209 Powell Mountain Road

Stanardsville, VA 22973
October 8th, 2023
Via Email

To: Greene County Board of Supervisors

Subject: SUP 23-001

Dear Chairman, Vice Chairman and Members:

Any decision regarding SUP 23-001 must be deferred until after Ms. Heflin’s position on the
Board can be filled by someone elected to represent the interests of the majority in the Stanardsville
district. To even consider passing legislation of direct concern to everyone in the district without a duly
elected member who can represent us would be an egregious breach of any democratic process.

Deferral of the decision offers the Board a subsequent opportunity to enforce the terms mutually
agreed to by the applicant and the Board when SUP 22-003 was passed. Mr. Murphy’s statements to the
Planning Commission on June 15th, 2022, and the Board on June 28th, 2022, clearly and unambiguously
commit to reducing the scope of the project if the capacity for water and sewer aren’t present. Given
those assurances the SUP was passed.

Though I remain strongly opposed to the development of a resort hotel and restaurant complex
on land zoned A-1, the Board seems firmly committed to the experiment, the terms of which were agreed
to on June 28th, 2022. If the capacity for water and sewer exists on the original parcel, there is no need
for Sojourners to acquire additional acreage at considerable expense. If the capacity doesn’t exist then
reducing the scope of the project will lessen many of the project’s negative impacts on adjacent property
owners (e.g., drawdown of wells, storm water runoff, etc.).

The simple question to be answered is whether engineering data confirms the capacity of the
existing site to support the project as designed. Without that answer, approval of the expansion would
simply be releasing the developer from accountability for promises made.

My final comment is that I find Mr. Murphy’s email of Sep 29th, addressed solely to Ms. Durrer,
offering $200,000 for community projects to be legally very questionable. It is not a proffer as those are
specifically required to address an impact from the rezoning. A proffer would be addressed to all
members of the Board, and would also be included in the staff report and proposed resolutions; it is not
and therefore may not be legally binding. On the face of it, the offer seems to be a blatant attempt to buy
Ms. Durrer’s vote.

/s/
M. Scott Mingledorff