Five questions: Matoaca District board candidates

The Chesterfield Observer believes it's important for voters to be informed when they go to the polls on Nov. 6. In the weeks leading up to the election, we are running Q & A's featuring the candidates for the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors from each district, so constituents can make a side-by-side comparison of where the candidates stand on some of the county's most important issues. This week, we are focusing on the supervisor candidates in the Matoaca District - Independent Marleen Durfee, Democrat Bill Hastings, Independent Eli Jones and Republican Mark Tubbs. We asked them each the same five questions. Here are their responses.

Do you support the rezonings for Branner Station (4,998 homes and 470,000 square feet of retail) and Roseland (5,140 homes and 1.5 million square feet of office/retail)?

Durfee: I will make careful, independent decisions on all zoning cases, taking into consideration the impact on public facilities, a cost benefit analysis for taxpayers, the recommendation of staff and the planning commission, and most importantly the input from concerned citizens. The Branner Station case needed more time to address eminent domain issues as well as a cost benefit analysis for taxpayers. The Roseland case, while it appears to be one of the best models we have seen for balanced development, may need more time for the board to review recent changes to the case and concerns by Charter Colony residents.

Hastings: The two projects together have the potential of adding over 10,000 new homes in our county at a time when providing the necessary infrastructure seems so far behind. Branner Station and Roseland appear to be high quality and represent smart growth design, and they will most likely be approved by Jan. 1 when the new board takes office anyway. My positive take on this is that these two developments, along with Magnolia Green, will provide the economic engine that is needed for businesses to prosper and also take development pressure off the more rural parts of the Matoaca District.

Jones: I do not support any new large amounts of growth until we build up the infrastructure of schools and roads around the county to be able to handle the new growth.

Tubbs: I do not have enough information to make an informed decision. I would like the opportunity to review the information prepared by staff for each case and work with the members of the planning commission to make a well-informed decision.

About $24 million in additional funding is necessary for a cloverleaf to provide direct access to I-295 for the Meadowville Technology Park. Should Chesterfield provide funding or financing for the cloverleaf?

Durfee: Yes, we must find the necessary public dollars to make certain this interchange is built. We have an excellent opportunity to expand the park and attract other technology businesses and related market companies if we provide the necessary infrastructure. Using the people's tax dollars in a manner that brings employment and economic opportunity is a win-win for the business community and our citizens.

Hastings: A $24 million appropriation is a fraction of the total investment in development of the park by Chesterfield County, the Commonwealth of Virginia and private enterprise. Providing funding for construction of the cloverleaf is an investment in our future and would affirm the county's commitment to attracting and retaining high quality and hightech employers.

Jones: It seems to me that if we have our children learning in trailers and eating lunch in Matoaca High in the hallway floor, then we should correct these issues first before providing millions to aid big business.

Tubbs: Yes, the cloverleaf establishes access that demonstrates Chesterfield's commitment to attracting new business to the park and will enable the park to be successfully marketed as a technology center.

How would you provide funding for Chesterfield County's road needs?

Durfee: We cannot build or pave our way out of the transportation challenge we have in front of us. Serving the transportation needs of our citizens is going to require a proactive planning approach that includes linking land uses with transportation, utilizing multimodal solutions, adopting sustainable development patterns and lobbying the General Assembly for funding, in addition to broadening impact fee authority if cash proffer limitations are passed by the 2008 session. Our current homeowners should not have to bear any more burdens through higher real estate taxes to pay for an inefficient transportation system that needs to be fixed.

Hastings: The county simply cannot afford to build roads and fund all of the county services we are currently funding. I continue to hold out the hope that our House of Delegates representatives and State Senators can find some way to work with the governor to build some roads in the county.

Jones: If we cut out unconstitutional and wasteful spending in this county we will be able to provide for the necessary school and road issues. Only with responsible money management can we hope to address the problem of roads correctly.

Tubbs: I will explore all funding options available, including community development authorities, special transportation districts and general fund dollars, to secure transportation bonds that will be used to construct roads to get traffic moving again.

Do you think that proffers should be increased from the maximum of $15,600 per home?

Durfee: Across the Matoaca District there is a critical need for infrastructure improvements. The current policy of "growth pays for growth" has failed because the county has solely depended on proffers to meet the needs of our citizens. All tools available, including but not limited to managing our growth, proffers, CDAs and impact fees, should be considered. Our revenue sources to meet these needs must be flexible enough to adjust to the demands of the marketplace. At this time, an increase in proffers is not what the citizens need from our government. We need strong planning, political courage and government accountability.

Hastings: Proffers should not be raised beyond the current rate. There needs to be a balance between helping to pay for the costs associated with growth and keeping housing affordable for the average citizen. Our county is a better place to live when police officers, firefighters, teachers, nurses and others in this income range can afford to live in our communities. In my judgment, a second reason for not raising the proffers is that this cost becomes incorporated into the market value of all the houses in the county and thus raises assessments and taxes for everyone.

Jones: The issue facing Matoaca District is growth management. Cash proffers have aided building schools and roads and are a major portion of the money for roads and schools. What is taking place is we are relying on these proffers. We only receive these proffers when new homes are built. This leads to the approving of more neighborhoods to bring in more proffers. But the neighborhoods bring more traffic and people, which leads to the needs of new schools and roads. This is a pattern that should be broken, and raising proffers will only encourage the reliance on growth for more money.

Tubbs: No, the proffer system should be replaced with an impact fee because the proffer system is broken. Proffers only apply to newly zoned lots while impact fees apply to both currently zoned lots and lots which may be zoned in the future. The impact fee should be set at a level to fully capture the cost of services required by new development and collected at the time the building permit is issued.

Should the board of supervisors be expanded to more than five members?

Durfee: I support increasing the number of supervisors, as well as adding at-large representation to the board. Additional supervisors will increase access for constituents and improve government efficiency. Our current population is around 300,000, leaving each district with approximately 60,000 residents. Of the fourth largest localities in the state, Chesterfield is the only board to not have at-large representation. I will advocate for a structure that provides a communitywide viewpoint. Enlarging our government structure to meet the needs of our growing community is not about making government bigger or more intrusive, it's about making government responsive to the people.

Hastings: The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors should be expanded to seven members. At the present time each supervisor is representing approximately 60,000 residents, and the population is growing. The citizens would benefit from better representation by increasing the number of supervisors. This would enable each supervisor to give more attention to each constituent. Elected officials need to be easily accessible and actively engaged within the community in order to be a true public servant. A smaller geographic area would facilitate this. The logical time to do the redistricting into seven districts would be after the 2010 census.

Jones: I believe that the will of the people should be the determining factor. We should put that question to the people and not to me and my fellow candidates. Personally, I have no objections to expanding the board.

Tubbs: It is extremely important that our citizens be well represented. If this is proven not to be the case, I would look at the 2010 census data and based on that information, consider one of two approaches to the problem: reconfigure existing boundary lines to reflect our changing population centers or add two more board members. Careful analysis is needed to ensure among other things that we limit additional expense to the taxpayer. Also, if we consider expanding the board to seven members, we will need to simultaneously explore adding two additional school board members.