Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Courthouse Construction Fee topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nottoway supervisors open hearing on $3 courthouse construction assessment

Nottoway County Board of Supervisors · May 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board opened a public hearing on an ordinance to add a $3 assessment on qualifying court filings to fund courthouse construction and renovation; staff estimated the fee could generate roughly $9,000–$15,000 annually; no members of the public spoke in opposition.

Nottoway County supervisors opened a public hearing on an ordinance that would impose a $3 courthouse construction assessment on certain district and circuit court filings. Bowen, the staff presenter, said the assessment would apply to civil actions with disputes of $500 or less and to criminal and traffic cases, and that the fee would be collected by the clerk and remitted to the county treasurer for courthouse construction, reconstruction or renovation.

"This assessment referred to as the courthouse construction fee shall be collected by the clerk...and remitted to this county treasurer to be held subject to disbursements by the board of supervisors solely for the construction, reconstruction, renovation of, or adaptive use of the structure of the county courthouse," Bowen said while explaining the proposed amendment to the county code. Bowen estimated the change could generate "somewhere in the neighborhood, maybe of, I don't know, 9 to $15,000." The public hearing drew no sign-ups and the board moved to close the hearing by motion and recorded a voice vote of assent.

The proposal cites provisions in the Code of Virginia as the enabling authority for local assessments on court filings; Bowen referenced the county code amendment during his presentation. Supervisors offered no extended discussion before closing the hearing and agreed next steps would follow the usual ordinance process, with formal readings and any required votes scheduled at later meetings. The board took no final adoption action during the hearing.