[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,86,98,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6610291,"mediaKeyId","2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12","parentId",2904551,"title","Votes at a glance: Key actions by the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, April 8, 2025","audioSeconds",3446,"startMs",2052000,"endMs",5498000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12&start=2052&end=5498","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12/thumbnail_2052000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6610291/Prince-William-County/Virginia/Votes-at-a-glance-Key-actions-by-the-Prince-William-Board-of-County-Supervisors-April-8-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610291-bb5e2962d8f4fdbc3452befb3a39da61/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448583&Signature=KbT8rtXdvZ9i9MWEPHdQG1gPeJlWwj4eljUZYtRASTCrQqHTjs3lpUUPbUA1PTg5-IpfP9uW1KtylXx~K1wCo2bp6thgufC4evl4oyIJWfElG8hP1o2lgXfwz2MJ5N2zXUki1OSwwvHwkoybEsQ3KK0v~8stF1XaLBRiiHjb0Jmr7m7VcUpMEsXCFD2rVN1ZNkDdh4sTr9d~x5fwxfGExPzmCBWSQj-UVtjbOuVbHjIBAXqSQb80HFhh9C4GzbM3mnaDhqgE~WrMoc1MFgGNxBg1X~J5ep4azLK9gzQ0TivPFha9WLDfxwwP8MROEKs~Y6aUd7gYNqxz7reh-Guq~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Prince William County","date","2025-04-08T00:00:00Z","article","This 'Votes at a glance' article summarizes formal motions, votes and outcomes that the Prince William Board of County Supervisors recorded on April 8, 2025. It is intended as a quick reference; for detailed discussion see the separate articles on the CRC funding, the state pass-through funds, budget recap, and policy directives.

- Approval of minutes (agenda item 3a): Motion to approve minutes was moved and seconded; the board approved the item and recorded that Supervisor Gordy was absent for this and subsequent votes.

- Proclamations (agenda items 4a'4g): A set of ceremonial proclamations (Child Abuse Prevention Month; Month of the Military Child; Volunteer Week; Education and Sharing Day; Freedom High School girls basketball recognition; National Education and Sharing Day; Law Day) were moved together and passed as part of the agenda with recorded unanimous votes on the proclamation blocks.

- Consent agenda (agenda item 5): The consent agenda items were moved and the board approved several grouped items. Two items were pulled for discussion:
- Item 5f: $2,000,000 for completion of the Crisis Receiving Center construction (see full article). Approved as part of consent follow-up; board requested construction and operational timelines.
- Item 5i: County acceptance of state-directed pass-through funds and execution of associated MOU. Approved 5-2 (Supervisors Vega and Weir voted no). Board requested final MOU language and documentation.
- Item 5j: Agreement with schools for county use of school buses. Pulled and deferred; board voted to defer action until the first meeting in May (motion to defer to May 13 passed 6-1; Supervisor Bodie voted nay on the motion to defer).

- Public hearings (agenda items 7a-7c): The board opened and closed public hearings for the listed items; votes on related items were taken individually and recorded as unanimous where indicated for 7a, 7b and 7c.

- Closed session certification: After a closed session on matters including real-estate disposition and prospective business, the board certified the closed session by unanimous roll-call vote.

Notes and next steps: For items with substantive policy or budget impact (CRC funding, state pass-through, budget recap), staff committed to follow-up reports and additional documentation. Several items were deferred for more information or scheduling (school-bus agreement; expanded CRC operational timeline).

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Prince William County - Board of County Supervisors Meeting - Apr 08, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","A concise list of formal votes and outcomes recorded during the April 8 meeting, including proclamations, consent items, a state pass-through funding approval, CRC funding, and deferral of a school bus agreement.","taxTitle","Prince William County, Virginia","taxId",21018,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6610296,"Board directs more noise testing and research on on-site power generation; ordinance work to continue",0,8852000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12&start=8852&end=8852","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12/thumbnail_8852000.jpg","/articles/6610296/Prince-William-County/Virginia/Board-directs-more-noise-testing-and-research-on-on-site-power-generation-ordinance-work-to-continue","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610296-ce465e720d99e47fe1a27ee80b24a3c1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448583&Signature=gWX8qS0zr8RzfIQ3fKIn7PmTxw0wJrBBPEw5GkyZVHE2eaurDnzgFWAHm5Sj22r0nLRwtJafEPI-he2u9~48slMcJm7CJtSWOXyc~Bxk3u2xL77xFhANNLBXKlc0rh2rJ6GKA1bbOLdhoREK8gL1UqpV0-rPNDfWVyryrk-wmTAvYtoOIMo3RaRVtbiFM3WG--BlwOfwYJIkHYtd3XQ8jnkTYk2vV~Njf50xXzS76nGEAwGly0-w~fTmpo5i2vJ2~7nAKdm-Nl6VhbeWDUrVrprmO2tO7Wn9VsyNby6KGg4SwU-TIQ2Yd4~gfLyypDbJEMEJkE6fb51PS78ML7C8bQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of County Supervisors directed staff to identify $35,000 in FY2025 funding to support additional noise testing and technical analysis tied to a draft noise ordinance, and separately approved a directive to study local legal and planning authority regarding microgrids and on-site power generation.

Supervisor said the additional testing will extend work already underway. Wade Hu, deputy county executive, described testing done around facilities and during a scheduled outage at a data center site where diesel/generator operations provided a chance to gather sound files. \"We did some field testing today... they were running the generators for about 3 hours, and we wanted to go out and get some readings there,\" Hu said. Staff said they are working with Rutgers University and a consultant with experience on dB(C) and octave-based enforcement training for police.

Board members asked for clarifications on types of measurements and enforcement. Supervisors asked whether tests would include construction noise, blasting, and typical subdivision activity. Hu said staff had already sampled construction-related sounds and planned targeted tests near schools, hospitals and other sensitive receptors.

Separately, Supervisor Bodie introduced a directive asking the county executive to research planning best practices and legal authority on microgrids and on-site backup generation, including gas-turbine generator plants mounted near industrial users. \"We're starting to see that large scale industrial applicants are beginning to look at creative ways to provide power to their facilities... right now there's not a lot of good playbook around how we handle something like that,\" Bodie said. The county attorney will review legal questions and staff will report back with timelines and fiscal impacts.

Ending: The board approved both actions. Staff said they will return with a list of proposed testing locations, measurement approaches, anticipated costs and a timeline for a larger ordinance proposal. The county executive's office will report research and recommendations on on-site generation and related land-use policy for board consideration and for the 2026 legislative agenda if needed.","Supervisors directed staff to fund additional noise testing and technical analysis and separately asked county executive to research planning and legal options for on-site power generation (microgrids, gas turbines, backup generation) ahead of possible ordinance changes.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6610301,"County executive proposes small cut to advertised real-estate rate; supervisors debate meals tax, data-center revenue and priorities",1343,10013000,11356000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12&start=10013&end=11356","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12/thumbnail_10013000.jpg","/articles/6610301/Prince-William-County/Virginia/County-executive-proposes-small-cut-to-advertised-real-estate-rate-supervisors-debate-meals-tax-data-center-revenue-and-priorities","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610301-228449db31343ee8afb3ae4d5a5dd8e1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448583&Signature=jnANSUBpave6ZWsBI-TGnbBWBxlQS7btAF0NLHztOgKAnpzW6ebPRBCB8M-C-ZRHig6wsbjy1s~PeyUjn9lEH-Q244ykzlOAPpR-6n3VvuGg-sfxbcplfieoBpw6giStZJEBFndv~U0SINskKmUccRL2U8MfOWhpxz3I35uVDtPATxgzDkQQKPvGxCz9dM9Nc9paqncdWTDLporWHoMEdb77kfwBQRCSuDZNKHjxffKjift~unY~i68ZT35Y48hm3eEesb1sUBiokUUcfUSc2e6cClovagBeEz29HGBjAQs1xfgwubIz5g0AXj9MD0eSFZsZWzxkZ7PsdAaDM3w8IQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County Executive staff presented a budget recap on April 8 that adjusted several assumptions in the advertised FY2026 budget, recommended lowering the advertised real-estate rate from 92 cents to 90.6 cents per $100 of assessed value and listed program additions, including a $1.5 million county allocation for the Adult Detention Center (ADC).

Staff said updated assessments increased the average homeowner's tax burden if the rate stayed at 92 cents, and that reducing the rate to 90.6 cents would partially mitigate that change. The county executive's presentation showed the net revenue loss from the lower rate and offsetting state and other revenue changes. The staff also summarized additional federal and state grants received since the advertised budget and a set of requests forwarded by board members.

Supervisors debated whether to use alternative revenue sources tied to the county's recent growth in data-center activity, specifically the computer and peripheral (C&P) personal property classification. Staff noted that increasing the C&P rate to $4.15 per $100 of assessed value would generate significant new revenue; one scenario discussed was pairing a higher C&P rate with a lower motor-vehicle personal property rate to produce a net revenue increase.

Public comment during the meeting focused on two taxes: several restaurant owners and workers urged the board to repeal the 4% meals tax, saying it depresses customer demand and reduces server tips; one owner said, \"The single most important thing you can do to save the restaurant industry during these hard times in Prince William County is allow them to lower their prices.\" Residents also urged lower real-estate rates.

Supervisor exchange and next steps: board members asked staff for more precise revenue modeling on C&P and vehicle personal-property rate tradeoffs, asked for detailed scenarios showing effects on homeowners and businesses, and signaled a range of priorities (public safety staffing, ADC supports, trails, parks, and housing). The board scheduled budget markup next week when supervisors will set rates and identify funding tradeoffs.

Ending: Staff left the budget framework with the board and will return for budget markup. Board members said they want detailed options, including the effect of raising the computer and peripheral rate while offsetting vehicle personal-property rates, and warned that choices will have distributional impacts between county operations and the school division.","At a budget-recap hearing, county staff recommended lowering the advertised real-estate tax rate from 92 cents to 90.6 cents per $100 of assessed value, outlined a range of program and one-time requests, and reopened debate over the meals tax, personal property and the distribution of revenues between county and schools.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6610306,"Board approves state pass-through funds despite reservations from two supervisors",381,5145000,5526000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12&start=5145&end=5526","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12/thumbnail_5145000.jpg","/articles/6610306/Prince-William-County/Virginia/Board-approves-state-pass-through-funds-despite-reservations-from-two-supervisors","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610306-cf284dee06862df46ff981553d142979/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448583&Signature=gtDOeVUrOQlGI-r2-BTow~C4BfAmYvPcXAzcDcVMiTgU~oIuiU3cfA88PicOM-yIHG-bIhGlq5hoQoXWiDMq6UkmZSLO6GKjZ6-j1gFDB-1yNjIbYdO8I3jsW-wXKY~mA~yq1VM7IiQ39YDtEJKao8sZhNZ8NUofnLZ8PyKwSNAJq2sobv8T7MJnqY6y0zcuj~jye0-50TkxX4xJ9mFEbxjs~eTqghJpCw-ix9wRiBDooWN6DmxY1cTkN9z~scOjZ7nbOO9KeV~MgM055YbRhDVHnJPuG-hoWcCGqLu66yP1WAESccp~zDkp0sOOROIOR94i999150peUgRSOKIrJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted 5-2 to approve a set of state-directed pass-through funds that county staff said must flow through the county to a community organization, despite objections from Supervisors Vega and Weir.

Supervisor Vega said she had tried to confirm whether the funding appropriation had been finalized in Richmond and that questions remained about oversight and potential liability. \"When you read the staff report and when you read the majority of the documents attached to this item, it all comes from Richmond... I am very cautious about the organization that is being, you know, tasked with handling $2,000,000 because of their past history with mishandling public dollars,\" Vega said.

Elijah Johnson, deputy county executive, told the board that the appropriation referenced in the item came from a prior year and that county staff had worked to clarify responsibilities in the memorandum of understanding. \"This is actually from last year's appropriation... the appropriation that was put in for this year did not pass, but this is previous appropriations that we've been working with with the state department of social services to get the MOU done so that we can move those funds forward,\" Johnson said.

The county attorney's office told the board it had negotiated wording to make clear the county is a conduit and not the primary manager of the funds. County counsel said the state Department of Social Services (VDSS) is responsible for auditing the use of the funds and that the organization receiving the funds must reimburse the county if the state requires repayment.

Supervisor Weir said he remained concerned about language in the draft agreement that appeared to require the county to \"enter into agreement with CASA for the funds paid by VDSS,\" and asked whether the county could be left on the hook for clawbacks. The county attorney said the county is not on the hook and that audit and reimbursement responsibilities reside with the state and the recipient.

The motion to approve passed 5-2; Supervisors Vega and Weir voted no.

Ending: The board approved the pass-through with language clarifications and staff told the board they would follow up with more detailed documentation. Supervisors who opposed the motion said they would prefer additional board review before taking action on state-directed pass-through agreements in the future.

","Supervisors approved a state-directed pass-through grant to an external organization over objections from two board members who said the county's legal and oversight risks were not sufficiently resolved.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6610311,"Board approves $2 million to finish crisis receiving center; opening pushed to October",1181,4774000,5955000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12&start=4774&end=5955","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2904551-8e42205f8410c75c655d31b3fce5fd12/thumbnail_4774000.jpg","/articles/6610311/Prince-William-County/Virginia/Board-approves-2-million-to-finish-crisis-receiving-center-opening-pushed-to-October","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610311-1576aa8327d62ce4f50c6884835aa69d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448583&Signature=SrCcclMH0gUSQx2OvP~8idKgAaiJORy~LH0V0nMlwMr1OXQqGk79SFfQSA0oXkoqVZaQc~hgITSH~6uQCfBJi3RqUUCh2vnwF1Bpsu3ztBMJyhLrdAJMx26stpoMna9ZYPbWDmgjmi9b3FpfzYoSHAm~rTsPV0i8F-icP9xEMX4PLipRMMk3y2R7maGCWz1ATDq5nkvXHJjX0GYI6jqse1OfJakVGpqrwLrFWE3yQ5qKDK5mXTh7cgTGclhf91TK2QRuD~Htjwp~H~0z~-yw6yU1jEuiEywXcpdJH9uDFeOe5L4NYiCD9yi7ZcUUIeNAIC6hKBlkuGLKZ~fWokLu0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted to allocate $2,000,000 to complete construction work on the county's Crisis Receiving Center (CRC), and board members asked staff for a fuller update on construction and operational timelines.

Board members said the additional money will pay for remaining site work, fixture changes and safety fencing. Matt Villareal, director of facilities and fleet management, told the board, \"We are seeking $2,000,000 to finish out on the project. This will cover we have about a million dollars of site work that we need to complete and we have, about 400 or so thousand dollars that we have to change, some bathrooms and make them have a we have to have a proper ratio of patients to, showers, and so we have to change these bathrooms to multi use.\" Villareal listed other items the funds will cover, including fencing around generators, switchgear and patient exterior spaces.

The board pressed staff for schedule clarity. Lisa Madron of the Transformation Management Office said, \"Once we get occupancy in August, then the licensing to be able to have the contractor connections operate the CRC and have our co located CS services there. It can take up to 90 days. We are hoping that to be expedited, and we are anticipating an opening October, the week of October 6.\" Deputy County Executive Elijah Johnson added program constraints: the Department of Medical Assistance Services (DMAS) has submitted a waiver application to CMS that must be approved for Medicaid reimbursement of youth services; until CMS approval, Medicaid reimbursement is not guaranteed.

Supervisors who raised concerns said costs have increased and that the project needs a single, clear timeline and a projection of remaining gaps. \"The cost of the crisis receiving center is growing rapidly by millions,\" Supervisor Weir said, and urged staff to provide detailed updates. Supervisor Vega asked for a briefing on operational and financial impacts and requested a future meeting focused on construction and operational timelines.

County staff agreed to return with a construction timeline and an operational schedule, and to notify the board if the DMAS-to-CMS waiver process changes the county's reimbursement assumptions.

Ending: The board approved the $2 million request as part of the consent agenda and directed staff to return with a timeline and operational update prior to full occupancy. Staff said occupancy is anticipated August 2025 and licensing/DMAS/CMS steps make October 2025 the initial target week for opening, contingent on regulatory approval and any further construction issues.

","The Prince William Board of County Supervisors approved a $2 million allocation to finish construction of the county's Crisis Receiving Center and set an anticipated operational opening in October, while asking staff for detailed follow-ups on timeline, costs and Medicaid waiver status.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Key actions by the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, April 8, 2025

Board directs more noise testing and research on on-site power generation; ordinance work to continue

County executive proposes small cut to advertised real-estate rate; supervisors debate meals tax, data-center revenue and priorities

Board approves state pass-through funds despite reservations from two supervisors

Board approves $2 million to finish crisis receiving center; opening pushed to October