Supervisors poised to adopt $187.6 million budget for FY26; BOS to consider slimmed-down request for more condos on Lake Anna; Town of Mineral suspends new water connections
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, April 28 through May 3
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).
Monday, April 28
Louisa County Board of Supervisors, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 6 pm. (agenda packet, livestream) The board will convene in closed session at 5 pm.
Other meetings and events
Tuesday, April 29
Mineral Town Council, special meeting, Mineral Town Hall, 312 Mineral Ave., Mineral, 6:30 pm. (agenda packet)
Friday, May 2
Early voting begins for June 17 primary elections, Louisa County Office of Elections, 103 McDonald Street, Louisa, 8:30 am to 4:30 pm.
This November, Virginians will go to the polls to elect a governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general, and choose who’ll serve in all 100 seats in the House of Delegates. Starting this Friday, Louisa County voters will have a chance to weigh in on the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor and attorney general. There’s no Democratic primary for governor and no Republican primary for any statewide office.
Click here for a sample ballot. Click here for more details about early voting and voting by mail.
Quote of the week
“[The] increase [in units] is needed to reduce overall development risk in a challenging construction environment, which includes higher financing costs, higher inflation, longer lead times for materials and equipment, increased regulatory fees, and tariffs.”
-LA Resort, LLC Managing Partner Mike Grossman in a request to Louisa County to add 18 dwellings to a 96-unit condominium building slated for construction on Lake Anna.
Read more about LA Resort’s latest proposal in the article below.
Supervisors poised to adopt $187.6 million budget for FY26
The Louisa County Board of Supervisors on Monday night is poised to adopt a $187.6 million budget for Fiscal Year 2026, including $174.86 million for operations and maintenance and $12.71 million for capital projects.
Thanks to a sizable decrease in capital spending, the budget is about 10 percent slimmer than FY25 when the board funded more than $30 million in school construction.
But the operating component jumped roughly 12 percent, or $18 million, over last year, an increase driven, in part, by staffing costs. The budget funds 10 new full-time county staffers; a three percent pay hike for employees, matching an increase in the state budget; and a 7.5 percent hike in employees’ health insurance costs.
A $5.5 million jump in debt service is also pushing the budget upward. In total the county’s on the hook for $11.4 million in principal and interest payments on borrowed funds in the coming fiscal year.
Over the last three years, the board has directly borrowed more than $80 million, mostly for school construction and utility projects. The county, via the James River Water Authority, took on another $21 million in debt last year to complete the final leg of the long-awaited James River Water Project. The 17-mile waterline will link the James River to Ferncliff, channeling millions of gallons of water to development along the Interstate 64 corridor.
To help fund its spending, the board is expected to adopt a slate of level tax rates including a 72-cent per $100 of assessed value rate for real estate, a $2.43 rate for cars, trucks and boats and a $1.90 rate for most business personal property.
The latter rate includes a carveout for data center equipment, which will be taxed at a $1.25 rate. The board adopted the reduced rate two years ago as part a deal with Amazon Web Services to build data centers in the county. The tech giant is currently developing a pair of data center campuses in the Technology Overlay District, a special zoning designation designed to attract lucrative tech sector development.
While the real estate tax rate has remained flat for nearly a decade, many homeowners have seen their tax bills jump as assessments on homes skyrocketed, especially in the last few years. Since 2022, the assessed value of the county’s real estate, which is based on property’s market value, has increased an average of 42 percent. It rose 8.12 percent this year.
To ease the pain of rising tax bills, the board’s Finance Committee, comprised of Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams and Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams, proposed a one-time 3.3 percent rebate for real estate taxes, which equates to a 2.4-cent reduction in the tax rate. Assuming the board green-lights the rebate, homeowners will pay real estate taxes based on a 69.6-cent levy in FY26.
To offset the revenue lost to the rebate, the committee recommended slashing $2.2 million from the advertised budget, which topped $190.5 million. The changes include pushing back to FY27 a $1.95 million expansion at the Louisa County Animal Shelter and removing three new Fire and EMS positions requested by FEMS Chief Kristin Hawk, good for about $250,000 in savings.
Adams and Williams also recommended expanding a real estate tax relief program for income-eligible elderly and disabled residents. The expansion, which will be the subject of a public hearing at the board’s May 5 meeting, would raise from $2,000 to $3,000 the maximum amount of tax relief available to participants.
The committee proposed those tweaks at the board’s April 7 meeting, just ahead of a public hearing on the advertised budget. The changes trimmed the budget to $188.3 million.
The spending plan proposed for adoption on Monday night comes in slightly lower after the board moved, from FY26 to FY25, $788,000 in capital projects requested by Louisa County Public Schools (LCPS). School officials want to start the projects, which include new flooring and parking lot repairs, before July 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year. They plan to finish them prior to the start of the next academic year.
Budget breakdown
Of the nearly $175 million allotted for operations and maintenance—the cost to run county government from day to day—the lion’s share goes to Louisa County Public Schools. The budget sends some $97.9 million to the school division, about 55 percent of the county’s operating expenses, with about half that coming from local funds.
The school division’s budget is roughly 6.9 percent more than last year. Driving the increase is 10 new teaching positions, six of which were added during the current fiscal year; a three percent pay hike for faculty; and a four percent raise for custodians, bus drivers and cafeteria workers, among other compensation increases.
The operating budget dedicates about $26.2 million, or 15 percent of its spending, to public safety, which covers the costs of running the Fire and EMS Department and sheriff’s office. Spending on public safety is expected to rise about nine percent in FY26.
The spending plan allocates nearly $14 million to Health and Welfare, including the county’s Human Services Department; $7.8 million to General Services, which covers routine maintenance costs and funds the animal shelter, landfill, and other services; and $3.2 million for Parks and Recreations and Cultural expenses, which mostly pays for the Parks and Rec Department.
Of the $12.7 million allotted for the capital budget, nearly $5 million is earmarked for the Fire and EMS Department, mostly for new emergency services equipment. About $2.7 million goes to the General Services Department, primarily for renovations and repairs at the county’s circa 1905 courthouse, the County Office Building and the Louisa Medical Center. Another $1.7 million is slated for LCPS, mostly for new school buses and technology upgrades.
To fund its daily operations, the county expects to pull in about $185 million in revenue, leaving a roughly $10 million operating surplus. The spending plan taps that money to help cover the capital budget. It draws $2.5 million from the county’s long-term capital reserves to cover the rest of those costs.
The county pulls its operating revenue from a variety of sources with more than 52 percent generated by general property taxes, 30 percent derived from state and federal sources and 8.8 percent pulled from other local taxes.
Even with the rebate, revenue from general property taxes is expected to increase more than six percent over FY25, and money from other local taxes is expected to rise more than seven percent, driven mostly by increases in sales and business license tax revenue.
Crafting the budget and community feedback
This year’s budget process has been a relatively low-key affair with most board members offering limited input—at least publicly—on how the county intends to spend nearly $188 million in taxpayer money.
The board held three budget work sessions, which it mostly spent discussing how much funding to give a handful of nonprofits, who receive only a tiny fraction of the county budget. Supervisors had little discussion about the proposed tax rates or the operating budget, which comprises the bulk of county spending.
The board’s Finance Committee, along with County Administrator Christian Goodwin and Finance Director Wanda Colvin, did most of the heavily lifting in crafting the budget. In an email to Engage Louisa earlier this month, Adams said the proposal responds to citizen concerns about rising taxes while meeting community needs.
“This recommended budget addresses the primary input the board heard from our citizens by proposing tax relief in the form of a .02 cent rebate on the real estate tax rate for FY26,” Adams said. “This recommendation funds the essential services of our county while maintaining a balanced budget and being fiscally responsible to our taxpayers.”
But some community members disagreed, expressing frustration with the budget. At a pair of public hearings, residents said their rising real estate tax bills are unsustainable and urged supervisors to slash the tax rate to offset the jump in assessments. Several speakers said the county’s spending is out of control, arguing that extending meaningful tax relief to citizens requires sizable budget cuts.
“In this county, we have been blessed with some significant increases in revenue over time and over the last few years. This increase is really based on the increased taxes that are being levied on the county residents. That is why we have all this budget to spend. You have the power to plan better…You have the power to lower the tax [rate],” Lake Anna resident Rosane Olyha said at the April 7 public hearing.
Looking ahead
While the FY26 budget is expected to deliver limited tax relief to citizens, Adams has said that significant tax cuts could be on the horizon, thanks to a massive influx of revenue anticipated from AWS’s data center development.
Amazon is expected to build as many as 36 data centers across its campuses over the next 17 years, according to county officials, with each of the warehouse-like facilities projected to bring in about $37 million in real estate and business personal property taxes over a 15-year timeframe.
“Next year, as we start to see the revenue that comes in from these economic development investments in the county, I think that’s an opportunity for the next board to look at widespread tax relief whether that’s broad-based real estate tax relief or, in my opinion, slashing the personal property tax rate,” Adams said at the April 7 meeting.
In budget projections for FY27, staff estimates the county will see a $13 million jump in revenue from general property taxes, discounting the lost revenue from next year’s rebate. Much of that increase is expected to come from AWS’s real estate taxes.
Revenue from general property taxes is expected to rise by more than $45 million by FY30 as AWS brings data centers online, and the county pulls in both real estate taxes from its buildings and personal property taxes from the pricey computer equipment inside.
While the board is set to adopt the budget on Monday night, it could see some tweaks post-adoption, due to delays in finalizing amendments to the biennial state budget.
Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin and the Democratic-controlled General Assembly have yet to agree on proposed changes to the state’s spending plan. The amendments could impact local revenues, especially school funding.
Check out the proposed budget for FY26.
BOS to consider slimmed-down request for more condos on Lake Anna
A controversial request to bring more condos to a high-density development planned for the shores of Lake Anna is back in front of the board of supervisors—albeit in a slightly slimmed-down form.
LA Resort, LLC (LAR) has asked supervisors for permission to increase, from 96 to 114, the number of residential dwellings permitted in a mixed-use complex slated for construction on 15.2 acres fronting Mitchell Creek, just west of the Route 208 bridge.
The board agreed to rezone the property from General Commercial (C-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) two years ago, clearing the way for Prince William County developers Mike Grossman and Mike Garcia to build a 276,000-square foot residential condominium building, a 130-key hotel, a 150-seat restaurant/bar, a marina and other amenities at the county’s primary gateway from Northern Virginia.
Grossman, LAR’s managing partner, returned to the board in January, seeking to tack on another 28 condos, raising the total from 96 to 124. He said he planned to swap 12 five-bedroom units for 40 one-bedroom units, noting the change was necessary to meet market demand and ensure the project’s economic feasibility. Based on market research, Grossman said, the five-bedroom units could be difficult to sell.
Supervisors balked at that request, but agreed to defer action, giving LAR time to craft a more palatable proposal. Several board members took issue with the developers’ plan to up the number of dwellings by nearly 30 percent. They also said they weren’t impressed with a pair of cash proffers thrown in to sweeten the pot.
The proffers would’ve obligated LAR to pay $28,000 each to the Fluvanna-Louisa Housing Foundation (FLHF), a nonprofit focused on addressing the community’s affordable housing needs, and the Foundation for Lake Anna Emergency Services (FLAES), an organization that supports the New Bridge Fire and EMS Station.
Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams was perhaps the bluntest. He called the proffers “paltry” and contended that LAR was pushing to add units only to make more money.
“You are going to be selling 28 additional units for the sum of maybe $28 million, and you want to offer a paltry $56,000 in proffers. I don’t know [whether] you think that we are a bunch of dumb country bumpkins that just got off here. I’d much rather you say, ‘we’d like to maximize the profits. We’d like to put more money in our pockets, and that’s why we need the additional 28 units,’” Williams said.
LAR will return to the board on Monday night with a reworked proposal that only adds 18 condos—instead of 28—replacing the 12 five-bedroom dwellings with a mix of smaller units under two potential design scenarios.
In their revised land use application, the developers also reserve the right to stick with the 96-unit plan, including the 12 five-bedroom condos, should market conditions change.
The developers say they need the flexibility to up the number of units, in part, to ensure they can sell the floor space necessary to make the project palatable to lenders.
“The purpose of this request is to provide flexibility and improved space utilization by changing the unit mix of the building to better meet (1) market demand and (2) lender requirements while maintaining a sellable unit gross square footage area needed to support the development's economic feasibility,” Grossman says in the application. “This increase is needed to reduce overall development risk in a challenging construction environment, which includes higher financing costs, higher inflation, longer lead times for materials and equipment, increased regulatory fees, and tariffs.”
In making its case for the change, LAR reiterates many of the points made in its previous proposal, noting the increase in density won’t require changes to the project’s overall site plan or alter the six-story building’s footprint.
They also point out that the complex comes in well below the 10 dwellings per acre allowed in a PUD under county code. On a 15.2-acre property, the developers could potentially build as many as 152 units.
LAR contends that tacking on 18 units would only minimally impact county services, like Fire and EMS and schools, and doesn’t significantly increase traffic on New Bridge Road (Route 208), a corridor that’s clogged with cars during the height of tourism season at the lake.
The developers submitted a traffic analysis from DRW Consultants showing that the additional dwellings would only increase traffic by about 119 trips a day and wouldn’t require improvements on New Bridge Road beyond the turn lanes already agreed to.
“There is an overall increase in traffic, but the increase is relatively small: 3% in the AM and PM peak hours, and 5% daily. This increase does not change results in the July 7, 2022 traffic study: a left turn lane and a right turn lane were warranted in the July 7, 2022 traffic study, and the 2025 development plan increase does not change that result,” the analysis says.
LAR says Louisa County Fire and EMS would likely see “a small” increase in demand for its services. The developers say Louisa County Public Schools wouldn’t be impacted because “the unit purchasers are expected to be active adult (over 55) primary home purchasers, 2nd home purchasers, and vacation home investment purchasers.”
While slimming down its request for additional units, LAR significantly beefed up its cash proffers. Per a proffer statement submitted in early April, the developers offer about $129,080—up from $56,000 in their previous request—earmarked for two nonprofits and one county agency.
LAR agrees to contribute $100,080 to FLHF to help with affordable housing. Of that, $9,000, or $500 for each additional unit, would be due 30 days after approval, while $91,080, or $5,060 per additional unit, would be due after the sale of each unit.
LAR agrees to contribute about $20,000, or $1,111 for each additional unit, to the Fire and EMS Department to purchase automated external defibrillators (AED) for cop cars. The money would also be due after the sale of each unit.
The developers would contribute $9,000, or $500 for each new unit, to FLAES, payable 30 days after approval.
The proffers would be tacked on to commitments LAR made when the project was initially approved in January 2023. Those include a $1 million contribution towards a $7.5 million overhaul of the New Bridge Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is necessary to treat sewage from the complex, and a $500 per unit donation to the Fire and EMS Department, payable 60 days after the building’s occupancy permit is approved. With the additional 18 units, the developers would pay $57,000, up from $48,000 for the 96-unit plan.
When the board initially considered the rezoning two years ago, it drew strong opposition from some community members. Residents along Mitchell Creek, a narrow cove lined with single-family homes, argued the project would forever change the character of their neighborhood, replacing its quiet, rural charm with high-density, “Northern Virginia-style development.”
They warned of jammed traffic on New Bridge Road (Route 208), more boats in an already dangerous section of the lake and various environmental threats. Some reserved their sharpest criticism for the condo building, which will soar 80 feet high, arguing it would mar their views and doesn’t belong at a gateway to the county.
Most board members embraced the project, however, voting 6-1 to approve the rezoning. Several said that LAR’s proposal conforms with the county’s vision for the area, noting the property is in the Lake Anna Growth Area and designated for mixed-use development on the Future Land Use Map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. They also argued that changing the parcel’s zoning from commercial to PUD gives the county more control over how it’s developed.
LAR’s latest request won’t require a public hearing since the board held a hearing on the item in January. During the hearing, the project again drew criticism from one lake resident while another called Grossman and Garcia “good corporate neighbors.”
Mitchell Creek resident Phil Winston, who staunchly opposed the rezoning, warned that LAR’s project and other development planned for the 208 corridor would only exacerbate traffic problems on the road.
“We need to do something. Because, if not, you are going to see a lot more deaths on that road,” Winston said.
Pat Gallagher, representing FLAES, the recipient of one of LAR’s proposed cash proffers, spoke in support of the project.
“[The developers] have been generously supporting our foundation’s goals in fundraising for the New Bridge [Fire and EMS] station, Station 8. We look forward to their continued support of our community,” Gallagher said.
Board to consider approving $35,000 in grants for tourism-related initiatives
In other business, supervisors will consider awarding $35,000 in tourism grants to three organizations that routinely draw visitors to the county.
The proposed allocation includes up to $10,000 for the Louisa Arts Center; up to $5,000 for Lake Anna Jazz and up to $20,000 for the Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation (TSBF).
The $10,000 allotted to the arts center would cover most of a $12,000 fee to bring a performer for an outdoor concert.
The $5,000 earmarked for Lake Anna Jazz would also help bring musical talent to an outdoor concert, covering part of $15,000 in performer fees.
The $20,000 for TSBF would pay nearly half the cost of replacing the roof at the Charles Goodall Trevilian House, which the proposed resolution calls “the centerpiece” of the Civil War battlefield. The roof replacement is expected to cost $45,000.
To receive the grant funding, each organization would be required to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the county. The MOU requires each organization to add the Visit Louisa logo with a link to the bottom of its e-newsletters/website for a minimum of one year, contribute blog posts related to their events and engage in other promotional activities in partnership with Visit Louisa.
The funding is part of the “Tourism Partnership Grants” program, a county initiative aimed at supporting tourism and economic development. The program relies on revenue from the county’s transient occupancy tax, a levy that’s tacked on to visitors’ tab when they stay the night at a hotel, bed and breakfast or short-term rental.
The board hiked the tax from two percent to seven percent in 2023. Under state law, about 40 percent of the revenue generated by the tax must be used for tourism-related initiatives.
Local organizations and other entities can apply for grants via the initiative. The county’s Tourism Advisory Committee, a collection of 13 residents with ties to the local tourism industry, reviews each application then makes a recommendation to the board of supervisors on whether a proposal is worthy of county support.
Note: The advertised agenda for Monday’s meeting includes a presentation from the Agricultural/Forestal and Rural Preservation Committee. That presentation will be pushed back to the board’s May 5 meeting, according to Board Chair Duane Adams. Read more about the committee’s work in last week's edition of Engage Louisa.
Town of Mineral suspends new water connections
Property owners in the Town of Mineral hoping to tap into its municipal water system are out of luck—at least for now.
In an April 15 statement, Town Manager Nicole Washington said the town isn’t “establishing new water connections or accommodating additional water demands at this time.” Washington said connections have been halted at the direction of the Virginia Department of Health (VDH), which notified the town that its reliance on the Louisa County Water Authority (LCWA) as its sole water source violates the operating permit issued by the agency. The permit allows the town to tap LCWA only as a “supplemental water source,” Washington said.
“With the Town Wells needing to undergo revitalization to assist with our source water production, the Town purchases 100% of its water from LCWA. Since this is against the permit that we have with VDH, the Town of Mineral cannot have any new water connections or new water demands that increase the demand placed on the LCWA,” she said.
In an email to Engage Louisa on Friday, Washington said the suspension of “new connections” means the town won’t install new water meters, water lines, or anything that would put additional demand on the system.” She said the restriction doesn’t impact customers with existing water service, including rental properties requiring a transfer of service.
Washington said the town is working with VDH on a plan to revitalize its wells, so it can resume new connections.
A corrective action plan signed by Washington and submitted to VDH on March 7 lays out a nearly three-year timeline for upgrading the water system. The plan required the town to certify by March 31 that “water line extensions, water system expansions, or other waterworks modifications that may increase waterworks demand will be paused until additional source water capacity can be provided.”
It gives the town until January 1, 2026 to submit a preliminary engineering report (PER) evaluating “alternatives to establish adequate source water capacity.” If the PER recommends construction, the town has until January 1, 2027 to obtain a construction permit and until January 1, 2028 to complete the required modifications. The town is also required to submit quarterly progress reports.
In a February 5 letter to the town from its Richmond Field Office, VDH said the operating permit issued to the town in 2020 lists Well No. 4 and a consecutive connection to the Lousia County Water Authority as sources for the waterworks. The letter said that it’s the agency’s “understanding that Well No. 4 has been offline for an extended period of time,” leaving the connection with LCWA as the sole water source.
The letter said the total source capacity on the operating permit is 201,600 gallons, but without Well No. 4, the source capacity drops to 93,600. The latter figure is based on the capacity of the size of the pump that transfers water from LCWA’s system to the town, the letter said, not “a firm capacity provided for the town by the wholesaler.”
“The intent of the connection was not to be the primary source of water for the Town, but a supplementary source of water with Well No. 4 being the primary source of water,” the letter said. “With no firm capacity, the actual source capacity is currently unknown. This is a concern as not having a firm capacity provided and no additional sources restricts the ability of the Town to expand and reduces reliability of the system.”
The letter asked Washington to review and sign the draft corrective action plan by March 7 to avoid potential violation of the state’s Public Water Supplies Law “for exceeding the waterworks permitted design capacity” established in the permit.
The Mineral Town Council didn’t publicly discuss the letter or corrective action plan at its last three meetings in February, March and April. Washington mentioned the letter and plan in her written “Town Manager’s Report” for the April 14 meeting.
In the report, Washington said the plan “established a timeline to address source water concerns” that would take about two years. She said the town plans to clean one well to “address some source water issue[s],” which could shorten the timeline. It’s also “looking into drilling another well.”
At the meeting, council approved a pair of applications for grants that could provide up to $90,000 to help “revitalize” one or more wells, potentially funding evaluations and engineering reports.
Council will hold a special meeting on Tuesday, April 29 at 6:30, in part, to discuss its water system and “prepare a statement” regarding the system, according to the advertised agenda.
It’s unclear why the town didn’t notify the public about the VDH notice or discuss it at its previous meetings. In an email on Friday, Mayor Ron Chapman declined to say when he found out about the letter and corrective action plan, and why the public wasn’t notified sooner.
“I look forward to speaking with you after the Tuesday meeting,” he said.
While Mineral has relied on multiple wells to feed its municipal water system over the years, it’s drawn from Well No. 4 at least since 2020, per its VDH operating permit. The town has relied solely on LCWA for water since May 2024, according to Pam Baughman, the authority’s general manager. Baughman said in an email last week that prior to last May, the town “intermittently purchased larger amounts of water from the Authority, due to their well being out of service.”
Neither Washington nor Chapman provided details about why Well No. 4 was taken offline. Washington said only that “there were conversations regarding Well 4” in April 2024 before she started working for the town. She said “it was May 2024 that [town officials] were looking into Well 4's production.” Chapman, who was a member of council at the time, didn’t answer questions about Well No. 4 or any of the town’s other wells.
The suspension of new connections comes as the town of 500 has attracted increasing interest from developers who see the community as ripe for residential growth. Oakwood Homes recently built a 14-home development on the town’s southern edge, and local attorney and developer Torrey Williams, via GW1 Properties, LLC, has won council’s approval to build a handful of multi-family dwellings.
Williams is now eyeing far bigger plans. Last year, he inked a contract to purchase 78 acres between First Street and Old Tolersville Road to develop a 300-plus dwelling Planned Unit Development (PUD). Council initially approved the project in 2007, but it stalled during the Great Recession.
Williams’ plan to resurrect the PUD has sparked concern from town leaders, who’ve said Mineral doesn’t have the infrastructure to support it. He’s made little headway gaining administrative approvals to move the project forward and, in March, filed a lawsuit in Louisa County Circuit Court, alleging the town mishandled a review of a preliminary site plan he submitted last October. The town has asked the court to dismiss the case. At publication time, a hearing date hasn’t been set.
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.