Cifers tops Adams, five other candidates to win Republican nomination in Senate District 10; PC recommends denial of utility-scale solar project near Gordonsville; Jarvis resigns as Mineral mayor
Engage Louisa is a nonpartisan newsletter that keeps folks informed about Louisa County government. We believe our community is stronger and our government serves us better when we increase transparency, accessibility, and engagement.
This week in county government: public meetings, Dec. 16 to Dec. 21
For the latest information on county meetings including public meetings of boards, commissions, authorities, work groups, and internal county committees, click here. (Note: Louisa County occasionally schedules internal committee/work group meetings after publication time. Check the county’s website for the most updated information).
Wednesday, December 18
Community Policy Management Team, Executive Board Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 12:30 pm.
Other meetings/events
Tuesday, December 17
Louisa Town Council, Louisa Town Hall, 212 Fredericksburg Ave., Louisa, 6 pm. (agenda)
Thursday, December 19
Mineral Town Council, special meeting, Mineral Town Hall, 312 Mineral Ave., Mineral, 6:30 pm.
Additional information about Louisa County’s upcoming public meetings is available here.
Interested in taking your talents to one of the county’s numerous boards and commissions? Find out more here including which boards have vacancies and how to apply.
Cifers tops Adams, five other candidates to claim Republican nomination in Senate District 10
Republicans in the 10th state Senate District on Friday night nominated Prince Edward County businessman Luther Cifers to represent their party in a special election to replace Sen. John McGuire (R-Goochland), who’s vacating the seat to head to Congress.
Cifers will face Democrat Jack Trammell, a Louisa County resident and college professor, in the January 7 contest. The winner will serve the remainder of McGuire’s term, which runs through 2027.
Cifers, a political newcomer who founded the kayak fishing supply company YakAttack, won a stunning victory in a mass meeting at the Goochland Sports Complex that stretched into the early hours of Saturday morning, defeating Louisa County Board of Supervisors Chair Duane Adams, the runner-up, in the third round of voting. Adams, a Lake Anna resident who’s represented the Mineral District on the board since 2018, was considered a favorite to win the nomination.
En route to his upset victory, Cifers bested six other candidates, including several political veterans. Aside from Adams, the contenders included: former state senator Amanda Chase; Chase’s former legislative aide Shayne Snavely; recent University of Richmond grad Alex Cheatham; former Powhatan County GOP Chair Jean Gannon; and Cumberland County Supervisor Bryan Hamlet.
More than 1,000 voters were credentialed to participate in the contest. After waiting in line for up to an hour, they packed the complex’s gymnasium, donning stickers and hoisting signs for their preferred candidate and cheering during a round of speeches before voting started. Adams’ speech was met with the largest applause, but it was Cifers’ supporters who cheered loudest at the end of the night.
In a mass meeting, voters cast ballots in rounds until one candidate gets more than 50 percent of the vote. Adams led after the first round of voting but couldn’t hold on as the evening wore on. Some voters didn’t stick around to vote in all three rounds. Others threw their support to Cifers after their top choice was eliminated.
Per the meeting’s rules, the three lowest voter-getters were knocked out after the first round: Cheatham, Hamlet and Snavely. Gannon, who finished fourth on the first ballot, dropped out while Chase was eliminated in the second round.
“I don’t know of a better way to enter this arena than for the people to prevail over the politics,” Cifers said after claiming the nomination. “Some of you here know me, some of you don’t but, in this last vote, a lot of you believed in me. What I can promise you is that I will do everything in my power to never let you down.”
In a brief speech before voting began, Cifers said he’s “pro-life and pro-family” and believes in preserving the district’s “rural way of life.” He recounted his upbringing being homeschooled and working in the tobacco fields of Amelia County then getting a GED and a job in manufacturing.
Armed with, as he put it, “lessons from [his] dad and God’s favor,” Cifers said he started YakAttack in a friend’s basement with just $2,000 15 years ago. From there, he’s launched several other businesses, which, he said, provide “more than 100 good-paying, American jobs.”
If voters send him to Richmond, Cifers said he’ll bring real-world experience to the job and center the voice of the people.
“Over the last 30 years, I’ve watched our district change. We’ve all heard the story of the family farm that was lost due to rising taxes from property values impacted by neighboring development. We’ve all heard the stories of citizens showing up in force to oppose solar farms or landfills or data centers, only to be ignored in favor of economic development. And we’ve all heard the story of the young family that still lives with Mom and Dad because they could not afford a home at today’s prices,” Cifers said. “While there are no easy answers, there are answers, and those answers have to align with the interest of the people.”
For the second time in the last two years, Adams finished as runner-up for the Republican nomination in the 10th. He lost to McGuire in a party-run convention in May 2023, finishing second in a four-candidate field.
As he did for McGuire, Adams motioned to nominate Cifers by acclamation at about 1:20 am to cheers from the smattering of attendees who stayed to hear the final results. Party organizers didn’t announce official vote totals for any round of balloting.
In an email to supporters Saturday evening, Adams congratulated Cifers, saying he’d “represent [the district] well in Richmond” and pledging his “complete support.”
Adams also thanked his supporters.
“To all my supporters in this race who made calls, invited people, donated, or attended the mass meeting; I want to say thank you so much. I couldn't have asked for a better and more loyal group of supporters, and I am proud of the race we ran,” he said.
Cifers is a heavy favorite to win the seat in the special election, which is scheduled for the day before the start of the General Assembly session. The 10th is a solidly conservative district that stretches from exurban Richmond nearly to Lynchburg and includes most of Louisa County. Donald Trump won support from 62.8 percent of the district’s voters in this year’s presidential election.
Early voting runs from Friday, Dec. 27 to Saturday, Jan. 4 at the Louisa County Office of Elections, 103 McDonald St., Louisa. Voters can apply for a mail-in ballot through Dec. 27 at 5 pm. Election Day is Tuesday, January 7. Polls are open from 6 am to 7 pm. Click here for more information.
Planning Commission recommends denial of solar array near Gordonsville, defers action on solar siting agreement policy
The Louisa County Planning Commission on Thursday convened for its final meeting of calendar year 2024, recommending denial of a utility-scale solar array near Gordonsville, deferring action on a policy that sets minimum standards for utility-scale solar project siting agreements and more. (meeting materials, video)
Commission gives three-megawatt utility-scale solar array near Gordonsville a thumbs down
Another large-scale solar project is facing tough sledding in Louisa County’s public approval process.
The Planning Commission voted 5-1 on Thursday night to recommend that the board of supervisors deny Louisa Solar 1, LLC’s request for a conditional use permit (CUP) to develop an up to three-megawatt (MW) utility-scale solar array on 55.7 acres of a 118.8-acre tract off Kloeckner Road (Route 860) just outside the Gordonsville Growth Area Overlay District and about 500 feet from the Louisa-Albemarle County line (tax map parcel 1-3). The parcel is owned by Benjamin Ochs.
Though the commission voted in favor of a slightly larger version of the project just a year and a half ago, which was ultimately rejected by the board of supervisors, the panel declined to support the project this time around.
Several commissioners cited concerns about stormwater runoff from the array and whether the CUP for the project should be attached to the entire property or just the 55 acres leased by the developer as proposed by the applicant.
Cuckoo District Commissioner George Goodwin said he wasn’t comfortable voting for the project, in part, because it wasn’t clear to him how it would be taxed. He suggested that the county either attach the CUP to the entire parcel, meaning all of the 118 acres would be taxed at a higher rate, or require the property owner to divide the project site from the larger tract.
“The reason this is important is because, without a division and a survey, the commissioner [of the revenue] and the treasurer have no way to separately tax this one parcel,” Goodwin said. “It’s going to be taxed at a different rate. One [part] under utility solar, the other, basically, under agricultural. We either need to split it out in the application or apply the CUP to the entire parcel,” he said.
Goodwin also said that he had concerns about where stormwater runoff from the site would go.
“If you take trees off of that property and you put up solar panels, you will have more runoff…I do want to know where that water is going to go,” Goodwin said.
Patrick Henry District Commissioner Ellis Quarles echoed Goodwin’s latter concern, saying he wasn’t comfortable with how stormwater would be managed on the site. He pointed to problems with runoff at another solar project in the county, presumably Dominion Energy’s Belcher Solar Facility off Waldrop Church Road where neighboring farmers have experienced severe erosion and flooding.
“I think this project is well thought out other than the issue with the runoff, and that is a big issue. We had a hearing once before where they didn’t really clearly define the runoff, sediment ponds and where the water’s going to go. It wasn’t clearly specified, and we ended up with a huge mess,” Quarles said.
In an apparent effort to buy time to answer Goodwin’s question about the CUP and a potential division of the property, Grif Jones, regional director of permitting for the project developer New Energy Equity, asked the commission to defer action on the application.
But Green Springs District Commissioner Jim Dickerson said he wanted to “get this done,” motioning to recommend that supervisors deny the CUP.
Quarles, Goodwin, Mineral District Commissioner John Disosway and Louisa District Commissioner Matt Kersey joined him in supporting the recommendation while Mountain Road District Commissioner Gordon Brooks cast the lone no vote. Jackson District Commissioner Troy Painting was absent.
Brooks reminded his colleagues that the commission had supported a CUP for solar development on the parcel last year, which the board voted down. Supervisors cited concerns that the proposal didn’t meet a 300-foot buffer requirement included in the county’s solar ordinance.
The developer reapplied for the permit several months ago with a revamped plan that shrinks the solar array from five MW to three and includes buffers that either meet or exceed the requirement.
The project next heads to the board of supervisors for a final up or down vote. At publication time, a public hearing hasn’t been set.
The last time the board approved a utility-scale solar project came in 2022 when it unanimously greenlit Energix Renewables’ request to develop an up to 118 MW array and 50 MW battery storage facility at the 1234-acre Cooke Industrial Rail Park. The park is mostly owned by the Louisa County Industrial Development Authority, a public entity created by the county to promote economic development.
County leaders have since taken steps to limit solar development, including capping the amount of land that can be used for large-scale solar generation at two percent of the county’s land mass, or 6,343 acres. About 5,200 acres have already been approved for large-scale solar projects with less than a third of that developed.
In response to community concerns, the county also beefed up its solar ordinance, toughening standards for buffers, stormwater management and erosion and sediment control, among others.
During his presentation, Jones presented the project as a good fit for the community, noting that it complies with all the provisions in the county’s enhanced solar ordinance and fits with the character of the neighborhood.
Though the property is zoned for agricultural use, it adjoins several industrial properties including Klockner Pentoplast’s manufacturing facility and a pair of natural gas-fired power plants. It sits near a substation, high-voltage transmission line and railroad tracks.
“It’s basically an industrial neighborhood, and this is a use that fits in very well there,” Jones said, adding that the project would be screened from view by both existing trees and supplemental plantings.
Jones contended that the facility would benefit the community in several ways, including producing clean energy and saving residents money on their electric bills. The latter would be made possible by the project’s enrollment in Dominion’s shared solar program.
Established by the General Assembly in 2020, the program provides residents who may not be able to put solar panels on their homes an opportunity to acquire subscriptions for solar power via a third-party provider. The power generated at the Kloeckner Road facility would feed Dominion’s distribution system, and Dominion customers could sign up for “a share” of what’s produced that’s credited to their bill.
The shared solar project would directly benefit customers in Louisa and surrounding counties who enroll in the program, including those classified as low-income. The state’s shared solar rules require that 30 percent of the program’s customers are low income and that those subscribers save at least 10 percent on their monthly power bills.
“This will provide monthly energy savings to local residential users. The power is not going to some big data center in Northern Virginia. It’s staying local. People can get clean energy in their home with no investment and save some money on their power bills,” Jones said.
Beyond that benefit, the facility would generate revenue for county coffers that significantly exceeds what’s derived from the property under its current use as a Loblolly Pine plantation.
According to an analysis by Mangum Economics conducted on the applicant’s behalf, the project would generate between $75,100 and $239,900 in local tax revenue over its 35-year lifespan, depending on whether its taxed via a revenue sharing plan or the county’s machinery and tools tax. Under its present use, the property would generate about $5,630 in local taxes over the same time frame.
The developer and the commission didn't discuss a siting agreement that could bring additional benefits to the county. Supervisors enacted a stringent policy governing the agreements—essentially deals between localities and solar developers aimed at mitigating a project’s impact and providing other compensation—that was the subject of a separate public hearing at Thursday’s meeting. The policy sparked concern from Jones and another representative of the solar industry (see article below).
More than 7,500 photovoltaic solar panels, accompanied by a string of inverters, would cover about 17 acres of the project site. They would be surrounded by an animal-friendly fence and at least a 300-foot buffer inclusive of both existing and new evergreen trees and pollinator-friendly plants.
Tom Egeland, a senior planner with Louisa County, said that staff believes the project meets the 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s goal of promoting economic diversity. He also noted that the project is the smallest utility-scale solar facility to apply for a CUP, and the applicant has agreed to cover 41 percent of its open spacing in pollinator-friendly plantings. That figure far exceeds the 10 percent required by the county’s solar ordinance.
Staff recommends that the project’s CUP include 31 conditions, which are standard for utility-scale solar facilities in Louisa County.
To guard against problems with stormwater runoff and erosion and sediment control, which have plagued the Belcher site, the conditions mandate that the project is developed in phases to ensure soil stabilization and limit runoff. They also direct the applicant to pay a third-party engineer to monitor the site’s erosion and sediment control measures during clearing and construction.
Jones emphasized that his firm understands the concerns about runoff, pointing to the numerous stormwater management features in its plans, including permanent stormwater basins. He also reminded the commission that since Belcher’s construction, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality has beefed up its stormwater control regulations for large-scale solar development.
“We are here to provide clean energy. We aren’t here to trash the environment or create muddy water courses. It’s important that we do this right,” Jones said. “With stormwater, we have to match pre- and post-[construction] flows, so we don’t increase flows. We don’t increase runoff,” he said.
But neither commissioners nor a neighbor were convinced.
Tom Gilbert, an adjoining property owner and the only person to weigh in during the public hearing, said that he opposed the project, in part, because of concerns about runoff.
“I have a picture here from March after two days of rain, and it’s like a lake down there. You’ve got the railroad that stops the water after it comes down the hill and when you put those arrays there, it’s going to go somewhere,” he said.
PC defers action on utility-scale solar project siting agreement policy
Commissioners voted 5-1 to defer action on a policy passed by the board of supervisors last month that establishes minimum standards for utility-scale solar project siting agreements, including hefty annual payments based on a project’s power production, compensation for adjacent landowners and a tight timeline for when a facility must start generating power. (policy)
Several commissioners said they wanted more information about the policy’s requirements before making a formal recommendation to the board of supervisors on whether to add it to county code. The commission will hold a work session on the item prior to its January meeting.
Siting agreements are essentially deals between localities and solar developers aimed at mitigating a project’s impact and providing other compensation. Per state code, they can include cash payments for capital needs and broadband deployment, among other items.
Louisa County’s solar ordinance requires that developers seeking a Conditional Use Permit for a utility-scale solar array—defined as a solar generation facility that provides at least two megawatts of power to the grid—negotiate a siting agreement, but it doesn’t include any minimum standards. Siting agreements are subject to approval by the board of supervisors.
Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams and Patrick Henry District Supervisor Fitzgerald Barnes, who comprise the board’s solar committee, recommended the policy. After initially supporting large-scale solar development, Adams and Barnes have soured on the use. Adams said at a meeting earlier this year that he didn’t want any more solar projects permitted in the county.
But, in a memo to the board, the committee framed the policy as beneficial to both the community and developers and claimed it would “help renewable energy development projects protect local values and resources.”
When the board voted on the proposal at its November 18 meeting, Adams said that passing it as a policy allowed it to take effect immediately, but the committee wanted its provisions codified in the county’s solar ordinance. The board subsequently sent the policy to the planning commission to begin the formal public approval process, which requires a public hearing and vote by the commission and the board.
While the policy already applies to any utility-scale solar project not yet permitted by the board, Deputy County Administrator Chris Coon said that adding it to code essentially gives it the force of law.
“[The policy] is a starting point for negotiation. So, if it was codified then it would be the mandatory minimum. This is what it would need to be to come to the board of supervisors. It strengthens the position,” Coon said.
Under the policy, siting agreements for utility-scale solar projects are required to meet several minimum standards. Most notably, developers must remit an annual payment to Louisa County at least equal to 0.1 percent of the county’s operating budget per megawatt (MW) of power produced.
Coon said that, under the current operating budget, that figure would be roughly $156,000, meaning a 20 MW project would be required to pay the county about $3.12 million annually.
The policy further stipulates that 25 percent of funding generated by a siting agreement “should be allocated to affordable housing initiatives within the county.”
The policy also recommends that the owners of large-scale solar projects provide at least $500 in annual compensation to adjacent property owners in the form of either electric bill abatement or property tax abatement.
“This provision acknowledges the potential impact on neighboring properties and offers tangible benefits to nearby residents,” the committee’s memo said.
In addition, the policy requires utility-scale solar projects to start generating electricity no more than three years after approval. Failure to meet the timeline would require renegotiation of the existing siting agreement, reapplication for a conditional use permit and updating the project’s decommissioning bond to comply with current standards.
Two representatives from the solar industry criticized the policy during the public hearing, zeroing in on the provision requiring project owners to annually pay the county .1 percent of its operating budget per megawatt. They argued the requirement places unreasonable demands on solar developers that are out of step with industry standards.
“[It’s possible] that this policy would act as an effective moratorium as fees of this order per megawatt completely wipe out any potential profit for a solar developer as the noted fees exceed what’s generally considered as a realistic return on a project of this nature,” said Grif Jones, regional director of permitting with New Energy Equity, whose proposed three-megawatt shared solar array near Gordonsville got a thumbs down from the commission at Thursday’s meeting.
Jones also questioned the policy’s legality, suggesting it didn’t comply with a section of state code governing what’s permitted in siting agreements.
“The county can request funding to address capital needs, including as set forth in its current fiscal budget. The [proposal] at issue here, however, seems to link the minimum payment to the county’s total operating budget rather than tying the requirement to addressing capital needs,” Jones said.
Coon responded by reading the code section. He contended its language applies to any of the millions of dollars’ worth of projects currently included in the county’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) as well as its current budget.
Val Newcomb, vice president of economic and community development for the solar developer Urban Grid, urged the commission to consult with stakeholders from the industry before making a recommendation to the board.
“Under this ordinance, the required voluntary payment structure would actually be higher than the revenue a facility might generate,” she said.
Newcomb said that she appreciates Louisa County’s efforts to leverage siting agreements to deliver benefits to the community and hopes industry stakeholders can aid the county in crafting a policy that helps meet local needs.
“Siting agreements offer significant advantages, allowing for voluntary contributions beyond our statutory tax obligations. Given that Louisa has not yet adopted a unified siting agreement or revenue sharing ordinance across these projects, we encourage this ordinance be informed by data reflecting realistic and fair terms for all the parties involved,” she said.
In their discussion, commissioners expressed similar concerns, wondering how the solar committee came up with the requirements and if solar developers had been consulted during the process.
“Did anybody reach out to the development community to see [if these provisions make sense]? Most of the time when we get something like this, we have to have supporting data for where these numbers came from,” Mountain Road District Commissioner Gordon Brooks said.
Coon didn’t directly respond to Brooks’ question.
A couple commissioners also zeroed in on the requirement that 25 percent of the revenue generated by the per-megawatt payment provision go to affordable housing initiatives.
“I have no idea, not only how the numbers were derived, but who decided that our hungriest child was affordable housing as opposed to other things that have gone unfunded in this county,” Cuckoo District Commissioner George Goodwin said.
Mineral District Commissioner John Disosway asked Coon if the county has any affordable housing initiatives.
Coon pointed to an affordable housing project under development by the Fluvanna-Louisa Housing Foundation, a private nonprofit organization. While the county has chipped in $775,000 in federal funds to the project, the current CIP, which forecasts 20 years of capital spending, doesn’t dedicate any funding to the facility or any other affordable housing initiative.
Commissioners told Coon that they needed more information about the policy before forwarding it to the board for codification. Several said they were confused about the board adopting the proposal as a policy then sending it to the commission for consideration. Generally, when considering changes to the county’s zoning code, the planning commission reviews the item first then makes a recommendation to the board.
“What you are telling us is this went to the board and now it’s coming to us. Seems to me like it’s inspect the ladder, climb the ladder. But this time it’s climb the ladder, inspect the ladder,” Disosway told Coon. “Why did we not have a work session on this to understand what was going on?”
Goodwin agreed.
“We’ve got to gather data on this stuff. We’ve got to have presentations from county staff,” he said
Louisa District Commissioner Matt Kersey was the only member to vote against deferral. Jackson District Commissioner Troy Painting was absent.
Commission recommends approval of rezoning for ag operation near Ferncliff
The commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend that the board of supervisors approve Robert and Stacy Fuller’s request to rezone, from General Commercial (C-2 GAOD) to General Agricultural (A-2 GAOD), 3.7 acres at 991 Courthouse Road (Route 208) in the Patrick Henry Election District (tax map parcel 67-3-2).
The Fullers plan to establish an agricultural operation behind their home, including a large garden, a row of fruit trees, a chicken coop with a maximum of 20 birds, ducks, fish and, potentially, goats. They also plan to build a barn on the property.
The parcel is less than a half mile from the Ferncliff exit off Interstate 64 in the Ferncliff Growth Area Overlay District (GAOD). It’s designated for mixed-used development on the Future Land Use Map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Agricultural activity isn’t permitted by-right on commercially zoned properties in the county’s GAODs, prompting the Fullers’ request.
“I want to be able to get up in the morning and, if I want to feed ducks, I can feed ducks. If I want to have some koi in a pond, if I want to have some chickens because I want to have eggs every morning and I want to have some healthy eating from raised beds then I would like to very much do that, and I can’t in C-2 [zoning] I’ve found out. So, here we are over a garden, essentially, and a duck pond,” Robert Fuller told the commission.
Fuller said that he grew up on a farm in Louisa County before joining the Marine Corps, and he’s lived on the subject property since he came back to the county in 2009. He suggested that he wants to return to his roots by growing his own food, adding that he believes the small farming operation would be beneficial to his health.
“I’d like to have a hobby greater than just watching TV all day…so this is going to give me something to do, but it’s also going to provide me with a better diet,” he said.
Community Development Department staff said in its report that the proposed use fits with the character of the neighborhood and wouldn’t impact county services. Staff also determined that the rezoning conforms with the Comprehensive Plan.
“The adjoining parcels in this area are zoned agricultural and commercial and remain largely undeveloped and vacant. Staff believes the Ferncliff Growth Area will experience future industrial and residential growth as utilities become available. Therefore, rezoning the subject property from General Commercial (C-2) to Agricultural (A-2) [will] have little effect on the character of the surrounding area and will follow the 2040 Plan Mixed Use designation,” staff wrote.
Commissioners agreed, voting 5-0-1 to approve the rezoning. Patrick Henry District Commissioner Ellis Quarles abstained, citing his interest in a neighboring parcel. Jackson District Commissioner Troy Painting was absent.
Commission greenlights proposed tweaks to LDR
Commissioners voted unanimously to recommend to the board of supervisors approval of a half dozen amendments to the county’s Land Development Regulations. (proposed amendments)
Community Development Department staff says the changes are necessary “to address discrepancies, clarify regulations, ensure alignment with more stringent State and Federal regulations, update standards to reflect current practices, and make adjustments based on community needs and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.” In addition, the proposed amendments are intended “to improve the efficiency of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and to better serve the community by removing conflicts and outdated provisions.”
Most notably, the amendments would prohibit new residential uses in commercial zoning; exempt specific improvements, including retaining walls for commercial projects and walkway structures that cross property lines onto Dominion Shoreland adjoining Lake Anna, from the required setbacks in all zoning districts; and codify the unwritten method for calculating the distance between over-water structures when determining the required width of a travel way.
The proposed changes next move to the board of supervisors for an as-yet-unscheduled public hearing and a final up-or-down vote.
Jarvis resigns as Mineral mayor, effective Jan. 3; Town advertises open council seat
Come January, the Mineral Town Council will be looking for someone new to sit atop town government.
Mayor Ed Jarvis announced at council’s December 9 meeting that he’s stepping down from the position, effective January 3. Jarvis, who’s run the Louisa County Airport for nearly eight years, said he’s leaving the area to take a job in Louisiana. (video)
“[I have] an opportunity to run an 1,850-acre airport versus a 300-acre airport, [which] is challenging to me,” Jarvis said in an interview on Wednesday.
Jarvis was elected mayor two year ago, ousting long-time incumbent Pam Harlowe. Before that, he served one term on council.
In brief comments at the end of Monday’s meeting, Jarvis admitted that his two-year tenure has been more tumultuous than he would’ve liked. It was marked by turnover among town staff, infighting among council members, including multiple resignations, and, most recently, a closed-door trial that ended with a unanimous vote to oust one of the body’s six members.
The town’s political turmoil has unfolded as council struggles to navigate interest from developers, who see the town as ripe for residential growth, and wrestles with aging infrastructure and an outdated town code.
“It’s been my privilege to be here. To say, I wish it had been a little smoother is probably an understatement…I have been able to deal with issues and people who are very passionate about things, and I hope that this group gets a little bit more gelled for the sake of [Mineral’s] residents,” Jarvis said.
Jarvis said on Wednesday that, going forward, he hopes council members remember they’re elected to serve the people of the town and they need to work together to accomplish the goals set forth by the body.
While serving as mayor hasn’t always been easy, Jarvis said he’s proud of several of the town’s accomplishments over the last two years, including hiring a well-qualified staff, upgrading the town’s IT infrastructure and adopting a range of policies and procedures that govern how the town conducts business.
“We didn't have a lot of what I would call standard operating procedures…any type of guidelines on how to do certain things. None of that was really well defined. I think, at least in my mind, that led to the public thinking that…it depended on who you were and what your contacts were whether you got what you wanted,” he said
Jarvis, who doubled as mayor and town manager for part of his tenure and was censured by council last June for his role in greenlighting a controversial 14-lot development at the town’s eastern edge, said he didn’t have any regrets. But he acknowledged he could’ve done a few things differently.
Specifically, he said he could’ve better prepared council members for the job. When Jarvis was elected mayor, town residents also voted in five new councilors, most of whom had no experience in local government.
Mineral’s town charter grants its mayor limited authority, mainly tasking him or her with running council meetings.
“[Looking back], I would've attempted to mandate that every member of council get some mandatory training or instruction on what their role is in terms of what does it mean to be on council. I think everybody has an idea of what they think it is. Some people mimic those that they've seen in the town council role before them, which may not be a good model. I think that, if we had gotten some formal training through [the Virginia Municipal League] or through some other way, that…would've given them a better sense [of what the job entails],” he said.
Jarvis’ resignation is effective at 11:59 pm on January 3. Per state law, council has 45 days to appoint an interim mayor until a special election to fill the remainder of his term, which runs through 2026. Pending circuit court approval, the election will take place next November.
Council advertises vacancy
Council is also preparing to appoint an interim member to fill the seat vacated by David Hempstead last month. Council voted to oust Hempstead after a closed-door trial in late November, accusing him of negligence of duty, misconduct of office, misuse of office, and multiple violations of the town’s code and council’s civility pledge.
Hempstead has repeatedly contended that his former colleagues don’t have the power to remove him—including in public comments Monday night—but, to date, he hasn’t challenged the action in court.
Council used a disciplinary process laid out in Robert’s Rules of Order, the parliamentary procedure that governs how council runs meetings, to expel Hempstead two weeks after he finished second in a special election to fill two seats. Prior to earning voters’ backing, Hempstead served as an appointed member for about six months.
Town leaders maintain they have the authority to remove a duly elected member under provisions in the town’s charter and ordinances and via a process laid out in Robert’s Rules of Order.
In his comments on Monday, Hempstead disagreed, pointing to provisions in state code that lay out a different removal process. He insisted that, under Virginia law, he’s still a council member.
“I will not resign my seat, and I will not abdicate my seat on the town council. I refuse to take part in any past or future illegal actions this council insists on repeatedly doing,” he said.
Despite Hempstead’s insistence that he was unlawfully removed, council authorized Town Manager Nicole Washington to advertise the open seat.
Qualified voters interested in filling the vacancy have until December 19 at 4 pm to submit a letter of interest and resume (more information). Council will convene on Dec. 19 at 6:30 pm to announce the candidates under consideration then appoint an interim member on Dec. 30 at 6:30 pm.
The seat will be on November’s ballot as part of a special election to fill the remainder of Hempstead’s term, which expires December 31, 2026. The seat currently occupied by Olivia McCarthy will also be up for grabs in a special election next November.
Change in leadership at Louisa County Airport
Jarvis’ departure will also prompt a leadership shakeup at the Louisa County Airport.
Brittany Shupe, currently second in command at the facility, will serve as interim manager until the county finds Jarvis’ permanent replacement.
Louisa County Board of Supervisors Chair Duane Adams said the county will “conduct an extensive search” for the airport’s next manager. The county took control of the facility last year from the Louisa County Industrial Development Authority, which had operated it since its founding in 1987.
In an email to Engage Louisa, Adams thanked Jarvis for his service and his efforts to grow the airport.
“I’d like to express my deep appreciation for [Jarvis’] leadership as the airport manager. His vision has helped position the airport for future growth and development, which I believe is a vital part of the continued commercial [and] economic development of Louisa County,” he said.
Jarvis noted that the airport is currently in the process of significant upgrades, and it would continue to follow his 10-year capital improvement plan, which is mostly funded by state and federal grants.
“They basically will continue to follow [the plan] as state and federal money becomes available. Right now, we're finishing up one project where we’re repaving what we call the taxi lanes, which is in between each of the hangers. We’ve done phase one. Phase two will come, hopefully, in the next couple weeks, once the weather gets a little better. After the first of the year, the first phase of the southside taxiway development will be started,” Jarvis said.
Click here for contact information for the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.
Find agendas and minutes from previous Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission meetings as well as archived recordings here.
Click here for contact information for the Louisa County School Board.
Click here for minutes and agendas for School Board meetings. Click here for archived video.
Click here to access past editions of Engage Louisa.