A tax by another name
I’ve only been living and farming in Botetourt County for a bit more than 10 years, but I’m raising my daughters here and plan to spend the rest of my own life here as well, so I guess I have reason to be concerned about where we’re going. Lately I was talking to a friend who was born and raised here; he’s a customer of mine and I’m a customer of his, and we usually find the time to chat a little longer than we should when he stops by the farm for his produce.
His theory on why Google wants to build a data center in Botetourt? “Cheap land, and they think we’re a bunch of stupid hillbillies.”
Personally, I wouldn’t put it just that way, but from what I’ve seen I don’t think his insight into Google’s decision-making process is too far off.
Most of the arguments I’ve heard in favor of the data center hinge on the huge “tax windfall.” The county will get millions a year in taxing the data center, and the rest of us won’t have to pay a dime. It sounds good, doesn’t it? Our county taxes stay flat or even go down a bit and the county rakes it in from Google. Maybe Silicon Valley’s made so much money they’ve gone into the charity business.
Here’s the thing they don’t tell you on the slick Google Public Relations kit that’s gone up on the county website at taxpayer expense: nationwide, people’s electricity bills in spots within 50 miles of new data centers are doubling and even tripling in cost. Maybe ours won’t go up that much, maybe they will. But, the demand on the grid is sure to raise them plenty. How much of this “tax windfall” will be balanced out by each household’s higher monthly power bill? How much money do you have left over at the end of each month to subsidize the county’s new tax scheme?
Even most of the folks I talk to who are ambivalent about the data center say the fix is in already. They think the papers have been signed and the Board of Supervisors are only holding public comment to make it look nice, but that their minds were made up a year ago. They think that there’s nothing we can do to stop the county government from laundering our higher electricity bills into a fat new tax payday, and have Google flush millions of gallons a day of our region’s drinking water down the data center toilets for the privilege.
What do you think?
Alex Stewart
Fincastle
Celebrate Earth Day in Fincastle
The Fincastle Sustainability Committee is sponsoring the third annual Earth Day event on Saturday, April 25, from 10 a.m.-2 p.m. at the Fincastle Library. We are excited about this annual partnership with the Friends of Fincastle Library’s book sale.
This free activity will feature tables with information on Earth Day topics, led by local experts. This year the displays will include Forestry, Astronomy (including a NASA Ambassador), Soil and Water, Solar, Build a Bird House with a Park Ranger, Bees, Conservation Easements, Future Farmers, Earth Day Art (including a poster contest with Lord Botetourt and James River art students), and more. We see the return of Wayne Parks with his kettle corn and fresh lemonade, and new this year are vendors selling bee products, native tree saplings, and seedlings for your vegetable garden. Get your questions answered by local experts about all these topics. Visitors are invited to bring plants and cuttings for the Plant Exchange. This is a great family event and we encourage the public to check it out.
We are a low budget event and therefore are very grateful to the support we have received from the Town of Fincastle and two anonymous donors. In addition, Ace Hardware has donated a tree that will be planted at Big Spring Park.
The mission of Fincastle’s Sustainability Committee is to help Fincastle continue to be a community that can persist over generations, enjoy a healthy environment, prosperous economy, and a vibrant civic life. We are thrilled to be partnering with the Friends of Fincastle Library who are holding their book sale on Thursday, April 23 through Saturday, the 25th.
This cooperation has generated some great ideas and enthusiasm that will make this a fun and educational event. We are very grateful to Sarah Rodgers of the Fincastle Library and to Paige Ware and all the dedicated members of the Fincastle Friends of the Library.
Bess Madonna, Chairperson
Fincastle Sustainability Committee
Schools’ needs are continually delayed
On behalf of the Buchanan Elementary PTA, I am writing to raise awareness about an important issue facing our community: the need for adequate funding for our public schools.
As the county works through its budget process, our school division is facing a significant shortfall that could directly impact students through larger class sizes, reduced programs, and fewer resources in the classroom. At the same time, critical needs outlined in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) continue to be delayed, leaving aging and declining school infrastructures unaddressed year after year. Nine out of our 12 schools are over 50 years old. Two of the three of our “newest schools” are 25 and 30 years old.
Recent budget discussions, including the subcommittee hearing, made it clear that while concerns are being heard, meaningful solutions are still needed. We understand that the Board of Supervisors is seeking constructive, solution-oriented input, and we support that approach. However, it is equally important to recognize that continued delays in both operational funding and facility improvements only compound the challenges facing our schools. Investing in education is not just about meeting immediate needs; it is also about planning responsibly for the future of our community. Safe, well-maintained schools and adequately funded programs are essential to student success and to the strength of our county as a whole.
We encourage community members to stay informed, get involved, and share thoughtful ideas with our local leaders as they make these critical decisions. Our students deserve both strong academic support and safe, reliable learning environments. We urge our county to make these priorities in the upcoming budget.
Clara Holland, President
Buchanan Elementary PTA
Letter says schools cannot continue to do more with less
My name is Brittany Turman, and I serve as the president of the Breckinridge Elementary School PTA. I have spent the past six years on our PTA’s Board of Directors, and I am also a parent of two children who will be fully educated within Botetourt County Public Schools.
Over those years, I have seen firsthand what our school budgets have meant for our classrooms, our teachers, and our students. I have also seen, time and time again, how parent organizations like ours step in to bridge gaps that should not exist in a fully supported public school system.
Breckinridge Elementary is an incredible school, led by Principal Wyatt Turner and supported by dedicated educators and staff who work tirelessly for their students. Our school community shows up, rolls up its sleeves, and does what needs to be done. And we do it gladly, because we care deeply about our children and our community.
But there is a growing concern that cannot be ignored.
Following a recent budget subcommittee meeting, it is clear that our school division is once again facing a projected shortfall. While final decisions are still ahead, the potential impacts are serious: larger class sizes, reduced programming, and fewer resources for both students and teachers. At the same time, critical facility needs outlined in the Capital Improvements Plan continue to be delayed, even as maintenance concerns increase – affecting the safety, functionality, and overall learning environment of our schools.
Parents and staff showed up to speak on behalf of our schools. They shared real concerns and real experiences. Yet, there was little movement toward clear solutions, and many questions remain.
This is not just a school issue, it is a community issue.
Our PTA will continue to advocate, because that is part of our role. But advocacy alone cannot replace adequate funding. Volunteer organizations should not be relied upon to fill systemic gaps.
When schools are underfunded, the impact is felt in every classroom. It shows up in the opportunities students miss, the strain placed on teachers, and the delays in maintaining safe and functional facilities.
These are not abstract concerns, they directly shape the daily experience of our children.
Our students are the future of Botetourt County. The decisions made today will determine the strength of our workforce, our community, and our quality of life for years to come.
I encourage our community to stay informed and engaged. Attend meetings. Ask questions. Share your perspective with the Board of Supervisors. When families and community members speak thoughtfully and clearly about the importance of investing in our schools, it matters.
We have an opportunity to prioritize what matters most. Our students, and the future of this county, deserve nothing less.
Brittany Turman, President
Breckinridge Elementary School PTA
Buchanan Supervisor comments on county and school funding
Since Friday’s Budget Subcommittee hearing on the school budget, county supervisors have received a number of emails and calls from residents urging us to fully fund a proposed $15 million increase to the county’s contribution to the school budget. For those of you who have not been directly involved in the formulation of the county and school budgets, I’d like to provide some context for understanding the process, the issues, and the challenges – as well as a realistic picture of our financial situation.
It is, we all know, quite easy to spend someone else’s money. But it’s a different story when it’s your own. One reason I ran for supervisor is that it looked to me as if the previous Board of Supervisors (BoS) was collectively finding it far too easy to spend the taxpayers’ money. Now, as a member of the Budget Subcommittee and BoS, I believe it is my job to treat your hard-earned taxpayer dollars as if every single one of them matters.
Unless we raise taxes or increase county debt, there are a finite number of dollars from county revenues that must be divided among a huge array of competing interests. This year, for a variety of reasons, projected revenues have declined, so the challenge of balancing competing needs is even more difficult.
The county budget process is separate from the school budget process. Under Virginia law, the county BoS is not able to dictate how the schools spend the money allocated to them by the BoS for public education. There is no system of checks and balances for the BoS to validate how the money was spent. The schools prepare their proposed budget and submit it to the BoS, which can approve, reduce or increase the number being proposed. But the county cannot, for example, require that the schools use the multi-million-dollar surpluses the schools have enjoyed in past years to repair Lord Botetourt’s decades old leaking roof or remove the mold from Buchanan District schools.
This year, the BoS created a new budget process. As a result, the proposed budget has been intensely scrutinized and revised through a series of reviews by the Budget Task Force, the County Administration, and ultimately the Budget Subcommittee. (Using round numbers,) county departments requested spending of $108 million, which is $13 million more than projected revenues of $95 million. The Budget Task Force and administration recommended reductions of $11.7 million and the Budget Subcommittee trimmed the remaining $1.3 million to reduce spending to match revenues. The Budget Subcommittee held a series of public hearings with the department heads who presented their respective proposed department budgets. The Budget Subcommittee members and participating citizens then examined every line of the department’s budget to find places to cut spending, or in some cases, raise revenues to cover costs.
This was the first time, in my experience, that the county budget process was so transparent and rigorous. Any citizen could access every line of every departmental budget and weigh in with their questions and comments. And, of course, still ahead is a public hearing on the final budget and another opportunity for residents to weigh in.
The school budget process is entirely different. I am one of two supervisor liaisons with the School Board and attended the two budget workshops and the public hearing on the school budget. The school budget process feels much like the county’s old one, where the Administration took the prior year’s budget as a given and simply increased it. Virtually no attention was paid to cutting inefficient programs or distinguishing “wants” from “needs” in the old process. The BoS then rubber stamped the budget. As we all (rather painfully) know, that budgeting process inevitably led to increased spending and increased taxes.
The School Board may have actually probed the proposed budget in closed meetings that I was not invited to attend. But what was publicly presented was this: the School Administration’s proposed increase went from about $3.9 million in the first working session to nearly $15 million in the second. With few questions asked, the $15 million increase was unanimously approved by the School Board. This $15 million increase is on top of the $35 million the county contributed to the schools last year ($32 million for operations and an additional $3 million for school debt). This brings the total requested contribution from the county to about $50 million. Fully funding the schools’ request would take more than HALF of all county revenues.
Now for some hard facts. I have been called “rude,” “not interested in education,” “uncaring of children,” “dictatorial,” and “not listening” for pointing them out. But we need to talk numbers, no matter how passionate we may be about education.
There are two primary ways to fund the schools’ proposed $15 million increase.
The first is to raise property taxes by about 30 cents. That would mean the property tax rate would go from 70 cents per $100 to a dollar. That’s about a 43% increase – and not a viable option.
The other way is to cut the budgets of some or every county department. Public Safety is the next biggest category of expense after schools. However, the combined budgets of the Sheriff’s Department and Fire/EMS total only about $18 million. Taking $15 million out of their budgets clearly isn’t possible. Nor is cutting every single county department in half to fully fund the schools’ request.
At the risk of being called worse than I have already been called, I would like to suggest a third alternative. And that is that the schools recognize that their current trajectory of declining student population and exponentially increasing costs is unsustainable. Since the BoS cannot dictate how the schools spend the county’s contribution, these are, of course, ideas to consider, not directives.
But a place to start is for the School Administration and School Board to re-examine its proposed budget with the same level of intense scrutiny that the county applied this year to every single county department. (Thanks to pressure from voters, I believe.) For example, $2.7 million was cut from Fire/EMS and the Sheriff’s proposals – and both departments indicated they can still function appropriately. Under pressure to balance the budget, other department heads came up with creative solutions to cut their proposed budgets. One came up with a plan to increase revenues to cover the costs of its primary programs. Surely there is room in the schools’ $80+ million overall budget to tighten belts and still function satisfactorily?
There are also four elementary schools that look to be only half full – what kind of savings could be achieved by consolidating the four schools into two? I am informed by former School Board members that an efficiency study conducted 8-10 years ago recommended consolidating elementary schools way back then. I haven’t been able to verify this or obtain a copy of the study. But if true – and the existence of four half-empty elementary schools support the claim – how much expense could have been saved over the years? How much of the savings could have been applied to maintain the remaining school buildings?
This one is extremely sensitive and still, like everything else in the school budget, requires rigorous examination. The schools’ Cadillac health care plan does not appear to be realistically sustainable. The 2025 audit showed the schools having a $4 million rainy day/savings fund. Conflicting explanations about what happened to that money have been offered at different times. The most likely explanation is that the money was actually used to prop up the schools’ health care plan rather than, for example, to eliminate mold from the facilities. There are some limited county funds outside of county revenues that may be available for school use this year. They come from the accumulated savings from the administration of the county’s health care plan. There is thus a healthy surplus on the county health care side and a giant deficit on the school side. The difference illustrates the need for thorough analysis and a serious investigation of alternatives.
Only one of the people who contacted me passionately pleading for full funding asked how to gain access to the schools’ financial records. No parents (or other residents) showed up for either of the public budget workshop sessions or for the public hearing on the school budget. I believe that the reformation of the county budget process came about because of citizen involvement, the citizens’ willingness to ask tough questions, and the turnabout in the last election. The schools have not been subjected to the same level of citizen oversight and scrutiny. But it’s time, because we can’t raise taxes 43% and we can’t cut every county department in half.
Linda Rottman
Buchanan District Supervisor
Letter criticizes supervisors over response to school budget request
I attended the Budget Subcommittee (BS) meeting on April 8 regarding schools/school contributions. I had attended BS meetings in past years, but none of them consisted of as much BS as was witnessed by the standing room only crowd in attendance at this one. Also, this was the first time I witnessed AI being put on display at a BS meeting, but not the AI which one hears about daily. This AI was “Arrogance & Incompetence,” excellently displayed through the BS spouted by two members of the Board of Supervisors, Blue Ridge District Supervisor Walter Michael (the chair of the BS) and Buchanan District Supervisor Linda Rottman.
There is an old proverb which, according to our good friend and soon to be corporate partner Google, is from a 1907 book by Maurice Switzer which says, “It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it.” Throughout the entire meeting, and thereafter, the abovementioned two members of the Board of Supervisors serving on the Budget Subcommittee successfully removed all doubt of it, if there were ever any doubt before this event.
I arrived around 1:10 p.m. during the Social Services BS hearing. The Director of Social Services was being grilled about a line item of $6,100 and change. It was identified as money for payment of the cost of disposing of the body of an indigent deceased person. Mr. Michael then revealed he had discussed this with his constituents at his Blue Ridge District Town Hall and 90% of them (9 out of 10 or 18 out of 20?) thought the best way to avoid this expense was to donate the body to science! And Mr. Michael thought that was a representative sample which needed to be mentioned in this meeting? An inordinate amount of time was spent discussing this by the chair and Linda Rottman agreeing with him when she said, “I think that’s a worthy idea”.
As this matter had been previously addressed by Mr. Michael at his Town Hall meeting, it seems as if he could easily have called the county attorney, or looked it up on our good friend, Google, and he would have discovered that this situation is addressed in Section 32.1-309.1, et. seq. of the Code of Virginia which requires the county to pay these costs in such an event and makes no provision for the county to donate the body to science! Again, this is a budget, not a spend it. It will be spent, when and if needed. It will still be there if not needed. But, the two of them really enjoyed grandstanding over this because, as she said at an earlier hearing that day, “I’m the numbers person here. I’m not really interested in, you know, sort of the explanations of stuff.” In other words, just cut it out, we don’t need facts or details. AI on full display for all to see.
After an excellent presentation by school representatives, Mr. Michael went to a whiteboard to the left of the dais, which had almost illegible words and numbers scribbled thereon (like the “mice writing” Linda Rottman had mentioned earlier) and said the bottom line was what money was available. He then went to the right of the dais to a similar whiteboard, which he said showed how much was asked. When he returned to his seat he said, if they gave the schools what they wanted, it would require a 28-cent increase in the real estate tax rate and asked the crowd, “Can you stand a 28-cent increase?” When he got an emphatic “YES” from the crowd he appeared to be shocked to hear from members of the silent majority rather than from the chronic complainers who attend his Town Hall, and his response was, “If you could leave me your number, name and address, we’ll certainly do that for you.” And while Linda Rottman was cackling gleefully at his comment, she said, “And, for all of you who are so happy to pay extra taxes, you could probably pay a little bit more for your health insurance, if that’s the case.” Then, when some in the crowd shouted out how rude her comment was, she said to the chair, “They just said I was rude for saying that.” They were right!
Also, during this process, she said, “I should not have dropped out of math.” Imagine that. The same person who, in an earlier hearing that day said she was the numbers person, had dropped out of math? AI on full display again
School teachers and staff packed the auditorium to support their budget requests and publicly comment during the designated citizen comment period, as provided in the Guidelines for Public Comment posted on the Botetourt County website. Well into the second hour, Mr. Michael started looking at the sheets (which he said were used to save money but which did nothing but create confusion) filled out by those in attendance and noted that all he had were names and addresses, not questions. Then, someone in the room asked if they were in the Public Comment period whereupon Mr. Michael explained the right to speak had been extended as a courtesy, but had been changed two days before. After a strong statement and request by Dr. Womack for them to allow public comment, the chair reluctantly allowed two people to speak before one of the few chronic complainers in attendance (who NEVER complained about his fellow chronic complainers cheering, whistling and applauding when and after his repetitive complaints) complained about the chair allowing a loud crowd to bend the rules (a totally baseless complaint, as usual) and Linda Rottman helped the chair bow to their followers wishes and said, “If you want to discuss an actual number on the budget rather than sort of quality of life kind of things, or philosophy kind of things – I think we’re all pretty aware of the value of education, and so forth, so – OK, all right, well, I think we should just bring this to an end then” to which Mr. Michael questioned, “We’re done?” She said, “Yeah” and he said, “All right, thank you for coming.” Together, those two left absolutely no doubt at all!
When I went to the BS meeting, I was hoping I would be enlightened as to how my district supervisor was going to miraculously lower our taxes without diminishing the quality of life we enjoy in Botetourt County which prompts so many people to move here. She complained and complains incessantly about “skyrocketing taxes” (a total mischaracterization) while never recognizing that, when real estate values significantly increase, NO ONE ever complains when they sell their real estate and smile all the way to the bank. If any Botetourt County resident doesn’t like to bear a small part of the cost of all of the great services and things we have here, perhaps they can smile all the way to the bank after they sell their property for far more than the tax assessed value and then discover how much less enjoyable living elsewhere may be.
After all, few of us enjoy the privilege of having our property assessed for less than we paid for it 13 years ago and accordingly pay less than our fair share of taxes while constantly complaining about “skyrocketing taxes.”
Some of the citizens have had about as much of the BS and AI they can stand but, unfortunately, I fear we are only in for far, far more grandstanding from them.
Bob Patterson
Buchanan District
