By Heather Michon
Editor
Facing rising infrastructure needs and a limited financial cushion, the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors took a major step in the fiscal year 2027 budget process Wednesday night (Mar. 4), voting to advertise a maximum real estate tax rate of 77.7 cents per $100 of assessed value.
The motion passed 3-2, with Chris Fairchild (Cunningham) and Mike Goad (Fork Union) voting against the measure.
Under Virginia law, the advertised rate establishes the highest rate the board may adopt later in the budget cycle.
Supervisors emphasized that advertising the higher ceiling does not mean the county will ultimately adopt that rate, but it preserves flexibility as the board works through budget pressures and long-term capital needs in the coming months.
The advertised rate is slightly higher than the county’s current real estate tax rate of 76 cents, though board members said the discussion reflects the county’s effort to balance its historically conservative fiscal policy with the need to maintain and upgrade aging public facilities.
Board Chair Tony O’Brien (Rivanna) said the county’s spending should also be viewed in historical perspective, noting that inflation-adjusted tax rates have declined over time.
“We are actually more efficient than we used to be in 1974,” O’Brien said. “We’re not spending the money like we’re crazy.”
Supervisors will continue reviewing revenue projections, departmental requests, and major capital projects, including potential upgrades to county buildings and infrastructure, as they work toward adopting a final FY27 budget later this spring.
A public hearing on the FY27 tax rates will be held in early April.
County Office Complex
The financial pressures behind that debate became clearer later in the meeting, when supervisors received a presentation outlining the potential cost of a new county office complex — an issue that has surfaced repeatedly in recent years as the county evaluates its long-term space needs.
In 2021, supervisors approved $16 million in the county’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to fund a new administration building.
While the project did not move forward at the time, the question of how to address the county’s aging and fragmented office space has returned to the board several times since.
The latest discussion stems from a recently completed facilities use study presented by Ryan Bogese of Dewberry, the consulting firm hired to evaluate the county’s government facilities and long-term space needs.
Bogese said several county buildings, including the current administration building and the social services offices, no longer adequately support current operations. Departments are spread across multiple facilities, with limited meeting space and security challenges, while some buildings are aging and increasingly difficult to maintain.
To address those issues, the study proposes constructing a new three-story county administration building of roughly 63,800 square feet near the library and public safety building on Route 53.
Bogese said the preliminary estimate for the new building is about $37 million, with additional renovations to existing county facilities expected to follow once departments relocate.
The presentation was informational only, and supervisors took no action. But the discussion underscored the broader challenge facing the board as budget season begins: balancing the county’s traditionally cautious approach to taxation with the growing need to modernize aging public infrastructure.
Tenaska
While the facilities discussion focused on long-term infrastructure planning, supervisors also returned earlier in the evening to a more immediate decision looming before the board: the proposed Tenaska Expedition Generation natural-gas power plant.
The project has been under county review for months, and the board now faces a series of key decisions at its March 18 meeting, when supervisors are expected to consider whether the project is in “substantial accord” with the county’s comprehensive plan, along with a related zoning text amendment and the project’s special use permit (SUP).
In preparation for that vote, supervisors reviewed the draft conditions that would govern the project if approved. The conditions address issues such as noise monitoring, traffic impacts, environmental protections, and operational standards for the facility.
County staff told the board the conditions have been refined through months of review involving county staff, outside consultants, and Tenaska representatives. Officials also noted that the language could still be adjusted before the public hearing and final vote.
The discussion reflected the groundwork supervisors are laying ahead of the March decision, which will determine whether the proposed gas-fired power plant can move forward in Fluvanna County.
The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to take up the substantial accord determination, zoning text amendment, and special use permit for the project at its March 18 meeting, which will be held at 6 p.m. in the Fluvanna County High School auditorium.
