[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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",[32,75,87],{"_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",6264409,"mediaKeyId","3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc","parentId",3096481,"title","Supervisors debate 3% cuts, COLA and use of one‑time funds as residents press for water and sewer spending","audioSeconds",6102,"startMs",3263000,"endMs",9365000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc&start=3263&end=9365","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc/thumbnail_3263000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6264409/Gloucester-County/Virginia/Supervisors-debate-3-cuts-COLA-and-use-of-onetime-funds-as-residents-press-for-water-and-sewer-spending","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264409-271ddc4c77ed1ebff3f7944343fb775b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160746&Signature=Zi1hVn7wMBP1E9BLRM8N3Og9VhQ6NqpnpSZFMgKhfL8AR6XMO6KRgPlbYHL9~wGDpDQCDiOokf1GKkj3SnVl6iGD-oxCPxbnKbylBN-CxuhaM0BRuTYnvJ-ZZRsvIpiARqW7Te9UhIqtgRFef3xSyDSQFARFC1XL1~zP~erVOi3FReA3N26M11lxScw0UEjjOj8fzEHT3c0~Chd27FeS3tfJRKXpDa1O~-GaJrGLfjnsz~edpL7HfwNlI5xT529r3Dsx~GUMpjW4-HHVpZTzSGswvcOkE8SzBgx0AvGiES38iEj3pyEUK~FOrioEWU5t5lwzgqLdjUpfc~8sHftx~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Gloucester County, VA","date","2025-04-23T17:02:59.31Z","article","At a Gloucester County Board of Supervisors work session, staff presented department budgets and the board debated proposed cuts, cost‑of‑living adjustments and whether to use one‑time revenue to cover recurring needs. Public commenters urged prioritizing water and sewer infrastructure over other spending.

During public comment multiple residents told supervisors the county’s water and sewer systems require immediate attention if growth follows the planned removal of the George P. Coleman Bridge toll. Speakers said repairs could cost “between $60 million and $80 million” (public comment) and pressed the board to prioritize the utilities budget over discretionary projects. Several commenters urged caution on tax increases and questioned recent spending choices.

County budget staff presented mechanics of a proposed 3% cut. They said 3% of the entire general fund equals about $2.6 million; when narrowed to only county departments (excluding schools, debt service and constitutional offices) the 3% target falls to roughly $1.07 million. When further excluding constitutional and state offices, the net 3% of the remaining departments was about $572,000. Staff reported a first pass exercise identified roughly $397,000 in potential cuts from 17 departments, primarily requiring personnel reductions, because operating budgets are already lean.

Supervisors debated whether the board should require a 3% cut to departmental budgets. Supporters of the idea said private industry routinely uses headcount reductions and process reviews to control costs; opponents warned that a 3% across‑the‑board cut would force layoffs, reduce core services and damage morale. Several supervisors suggested an alternative approach: examine process improvements and efficiencies over the next year rather than immediate position cuts.

Compensation was another major topic. The proposed budget includes a 3% cost‑of‑living allocation estimated at about $837,000 (including Department of Social Services). Staff described three choices: implement the COLA July 1 as budgeted, delay the COLA until January and save an estimated $232,000 in the current fiscal year (or $70,000 if only delayed one month), or adopt a different mix of COLA and targeted implementation tied to a compensation study.

The county had budgeted roughly $700,000 for partial implementation of a recent compensation study; staff said full implementation would be larger. Separately, there was discussion about a possible state bonus (a proposed 1.5% state bonus) and whether to use FY25 vacancy savings to pay a one‑time staff bonus.

School requests were also on the table. The school division asked the board to fund universal breakfast and lunch countywide and to begin a device replacement cycle for student Chromebooks. The superintendent’s office estimated an additional roughly $526,240 for a Chromebook device replacement tranche (approximately one‑third of devices) and said feeding programs are estimated at roughly $450,000; staff noted state funding changes could offset some school requests and that the General Assembly action had not yet been fully quantified at the local level.

Board members discussed how to handle expected additional revenue tied to a proposed property tax increase and the calendar timing of collections. Staff called the additional receipts a one‑time “manna” for planning purposes and recommended earmarking any extra receipts for capital or other one‑time investments (for example Chromebook replacement) rather than for recurring operating costs.

Supervisors scheduled follow‑up work sessions to continue budget deliberations and directed staff to provide breakdowns of: personnel earning over $90–100k, specific training line items per department, and detailed Chromebook replacement scenarios (one‑third/one‑half/total replacement costs). The board also approved administrative scheduling adjustments for future budget meetings.

—END—","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Gloucester County Board of Supervisors Meeting, 4/21/2025","oneSentenceSummary","County staff told the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors a 3% cut to the general fund would equal roughly $2.6 million and that targeted department cuts already identified would likely require eliminating positions; supervisors debated layoffs, COLA timing, compensation study implementation and whether one‑time receipts should fund recurring needs.","taxTitle","Gloucester County, Virginia","taxId",30980,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6264414,"Gloucester County schools cut bus fleet and routes; transportation director seeks funds for replacement buses and higher driver pay",1157,1465000,2622000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc&start=1465&end=2622","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc/thumbnail_1465000.jpg","/articles/6264414/Gloucester-County/Virginia/Gloucester-County-schools-cut-bus-fleet-and-routes-transportation-director-seeks-funds-for-replacement-buses-and-higher-driver-pay","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264414-22eb3c7230b4c3c51c970f43312d3ad5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160746&Signature=h3CjijczfBYDD-MuSdEkGdvZXvxxc4nX2L9~5beI4qB-n-PPtwBxgocSn~LeZEyB2319zJjofC2fC0nZFC2FKZB-9OZw4AjYUTOwSEP~fhm3hSQWvpRNjxomfweaBHLdHoQPlnhjEJ7jYwvOqMn211VCtyDG0s0-SGis5EKcNp3kaWiUXM5llX7ZYVzqhGkLN5u963gHOG846Lntb67pvUzQK3rnNt3PP-g~sdyBs6miijDs9KGXpXnYrYJjHUIWVSNmvsP00cnRF5Af6vdyHiUEOqa1q7P16sDeMjwj9maoo6fOHuhORJKIj7BlmhGSV7ecPR23fHcosCg4gWtFOw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Gloucester County Public Schools has reduced its bus fleet and routes since 2019 and is seeking county support to replace aging vehicles and retain drivers, the school division’s transportation director told the Board of Supervisors.

Tanya Decker, the division’s director of transportation, said when she took the job in 2019 the district operated 118 buses on about 110 daily routes with 126 employees. She said the fleet now totals 76 buses, routes have been optimized to about 68 and staff have fallen to 98 employees — a reduction Decker attributed to vehicle consolidation, a two‑tier bell schedule and process changes.

Decker told supervisors grants and funding of “a little over $3,900,000” have been used since 2019 to purchase buses and communications equipment. She said those grants funded 19 buses and upgrades including bus patrol camera systems, GPS and Motorola radio communications, which staff say reduced the time to locate missing or misrouted students from as much as 47 minutes to four to six minutes.

The division is requesting approximately $1,300,000 for new buses in the coming fiscal year. Decker estimated a modern 77‑passenger school bus costs about $166,000–$168,000; at current prices $1.3 million would purchase roughly eight buses, she said. The district is also seeking funds to replace and modernize non‑CDL “white fleet” vans used for low‑density routes and special programs; those vehicles are aging and parts are increasingly expensive.

Board members asked about driver pay and recruitment. Decker said Gloucester’s starting wage is $18 per hour and that a competitive starting rate in nearby localities can be $20–$21. She urged the board to keep driver pay competitive to retain staff, warning that the removal of the Coleman Bridge toll will remove a geographic barrier to cross‑jurisdictional competition for employees.

Supervisors pressed on walk zones, parking and vehicle choices for outlying routes. Decker said Gloucester currently does not have a walk zone; establishing one would require a board determination and safe pathways, and could require crossing guards and associated compensation.

On fleet strategy, Decker said 77‑passenger buses are more fuel‑efficient and flexible for athletics and other trips, while vans reduce fuel and staffing costs on low‑density routes and avoid the need for CDL drivers. She said older 2013–2015 model buses account for a disproportionate share of repair and maintenance costs and argued for a replacement program that balances buses and minivans based on route density.

The transportation briefing followed extensive public comment to the board about county infrastructure and budgets, including repeated pleas from residents that water and sewer systems be prioritized over new projects. Decker’s presentation noted the transportation department had made service and efficiency gains without compromising daily service levels.

—END—","Gloucester County Public Schools has shrunk its bus fleet from 118 to 76 vehicles and optimized routes to 68, the division’s transportation director told the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors while requesting roughly $1.3 million to buy about eight replacement buses and urging higher starting pay for bus drivers.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6264419,"Board approves carnival at Old Page site; operator to pay share of ride revenue, carry insurance",610,2638000,3248000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc&start=2638&end=3248","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096481-bf5511c356b6dc5c78ed0f1256332ccc/thumbnail_2638000.jpg","/articles/6264419/Gloucester-County/Virginia/Board-approves-carnival-at-Old-Page-site-operator-to-pay-share-of-ride-revenue-carry-insurance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264419-99462d96ef3760023256841f542d513e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160746&Signature=mKMEG9vMBKI6aK~BfzxaSz2CaHvwX9OQLV~5MvMmjS5R9bm4nzRrJJGlkwaeU5Aqxkwkf5R~FImRrTYuWObXO0PhBp0QQSAFbC2RLDR0SQh02NkugNHDfFD8IMdOEU-54gCfiEbIefg9BFr1bm0vwpYGp~PnUm6oA~xK27s7eZVRR1w6XaPjBAnwLJtKPwz-v9lq2DwiOp8zlBPvqfZCubMRAN8muVSdZJXxR~fuD5yRD6sU-Krh4873UgGDm74efdYpcz5TigDxqQUfMk6Tv1kTU6HuqCzJYsCghHsMwvWznLJrHlax~aFqeHLICzHpCa6MGpRKD760truA6vQGaw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors on a unanimous voice vote approved a contract allowing a private carnival operator to stage a multi‑week event at the Old Page site.

The carnival will be run by National Events Management Corporation over two weekends in June, with an option to add Thursday nights. The company will provide rides, games, food vendors, traffic management and permitting; the county would receive 10% of ride revenue after expenses, estimated by staff at roughly $8,000–$10,000 depending on weather and attendance.

County parks director Matt Barber said the vendor would be responsible for “all permitting, licensing, traffic management, and staffing,” and that the company had provided services for the Virginia Beach Boardwalk and the Suffolk Peanut Festival. Barber told the board the company would “return the grounds fully back to like it is” and would reseed and restore areas disrupted by the event.

County staff said the agreement requires the operator to handle amusement permits and to ensure food vendors comply with meal tax and vendor registration. County staff also told the board the sheriff’s office would be consulted about traffic and public safety plans and that any additional deputy expenses required for the event would be paid by the vendor.

County staff also said the initial draft of the contract had required the county to indemnify the vendor; that clause was removed during legal review. A staff member said the current contract requires the operator to indemnify the county and to carry required insurance. “That was an immediate nonstarter,” the staff member said of the original indemnity language.

Supervisor questions centered on parking capacity and cleanup responsibilities. Barber acknowledged parking was a “concern slightly,” and said staff had discussed the possibility of satellite lots and would coordinate with the sheriff’s office on traffic control. He said the vendor had agreed contractually to return the grounds to their original condition.

The board moved and seconded the resolution and then voted. During the roll call supervisors answered “yes” in sequence; the chair declared “Motion carries.”

The contract signed by the county attorney’s office remains the operative document for insurance, indemnity and cleanup obligations. Staff recommended the board approve the agreement to add a revenue‑generating event at the county‑maintained Old Page site while minimizing direct county expenditures.

Votes at a glance: the resolution to authorize the carnival agreement was approved in a board roll call; the motion carried.

The carnival will proceed only after the vendor files required amusement and vendor permits and after the county and the sheriff’s office approve any traffic or public safety plans.

—END—","The Gloucester County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a multi‑week carnival at the Old Page site operated by National Events Management Corporation. The company will handle permits, staffing and cleanup, pay 10% of ride revenue after expenses to the county, and must indemnify the county under the contract reviewed by staff.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Supervisors debate 3% cuts, COLA and use of one‑time funds as residents press for water and sewer spending

Gloucester County schools cut bus fleet and routes; transportation director seeks funds for replacement buses and higher driver pay

Board approves carnival at Old Page site; operator to pay share of ride revenue, carry insurance