Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Nottoway supervisors pause sale of Pickett Park parcel after residents warn of displacement and legal risks
Loading...
Summary
After a public hearing in which residents and business owners warned that selling 53 acres at Pickett Park could trigger federal relocation obligations and displace long-term campers and businesses, the Nottoway County Board of Supervisors declined to approve the sale and voted to carry the issue to a work session pending legal review.
Residents filled the podium and the board chamber on the public hearing for a 53‑acre parcel at Pickett Park, urging supervisors to halt a proposed $700,000 sale to the Ward Burton Foundation and to study potential legal and human‑service consequences.
"If you proceed to sell it, it's actually gonna be a very, very bad thing for the county," said Jed, a fifth‑district resident, who told the board he had reviewed county financial records and argued that mandatory relocation assistance tied to federal programs could add "between $2.4 and $3,000,000" in unbudgeted costs. Several other speakers, including Rebecca, who identified herself as a long‑term camper relying on Fort Pickett access, said sale would displace families and businesses that depend on the campground.
Administrator Bowen introduced the item and said Ward Burton Foundation has offered $700,000 for the barracks area (parcel 4369). The board opened the public hearing and heard repeated concerns about whether county advertising and notice complied with legal requirements and whether federal relocation rules or REPI (readiness and environmental protection integration) funding would trigger displacement obligations.
Clerk Catherine, who assisted with the advertising, told the board she helped draft the notice and considered it legally sufficient. County supervisors pressed staff and counsel for definitive legal guidance about whether the county or purchaser would bear relocation costs and whether receipt of federal funds creates mandatory procedures prior to sale.
Supervisor Ingram moved to accept the sale; after discussion and a roll‑call style exchange the motion failed. Board members said they were not confident they had the legal clarity needed to approve a sale that could obligate the county financially or lawfully to provide relocation assistance.
Following additional debate, the board carried a motion to move the matter into unfinished business and to the next work session for a fuller legal review and exploration of displacement obligations, funding mechanisms, and alternatives. The board instructed county attorneys to research the application of federal relocation law and to report back; supervisors also asked staff to explore whether a special meeting would be needed if the legal review supports immediate action.
The public hearing record included testimony from business owners and multiple residents who said Pickett Park provides affordable rental and camping options and that some tenants have relied on nearby Fort Pickett access for years. Board members asked staff to gather precise accounting of Pickett Park revenue, LRA/timber sale funds, and any earmarked grant matches.
The board did not approve the sale at the meeting; the item will return to the board after legal review and additional staff analysis.
