Rec Center Talks Continue

By Debra McCown
Reporter / Bristol Herald Courier
Published: September 2, 2008

ABINGDON, Va. – The Washington County Board of Supervisors voted 4-3 in a recessed meeting on Tuesday to continue negotiations with Abingdon officials on a proposed recreation complex just outside the town limits.

The board has been at an impasse for months with the Abingdon Town Council, which wants to pay 40 percent of the cost but have 50 percent representation on the governing authority for the complex.

The majority of board members wants representation to match financial contribution, however the cost is ultimately split, which Supervisor Tom Taylor says is the board’s “fiduciary responsibility” to county taxpayers.

“There’s no way I can justify, talking to my constituents, they’re paying 40 percent [and] we’re going to give them half interest in it,” said Supervisor Odell Owens. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

A few new solutions to the impasse were suggested Tuesday before the board voted to send Chairman Kenneth Reynolds and Vice Chairman Jack McCrady to meet with Abingdon’s mayor and vice mayor.

Supervisor Dulcie Mumpower suggested a reversal of what’s been discussed so far: keep the 60/40 split, but reverse roles, with the town paying 60 percent and having a controlling interest in the authority, and the county paying 40 percent with 40 percent representation.

“I don’t know why that wouldn’t be workable … and I don’t know of any reason why that wouldn’t be a fair deal,” she said.

“We just have a black cloud hanging over our head … because there are so many unanswered questions, so many issues that we can’t resolve.”

Supervisor Jack McCrady suggested the county appoint four members to the authority and the town appoint three with a chairman, who would only vote in the event of a tie, selected by the seven-member board.

Taylor suggested tying the sports complex in with other town-county issues like sewer service, debt service, recreation fees and the potential for future boundary adjustments.

Other unresolved issues – like whether the complex would serve as home fields for Abingdon Little League, how many soccer fields would be included and who would cover maintenance costs – also came up during the meeting.

County Administrator Mark Reeter said an extension could be requested on the Nov. 3 closing date on the land purchase for the complex, or the town could buy the land for the project.

While the supervisors did not vote on the town’s latest proposal – three authority members appointed by each governing body with a seventh recommended by the other six and approved by both boards – a majority seemed in agreement that it wouldn’t do.

“I hate to see us put in … that both boards have to approve the seventh member for the simple reason of how much trouble we have had agreeing on this stuff,” said Owens. “I think we’d have a tremendous roadblock to begin with.”

Owens said he looked on the Internet at other sports complexes built around the state, and the localities that built them had a plan before they acquired property or started spending money.

“I think one of the reasons we are having the difficulty we are is because neither the town nor the board of supervisors at this point knows for sure what’s going to be on the property, but we’re trying to decide how to run something that we don’t have plans for,” he said.

Taylor also pointed out the divide between board members who represent town residents and those who do not.

“I think the three of you that represent parts of Abingdon have a different mind-set because a lot of your constituents live in the town of Abingdon and I’m sure they are wanting you to do something,” Taylor said.

“I understand that and respect that, but there are four of us whose election districts don’t touch the town of Abingdon and there is a whole lot of concern from people who live in our areas … that we need to negotiate a strong agreement that’s a benefit to the entire county.”

The board’s decision to pursue further negotiations comes after warnings by town officials that the proposal was a final one, the same warning given after the town’s last proposal.

“I’ve got a feeling it’s not going to happen,” said Supervisor Paul Price of further discussion with the town.

“You remember when it [the project] almost failed before and [Supervisor] Phil [McCall] asked us to have the joint meeting with them and that’s what we did and nothing came out of it?” Price asked. “I don’t believe they’re going to want to meet with us again and I don’t believe they’re going to discuss it any further.”

| (276) 791-0701