

Committee members absent: Mr. Jimmy Epps and Mr. Paul Smith
Guest attending: Mr. Justin Dix, Ms. Shelly Dix, Mr. Ivan Mast, and Mr. Jeremy Vaughan
Staff members: Mr. Jason Johnson, Director of Emergency Services.

NEW BUSINESS

1.

FAA and DOAV Meeting Update

Mr. Jason Johnson reported on a recent meeting with representatives from the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and the Virginia Department of Aviation (DOAV).
•

•

The primary issue discussed was the ongoing malfunction of the airport fuel system.
Multiple repair attempts had been unsuccessful; however, FAA and DOAV
representatives acknowledged the situation and expressed understanding.
Additional topics included the status of the grass runway, which is currently unlicensed. It
was noted that there are only two such runways in the Commonwealth .

Chair Vaughan asked for objections to proceeding with licensing the grass runway.
No objections were noted .
Committee members discussed and determined that meeting dates will be set for the 2nd
Thursday of the 1st month of each quarter, 6:00 pm at Dix Aviation .

2.

Runway and Safety Maintenance

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Airport Advisory Committee
March 16, 2026

P74

The committee members discussed obstructions of a tree near the runway approaches. It was
confirmed that tree removal had been conducted previously, though ongoing maintenance is
required. The grass runway license had lapsed before the current management.

3.

Airport Administration and Governance

Mr. Johnson reported that airport contact and sponsor information has been updated in FAA
records. The committee members discussed the designation of an authorized grant signature.
The following was noted:
•
•
•

Mr. Johnson is currently serving in this capacity.
A formal designation by the Board of Supervisors may be required .
Interim authorization for Mr. Johnson to continue signing grant documents was
supported .

Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and Grants

4.

Mr. Jon McMount presented updates on the airport's Capital Improvement Plan :
•
•

•

The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) update has been deferred to Fiscal Year 2027 due to FAA
staffing limitations.
Planned projects include:
o Taxiway rehabilitation (milling and asphalt replacement)
o Environmental reviews required prior to construction
Federal AIG funding is available and must be obligated by submitting a grant application
by the end of May.

It was noted that failure to submit the grant could result in significant loss of available funds .

5.

State Supported Projects

The Commonwealth continues to support a future terminal development project.
•
•
•

6.

A terminal feasibility study is proposed to determine size and location.
The study may be funded at approximately 80-90% by the state.
Future construction funding may follow completion of the study.

Environment and Regulatory Compliance

Mr. Johnson reported progress on the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan
(SPCC).
•
•
•

7.

Coordination with the local fire department is pending.
FAA and state inspections are expected; dates have not yet been scheduled.
Continued monitoring of safety compliance and runway conditions is ongoing.

Airfield Operations

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Airport Advisory Committee
March 16, 2026

P7S

•
•

8.

The grass runway remains closed and has been properly NOTAMed.
Reopening is contingent upon completion of licensing requirements.

Ongoing Capital Projects

Runway Lighting Project
•
•
•

Installation is underway and progressing well.
A required FAA flight check is pending and may take several months to schedule.
Estimated cost of flight check: approximately $21,000 .

Windsock Relocation
•
•

9.

Proposed relocation near the AWOS/ASOS system .
Must be treated as a separate FAA project.

Fuel System Infrastructure

Significant discussion was held regarding the airport fuel system:
•
•
•
•

10.

DOAV has recommended the replacement of components from the tank forward .
The state has indicated willingness to fund repairs.
A revised Request for Proposals (RFP) process has been issued following earlier
inconsistencies.
Target timeline for resolution : approximately 60 days, subject to vendor response.

Potential Medical Helicopter Operations

Mr. Johnson reported interest from Centra Health in establishing helicopter operations at the
airport.
•
•
•

Requirements include hangar space and operational area.
The airport currently lacks suitable hangar facilities .
Options discussed included :
o Temporary structures
o Concrete pad development
o Long-term construction possibilities

Consensus was reached to authorize Mr. Johnson to continue discussions with Centra Health
and explore feasible options.

11 .

Airport Manager Position

The committee members held a discussion regarding the need to formalize the airport manager
role.
•
•

The position is anticipated to be part-time initially, with potential for future expansion.
The role should be established as a county position .
Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Airport Advisory Committee
March 16, 2026

P76

•

A draft job description has been prepared.

Action:
•
•

12.

The draft will be reviewed by the County Administrator and legal counsel.
The position will be publicly advertised upon approval.

Governance and Responsibilities

The Committee discussed the need to clearly define responsibilities among:
•
•
•
•

Halifax County
FAA and DOAV
Airport management
Engineering consultants

Emphasis was placed on accountability, coordination, and proper documentation.

13.

Meeting Schedule

The Committee agreed to resume regular quarterly meetings.
•
•

Standard schedule: Second Thursday of each quarter at 6:00 PM
Additional meetings may be called by the Chair as needed.

ADJOURN

Motion made by Mr. Speece seconded by Mr. Stevens to adjourn the meeting .
Motion passed 6-0.

Meeting adjourned at 8:32 pm

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Airport Advisory Committee
March 16, 2026

P77

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
HALIFAX COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Joint Meeting
County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Meeting Room
1050 Mary Bethune Street
Halifax, VA 24558
March 17, 2026 / 6:30 PM

A.

CALL TO ORDER
Chair Roller called the Board of Supervisors meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Chair Griles called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Planning Commissioner Wimbish gave the invocation .
Chair Roller led the Pledge of Allegiance

Chair Roller stated that a request had been received from Supervisor Riddle to participate remotely.
Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, and seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to approve Supervisor Riddle to
participate remotely.
Chair Roller requested the reason for remote participation . Supervisor Riddle stated that he was out of
town for work. Chair Roller also requested disclosure of the remote location, to which Supervisor Riddle
responded that he was located in Newport News, Virginia .

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K. McDowell , and
Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Mr. P. Riddle
Absent During Meeting: No one

B.

ATTENDANCE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTENDANCE
Board of Supervisors members attending were: Mr. P. Riddle, ED1 (remote participation); Mr. L. Roller, ED2;
Mr. D. J. Oakes, ED3; Mr. D. Witt, ED4; Mr. R. Smart, ED5; Mr. M. Thompson, ED6; Mr. K. McDowell, ED?;
Mr. W .B. Claiborne, ED8; and Mr. W . Smith, Tie Breaker.
Staff members attending were: Mr. Ron Brade, County Administrator; Mr. Detrick Easley, Planning/Zoning
Administrator; Ms. Nancy Spencer, Strategic Programs Coordinator; and Mrs . Nancy Kamp , Executive
Assistant

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026

P78

News reporter attending was : Miranda Baines, The Gazette-Virginian
Security was provided by: Halifax County Sheriff's Department
Board of Supervisors conducted Roll Call and determined a quorum was present.

PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE

Planning Commission members attending were: Mr. A. Hughes, ED1; Mr. D. Griles, ED2; Mr. B. Pearce,
ED3; Mr. J. Jennings, ED4; Mr. R. Watts, ED5; Mr. J. Beard, ED6; and Mr. C. Wimbish, ED7
Planning Commission members absent: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum , ED8
Staff members attending were: Mr. Ron Brade, County Administrator; Mr. Detrick Easley, Planning/Zoning
Administrator; Ms. Nancy Spencer, Strategic Programs Coordinator, and Mrs. Nancy Kamp, Executive
Assistant
News reporter attending was: Miranda Baines, The Gazette-Virginian
Security was provided by: Halifax County Sheriff's Department
Planning Commission conducted Roll Call and determined a quorum was present.

C.

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPTION OF AGENDA

Mr. Brade stated that a closed session needed to be added to the agenda to discuss contracts and
agreements.

Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to add closed session to the
Agenda for contracts and agreements; subsection (a)(29.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one

Supervisor McDowell made a motion to amend the agenda to include a discussion of the forensic audit.
Mr. Brade stated that he had consulted with legal counsel regarding the forensic audit and was advised to
forward the audit report to the Auditor of Public Accounts for the Commonwealth of Virginia . He indicated
that he would transmit the report the following morning .

Motion made by Supervisor McDowell, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to add Forensic Audit discussion to
the agenda.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026

P79

Supervisor Oakes stated that, in light of comments provided by Mr. Brade, it would be appropriate to delay
discussion of the forensic audit until at least the April meeting, pending the report from the Auditor of Public
Accountants.
Supervisor Claiborne clarified that the motion on the floor was solely to add the forensic audit discussion to
the current meeting agenda .
Discussion continued among Board members. Supervisor Witt noted that the audit report had only recently
been received and expressed a preference for allowing additional time for review and potentially discuss at
the April meeting. Chair Roller concurred, stating that the Board had limited time to review the report since
its receipt.
Supervisor McDowell stated that under Virginia law, specifically statute 30-138 of the Code of Virginia,
state agencies, courts, and local constitutional officers are required to report any circumstances suggesting
a reasonable possibility of fraudulent transactions involving funds or property under their control. This
includes situations where an officer or an employee of the state or local government may have participated
in possible fraud . The report must be made properly to the Auditor of Public Accounts, the State Inspector
General, and the Superintendent of State Police. Failure to comply with this reporting requirement
constitutes a class three misdemeanor, and that is section 30-138 of the State of Virginia law.
Supervisor McDowell withdrew his motion but wanted to clarify the Virginia Code.

Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor Witt, to approve the Agenda with
amendments.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one

PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTION OF AGENDA

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Hughes, seconded by Planning Commissioner Watts, to approve
the Agenda .

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts , Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

D.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meelinn - March 17, 2026

P80

1. Approval of Minutes - March 5, 2026 Board of Supervisors Finance Committee

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to approve the March 5, 2026, Board
of Supervisors Finance Committee.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson , Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one

2.

Finance Committee
a. Health Insurance Premiums

Mr. Brade presented a recommendation from the Finance Committee regarding a forthcoming 7% increase
in health insurance premiums . He stated that the matter had been reviewed by the Finance Committee,
which unanimously recommended that the County absorb the increased costs rather than pass them on to
employees.
Mr. Brade stated that the Finance Committee recommended reallocating $75,000 previously designated
within the Strategic Core Planning budget to fund repairs and upgrades at Edmunds Park. He noted that the
park has experienced deferred maintenance and that reallocating these funds in the current fiscal year
would allow the County to begin necessary improvements. He further stated that funding for an architectural
and landscaping design for Edmunds Park would be proposed in the upcoming fiscal year budget.
Mr. Brade stated the Finance Committee recommended improvements to the Boardroom audio-visual
system. He noted that the County has received concerns and complaints from citizens participating via
livestream regarding system failures and interruptions. Proposed improvements include upgrading the
existing system, adding an additional camera focused on the podium , and installing additional microphones
to enhance audio clarity during meetings.
Mr. Brade stated that the third item was presented to the Finance Comm ittee from administration,
recommending amending the County's existing agreement with CivicPlus to expand agenda management
capabilities . He explained that the enhancement would support improved management of meeting minutes
and assist with processing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The proposed upgrades are
intended to automate currently manual processes and improve overall efficiency and effectiveness within
County administrative operations .

Chair Roller restated each motion separately in order for the BOS to vote on them individually.

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to recommend to the Board that the
County absorb the forthcoming 7% increase in health insurance premiums and not pass the increase to the
employees. Motion passed 3-0 unanimously.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meeting - March 17, 2026

P81

Nays:
No one
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting: No one

Motion made by Vice Chair Smart, seconded by Supervisor Oakes, to recommend to the Board to
reallocate the previously designated $75,000 from the Strategic Core Planning budget to the operating and
maintenance budget to provide funding for repairs and upgrades at Edmunds Park and continue the
discussions regarding the architectural study for the entire facility. Motion passed 3-0 unanimously.
Vice Chair Smart stated he had sent a notice that he suggested to have the grass cutting at Botanical
Gardens included in the maintenance of County staff, since it is part of Edmunds Park.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
No one
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one

Chair Roller stated the last motion on the floor is to approve the proposal from Exclusive Technologies, for
the boardroom or the visual system upgrade in Civic Plus, for management software, including minutes
and FOIA requests. Chair Roller called for discussion among Board members regarding the motion on the
floor.
Supervisor Claiborne asked about the cost. Mr. Brade stated that the total cost for the proposed
Boardroom audio-visual upgrades and software enhancements would be less than $45,000. He further
explained that he had requested the Finance Committee defer the acquisition of a County Administrator
vehicle, as outlined in his contract, in order to prioritize funding for these improvements. The vehicle
acquisition would be deferred to the next fiscal year to allow the County to address these critical needs in
the current fiscal year.
Vice Chair Smart asked whether the total cost reflected a three-year amount. Mr. Brade clarified that the
estimated cost of less than $45,000 pertained to the immediate acquisition and implementation. He further
noted that the amendment to the agreement with CivicPlus would include an increase in recurring annual
costs associated with the additional features and capabilities
Supervisor Claiborne requested a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0 .

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026

P82

E.

PRESENTATION
None

F.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED #2:
Applicant:
Stephanie Stephens
Business Name:
Quintessence Cove, LLC
PRN:
13501, 13500, 13499, 14617, 14540, 18224
Location :
Mount Laurel Road
Landowner:
Wynona Godwin & Alfred Godwin Trust
Proposed Use:
Construct a new venue event center for weddings,
dance recitals, and corporate functions .
a. Zoning Administrator Overview

Mr. Easley stated that an application was submitted by Ms. Stevens for property located on Mount Laurel
Road . He provided background on Ms. Stevens' long-standing and successful dance studio, noting that
she has historically utilized the former high school for large events; however, the new high school facility
has reduced seating capacity, creating limitations for her annual recitals and events . The application
involves approximately six parcels, which Ms. Stevens is under contract to purchase contingent upon CUP
approval. The proposal includes the construction of two event buildings to be completed in phases. Phase
one consists of a 61-by-80-foot structure with restrooms, a prep kitchen, and event space, while phase two
would include a similar building with a modified stage layout. The facility is intended to host a variety of
events, including recitals, weddings, corporate functions , and private gatherings.
Mr. Easley reported that adjoining property owners were notified, with minimal feedback received . A
nearby cemetery raised concerns regarding potential conflicts with funeral services; however, discussions
between the parties have resulted in an agreement to accommodate such services . All events will be held
indoors, with no outdoor music or entertainment permitted.
Mr. Easley noted that the site conditions included an adjustment to extend event end times from 11 :30
p.m . to 12:00 a.m. Mr. Easley concluded by inviting Ms. Stevens to provide additional comments before
opening the public hearing.

b. Applicant Presentation
Ms. Stephanie Stephens confirmed that the purchase of the subject property is contingent upon approval
of the CUP. She explained that the proposed event center is necessary due to limited seating capacity at
current facilities , noting that her annual dance recitals draw approximately 1,300 attendees on the first day
and 900 on the second day, while the new high school accommodates only 798 individuals. As a result,
additional performances are required. Ms. Stephens stated that the proposed facility would allow for
approximately 1,100 attendees indoors, alleviating capacity issues, and her kids will not have to worry
about event space every year. She emphasized that the building would be soundproof, with all activities
conducted indoors, and that sufficient parking would be provided to accommodate attendees .
She further noted that the project has been in development for approximately two years, prompted in part
by changes in school facility availability. Ms. Stephens indicated there are currently no other venues in
Halifax County capable of accommodating events of this size.
Ms. Stephens stated that she has coordinated with Mr. Griles regarding the adjacent cemetery and
confirmed a mutual understanding to operate cooperatively. She acknowledged that funeral services will
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P83

occur at the site and noted that event attendees will remain primarily indoors to minimize disruption. She
further indicated that a website will be maintained to display scheduled events, ensuring transparency for
both the public and cemetery representatives. Ms. Stephens emphasized her commitment to making
appropriate accommodations to ensure compatibility between the event venue and cemetery operations.
Vice Chair Jennings inquired about the anticipated capacity of the proposed event center during recital
events. Ms. Stephens responded that the primary event space would measure approximately 100 feet by
100 feet and would have the capacity to accommodate approximately 1,100 individuals. Ms. Stephens
noted that the increased capacity would not only serve the needs of their studio but also provide a venue
for other studios and large-scale commuriity events within the County, addressing current space limitations
of approximately 798 attendees.
Vice Chair Jennings asked whether the proposed event center would adequately accommodate the
anticipated number of attendees . Ms. Stephens responded that the building would be designed primarily
as an open space, consisting of a stage and dressing rooms, with the remainder of the structure
functioning as a shell building. She explained that furnishings such as tables would not be permanently
installed , allowing flexibility in layout and maximizing occupancy capacity.

c.

Board of Supervisors Open Public Hearing
Planning Commission Open Public Hearing

Planning Commission Chair Griles opened the Public Hearing on behalf of the Planning Commission .
Board of Supervisors Chair Roller opened the Public Hearing on behalf of the Board of Supervisors

d. Public Comment
Chair Griles asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in favor .
No one wished to speak.

Chair Griles asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in opposition.
Mr. Joe Griles
Mr. Griles, Chairman of the Clover Cemetery Board of Directors , addressed the Board regarding the CUP
application submitted by the applicant. He said he was unsure if he was in favor or against at the moment.
He stated that the Clover Cemetery Board represents 414 current cemetery plot owners, with the potential
for 520 additional owners . Mr. Griles explained that, following receipt of the public hearing notice, a
majority of the cemetery board members were contacted to determine whether there were any concerns
regarding the proposed event center to be located across from the cemetery. He noted that the members
were generally supportive of the proposal, and excited that something else would be placed there, and the
existing structures would be demolished that are located across from the cemetery.

Mr. Griles stated that the only concern expressed by members was the potential for outdoor activities
associated with the venue to cause distractions during funeral services, should such events occur
simultaneously. Mr. Joe Griles stated that he and the applicant have discussed the conditional use permit
request. He noted that the applicant assured him there would be no outdoor music, that the buildings
would be soundproof, and that, in the event a function coincides with a funeral service, appropriate
measures would be taken to ensure respect and minimize distractions to the family and attendees .
Mr. Griles stated that he has known Ms. Stephens for many years and is comfortable in those assurances .
However, he further indicated that both parties agreed it would be beneficial to have these provisions
documented in writing to protect all parties involved . Mr. Griles concluded that, if these concerns are

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meeting - March 17, 2026

P84

addressed as part of the conditional use permit, the Clover Cemetery Board would support approval of the
request.
Mr. Sammy Coleman
Mr. Coleman, a resident of Clover, spoke on behalf of nearby residents who, he stated, may not have
received notification of the proposed event center. He noted that several individuals have resided in the
immediate area for 25 to 30 years or more and expressed concern about the proximity of the proposed
venue, which he estimated to be within approximately 500 feet of surrounding homes.
Mr. Coleman raised concerns regarding potential noise impacts. While acknowledging the applicant's
statement that events would primarily be held indoors, he referenced a similar venue in Amherst County,
where initial expectations reportedly changed over time to include outdoor activities. He expressed
concern that similar issues could occur with the proposed use. He also cited concerns related to traffic
and congestion along Mount Laurel Road , describing it as a two-lane roadway with frequent log truck
traffic. Mr. Coleman stated that events with attendance ranging from several hundred to approximately
1,100 individuals could create safety hazards and increase congestion in the area.
Additional concerns included public safety and the availability of law enforcement, noting that routine
police presence in the area is limited. Mr. Coleman also referenced the nearby cemetery, stating that it is
regularly visited by residents and could be impacted by increased traffic and activity. In conclusion, Mr.
Coleman stated that the residents he represents are opposed to the proposed location and suggested that
an alternative site within Halifax County be considered .

SPOKE IN FAVOR:
Mr. Jason Ross
Mr. Jason Ross, a lifelong resident of Halifax County, spoke in support of the proposed event center. He
stated that he has lived in the area since 2019 and has known the applicant, Ms. Stevens, for a significant
period of time. He noted her track record of operating a successful business in the County for
approximately 20 years.
Mr. Ross stated that the County must continue to move forward and referenced the need for larger event
space, particularly due to the downsizing of school facilities and the demand for events such as the
National Day of Prayer and other large gatherings currently held at school locations.
Addressing concerns about traffic, Mr. Ross noted that the project would be subject to review and approval
by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), including evaluation of traffic flow, ingress and
egress, and roadway capacity. He expressed that traffic should not be a major concern given these
requirements.
Mr. Ross further stated that the proposed facility would not operate as an unattended rental venue, but
rather would have staff on-site at all times. He explained that this would allow for oversight of noise,
parking, and coordination with nearby activities, including funerals at the adjacent cemetery.
He also described the layout of the property, stating that the event center buildings (Phase I and Phase 11)
would be located in the lower portion of the property, while parking would be situated on the upper portion .
He indicated that, due to this design and anticipated soundproofing, noise impacts would likely be minimal.
Mr. Ross added that Mount Laurel Road has historically supported significant traffic, including during
periods when the Clover area had higher industrial activity and multiple work shifts. He stated that traffic
has existed on the roadway for many years and that the road has previously accommodated higher
volumes than currently experienced .
Mr. Easley stated for the record that correspondence had been received from Mr. Heath, adjoining
property owner, stating his only concern was to ensure that patrons of the event center remain on the
subject property and do not encroach upon neighboring properties . Mr. Heath expressed support for the
CUP application.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P85

Mr. Easley further advised that documentation from the Virginia Department of Transportation was
included in the Board's packet (pages 48 and 49), confirming that the agency conducted a site inspection
of the property and entrance. He stated that certain improvements will be required to meet access and
safety standards; however, those requirements are outlined in the packet and would be addressed
following acquisition of the property and before development.
A member of the audience asked about the parcel zoning. Mr. Easley said it was zoned Agricultural. Vice
Chair Smart asked if the venue was permitted in A-1, and Mr. Easley stated it was with a CUP.

e.

Planning Commission Close Public Hearing
Board of Supervisors Close Public Hearing

Hearing no further comments, Planning Commission Chair Griles closed the Public Hearing on behalf of
the Planning Commission. Board of Supervisors Chair Roller closed the Public Hearing on behalf of the
Board of Supervisors
Commissioner Hughes asked whether the purchase of the land would be contingent upon approval of the
conditional use permit. Ms. Stephens replied, yes .
Chair Roller stated that the property, located within his district, is along a straight stretch of Mount Laurel
Road and contains long-vacant structures considered an eyesore. He expressed that redevelopment
would enhance the area, increase property values, and support renewed growth in Clover, ultimately
contributing to future economic development.
Commissioner Wimbish raised concerns regarding potential conflicts between event traffic and funeral
services occurring simultaneously at the nearby cemetery. Chair Griles acknowledged that conflicts could
arise, but noted that a site condition may be added to address the concern. Commissioner Wimbish
further commented on the differing nature of scheduling between events, which could be six months in
advance, and funerals are most likely scheduled in three days. Mr. Easley advised that the Boards could
discuss and incorporate appropriate permit conditions and language during deliberations.
Commissioner Pearce wanted to know if most of the activities at the proposed facility would be held in the
afternoons and evenings . Ms. Stevens responded that the event center would primarily host afternoon
and evening events, such as weddings, while her existing dance studio would remain downtown. She
noted that large recitals would occur once annually, with most other activities scheduled during evening
hours.

2.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED# 3:
Applicant:
Dominion Energy Virginia
PRN :
34991 & 20069
Location :
Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road
Landowner:
Kenneth and Kevin Hodges
Proposed Use:
Construct a 3.00 MW Community/Shared Solar Energy Facility

a. Zoning Administrator Overview
Mr. Easley stated that credit should be given to Dominion for identifying sites that align with the County's
goals for solar development. He noted that the selected location avoids close proximity to property owners
and minimizes visibility impacts to nearby residences .
He explained that the proposed project comprises approximately 15.7 acres and is classified as a
Community/Shared Solar facility. Mr. Easley requested that the Board be provided with additional
information on how the community solar program operates . Mr. Easley stated that staff had reviewed the
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meeting - March 17, 2026
P86

proposal in relation to the Comprehensive Plan and found it to be in alignment. He also noted that a
decommissioning bond of approximately $424,000 would be established for the site.
Mr. Easley explained that the property is already well screened with existing vegetation, resulting in little to
no need for additional tree planting. He further referenced proposed cash payments associated with the
project, including an estimated amount of approximately $190,000 under applicable agreements, in
addition to ongoing tax revenue .
Mr. Easley reviewed the site plan, identifying the two parcels designated for the solar facility. He reiterated
that the site is located in a remote area, is well screened, and is suitably positioned to minimize impacts to
surrounding properties .

b. Applicant Presentation
Mr. Austin Jones, representing Dominion Energy, presented the Red Oak Solar Project and requested a
favorable recommendation and approval of a CUP for the proposed 3-megawatt solar facility located along
Lewis Trail Road .
Mr. Jones stated that his presentation would provide an overview of the project location, design,
compliance with County ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan, environmental protections, and
decommissioning measures. He explained that the presentation intended to demonstrate how the project
aligns with the rural character of Halifax County while providing tangible benefits to residents .
Mr. Jones described the Red Oak Solar Project as a proposed 3-megawatt facility located in the
southwestern portion of Halifax County. He noted that the project has been reviewed by County staff and
that it was being considered jointly by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
He further stated that Dominion Energy's mission is to provide reliable, affordable, and increasingly clean
energy, and that projects such as the Red Oak Solar Project contribute to achieving those goals.
Mr. Jones stated that the proposed distribution-connected solar facility would generate clean, emissionsfree electricity that is produced and utilized locally through connection to the distribution grid. He noted that
the project would generate tax revenue, support local jobs during construction, and provide funding to
community organizations .
Mr. Jones described the project as a "passive taxpayer," explaining that it would contribute fiscal value
over its operational life without placing additional demands on schools, water, sewer, or other public
services .
He further stated that Dominion Energy has worked collaboratively with Halifax County staff and the
property owner to responsibly site and design the project, and that this collaboration informed both the
project layout and the proposed conditions included in the application .
Mr. Jones also highlighted Dominion Energy's community engagement efforts, noting that the company
has interacted with local residents, organizations, and community groups during the development process .
He expressed appreciation for the community's engagement.
Mr. Jones then transitioned to additional details regarding the project.
Mr. Jones stated that the proposed Red Oak Solar facility is a 3-megawatt AC solar project located along
Lewis Ferrell Road on two parcels owned by Mr. Kenny Hodges and Mr. Kevin Hodges, totaling
approximately 144 acres . He emphasized that less than 18 acres of the total acreage would be utilized
within the fenced project area .
Mr. Jones stated that the surrounding land uses consist of agricultural, timber, and low-density residential
properties. He explained that the site was selected to allow for significant setbacks and utilize existing
natural screening . He noted that the property is remote and well-buffered from surrounding areas.
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P87

Mr. Jones provided a visual overview of the project, describing the scale and layout of the proposed
facility, including solar arrays, an inverter bank, and a pad-mounted transformer located within the project
area . He emphasized that the site is naturally screened and not readily visible from surrounding properties
or public viewpoints. He stated that the facility would meet or exceed required setbacks, including a
minimum of 150 feet from public rights-of-way, adjacent property lines, and nearby residences. He further
explained that the distance from Lewis Ferrell Road to the nearest solar panels is approximately 720 feet,
with some portions of the site located up to approximately 3,500 feet from the roadway.
Mr. Jones noted that no floodplains, wetlands, or streams are located within the fenced project area, and
that all identified water resources would be buffered by at least 100 feet in accordance with County
requirements . Access to the site would be provided by a single entrance from Lewis Ferrell Road designed
to meet VDOT standards .
He further explained that visual screening was a key component of the project design. The proposal
includes a 75-foot vegetative buffer around the perimeter, utilizing existing vegetation and supplementing
with native, pollinator-friendly plantings as needed to maintain the rural character and provide year-round
screening.
Mr. Jones stated that the project is consistent with the Halifax County Comprehensive Plan, supporting
policies related to the responsible siting of energy infrastructure, economic diversification, environmental
protection, and innovative land use design. He noted that the project minimizes impervious surfaces and
incorporates storm water management practices .
Regarding decommissioning, Mr. Jones stated that the facility would have an expected operational life of
approximately 35 years and would be decommissioned in accordance with County ordinance
requirements . He indicated that the estimated decommissioning cost is approximately $425,000, which
would be secured through financial assurance equal to 100 percent of the estimated cost. He explained
that all equipment would be removed , materials recycled where possible, and the site restored for future
agricultural or other approved uses.
In closing, Mr. Jones described the project as a modest-scale, carefully sited development that meets
County requirements , aligns with the Comprehensive Plan, and provides both short-term and long-term
economic and community benefits with minimal impact. He respectfully requested a favorable
recommendation and approval of the conditional use permit.
Supervisor Witt inquired whether the proposed solar project would generate any noise impacts for nearby
residents. Mr. Jones responded that no noise issues are anticipated, noting that the project's design,
scale, and remote location, including the use of relatively small inverters, are expected to minimize any
potential noise impacts.
Supervisor Claiborne inquired about the $425,000 decommissioning cost estimate and the projected
lifespan of the solar facility. Mr. Jones confirmed that the estimate is based on present-day costs and
stated that the facility has an expected lifespan of approximately 35 years, noting that costs may increase
over time due to inflation. Mr. Easley added that the decommissioning bond can be updated periodically,
typically every 5 years, to reflect current cost estimates .
Supervisor Witt inquired about the anticipated timeline for completion and operation of the proposed solar
facility. Mr. Jones stated that, contingent upon approval of the CUP, the project would proceed through
additional development phases, including intensive studies and regulatory review by the Virginia State
Corporation Commission . He indicated that interconnection study results are expected by fall 2026, with
regulatory review anticipated in 2027 and a potential decision by spring 2028. Construction could begin
thereafter, with spring 2028 identified as the earliest projected start date.
Chair Roller inquired about the location and visibility of the project's electrical interconnection
infrastructure, specifically whether it would be visible in public roadways. Mr. Jones provided additional
explanation regarding Community/Shared Solar and the project's electrical interconnection . He explained
that the proposed facility is a distribution-connected project, meaning it is interconnected at the mediumvoltage level rather than the high-voltage transmission system . He described medium-voltage distribution
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P88

lines as the local electric lines commonly seen along roadways, which serve nearby homes, businesses,
and organizations . In contrast, he noted that high-voltage transmission lines are larger facilities designed
to carry electricity over long distances. Mr. Jones stated that, due to its scale, the Red Oak Solar facility
would connect to the local distribution system . As a result, the energy generated by the project would be
consumed locally within the same service area supplied by the nearby substation, directly benefiting the
surrounding community. He further explained that the interconnection would occur along an existing
distribution line, with minimal additional infrastructure required. He indicated that any necessary pole
infrastructure would be located along the identified interconnection path and would be situated to remain
well screened from public view. Mr. Jones emphasized that the project would not introduce visually
intrusive infrastructure along public rights-of-way.
Chair Roller inquired whether the project would require connection to a three-phase power line, noting that
the existing line at the site did not appear to meet that standard and may require upgrades. Mr. Jones
confirmed that interconnection requirements, including any necessary infrastructure upgrades, are being
evaluated through the ongoing interconnection study process to determine the appropriate system
improvements.
Supervisor McDowell asked how residents would benefit from the proposed solar facility, noting prior
statements that the power generated would serve the local area. He stated that he is not on Dominion, but
other residents inquired how residents would benefit from the proposed solar facility. Mr. Jones stated that
the project would provide clean energy produced and used locally, contribute tax revenue, and support
broader system benefits such as reliable and affordable electricity for customers. He noted that the facility
operates as part of the overall energy system serving all customers rather than providing direct individual
profit to nearby residents .
Supervisor McDowell noted that some residents may not see a direct reduction in their electric bills and
questioned how the project benefits residents. Mr. Jones explained that solar generation contributes to the
overall energy mix by providing a zero-fuel-cost resource, which helps stabilize and reduce long-term
energy costs . He stated that solar projects can limit reliance on higher-cost fuel sources, particularly during
periods of high demand , and help maintain competitive and stable utility rates , even if individual customers
do not see immediate or direct bill reductions . Vice Chair Smart stated that the project would result in
reduced rate increases rather than direct decreases in utility costs . Mr. Jones confirmed that is how
Dominion keeps prices affordable.
Commissioner Beard asked what the mile radius of the solar project. Mr. Jones said that It depends on the
service radius of the Sinai substation that this project supports . I do not have the exact radius available at
this time; however, it is typically around 5 to 6 miles, depending on system conditions. In some cases,
distribution circuits may extend beyond that range due to network configuration and load requirements.
Therefore, the project area would encompass all locations served by the Sinai substation .
Vice Chair Jennings inquired whether the proposed project qualifies as a Community/Shared Solar facility
and whether it is required to serve a defined local subscriber base. Mr. Detrick Easley noted that the term
"community solar" can create confusion, as it is often associated with subscriber-based programs that
provide direct bill credits to participants. Mr. Jones clarified that the proposed project is not a
Community/Shared Solar facility, but rather a utility-owned, front-of-the-meter generation project. He
explained that, under current regulations administered through the Virginia State Corporation Commission,
regulated utilities such as Dominion Energy cannot own subscriber-based shared solar projects that
provide direct bill offsets to customers. Mr. Jones acknowledged that the project's classification under
County ordinance terminology may create confusion .
Commissioner Hughes inquired whether the solar panels for the project would be manufactured in the
United States, citing concerns regarding potential security risks associated with foreign-manufactured
equipment. Mr. Jones stated that Dominion Energy follows strict procurement and cybersecurity protocols,
including the use of domestic equipment where required. He further noted that the company prohibits
procurement of solar panels from certain foreign sources, including China, and that all equipment
undergoes a rigorous cybersecurity review process to address such concerns .
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P89

c.

Board of Supervisors Open Public Hearing
Planning Commission Open Public Hearing

Planning Commission Chair Griles opened the Public Hearing on behalf of the Planning Commission .
Board of Supervisors Chair Roller opened the Public Hearing on behalf of the Board of Supervisors

d.

Public Comment

Chair Griles asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in favor.
Mr. Michael Barnes
Michael Barnes stated he submitted a letter expressing my opinion on this project. I am a resident and
property owner in the area where the project is proposed, and he supports solar energy. He said that as
we move forward, he believes it is important to focus on cleaner, more sustainable sources of energy.
Based on his research, approximately 80% of energy in the United States is still derived from fossil fuels .
Solar energy presents an opportunity to reduce that reliance while providing a cleaner alternative. From
what has been presented, he believes this project is well planned and represents a positive step for the
community. Fossil fuels contribute to pollution and can lead to fluctuations in energy costs, whereas solar
offers a more stable and environmentally friendly option. Overall, he believes this is a beneficial project
and hopes to see more developments like this in Halifax County.
Mr. Detra Carr
Mr. Datrick Carr spoke in support of the proposed project. He stated that he attended the site visit and
acknowledged that weather conditions made it challenging for Board members, the Planning Commission,
and the public; however, he emphasized the value of viewing the site in person. Mr. Carr noted that the
project is located a significant distance from the roadway and is well secluded. He further stated that, to his
knowledge, no adjoining property owners have expressed opposition to the project. He referenced prior
comments he made to the Board, emphasizing that solar projects should be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis, noting that some sites are more appropriate than others. He expressed his opinion that this location
is one of the more suitable sites and is well-positioned to serve the community. He also noted that, unlike
large transmission facilities , the energy generated from this project would be utilized locally. Mr. Carr
concluded by respectfully requesting the Board's support for the project.
Ms. Nevaeh Hodges
Ms. Hodges spoke in support of the Red Oak Solar Project. She stated that, as a young resident of Halifax
County, she believes it is important to balance community growth with preservation of the County's rural
character. Ms. Hodges noted that many young residents desire to remain in the community but seek
meaningful progress and economic opportunity. She expressed that the proposed project represents a
small-scale solar development that is appropriately suited for a rural area, utilizing less land while still
providing economic and environmental benefits. She further stated that the project is expected to
generate jobs, economic activity, and additional tax revenue without placing demands on County
infrastructure. Ms. Hodges emphasized the importance of clean energy investments for future generations
and noted that such projects support long-term sustainability goals. Ms. Hodges concluded that the project
represents a balanced approach to development, supporting both economic growth and environmental
responsibility, and stated her support for the application.
Mr. Ricky Carr
Mr. Ricky Carr spoke in support of the proposed solar project. He stated that he is a Halifax County
resident, veteran, and OSHA-certified solar construction safety professional with extensive experience in
solar site safety. Mr. Carr indicated that, based on his professional experience, solar projects of this scale
are predictable, manageable, and controlled. He noted that such facilities can provide backup power
support during outages, as well as generate jobs, tax revenue, and long-term land lease opportunities,
while contributing to clean energy and public health. He further stated that his observations from the site
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meeting - March 17, 2026

P90

visit were positive and reflected well-planned development and safety considerations. Mr. Carr also noted
his involvement in other solar projects and expressed his willingness to support similar efforts locally.

Ms. Linda Owen
Ms. Owen addressed the Board and expressed appreciation for the opportunity to speak. She stated that
she owns property adjoining the Red Oak Solar Project and noted that Board members had passed her
residence during the recent site visit. Ms. Owen acknowledged and expressed appreciation for the
responsiveness and willingness to listen demonstrated by the landowner, Mr. Hodges, and representatives
of Dominion Energy. She emphasized that open communication at this stage of the project is necessary,
helpful, and encouraging. She further stated that, as the project moves forward, it is her expectation that
the spirit of cooperation will continue not only during the construction phase but also beyond completion.
She highlighted the importance of ongoing communication, transparency, and mutual respect in
maintaining a positive relationship between Dominion Energy and adjoining property owners. Ms. Carr
noted that projects of this nature are long-term and should be accompanied by a long-term commitment to
being good neighbors. She concluded by expressing her support for continued dialogue and collaboration
to ensure outcomes that serve both the community and the project.

Mr. Glen Ratliff
Mr. Ratliff stated that he is a resident of District 7 and the property owner of the land on which the
Watlington 20-megawatt solar project is proposed . He noted that Mr. Kenny Hodges had asked him to
evaluate the project, and he was glad to do so. Mr. Ratliff concurred with prior comments regarding
setbacks and related considerations, stating that he believes it is a good project from that perspective. He
further stated that he attended the community meeting, participated in the site visit, and reviewed the
project plans. His evaluation focused primarily on site and sound impacts, and he expressed the opinion
that the project meets those requirements . He noted that the project is smaller in scale and would not
include larger inverter skids or transformer banks that could generate higher noise levels. Instead, he
stated that the equipment would be smaller and pole-mounted, and he does not believe it would produce
noise sufficient to impact neighboring properties. Mr. Ratliff also commented on the distribution line
serving the site, noting that he observed a single line, which typically indicates single-phase service,
whereas three lines would indicate three-phase service. He concluded by stating that he has had
productive discussions with representatives of Dominion Energy, including Mr. Morgan Vickery and Mr.
Austin Jones, whom he described as responsive and forthcoming in addressing questions. Mr. Ratliff
stated that, if all conditions are met, he believes the project would be a positive development.
Mr. Detrick Easley stated for the record that multiple letters of support had been received for the proposed
project. He identified the following individuals and organizations as having submitted letters of support:
William Confoy, Sharon Wilborn, Deborah Griles, Kelly Franco (Meadville School), Michael Barnes Sr., and
Peter Raines.

Chair Griles asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in opposition.
No one wished to speak.

e.

Planning Commission Close Public Hearing
Board of Supervisors Close Public Hearing

Hearing no further comments, Planning Commission Chair Griles closed the Public Hearing on behalf of
the Planning Commission. Board of Supervisors Chair Roller closed the Public Hearing on behalf of the
Board of Supervisors .

G.

MINUTES CORRECTION/APPROVAL- PLANNING COMMISSION

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint MeetiP l March 17, 2026

9

A.

February 17, 2026

Planning Commission Organizational Meeting

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Watts, seconded by Planning Commissioner Pearce, to approve
the February 17, 2026, Planning Commission Organizational Meeting.

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard , Mr. C.
Wimbish, and
Nays:
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

B. February 17, 2026

Planning Commission/Board of Supervisors Joint Meeting

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Wimbish, seconded by Planning Commissioner Beard, to
approve the February 17, 2026, Planning Commission/Board of Supervisors Joint Meeting .

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

H.

PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATION
1.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED #2:
Applicant:
Stephanie Stephens
Business Name:
Quintessence Cove, LLC
PRN :
13501 ,13500,13499,14617,14540,18224
Location:
Mount Laurel Road
Landowner:
Wynona Godwin & Alfred Godwin Trust
Proposed Use:
Construct a new venue event center for weddings,
dance recitals, and corporate functions .

Chair Griles noted that the cemetery located across the road had been referenced multiple times during
the discussion. He stated that the Board would like to include a site condition to ensure coordination
between the project and cemetery operations. He asked Mr. Easley for input on an appropriate condition .
Mr. Easley explained that the applicant would not be aware of scheduled funeral services unless notified
by the cemetery. He recommended including a condition requiring mutual communication between the
applicant and the cemetery representatives to allow for appropriate accommodations during funeral
services. Mr. Easley further suggested that both parties exchange contact information and maintain
ongoing communication to ensure coordination when services are scheduled . He noted that staff could
draft a condition formalizing this requirement.
Commissioner Wimbish stated that he had previously raised concerns regarding potential traffic and
scheduling conflicts between events and funeral services. However, he indicated that he does not
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026

P92

anticipate a significant issue, noting that most events at the venue are expected to occur in the evening,
while funeral services could be held earlier in the day. He further stated that, in situations where events
and funeral services may occur on the same day, coordination between the venue operator and local
funeral homes would be important. Commissioner Wimbish acknowledged that a lack of communication
could create conflicts but expressed the opinion that, with proper coordination, such issues should be
avoidable.
Chair Griles stated that he believes the wording for the site condition is key to keeping open lines of
communication between Ms. Stephens and the cemetery. Mr. Easley referenced the proposed site
conditions and recommended including language requiring both parties to work together and notify one
another of scheduled funeral services to allow for proper accommodations .

Motion made by Chair Griles, seconded by Planning Commissioner Beard, to recommend to the Board of
Supervisors to approve the approve the CUP for Ms. Stephanie Stevens to operate Quintessence Cove,
LLC, subject to 21 site conditions.
VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

2.

Legal status of plan Virginia Code§ 15.2-2232 review for Dominion
Energy Virginia, (Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road) (ED#3)
(3 MW Community/Shared Solar Energy Facility

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Pearce, seconded by Planning Commissioner Watts, pursuant to
Virginia Code § 15.2-2232(A), that the Halifax County Planning Commission find that the general or
approximate location, character, and extent of the proposed Dominion Energy Solar Project (Parcels
34991 and 20069) are substantially in accord with the adopted Halifax County Comprehensive Plan. He
further moved that the proposed facility be approved as being substantially in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan.
VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Pearce, seconded by Planning Commissioner Watts pursuant to
Virginia 15.2- 2232B that the zoning administrator be directed to communicate its finding to the Halifax
County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meeu~~ March 17, 2026
P93

Ayes : Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. 8. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

3.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED# 3:
Applicant:
Dominion Energy Virginia
PRN :
34991 & 20069
Location :
Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road
Landowner:
Kenneth and Kevin Hodges
Proposed Use:
Construct a 3.00 MW Community/Shared Solar Energy Facility

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Pearce, seconded by Planning Commissioner Watts, to
recommend to the Board of Supervisors to approve the Red Oak solar project with the 38 site conditions
being met.

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. 8 . Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

I.

PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURN

Motion made by Planning Commissioner Wimbush, seconded by Planning Commissioner Beard, to
adjourn the Planning Commission meeting.

VOTE
Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard, and Mr. C.
Wimbish
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Vote:
Absent During Meeting: Ms. G. Smith-Mangum

The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:06 p.m.

J.

MOTION TO ENTER CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO VIRGINIA CODE §2.2-3711
Subsection (a)(29): Discussion of the award of a public contract involving the expenditure of public
funds , including interviews of bidders or offerors, and discussion of the terms or scope of such

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
March 17, 2026
Joint Meet~
94

contract, where discussion in an open session would adversely affect the bargaining position or
negotiating strategy of the public body. (Contracts) (Agreements)

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to enter into closed session .
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J . Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
No one
Abstained :
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one
The Board entered into Closed Session at 8:10 p.m.

K.

MOTION TO RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION

Motion made by Supervisor Witt, seconded by Supervisor Thompson, the Board arise from Closed Session
and return to its Regular Meeting.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J . Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained:
No one
Absent During Vote:
No one
Absent During Meeting: No one
The Board reconvened in Open Session at 8:38 p.m.

L.

MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

Motion made by Supervisor Riddle, seconded by Supervisor Oakes to enter into closed session
pursuant to Virginia Code §2.2-3711, for the following items:
WHEREAS, the Halifax County Board of Supervisors has convened a closed meeting on this date
pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia
Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by this governing body that
such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this governing body 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 governing body.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetino - March 17, 2026
P95

ROLL CALL VOTE
Supervisor Pete Riddle
Chair Larry Roller
Supervisor Jeff Oakes
Supervisor Dennis Witt
Vice Chair Robbie Smart
Supervisor Monte Thompson
Supervisor Keith McDowell
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0 .

M.

ACTION RESULTING FROM CLOSED SESSION
None

N.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADJOURN
Motion made by Supervisor Claiborne, seconded by Supervisor Riddle, to adjourn.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes : Mr. P. Riddle, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. D. J. Oakes, Mr. D. Witt, Mr. R. Smart, Mr. M. Thompson, Mr. K.
McDowell, and Mr. W .B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained :
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

The meeting recessed at 8:40 p.m.

Halifax County Board of Supervisors
Halifax County Planning Commission
Joint Meetinn - March 17, 2026
P96

CONSENT

AGENDA

P97

MONTH:

FEBRUARY 2026

BILL WARRANT NUMBERS:

145033 - 145222
145016 - 145032

PAYROLL WARRANT NUMBERS:

45170 - 45390
GENERAL FUND:

TOTAL EXPENDED

BILLS

$1,314,768.54

PAYROLL

$1,024,990.26
GRANT FUND:

BILLS
PAYROLL

$18,079.14
$110,600.63
E 911 FUND:
'

BILLS

$15,434.88

PAYROLL

$79,683.18
OTHER:

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES

$27,177.60

COMM. DEBT ACCOUNT
COURTHOUSE MAINTENANCE FUND
DRUG PROSECUTOR FORFEITURE
HERITAGE
GENERAL OBLIGATION FUND (LANDFILL)
$2,322.66

AIRPORT
AIRPORT CAPITAL

LAW LIBRARY
UNEMPLOYMENT FUND
WAR MEMORIAL
DRUG PROS. FUND
SCHOOLS
$52.78

LIBRARY - VRS HYBRID
ANTHEM HEALTH PREMIMUM
SOCIAL SERVICES

$441.98
$2,593,551.65

TOTAL

P98

COUNTY OF HALIFAX
Cash Statement as of JANUARY 31, 2026
CASH

$

8,000.00

CASH IN BANKS

$

93,844,513.91

Prepaid 2026 County Taxes

$

2,387.97

Benchmark Non Judicial

$

71,483.05

Available Surplus

$

65,896,714.85

Cares Program

$

VPA

$

Courthouse Maint

$

322,603.15

Capital Improvement Projects:

$

16,280,670.49

GENERAL FUND:

-

VA SNAP 2014 Series-reov.
(INTEREST)
2016C VRA CTHSE MAINT.

$

(INTEREST)

$

-

$

-

2019C VRA
(INTEREST)
Drug Task Force Fund:(Sherift) FEDERAL

$

15,392.30

Drug Task Force Fund:(Sheriff) REG.

$

23,325.70

Drug Task Force Fund:(Sherift) STATE

$

322,121.97

Drug Prosecutor Atty Fund:

$

25,267.47

Comm Atty Forfeiture Drug Fund:

$

73,785.03

Law Library Fund:

$

57,931.70

E-911 Surcharge Bldg. Const. Fund:

$

217,857.53

E-911 Equipment Lease Purchase:

$

300,663.64

War Memorial Commission Fund:

$

12,150.04

William Tuck Airport Commission Fund:

$

351,836.82

William Tuck Airport Capital Fund:

$

129,858.17

School Textbook Fund:

$

1,261,159.64

School Cafe Food Service Fund:

$

4,501,923.11

Comm Atty Forfeiture Drug Fund: FEDERAL

E-911 Surcharge Tax Fund:

Page 1 of 2
P99

COUNTY OF HALIFAX
Cash Statement as of JANUARY 31, 2026

58,888.29

School Operat. Capital Const. Fund:

$

School Oper. Fund:

$

School Operat. Payroll Tax Payables Fund:

$

School Cafe Payroll Tax Liability

$

[4,114.81)

Health Savings Account (HSA)

$

1,338.34

Special Welfare Fund:

$

398,906.05

Grant Fund:

$

3,289,898.55

Halifax/South Boston Library

$

130,839.08

C/ W Current Credit Acct Est.Tax

$

3,709.31

C/W Current Debit

$

-

VA Housing Tax 2% VHCD

$

1,319.56

Hal. Co. Heritage Commission Fund:

$

9,301.47

Hal. Co. Heritage Fest.: (Surplus in CD's)

$

74,433.85

TOURISM SAVINGS

$

40,673.16

TOURISM REGULAR

$

54,622.28

OPREF

$

-

GENERAL FUND APPRO

$

-

Hal. Co. Heritage Fest.: (Investments)

-

74,433.85

$

TOTAL

Shana L. Hetzell, County Treasurer

Page 2 of 2
PlOO

93,926,947.76

$

93,926,947.76

COUNTY OF HALIFAX
Cash Statement as of FEBRUARY 28, 2026

Cash

$

8,000.00

Cash in Banks

$

93,773,836.23

2026 Prepaid County Taxes

$

4,204.53

Benchmark Non-Judicial

$

71,483.05

OPREF

$

General Fund: Available Surplus

$

VPA

$

Courthouse Maintenance

$

323,553.18

Drug Task Force (Sheriff) FEDERAL

$

15,393.48

Drug Task Force (Sheriff) REG.

$

23,325.70

Drug Task Force (Sheriff) STATE

$

322,143.66

Law Library:

$

58,663.10

E-911 Surcharge Bldg. Construction

$

323,133.95

E-911 Equipment Lease Purchase:

$

300,663.64

Drug Prosecutor Atty:

$

25,267.47

Comm Atty Forfeiture Drug:

$

73,785.03

Grant:

$

3,464,288.93

William Tuck Airport Commission:

$

341,980.45

School Operating:

$

-

School Operating Payroll Tax Payables:

$

-

School Textbook:

$

1,261,159.64

School Cafe Food Service:

$

4,637,807.26

School Cafe Payroll Tax Liability

$

(4,114.81)

Capital Improvement Projects:

$

15,936,814.75

School Capital Construction:

$

58,888.29

William Tuck Airport Capital Fund:

$

129,858.17

Tourism: Regular

$

46,212.83

Tourism: Savings

$

40,685.64

Health Savings Account (HSA)

$

97.23

Special Welfare:

$

371,011.90

65,660,606.06

-

Comm Atty Forfeiture Drug: FEDERAL

Page 1 of 2

PlOl

COUNTY OF HALIFAX
Cash Statement as of FEBRUARY 28, 2026

War Memorial Commission:

$

12,150.04

Hal. Co. Heritage Commission:

$

9,061.47

Halifax County Heritage Festival: (Surplus in CD's)

$

74,433.85

Halifax/South Boston Library

$

273,015.06

C/W Current Credit Acct Est.Tax

$

-

C/W Current Debit

$

-

VA Housing Tax 2% VHCD

$

696.53

$

93,856,270.0~

Halifax County Heritage Festival: (Investments)

74,433.85

TOTAL

$

Shana L. Hetzell, County Treasurer

Page 2 of 2
Pl02

93,856,270.08

COMMITTEE
REPORTS

P103

HALIF
AGENDA BRIEFING
Staff Members:
Meeting Date:

April 6, 2026

Item#

J-1

Ron Brade

Ordinance#

Department:

County Administration

Subject:

Finance Committee - March 25, 2026

Background:
A Finance Committee meeting was held on March 25, 2026. After discussion, the Committee
made the following motion for recommendation to the Board .

Motion made by Supervisor Oakes, seconded by Vice Chair Smart, to recommend to the full
Board to approve the proposed competition renovations to the Tisha Waller Track at the High
School.
Motion passed 3-0 unanimously.

Needed Action:
Consider recommendation of the Finance Committee.

Suggested Motion:
Motion to approve the proposed competition renovations to the Tisha Waller Track at the High
School.

P104

tjoarauocs® n o

Tuesday, March 31, 2026
Joint Facilities Meeting -Halifax County School Board Facilities Committee & Building
and Grounds Committee
Halifa x County Middle School
1011 Middle School Circle-Fine Arts Building
South Boston, VA 24592
Door A - Room FA-3
1:00 P.M.

A. Call to Order
1. Call to order

2. Moment of Silence and Pledge of allegiance

B. Roll Call
1. Roll Call

C.ApprovalofAgenda
1.Approval of Agenda

D. Unfinished Business
1. Overview of Athletic Complex

E. New Business
1. Tennis Courts/Track Resurface

2. Capital Improvements/Preventive Maintenance
3 . MOU/Shared Commitments

4. Next Steps: Joint Board Meeting
F. Adjournment
1. Adjourn

P105

Halifax County Athletic Facilities Briefing
Background Information for the Halifax County School Board and Board of Supervisors
Prepared for the Joint Facilities Committee Discussion
March 31, 2026
This briefing document provides background information and potential partnership options
related to the Halifax County High School athletic complex, tennis court renovation, and
track resurfacing projects for review by members of the School Board and Board of
Supervisors prior to the March 31 Joint Facilities Committee meeting.

1. Background and Origin of the Project
•

•
•
•

•
•

•

In May 2025, a meeting was held between the Board Chairs of the School Board and
Board of Supervisors, the former County Administrator, the Superintendent of Halifax
County Public Schools, the IDA Director, and representatives from Hitachi Energy to
discuss opportunities for collaboration around athletic and recreational facilities.
A point of confusion emerged regarding which tennis courts were being discussed.
Halifax County Public Schools intended the discussion to focus on the high school tennis
courts, which are currently in use.
Some participants believed the discussion referenced the middle school tennis courts,
which have not been playable for more than 10 years and were never included in the
athletic complex plan.
As a result, the middle school courts were referenced in the draft Memorandum of
Understanding.
HCPS does not currently have funding available to renovate the middle school tennis
courts as the HCMS tennis courts are NOT included in plans for the future HCHS athletic
complex; at present, there is no middle school tennis team.
HCPS would be open to considering the middle school courts as a potential future joint
project.

Shared goals discussed included strengthening community recreation infrastructure,
supporting student athletic and physical education needs, building collaborative
public-private partnerships, and maximizing existing facilities while planning for the future
athletic complex.

P106

2. Tennis Court Renovation Partnership
Current Situation
• The Halifax County High School tennis courts are currently the only operational public
tennis courts in Halifax County.
• Renovation of the existing courts is already included in plans for the future HCHS
athletic complex.
• A partnership structure would allow renovation under public-use facility codes and
allow full public access without facility rental forms or fees.
• A partnership approach promotes fairness in financial responsibility between HCPS and
the County while maximizing use of existing facilities.
Construction Cost Comparison
Construction
Estimated Cost
Standard

Key Requirements

Impact

Public Use Code

$840,000

Standard
renovation under
public recreation
facility code

Allows full public
access without
rental forms

School Building
Code

$923,000

Includes ADA
walkways and
spectator bleachers

Higher cost due to
school facility
standards

Estimated
Contribution

Operational
Elements

Funding Structure Options.
Description
Funding Option

Option 1 - Shared
Cost (50/50)

HCPS and County
share renovation
costs

HCPS $420,000 /
County $420,000

Maintenance $25k
each annually;
County covers
electricity for lights;
full public access

Option 2 - Credit
Structure

HCPS funds project
and receives credit
toward county
obligation

HCPS $840,000
upfront with
$420,000 credit

Maintenance $25k
each annually;
County covers
electricity for lights

Option 3 - 70/30
Partnership

HCPS funds 70%
and County funds
30%

HCPS $588,000 /
County $252,000

County contributes
$50k maintenance
annually; County

P107

covers electricity for
lights
Option 4 - HCPS
Only

Renovation under
school building
code

HCPS $923,000

Limited public
access through
facility agreements

3. Track Resurfacing Project (Tisha Waller Track)
•
•
•
•
•

The Tisha Waller Track currently serves HCPS students for Physical Education classes,
practices, and training.
The track is open to the public as a safe place for walking, running, and exercise.
The estimated resurfacing cost is approximately $350,000.
A partnership approach would allow resurfacing under an MOU supporting both school
and community use.
The school division plans to construct a new track at the football stadium as part of the
athletic complex.

Funding Structure Options
Description
Funding Option

Estimated
Contribution

Operational
Elements

Option 1Collaborative
Partnership

Community
partners share
resurfacing cost

Total $350,000
(HCPS $80k, Hitachi
$50k, SoBo $25k,
Halifax Town $5k,
County $191k)

Maintenance $10k
each annually from
HCPS and County;
public access, full

Option 2 - No
Improvements

Track remains in its
current condition

No contributions

Limited continued
use

4. Funding Context for the Athletic Complex
•
•
•
•
•

A facility comparison study determined that a blended approach of new construction
and renovation is most cost-effective.
Estimated cost of the athletic complex: $16.6 million.
Bond interest from the new high school project has generated approximately $13
million (as of May 2025), less the arbitrage rate of 3.5%.
The Board of Supervisors approved the use of these funds to secure the construction
contract and allow work to begin.
The voter-approved 1 % sales tax has generated approximately $25 million, exceeding
projections of 21 million by about $5 million. Funds are currently being used to repay
the bond for the new high school; $4 million of the overage is needed for the athletic

P108

•
•
•

•

facility, and some overage funds (1 million) should be kept in reserve to prepare for any
year the tax revenue underperforms projected amounts. Future plans can be developed
for projects on other campuses based on five years of revenue reporting.
Approximately 70% of voters approved the tax as a 'YES ... AND' investment intended to
supplement-not replace-existing commitments.
1 % SALES TAX FY Working Papers.xlsx
1 % Referendum
Funding Avenues (based on backup documentation)

S. County Debt Service Consideration
• The County currently maintains a $2.8 million annual debt service obligation from the
HCMS renovation project.
• This obligation is scheduled to conclude in FY2027.
• As the obligation concludes, the BOS will need to appropriate the debt service to fund
school projects as a condition of continuing the 1 % sales tax. The voters understood the
1 % tax was to be an additional revenue source and not replace the existing debt service
commitment.
• The plan for the High School Athletic Complex includes the use of the $2.8 million for
FY27. Both boards will need to decide on specific projects for debt service funds for
FY28 and beyond.
•

Debt Service Report

6. Maintenance & Facilities Stewardship
•

•
•

•

•

Halifax County Public Schools was awarded a $20 million School Construction Grant
from the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) to support construction of the
new Halifax County High School.
As part of the grant requirements, HCPS developed a formal Preventive Maintenance
Plan to ensure long-term stewardship of this major public investment.
HCPS is committed to strengthening its maintenance practices by moving from a
primarily reactive approach-responding to issues after they occur-to a
preventive, lifecycle-based model designed to protect facilities before failures occur.
Historically, carry-over funds have often been the primary source for larger
maintenance projects. While this approach allowed critical issues to be addressed, it
also contributed to many facilities not receiving consistent preventive care over
time.
While we cannot change past practices, HCPS is committed to moving forward with a
proactive maintenance strategy that prioritizes asset protection, facility longevity,
and responsible stewardship of public resources.

Pl09

•

•

•

•

•

Implementing this approach will require predictable and sustainable funding so that
maintenance can be planned intentionally rather than relying on year-to-year
carry-over availability.
Protecting community assets such as the new high school and future athletic
facilities requires maintenance to be treated as an essential operational priority, not
an occasional or optional expense.
A strong preventive maintenance program helps:
o Protect multi-million-dollar public investments
o Extend the lifespan of buildings and infrastructure
o Reduce emergency repairs and unexpected costs
o Maintain safe, reliable facilities for students and community use
HCPS looks forward to continuing to work collaboratively with the County to ensure
that maintenance planning keeps pace with the scale of the community's investment
in its school facilities.
Preventive Maintenance Plan

Halifax County Schools Preventive Maintenance Plan
Halifax County Public Schools-2026-2030 CIP Plan

7. Review of Draft Agenda for the March 31 Joint Facilities Committee
Meeting
•
•

Members are asked to review the draft agenda available in BoardDocs prior to the
meeting.
Key topics include the athletic complex overview, tennis court partnership options, track
resurfacing partnership, capital improvement planning, and next steps for collaboration.

•

Next Steps: Key Education Metrics

•

Joint Facilities Meeting Agenda 3-31-26

PllO

=unding Source Analysis for Athletic Fields

Halfiax County Public Schools
......----------------.
Funding Source Analysis for Athletic Fields
AVAILABLITY OF FUNDS
L-----~----------___J

03/21/2026

2025-2026
As of Date March 21, 2026

03/01/2025
Based on
County Records

1% Tax FY 21-FY 26
Remaining loan distribution.

:!

......

5,615,732.99 *Varjance between Projected and Actual To-Date
$4,243.46 Issuance costs reduced available balance

Bond Service Interest

*Agree after arbitrage number provided by Interim
Finance Director. Need to see actual docu ment to
9,194,340.47 confirm

Reserved from Debt Services from Middle School Reno

$2,832,082.00 FY27

Tax Savings from Owner Direct Purchases

3/25/2026

$0.00

$17,646,399

VPSA WorkingPapers.xlsx
g Papers

"O
......
N

OBJ

PROJ

ACCOUNT DESC

00100000

01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

00100000

01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

00100000

01025

HS

00100000

01025

00100000

01025

00100000

01025

00100000
00100000
00100000

MUNIS Account Detail History
YR/PR

JNL

EFF DATE

SRC

REFl

REF4

COMMENT

22/11

11568

05/20/22

GEN

RO

SCH CAP IM

LAND PURCHASE

22/11

11800

OS/31/22

GRV

RO

2211011568 VOIDED CHECK

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/11

11808

05/17/22

GEN

so

VPSA 22A

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/11

11810

05/20/22

GEN

SH

SCH CAP IM

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/11

11811

05/31/22

GEN

SCJ

MAY INT

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/11

11812

05/30/22

GRV

SH

2211011810 POSTING ERROR

01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/12

12775

06/30/22

GEN

SH

VPSA

VPSA PRINCIPAL

01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/12

12807

06/30/22

GEN

SCJ

JUNE INT

JUNE INTEREST 2022A VPSA

01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/12

12810

06/30/22

GEN

SH

VOID CK

VPSA HIGH SCH PROJ

00100000 •01025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

22/12

12813

06/30/22

GRV

SH

2212012810 ERROR

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 1

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

100000 102S

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

100000 1025

HS

100000 1025

HS

100000 1025
100000 102S
100000 1025

07 / 01/22 SOY

Interest Ea med

TO RECORD VPSA 2022A PROCEEDS
MAY INTEREST 2022A VPSA

41,325.70

219,188.59
106,337.71

OPENING BALANCE

JULY INT V

JULY INTEREST

150,954.82

SCJ

AUG INT

AUGUST INTEREST

208 ,739 .85

sh

TRANSFER

09/30/22 GEN

SCJ

SEPT INT

4745

10/ 31/22 GEN

SH

TRANSFER

474 7

10/31/22 GEN

SCJ

23/ 4

4767

10/31/22 GEN

23/ 5

5358

11/18/22 GEN

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 5

S842

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 6

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 7

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 7

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

100000 1025

HS

100000 1025

07 /31/22 GEN

SCJ

23/ 2

271 8

08/31/22 GEN

23/ 3

3366

09/26/22 GEN

23/ 3

3838

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 4

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 4

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

HS

100000 1025
100000 1025
100000 1025

SEPTEMBER INTEREST

230,4B9.59

OCT INT

OCTOBER 2022 VPSA INT

286,626.11

SCJ

INT

OCTOBER INTEREST

SCJ

VPSA #4

VPSA REQUISITION #4

11/30/22 GEN

SCJ

NOV INT

NOVEMBER INTEREST

341.464.02

6729

12/31/22 GEN

SCJ

DEC INT

DECEMBER INTEREST

392,258.65

7608

01/30/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ #5

REQUISITION #5

7800

01/31/23 GEN

SCJ

JAN INT

JANUARY INTEREST

23/ 8

8564

02/28/23 GEN

SCJ

FEB INT

FEBRUARY INTEREST

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 9

9207

03/ 09/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ #6

REQUISITION #6

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/ 9

10159

03/31/23 GEN

SCJ

MARCH INT

MARCH INTEREST

90,882.62

100000 102 S

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/10

10432

04/24/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ#7

REQUISITION #7

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/10

10738

04/30/23 GEN

SCJ

APRIL INT

APRIL INTEREST REVENUE

0.00

2,000.00
139,982 .56

NET LEDGER BALANCE
-350,920.00

350,920.00

0 .00

105,2 23,432 .05

105,223,432 .05

-Jl 0,9~ .ooJ

104,872,512.05

41 ,325 .70

104,913,837.75

12_0.no.oc

105,264,757.75

-219,188.59

105,045,569.16

106,337 .7 1

105,151,906.87

3SO.no.oo 1

105,502,826.87

·360,9z0 00

105,151,906.87

105,151,906.87 lOS, 151,906 .87

914,509.40

100000 102 5

IJOURNAL AMOUNT SOY BALANCE
:g 50_920.oo;

SOY BAL

1574

ENpense toward
High School

105,151,906.87

lS0,954.82

105,302,861 .69

208,739.85

105,5 11,601.54

·914 ,509 .40

104,597,092 .14

230,489.59

104,827,581.73

-90,882 .62

104,736,699 .11

286,626.11

105,023,325 .22

2,000.00

105,025,32S .22

-139,982.56

104,885 ,342 .66

341,464 .02

105,226,806.68

392,258.65

105,619,065.33

•764,085.18

104,854,980.15

415,251 .71

415,251.71

105,270,231.86

389,058.65

389,058 .65

105,659,290.S1

764,085 .18

618,107.06
436,361.04
1,064,004.65
435,844 .79

-618,107 .06

105,041,183 .45

436,361.04

105,477,544.49

•l,064,004.65

104,413,539.84

435,844 .79

104,849,384.63

-344,643.92

104,504,740.71

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/11

11576

05/30/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ #8

VPSA 2022A REQ #8

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/11

11720

05/31/2 3 GEN

SCJ

MAY INT

MAY 2023 INTEREST

464,479.72

464,479 .72

104,969,220.43

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/12

12684

06/ 30/23 GEN

SCJ

JUNE INT

JUNE INTEREST

455,578.10

4SS,578 .10

105,424,798.53

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

23/12

1268S

06/20/23 GEN

SCJ

-297,315.43

105,127,483 .10

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 1

1S43

07 /31/23 GEN

REQ#9

REQUISITION #9

SOY BAL

OPENING BALANCE

SCJ

JULY INT

JULY VPSA INTEREST

07 / 01/23 SOY

344,643 .92

297,315 .43

lOS,127,483.10 105,127,483.10
477,782.46

105,127,483.10

477,782.46

105,605,265.56

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 1

1543

07/31/23 GEN

SCJ

JULY INT

REQUISITION #10

517,087 .B6

-517,087.86

105,088,177.70

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 2

2152

08/11/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ#ll

REQUISITION #11

853,339.88

-853,339.88

104,234,837 .82

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 2

2S 84

08/31/23 GEN

SCJ

AUG INT

AUGUST INTEREST

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 3

3041

09/ 08/23 GEN

SCJ

VPSA #12

REQUISITION #12

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 3

3956

09/30/23 GEN

SCJ

SEPT INT

SEPT VPSA INTEREST

471,939.75

471,939.75

102,679,789 .04

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 4

4791

10/31/23 GEN

SCJ

OCT INT

OCTOBER VPSA INTEREST

483,193 .68

483,193 .68

103,162,982 .72

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 4

4794

10/31/23 GEN

SCJ

DRWON #13 VPSA DRAWOOWN #13

1,580,896.47

-l,S80,896.47

101,582,086.25

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ S

Sl40

11/09/23 GEN

SCJ

DRWON #14 VPSA REQUISITION #14

1,864,831.46

-1,864,831.46

99,717,254 .79

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ S

S635

11/30/23 GE N

SCJ

NOV INT

NOVEMBER 2023 INTEREST

462,297 .87

100,179,552.66

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 6

6S65

12/10/23 GEN

SCJ

REQ lS

REQUISITION #15

•l ,373,823.03

98,805,729.63

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 6

6S66

12/31/23 GEN

SCJ

DEC INT

DECEMBER INTEREST

472,701 .66

99,278,431 .29

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 7

7138

01/12/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ #16

REQUISITION #16

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 7

7442

01/31/24 GEN

SCJ

JAN INT

JANUARY 2024 INTEREST

462 ,684.20

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 8

8543

02/29/24 GEN

SCJ

FEB INT

FEBRUARY 2024 INTEREST

428,2 92 .17

428,292 .17

98,027, 172.58

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/ 9

9094

03/08/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ #17

REQUISITION #17

2,301,949 .42

-2,301,949.42

95,725 ,2 23 .16

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHO OL PROJECT

24/ 9

9236

03/12/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ#l8

REQUISITION #18

3,099,891.58

-3,099,891.58

92,625,3 31.58

3/24/2026

493,409 .64
2,S2 0,398.17

462,297.87
1,373,823 .03
472,701.66
2,142,235 .08

493,409.64

104,728,247 .46

·2, 520,398.17

102,207,849 .29

-2, 142,235 .08

97 ,13 6,196.21

462,684.20

97,598,880.41

MUNIS Account Detail History

VPSA WorkingPapers.xlsx

......
'"Cl
t..i

440,948.76

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/9

9714

03/31/24 GEN

SCJ

MARCH INT MARCH 2024 INT

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/10

10286

04/15/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ#19

REQUISITION #19

440,948.76

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/10

11087

04/30/24 GEN

SCJ

APRILINT

APRIL VPSA INTEREST

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/11

11282

05/14/24 GEN

SCJ

VPSA#20

VPSA REQUISITION #20

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/11

11731

OS/31/24 GEN

SCJ

MAY INT

MAY 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/12

12137

06/11/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ#21

REQUISITION #21

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/12

12618

06/30/24 GEN

SCJ

JUNE INT

JUNE 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

24/12

12619

06/30/24 GEN

SCJ

REQ#22

REQUISITION #22

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/

5

07/01/24 SOY

SOY BAL

OPENING BALANCE

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 1

1620

07/31/24 GEN

SCJ

JULY INT

JULY 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 2

2195

08/12/24 GEN

sa

REQ#23

REQUISITION #23

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT 25/ 2

2828

08/31/24 GEN

SCJ

AUG INT

AUGUST 2024 INTE.REST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 3

3014

09/04/24 GEN

REQ#24

REQUISITION #24

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 3

4197

09/30/24 GEN

SEPT INT

SEPTEMBER 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 4

4541

10/08/24 GEN

REQ#25

REQUISITION #25

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 4

5084

10/31/24 GEN

OCT INT

OCTOBER 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

2S/ 5

5137

11/07/24 GEN

sa
sa
sa
sa
sa

REQ#26

REQUISITION #26

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 5

5919

11/30/24 GEN

SCJ

NOV INT

NOVEMBER INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 6

6064

12/06/24 GEN

sa

REQ#27

VPSA 2022 REQ #27

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 6

6539

12/31/24 GEN

SCJ

OECINT

DECEMBER 2024 INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 7

7127

01/09/25 GEN

REQ#28

REQUISITION #28

100000 102S

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

2S/ 7

760S

01/31/25 GEN

JAN INT

JANUARY 2025 VPSA INT

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 8

8112

02/10/25 GEN

sa
sa
sa

VPSA#29

VPSA REQUISITION #29

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 8

8471

02/26/25 GEN

SCJ

VPSA #30

REQUISITION #30

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 8

8676

02/28/25 GEN

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/ 9

9781

03/31/25 GEN

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/10

10807

04/17/25 GEN

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT 25/10

10826

04/30/25 GEN

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/11

11943

05/15/25 GEN

SH

VPSA#32

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

25/12

12560

06/16/25 GEN

SH

VPSA#33

VPSA REQUISITION #33

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT 25/12

12652

06/30/25 GEN

VPSAINT

JUNE VPSA INT

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT 25/13

13001

OS/31/25 GEN

MAY INT

MAY VPSA INTEREST

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/01

267

07/16/25 GEN

SLH

3,601,375.30

-3,601,375.30

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/02

421

08/27/25 GEN

SH

2,967,429.59

·2,967,429.59

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/03

165

09/15/25 GEN

SH

6,504,949.93

-6,504,949.93

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/04

1178

SH

1,456,470.97

·1,456,470:97

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT 26/05

484

10/29/25 GEN
11/19/25 GEN

SH

419,624.18

-419,624.18

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/06

516

01/14/26 GEN

SH

2,100,232.49

·2,100,232.49

100000 1025

HS

VPSA 2022A SCHOOL PROJECT

26/07

517

01/15/26 GEN

SH

446,550.92

-446,550.92

.,

MAR

MARCH INTEREST VPSA

VPSA#31

VPSA REQUISITION #31

409,550.21
3,516,356.28

'

407,SS2.03
3,647,331.62
377,478.80
4,957,347.89

·~

365,354.46
5,982,866.95

'

344,791.71
6,014,313.50

r;:

·~

295,066.01
4,459,611.43
273,987.50
3,487,969.97
242,764.82
4,242,965.53
227,422.04

~

,;•
';:--~-

APR2025INT APRIL INTEREST VPSA

..
~

~~

' ..
4

-

86,167,857.53

407,552.03

86,575,409.56

-3,647,331.62

82,928,077.94

377,478.80

83,305,556.74

·4,957,347.89

78,348,208.85

78,348,208.85

78,348,208.8S

365,354.46

78,713,563.31

-5,982,866.95

72,730,696.36

344,791.71

73,075,488.07

-6,014,313.50

67,061,174.57

295,066.01

67,356,240.SB

-4,459,611.43

62,896,629.15

273,987.50

63,170,616.65

-3,487,969.97

S9,682,646.68

242,764.82

59,925,411.50

·4,242,965.53

55,682,445.97
SS,909,868.01

209,024.92

53,334,951.85

3,446,302.42

·3,446,302.42

49,888,649.43

4,671,362.38

-4,671,362.38

45,217,287.05

176,074.90

45,393,361.95

173,364.46

45,566,726.41

-4,643,534.20

40,923,192.21

159,812.69

159,812.69

41,083,004.90

6,447,406.82

· 6,447,406.82

34,635,S98.08

4,609,331.80

-4,609,331.80

30,026,266.28

118,141.42

118,141.42

30,144,407.70

141,729.36

141,729.36

30,286,137.06

3,277,795.Sl l
9,194,340.47

3/24/2026

· 3,516,356.28

53,125,926.93

173,364.46

12,472,135.98
Arbitrage Value

89,684,213.81

-2,783,941.08

176,074.90

VPSA REQUISITION #32

89,274,663.60

409,550.21

2,783,941.08

4,643,534.20
.... ,... ........
rI, • •

93,066,280.34

-3,791,616.74

227,422.04

209,024.92

FEB2025INT FEB 2025 INTEREST VPSA
SH

3,791,616.74

104,906,064.35

1% SALES TAX FY Working Papers.xlsx

Projection
ORG

OBJ

ACCOUNT DESC

YR/PR

JNL

EFF DATE SRC REFl

REF4

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/ 4

5392

10/30/20 GEN SCJ

RECLASS RECLASS SCHOOL SALES TAX

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/ 5

5732

11/25/20 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/ 6

6836

12/31/20 CRP TREAS

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/ 7

7530

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/ 8

8577

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/9

9958

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

COMMENT

(provided by

JOURNAL AMOUNT NET LEDGER BALANCE

Revenue CY

County)

-SS1,315.S9

-551,315.59

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-289,899.65
-215,742 ,43

-l,OS6,957.67

01/27/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-200,228.84

-1,257,186.S1

02/26/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-278,154.19

-1,535,340.70

03/31/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-185,502.56

-1,720,843.26

21/10

10891 04/30/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-178,530.59

-1,899,373.85

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/11

11722 05/31/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-240,838.82

-2,140,212.67

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/12

12722 06/30/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-230,901.84

-2,371,114.Sl

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW}

21/13

13031 06/30/21 GEN SCJ

CYAR

TO RECORD FY2021 ACCTS REC

-205,888.08

-2,577,002.59

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

21/13

13031 06/30/21 GEN SCJ

CY AR

TO RECORD FY2021 ACCTS REC

-241,441.50

-2,818,444.09

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ l

1574

07 /30/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-205,888.08

-205,888.08

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 2

2709

08/19/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-241,441.50

-447,329.58

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 3

4210

09/30/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-201,150.23

-648,479.81

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 4

4973

10/29/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-183,585.06

-832,064.87

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 5

5982

11/30/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-222,991.8S

-1,055,056.72

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 6

6837

12/31/21 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-1,394,225.06

-2,449,281.78

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 7

7621

01/31/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-323,293.09

-2, 772,574.87

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/ 8

8620

02/28/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-437,420.20

-3,209,995.07

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/9

9782

03/29/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-316,410.52

-3,S26,405.S9

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/10

lOS67 04/29/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-274,073.82

-3,800,479.41

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/11

11624 05/24/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-349,SS5.29

-4,150,034. 70

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/12

12735 06/30/22 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-328,767.54

-4,478,802.24

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/13

13082 06/30/22 GEN SCJ

PYAR

REVERSE PY AR

205,888.08

-4,272,914.16 Moved to correct year

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/13

13082 06/30/22 GEN SCJ

PYAR

REVERSE PY AR

241,441.50

-4,031,472.66 Moved to correct year

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

22/13

13090 06/30/22 GEN SCJ

CYAR

TO RECORD CY ACCOUNTS REC

-700,343,15

-4,731,815.81

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ l

1517

07/30/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-331,859.93

-331,859.93

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ 2

2618

08/22/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-368,483.22

-700,343.15

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ 3

3770

09/26/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-362,472.33

-1,062,815.48

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ 4

4702

10/31/22 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-377,52S.08

-1,440,340.56

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ 5

5770

11/30/22 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-390,542.57

-1,830,883.13

-841,21S.24

$2,818,444.09
2021

......

..

""O

$2,371,000.00

$447,444.09

$3,600,000.00

$1,131,815.81

$4,731,815.81
2022

3/25/2026

Variance

1/o SALES TAX FY Working Papers.xlsx
10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/6

6665

12/28/22 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-365,950. 78

-2,196,833.91

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/7

7640

01/23/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-354,215.40

-2,551,049.31

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/ 8

8510

02/28/23 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-457,994.44

-3,009,043.75

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/9

10117 03/31/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-383,3S6.52

-3,392,400.27

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/10

10653 04/25/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-368,180.11

-3,760,580.38

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/11

11615 05/12/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-408,830. 73

-4,169,411.11

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/12

12476 06/27/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-383,703.50

-4,553,114.61

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/13

13011 06/30/23 GEN SCJ

PYAR

TO REVERSE PY AR

700,343.15

-3,852,771.46 Moved to correct year

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

23/13

13030 06/30/23 GEN SCJ

CYAR

TO RECORD CY AR

-S19,209.43

-4,671,980.89

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ l

1542

07/31/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-390,925.87

-390,925,87

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 2

2575

08/30/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-428,283.56

-819,209.43

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 3

3917

09/21/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-368,002.59

-1,187,212.02

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 4

4629

10/27/23 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-377,533.77

-1,564,745.79

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 5

5611

11/30/23 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-405,035.07

-1,969,780.86

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 6

6502

12/26/23 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-375,253.78

-2,345,034.64

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/ 7

7475

01/31/24 CRP TREAS

AOO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-385,487.20

-2,730,521.84

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/8

8517

02/23/24 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-378,397.71

-3,108,919.55

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/9

9504

03/25/24 CRP TREAS

AOO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-351,602.24

-3,460,521.79

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/10

11125 04/25/24 GEN SCJ

-375,221.25

-3,835,743 .04

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/11

11542 05/23/24 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-415,159.79

-4,250,902.83

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/12

12442 06/25/24 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-360,627.20

-4,611,530.03

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/13

13011 06/30/24 GEN SCJ

PYAR

REVERSE PY AR

819,209.43

-3, 792,320.60 Moved to correct year

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/13

13066 06/30/24 GEN SCJ

CYAR

RECORD CY AR

-379,367.66

-4,171,688.26

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

24/13

13066 06/30/24 GEN SCJ

CYAR

RECORD CY AR

-426,786.67

-4,598,474.93

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/ l

1340

07 /24/24 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-379,367.66

-379,367.66

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/2

2526

08/22/ 24 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-426,786.67

-806,154.33

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/ 3

4140

09/25/24 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-400,404.35

-1,206,558.68

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/ 4

4821

10/25/24 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-376,284.27

-1,582,842.95

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/ S

5520

11/22/24 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-440,301.83

-2,023,144.78

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/6

6407

12/26/24 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-418,242.36

-2,441,387.14

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/7

7362

01/23/25 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-414,238.47

-2,855,625.61

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/ 8

8412

02/24/25 CRP TREAS

ADO SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-442,209. 72

-3,297,835.33

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/9

9515

03/25/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-358,006.03

-3,655,841.36

$4,671,980.89
2023

RECLASS RECLASS APRIL SALES TAX

""'......

,/2512026

$1,006,820.89

$3,731,499.00

$866,975.93

$4,598,474.93
2024

UI

$3,665,160.00

2

% SALES TAX FY Working Papers.xlsx
10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/10

10774 04/30/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-318,016.02

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/11

11716 05/22/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-446,529.19

-4,420,386.57

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/11

12011 05/22/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

446,529.19

-3,973,857.38

-3,973,857.38

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/11

12012 05/22/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-446,529.16

-4,420,386.54

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

25/12

12442 06/25/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-422,464.92

-4,842,851.46

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/1

299

07 /23/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-418,979.37

-418,979.37

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/2

277

08/25/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-458,646.21

-877,625.58

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/3

310

09/25/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-414,010.22

-1,291,635.80

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/4

1130

10/24/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-370,985.40

-1,662,621.20

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/5

685

11/25/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-392,132.50

-2,054,753.70

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/6

630

12/24/25 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-445,918.81

-2,500,672.51

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/7

389

01/23/26 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-396,734.24

-2,897,406. 75

10018000 189979 LOCAL SALES TAX 1% (NEW)

26/8

414

02/25/26 CRP TREAS

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-427,040.06

-3,324,446.81

26/9

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-415,555.00

-3, 740,001.81

26/10

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-415,555.00

-4,155,556.81

26/11

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-415,555.00

-4,571,111.81

26/12

ADD SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS

-415,555.00

-4,986,666.81

$4,842,851.46
2025

-26,650,233.99

$1,043,811.46

$3,867,802.00

$1,118,864.81

$3,740,001.81
2026

Total Tax revenue

$3,799,040.00

Total Projection to date $21,034,501.00 $5,615,732.99
$25,403,568.99

...-=...
O'I

3/25/2026

3

Affordability Analysis I Updated Budget for DS and Sales Tax
: ac1ude~ 'Rese:rved for Future Debt Se1."1ce" Revenue

ISAMPLE - To Be Discussed I

Updated from Prior Analysis
B

C

D

E

F

I

H

J

K

L

N

M

0

p

Q

R

s

IJl'bl Scrv•cc C11~h rrcw

Current General

Schools

2022 VPSA

Existing Debt

Spring Pool
Final Numbers

FY

SeN1Ce

202 2
20 23
2024

4,664 ,564
4,647 ,342

2029

......-a
~

Schools ClP
Debt service

3,030,067
5,937,036
5,939,671
5,937 .761
5,936,180
5,939,549
5,937 ,_6 _1 5
5,_9 35,253 .
5,93_7 ,08] __ _ .
5,93_1, 12_6_ ·-·
5,936,93 1
. 5,939,319
5,939,510
5,935,871
5,_9 40.023

29 25·- 1--•.156,97 1
4.149,B62
2020
20 27.... '2,832,082
2028
2030
2031
2032
203 3
2034
2035
2036
203 7
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
20~3
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
205 1
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056

Projected
Future
Revenue
Loss

Fund Budget for

5,936,753 --_ _5,9_3_5,3_6 9
..5,938,315_
5,935,389
. 5,936,388,.
5,936_,008
5,9_38,945 .
5,939.896
5,9~8.6_59
5_.9_39.929
.. 5.,938,~03
5,9_38.776
5,935.746
. 5.938,908
5,937 ,855

Schools Debt
Service

Total

7 .694,630
4,654,494
10,584,378 . _ .. : ~:i i t~3i

5,939,549 .
5,937,615

~
t

_4,<>_75,0.3_6,
4,075 ,036

1,;6~.39~
1,162,3911

fromVPSA

Retail Sales
Tax Revenues

Revenues

for Ref. of

(2 ,500,000)

4,671,981
4,598:475
4,84f851
3,867,802
3,937,8~9
4,009,084

(2 ,500,000 )

4,081,648

_7 9.962
491,893

• it!:t!;~.~~~ 51!1i~!t :~t~!i:i!!··

Additional

Revenue

Total Revenues
Available

Re~~05D

. ••- ·--

-t -tti}]!!1

- - ·- · -· - ·

4,545.4_64
4,627,737 ...

5,9·4· o_.02_~........ _4,9_75.,03fj _J ___ _yfj~,399J . 1_.2,50..0 .000.1
5,936,753
4,075,03~
ug~~~ - _12,50IJ.,009l .

4,711.4_99
. 4 ,79f;,7_n .
4,883,598
4,971,991
5,061,985
_5,153 ,606
_(2,500 ,000) ... 5,246.887
(2,500,000}
5,341,855

. ·~:i~!!i~~~~titiJili:1~3J!1tttlii!l!Il~:!:'~~~ ~= ~:~~!:~!:1·.~:~:~: :
5,939,896 _
5,938,659.
5,939,929_
5,938,403
5,938,776
5,935,746
5,938,908
5,937,855

Sur'plus/
(0eflclt)

Future Schools
From Prior Tax Debt service

[ll_
filj)_
!llillf~i 1~!1~
4,01s,035 .... p6;2,~9_9 _12,500,0001 • _ 1,514,137
.4.015,!J.3~ - . . 1A8_2 ,3~9- 12,soo,0001
(2 ,500,000}
4,07~,03_6..
;,162,39~
(2,500,000)
4,()~5 ,036.
1,.1.62,399
(2,500,000)
4,075.036 .
1,162,3~.?
(2,500,000)
4,075 ,036
. 1,162.3_99_

1,7_21,876
(846,668)
58,610
' 1iio1:s61J •
9,175,24_4
406,982
6,746,519
806.970
6,819,083
_881,468
957,708
6,892,961
6,968 ,176
1,031,093
7,044,752
1,107 ,026
1,i22.1·15
1,185,784
7,202.088
1,262.770
7,282,899
1,343,389
7,365.172
1.429,300
:;;44Sil34
1,508,911
7,_534.212
_1,597,459 ..
_7,621.033 _
.1.,685,665..
1,771,_1 11
7,709,426
7,79_9,_4 20 ... 1,864.031,
7,891,041
1,954,65_4 _
7,984.322
2,048,314
8 ,079,290
2,140,345
8 ,175.978
2,236,082
_2 ,335,757
8,274.416
8 ,374,635
2.434,706
8,476,668
2,_538,266
a ,5ao:s4B
2,641,772
8,686,309
2,750,562
:4,25i,572
. (1,687,335)
2,737.435
(3,200,420)
2,737.435
2,737.435
2,737.435
2 ,737,435
2,737.435
2,737,435
2,737,435
2,737 .435

Impact

Reserve Fund

10,070
9.416,506
74.411
• 9,7.37.710
74,472
10,155,252 ...
•14,826. ••• • 9,18o:oii3

[!:m::::i:~1t-----:;i;::
]i!lfmL
?Jl!l -·f~ft!~g:~~~fiS-i; jEm.
···-~------ -·--1-------·1-.... ... ....

Future

Transfer from

Rebates
Additional

Adjusted

~evenue Debt

Sales Tax

Surplus/

service
eserve Fund

R~_s er_ve_Fu~Deflclt)

1,338.561
1,096.820..
2,069,959
1,998,371
1,930,465
757 ,998

··· ·····-···

1,674,208
3,200.420

Sales Tax

Transfer from

1,721,876
491,893
1.155.430
i,162.398
2,405,353
2,737.435
1,639.467_
957,708
1,031,09~
1,101,<>_2~.
1,185, 78_4 _
1,262.770
1,343,389
1.429,300
1,508,911_
1,597,459 , .
. _1,685,665
1,771,111
1,864,031
1,954,654 ,. ..
2.048,314
2,140,345
2,236,082_
2,335,75~
2.434,706
2,538,266
2.641:1121 •
2,750,562

13,127
2,737,435
2,737,435
2,737,4_35
2,737,435

_!.,5~Cl,?60
9 ,1_9 2.17 4
7,853,613
2,3~?,_8~9- t 6 ,?56.793
3,473.257
.. 4,686.834
_5 ,878,610_
2 ,688.464
8 ,616,045
75 7,998
_1 0.,2_55_,512
11,213_.220
12,244,314
- i i:i5i.340
_1 4 ,5_3 7 .1_2.4__
.. 15,799,893_
_17.143,28_2_
. ~.8 ,5 72.582
. 2_0 ,081.493
21,67~,952
2~,364,617
25,135,728
26, 999.759
28,954,413
31.002,727
33,143,073 .
_ 3?,3 ! 9,154
_37 ,714,91_1
__40,149,617
•~.687 ,8_83 ..
45,329.655
-a1--~s~·os1·.090
13,12 7
.. 46 ,392,882
43 ,192,462
_4_5 ,929,897
_4 8,667 ,332
5_1 ,4_04 ,76 7
. 54 ,1 42.202

~o•
Total

I 20.450,82 0

175,224,930

195,675,750

{1)

■

Value of a Penny(4 l:

$381,000

• Assumed Growth:

0.0%
(1)
(2)
(3)

DAVENPORT ~
PUBLIC FINANCE

~

(4)

144,102,907

139,636,040
12)

233,778

241,684,118

46,008,368

131

Note: Should we still assume the same oroiected revenue loss?

Actual Budget for Schools Debt Service for FY 23 through FY 26. FY 27 and beyond held constant at FY 26 levels.
Represents incremental additions to Future Debt Service Assigned Fund Balance. FY 2025 and 2026 come from the Budgets.
Total includes FY 2021 and 2022 actual collections of Additional Sales Tax Revenues of $6,849,802.24. FY 2023- 2025 actual collections of Additional Saled Tax Revenues
have been updated. Future growth in the Sales Tax revenues is calculated using a base value of $3,600,000 in FY 2022 and the Census Bureau South Region 's 10-year
compound annual growth rate in CPI for the period August 2011 to August 2021 (1.81% per year}.
Provided by Staff.

October 2 7. 2025

Ha li fax County, Virginia

,.,,

.:... ;

ABSTRACT of REFERENDUM VOTES
Cast in HALIFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA
at the 2019 November General Election held on November 05, 2019 for.

Local Option Sales Tax
District: HALIFAX COUNTY
Should Hallfax County be authorized to levy a general retall saln tax at a rate not to exceed one percent (1%),
provided the revenue from the sales tax shall be used solely for capita! projects for the construction or renovation
of schools In Halifax County and that the sales tax shall expire by September 30, 2051?
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED
{IN FIGURES)

QUESTION RESPONSE
I

• --

•

70061

1Total YES votes

1:;:---·· .
!Total NO votes

__ . __ .

1Total Number of Overvotes for Question
I

We, the undersigned Electoral Board, upon examination of the official records deposited with the Clerk of the Circuit Court
of the election held on November 05, 2019, do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct Abstract of Votes cast at
said election for the proposed referendum.

PASSED

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Regular Meeting
Mary Bethune Office Complex
1030 Mary Bethune Street, Room 201
Halifax, Virginia
Monday, March 7, 2022 / 6:30 PM

A. CALL TO ORDER - Chairman Short
Chairman Short called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Supervisor Pannell gave the invocation.
Chairman Short led the Pledge of Allegiance.

B. ATTENDANCE
Board of Supervisors members attending were: Mr. C. Short, ED1; Mr. L. Roller, ED2; Mr. H.W.H.
Pannell, ED3; Mr. R. Duffey, ED4; Mr. D.E. Throckmorton, EDS; Mr. S. Brandon, ED6; Mr. G.
Ricketts, ED7; and Mr. W. B. Claiborne, ED8. Also attending was Mr. W. Smith, Tie Breaker.
Staff members attending were: Mr. Scott Simpson, County Administrator; Mrs. Stephanie
Jackson, Finance Director; Mr. Detrick Easley, Planning/Zoning Administrator; Ms. Olivia Epps,
Strategic Programs Coordinator; Otis Vaughan, Director of Buildings & Grounds; Jason Johnson,
Emergency Services Coordinator; and Mrs. Charlene Hendricks, Executive Administrative
Assistant.
News reporters attending were: Ashley Conner, The Gazette-Virginian; Tom McLaughlin, The
News & Record.
Security was provided by: Halifax County Sheriffs Department
Chairman Short said masks are required for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals for indoor
public settings.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion made by Supervisor Throckmorton, seconded by Supervisor Brandon, to adopt the
Agenda as presented in the Board packet.

VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. C. Short, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. H. W. H. Pannell, Mr. R. E. Duffey, Mr. D. E.
Throckmorton, Mr. S. Brandon, Mr. G.B. Ricketts, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

Halifax County Board cp t t 9'ervisors - Regular Meeting
~'°'"""'
•

• -

-- L

-,

D. MINUTES CORRECTIONS/ APPROVAL

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
7.

February 4, 2022
February 4, 2022
February 7, 2022
February 7, 2022
February 22, 2022
February 23, 2022
February 24, 2022

Airport Advisory Committee Meeting
Policy & Personnel Committee Meeting
Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session
Board of Supervisors Regular Board Meeting
Board of Supervisors Meeting - Solid Waste
Finance Committee Work Session
Ordinance Committee

Motion made by Vice Chairman Ricketts, seconded by Supervisor Throckmorton, to adopt the
minutes as presented.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. C. Short, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. H. W. H. Pannell, Mr. R. E. Duffey, Mr. D. E.
Throckmorton, Mr. S. Brandon, Mr. G.B. Ricketts, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

E. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL

1. Warrants - January 2022
2. Treasurer's Report-December 31, 2021
3. Supplemental Appropriations
Motion made by Supervisor Brandon, seconded by Supervisor Throckmorton, to approve the
Consent Agenda as presented.
VOTE
Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. C. Short, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. H. W. H. Pannell, Mr. R. E. Duffey, Mr. D. E.
Throckmorton, Mr. S. Brandon, Mr. G.B. Ricketts, and Mr. W.B. Claiborne
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:
Noone

F. RECOGNITIONS
1. Resolution 2022-10 Honoring Howard Claiborne "H.C." Phillips, Sr.
Chairman Short said the Board of Supervisors would like to recognize H.C. Phillips, Sr. He said
Mr. Phillips has been a dedicated community member in Halifax for numerous decades. The
Board of Supervisors of Halifax County wishes to offer its gratitude and posthumously honor Mr.
H.C. Phillips, Sr. for his contributions.

Halifax County Board of Suoervisors , Regular Meeting

Mall 12 P2022

Motion made by Supervisor Duffey, seconded by Supervisor Pannell, to adopt Resolution 202210 recognizing Howard Claiborne "H.C." Phillips, Sr.
VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. C. Short, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. H. W. H. Pannell, Mr. R. E. Duffey, Mr. D. E.
Throckmorton, Mr. S. Brandon, Mr. G. B. Ricketts, and Mr. W. B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

2.

Resolution 2022-11 Recognizing National Vietnam War Veterans Day

Chairman Short said the next item on the agenda is the recognition for National Vietnam War
Veterans Day. He said the Berryman Green Chapter of the Daughters of the American
Revolution had requested the Board of Supervisors to proclaim March 29, 2022 as National
Vietnam War Veterans Day.
Motion made by Supervisor Pannell, seconded by Vice Chairman Ricketts, to adopt Resolution
2022-10 recognizing National Vietnam War Veterans Day.

VOTE

Motion passed 8-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. C. Short, Mr. L. Roller, Mr. H. W. H. Pannell, Mr. R. E. Duffey, Mr. D. E.
Throckmorton, Mr. S. Brandon, Mr. G. B. Ricketts, and Mr. W. B. Claiborne
Noone
Nays:
Noone
Abstained:
Noone
Absent During Vote:
Noone
Absent During Meeting:

G. CITIZENS' COMMENTS

Chairman Short said comments will not be heard regarding items on the Agenda for which a public
hearing is scheduled or has already been held. He opened Citizen Comment time and asked anyone
desiring to speak to come forward one at a time and to state their name and address.
Trudy Berry
Ms. Berry introduced herself and said she lives in Lunenburg County. She said she is running for
the Virginia House of Delegates in District 50. She stated the Northern part of Halifax County is
included in that House District. She left her business card and contact information for citizens
should they want to reach out to her.
James Dixon
Mr. Dixon introduced himself and said he lives in Clover area. He said he wanted to thank
Barbara Bass, The Berryman Green Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and
Halifax County for recognizing Vietnam Veterans. He stated he is a Vietnam Veteran and when
they returned home, they did not receive any recognition other than from family members. He
said the recognition had been a long time coming.

Halifax County Boar~ ~P1_2!e~~~s- Regular Meeting

Emily Rickman
Ms. Rickman introduced herself and she said she lives on Grubby Road in Halifax. She said
since the last Board meeting, she had made several calls regarding her paycheck stubs and
tlmesheets. She stated she had left numerous messages and no one will retum her calls. She
wanted to know why County staff got to determine how many hours to pay her for time that she
had worked. She said if she worked 8 hours, why shouldn't she be paid for those 8 hours. She
stated County staff had sent text messages, which indicated she would be paid for her training
but another County employee informed her otherwise. Ms. Rickman said she kept the text
messages, and she had been paid for the training. She said she had not been paid for hours that
she had worked.
Ms. Rickman said she had been told she could not run calls because she did not have the
required certification. She stated when she was hired, she signed a contract which stated she
was required to obtain certification within 1 year. She said she paid for the certification herself
but it had never been recognized. She stated times are hard, and all she wanted was to be paid
for the hours she had worked. She said her hours had been changed on her timesheets and she
did not sign off on them. She wanted to know if there had been an investigation done for cash
being accepted at the Animal Control Shelter after County staff had told employees not to accept
any cash. She also wanted to know why County staff gave out her personal address and what Is
being done about it. Ms. Rickman said she would continue to retum to board meetings until
matters are resolved.

Detra Carr
Mr. Carr introduced himself and he said he is thankful for the opportunity of being selected as one
of the candidates for the Tie Breaker position. He congratulated Wayne Smith on being selected
for the appointment for the remainder of the year. He expressed disappointment that the Board
of Supervisors made their decision based on race. He said he had lived and worked in Halifax
County all of his life. He said over the years he had attended numerous board meetings and
served the community for years. He said he had been appointed and served on several boards.
He stated that he gets along weli with people, and he believed his credentials qualified him for the
Tie Breaker position.
Mr. Carr said he appreciated the support of the members that voted for him, and he stated the
members that voted against him had put more spark in him to find jusUce for all. He said it is a
shame that in 2022, there is a need to continue to speak about race. He said he had continued
his education, served his community, and strived to be a good citizen of Halifax County. He said
moving forward we all need to do better. He said he is not only speaking for himself but for
others that are coming behind him.

Michael Terry
Mr. Terry introduced himself and he said he lives in Scottsburg. He said over the last 50 years
his Dad had been trying to get Route 716 widened. He said his sister also came before the
Board of Supervisors requesting Route 716 to be widened and he is now requesting the Board's
help to get Route 716 widened. He said one of the reasons for this request Is when you see the
traffic going down to Staunton River State Park, the vehicles are so close they almost run into
each other. Mr. Terry asked the Board members to help with his request.
With no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Short declared Citizen Comment time complete.

H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.

School Facilities Financing

Halifax County Board of Suoervisors - Regular Meeting

M~l2l2022

Chairman Short opened the Public Hearing and he asked if anyone had any comments.
Chairman Short said as part of the ongoing process to secure finding for the County's School Facilities
projects, a public hearing is required to be held to receive citizen input regarding the issuance of Bonds.
After the public hearing, the Board of Supervisors Is asked to consider Resolution 2022-6 authorizing the
issuance of General Obligation School Bonds. For brevity of the Board Packet; the 33 page Virginia
Public School Authority Bond Sale Agreement is available for review at the County Administrator's Office
and will be on hand at the Board of Supervisors meeting. He said the final dollar amount for borrowing
will be determined at the April 4, 2022 Board of Supervisors meeting. The Board's financial advisors from
Davenport Public Finance are in attendance to facilitate any questions.
Barbara Coleman-Brown introduced herself and she said she represented the NAACP of Halifax/South
Boston. She stated the County Is becoming a bedroom of Danville, VA which is on the crossroads of
mega growth. She said our County needed to benefit from that growth. She said we could not benefit
from that growth if our schools are broken and rundown. She asked the Board members to please
consider financing the high school so that it is first rate when it came to technology and offering a variety
of curriculum. She stated we need to think about our children and their future.
With no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Short closed the Public Hearing.
Vice-Chairman Ricketts commented that he had reservations about the resolution. He said part of the
resolution addressed investments for the elementary school projects. He stated there had been no
feedback from the School System for the project and what it does or does not entail. He said the Board
should consider deleting that portion of the resolution dealing with elementary schools until the School
System brings forward a proposed plan.

Motion made by Vice-Chairman Ricketts, seconded by Supervisor Roller, to modify Resolution 2022-6 by
deleting number (2) for the multiple elementary schools and modifying the financial obligation not to
exceed $1 05,000,000 million proceeds for the portion of the financial funding directly associated with the
additional percent 1 penny sales tax that will adequately finance the new high school project and with an
interest rate not to exceed 4.5 percent.
Supervisor Cfaibome said if the Board approves the modified Motion, it would be a grave mistake. He
said the Board voted to borrow $135,000,000. He stated the issue would be back in the same
predicament as it had been in 2 years ago. He suggested to table the borrowing of the $31,500,000 and
not deleting it. He said modifying the Resolution to delete the elementary schools is not in the best
Interest of the County. He commented the money could be put into an escrow account to be utilized at a
later time when a proposed plan was available for the elementary school projects.
Vice Chairman Ricketts said he does not agree with comments made by Supervisor Claiborne. He said
the School System had been aware for months that a plan for the elementary school projects was needed
for bond counsel to approve the financing of the project. He said the suggested modification to the
resolution is being financially responsible from a County standpoint. Vice Chairman Ricketts said the
money could only be put in an escrow for three years and he did not anticipate the elementary projects
being completed by then.
Supervisor Roller said the money is being borrowed for a defined project to build a new high school. He
said there is no defined project for the primary schools. He said the County would need to spend money
to renovate or build primary schools in the future but it doesn't make sense to borrow the money with no
plan for the projects.
Supervisor Claiborne said he disagreed with Supervisor Roller. He said he had spoken with individuals in
Richmond and bond counsel had nothing to do with borrowing the funds. He said Virginia Public School
Authority (VPSA) is the entity to help with those decisions. He stated no specific plan is necessary to

Halifax County Board cl'U;Jervl~rs - Regular Meeting

borrow the funds. Supervisor Claiborne said the County would need funds for future projects and now is
the time to borrow it while interest rates are low. He emphasized taxpayers don't want taxes to increase,
and the Board needed to look at the long term issues and what is best for the County.
Mr. Simpson said Davenport Public Finance is present to conduct a presentation with regards to the
funding. He said April 7, 2022 is the deadline to opt in or out to borrow the money and the County would
need to determine how much money to borrow. He said once that is determined, and in order for the
funding to be a tax exempt funding, the bond counsel had to certify the use of funds will meet the
reasonable expectation rule. He said at this time the only part of the project that met that rule is the high
school project because the School System had voted to build a new high school. He said the School
System had begun the process of hiring an architect and construction managers, and they have a
preliminary conceptual plan with a detailed estimate, which indicates the budget is accurate. He said
that a plan exists and the Board of Supervisors had voted to borrow $105 million for the high school
project. He stated currently the certification of reasonable expectation to spend the balance of the $30
million cannot be met. He said If the School System met in the next 3 weeks to have a defined project for
the elementary schools, then the funds could be borrowed in April.
Mr. Simpson said the School Board made a decision on the high school but they had not made a plan for
the elementary schools. He stated the Board would need to determine how much money to borrow. He
stated If the School System had not made a definitive decision to move forward with the elementary
schools, the amount borrowed could only be $105 million.
Mr. Simpson said the commibnent stands that the Board of Supervisors Intended to borrow $105 million
and pair that amount with $4 million of ESSER funds from the School System which would bring the total
of the high school project to $109 million. He said the Board of Supervisors could still vote to put $5
million Into contingency and then address the $25 million towards elementary schools but the decision
needed to be determined how to borrow the money.
Supervisor Claiborne said he had spoken directly to VPSA and he asked Mr. Simpson if he had spoken
with anybody from VPSA. Mr. Simpson said there had been a conference call with VPSA last week.
Supervisor Claiborne said VPSA did not expect any architectural plans and all they needed from the
County was that the intended use of the borrowed funds would be for the elementary school projects in
the next 3-5 years. Supervisor Claiborne said the most feasible time to borrow the funds is now while the
interest rates are low. Mr. Simpson said he agreed with that statement but the funds could not be
borrowed under the expectations the County would use it for the elementary school projects. He said
bond counsel's guidance Is a definitive plan is required for the elementary school projects in order for the
issuance to be certified as tax exempt. Supervisor Claiborne said it is a reality that the County would
need to move forward with the elementary school projects. He said his main concern is what Is In the
best interest of the County and borrowing the funds while the interest rate is low.
Supervisor Brandon said the Board had until April 4, 2022 to make a decision which allowed enough time
to see what the School Board's decision would be for the elementary schools. He said It also would allow
time for the Board of Supervisors to have more deliberate direction. He stated he got lost in the modified
motion and he needed some clarity. He said he understood the funds are not to exceed $110,250,000
for the high school project but the interest rate would play a key factor as well.
Supervisor Duffey expressed concerns about the School System making a decision on the elementary
school projects between now and April 4, 2022 because they are faced with making decisions regarding
employee compensation increases which were overspent.
Supervisor Claiborne commented he had spoken with several School Board members, and they had
indicated the funds are available for the salary Increases. He said employee compensation for the School
Board is not what is being discussed right now but being fiscally responsible and operating in the best
interest of the County is what needed to be discussed to avoid the possibility of future tax increases.
Supervisor Claiborne stated he didn't think deleting any part of the motion passed a few months ago

Halifax County Board of Sunervlsors - Regular Meeting
Maie1H2022

would be beneficial to anyone, and the Board of Supervisors needed to move forward with borrowing the
funds.
Chairman Short said he wanted to clarify that the School Board had not provided details of how they
intend to spend the $30 million for the elementary school projects, and the Board of Supervisors would
not be able to obtain the financing for that portion of the funding. Mr. Simpson said the Resolution
authorizes the Issuance up to $135 million on face value. He said if the Interest rate came back over 5
percent, it would mean the funding would not be affordable. He stated interest rates are currently
increasing and from the guidance being provided to the County, the interest rate would need to remain at
4.5 percent or less in order to move forward with the funding. He said the bond counsel would still need
to be able to show how the funds were going to be utilized or how the funds are going to be spent. He
said the County could still borrow the funds but they would no longer be considered tax exempt, which
means the interest rate would increase considerably.
Mr. Simpson said he understood the motion made by Vice Chairman Ricketts as trying to get a step
ahead of April 4, 2022 since there is not enough time for the School System to define the elementary
school projects and move forward with architects and plans within the next 4 weeks. He said to validate
the reasonable expectations would mean meeting with an architect or engineer and three other
components are time, expenditure, and due diligence. Mr. Simpson read a portion of an email from the
bond counsel to the Board members which explained in detail the three components.
Supervisor Claiborne reiterated VPSA had told him that specific plans for the elementary school projects
were not needed. He suggested allowing the School System the 3 weeks to present their intensions for
the elementary school projects and to give them a chance to come up with a conceptual plan.
Chairman Short said the motion on the floor and the presentation from Davenport comingled together.
He said the Board might need to consider tabling the motion for 3 weeks to further determine how best to
proceed. Mr. Simpson said on page 98 in the Board packet, there is a financing calendar provided by
Davenport. He said March 7, 2022 is on the calendar for the Board's Public Hearing and the Board's
consideration for approval of the resolution authorizing the issuance through VPSA and the Spring Pool.
He said on April 6, 2022 there is a VPSA deadline for the County to have adopted a resolution/ordinance
authorizing the bond issuance. He said the discussion on the resolution could be moved to the agenda
for the Board of Supervisors meeting on April 4, 2022. The Board members agreed it would be beneficial
for Davenport Financial to present their presentation tonight.
Mitch Brigulio with Davenport Financial Group introduced himself and he said in the Board's packet there
is an updated analysis from a summary level. He wanted to clarify the resolution which could be
considered tonight or on April 4, 2022 at the next Board meeting. He said the resolution is specific to the
Spring Pool 2022 VPSA pool financing. He said the resolution is setting a series of parameters under
which the bonds would be issued this Spring. He stated the resolution speaks specifically to the bonds
that would be closed in May 2022.
Mr. Brigulio said there are 4 key parameters within the resolution, and those parameters gave VPSA
guidelines to issue bonds on behalf of the County. He said the first key parameter is based on the
proceeds being requested and as drafted the amount is $135 million but that amount could be reduced
from there if desired. He said the second component of the parameter is the principle of the amount of
the bond being issued. He stated in the bond market where bonds are being sold and investors can
purchase the bonds at a premium or a discount, and VPSA recommends an allowance being made of a 5
percent discount pricing on those bonds. He said at the $135 million proceeds, the bond could be issued
up to $141,750,000 which would be the principle amount of the bond to be paid back. He stated the third
key component is the not to exceed interest rate. He said it had been established how much money is
being requested, what the principal amount to be repaid, and then the not to exceed interest rate. He
said the principal amount plus interest on the bonds would have to be paid back.
Mr. Brigulio said VPSA typically recommends 5.5 percent and that recommendation is to give them
comfort that regardless of what's going on with the market, they feel like they could deliver the $105

Halifax County Boar~ ~P 1.2~a~~,..rs - Regular Meeting

million of proceeds within that not to exceed 5.5 percent. He said the consideration for the County In
making the not to exceed interest rate is the County's request would be in the amount of $105, $110, or
$135 million to fund the projects but if it exceeds the Interest rate of 5.5 percent, it would then not be
affordable. He said the 5.5 percent interest rate is a good and safe assumption that under most
marketing environments, you would be able to get the money but the question is If the interest rate is at
5.5 percent, If the County would still want the funds at that cost. He said the final key parameter is the
final maturity of the bonds or as stated in the resolution 30 years. He stated those are the 4 key
components that are built in the resolution for the Board's consideration. He said Davenport is aware of
the amounts being considered, the not to exceed amounts, and the term being 30 years. He said the
question is which of the projects need to be included, and if a lower cap needed to be set on the not to
exceed interest rate. He said the focus is on the proceeds being requested and the interest rate. He
referred the Board to page 1 of the Davenport summary. He discussed the tax exempt interest rates and
the possible maturity dates and emphasized the not to exceed the 30 years. He said going back 6
months to August 2021, the trend for interest rates had been upwards but in particularly since January
2022.
Mr. Brigulio said Davenport set up a sensitivity analysis which provided more perspective on what
happens as interest rates evolve, what happens with affordability or the ability for cash flow, and the
annual principal plus interest on the bonds. He said the analysis on page 3 for the base case right now
indicates 2.7 percent which is still attractive in the grand scheme of things. He noted 2.7 percent is still a
good rate but it had increased since the end of 2021. He noted the $105 million amount had been
chosen just to use as an example to run the analysis, and he said over the life of the bond the total debt
would be approximately $158 million. He said Davenport understood the County wanted to be able to
track what is paid from the sales tax verses what is paid from the existing debt service budget for schools.
He emphasized as the existing debt declined there would be other revenues to help fund the projects. He
discussed the affordability for option 1, lines 6-15, and he said based upon current market interest rates
approximately $95 million could be funded from the sales tax revenue. He said the remaining $10 million
would need to come from the decline in school debt services.
Mr. Brigulio said some conservative responsible assumptions had been included In the analysis based on
conversations with staff. He explained under the current market interest rates and keeping the two forms
of revenue separate, the analysis is short of approximately $608,000, which means additional revenue
would be needed to fund ·the $105 million for the projects. He noted one of the important things to note
on the sales tax is it was implemented in FY2021 so those taxes started being collected in FY2021 and
payments for the debt service would not begin on the issuance of the bonds until FY2023. He said some
of the sales tax had been set aside in anticipation of funding of the school projects. He said if those two
debts, the decline in school debt service and the sales tax, were looked at together some of those funds
had already built up in reserve. He said the funds could be used to provide a better cash flow without the
need of finding additional revenues. He said that is one approach to bridge the gap and make the cash
flows work. He said the two revenues could still be tracked to provide reports for both.
Mr. Brlgullo discussed cases 1 - 5 with the Board members and how the market Interest rates fluctuate
resulting In the combined revenues not being able to provide the cash flow which is needed for the
projects. He agreed with Mr. Simpson that Vice Chairman Ricketts had most likely suggested the
modification in his motion to avoid the need of having to come up with those additional funds. He
reminded the Board this analysis Is based on funding for $105 million. He stated under the current base
case market scenario, the additional funds could be calculated for when the additional funds could be
issued but the analysis right now Is only looking at the $105 million. He said the Board's decision would
need to be made by the Board meeting scheduled on April 4, 2022. He said there is a deadline to submit
the resolution to VPSA before April 6, 2022, and they would need copies of the adopted resolution before
April 7, 2022.

Halifax County Board of Supe,vlsors - Regular Meeting
Ma'P1262022

Schools Capital Funding An.1lysi~ !

-

·!- :fr ---d-e
~

..:,

.

-

Supervisor Claiborne asked Mr. Brigulio if he kept up with the Federal Reserve and he wanted to know
what they were predicting for interest rates. Mr. Brigulio said they are currently looking at the shortest of
short term interest rates which is typically the overnight interest rate. He said Federal Reserve had a
meeting scheduled for tomorrow and most likely would come out with a new forecast then. Mr. Brigulio
stated projections are the Federal Reserve will have several short term interest rate increases over the
next year.
Supervisor Brandon wanted clarity regarding the 1 percent sales tax. He asked if the 1 percent sales tax
had been allowed for school improvements until the debt is paid. Mr. Simpson said the 30- year term is
the length of the loan and the 1% tax will be collected for 30 years.
Supervisor Pannell said it seemed the most logical approach would be to table the motion until the Board
meeting in April to allow additional time to gather more information.
Chairman Short stated it appeared that the County could afford the $105 million under the current market
rate. Mr. Brigulio said if the Board is willing to consider the combined approach, which included revenue
from the sales tax, the $105 million would be affordable under the current interest rates up to
approximately a 4.2 percent interest rate.
Chairman Short said it appeared the Board members wanted additional time to discuss how best to
proceed and the matter could be continued to the next Board meeting in April. Mr. Simpson said there is
a scheduled meeting on March 21, 2022 for the Public Hearing regarding the County budget and tax
rates, and this subject could also be included on the agenda for that meeting. Supervisor Claiborne
suggested allowing the School System the opportunity to determine how they want to proceed with the
elementary school projects.
Vice Chairman Ricketts said he wanted to clarify his motion that is on the floor. He said the amended
resolution being proposed is that the County would only take on the obligations that it had the resources
to repay. He said he used the wrong verbiage when he used the word delete for the second part of the
Resolution because the modification would still allow the Board to come back and consider funding for the
elementary school projects. He said when he used the word delete, he did not mean to take the
elementary school projects off of the table. He reiterated the purpose of the amended motion was to only
borrow money that the County had resources to pay back without any additional tax burden to citizens.

Halifax County Board cru;zervi~o_rs - Regular Meeting

Vice Chairman Ricketts said he did not anticipate the School System would be coming forward with a
proposed plan for the elementary school projects because of the Issues they are currently working
through. He said he would like to see the Board members take action on the Resolution tonight which
would send a message to the School System that the elementary school projects could still be considered
in the future with the adequate planning.

Motion made by Vice-Chairman Ricketts, seconded by Supervisor Roller, to modify and adopt
Resolution 2022~6 authorizing the issuance of up to $110,250,000 of bonds in order to finance
the new high school project, with an interest rate not to exceed 4.5 percent and leaving open the
ability to consider elementary school projects at a future date.

ROLL CALL VOTE
Supervisor Stanley Brandon
Supervisor Bryant Claiborne
Supervisor Ronnie Duffey
Supervisor Hubert Pannell
Vice Chairman Ricketts
Supervisor Larry Roller
Chairman C. Ricky Short
Supervisor Dean Throckmorton

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Motion passed 8-0.
Supervisor Claiborne said for the record he voted for the motion because the elementary school projects
could still be considered at a future date.

2.

Reassessment

Chairman Short said the Virginia Code requires that any time tax collections increase by 1% or more due
to reassessment of real estate in a locality, a public hearing must be held. He said a Reassessment
Public Hearing has been scheduled for today. He said real estate values In Halifax County have
increased by 4.4% and the process of proper advertisement with the pertinent information related to the
increase of the assessment and revenues had been done.
Chairman Short opened the Public Hearing.
Hearing no comments and no further action needed, Chairman Short closed the Public Hearing.

I.

PRESENTATIONS
1. Southern Virginia Higher Education Center - Dr. Betty Adams

Chairman Short said Dr. Betty Adams, Executive Director of Southern Virginia Higher Education Center,
will present to the Board of Supervisors an overview of the Center's mission, its programs, and its funding
allocations and she would accommodate questions from the Board members regarding the Higher
Education Center.
Dr. Adams introduced herself and she said that she would like to offer a short presentation. She stated
Southern Virginia Higher Education Center(SVHEC) is requesting level funding for FY2023. She said
funds are being used to create worker pipelines providing opportunities to change lives and making
Halifax County's workforce more competitive. She said the basics are about workforce development and
preparing citizens for jobs that exist today and jobs that are predicted for the future, and to provide

Halifax County Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting
MaJP 12 8 2022

Halifax County Public Schools-Preventive Maintenance
Strategy
New High School & Future Athletic Facility
Prepared by: Mr. Jeff Garber, Director of Maintenance
Presented to: Joint Facility Committee (School Board & Board of Supervisors)

I. Executive Summary
The purpose of this Preventive Maintenance (PM) Plan is to establish a structured,
accountable, and sustainable maintenance program that protects Halifax County's
investment in its new high school and future athletic facilities.
This plan:
•

Extends the useful life of major capital assets

•

Reduces unexpected failures and emergency costs

•

Aligns with best practices from VDOE, VACO, and public-sector asset management
standards

•

Clearly defines roles between HCPS staff, contracted vendors, and Sodexo
services

II. Maintenance Philosophy
HCPS will operate under a three-tier maintenance model:

1. Preventive Maintenance (PM)
Scheduled, recurring tasks to prevent failure

2. Predictive Maintenance (PdM)
Data-driven monitoring (HVAC controls, system alerts, inspections)

3. Corrective Maintenance (CM)
Repairs when issues arise

P129

Goal: Shift from reactive maintenance ----+ planned, lifecycle-based maintenance

Ill. Asset Categories Covered
A. Core Building Systems
•
•
•
•
•

HVAC (RTUs, chillers, boilers, controls)
Electrical systems (switchgear, panels, generators)
Plumbing systems
Fire alarm & suppression systems
Building automation systems (BAS)

B. Facility Infrastructure
•
•
•
•

Roofing systems
Exterior envelope (doors, windows, masonry)
Parking lots & drainage
Interior finishes

C. Athletic Facilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Natural grass fields
Track surfaces
Turf on Fields
Dugouts
Bleachers & press boxes
Scoreboards & lighting systems
Locker rooms & training areas
Multipurpose Building

D. Support Systems
•
•
•

Kitchen equipment
Custodial systems
Security systems (cameras, access control)

IV. Roles & Responsibilities
1. HCPS Maintenance Team
Lead: Director of Maintenance (Jeff Garber)
Responsibilities:

P130

•
•
•
•
•

Oversight of all PM schedules
Work order management
Minor repairs and routine inspections
Coordination with vendors
Compliance tracking and documentation

2. Vendor Preventive Maintenance (Vendor PM)
Purpose: Ensure specialized systems are maintained by certified professionals
Examples of Vendor PM Contracts:

•
•
•
•
•
•

HVAC systems (seasonal servicing)
Fire alarm & sprinkler inspections (code compliance)
Elevator inspections and servicing
Generator testing
Kitchen equipment servicing
Athletic field maintenance

Vendor PM Requirements:

•
•
•
•

Documented service reports
Compliance with manufacturer warranties
Annual contract review by HCPS
Integration into HCPS maintenance calendar

3. Sodexo - Custodial & Nightly Cleaning
Scope of Services:

•
•
•
•
•

Daily cleaning of classrooms, offices, and common areas
Restroom sanitation and restocking
Trash removal and recycling
Floor care (routine and periodic deep cleaning)
Event cleanup support

Preventive Role of Sodexo:

•
•
•

Early identification of facility issues (leaks, damage, wear)
Protection of interior finishes through proper cleaning methods
Reporting of maintenance concerns via HCPS work order system

V. Preventive Maintenance Schedule Framework
A. Daily / Weekly Tasks

P131

•
•
•

Custodial cleaning (Sodexo)
Visual inspections by staff
Grounds upkeep (fields, trash, entrances)

B. Monthly Tasks
•
•
•

HVAC filter checks/replacements
Plumbing inspections (leaks, pressure)
Safety chepks (lighting, exits)

C. Quarterly Tasks
•
•
•
•

HVAC system servicing
Roof inspections
Athletic field inspections
Floor maintenance cycles

D. Semi-Annual Tasks
•
•
•

Deep cleaning (Sodexo)
preventive equipment servicing
Drainage system checks

E. Annual Tasks
•
•
•
•

Fire alarm & sprinkler inspections (Vendor)
Generator load testing
Full facility condition assessment
Athletic facility resurfacing/conditioning (as needed)

VI. Work Order & Tracking System
HCPS will utilize its work order system to:
•
•
•
•
•

Track all maintenance requests
Schedule recurring PM tasks
Maintain service records
Document vendor performance
Provide reporting for administration and Board review

Key Metrics:

•
•

PM completion rate
Response time to work orders

Pl32

•
•
•

Maintenance cost per square foot
Equipment downtime tracking
Support compliance with
o the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Statewide Fire Prevention Code
framework administered by the state, and
o Virginia Code § 22.1-138 requirements for radon testing records, a Legionnaires'
disease water management program with annual validation, and
o mold testing/remediation plan aligned with EPA guidance

VII. Lifecycle & Capital Planning Integration
Preventive maintenance will directly support the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) by:
•
•
•
•

Forecasting replacement timelines
Reducing premature asset failure
Informing budget development
Supporting long-term financial sustainability

Examples:

•
•

HVAC lifecycle: 15-25 years
Roofing systems: 20-30 years

VIII. Risk Management & Compliance
This plan supports:
•
•
•
•

OSHA safety standards
Fire code compliance
Insurance risk reduction
Audit readiness and documentation

Failure to maintain PM programs can result in :
•
•
•

Increased liability exposure
Warranty voidance
Accelerated asset deterioration

IX. Reporting to the Joint Facility Committee
The Director of Maintenance will provide:

Quarterly Reports

Pl33

•
•
•

PM completion rates
Major repairs and issues
Vendor performance summaries

Annual Report
•
•
•

Facility condition summary
CIP recommendations
Budget implications

X. Implementation Timeline
Phase

Timeline

Key Actions

Phase 1

Pre-Opening

Establish PM schedules, vendor contracts

Phase 2

First 6 Months

Monitor systems, adjust schedules

Phase 3

Ongoing

Full PM program execution & reporting

XI. Summary for Board Consideration
This preventive Maintenance Plan:
•
•
•
•

Protects a multi-million-dollar public investment
Establishes clear accountability across HCPS, vendors, and Sodexo
Aligns maintenance with long-term financial planning
Ensures facilities remain safe, efficient, and high-performing

Appendix A - Responsibility Matrix
Task Type

HCPS

Vendor

HVAC Maintenance

Oversight

✓

Fire Systems

Oversight

✓

Cleaning

Oversight

Minor Repairs

✓

Inspections

✓

Sodexo

✓

✓

Pl34

Assist

Grounds

✓

✓

Appendix B - PM Calendar
Month

Key Activities

January

HVAC winter check, indoor inspections

April

Spring HVAC startup, athletic field prep

July

Deep cleaning, major repairs

October

Heating system prep, safety checks

Appendix C - Vendor Contracts
Vendor

Key PM

Anderson Lawn Care

School Groundskeeping, Athletic Fields-(Grass and Turf)

Trane

Controls on HVAC

Comfort Systems

Ice Machine PM

Sodexo

Cleaning

Pye-Barker

Fire Prevention

Samples Inc

Water testing

P135

61st
Out of 132

Statewide Per
Pupil Spending
Halifax is a mid-range
division in per pupil fund ing
statewide.

I 118th

4th
Outof 12

Out of1 32

I
II

Local Capacity to
Fund Education
Halifax ranks among th e
lowest divisions in the
Commonwealth in local
funding per student.

I

I 95th I 49th
Outof 132

Out of 132

Region 8 Per Pupil
Spending

Increase in Funding
Capacity

Free and Reduced
Lunch

Halifax is mid-range In per
pupil funding within Regi on
8, yet we serve a
higher-need student
population

Halifax ranks 95th out of
132 divisions in local
capacity, placing us in the
lower third statewide, yet we
are experiencing increasing
expectations in requ ired
local funding

Based on Virginia
Department of Education
data, Halifax County Public
Schools ranks 49th out of
132 divisions In student
poverty, placing us in the
upper third statewide in
student need

NEW BUSINESS

P137

HA IF

OUNTY

AGENDA BRIEFING
Staff Members:
Meeting Date:

April 6, 2026
Jason Johnson

Item#

K-1

Ordinance#

Department:

Emergency Services

Subject:

Emergency Operations Plan Update

Background:
This plan has to be renewed every 4 years per recommendation of the
Virginia Department of Emergency Management we have left the plan the
same and updated phone numbers and names.
The County is required to formally adopt the plan. Being no major changes
other than those listed above. The attached resolution is presented for
consideration at this time.
Needed Action:
Consider Adoption of Resolution 2026-7 adopting the 2026 Halifax County
Emergency Operations Plan.
Suggested Motion:
Motion to adopt Resolution 2026-7 adopting the 2026 Halifax County
Emergency Operations Plan

P138

HALIFAX COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPER\flrsORS
1050 Mary Bethune Street
P. 0. Box 699
Halifax, VA 24558-0699
Verron "Ron" M. Brade
County Administrator
ron. [email protected]

LARRY 0 . ROLLER - ED #2
CHAIR
R. L. "ROBBIE" SMART - ED #5
VICE CHAIR
M. A. " PETE" RIDDLE - ED #1
0 . JEFFREY OAKES- ED #3
DENNIS G. WITT - ED #4

(434) 476-3300
Fax:(434) 476-3384

KEITH A . MCDOWELL - ED #7

www.halifaxcountyva.gov

W. BRYANTCLAIBORNE-E0#8

MONTE THOMPSON - ED #6

WAYNE SMITH - TIEBREAKER

2026-7
RESOLUTION

ADOPTION OF REVISED 2026 HALIFAX COUNTY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN

WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to §44-146 Code of Virginia requires
each political subdivision within the Commonwealth to be responsible for local disaster
preparedness, response, and recovery; and,
WHEREAS, each political subdivision shall maintain local emergency operations plans
consistent with state disaster preparedness plans and programs; and,
WHEREAS, the County of Halifax has a responsibility to provide for the safety and wellbeing of its citizens and visitors; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors wishes to establish an Emergency Operations Plan to
be used to prepare for and to mitigate the impacts of natural or manmade disasters affecting
Halifax County,
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Halifax County Emergency Operations Plan is
approved, and shall serve as the Official Emergency Operations Plan for the County of
Halifax; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Emergency Services Coordinator is authorized and
directed to revise and update this plan as warranted to reflect local emergency response
resources and capabilities.
Adopted this 6th day of April, 2026.

Larry Roller, Chairman
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:

Verron "Ron" Brade Clerk
Halifax County Board of Supervisors
P139

ALIF
AGENDA BRIEFING
Staff Members:
Meeting Date:

April 6, 2026
Detrick Easley

Item#

K-2

Ordinance#

Department:

Planning/Zoning

Subject:

Berkley Group/ Amend zoning ordinance to allow
Battery Enerav Storage

House Bill S8443 is awaiting the Governor's signature. The bill deems battery energy
storage projects as a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts on any parcel of land
that is subject to an approved special exception, special use, or conditional use approval.
•

•

•
•

For newly proposed special exception, special use, or conditional use applications
for solar facilities, we understand that even if the application is not now proposing
to include battery energy storage, that under this provision, the owner could come
back to add battery energy storage as an accessory use, subject to the battery
energy storage facility being located within the boundaries of the parcel covered
by the existing special exception.
Any established siting agreements, payment obligations, state or local tax
exemptions, etc. would not be able to be changed with the addition of battery
energy storage to these solar facilities.
Such battery energy storage facilities will need to comply with all applicable
federal, state, and local safety or fire codes and environmental regulations.
Please note, with review and agreement by your local legal counsel, we do not
interpret this as a total exemption. While battery energy storage facilities may be
added to solar facility projects with an existing special exception, special use, or
conditional use approval, it is our understanding that the inclusion of battery
energy storage facilities as part of solar facilities yet to be reviewed or approved
may be considered by a locality, and may be subject to a special exception
pursuant to S8347 discussed below.

P140

If House Bill SB443 passes without Halifax County amending our existing ordinance by
July 1, 2026, we could potentially lose out on control of placement of BESS, siting
agreements, and payment obligations.
Staff Request:

Staff is asking the board to consider the estimated cost of $7,600.00 to allow the Berkley
Group to draft language within our existing solar ordinance to amend provisions to
address battery energy storage as an accessory use as part of any solar facility,
establishing specific standards. These standards shall address setbacks, fencing,
screening, visual impacts, and wildlife access.

P141

Detrick Easley
From:

Sent:
To:

Cc:
Subject:

Rebecca Cobb <[email protected]>
Thursday, March 12, 2026 8:03 AM
Detrick Easley
Michael Zehner
Draft Scope and Estimated Cost for BESS Ordinance

Detrick,
It was a pleasure meeting you this morning. Per your request, I am providing a brief outline of anticipated tasks
and estimated cost for the BESS ordinance preparation so that you can share it with the Board during the
upcoming retreat.
Berkley Group would provide the following services:
•
•
•
•
•

Draft the ordinance language consistent with the County's existing ordinance style and formatting.
Conduct three virtual meetings with County staff to direct drafting and then review the draft and discuss
rev1s1ons.
Incorporate edits as provided by County staff during review meetings.
Incorporate two rounds of edits directed by the Planning Commission.
Prepare and provide the final ordinance after adoption in both Word and PDF formats.

The County would be responsible for materials and facilitation of all meetings and hearings with the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors. Berkley Group can provide our in-person assistance for an additional
fee.
The total estimated cost for the services listed above is $7,600. A data center ordinance would have similar
tasks and cost.
Please let me know how you would like to proceed. I can make adjustments to the scoped services to fit the
County's budget and needs.
Rebecca S. Cobb
Deputy Director of Planning & Community Development

Mobile: 434-547-2789
Email: rebecca [email protected]
P.O. Box 181
Bridgewater, VA 22812
www.bgllc.net

BERKLEY
GROUP
1
Pl42

OUNTY
AGENDA
Staff Members:
Meeting Date:

April 6, 2026
Detrick Easley

Ordinance#

Department:

Subject:

K-3

Planning & Zoning
Election District # 2
Public Hearing
Conditional Use Permit (Quintessence Cove, LLC)

Background:
1. Conditional Use Pennit Application ED# 2:
Applicant:
Stephanie Stephens
Business Name:
Quintessence Cove, LLC
PRN:
13501,13500,13499,14617,14540,18224
Location:
Mount Laurel Road
Landowner:
Wynona Godwin & Alfred Godwin Trust
Proposed Use:
Construct a new venue event center for weddings, dance recitals, and
corporate functions .

Mrs. Stephanie Stephens has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate venue and event
center for weddings, dance recitals, and corporate functions to social gatherings. The property
is located on Mount Laurel Rd. Quintessence Cove, LLC proposes to offer catering, and event
planning with 2 event planners, one marketing director, office coordinator, environmental
director, social media creator, decorating team, and audio visual team.
Mrs. Stephens currently do not own the property, there is pending contract upon successful
approval of her conditional use permit.
Upon approval of the application, Mrs. Stephens proposes to construct the event spaces into
two phases. Phase 1 is to construct a new 51 X 80 building for event venue with Phase 2
constructing an 80 X 78 center with stage for hosting larger events.

P143

VDOT has confirmed existing entrance meets requirement for a low volume commercial
entrance which allows for up to 50 vehicles per day.
Site conditions have been drafted, and Mrs. Stephens has been provided a copy for review.
Please find all supporting documents for the land use application.
Joint Public Hearing was held on March 17, 2026 with a favorable recommendation from the
Planning Commission to approve the CUP for Stephanie Stephens.
Per the Planning Commission recommendation, a site condition was added to address the
Clover Cemetery.

Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Public Hearing Comment Summary
a. Zoning Administrator Overview
Mr. Easley stated that an application was submitted by Ms. Stevens for property located on
Mount Laurel Road. He provided background on Ms. Stevens' long-standing and successful
dance studio, noting that she has historically utilized the former high school for large events;
however, the new high school facility has reduced seating capacity, creating limitations for her
annual recitals and events.
The application involves approximately six parcels; which Ms. Stevens is under contract to
purchase contingent upon CUP approval. The proposal includes the construction of two event
buildings to be completed in phases. Phase one consists of a 61-by-80-foot structure with
restrooms, a prep kitchen, and event space, while phase two would include a similar building
with a modified stage layout. The facility is intended to host a variety of events, including
recitals, weddings, corporate functions, and private gatherings.
Mr. Easley reported that adjoining property owners were notified, with minimal feedback
received. A nearby cemetery raised concerns regarding potential conflicts with funeral services;
however, discussions between the parties have resulted in an agreement to accommodate such
services. All events will be held indoors, with no outdoor music or entertainment permitted.
Mr. Easley noted that the site conditions included an adjustment to extend event end times from
11 :30 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. Mr. Easley concluded by inviting Ms. Stevens to provide additional
comments before opening the public hearing.

b.

Applicant Presentation

Ms. Stephanie Stephens confirmed that the purchase of the subject property is contingent upon
approval of the CUP. She explained that the proposed event center is necessary due to limited
seating capacity at current facilities, noting that her annual dance recitals draw approximately
1,300 attendees on the first day and 900 on the second day, while the new high school
accommodates only 798 individuals. As a result, additional performances are required. Ms.

P144

Stephens stated that the proposed facility would allow for approximately 1,100 attendees
indoors, alleviating capacity issues, and her kids will not have to worry about event space every
year. She emphasized that the building would be soundproof, with all activities conducted
indoors, and that sufficient parking would be provided to accommodate attendees.
She further noted that the project has been in development for approximately two years,
prompted in part by changes in school facility availability. Ms. Stephens indicated there are
currently no other venues in Halifax County capable of accommodating events of this size.
Ms. Stephens stated that she has coordinated with Mr. Griles regarding the adjacent cemetery
and confirmed a mutual understanding to operate cooperatively. She acknowledged that funeral
services will occur at the site and noted that event attendees will remain primarily indoors to
minimize disruption. She further indicated that a website will be maintained to display scheduled
events, ensuring transparency for both the public and cemetery representatives. Ms. Stephens
emphasized her commitment to making appropriate accommodations to ensure compatibility
between the event venue and cemetery operations.
Vice Chair Jennings inquired about the anticipated capacity of the proposed event center during
recital events. Ms. Stephens responded that the primary event space would measure
approximately 100 feet by 100 feet and would have the capacity to accommodate approximately
I, 100 individuals. Ms. Stephens noted that the increased capacity would not only serve the
needs of their studio but also provide a venue for other studios and large-scale community events
within the County, addressing current space limitations of approximately 798 attendees.
Vice Chair Jennings asked whether the proposed event center would adequately accommodate
the anticipated number of attendees. Ms. Stephens responded that the building would be
designed primarily as an open space, consisting of a stage and dressing rooms, with the
remainder of the structure functioning as a shell building. She explained that furnishings such as
tables would not be permanently installed, allowing flexibility in layout and maximizing
occupancy capacity.

c. Public Comment
Mr. Joe Griles
Mr. Griles, Chairman of the Clover Cemetery Board of Directors, addressed the Board regarding
the CUP application submitted by the applicant. He said he was unsure ifhe was in favor or
against at the moment. He stated that the Clover Cemetery Board represents 414 current
cemetery plot owners, with the potential for 520 additional owners. Mr. Griles explained that,
following receipt of the public hearing notice, a majority of the cemetery board members were
contacted to determine whether there were any concerns regarding the proposed event center to
be located across from the cemetery. He noted that the members were generally supportive of the
proposal, and excited that something else would be placed there, and the existing structures
would be demolished that are located across from the cemetery.
Mr. Griles stated that the only concern expressed by members was the potential for outdoor
activities associated with the venue to cause distractions during funeral services, should such

P145

events occur simultaneously. Mr. Joe Griles stated that he and the applicant have discussed the
conditional use permit request. He noted that the applicant assured him there would be no
outdoor music, that the buildings would be soundproof, and that, in the event a function
coincides with a funeral service, appropriate measures would be taken to ensure respect and
minimize distractions to the family and attendees.
Mr. Griles stated that he has known Ms. Stephens for many years and is comfortable in those
assurances. However, he further indicated that both parties agreed it would be beneficial to have
these provisions documented in writing to protect all parties involved. Mr. Griles concluded
that, if these concerns are addressed as part of the conditional use permit, the Clover Cemetery
Board would support approval of the request.
Mr. Sammy Coleman
Mr. Coleman, a resident of Clover, spoke on behalf of nearby residents who, he stated, may not
have received notification of the proposed event center. He noted that several individuals have
resided in the immediate area for 25 to 30 years or more and expressed concern about the
proximity of the proposed venue, which he estimated to be within approximately 500 feet of
surrounding homes.

Mr. Coleman raised concerns regarding potential noise impacts. While acknowledging the
applicant' s statement that events would primarily be held indoors, he referenced a similar venue
in Amherst County, where initial expectations reportedly changed over time to include outdoor
activities. He expressed concern that similar issues could occur with the proposed use. He also
cited concerns related to traffic and congestion along Mount Laurel Road, describing it as a twolane roadway with frequent log truck traffic. Mr. Coleman stated that events with attendance
ranging from several hundred to approximately 1,100 individuals could create safety hazards and
increase congestion in the area.
Additional concerns included public safety and the availability of law enforcement, noting that
routine police presence in the area is limited. Mr. Coleman also referenced the nearby cemetery,
stating that it is regularly visited by residents and could be impacted by increased traffic and
activity. In conclusion, Mr. Coleman stated that the residents he represents are opposed to the
proposed location and suggested that an alternative site within Halifax County be considered.

Mr. Jason Ross
Mr. Jason Ross, a lifelong resident of Halifax County, spoke in support of the proposed event
center. He stated that he has lived in the area since 2019 and has known the applicant, Ms.
Stevens, for a significant period of time. He noted her track record of operating a successful
business in the County for approximately 20 years.

Mr. Ross stated that the County must continue to move forward and referenced the need for
larger event space, particularly due to the downsizing of school facilities and the demand for
events such as the National Day of Prayer and other large gatherings currently held at school
locations.
Addressing concerns about traffic, Mr. Ross noted that the project would be subject to review
and approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), including evaluation of

P146

traffic flow, ingress and egress, and roadway capacity. He expressed that traffic should not be a
major concern given these requirements.
Mr. Ross further stated that the proposed facility would not operate as an unattended rental
venue, but rather would have staff on-site at all times. He explained that this would allow for
oversight of noise, parking, and coordination with nearby activities, including funerals at the
adjacent cemetery.
He also described the layout of the property, stating that the event center buildings (Phase I and
Phase II) would be located in the lower portion of the property, while parking would be situated
on the upper portion. He indicated that, due to this design and anticipated soundproofing, noise
impacts would likely be minimal.
Mr. Ross added that Mount Laurel Road has historically supported significant traffic, including
during periods when the Clover area had higher industrial activity and multiple work shifts. He
stated that traffic has existed on the roadway for many years and that the road has previously
accommodated higher volumes than currently experienced.
Mr. Easley stated for the record that correspondence had been received from Mr. Heath,
adjoining property owner, stating his only concern was to ensure that patrons of the event center
remain on the subject property and do not encroach upon neighboring properties. Mr. Heath
expressed support for the CUP application.
Mr. Easley further advised that documentation from the Virginia Department of Transportation
was included in the Board's packet (pages 48 and 49), confirming that the agency conducted a
site inspection of the property and entrance. He stated that certain improvements will be required
to meet access and safety standards; however, those requirements are outlined in the packet and
would be addressed following acquisition of the property and before development.
A member of the audience asked about the parcel zoning. Mr. Easley said it was zoned
Agricultural. Vice Chair Smart asked if the venue was permitted in A-1 , and Mr. Easley stated it
was with a CUP.

Commissioner Hughes asked whether the purchase of the land would be contingent upon
approval of the conditional use permit. Ms. Stephens replied, yes.
Chair Roller stated that the property, located within his district, is along a straight stretch of
Mount Laurel Road and contains long-vacant structures considered an eyesore. He expressed that
redevelopment would enhance the area, increase property values, and support renewed growth in
Clover, ultimately contributing to future economic development.
Commissioner Wimbish raised concerns regarding potential conflicts between event traffic and
funeral services occurring simultaneously at the nearby cemetery. Chair Griles acknowledged
that conflicts could arise, but noted that a site condition may be added to address the concern.
Commissioner Wimbish further commented on the differing nature of scheduling between
events, which could be six months in advance, and funerals are most likely scheduled in three

P147

days. Mr. Easley advised that the Boards could discuss and incorporate appropriate permit
conditions and language during deliberations.
Commissioner Pearce wanted to know if most of the activities at the proposed facility would be
held in the afternoons and evenings. Ms. Stevens responded that the event center would
primarily host afternoon and evening events, such as weddings, while her existing dance studio
would remain downtown. She noted that large recitals would occur once annually, with most
other activities scheduled during evening hours.
Chair Griles noted that the cemetery located across the road had been referenced multiple times
during the discussion. He stated that the Board would like to include a site condition to ensure
coordination between the project and cemetery operations. He asked Mr. Easley for input on an
appropriate condition.
Mr. Easley explained that the applicant would not be aware of scheduled funeral services unless
notified by the cemetery. He recommended including a condition requiring mutual
communication between the applicant and the cemetery representatives to allow for appropriate
accommodations during funeral services. Mr. Easley further suggested that both parties
exchange contact information and maintain ongoing communication to ensure coordination when
services are scheduled. He noted that staff could draft a condition formalizing this requirement.
Commissioner Wimbish stated that he had previously raised concerns regarding potential traffic
and scheduling conflicts between events and funeral services. However, he indicated that he does
not anticipate a significant issue, noting that most events at the venue are expected to occur in the
evening, while funeral services could be held earlier in the day. He further stated that, in
situations where events and funeral services may occur on the same day, coordination between
the venue operator and local funeral homes would be important. Commissioner Wimbish
acknowledged that a lack of communication could create conflicts but expressed the opinion that,
with proper coordination, such issues should be avoidable.
Chair Griles stated that he believes the wording for the site condition is key to keeping open lines
of communication between Ms. Stephens and the cemetery. Mr. Easley referenced the proposed
site conditions and recommended including language requiring both parties to work together and
notify one another of scheduled funeral services to allow for proper accommodations.
Motion made by Chair Griles, seconded by Planning Commissioner Beard, to recommend to the
Board of Supervisors to approve the approve the CUP for Ms. Stephanie Stevens to operate
Quintessence Cove, LLC, subject to 21 site conditions.

P148

VOTE

Motion passed 7-0 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. A. Hughes, Mr. D. Griles, Mr. B. Pearce, Mr. J. Jennings, Mr. R. Watts, Mr. J. Beard,
and Mr. C. Wimbish
Noone
Nays:
Abstained:
Noone
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Vote:
Ms. G. Smith-Mangum
Absent During Meeting:

Suggested Motion to approve:
I move to approve Conditional Use Permit for Mrs. Stephanie Stephens to operate
Quintessence Cove, LLC with the 21 proposed site conditions.
Suggested Motion to deny:
I move to deny Conditional Use Permit for Mrs. Stephanie Stephens to operate
Quintessence Cove, LLC
****Identify reasons for denial****

P149

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
PLANNING AND ZONING OFFICE
1050 Mary Bethune St
P.O.Box699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558-0699
PHONE: (434) 476-3300
FAX: (434)476-3384
[email protected]
Detrick Easley
Zoning Administrator

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC
VENUE RENTAL
EVENT CENTER
MOUNT LAUREL ROAD
Conditional Use Permit

SITE CONDITIONS
1. Development activities on this site shall be limited to those as specified in the Conditional
Use Permit Application dated February 20, 2026. The final locations of incidental facilities
may be adjusted provided no such adjustment violates any buffers, setbacks, or other
statutory requirement.
2. Any proposed expansion of the operation, change of activities, additional facilities or
activities shall be submitted to the Halifax County Planning and Zoning Office for review
prior to implementation. Any changes may be subject to Permit amendment procedures
including Public Hearings.
3. All pollution control measures, erosion and sediment control measures, storm water control
facilities, and all construction activities shall comply with the requirements of the
appropriate federal, state, and local regulations and Ordinances. This shall include, but not
be limited to, Environmental Protection Agency, Virginia Department of Health, Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality, Virginia Department of Transportation, Halifax
County Building Code, and Halifax County Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance.
4. All Entrance Permits must be authorized by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
5. All internal roads used for public access shall be of compacted earth, have a minimum four
(4) inch stone base, or shall be paved.
6. All facilities for the provision of potable water and sanitation and wastewater disposal
systems shall be approved by the Virginia Department of Health.

PISO

7. Any development activities of structural or land disturbing nature not specifically
addressed by these Conditions shall be in conformance with applicable provisions of
appropriate federal, state, and local statutes and regulations.
8. All exterior lighting shall be designed and installed so as to minimize glare onto adjoining
properties or any public access road.
9. Adequate area shall be provided on site to accommodate parking for all employees and
patrons. It shall be the responsibility of the Permittee to assure that employees and patrons
park only on site and not on highway right-of-way or on adjoining or adjacent parcels
unless written consent is provided by the owner or owners thereof.
10. All events shall be completed by 12:00am. Outdoor amusement/entertainment shall begin
no earlier than 1:00 p.m. on Sundays.
11 . The owner shall encourage employees and attendees to show respect to those participating
in burial services at the Clover Cemetery.
12. Signage shall be posted on Mount Laurel Road on the day of each event. Sign information
shall include but not be limited to "caution, slow down," directional, and event parking.
13. No preparation of food shall be allowed unless inspected and approved by Virginia
Department of Health. All food for events shall be cooked off premises at approved
locations. All food vendors shall comply and obtain any permits required from the Virginia
Department of Health.
14. Any business advertising signs shall not encroach onto VDOT right-of-way.
15. The Permittee is responsible for the appearance of the site, including litter pick-up and
other orderly site appearance.
16. All activities shall comply with Halifax County Noise Ordinance (Section 17-141).
17. If for any reason Quintessence Cove, LLC stops operation for more than two consecutive
years, this conditional use permit becomes null and void.
18. This permit shall become null and void if Quintessence Cove, LLC operation is not
commenced within three (3) years of the Permit issuance.
19. A yearly business license shall be obtained from Halifax Commission of Revenue.
20. This Permit is non-transferable, except and unless written notice from the Permittee
regarding the transfer and a signed statement from the proposed new Permittee is received
by the County Planning and Zoning Office, which states that the new Permittee agrees to
comply with all terms and Conditions imposed with the original Permit issuance. If the
proposed new Permittee desires to amend the original Permit Conditions, amendments

Pl51

must be addressed by the Halifax County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
through the Use Permit Public Hearing Process.
21. Failure of Permittee to fully conform to all terms and conditions of this Permit may result
in revocation of the Conditional Use Permit.

P152

HALIFAX COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1050 Mary Bethune Street
P. 0. BOX699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558
Telephone: (434) 476-3300
Fax: (434) 476-3384
E-mail: [email protected]

DATEFlLED:

~-:iv/uiu
I

ELECTIONDISTRICT#ED 2

COUNTY OF HALIFAX, VIRGINIA
LAND USE APPLICATION
{!)conditional Use Permit

QRezoning

1.
2.

3.

4.

QPlanned Unit Development

Applicant: Quintessence Cove, LLC / ~e:Li n&

7
'P£
Address & Telephone: 602 Edgewood Circle
Ha Iifax, VA 24558
434-470-1415

£.l-eph~s
f-

--------------------

Current Zoning Classification:

A-1

Proposed Zoning Classification:

Conditional Use Permit

Proposed Use:

Event Center
Full Service Venue

5.

County Code Section: 53-175

6.

Location:

--------------------Street Address: Mount Laurel
-----------------Ro ad Number: 2022
-----------------Nearest Intersection: State Route 746
---------------Distance and Direction from Intersection:
5.3 miles from State route 746

Side of Road (North, South, East or West): _N_o_rt_h_______

P1S3

_8_a_c_re_s______,__,_________......,~--

7.

Size of Parcel:

8.

Size of Proposed Use Area: _8_a_a_e_s____________..._._........_

9.

Property Owner (If different from #1): .Wynona H. Godwin &Alfred P. Godwin Chertlable Tl\lllt
Property Owner Address: ~11~3..,.1..,.B;wu~tt~o'""':nw~ood~lll,,,IP~c~,- - - - - - - Cherry Hill. NJ 08003

10.

Deed Book: 6~5 .

Page #_73_2_
. _ __

Parcel Record Num~ (PRN):
11.

!$~b I, I35j)D, 13 4't~ 1 14\j 11 1 f <4$'-/ ~, 1g~c:f

Water Supply (Type): _W_e_l_lW
___a_te__r_________________

Sewage Disposal (Type): Septic.Tank

---~--------,,.....------------------

Approved by Health Department: See attached-documentation

Approved by Municipality: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
I certify that the information contained in and submitted with this Application Is true and
accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

rrAl«/10.202$

-

P154

.s . .. . ..... .

u

TESSENCE COVE, LLC

Stephanie W. Stephens, Owner

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

P155

ompany

escription

Principal Member
Stephanie Stephens -

Owner

Legal Structure
Quintessence Cove is a Limited Liability Corporation in Halifax, VA

Mission Statement
Our Venue and Event Center will strive to be the premier event planning destination and venue
by creating unforgettable occasions tailored to meet the unique needs and preferences of our
discerning clientele. From weddings, dance recitals, and corporate functions to social
gatherings celebrating milestones, our goal is to surpass expectations, ensuring that each event
leaves a lasting impression and becomes an unforgettable moment in our clients' lives.

Executive Summary
Our vision at Quintessence Cove is to be the leading destination and trusted partner for
creating extraordinary events. We envision a future where our Venue becomes synonymous
with exceptional experiences, setting the stage for unforgettable moments that leave a lasting
impression. By providing top-notch event planning service coupled with an unparalleled Venue,
we strive to become the go-to choice for individuals, businesses, and organizations seeking
seamless, memorable, and innovative event solutions. Through our commitment to excellence,
attention to detail, and dedication to customer satisfaction, we aspire to shape the landscape
of event planning, setting new standards in creativity, professionalism, and client-centricity. As
we continuously evolve, our vision is to be a driving force in making dreams come true, one
remarkable event at a time.

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

2

P156

Office Hours
Monday - loam to 4pm
Tuesday - 10am to 4pm
Wednesday- Tours
Thursday from 10am to 4pm
Friday- By Appointment
Saturday - By Appointment
Sunday - Closed

Operational Hours
Operational hours are based on scheduled events. All events will have an ending time of 11:30
PM.

Quintessence Operational Staff
2- Event Planners
1- Marketing Director
1 - Office Coordinator
1- Environmental Services Coordinator
1- Social Media/Content Creator
Decorating Team
Audio-visual Team

Milestones
The Grand Essence Event Center expects to complete the following milestones in the coming
months to ensure its success:

Secure Location: Identify and secure a prime location in Halifax, VA, and finalize a property to
ensure a stable operating environment.

Obtain Necessary Permits and Licenses: Complete all required paperwork and obtain necessary
permits and licenses from local authorities to legally operate the event venue.

Design and Build-Out the Venue: Oversee the design and construction of the venue to ensure it
meets the unique needs of various events, including weddings, recitals, corporate gatherings,
family and social events.

3

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

P157

Hire and Train Staff: Recruit, hire, and train a skilled team, including event coordinators,

customer service representatives, and maintenance staff, to provide exceptional service to
clients.
Launch Marketing and Promotion Campaign: Execute a targeted marketing and promotion

campaign to generate awareness and attract initial bookings. Utilize social media, local
advertising, and partnerships with event planners.
Host a Grand Opening Event: Plan and host a grand opening event to showcase the venue's

features and capabilities to potential clients, local influencers, and the media.
Initial Monthly Revenue Goal: Achieve first $10,000 in Monthly Revenue: Focus on securing

enough bookings and events to reach the milestone of generating $10,000 in monthly revenue,
demonstrating early financial viability.
Build a Network of Preferred Vendors: Establish partnerships with preferred vendors such as

caterers, florists, and entertainment providers to offer comprehensive event packages and
enhance cust6mer satisfaction.
Implement Customer Feedback Mechanism: Develop and implement a system to collect and

analyze customer feedback to continuously improve service quality and address any issues
promptly.
Establish Financial Tracking and Reporting: Set up robust financial tracking and reporting
systems to monitor revenue, expenses, and profitability, ensuring financial health and making
informed business decisions.

Marketing Plan
Our diverse range of services, including an immense and intimate event space, catering, and
event planning, is competitively priced to meet the needs of various events. We will employ a
comprehensive promotional strategy that leverages online marketing, social media, and local
partnerships to effectively reach and engage our target audiences. Our focus on engagement
aims to drive traffic and bookings, while local partnerships and community events will enhance
our visibility and reputation in Halifax County. This multi-faceted approach ensures a strong
market presence and sustained customer interest.

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

4

Pl58

Customer Analysis
Our primary target markets are residents, corporate clients, the community, and non-profit
organizations, offering a versatile space for celebrations, academic and corporate functions,
and community events. With competitive pricing and top-notch services, we will cater to the
diverse needs of Halifax County's residents and businesses to ensure a memorable venue for
every occasion. Our approach aims to build strong relationships within the community,
enhancing our brand reputation and ensuring a broad and loyal customer base.

Competitive Analysis
Among our competitors are Atelier Studio & Gathering Space, The Factory Street Brewery, and
The Prizery, each offering distinct event spaces and services in Halifax, VA. Atelier Studio &
Gathering Space is known for its versatility and strong community reputation . The Factory
Street Brewery offers a casual setting with competitive pricing, and The Prizery appeals to
clients seeking open-floor event space. At Quintessence Cove, we distinguish ourselves through
unparalleled service, comprehensive offerings, and state-of-the-art facilities, providing
personalized experiences, immense space, and leveraging technology to meet our clients'
unique needs and exceed their expectations. Our comprehensive approach covers everything
from the initial planning stages to the final execution, distinguishing us from other venues. We
provide personalized consultations and meticulous planning services to understand each
client's unique vision and requirements. By doing so, we can tailor our offerings to meet
specific needs, ensuring every event is executed flawlessly. Our experienced team of event
coordinators will work closely with clients, providing expert guidance and support throughout
the entire process.
Moreover, our facilities and amenities will set us apart from the competition. We will offer
versatile spaces that can be customized for various types of events, whether it's a corporate
gathering, a wedding, or a community function. Our venue will be equipped with audiovisual
technology and modern decor, ensuring a seamless and impressive experience for guests.
Additionally, we plan to collaborate with top-tier vendors and service providers to offer a onestop solution, including catering, entertainment, and decor services. This holistic approach not •
only simplifies the planning process for our clients but also guarantees a cohesive and
extraordinary experience.

5

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

Pl59

'

'

Products & Services
Quintessence Cove plans to offer a diverse range of products and services tailored to meet the
needs of various events. The primary service to be provided is our event space. This includes
access to a versatile space that will be able to be customized for different types of events such
as weddings, dance recitals, corporate functions, family and social events.
Catering Services will also be made available, ensuring that guests enjoy delicious and highquality meals. This includes a variety of menu options to suit different tastes and dietary
requirements, from gourmet meals to casual buffets.
Audio-Visual Services will be available. This includes high-quality sound systems, projectors, and
lighting to enhance the overall experience of any event.
Event Planning and Coordination services are offered to help clients manage every aspect of
their event. This will include professional planners who work closely with clients to ensure that
all details are covered, from initial concept to final execution. This service will include timeline
management, vendor coordination, and on-site support during the event.
Decor and event design will be another key offering, allowing clients to create a visually
appealing at mosphere for their events. This service will include a wide selection of furniture,
linens, centerpieces, and other decorative elements.

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC

6

P160

Detrick Easley
From:

Sent:
To:
Cc:

Subject:

Gravitt, Arron (VDOn <[email protected]>
Friday, February 20, 2026 2:16 PM
[email protected]; Detrick Easley
Fisher, Mark (VDOT)
Re: 2022 Mount Laurel Road Commercial

Detrick,
Mark reviewed the entrances this morning at 2022 Mount Laurel Road. He feels comfortable that sight
distances can be obtain if the vegetation is cleared in the future.
VDOT gives a Conditional Approval for a Commercial Entrance(s) on this site to satisfy the Special Use Permit
process. If the applicant gets through this process we can work with the applicant to meet the requirements.
In general the entrance(s) will have to be paved to our specifications. Sight distance will need to be obtained. A
permit and bond needs to be gotten through VDOT. Etc. The only thing that I can think of is there needs to be
50' in between a double commercial entrance. I think we can make it work, but one may need to be shifted over
a little. Shouldn't be a big deal.
Let me know if you need anythinig else.
Thanks,
Arron Gravitt

\VDO

Arron Gravitt
Assistant Resident
Engineer
Halifax Residency
Virginia Department of Transportation
(434) 222-0066
[email protected]

From: Gravitt, Arron (VDOT) <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2026 9:49 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: Fisher, Mark (VDOT) <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: 2022 Mount Laurel Road Commercial

Hello,
Mark checked the sight distances on the entrances for 2022 Mount Laurel Road. His measurements are below
highlighted in "Yellow". As it stands now you do not have the required sight distance looking west, which in
this case you need 61 O'. (Please see attached photo)
The vegetation along Rte 746 is what is blocking the sight distance. There is no way for us to know if you will
get the required sight distance, until you actually get it. You can cut down the trees and vegetation back to the
property comer and Mark can come back out and take another set of measurements. There is no way I can
promise you that you will get it.
1
Pl61

If you can not get the sight distance by removing the vegetation back to the property comer, then you would
have to get permission to remove more vegetation on the neighbor's property. Also there most likely would
need to be a sight distance easement grant by the neighbor. It might be a good idea to talk with them before you
remove the vegetation on your property, just in case it comes to that. Just looking at it on the computer, I think
you are going to needs to remove some trees on the 2044 property, but I can not say for sure.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Arron Gravitt
Both of the entrances at this sight have over 1000' of sight distance on the easteril side toward Clover. The
;western si4~ ~igh! ~is~~e ofb~th entr_an~es ar~ l?~~_c k~ QY a f!'ee !µi~ ~~ !1,ie \V~~t~_~id~ fu!l~ is ~i:! ~e ?~c!:1¢
photo.
!1'he west entrance has 21 7'
[h~_~-~ ! e~f!"~~~h~ ?~~•
Arron Gravitt
Assistant Resident
Engineer
Halifax Residency
Virginia Department of Transportation

(434) 222-0066
Arron. [email protected]

2

Pl62

PHASE 1

Pl63

Exit

'C
(I)

0

[!]

00

bl)

C

a:

:t::

'o 0
==: , G>Cl)
CO LL
0
0

...

Quintessence Cove
Venue
Conference room

Sign on the Building

Waiting area
12X 18

32X20

Office

Ladies Bathroom

12x 15
01
0

22X 12

~

0
0

;::

0

3
en
C:
(II
(/)

-

X

Men's Bathroom

(.,)

""O

~

22X 12

D)

~

0

0 ...
0 Ql
II 01 Ill

oC

0~

-i

~
::J
00.

0

Prep Kitchen

en

.0

C.

- ·

:,

_a..

Storage Room

(D

~

25x20

r-

10x 12

0

~

Exit
Ci)

0
0

-

Entrance

;::

0
3

en
C:
(I)
(/)

Event Space
51 X80

Exit

0

outs;deEventSpaee

I

200ft from the Rear

I

0
0

Goo o loo o O
P164

.

,

PHASE2

P165

Parking Lot
'-------------11 300 ft Off Road I

I

I

Quintessence Event Cent er

Men's Restroom

Women Restroom

20x22

20X22

a
0
0

;:r

3

(J)

C:
CD

1/l

Exit

I

-

...

'00

c..)

0
0

0

C:

"""'

Cl)

r-,..
X

C:

+-'

0

-0

ID

~

-·

::l
00.

r

;:r

0

+-'

a

Q)

3

en
(I)

1/l

C:

,----

>
w

CD

X

0
0

(ti'

-

CX)

Q)

0

....
(ti'

CX)

ro

CD

r+

age
38X20

Bathroom
20X 18

Dressing
Rooms
30 X18

Loading
dock
15x20

I Exit I

Dressing
Rooms
30x18

... a
0

::0 0

CD

;:r

Q)

3

P166

Bathroom
20x18

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P LANNING AND ZONING O FFICE
1030 Mary Bethune St., Suite LL 1
P. O.Box699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558-0699
PHONE: (434) 476-3300
FAX: (434) 476-3384
[email protected]

Detrick Easley
Zoning Administrator

March 5, 2026

Stephanie Stephens
Quintessence Cove, LLC
602 Edgewood Circle
Halifax, Va. 24558
Dear Stephanie:
The Halifax County Planning Commission and Halifax Board of Supervisors will hold a Joint
Public Hearing on Tuesday, March 17, 2026 at 6:30pm. The Public Hearing will address your
Conditional Use Permit application to operate Quintessence Cove. The Joint Public Hearing will
be held in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room located in the Halifax County Administration
Building, 1050 Mary Bethune Street, Halifax, Virginia.
For Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) Applications, it is my practice to prepare a list of"Potential
Conditions" for use by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors in their respective
deliberations regarding activities covered by a Conditional Use Permit. Should the Commission
recommend Permit approval, or if the Board of Supervisors ultimately approves Permit issuance,
the "Potential Conditions" are used as basis for any final conditions that may be imposed by the
Board of Supervisors.
A copy of the "Potential Conditions" is enclosed. I urge you to carefully review this document.
Please understand that the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors may accept, reject,
or modify any or all of the "Potential Conditions" if Permit issuance is determined to be
appropriate.
You will be allowed ten (10) minutes to present your application prior to the Public Hearing.
Should you have any questions or wish to discuss this prior to the Joint Public Hearing please do
not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,

~~~
Zoning Administrator

Pl67

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P LANNING AND ZONING OFFICE
1050 Mary Bethune St
P.O.Box699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558-0699
PHONE: (434) 476-3300
FAX: (434) 476-3384
[email protected]
Detrick Easley
Zoning Administrator

QUINTESSENCE COVE, LLC
VENUE RENTAL
EVENT CENTER
MOUNT LAUREL ROAD
Conditional Use Permit

SITE CONDITIONS
1. Development activities on this site shall be limited to those as specified in the Conditional
Use Permit Application dated February 20, 2026. The final locations ofincidental facilities
may be adjusted provided no such adjustment violates any buffers, setbacks, or other
statutory requirement.
2. Any proposed expansion of the operation, change of activities, additional facilities or
activities shall be submitted to the Halifax County Planning and Zoning Office for review
prior to implementation. Any changes may be subject to Permit amendment procedures
including Public Hearings.
3. All pollution control measures, erosion and sediment control measures, storm water control
facilities, and all construction activities shall comply with the requirements of the
appropriate federal, state, and local regulations and Ordinances. This shall include, but not
be limited to, Environmental Protection Agency, Virginia Department of Health, Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality, Virginia Department of Transportation, Halifax
County Building Code, and Halifax County Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance.
4. All Entrance Permits must be authorized by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
5. All internal roads used for public access shall be of compacted earth, have a minimum four
(4) inch stone base, or shall be paved.
6. All facilities for the provision of potable water and sanitation and wastewater disposal
systems shall be approved by the Virginia Department of Health.

Pl68

7. Any development activ1ties of structural or land disturbing nature not specifically
addressed by these Conditions shall be in conformance with applicable provisions of
appropriate federal, state, and local statutes and regulations.
8. All exterior lighting shall be designed and installed so as to minimize glare onto adjoining
properties or any public access road.
9. Adequate area shall be provided on site to accommodate parking for all employees and
patrons. It shall be the responsibility of the Permittee to assure that employees and patrons
park only on site and not on highway right-of-way or on adjoining or adjacent parcels
unless written consent is provided by the owner or owners thereof.
10. All events shall be completed by 12:00am. Outdoor amusement/entertainment shall begin
no earlier than 1:00 p.m. on Sundays.
11. Signage shall be posted on Mount Laurel Road on the day of each event. Sign information
shall include but not be limited to "caution, slow down," directional, and event parking.
12. No preparation of food shall be allowed unless inspected and approved by Virginia
Department of Health. All food for events shall be cooked off premises at approved
locations. All food vendors shall comply and obtain any permits required from the Virginia
Department of Health.
13. Any business advertising signs shall not encroach onto VDOT right-of-way.
14. The Permittee is responsible for the appearance of the site, including litter pick-up and
other orderly site appearance.
15. All activities shall comply with Halifax County Noise Ordinance (Section 17-141).
16. If for any reason Quintessence Cove, LLC stops operation for more than two consecutive
years, this conditional use permit becomes null and void.
I 7. This permit shall become null and void if Quintessence Cove, LLC operation is not
commenced within three (3) years of the Permit issuance.
18. A yearly business license shall be obtained from Halifax Commission of Revenue.
19. This Permit is non-transferable, except and unless written notice from the Permittee
regarding the transfer and a signed statement from the proposed new Permittee is received
by the County Planning and Zoning Office, which states that the new Permittee agrees to
comply with all terms and Conditions imposed with the original Permit issuance. If the
proposed new Permittee desires to amend the original Permit Conditions, amendments
must be addressed by the Halifax County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
through the Use Permit Public Hearing Process.

P169

20. Failure of Permittee to fully conform to all terms and conditions of this Permit may result
in revocation of the Conditional Use Permit.

Pl70

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P LANNING AND ZONING OFFICE
1050 Mary Bethune St., Suite LL 1
P.O.Box699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558-0699
PHONE: (434) 476-3300
FAX: (434) 476-3384
[email protected]

Detrick Easley
Zoning Administrator

March 5, 2026

Dear Adjoining Property Owner:
You are being notified of a Conditional Use Permit application, which has been submitted by Mrs.
Stephanie Stephens to operate a venue and event center for weddings, dance recitals, and
corpaorate functions. The property is located Mount Laurel Road.
The applicant proposes to construct two new builidings on the property in separate phases.
Catering services, audio-visual, and event planning coordinantion services will be offered.
The attached Public Notice identifies the Applicant, property location, and describes the nature of
the Land Use Application. The date, time, and location of the Public Hearing are noted.
Should you wish to comment on any application, you may speak at any or all Public Hearings.
You may also comment by letter, fax, email, or telephone prior to any Hearing. Please note that
speakers at Public Hearings are subject to time limits.
The final decision on any Land Use Application is made by the Halifax County Board of
Supervisors upon completion of a review of the merits of the Application, consideration of public
comments, and consideration of any recommendations from the Halifax County Planning
Commission.
Please do not hesitate to contact me for additional details, or if you have any questions.
Sincerely,

~~~
Zoning Administrator

Pl71

HALIFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P LANNING AND ZONING OFFICE
1050 Mary Bethune St.
P.O. Box699
HALIFAX, VIRGINIA 24558-0699
PHONE: (434) 476-3300
FAX: (434) 476-3384
[email protected]

Detrick Easley
Zoning Administrator

PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a Joint Public Hearing will be held Tuesday, March 17, 2026 at 6:30
PM by the Halifax County Planning Commission and Halifax County Board of Supervisors to consider and
receive comments on the below applications:

1.

Conditional Use Permit Application ED # 2:
Applicant:
Stephanie Stephens
Business Name:
Quintessence Cove, LLC
PRN:
13501,13500,13499,14617,14540,18224
Location:
Mount Laurel Road
Landowner:
Wynona Godwin & Alfred Godwin Trust
Proposed Use:
Construct a new venue event center for weddings, dance recitals, and
corporate functions.

2. Conditional Use Permit Application ED# 3:
Applicant:
Dominion Energy Virginia
PRN
34991 & 20069
Location:
Lewis Ferrell Road and Oak Level Road
Kenneth and Kevin Hodges
Landowner
Construct a 3.00 MW Community/Shared Solar Energy Facility
Proposed Use:

The Joint Public Hearing will be held in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room located in the Halifax
County Administration Building, 1050 Mary Bethune Street, Halifax, Virginia. Public attendance at the
Public Hearing will be permitted.
Any comments sent by letter, fax, or email will be distributed to the individual Commissioners and Board
members. Comments received by March 11 , 2026, at 5:00 PM will be included in meeting packets sent to
members. Comments received after this date will be distributed to the members at the beginning of the
Public Hearing.
Individuals requiring special assistance to attend and participate in the Hearings, or requiring additional
information on the Hearings' issues, including copies of any applications, proposed plans, ordinances, or
amendments, should contact the Halifax County Planning and Zoning Office, I 050 Mary Bethune Street,
P.O. Box 699, Halifax, Virginia 24558.
For further information, please call or email:
Telephone:
Email:

(434) 476-3300 ext. 3321
[email protected]

P172

A-o-:ro,~,\)a._ ' ~ , 4
)\2-N

----

()t.J tu€: (b..

owNt

R...

AJ&-es.S

~olL\3

76 3

T~hn t\eo..~~

4201 c~+hQr-p1n (a.

q113

La.l.).ro.. ~~ Y~,

8~ I , r i \11 ~W) Lt\. w,~5-fc(\ 'Stt~Wl NC.. :J.'7 I 2-,

3(Di5

C!Dvt f2.. Cem~ fet''--(

PO !3o'f 151../-

3:l~ \

'Pa+Si Vea s sA&?-

217 '2- If}) /I 'Rd,

~/~Vtr J/q ~ rJ._l{53t/

1t~~

\vat de)\ L~cks ·

2,.15 'R,'cf3e- 'f.d

'Wef/2ersf1JeJJ CT (}~ltJ1

3230

Sf11cey ~ /e,,~on.:M. (J.drr~fl

..-=
...i
CM

/ [f /s

CIDVe£.. Vq. /). ¥5 3 '/

ieed /lllfl2Stf P/Ace/ G-cocl\a.~J VA.:&~

AGENDA BRIEFING
Staff Members:
Meeting Date:

April 6, 2026
Detrick Easley

Item#

K-4

Ordinance#

Department:

Subject:

Planning & Zoning
Legal status of plan § 15. 2-2232 review
Dominion Energy (Red Oak Solar (Parcel 34991 & 20069)
3.00MW

Background:

Virginia Code § 15.2.2232 requires the local Planning Commission and governing body to
consider if the general location, character, and extent of the proposed solar facility is
substantially in accordance with the County's Comprehensive Plan.
Dominion Energy Virginia has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to install a 3.00MW solar
facility on two (2) parcels, listed as parcel record number 34991 & 20069 owned by Mr. Kenneth
& Kevin Hodges. The project is located on Lewis Ferrell road and will encompass 15.7 acres.
The parcel is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural. Halifax County 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan
envisions the property will remain in agricultural use. The Comprehensiv