Public Notice: Gloucester County, Virginia Government 90 Plus Days Late In Paying Bill

Gloucester County Government is presently over 90 days late in paying one bill and over 30 days late on yet another bill.  The total is estimated at roughly $40,000.00 and compounding daily.  Gloucester County officials have failed to rebut said bill if they thought said bill might have been in error.  Said bills are owed to CRF Ventures for contract work performed.  

Public Notice: Judge Jeffrey W Shaw Being Sued

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2019, filed today in King William County Court, Judge Jeffery W Shaw is in default of jurisdiction and is being sued for malicious prosecution under extortion, bribery and graft.  We have a copy of the suit as filed in King William County and have verified the suit.  This is a matter of public record.  Further, a commercial lean has been put against Judge Jeffery Shaw in this matter.

An update has been posted at the top of the site.

(By:  Liberty Law)

Gloucester County, Virginia's Hidden Tourism Plan

 

Imagine a tourist area that is made up of Colonial Yorktown with its’ battlefields, new Victory Museum, the Yorktown River Walk, the Waterman’s Museum, floating docks that can accommodate cruise ships up to 400’ long and numerous other tourist attractions. Further imagine two Virginia State Parks located on the York River in Gloucester; a National Park on the York River in the Capahosic area of Gloucester; the York River State Park on the York River in the Toano area of James City County and; New Quarter Park located next to Cheatham Annex and close to historic Williamsburg. Imagine tour boats picking up and dropping off tourists at each location as they navigate up and down the York River while tour guides describe locations of various shipwrecks on the floor of the York, the docks at the Navel Weapons Station and Cheatham Annex, watermen harvesting clams, fish, oysters and crabs, historical sites and so on. Imagine new marinas in Gloucester and more boats, jet skis and other watercraft enjoying the York River and it’s tributaries for recreation. Imagine Gloucester’s rich history being brought to the forefront and Gloucester becoming a high density part of Virginia’s tourism industry. Imagine ferry boats or an up river bridge connecting Gloucester to the Williamsburg area, creating a historic tourism circle made up of Gloucester, Yorktown, Jamestown and Williamsburg. 

Now let reality set back in and let yourself begin to realize that a tourist area of that magnitude would cost hundreds of millions of dollars or more and would take a very long time to design, plan and complete. Let yourself begin to realize there would be even more negative impacts on commercial Watermen. Let yourself realize it will require more roads, housing, hotels, restaurants, fire and rescue, police, schools and bigger local government. Finally let yourself realize Gloucester County would no longer be the quiet little town it has been throughout history.

It is now time for a serious question. What would you say if you learned that such a tourism plan has been in the works for several years and that several steps have already been taken to move the concept forward without informing the People that such a plan exists? After reading the rest of this article we think you will realize that is exactly what is occurring as none of the steps taken thus far have included public statements from anyone acknowledging or even mentioning the existence of a non-publicly disclosed master plan that we believe has been in existence for over 20 years. Anyway, here are just few steps that have been taken publicly so far without the un-named plan being mentioned.

On February 14, 2014 the daily press reported funding for a new state park on the York River and Aberdeen Creek was being sought by local legislators to begin constructing amenities to include trails, camp sites, cabins and water access. The Daily Press reported that Del. Keith Hodges, R-Middlesex, and Sen. Thomas K. "Tommy" Norment, R-James City were seeking $8 million for work on the first phase of the park which include roads, a beach, swimming area, seven miles of trails, a fishing pier and other basic amenities. A 2011 park master plan estimated the cost of the first phase at $13.3 million. Hodges had also requested $600,000 to pay for staff and equipment to develop the park. The park has 2,260 feet of York River shoreline at an area where the river is two miles wide, it has 3,776 feet of shoreline along Aberdeen Creek, it encompasses 431 acres of land and was purchased in 2005 for $3.9 million from Newport News resident Pela Hundley during former Gov. Mark Warner's administration. (The same Pela Hundley who sold the new Page Middle School property to Gloucester County in 2004.) The property purchase was financed using general obligation bonds from a voter-approved state referendum in 2002. Phase two plans for lodging facilities at the state park include 30 camping sites and a group camp site, 10 cabins to include one three-bedroom, eight two-bedrooms, one lodge, a picnic area and a play area. More amenities are included with a price tag of $13.6 million for phase II. A 2010 park master plan estimated the total cost of the park to be around $28.2 million.

On May 20, 2014 the Daily press reported President Obama’s proposed budget called for spending $6 million on the Werowocomoco site in Gloucester and the John Smith Trail, which traces Smith's exploratory journey throughout the Chesapeake Bay area from 1607 to 1609. (The story behind this park coming to the attention of the President is another complex and somewhat curious story that will be covered in the future.) Governor Terry McAuliffe visited the farm that is owned by Bob and Lynn Ripley which was supposedly home to Chief Powhatan and his daughter Pocahontas when settlers arrived in Virginia in 1607. That during the Governor’s visit he is reported to have said the property could link Gloucester with the Hampton Roads region's famed Historic Triangle of Jamestown, Yorktown and Williamsburg. The Daily Press further reported that McAuliffe said he had briefed and had the full support of Virginia's congressional delegation about the proposal for the national park. They also reported that he sees Werowocomoco National Park and the John Smith Trail as a way to draw tourists, help diversify the state's economy and bring money to communities such as Gloucester. The Daily Press reported that he said he can see tourists landing from the water.

On August 7, 2012 the Daily Press reported that the Gloucester Board of Supervisors unanimously approved establishing “No Discharge” zones in Gloucester. The establishment of these zones means boaters will be prohibited from dumping human sewage in the Piankatank River, Mobjack Bay and the York River and all of their tributaries. On October 7, 2014 the Board of Supervisors authorized the Gloucester Go Green Advisory Committee to submit an application for the establishment of No Discharge Zones in Sarah Creek and the Perrin River. Currently, the Federal Clean Water Act prohibits dumping untreated sewage from boats anywhere in the U.S., but does permit dumping treated sewage from certain marine sanitation devices in U.S. waters, except in No Discharge Zones. Once No Discharge Zones are establish even those with both device types will not be permitted to dump sewage in the No Discharge Zone waters and will be required to have human waste removed from their boats at marinas with waste pumping stations or through other on-land disposal facilities.

In March 2015 Lewis Lawrence, executive director of the Hampton Roads Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission made a presentation to the Gloucester Board of Supervisors on dredging Aberdeen Creek. During this briefing Lawrence said watermen have been raising concerns in recent years about their ability to get boats in and out of the wharf at the end of the creek. He further said that in 2009 the Middle Peninsula Chesapeake Bay Public Access Authority and Planning District Commission were asked to study Aberdeen Creek as a commercial seafood hub, specifically looking at land-use issues and options for dredging. This study was funded through a grant from Virginia's Coastal Zone Program. (A “networked program”. established to manage Virginia's coastal resources, the program relies on a network of state agencies and local governments to administer the enforceable laws and regulations that protect our wetlands, dunes, subaqueous lands, fisheries, and air and water quality within the Virginia “Coastal Zone.) The Daily Press reported that the Virginia Institute of Marine Science is performing an economic impact study and that Lawrence said the dredging could cost $600,000 to $1.5 million, depending on the extent of the project. They further reported him saying the most probable cost should be around $744,000, or $93,000 a year which would be paid for by Gloucester taxpayers over eight years.

On April 16, 2015 the Gloucester Board of Supervisors repealed the Boat Tax, resulting in a $438,000 annual revenue loss.

On July 19, 2015 the Daily Press reported that Governor McAuliffe, the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Virginia Department of Transportation met under the bridge at Gloucester Point where they signed a memorandum of understanding which asks the three agencies to work together to identify new potential public access projects, especially at bridge crossings and roads. The Daily Press quoted McAuliffe saying, "Where ever we have VDOT next to one of our state parks and [there is a bridge] or an opportunity for us to build at that waterway and allow people to access the water I want that done"

On October 20, 2015 the Gloucester Board of Supervisors received a presentation on what is being referred to as the York River Stewardship Program. The presentation primarily focused on what is being called the York River Maritime Heritage National Marine Sanctuary Initiative. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is legally responsible for the management of maritime heritage resources within designated sanctuaries. According to NOAA, the National Marine Sanctuaries Act authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to, “…designate and manage areas of the marine environment with special national significance due to their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, scientific, cultural, archaeological, educational or esthetic qualities as National Marine Sanctuaries.” In other words, the U.S. Secretary of Commerce will be in complete control of the York River, its tributaries and land that “may” impact the condition of the York River. Bodies of water that are designated sanctuaries under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act appear to be highly regulated, especially in the area of commercial fishing. The president of the Waterman’s Museum Board also shared that York River boat tours leaving from the Waterman’s Museum will likely begin during the summer of 2016.

As we said earlier, those are only some of the steps that have been taken to push along the un-named project. Other steps that have been taken include things like; several million dollars in improvements to Hickory Fork Road; multiple strategically placed mixed use development type plans that have been approved in Gloucester; strategic land purchases by a small number of individuals who obviously know more about the un-named plan than the general public; building Page Middle School on T.C. Walker Road with plans to relocate the school bus garage and sell the property being in the works long before the tornado damaged Page and; the efforts of the Gloucester Main Street Preservation Trust to re-construct Main Street, through a backdoor tax dollar funding mechanism called library and health department space rent. There are plenty more occurrences that clearly demonstrate a long and continuous effort by a few individuals to bring the un-known plan to reality and profit from it without letting the vast majority of Gloucester residents, businesses and property owners know what is actually taking place. There are people who live among us and elsewhere who have and continue to take advantage of knowing things the majority of Gloucester property owners have no knowledge of. Just like what went on with Page Middle School; the plans for the un-named plan have been created, the People’s money is being spent and when the time comes, the whole thing will be shoved down a huge majority of the People’s throats and the few who were in the “know” will profit.

We are not trying to advocate for or against the un-named plan as our primary goal is to let everyone know what is going on I Gloucester County. We realize there could be many long term benefits for Gloucester’s residents, businesses and property owners, but we also know that when things are done outside of the People’s watchful eye, many get taken advantage of so a few greedy individuals can profit. Our advice to Gloucester property owners is to hang onto what you have because within the next several years the value of your property will increase. Don’t be fooled by offers that appear to be high in comparison to Gloucester’s assessed value as the assessment is not a true reflection of your property’s true worth, even though the Code of Virginia requires all properties to be assessed at true market value. That does not happen in Gloucester. A prime example of this is the Route 17 frontage property that connects to the new Page Middle School property, which Harry Corr, now deceased, purchased one day before the School Board voted to build Page on that property. Mr. Corr paid the Pella Hundley Trust more than six times the properties’ assessed values, or so it would appear in Gloucester’s online land records. (Again the Hundley name comes up) As can be seen from this example, Gloucester’s assessments appear to be far lower than true market value.

Should Gloucester become a tourist destination and retirement community, or should it remain a place to live away from all of that?

Kenny Hogge, Sr.

Gloucester Point, Virginia

Contact Kenny

8 Shires Distillery Investment Opportunities

There is presently an investment opportunity available with 8 Shires Distillery in Williamsburg, Virginia.  The investment type is called a debt derivative.  What is a debt derivative?  As defined on Wikipedia;  In finance, a derivative is a contract that derives its value from the performance of an underlying entity. ...Derivatives are one of the three main categories of financial instruments, the other two being stocks (i.e., equities or shares) and debt (i.e., bonds and mortgages).  This opportunity is only available for about one more week.

(By:  Chuck Thompson)

Today being May 29th, 2018.  A little about 8 Shires Distillery.  From farm to table.  Locally sourced grains come from a local Virginia farm known as Hart and Son located between Gloucester and West Point.  750 acres of farmland and these folks use natural farming techniques producing high quality grains which include indian corn used in both 8 Shires bourbon and gin products creating very unique flavors.

  What sets 8 Shires apart from any other Distillery anywhere is the commitment to 17th and 18th century interpretations of spirits produced by this distillery.  Years have been spent researching recipes and techniques in an effort to recreate the flavors of the past.  This caused interest with folks over at the Jamestown Island who do the archaeological excavations and interpretations.  They approached 8 Shires with the idea of recreating the first spirit ever made in what is now the United States.  They offered a very unique proposition that was just to good to pass up.  They found a well that was capped by Captain John Smith which was no longer producing enough water for the settlers.  The Jamestown folks managed to pull 20 gallons of water from the well and save it.  8 Shires has reproduced a single malt spirit using 10 gallons of that water for recreating the spirit of the time.  It's a single malt and it is slated to be bottled in hand blown glass bottles and topped with natural cork wired to the rim of the neck of the bottle.

  Release date is expected to coincide with a special event happening at Jamestown Island in April, 2019.  Bottles will be 375 ml each and are expected to sell for about $500.00 each.  Other spirits being produced by 8 Shires are as follows, Silver rum, dark or aged rum, spiced rum, cordials that change with the seasons are about to be released, George Thorpe original which is a bourbon mash bill white whiskey honoring the father of American Bourbon, and the distillery is also working on a single malt similar to the first spirits ever produced in North America.

  A trip to the distillery is quite a treat as you can view reproduction stills from the late 16th century all the way up to the late 18th century.  Plans are being finalized now to start outdoor interpretations of colonial distilling using some of the stills on display at the distillery.  While you are there, be sure to try one or several colonial drinks like the wicked maiden that is a favorite by just about everyone who tries it.  Also try a stone fence and be sure to hear the story behind the drink which is a wonderful American Revolution story that is indeed well reputed.  The distillery is located at 7218 Merrimac Trail in Williamsburg.  It is a bit difficult to find as the distillery is located in a building in the back part and the front of the building houses a church.

Check out this link to view more details about this investment opportunity.

 https://goo.gl/RE3p6H

Charlottesville, Virginia, City Selling Illegally Misrepresented City Bonds?

Charlottesville, Virginia.  City council just made a public notice that will not get much, if any attention at all.  But everyone must see this.  Every American needs to be mad as hell as to what is in that public statement.  And we want everyone to see this.

https://emma.msrb.org/SecurityView/SecurityDetails.aspx?cusip=A3CB8500ABB5512B9E5D3EAB268DFBDBB

  Above is a link to the MSRB, or Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.  On that site, this link will take you to the Bond offering by the city, at least their statement anyway,  Now, this may be just a standard form, and the wording may be the same on every bond in every locality, in every state and by every state.  The problem is how the funding for those bonds are stated.  You need to read this for yourself.  Below is the words I have a real problem with and consider to be horribly illegal.

  "The Bonds are general obligations of the City, and the full faith and credit and UNLIMITED TAXING POWER OF THE CITY, are irrevocably pledged to the punctual payment of the principle of and interest on the Bonds as they become due".

  What?  Who gave these scumbags unlimited taxing power?  Are they trying to read the 16th Amendment to the US COnstitution for their basis?

  " The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Does anyone understand that the above Amendment gave no new taxing powers to the Federal Government, nor to the states?  That has been ruled on by the Federal Supreme Court over and over and over again.  No new power of taxation.  Google or other search engine returns all have data that is horribly incorrect.  We have posted evidence recently about this showing the true meaning of the 16th Amendment and that it does not grant the government any new rights of taxation.  Here it is again.  Watch the video.

What you will see in this video is the guy who wrote the tax laws, lie to no end about who has to pay taxes and who does not.  He uses the 16th Amendment in the wrong way.  Folk's you are being lied to everyday.  It is up to you to know if you are required to pay taxes.  And almost none of you are required to.   But Charlottesville Thinks they have an unlimited license to steal all of your money and more.  That is what unlimited means.  They can not only take everything you own, they can also bill you for so much more on top of it all.

  So, if this is in fact the case, then the City of Charlottesville has written some fraudulent paper that it plans on marketing to investors under false pretenses.  That is not only fraud, that is conspiracy to commit fraud.  This has so many violations against the people of the City of Charlottesville, the people of this state and the people of this entire Nation.  This is an outrage.  Again, it might be stated on every municipal Bond sold here in this country, but that is still fraud. 

(Story assistance by Marsha Maines)

Related articles

• White House Chief of staff John Kelly says Robert E. Lee was an 'honorable man', not being able to compromise led to Civil War
• 2 Marines sentenced for trespassing during Confederate rally
• Florida Declares State of Emergency Ahead of Richard Spencer's Speech
• Terrorist groups planning another 9/11-style attack, top US official warns
• Trump Slams Michael Moore's One-Man Show; Moore Fires Back
• Did Rick Baker speak out about Charlotttesville? Democratic ad suggests he didn't. But Baker did say something

Delegate Keith Hodges Debates Sheila Crowley For The 98th District

Delegate Keith Hodges debates candidate Sheila Crowley in the race for the delegates seat of the 98th district here in Virginia.  Keith Hodges is the present seated candidate here in the 98th district and is a Republican.  Sheila Crowley is the Democratic challenger for that seat.  This debate happened in Gloucester County, Virginia at the Moose Lodge along route 17 North.  Watch the video and then cast your vote on November 7th, 2017 for the candidate you think will serve the 98th district the best.

Related articles

• Pence, Biden stump for Virginia governor candidates Gillespie, Northam
• Will: Trying times for GOP candidates in shadow of prez
• President Obama to hold Richmond rally
• Man spotted wearing 'Build the Wall' hat to Trump's Hispanic Heritage Month event at the White House
• Poll: Strong majorities of Republicans support various gun-control measures, including banning bump stocks
• Dominion Energy Virginia issues RFP for 300MW of PV, wind generation

Second 2017 Gloucester County, Virginia Election Forum Video (Brought to you by GVLN)

Meet the candidates of 2017 for seats on the Board of Supervisors and School Board. Held at the Lighthouse Worship Center on Route 17, Gloucester County, Virginia. Forum was held on October 23, 2017. Gloucester Virginia Links and News (GVLN) brings you this video.  This meeting was produced by the Gloucester Citizens for Accountable Government.  

Related articles

• Oklahoma City School board to decide on renaming schools
• Penn State officials sued for rejecting Richard Spencer talk
• Construction begins on Trump's border wall prototypes
• Mississippi school drops Jefferson Davis - the US Confederacy's only president - to rename itself after Barack Obama
• U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez Corruption Trial Set To Get Underway In New Jersey
• Johnson County supervisors pass resolution condemning hatred

Are Gloucester County’s Budgets By Administrator Fedors As Spectacular As York District Supervisor Bazzani Claims?

During a recent Gloucester County candidate forum, York District Supervisor Phillip Bazzani touted his vast experience in creating and managing budgets involving substantial amounts of money. He further insisted he knows every aspect of Gloucester’s 2018 budget. Supervisor Bazzani has also repeatedly publicly asserted that County Administrator Brent Fedors’ budget documents are the best he has seen in the 34 years he has lived in Gloucester. Are these assertions true? Here is what we know to be true and factual.

When Mr. Fedors presented his first budget to the Board of Supervisors and the public, it lacked details that were present in budgets prepared by his predecessors. When we pointed this out to Mr. Fedors he said,

“While we are not planning to add that level of detail to the proposed budget book for FY17, we are preparing a supplemental information piece for Board Members that does. I will make sure you get a copy when it is ready.”

After receiving his response, we forwarded the email conversation with Mr. Fedors and the following statement to the Board of Supervisors.

“I and others find Mr. Fedors' budget proposal and last response disturbing for a number of reasons and hope the majority of you do as well. Foremost, Mr. Fedors' budget process does not appear to include transparency; as the Code of Virginia requires the People to be presented information at the same time as the governing body. (Unless otherwise exempted by FOIA) Mr. Fedors' budget process does not appear to include an acceptable level of transparency which has led to restricting the People from data that is necessary to evaluate how their tax dollars are being spent. I will not say much more at this time as I understand Mr. Fedors' is new to the government game. On the other hand, his staff certainly are not. One would hope they would guide their new boss in a better direction.”

Mr. Fedors provided us the information piece as he promised, but even after we expressed our concerns to him and the Board of Supervisors, his FY18 budget demonstrated the same lack of transparency. Again we contacted Mr. Fedors via email to request line item data, which the Finance Director provided.

What we find concerning is the fact that Mr. Bazzani publicly stated Mr. Fedors’ FY17 Budget was the most comprehensive budget document he has seen in all his years of managing budgets. How could anyone make such a statement about a budget document that lacks the amount of detail Mr. Fedors’ lacked? The FY17 budget email conversation we have shared below clearly demonstrates the Board of Supervisor did not have the necessary data to effectively scrutinize Mr. Fedors’ proposed budget until several days after Mr. Bazzani praised Mr. Fedors.

We have provided Slideshare presentations of both of Mr. Fedors’ budgets and the last budget his predecessor prepared. We have provided our email conversations with Mr. Fedors, the Finance Director and the Board of Supervisors, as well as Slideshare presentations of the data we were forced to request from Mr. Fedors. We have also provided some video clips for your enjoyment. Though there are numerous other transparency shortcomings and many wasteful spending practices that we have not touched on here, we ask you to take special notice of the difference in the amount of data provided for budgeted expenditures for each department. You will see that Mr. Fedors combined budgeted expenditures into three line items for each department, whereas his predecessor had many more line items for each department. What are they trying to hide??

Written comments may be emailed to Kennysr61@gmail.com

Read more stories at: http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com/

Supervisor Bazzani stating he knows every aspect of the budget


 

Supervisor Bazzani praising Mr. Fedors' FY17 budget even before Mr. Fedors' information piece with detailed data was provided.

FY16 Budget (General fund expenditures begin on Slideshare page 75)

Gloucester county va adopted fy16 budget capital budget from Kenneth Hogge Sr 

FY17 Budget (General fund expenditures begin on Slideshare page 66)

Gloucester county virginia fy17 adopted budget and capital budget from Kenneth Hogge Sr

FY18 Budget (General fund expenditures begin on Slideshare page 71)

Gloucester county va adopted fy18 budget capital budget from Kenneth Hogge Sr 

FY17 info we were forced to requested from Mr. Fedors

Fy17 ca proposed budget general fund expenditures by department from Kenneth Hogge Sr 

FY18 info we were forced to requested from Mr. Fedors

Fy2018 proposed budget gf & capital expenditure line item including exte. pdf from Kenneth Hogge Sr 

Email conversation about FY17 budget

03/20/16 at 11:57 AM

To Board of Supervisors

Board Members,

I and others find Mr. Fedors' budget proposal and last response disturbing for a number of reasons and hope the majority of you do as well. Foremost, Mr. Fedors' budget process does not appear to include transparency; as the Code of Virginia requires the People to be presented information at the same time as the governing body. (Unless otherwise exempted by FOIA) Mr. Fedors' budget process does not appear to include an acceptable level of transparency which has led to restricting the People from data that is necessary to evaluate how their tax dollars are being spent.

I will not say much more at this time as I understand Mr. Fedors' is new to the government game. On the other hand, his staff certainly are not. One would hope they would guide their new boss in a better direction.

Respectfully,

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Fedors, Brent" bfedors@gloucesterva.info

To: Kenny
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2016 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: 2017 Budget

Mr. Hogge -

While we are not planning to add that level of detail to the proposed budget book for FY17, we are preparing a supplemental information piece for Board Members that does.

I will make sure you get a copy when it is ready - likely Tuesday.

Brent

On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:22 AM, Kenny wrote:

Brent,

We are looking for a proposed budget document that contains at least as much information as the 2016 budget proposal which can be found at:  http://www.gloucesterva.info/Portals/0/finance/documents/FY16%20County%20Administrator's%20Proposed%20Budget.pdf?ver=2015-03-05-090048-737

A "general fund expenditure budget" as presented in the 2016 proposal is one example of the expanded data we would like to continue to see and are hoping the Supervisors are already assessing as they process the FY17 proposal. 

Kenny 

From: "Fedors, Brent" <bfedors@gloucesterva.info>

To: Kenny
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: 2017 Budget

Mr. Hogge -

The 2017 Budget Book provided to Board Members is the same as can be found at the following link: http://gloucesterva.info/Portals/0/finance/documents/FY17%20Proposed%20Budget%20and%20FY17%20Proposed%20Capital%20Budget.pdf?ver=2016-03-11-154752-740

There are also copies of the book available for public review at both libraries and in the County Administration office.

Please let me know if there are specific questions you have that I may be able to address - I'm glad to help in any way I can.

Brent

On Mar 16, 2016, at 9:55 AM, Kenny wrote:

Hello Mr. Fedors,

I would like to get a copy of the "2017 Budget Book" that has been provided to the Supervisors. The information posted on the County's website is not detailed enough for the People to do any sort of analysis of what is being proposed.

Thank you sir,

Email conversation about FY18 budget data

Tinsley, Stephanie <stinsley@gloucesterva.info>

Mar 20 at 11:15 AM

To Kenny

CC Lewis, Christi , Fedors, Brent

Message body

Good Morning Mr. Hogge,

 Attached is the information as requested.

 1^st tab – General Fund by Expenditure Line Item

2^nd tab – Provides information on the Total Transfers Out line item from the General Fund

3^rd tab – Capital Projects

4^th tab – External Agencies Funding Request and what is included in the Proposed Budget

Please let me know if you have questions or need anything further.

Thanks,

Stephanie

From: Fedors, Brent
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 2:06 PM
To: Kenny
Cc: Tinsley, Stephanie <stinsley@gloucesterva.info>; Lewis, Christi <clewis@gloucesterva.info>
Subject: Re: FY18 Budget Info Request

Mr. Hogge -

I am forwarding this to Ms. Tinsley who will coordinate our response.

Thank you for your inquiry,

Brent

On Mar 19, 2017, at 9:51 AM, Kenny wrote:

Hello Mr. Fedors,

Hope this finds you in good health and spirits.

Can I get a copy of the proposed FY18 line item budget and proposed capital improvement expenditures? If possible; I would also like something that reflects the name of all external agencies/nongovernmental organizations that are requesting FY18 funding and how much each is asking for. Electronic copies are preferred.

Thank you,

Kenny

Related articles

• UMich settles FOIA lawsuit, releases Schlissel's Donald Trump emails
• Supervisors offer mixed opinions on Linn County representation map
• Lawsuit seeks disclosure of FBI 9/11 investigation files
• Congressman lambasts Pentagon for withholding Osprey documents
• 'The whistle is about to blow': Secret report exposed Tesco's £250 million accounting scandal, court hears
• MLive asks appeals court for contested police calls in prosecutor's crash

Gloucester County Employees May Be Getting More Tax Dollars; But Is It The Right Type Of Pay Increase?

After publishing our story about Gloucester County’s Administrator and Attorney getting raises, we received numerous comments from Gloucester residents. It looks like there are a whole lot of people in Gloucester who do not agree with the Board of Supervisors repeatedly giving nice raises and increased hours of paid time off to our local government executives while our non-executive employees get little to nothing. In fact, there are employees who take home less pay now than they did ten and more years ago. This type of crony socialist practice in our local government should be considered unacceptable by anyone who has worked for a living.

Now there is talk of bonuses for county employees, (Imagine that, just before election time) but are bonus payments in the best interest of non-executive local government employees? Yes and no. If a person working for our local government has no intentions of ever retiring under the Virginia Retirement System (VRS), then yes, bonuses would likely be beneficial to them.

Bonuses are not in the best interest of non-executive employees who intend to make Virginia government service a career. Bonuses are not included as part of a Virginia government employee’s annual salary when determining how much their retirement check from VRS will be. VRS defines Annual Salary as:

An employee’s full compensation payable annually, not including overtime pay, extraordinary pay, bonus pay, nonpermanent shift differentials or termination pay for annual or sick leave.

The best way to compensate or reward our non-executive local government employees is with a real pay raise. Throwing a bonus to these employees is nothing more than an effort to get by with paying these hard-working people as little as possible. What the current and previous Boards of Supervisors don’t seem to get is, these employees are the ones who provide us with water and sewer, maintain our infrastructure, repair our government used vehicles and perform numerous other important functions and services. They don’t get the concept of investing in those employees at any level, but they will hand out tax dollars and paid time off to executive employees like it is candy. Some things need to change in Gloucester and the last four years have not produced those changes. 

Below are the contents of emails one Gloucester resident received from some Gloucester County Supervisors when she questioned our local government employees’ pay. Sounds like the same old empty promises that have fueled the waste of Gloucester County taxpayer dollars in other areas. Like renting our libraries and health department spaces instead of owning them and not creating a revenue stream from health department rent that is paid to Gloucester by the Commonwealth, not consolidating compatible school and county services, building more parks than our local government should ever be responsible for and numerous other wasteful practices.  

From Andy James:

“Thanks for sending your e-mail.  I totally agree, all our county employees deserve a substantial raise, and even though I am one of seven on the BOS, will fight for this raise when it comes up.  Please know that even though the funding is tight, we still greatly appreciate the great jobs that our employees do to make it all work.  Also, the raises that we gave to Mr. Fedors and Mr. Wilmot were much deserved, as well.

 Sincerely,

 Andy James, Ware Dist. Supervisor”

From Phillip Bazzani:

“Coming from private industry as a retired executive at Newport News Shipbuilding, we always paid employees for performance and results.

Having said that, I will tell you that for the upcoming budget, compensation for all County employees will be our first priority.  Because this Board has simplified ordinances stifling new business growth over the last few years, and the significant organizational initiatives Mr. Fedors has implemented, we will have the ability to address compensation.  This is due to the additional sales tax revenue from new businesses who recently set up shop here, and savings/cost avoidance we have experienced thus far thanks to Mr. Fedor’s leadership.

Compensation will be a top priority for me in my upcoming term for all employees.  Moreover, Mr. Fedors has not indicated that the County will not provide the additional compensation bonus to our employees which is scheduled to occur at the end of this year.  

You will hear more about compensation as the year goes on.  I would be glad to talk to you more about this issue, so please do not hesitate to call me at 757-262-8462 (cell).

Phillip

Chair, BOS” 

From John Meyer:

“It was a pleasure to talk to you at the Jubilee – I just thought I’d take the time to put into writing what we discussed.

On the road trip back from the Governor’s Rural Prosperity Summit last week, Mr Fedors and I talked at some length about employee compensation.  There are several factors – sustained low wage growth; increased cost-of-living (to include health insurance); an improving economy that offers employees options; and increased competition for talent from other counties – that lead to the conclusion that county pay must be increased.  Brent is currently working on the pay structure for next year to determine how much it should be and how it should be allocated.  But there is no doubt in my mind that an upward adjustment needs to and will be made.

As for the 1% bonus this year – this was based on using the unexpended fund balance from last year, and couldn’t be awarded until after the books were ‘closed’ for FY17 (ending Jun 30, 2017).  The review is nearly done and the numbers look good.  There is no reason not to expect the bonus in the very near future.

Finally, with regards to Mr Fedors and Mr Wilmot salary increases.  As Mr James pointed out, they have been doing exceptional work – and the Board wanted to recognize that.  But something to keep in mind is that they are on a different pay cycle than the rest of the employees.  The budget and employee compensation for this current fiscal year has to be set in April.  The Administrator and County Attorney have their reviews in late summer and their compensation adjustment is determined by the end of September, and they are paid starting in January.  This out-of- cycle pay adjustment means that you could either think of them as the only ones that got pay increases this year – or you could think of them as being the first ones to get pay raises for next year … and as a leading indicator for good things to come for all employees.

Thank you for writing,

John”

Gloucester Board of Supervisors Increasing County Administrator’s and Attorney’s Pay and Benefits on the Sly

On Tuesday night October 3^rd, the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors will vote on a resolution to increase County Administrator, Brent Fedors’ and County Attorney, Ted Wilmot’s pay and benefits, effective July 1, 2017. That’s right last July. Unfortunately, the vote will be held with no public discussion because the matters are contained in the meeting’s consent agenda. For those who do not know; a consent agenda is basically a list of public matters and supporting documents that are voted on collectively, with no public discussion. We can’t help but wonder if the County Administrator didn’t hide money in this year’s budget to cover his and the County Attorney’s pay increase.

There are other significant increases in paid time off, bonus paid days off, increases in the amount of accrued paid time off, increases in the amount of accrued paid time off that can be cashed in at the time of separation from employment with the County and increases in the amount of healthcare expense payouts by the county. Wonder how our blue-collar county employees will feel when they become aware of this nonsense?

We have provided the resolution documents in the Slideshare presentations below. We encourage everyone to review the increases and let the Board of Supervisors know this is completely unacceptable on many levels. Tell them the County Administrator and the County Attorney need to use their paid vacation time or lose it.

Gloucester county admistrator perks from Kenneth Hogge Sr

Gloucester county attorney perks from Kenneth Hogge Sr