Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves $255,000 for third‑party plan review at Stafford Technology Campus; developer to reimburse county
Summary
The Stafford County Board of Supervisors voted 6–1 to appropriate $255,000 to hire third‑party plan‑review services for the Stafford Technology Campus data center project, with staff saying the developer will reimburse the county.
The Stafford County Board of Supervisors voted 6–1 on Jan. 21 to budget and appropriate $255,000 of prior‑year Development Services revenue to fund third‑party plan review services for the Stafford Technology Campus data‑center project.
Paul Sante, director of Development Services, told the board the appropriation will support hiring a third‑party engineering consultant to supplement county plan review resources on the fast‑moving project. “Staff is requesting the board to budget and appropriate $255,000 of previous year's development services revenue,” Sante said, explaining the money comes from permitting and plan‑review fees, not general fund dollars. He said the proffer associated with the rezoning allows the county to use third‑party reviewers and be reimbursed by the developer for reasonable costs.
Why it matters: the campus is expected to submit a large volume of site plans over a short period. Development Services said an on‑call consultant will accelerate reviews and help the county keep other permitting workload on schedule. Staff and procurement recommended the county contract the on‑call consultant and administer payment and reimbursement, rather than having the developer pay the reviewer directly, which county staff said raised optics and oversight concerns.
Board concerns and debate
Supervisors asked whether the developer had agreed in writing to reimburse the county; Sante said staff has an email confirming the developer’s commitment and that a draft contract is under review by the county attorney. Several board members preferred receiving written commitment or an upfront deposit from the developer; others supported moving forward so the county’s reviewers could be supplemented immediately. The public‑procurement approach, staff said, offers the county better control of review independence and ensures county oversight of invoices.
Vote and implementation
The motion to approve the appropriation and to procure third‑party plan‑review services passed 6–1. The board directed staff to continue coordinating with procurement and the county attorney and to aim for a written agreement with the developer. Staff said the county will pay the consultant from the appropriated funds as reviews occur and seek reimbursement from the developer under the proffer terms or a forthcoming agreement.
Quotable
- “We are in desperate need of that help from our on call consultant,” Paul Sante said of the plan‑review workload.
Ending
Staff will return with contract documents and the county attorney will review the draft agreement; staff said it will not expend general‑fund dollars and expects reimbursement from the developer per the proffer commitments.
