PC to consider tech district rollback, discuss proposals aimed at slowing residential growth; Cutalong developer proposes another upscale project at Wares Crossroads; BOS roundup
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, Feb. 9 through Feb. 14
For the latest information on county meetings, including public meetings of boards, commissions, authorities, work groups, and internal county committees, click here.
Wednesday, February 11
James River Water Authority, 214 Commons Blvd., Palmyra, 9 am. At publication time, an agenda wasn't publicly available.
Neighborhood Meeting, Louisa County Community Development Department and Wares Crossroads Development, LLC, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 4 pm. (public notice)
Read more about Wares Crossroads Development, LLC’s land use request in the article below.
Louisa County Water Authority, 23 Loudin Lane, Louisa, 6 pm. At publication time, an agenda wasn't publicly available.
Thursday, February 12
Louisa County Planning Commission, long-range planning work session, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 5 pm. (agenda packet, livestream)
Louisa County Planning Commission, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 7 pm. (agenda packet, livestream)
Other meetings/events
Monday, February 9
Mineral Town Council, Mineral Town Hall, 312 Mineral Ave., Mineral, 6:30 pm. (agenda packet)
Quote of the week
“More than anything, this event is about bringing our community together, supporting our local businesses, and welcoming visitors into our little slice of small-town charm.”
-Town of Louisa Mayor Ashley Michael in a Facebook post last week, discussing the town’s plans to host a Fourth of July celebration, including a street festival, parade and fireworks show. The board of supervisors allocated just over $30,000 in tourism support funding for the event. Read more in the article below.
PC to make recommendation on TOD rollback, discuss measures to rein in residential growth
The Louisa County Planning Commission on Thursday night will convene for a pair of meetings. At 5 pm, commissioners will hold a two-hour work session where they’ll discuss proposed amendments to the zoning code aimed at slowing residential growth outside the county’s designated growth areas. At 7 pm, the body will convene for its regular meeting with four public hearings on the agenda, including a proposal to roll back the county’s Technology Overlay District.
Commission to consider TOD rollback
In the marquee public hearing on Thursday night’s agenda, the commission will consider whether to recommend that the board of supervisors remove more than 2,600 acres from the county’s roughly 4,200-acre Technology Overlay District. The TOD is a special zoning designation adopted by the board nearly three years ago to attract lucrative tech sector development—namely data centers.
The board at its January 20 meeting asked the commission to review the TOD and make a recommendation on whether it should remove its two undeveloped assemblages: the roughly 1400-acre Fisher Chewning tract, which stretches from the northern end of the Northeast Creek Reservoir nearly to Davis Highway (Route 22) and the 1200-acre Cooke Rail Park on the other side of Route 22 between Chalklevel and Chopping Roads (Routes 625, 623). Both properties are in the Mineral District.
Removing the assemblages from the TOD would make it more difficult to develop data centers on the properties in the future but wouldn’t prevent new projects from coming to the county. Property proposed for data center development would have to be placed in the TOD and acquire a Conditional Use Permit, both of which require a public approval process.
The commission’s consideration of the rollback comes on the heels of Amazon Web Services’ (AWS) acquisition of the Fisher Chewning property last month, part of a blockbuster $72.45 million private land deal. The tech giant last June applied for a CUP to build up to 7.2 million square feet of data center capacity on the tract, but pulled its application two months later amid staunch resistance from neighbors and opposition from Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams.
AWS is already building two data center complexes in the TOD: one on 150 acres at the corner of Kentucky Springs Road (Route 652) and Haley Drive (Route 700) adjacent to the North Anna Power Station and the other on 1,444 acres south of Jefferson Highway (Route 33) and east of Mt. Airy Road (Route 644) near the reservoir. EdgeCore Digital Infrastructure is also developing a campus at the 697-acre Shannon Hill Regional Business Park, an industrially zoned property that’s not in the TOD, but has proffers that allow data centers.
The prolific pace of data center development and the fact that the initial projects were permitted by-right—meaning without a public approval process—has roiled many residents. Some argue that data centers will detract from the county’s rural character, overwhelm local infrastructure, including draining the public water supply, and raise their power bills.
County officials maintain that the giant warehouse-like facilities, which power cloud-computing and artificial intelligence, are smart economic development. They say the campuses will deliver millions of dollars in much-needed tax revenue annually to pay for schools, fire stations and other core services.
But supervisors have acknowledged community concerns. In 2024, the board opted to give the public a say in future projects, shifting data centers from a by-right use in the TOD to one that requires a CUP.
Still, opposition to the use has grown, especially among neighbors of Fisher Chewning and others in the Mineral District. That’s prompted Adams to push to shrink the TOD.
“To be perfectly clear, this area of the county should not be open to any additional data center or commercial development,” Adams said in a statement to Engage Louisa after AWS purchased the Fisher Chewning property.
It’s unclear if all of Adams’ colleagues are on board with shrinking the district or where the owners of the assemblages proposed for removal stand. When the board directed the planning commission to review the TOD, Louisa District Supervisor Manning Woodward and Patrick Henry District Supervisor Fitzgerald Barnes asked staff to notify the owners to, as Woodward put it, “see whether or not they agree.”
AWS owns Fisher Chewning. The Louisa County Industrial Development Authority (IDA) owns about 800 acres of the Cooke property while Rail Park North, LLC, a firm affiliated with the William A. Cooke Foundation, owns the other 400 acres.
The IDA in 2014 purchased the rail park from Route 22 Rail Site, LLC, another affiliate of the Cooke Foundation, for $7.2 million in a seller-financed deal, according to Louisa County land records. The authority planned to pay off the property as it sold it to end users. To date, that hasn’t happened. The industrially zoned tract has mostly been used for timber production.
The authority appeared to land a lucrative lease agreement with the solar developer Energix four years ago to construct a 118-megawatt (MW) utility-scale solar array and 50 MW battery storage bank. But after supervisors approved a CUP for the uses, the project stalled. Per minutes of IDA meetings, it’s unclear if it will move forward.
AWS’s long-term plans for Fisher Chewning remain unclear. An AWS spokesperson said in January that the company “acquired land in Louisa County to help support water infrastructure needs in the area,” adding that “any future considerations for development would involve community input, coordination with local leaders, and transparent public processes.”
Louisa County is building an 11-mile waterline from the reservoir to deliver cooling water to AWS’s campus by North Anna. The line will cross Fisher Chewning as it travels along the right-of-way of a Dominion-owned 230-kilovolt transmission line. AWS is paying for the infrastructure.
Engage Louisa submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to Louisa County, in part, asking for any communication from the properties’ owners related to their parcels’ potential removal from the TOD. At publication, the county hadn’t provided any responsive records.
After the planning commission makes its recommendation, the board will hold a public hearing, likely in March, and vote on whether to downsize the district.
Planning Commission to discuss changing zoning code to rein in residential growth
Big changes could be coming to Louisa County’s zoning code.
At the direction of the board of supervisors, the planning commission on Thursday night will begin discussing potentially significant revisions to the county’s land development regulations aimed at reining in residential growth and preserving the county’s rural character.
The board at its January 20 meeting directed staff to send to the commission a range of policy ideas designed to slow residential sprawl outside the county’s eight designated growth areas, mostly by limiting landowners’ ability to create new parcels and beefing up restrictions on where homes can be built.
Several board members have insisted that sweeping changes to the zoning code are necessary to curb the influx of new residents and protect the county’s farms and forestland. Since the 2020 census, Louisa ranks as the third fastest growing locality in the state, according to the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, growing more than 10 percent. It’s population now tops 42,000.
“We’ve probably almost lost the county. We’ve got to do some things if we’re going to maintain some of the rural nature. It’s real. It’s in real time, and we’ve got to get serious about it,” Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams said at a board meeting last month, observing that new homes are going up rapidly in his district—the only one in the county without an area designated for growth.
In a memo to the commission, Community Development Department staff backs up Williams’ point, noting that there are more than 9,300 parcels in the county that could, at least in theory, be used for residential development. Of those, about 73 percent are outside the county’s designated growth areas, illustrating the existing capacity for growth and the threat of suburban-style development in the county’s rural reaches.
Board members and staff have also said that steady residential growth is ballooning the budget as the demand for services increases. In its memo, staff emphasizes that the county faces “school capacity constraints,” rising “public safety demands,” “animal shelter capacity challenges,” and increased solid waste disposal.
Staff proposes a handful of policy changes aimed at slowing growth, noting that the tools are prospective, not retroactive, and aren’t designed to prohibit development but manage it.
“The ordinance amendments are intended to slow the pace of residential growth outside designated growth areas, align growth patterns with documented infrastructure capacity, and preserve the rural character of the county,” staff said, emphasizing that the proposed revisions are intended to protect farms, forestland and scenic views, limit suburban-style development in rural areas and “slow the pace of change to better match infrastructure capacity and community expectations.”
The planning commission will dig into the proposals during its work session on Thursday. Any changes to the zoning code require public hearings in front of the commission and the board of supervisors and an affirmative vote by the latter body.
Here’s a look at staff’s proposals.
Increasing the minimum lot size and creating “homestead” lots: One of the most dramatic changes staff proposes is to increase, from 1.5 acres to 10 acres, the minimum acreage required to create a new parcel in agricultural zoning (A-1, A-2) outside the county’s eight designated growth areas.
Property owners would still be allowed to utilize parcels smaller than 10 acres that existed before the amended ordinance’s effective date, but they’d be barred for dividing property into lots smaller than 10 acres after the effective date.
The 10-acre threshold wouldn’t apply to the creation of family subdivisions, which would still be subject to the 1.5-acre minimum, nor would it apply to “lots created for public purposes, including but not limited to public rights-of-way or public utilities.”
In addition to setting the minimum lot size at 10 acres, staff proposes adding a definition for “homestead” to county code.
A “homestead” would be defined, in part, as a “parcel of land consisting of ten (10) acres or greater, containing or intended to contain one single-family detached dwelling as the principal use.” On a “homestead,” the county would permit “agricultural or horticultural activities that are incidental and accessory to the residential use and that support the residency” even if those activities aren’t “otherwise expressly listed as permitted uses in the applicable zoning district” and provided they’re “non-commercial” in nature. The use would only apply to lots in agricultural (A-1, A-2) zoning outside of designated growth areas.
Staff says in its memo that pairing a larger minimum lot size with the creation of a “homestead” aims to “encourage large, contiguous parcels,” promote agricultural uses in the county’s rural areas and “slow dispersed rural residential development.”
Increasing minimum road frontage requirements: County code currently permits property owners in A-1 and A-2 zoning to create two lots from a parent parcel if they front an existing state road for a minimum of 200 feet. Beyond that, each permitted lot must have 300 feet of road frontage.
Staff proposes dramatically increasing road frontage requirements in agricultural zoning outside of the county’s designated growth areas by upping the minimum requirements for the first two lots to 450 feet each and any lot beyond that to 550 feet.
Lots created within designated growth areas would still be subject to the frontage requirements in their applicable zoning designation.
Staff says the proposed requirements would accomplish several goals, including slowing new parcel creation in the county’s rural areas, improving access for emergency vehicles and preserving “traditional rural road patterns” by ensuring more distance between new residential development.
Revamping family subdivision requirements: Staff proposes significant changes to the county’s family subdivision ordinance, including establishing a threshold for how long a property owner must own a parcel before dividing it for family members and how long recipients of a family division must retain their parcel.
Under current county code, landowners can subdivide properties zoned agricultural and residential into two or more parts for the purpose of sale or gift to a member of their immediate family. In most circumstances, the person to whom the property is sold or gifted must retain it for at least five years before it can be sold unless it’s subject to “an involuntary transfer such as foreclosure, death, divorce, judicial sale, condemnation or bankruptcy.”
State law permits an individual to receive one family subdivision parcel per locality during their lifetime. Family divisions don’t count against a parent parcel’s by-right divisions.
Staff proposes tacking on a provision requiring landowners to own a parcel for at least 15 years before it qualifies for a family subdivision. In addition, staff suggests increasing from five to 15 years the length of time the recipient of a family division must hold onto it before it can be sold.
Some county leaders have argued in the past that developers have abused the family subdivision ordinance, using it as a tool to skirt county rules. Staff says the changes would “preserve the original intent of family-based transfers” and “reduce long-term fragmentation that functions as de facto subdivision.”
Beefing up requirements for dividing land: County code currently has different requirements for divisions and subdivisions. Less stringent standards apply to divisions, defined, in part, as dividing a parent parcel no more than two times. Heftier regulations apply to subdivisions, which typically involve more extensive parcel creation.
Staff proposes applying subdivision regulations to most property divisions, except family divisions. The change would essentially require divisions to undergo more scrutiny, meeting the same road frontage and access requirements as subdivisions and requiring review by the Virginia Department of Health.
Staff says the changes would ensure that land divisions are reviewed consistently, “reduce administrative circumvention” and “align regulatory review with actual infrastructure and service impacts.”
“[Treating divisions the same as subdivisions] makes the process [of dividing land] a little bit longer for the developer,” Community Development Director Linda Buckler said in a presentation to the board last month.
Prohibiting the use of private lanes for new lot creation: Staff proposes eliminating a code provision that allows a private lane—essentially a shared driveway—to serve two parcels, a tool that’s typically used when a landowner divides a parcel and one of the lots doesn’t have the required road frontage for residential development.
The private lane option offers a cheaper way to divide property as code allows the lane to serve two lots, but requires a road built to state specifications to serve three or more if those parcels don’t have adequate frontage on an existing state road. Eliminating the option means a property owner would have to construct a road to state specs to serve a second parcel. Family subdivisions would retain their current access rules.
Staff says prohibiting the use of private lanes to serve new lots would “reduce incremental development without comprehensive review,” address long-term upkeep and emergency access concerns and “prevent dispersed rural development patterns” facilitated by the proliferation of private lanes.
In her presentation in January, Buckler noted that the utilization of private lanes is becoming increasingly popular as more parcels are divided for residential development. Between 2014 and 2023, the county completed 18 private lane inspections, she said. In just the last two years, that number jumped to 33.
Planners to hold public hearing on draft FY27 to FY46 Capital Improvement Plan
As required by state law, commissioners will hold a public hearing on the proposed Fiscal Year 2027 to Fiscal Year 2046 Capital Improvement Plan, a 20-year forecast for spending on big-ticket items like new fire trucks, school buildings and infrastructure project.
The commission reviews the plan, in part, to ensure it conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, a long-range planning document that lays out a vision for future development and the allocation of county resources.
Though the board of supervisors adopts a 20-year CIP as part of its annual budget process, money is allocated on a yearly basis. Supervisors have the final say on when and if a project receives funding.
After a few tweaks, this year’s draft CIP tops $13.1 million with nearly a third of that going to the General Services Department for a laundry list of projects. Those include roughly $2 million for an expansion at the Louisa County Animal Shelter, nearly $900,000 for a maintenance shop for the Parks and Rec grounds crew and $400,000 for parking lot repairs at the County Office Building.
Another roughly $3 million is slated for the Fire and EMS Department, mostly for new apparatuses, equipment upgrades and renovations. Louisa County Public Schools would also get about $3 million for school bus purchases, maintenance projects, technology upgrades and more.
The draft CIP initially included $16.2 million in capital spending. But that number shifted after staff moved several requests to FY26, most notably $3 million for LCPS to plan and design a fifth elementary school.
Finance Director Wanda Colvin said the division received a $3.9 million state grant for construction of its Career and Technical Education Center, prompting the move.
Looking ahead, the FY28 CIP includes considerably more spending. It currently tops $85 million. That figure tentatively includes $52 million for construction of the elementary school and $18 million for two new fire and EMS stations, likely to be built near Zion Crossroads and Ferncliff.
Read more about the draft CIP, here and here.
PC to make recommendation on request to add 79 acres to Taylor’s Creek AFD
Commissioners will hold a public hearing and consider whether to recommend that the board of supervisors approve Conway, Audrey and Michael Stanley’s request to add 79.78 acres, encompassing seven parcels (tax map parcels 91-20-2, 91-20-3, 91-20-4, 91-33, 91-34, 91-34A, 91-96), to the Taylor’s Creek Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD).
The property is located off Paynes Mill Road (Route 601) and Jackson Road (Route 658) in the Jackson Election District and sits about .34 miles from the Taylor’s Creek AFD’s core. Under state law, an agricultural and forestal district’s core must comprise at least 200 contiguous acres.
In a memo to the commission, staff recommends green-lighting the request, noting that the property is currently in agricultural use.
AFDs are a conservation tool that allow landowners to voluntarily prohibit development on their property for 10 years. In return, participating parcels are assured enrollment in the Use Value Taxation program, colloquially referred to as “land use.” The program places a special assessment on land used for agriculture, horticulture or forestry based on its “use value,” instead of its fair market value, translating into substantially lower tax bills. The parcels also receive some protection from the use of eminent domain, including when utilities install electrical infrastructure like transmission lines.
PC to consider tweaks to Community Development Department fee schedule
Commissioners will hold a public hearing and consider whether to recommend that the board of supervisors tweak the Community Development Department’s fee schedule, increasing fees for several building-related tasks and adding a fee for re-review of applications for zoning permits.
In a memo to the commission, staff says the changes are necessary to “correct scriveners errors related to fees that were not transposed to the final documents” when the fee scheduled was last amended in September 2024.
The amendments would increase from $50 to $75 fees for temporary certificate of occupancy renewals, residential temporary electrical service and residential service upgrades. It would hike the fee for commercial modification requests from $150 to $200 and add a fee for the re-review of zoning permit requests when an applicant changes its initial submission. That fee would equal one half of the original zoning permit fee.
Cutalong developer seeks to rezone 394 acres at Wares Crossroads for second resort, golf course
Another high-end resort community could be coming to Lake Anna.
Wares Crossroads Development, LLC, an affiliate of REEF Investments, has filed an application with Louisa County to rezone, from A-1 and A-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD), about 394 acres off Zachary Taylor Highway (Route 522) and New Bridge Road (Route 208) at Wares Crossroads to develop an upscale residential resort community with up to 134 dwellings. The Utah-based developer is also requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to build a golf course, clubhouse, indoor shooting range, adventure course, helicopter landing pad and other amenities.
REEF is well known to many Lake Anna residents for its development of the Cutalong golf course and Tributer Resort off Route 208 and Kentucky Springs Road (Route 652). The proposed project would adjoin Cutalong to the west and share utilities. Beyond Virginia, REEF manages some $2 billion worth of resort projects in Utah, Hawaii and Colorado.
The rezoning and CUP requests cover four mostly vacant parcels, currently owned by Dickinson Land & Properties, LLC, Dickinson Investment, LLC and Ware Family, LLC (tax map parcels 28-97D, 28-97E, 29-3, 29-2). Wares Crossroads Development is the properties’ contract purchaser.
The parcels are in the Mineral Election District and the Lake Anna Growth Area Overlay District and designated for mixed-use development on the Future Land Use Map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Louisa County’s Community Development Department, along with the developer, will host a neighborhood meeting to discuss the project this Wednesday, February 11, from 4 pm to 6 pm in the Public Meeting Room at the Louisa County Office Building. The community meeting is the first step in the public approval process, which requires public hearings in front of the planning commission and the board of supervisors and an affirmative vote by the board.
In a 634-page land use application submitted in late January, Wares Crossroads Development provides a detailed overview of the project, noting that the community “is intended to be a golf course resort-style neighborhood, marketed to residents looking for a second or third home, within close proximity to Lake Anna.”
The community is set to include 134 residential dwellings, including 79 single-family homes and 55 villas and cottages with the former accommodating year-round residency and the latter targeted as short-term rentals.
Per its proposed master plan, the community will feature a wide-range of private amenities to cater to residents and visitors alike, including a golf course, 9,000-square foot clubhouse, restaurant and distillery, indoor shooting range, adventure course, garden, walking trails, dog park, indoor pickleball venue, public event space, helicopter pad, glamping area and more. To accommodate the golf course, the applicant requests an amendment to Cutalong’s master plan to allow the fifth and eighth holes mostly on its property.
The project would include 70 percent open space, “designed to encourage active and passive recreation,” per the application, and a residential density of .34 units per acre with some of the single-family dwellings on lots as large as two acres. In addition, it would feature a 50-foot vegetative buffer on Route 522 along with supplemental plantings. “The project is intended to maintain the rural character of this area,” the application says.
To reach the resort, the developer proposes multiple access points, including two entrances off Route 522, a secondary entrance off 208 and an internal private access road connecting the existing resort with the proposed project.
According to a traffic impact study, the complex is expected to generate 2,234 total vehicle trips on an average weekday, including 143 total trips during the morning peak hour and 199 total trips during the evening peak hour. To mitigate those impacts, the developer agrees to construct a westbound left turn lane and eastbound right turn taper off Route 208 and southbound left turn lanes into both entrances off Route 522.
Within the resort, the roads would be privately owned and maintained. The developer would also rely on private water and sewer service, tapping, on average, 258 gallons of groundwater per minute. Based on a hydrology report, the applicant says there “appears to be adequate groundwater supply to support the project.”
In its application, Wares Crossroads Development touts the resort’s economic benefits. According to an economic impact analysis performed by MuniCap, Inc. on the applicant’s behalf, the resort is expected to create 35 full-time jobs at full buildout and annually generate about $989,000 in gross, new tax revenues for county coffers.
The analysis contends that the resort would have limited impact on county services, noting that its 79 single-family dwellings could add about 140 residents over what’s currently permitted by-right and no more than 17 students to local schools. It says the project would only slightly increase calls to the Louisa County Sheriff’s Office and Fire and EMS Department.
To offset service impacts, the developer agrees to pay the county at least $376,265.15 in cash proffers, or $4,762.85 per single-family unit. That money would be due after the county issues a certificate of occupancy for the dwellings.
Wares Crossroads Development also agrees to chip in $10,000 to the Lake Anna Civic Association to address water quality issues at Lake Anna and establish an internship program with Louisa County Public Schools’ Career and Technical Education program.
The application doesn’t include a construction timeline, but the master plan indicates the developer would build the project in four phases, beginning with the golf course.
Check out the land use application here.
BOS roundup: Supes ok funding for Town of Louisa July Fourth celebration, talk FY27 budget
The Louisa County Board of Supervisors last Monday convened for a pair of meetings, breezing through public business in a little over an hour at its regular meeting and discussing the Fiscal Year 2027 budget at a pre-meeting work session. (meeting materials, video) (work session video)
Board allocates more than $30,000 in tourism support funding for Town of Louisa Fourth of July celebration
The Town of Louisa is planning a big party to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and Louisa County is pitching in to help.
At the recommendation of the Tourism Advisory Committee, supervisors on Monday night voted unanimously to allocate up to $30,360 in tourism support funding to the town’s Economic Development Authority (EDA) to support plans to host a Fourth of July bash, complete with a street festival, parade, vendor’s market, live entertainment, children’s activities and a 16-minute fireworks show.
“It’s a pretty large-scale event that they are planning. It’s tied to VA250,” Louisa County Community Engagement Manager Cindy King told the board, referencing a statewide initiative celebrating the nation’s semiquincentennial.
The county draws its tourism support funds from revenue generated by the transient occupancy tax, a seven percent levy tacked on to visitors’ tabs when they stay the night at a local hotel, bed and breakfast or short-term rental. Per state law and county guidelines, a portion of the tax money must be spent on tourism-related initiatives, particularly those aimed at increasing overnight stays.
King said that while the town doesn’t have a lot of overnight lodging, the event would be part of a larger effort to bring tourists to the county in July. She said that it would work in concert with other July Fourth festivities, noting that the fireworks show wouldn’t take place at the same time as shows planned at Lake Anna and Southern Revere Cellars.
“This would be part of a larger package. The town did request money for advertising, and we did bring that down a bit because, as Visit Louisa, we’ll market the whole county and, working with them as partners, we’ll ask them to do the same,” King said, referencing the county’s tourism marketing arm.
King said the town expects the event to draw between 2,000 and 3,000 people and conservatively estimates that it could generate between $80,000 and $150,000 in economic impact. She also noted that the town hopes to host a Fourth of July celebration annually, calling this a “building year.”
Before voting in support of the request, Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams expressed enthusiasm for the event, noting it would be a “shot in the arm” for local businesses. Cuckoo District Supervisor Chris McCotter said that he “loves the idea of a vibrant Town of Louisa.”
In a Facebook post on Tuesday, Town of Louisa Mayor Ashley Michael expressed her gratitude for the county’s support and said town leaders are looking forward to putting on a memorable event for residents and tourists alike.
“Thanks to the incredible support of our Board of Supervisors, who approved a funding request from the Town of Louisa Economic Development Authority, we are bringing back a true hometown Independence Day celebration—the kind of celebration that fills Main Street with pride and memories that last a lifetime…This celebration will be a beautiful nod to the nostalgia of Louisa, honoring our past and recognizing the tireless work of our volunteer fire department, who for so many years made this tradition possible for our town. More than anything, this event is about bringing our community together, supporting our local businesses, and welcoming visitors into our little slice of small-town charm,” Michael said.
Board talks funding for outside agencies at work session
Supervisors convened for their first budget work session of the Fiscal Year 2027 cycle, spending much of the hour and a half meeting discussing funding for outside agencies, entities that aren’t formally part of county government but provide services to residents.
Funding for outside groups, which run the gamut from the local jail and library to small nonprofits like the Louisa County Historical Society, typically comprises less than four percent of the county’s annual operating budget.
This year, the board is on track to provide about $6.48 million to the groups, a roughly $190,000 jump over the current fiscal year. Of the 30 groups that received county support in FY26, the board tentatively agreed to fund 29, mostly at their requested amounts.
The lone exception is the Monticello Area Community Action Agency, which the board chose not to fund. The agency received $2,000 in the last budget cycle and requested $30,000 this time around. Supervisors have pulled back on funding the group since it stopped running a local Head Start program.
More than half of the county’s support for outside agencies is slated to go to two entities: the Central Virginia Regional Jail and the Virginia Department of Health’s local affiliate. Both allocations are state-mandated. The jail will receive about $2.62 million, roughly $77,000 less than the current fiscal year, while the health department will get about $872,000, roughly $112,000 more than FY26.
The board opted to fund most outside groups at their requested amount, save the Louisa Arts Center, Fluvanna-Louisa Housing Foundation (FLHF) and the Louisa County Resource Council.
The Arts Center asked for $80,000 but the board chose to match the $60,000 it received this year with some of that money potentially coming from tourism support funding. A couple board members expressed strong support for the center, noting that it could potentially tap additional tourism money for its initiatives.
“I would challenge you to come up with a bigger tourism draw than the Louisa Arts Center…in the downtown area, other than the [Virginia Scenic Railway]. We do have an interest as a county in making sure the arts center is funded,” Cuckoo District Supervisor Chris McCotter said. “I think it is important that the center remains a part of the Main Street economic engine.”
The board opted to increase FLHF’s funding from $118,250 to $134,450 but decided not to fund a $50,000 ask for its emergency home repair program. At the request of Green Springs District Supervisor Rachel Jones, the board agreed to invite Kim Hyland, the foundation’s executive director, to its next work session, to share more details about the initiative.
Supervisors decided to hike the resource council’s funding from $95,000 to $100,000, The council, which operates the local food pantry, had requested $119,000.
Perhaps the board’s most interesting discussion involved funding for the Louisa County Library, part of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library system (JMRL). Though the board agreed to fund the library at its requested amount—roughly $518,800, about $40,000 more than this year—a few board members expressed concerns about the escalating cost of the facility.
Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams, long a library skeptic who once suggested the county replace it with a Starbucks, questioned how many people use the service. Several supervisors countered that the facility is well-used and pointed to statistics provided by JMRL. In its request, the library says that patrons across its five jurisdictions—Louisa, Albemarle, Charlottesville, Nelson and Greene—checked out 1.9 million items last year, one of the highest totals in its history.
Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams suggested that the county investigate whether it would be cheaper to run its own library, as opposed to participating in the regional system. County Administrator Christian Goodwin said the county has explored the idea in the past, noting a regional library offers the opportunity to pool resources.
“If we look at taking it from a regional effort down to a local effort, a lot of the costs that are shared regionally, on an allocation basis with Louisa based on usage, we’re going to pick up 100 percent of. So, if you buy a subscription to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, instead of splitting it by the number of users we have versus the number everybody else has, you’re going to pay 100 percent of that,” Goodwin said.
The board ultimately opted to fund the library at its requested amount and ask for user data specific to Louisa.
The board’s next budget work session will be Tuesday, February 17 at 4 pm, just prior to its regular meeting.
To learn more about outside agency requests, click here.
Adams suggests board reaffirm county’s status as “Second Amendment sanctuary”
Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams suggested on Monday night that the board of supervisors consider reaffirming Louisa County’s status as a “Second Amendment sanctuary county,” a symbolic move the board made in 2019 in response to proposed legislation in the General Assembly aimed at significantly changing the state’s gun laws.
Adams, a Republican who’s twice run for a seat in the state Senate but lost in party nominating contests, said that he’s received about two dozen emails from constituents asking the board to formally oppose gun law reform measures under consideration this session, which they fear would infringe on their constitutional right to bear arms. He noted that other localities have already passed resolutions reiterating their “sanctuary” status.
Adams said he shares his constituents’ concern about some of the bills pending in Richmond, contending they run afoul of the Second Amendment. He expressed particular frustration with legislation that, he said, would “outlaw the gun that [he] uses to duck hunt or turkey hunt with,” an apparent reference to a proposed ban on “assault style weapons” that would prohibit the importation, manufacturing, possession, sale or transfer of certain high-powered firearms and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices. Among other exemptions, the legislation wouldn’t apply to weapons manufactured before July 1, 2026.
“I think there’s some awful legislation in Richmond right now that maybe makes some people feel good. But, at the end of the day, if you want to address crime, address criminals. Don’t address the people that are exercising their constitutional rights and have no intentions of going out and doing anything bad,” Adams said.
Adams said he plans to talk with his colleagues about adopting a resolution at an upcoming meeting reaffirming the county’s “Second Amendment sanctuary” status. No other board member weighed in.
Democrats hold a coveted trifecta in Richmond, controlling the House of Delegates, state Senate and governor’s office. In her “State of the Commonwealth” address last month, newly elected Governor Abigial Spanberger said she’s eager to enact “commonsense” legislation aimed at curbing gun violence, some of which was vetoed by her Republican predecessor, Glenn Youngkin.
“Over the last four years, dozens of gun safety bills have been vetoed — many of which had passed through the General Assembly with bipartisan support. This includes legislation that would ban ghost guns, restrict access to firearms to convicted domestic abusers, and strengthen red flag laws for those who might be a danger to themselves or others. These are commonsense measures, supported by the overwhelming majority of the voters who sent us all here. Virginia is ready. And I am ready to sign. Send them to my desk,” Spanberger said.
Other business
Board oks tweaks to county code related to road name signs, Community Development Department fee schedule: Supervisors voted unanimously to add provisions to county code clarifying that new roads serving three or more parcels must have a name and that the property’s developer or a related party must pay for road name signs’ initial installation. The code amendments also state that the county will pay to maintain and replace the signs should that be necessary. To offset those costs, the board agreed to tack on new fees and increase some existing fees on the Community Development Department’s fee schedule. Most notably, the board increased from $50 to $75 the fee to create a new parcel or change an existing parcel in the county’s GIS system; raised from $75 a mile to $100 a mile the fee for digitizing a new road; added a $75 fee for assigning a new address; and added a $275 fee for a street sign for a road serving a new development of three or more parcels.
Supes green-light pair of capital projects: Supervisors voted unanimously to green-light a pair of capital projects initially included in the Fiscal Year 2027 capital budget, opting to instead mostly fund the projects in the current fiscal year. The allocations include $40,000 to replace the flooring in the terminal building at the Louisa County Airport and $50,000 to upgrade the county’s phone system. Finance Director Wanda Colvin said the phone system overhaul is expected to cost $70,000 with $20,000 of that included in next year’s capital budget.
Board appropriates $70,000 for generator purchase: The board voted unanimously to appropriate $70,000 to help cover the cost of a generator for the Betty Queen Center. The county received a $130,000 grant from the Virginia Department of Emergency Management, which was good for 65 percent of the equipment’s cost. Acquiring the generator will allow the county to use the Betty Queen Center as a backup shelter in the event of an emergency. The facility currently doesn’t have a generator.