Highland officials defend legal defense BY JAMES JACENICH • STAFF WRITER
MONTEREY - Monterey resident Larry Held was the only citizen addressing Highland supervisors Tuesday during the budget hearing, and his comments stirred the frustration of Jerry Rexrode and Lee Blagg, especially when it came to debate on wind energy.
Larry Held of Monterey was one of only two citizens to attend the budget hearing. No letters or e-mails were received.
"Last year the board said they were upset the public didn't comment at the public hearing," Held said. "I prepared a statement.
 | | Lee Blagg |
|
"Several weeks ago I wrote (in a letter to the editor, published in The Recorder) that it is a waste of money to pay for legal fees to fight the wind turbine farm."
Held explained he believed the legal battle over the proposal for a wind energy utility in Highland was not in the best interests of the county because a majority of citizens opposed industrial wind turbine development.
 | | Jerry Rexrode |
|
County residents and landowners near the project site on Allegheny Mountain sued the board of supervisors, alleging the process by which the board granted Highland New Wind Development LLC a permit was illegal. In lower courts, that decision has been upheld, but Virginia's Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case this Septmber.
"It is kind of hard to hear about the majority," said supervisor Jerry Rexrode, replying to Held. "Government wasn't founded on majority rules. It is founded on law. The majority has no bearing on making the decision.
"As far as defending the decision legally, we would probably be poor supervisors if we didn't defend ourselves. We didn't bring this suit; we didn't bring the one before. It's disgusting, but you have to defend your decisions. You are elected to make your decisions on the best information that you have. The answer is not to sue your board (of supervisors), the answer is to run against them if you are not satisfied with their decisions. I can just think what this county could have done if they had not spent that quarter of a million dollars (on legal fees). They brought the lawsuit, we didn't," he said.
Held insisted the majority of citizens voiced opposition to commercial wind turbines in Highland, but Rexrode disagreed.
"Maybe we have gone with the majority of the people," said Rexrode. He said he talked to a lot of people in favor of the utility.
"We'll find out in November (if the majority is on your side)," said Held.
"That's the way it should be," said Rexrode. "I appreciate people coming to public hearings, but we as supervisors have to go beyond what special interests say. Vote us out of office. That's my opinion."
"I made it clear I would not vote for a tax increase," said supervisor Lee Blagg. "This is a farmer's budget - not enough revenue, too much expenditures, little reserve and disaster on the horizon.
"Larry is new to the county," Blagg added. "For 30 or 40 years we have fought every kind of growth that has wanted to come to this county. You either grow or you die … I know there is a lot of contention about this wind thing, but I can't vote for something when someone comes to me before the vote and says we will chip in to your defense fund if you vote our way. I call that bribery. People ask me what's wrong with people in Highland County. I don't understand why people are against growth.
"We don't want growth so bad and we don't want revenue so bad that we sue the county, we sue the kindergarteners, we sue the elderly, and we don't have more money," Blagg continued.
"Three years in a row I voted for a tax increase. We have young farmers trying to keep this land in farming but we are trying to tax them off the land."
Blagg said unless other sources of revenue were found to pay for local government, property taxes would have to increase in the future.
"As time goes on and the Economic Development Authority comes up with something, there will be a group of people who will say they don't want it," said Blagg. "You can write comprehensive plans till hell freezes over, but it won't change a thing. There's nothing in the comprehensive plan that says there has to be an attitude change, but there should be."
"One of the reasons we can hold the rate at 38 cents is we have twice a year taxation," said Rexrode. "What bothers me is the increase was $110,000. What really bothers me is that $89,000 was state-mandated. These are unfunded mandates. You can offset a year or two without tax increases; then you have to look at what you have in the reserve. Without growth and without zero inflation you have to do something."
"I would love to see this county grow, but I am for development that will benefit the county," said Held. "I don't think what you voted for will benefit the county."
"The answer is not to waste money, but to put people in office who think like you think," Rexrode replied.
"Mr. Held, I suppose I should thank you for being the designated public," said chairman Robin Sullenberger.
"You're welcome," said Held with a smile.
No tax increase
"Levies are to remain at 38 cents per $100 of assessed value on all taxable real estate and $1.50 on each $100 of value on all tangible personal property located in Highland County," said Highland County administrator Roberta Lambert on the proposed county budget.
The property tax rate has fluctuated over the past 14 years from a high of 73 cents in 2005 to a low of 38 cents last year. The rate was 65 cents in 1993. There have been three reassessments over the same period.
Total projected income is expected to increase to $6,955,108 this year, up $110,210 or 1.6 percent from last year's total county income of $6,844,900.
Seventy-three percent of the money the county generates from local revenue comes from real estate taxes.
Expenses will equal income next year. Sixty-one percent of the money goes to the school, 30 percent to the county, 4 percent to social services, 3 percent to comprehensive services and 2 percent to capital improvement. A percentage point is roughly equal to $68,000.
School budget left intact
Highland County School Board chair Bobbie Hefner and Highland County Public Schools superintendent Gary Blair attended the supervisors' meeting. "We appreciate the fact that the school board came to us to discuss the budget request," Sullenberger told them. "We left your budget as proposed. Thank you for your cooperation.
"We have some capital improvement issues that are somewhat significant," said Sullenberger. "We encourage you to make some recommendations."
Blair said, "I know it was not an easy decision. I don't like that the school is 61 percent of the county budget, but it is necessary. It will be well cared for and well spent."
School spending next year will be $4,255,477, up $139,200 from last year. County taxpayers will contribute $1,886,527 of the total cost for education, the rest comes from state and federal money.
Forest funds, trash fees
Lambert said the county would probably receive $33,000 from the forest reserve fund. The federal government has for years reimbursed localities for loss of property tax revenue because of national forest land, but this year the money was in question due to its attachment to another spending bill that President George Bush had threatened to veto. The money from forest reserve will be used in the school budget.
Sullenberger closed the budget hearing and opened the public hearing for the enterprise fund, which provides money for the operation of the county's trash disposal site.
The fee will remain at the same amount as last year: $150 residential, $75 business low density, $150 business low-medium density, $225 business medium density, and $300 business high density.
"I commend the board on this (enterprise fee) budget and recommend its approval, since I represent the public," said Held.
"We implemented this 13 years ago and it has worked relatively well," said Sullenberger. "We have had other jurisdictions look at the model we created for this. Generally it is well-structured, it has worked out pretty well.
"Our non-resident landowners complain (because they are charged the same as a full-time resident but may not use the facility as often as a full-time resident). I welcome non-resident landowners, but this is the only way to raise some revenue (to pay for solid waste collection and disposal). I empathize but do not sympathize with them. I think our full-time residents are our first priority. We are not trying to do anything to the detriment of non-resident landowners. It may not be fair, but I have no intention to change it," Sullenberger.
"Without the support of the public, this (enterprise fee) budget would be a lot higher," said Rexrode. "If not for recycling we would have to raise the fee. Anybody that recycles certainly helps keep the costs down."
Supervisors meet at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 24 at the Highland Modular Conference Center to consider adoption of the budget. The budget is subject to modification until then.
The board then went into closed session discuss duties and assignments of personnel, specifically dealing with the operation of the animal shelter.
| 
