Proposed joint county ag center sparks debate among Nelson supervisors – Lynchburg News and Advance
Get local news delivered to your inbox!
Sheep from the high school barn during FFA Day for fourth graders from Tye River Elementary School on March 29, 2019 held at Nelson County High School.
The Nelson County Board of Supervisors remains divided over the county’s participation in a joint Amherst-Nelson Agriculture Center.
The Amherst County Agriculture Committee is considering a 300-acre property just south of the Nelson County line on U.S. 29 for the facility. At their Oct. 12 meeting, Nelson supervisors voted 3-2 to fund half of a feasibility study to determine if the site is suitable for the facility. The Amherst County Board of Supervisors voted Sept. 7 to fund its half of the study’s estimated $59,300 cost.
At the Nelson board’s Dec. 7 meeting, Mark Smith of local firm Architectural Partners presented a proposed site plan for the center with programming options to include an arena, horse stalls, a cattle working area, a kitchen, offices and classrooms, conference space, market space, a cannery, meat processing area, a large bay training area, warehouse space, a greenhouse space and outdoor facility options, according to meeting minutes. Smith estimated the total cost, including land acquisition, site work and new buildings and structures, to be about $51 million.
During public comments at the board’s Feb. 8 meeting, Nelson County Farm Bureau President William Mays urged the board to resume the feasibility study.
“This critical step needs to move forward to determine the most important aspects of the property’s suitability for an agriculture complex,” Mays told the board.
Chris Bryant, speaking on behalf of the Amherst County Agriculture Committee, said the committee was excited to continue to collaborate with Nelson County on the project but that some information needed to be clarified.
“First, and most importantly, the intent of the complex is to provide a facility where youth and adults of both communities can be trained to acquire skilled trades. Once established, this could serve as a pipeline to provide skilled workers for area businesses and contribute to a healthier business growth of both communities,” Bryant said.
Another purpose of the complex is to provide a location for special events such as joint county fairs and trade shows to benefit both counties, he added.
“The intention of the workgroup for the counties was to provide the seed money to purchase the real estate, assuming the study was sufficient. There was never an expectation for the counties to cover the cost of the infrastructure. The work group would assume the responsibility of soliciting the funding through grants and private business to cover the infrastructure cost.”
Bryant said the work group would be more likely to obtain “secure and significant” grant funding if both counties demonstrate involvement.
County Administrator Steve Carter told the board he had met with Architectural Partners and local surveying and engineering firm Hurt & Proffitt and requested updated cost proposals for a water, sewer, geotechnical and road accessibility assessment.
Carter said the additional work would mean a substantial increase in the study’s cost.
West District Supervisor David Parr asked where the county stood on the survey, and board chair Jesse Rutherford asked Carter if the study was continuing.
Carter answered no and said county staff’s understanding from the Dec. 7 board meeting had been that the board wished to delay making a decision on the project, given its substantial cost, and to discuss it and all proposed county projects at a later meeting.
“I didn’t leave the Dec. 7 meeting with that understanding because I knew that what was being requested wasn’t $51 million,” Parr said.
“At no time in any of this project other than in this room or from Nelson’s administration has it been indicated that there was an expectation of anybody to spend the money for the infrastructure other than the Amherst agriculture committee. The agriculture committee’s request is the money to purchase the land to get things going,” Parr added.
“This gives me kind of a bad feeling,” said South District Supervisor Robert “Skip” Barton in expressing support for agriculture in Nelson County but concern about the center project.
“How much influence will we have in what this facility is about? I mean, I strongly support anything done in Nelson County, but I have questions about something of this massive scale being done somewhere else,” he said.
East District Supervisor Ernie Reed said he strongly disapproved of the board’s continued involvement in the joint project.
“For reasons that I’ve said from the very beginning, I am not in favor of investing any more money in this project, whether it be exploratory or not,” Reed said.
“I don’t feel it’s in the best interest of the county. I’m not in favor of entering any long-term agreement for a facility located in Amherst County that the county has any responsibility for at all.”
Reed said he was concerned about the county becoming financially tied and invested in a project it would have little oversight over.
“It would be a tragedy for this to be a black hole that we would be forced to pour funds in to keep solvent and at the same time have it distract from the capital improvement that our county needs and wants,” Reed said, adding, “Investments in Nelson County are investments in Nelson County. Investments in Amherst County are investments in Amherst County.”
Parr said the center’s board would be established with equal representation from both counties.
“Amherst has been adamant that they want full disclosure, they want transparency, they want us to be 50/50 in this project together in order to take advantage of the funding that will be exponentially larger,” with support from Amherst and Nelson, Parr said.
Rutherford said he was in favor of the study continuing with the addition of water and sewer capability assessments.
“I would certainly be in favor, that since this property is in Amherst County, that Amherst Country pay for that study,” Reed said.
“If it’s in the best interests of Amherst County and it’s in Amherst County, why in the world are they asking us to provide money for that study? It’s in their county. They’re the ones that stand to be the greater beneficiaries.”
Parr stressed the joint nature of the project.
“I think starting now with the ‘you take care of this’ and ‘we take care of that’ or ‘you take care of all of this and we don’t take care of anything’ is not in the spirit of how we’re entering into this,” he said.
A motion from Parr that the county move forward with the feasibility study with the addition of water, sewer, geotechnical and transportation evaluations was accepted, with Parr, Rutherford and North District Supervisor Tommy Harvey voting yes and Reed and Barton voting no.
Get local news delivered to your inbox!
{{description}}
Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.
Virginia State Police are investigating a two-vehicle crash along U.S. 29 in Nelson County.
In his 22 years of service with Wintergreen Fire and Rescue, Chief Curtis Sheets has never had to phase out an ambulance.
A trial date has been set for a man charged with murder in connection with a burned body found alongside a trail in Nelson County.
Nelson Heritage Center Executive Director Johnette Burdette said one of the Arrington site’s missions is to support healthy lifestyles for the…
The Nelson County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 31 approved a redistricting plan that affects two of the county’s five election districts.
A Roseland man pleaded guilty on Feb. 1 to charges of injuring a person after driving while intoxicated last year.
Man arrested on attempted murder and other charges
JAN. 24
Mike Patterson said he and his wife have always had a special place in their hearts for Nelson County.
Sheep from the high school barn during FFA Day for fourth graders from Tye River Elementary School on March 29, 2019 held at Nelson County High School.
Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.
