Board of Supervisors Chairman Scott York (At large) held a town hall meeting Thursday, June 28, to clear up any misconceptions about eminent domain.
After a newsletter circulated around the Sugarland Run neighborhood in May, calling for the support of Sugarland Run’s future, residents have been up in arms about their property, and their rights.
The newsletter read: "The Comprehensive Plan calls for the county to use its right of eminent domain to buy your home, bulldoze our community, and replace it with a densely-populated high-rise one."
"There is simply no truth to this whatsoever," York said.
The Comprehensive Plan is a guide the county uses to determine where and how the county grows. In 2001, the Board of Supervisors approved an update of the plan.
Some Sugarland Run residents were concerned about a policy in chapter six of the plan, which calls for establishment of at least one town center in each of the four suburban areas of the county, including the Potomac Suburban Area and the Sterling Suburban Area.
"Each community will have a recognized town center, provide a full range of housing types, and provide a diverse, stimulating social, cultural, recreational, spiritual environment," a resident read from the plan.
YORK BROUGHT residents' attention to the top of the page. The plan states the county will work with residents and business leaders to develop individual, detailed community plans to address particular needs of the build out of each of the communities during the next 20 years.
"Different detailed planning approaches will be required because of the development of the four communities," York read from the plan.
The chairman assured residents the words "eminent domain" never appear in the Comprehensive Plan, and furthermore, the General Assembly passed a law this year that prohibits eminent domain in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
"It is against the law as it stands today," York said.
Instead, York said it was the Board of Supervisors' intent to involve residents in the planning process of their communities.
"It is you that would determine what is in that plan. It is you that would determine if the town center was in the plan," he said. "The intent of the general plan was to bring you together as a community to decide."
STILL SOME RESIDENTS at the meeting wanted more assurance from the chairman that their neighborhood was not going to turn in to an overdeveloped area.
Supervisor Mick Staton (R-Sugarland Run) initiated a change to the Comprehensive Plan in May that would bar the county from taking land through eminent domain and giving it to a private entity for economic development purposes; eliminate the term "redevelopment" from the comprehensive plan; and remove language calling for construction of mixed-use town centers in communities east of Route 28.
"We don’t need to put words in the plan because it is a nonissue," York said. "It is against the law."
Robert Simanski, a member of the Sugarland Run Homeowner’s Association board of directors, sent out the newsletter that caused such a ruckus in May.
Simanski apologized for the "tone and content" of the newsletter. However, he said he has never been involved in any planning process of his community.
"Nobody ever said we could participate in the planning process," he said. "Nobody’s ever asked for our help."
"It is your choice at the end of the day," York said.