Lessons from a Board of Supervisors Meeting

By Charles Houston

The Board of Supervisors met Sept. 15. It was a lesson in civics, civility, and on how to persuade others to support one’s idea. 

It started with the Pledge of Allegiance; the audience stood respectfully. After introductory remarks by Chair Phyllis Randall, citizens could speak for several minutes on agenda items or on anything on their minds.  

One agenda item was controversial, and generated much citizen comment. An area just west of Leesburg is annoyed at the sound of frequent gunfire to its west. As you know, anything even hinting at limiting Second Amendment rights brings howls of anger from some quarters.

I am going to dispense with formality and call some Supervisors by their given names, since I consider them friends. This also should humanize them, which is a good thing. 

Phyllis actually went to a house in that neighborhood to hear the guns for herself. Yes, it was annoying, she reported. The Board then asked for advice from the County Administrator and the County Attorney, as to any relevant zoning provision. There was none. Supervisors, one at a time, asked questions or made comments. They were limited to three minutes each, and the meeting moved along efficiently. One Supervisor then made a motion to restrict the shooting. As is the Board’s practice, there was a round of questions about the motion, also time-limited, followed by a vote. The vote was tied four to four and the Chair, Phyllis was last and had the tie-breaking vote. Even though she supports tighter gun controls, Phyllis voted against the motion on the pragmatic grounds that it was a Constitutional issue and County intervention would lead to a sinkhole of litigation.

There were 17 other items on the agenda and most were not political, or very controversial. On each the Board followed the same routine of questions, motions, comments and voting. Meetings are efficient, but there are always many items to cover, and thus meetings are never short.

I was interested in Item 15 of the agenda, put forward by the Ashburn Supervisor, Mike Turner. I’m deeply involved in land use issues and while Item 15 did not deal with any specific land use problem, it was Mike’s plan to improve the way the County deals with them. It was not controversial and was elegant in its design. However, it was complex. The way he handled it was a tour de force but before I tell you about that, I’ll reminisce about the boneheaded way I handled an idea some years ago.

I developed large office buildings for a large Atlanta-based commercial developer. I personally developed six million square feet of office space, the largest of which was 1.2 million square feet. My clients included AT&T, UPS, Coca-Cola and even the Duke of Milan, Italy. Any developer, of any project of any kind, starts with an idea. And I had a big one: To build the tallest building in the country. The site was perfect. Two anchor tenants were nearby and we could layer more floors of office space, a hotel, luxury apartments and so on. Television antennas would be added and integrated into the architecture. The building would then be around 1,400 feet tall.  It was a big idea that could become real.

A few days after these things coalesced in my mind, I was in an executive meeting. During a break in the agenda I announced, “I have a great idea. Let’s build the tallest building in the country!” Reactions ranged from “Are you kidding?” to “No.” I had done no homework or produced even a typewritten summary. Most importantly, I had not met with any of the others to discuss my idea. I had done neither homework nor preparation and I blew it.

Mike Turner most clearly did not blow it. He began his presentation with just a handful of simple slides that explained what he wanted to do and why. He kept it short, and Supervisors then offered their comments. Every one began with heaping praise on Mike for his work. I’ve attended many Board meetings and have never seen such effusive and enthusiastic compliments. They were deserved.

One could look behind the scene and draw an important conclusion. The first is that Mike had obviously talked in advance to every Supervisor, explained his idea and answered questions. I knew their reactions were positive when
Phyllis Randall said something like, “This will end up passing.” 

The proposal was to dissolve a land use advisory panel called ZOAG (Zoning Ordinance Action Group) and replace it with a new body called ZOC (Zoning Ordinance Committee.) Sounds esoteric and boring, right? Actually, it’s a very good idea that eliminates some overlaps between ZOAG and the Planning Commission, addresses some membership issues and makes other refinements. It was apparent that there were many devils in the details: One Supervisor said too many real estate interests were represented, while another said there were too many conservation groups. Then, would ZOC report to the Planning Commission or directly to the Board? 

These and other comments were amiable, but it was becoming clear that a lot of details needed resolution. A motion was made to defer a vote until their Oct. 6 meeting. While Mike said he thought the vote could be taken then (It was 11:43 at the time), a wrinkle in his brow acknowledged that he saw the inevitability of the short delay, so he seconded the deferral motion. I‘m sure he’s already refining his motion, and as Phyllis said, “I’m confident his idea will pass.”

With much chagrin, I wonder how my Atlanta skyscraper idea would have fared had I done my homework and preparation. 

Charles Houston Developed office buildings in Atlanta, and has lived in Paeonian Springs for over 20 years.