The Shadow
CLIFTON FORGE - The Citizens Committee to Perfect a Consolidation Agreement has the right to go into closed session to discuss legal matters, said Richmond attorney Carter Glass IV.
Meeting Tuesday night at Dabney S. Lancaster Community College, Glass said since the committee is acting in lieu of the governing bodies, the committee is subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
“This exemption would be limited to the provision of legal advice about consolidation and cannot include policy discussions as to what should be in the merger agreement,” Glass stated.
“I’ve always viewed the citizens committee as the governing body that also utilizes public funds,” he added.
Glass was retained by the committee last week after learning that The Alleghany Foundation provided a $30,000 matching grant to fund the legal expenses. According to an order by Alleghany County Circuit Court Judge Malfourd Trumbo, any funding used by the committee will be doled out in $5,000 increments and will be closely monitored by the court.
Glass explained the procedure of going into executive session and the need to vote to affirm that only business legally exempted was discussed.
The law is less clear however, Glass said, if non-legal items such as personnel were discussed.
The committee can meet in closed session to negotiate issues that would be subject to review by the Commission on Local Government (COLG).
“If you want to test the law in that area, you’d have a good argument to go into closed session,” Glass added.
Prior to the beginning of the meeting, committee co-chairmen Joe Carpenter and George Goode met privately with Glass to discuss legal matters. The meeting was not subject to the Freedom of Information Act since there was no quorum present.
The 10-member committee, composed of five members from Covington and five members from Alleghany County, is technically two separate committees according to Glass and a quorum is not present unless three members from a particular locality are present.
Glass also advised committee members to utilize a template to draft a consolidation agreement since a court-mandated June deadline is looming. The 1991 consolidation agreement between Clifton Forge and Alleghany County would provide a suitable template, Glass added.
“You are on a very tight time frame,” Glass said, and added, “You do not have time to go out and re-invent the wheel.”
Committee member Wes Walker asked if now is the time to ask Judge Trumbo for an extension.
Art Mead of the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia said he recently spoke to the judge and he indicated that any extension request be made closer to the deadline. Mead, who serves as facilitator for the committee, is from the U.Va. campus at Wise.
A county form of government with Covington as a tier city was discussed.
Members of the committee inquired if a tier city could be developed without a second layer of government. Glass said a tier city is an incorporated political subdivision which requires an elected governing body.
The development of a new city charter as well as the COLG’s review of the consolidation agreement would involve more time and legal expenses, Glass said.
The only example of a tier city concept was the failed 1984 attempt to consolidate Augusta County with Staunton as a tier city.
“It’s basically a town,” Glass said.
Glass said the Virginia General Assembly is receptive to localities attempting to consolidate.
“The General Assembly will allow almost everything to help that process as long as its constitutional,” Glass noted.
A top priority for the committee, Glass said, is deciding what form of government to pursue since a city form, a county form, or a tier city concept involves different paths to draw up an agreement.
“That’s a basic policy choice you have to resolve,” he added.
For urbanized areas that supply additional services, a service district can be established which would allow additional taxation or the implementation of fees for certain services such as refuse collection. Covington charges a monthly fee for refuse collection and Alleghany County does not.
The structure of a consolidated school system also needs to be carefully considered if there are any hopes of getting a consolidation referendum to pass.
“Obviously, schools are a critical issue down here,” said Glass.
There has not been a successful consolidation agreement in Virginia since the city of Suffolk was formed in the 1970s. Clifton Forge and Alleghany County merged as a result of Clifton Forge reverting to a town.
“This ought to be one of those places that can have a successful merger,” Glass said.
Initially, Glass said, it will be difficult for a consolidated government to realize any financial savings.
Committee member Annette Comer said, “We must show financial savings to get the voters to approve a merger.”
Members of the committee asked if they could guarantee that no one would lose their job if a Reduction in Force occurs in a consolidated government.
The committee has stated numerous times that any duplicate services and personnel would be reduced through attrition.
‘There is no provision in the merger statutes that permits the consolidation agreement to bar the governing body of the new locality from eliminating positions,” Glass said and added that the committee can, however, include an advisory statement to recommend such a policy.
The consolidation agreement cannot order the school boards from each locality to devise a salary equalization scale.
The Covington school system has a higher pay scale than Alleghany County. The projected cost of salary and benefit equalization is $1.5 million.
Glass said the merger agreement can issue an advisory statement suggesting salary equalization.
“The consolidated locality must appropriate funding for the support of the school division, and can influence the compensation plan that is implemented by the amount of funding that is provided,” Glass said.
The committee will convene next Tuesday at 6:30 p.m. in McCarthy Hall at Dabney S. Lancaster Community College.
