Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/13/2005 - Regular September 13, 2005 1003 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 September 13, 2005 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of September, 2005. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Altizer called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Michael W. Altizer, Vice-Chairman Michael A. Wray, Supervisors Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Richard C. Flora, Joseph McNamara MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board; Teresa Hamilton Hall, Public Information Officer IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. September 13, 2005 1004 IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Supervisor McNamara requested the addition of Item E-4, discussion of a contribution to the American Red Cross. Mr. Hodge requested that Item O-3, work session to provide an update on the Roanoke Valley Greenways, be removed and re-scheduled for September 27. There was a consensus of the Board to approve the above changes. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of appreciation to Daniel W. Brown for his service as Superintendent of the Blue Ridge Parkway R-091305-1 Chairman Altizer presented the resolution of appreciation to Mr. Brown. Also present was Mrs. Linda Brown. Supervisor Wray moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-1 OF APPRECIATION TO DANIEL W. BROWN FOR HIS SERVICE AS SUPERINTENDENT OF THE BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY WHEREAS, Daniel W. Brown retired on August 1, 2005, after thirty-six years with the National Park Service, having served as Superintendent of the Blue Ridge Parkway for the past five years; and September 13, 2005 1005 WHEREAS, Mr. Brown began his career as a seasonal park ranger at the National Military Park in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania; and also served as Superintendent of the Fort Pulaski National Monument in Savannah, Georgia; Superintendent of the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park; manager of the Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee; and Deputy Regional Director for the Southeast Region; and WHEREAS, Mr. Brown was instrumental in drawing state and regional attention to the need to preserve Parkway views in the Roanoke vicinity by working with Scenic America which designated a twenty-eight mile section of the Roanoke Valley as a "Last Chance Landscape"; and WHEREAS, Mr. Brown improved cooperative relationships and collaborations between the Parkway’s eight major partner groups; forged a new alliance with the Western Virginia Land Trust; and supported the Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway’s efforts to implement plantings along the Parkway corridor and the Blue Ridge Parkway Association's initiative to have the Parkway in Virginia designated an All-American Road; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Brown’s tenure, he supervised construction of the Blue Ridge Music Center which showcases mountain music, encourages travel and tourism, and contributes to the economy of Southwest Virginia; and WHEREAS, Mr. Brown encouraged communication and cooperation with Roanoke County on areas of mutual interest and concern which included the Visitor’s Center at Explore Park, Mason’s Crest subdivision, adjacent rights-of-way and critical view sheds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke DANIEL W. BROWN County, does hereby extend its sincere appreciation to for his contributions to the County during his tenure as Superintendent of the Blue Ridge Parkway; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its sincere best wishes to Mr. Brown in his future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Wray to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 2. Recognition of the Roanoke County Police Department for receiving the following national and state awards: (a) First place in the 2004 National Law Enforcement Challenge September 13, 2005 1006 (b) First place in the 2004 Virginia Law Enforcement Challenge (c) Underage Alcohol Prevention Award Chairman Altizer presented the certificate of recognition to the following representatives of the Police Department: Chief Ray Lavinder, Assistant Chiefs Donna . Furrow and Terrell Holbrook, Sergeant Tim Wyatt, and Lieutenant David McMillan 3. Proclamation declaring the month of September 2005 as National Preparedness Month in the County of Roanoke Chairman Altizer presented the proclamation to Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police, and Rick Burch, Chief of Fire and Rescue. IN RE: BRIEFING 1. Briefing to provide an update on the public safety building project. (Dan O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) Mr. O’Donnell reported that the theme today has begun to take on an air of preparedness and the public safety building project demonstrates the Board’s foresight. He noted that all the planning does not do much without a solid infrastructure for emergency services and the public safety building will accomplish that. He advised that he would review three areas: (1) project status; (2) status of the closure of Cove Road; and (3) proposed color of the building. Mr. O’Donnell stated that in June 2005, the Board approved the auger cast piles for the foundation support. He indicated that 174 auger cast piles have been installed which will support the foundation of the building, and advised that the system is September 13, 2005 1007 working well and the foundation and interior walls are currently being constructed. He reported that the soft soils problem has been met and solved. He further advised that part of the County’s concern for this project is ensuring protection of the environment and he displayed photographs of the temporary stormwater management pond which is being constructed. State agencies, including the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and the Virginia Department of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), have visited the site and all inspections have passed. Mr. O’Donnell reported that the building is beyond the grading stage and has progressed to construction of interior walls. The construction of a permanent stormwater management pond which will serve both the public safety building and the school administration building is currently under way. Mr. O’Donnell stated that Cove Road will be closed in order to remove a knoll in the road in front of the public safety building to provide for safe sight distance into the southern entrance of the facility. The road closure began on September 12 and it will remain closed for two weeks. Prior to the road closure, over 600 letters were mailed to residents notifying them of detour routes; the School Board and students at Glen Cove Elementary School were also notified. In addition, message boards have been posted along the road announcing the upcoming closing. Mr. O’Donnell advised that to access Glen Cove Elementary School, you must enter from the South at Peters Creek Road; to access the School Board offices, you must access Cove Road from the north and Route 419. He further advised that there have not been any complaints with September 13, 2005 1008 regard to the road closure and the construction manager has indicated that the two- week construction time frame may be reduced if the weather conditions remain favorable. A map identifying the detour routes was displayed. Supervisor Church stated that the closure of the road is a major concern and he commended Mr. O’Donnell for his efforts in communicating this information to the citizens. Mr. O’Donnell reported that the original concept for the building proposed a yellow/beige brick facade. Following discussion with the architects, staff is recommending a red brick facade which will blend better with the school administration office and the homes in the surrounding neighborhood. He also noted that the red brick is slightly less expensive. Supervisor Wray stated that he supports the change in the color of the brick and commended Mr. O’Donnell for keeping the project on schedule and within budget. He inquired if the work on the sewer line has been completed. Mr. O’Donnell responded that the construction should begin any day now and will take several weeks. He advised that backfilling is occurring every day to prevent disruption to the school play area. Supervisor Flora supported the change in the brick facade and indicated it is more traditional in appearance. He stated that the construction on the sewer line will begin in mid-October and will take six weeks to complete; however, only two weeks will impact the school. He noted that due to the fact that construction is beginning later in September 13, 2005 1009 the year, there will be less impact to the school because they will not be conducting as many activities outside. Supervisor Church concurred with the change in the color of the brick. He inquired what the cost savings would be with this change. Mr. O’Donnell stated that it is several thousand dollars; however if there are costs savings at the end of the project, this amount is split equally with the developer and staff is monitoring the project for potential cost savings. Supervisor Altizer inquired when the building will be under roof. Mr. O’Donnell stated that the target date is December 2005, but this will depend upon weather conditions. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to adopt a resolution establishing the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as the County of Roanoke’s standard for incident management. (Rick Burch, Chief of Fire and Rescue; Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police) R-091305-2 Chief Burch advised that the Roanoke Valley has had its share of natural disasters, the most prevalent being the flood of 1985. He also noted the tire fire which required response from multiple emergency management agencies. On a national level, the President has directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a National Incident Management System (NIMS) to handle these types of emergencies. September 13, 2005 1010 He stated that we are finding that emergencies can no longer be handled by a single locality alone. This system is a national program and each locality must adopt the standards of the new management system. The benefits of NIMS include the following: (1) standardized organizational structures, processes and procedures; (2) standards for planning, training and exercising, and personnel qualification standards; (3) equipment acquisition and certification standards; (4) interoperable communications processes, procedures and systems; (5) information management systems; and (6) supporting technologies – voice and data communications systems, information systems, data display systems and specialized technologies. Chief Burch advised that the first part of the process is for Fire and Rescue and Police to go through incident command training; however ultimately, all departments involved in the emergency operations center (EOC) and elected and appointed officials will receive the training. This is important to success in handling emergencies but it also could have an impact on future federal funding if the locality does not adopt the standard. Chief Lavinder encouraged the Board to adopt the resolution and noted that there are many positive aspects to doing so. He emphasized the importance of receiving the necessary federal grants. He stated that this system will be helpful and will encourage closer working relationships with other departments. The Police Department will adopt new methods of dispatch so that everyone can hear and understand what is being transmitted. He advised that he attended the training at the Chief’s recertification program in May and advised that this will be good for the County. September 13, 2005 1011 Supervisor Church noted that communication problems were experienced on September 11, 2001 and also during the recent hurricane on the Gulf Coast. He inquired if there has been planning for handling dispatch communications under these circumstances. Chief Lavinder stated that the system employed by Roanoke County is far better than methods currently used in more affluent areas. He advised that the County has fail safe backup systems and the new public safety building will assist in this goal. If the system were to fail, the County has the ability to switch to the Roanoke City communications system. He further advised that the County can also access the Vinton communications center. Supervisor Wray requested clarification of the dispatch language that will be used. Chief Burch stated that localities previously used 10 codes for dispatch purposes; however, it was determined that the codes were not the same across jurisdictions. One element of this plan is to establish “plain talk” where everyday language is used in communications by dispatchers. Supervisor Wray further inquired if there will be jurisdictions who will choose not to participate. Chief Burch stated that Virginia localities have been leaders in this movement and he noted the existence of a state-wide mutual aid agreement which has been signed by most cities in Virginia. He stated that there may be some small rural jurisdictions that do not have the resources to comply; however, non- compliance will jeopardize federal grants. September 13, 2005 1012 Supervisor Wray questioned when the program will be fully implemented and in practice. Chief Burch responded that both fire and rescue and police personnel have received training. There are three tiers to the program and training at the department head level will be held in October. Supervisor Wray inquired if there is a deadline for implementation of NIMS. Chief Burch indicated that it will be an ongoing process and once department heads are trained, an emergency training exercise will be held in the spring 2006. He stated that staff training should be completed by the end of 2005. Supervisor Wray requested that the Board be notified when the training is complete. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-2 ADOPTING THE NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (NIMS) AS THE COUNTY STANDARD FOR INCIDENT MANAGEMENT WHEREAS, the President of Homeland Security Directive (HSPD) -5, directed the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident Management System (NIMS), which would provide a consistent nationwide approach for Federal, State, and local governments to work together more effectively and efficiently to prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from domestic incidents, regardless of cause, size or complexity; and WHEREAS, the collective input and guidance from all Federal, State, and local homeland security partners have been, and will continue to be vital to the development, effective implementation and utilization of a comprehensive NIMS; and WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that all Federal, State, and local emergency agencies and personnel coordinate their efforts to effectively and efficiently provide the highest levels of incident management; and September 13, 2005 1013 WHEREAS, to facilitate the most efficient and effective incident management it is critical that Federal, State, and local organizations utilize standardized terminology, standardized organization structures, interoperable communications, consolidated action plans, unified command structures, uniform personnel qualification standards, uniform standards for planning, training, and exercising, comprehensive resource management, and designated incident facilities during emergencies or disasters; and WHEREAS, the NIMS standardized procedures for managing personnel, communications, facilities and resources will improve the County’s ability to utilize federal funding to enhance local agency readiness, maintain first responder safety, and streamline incident management processes; and WHEREAS, the Incident Command System components of NIMS are already an integral part of various County incident management activities, including current emergency management training programs; and WHEREAS, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (9-11 Commission) recommended adoption of a standardized Incident Command System. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the National Incident Management System (NIMS) is established as the County standard for incident management. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 2. Allocation of revenue sharing funds for fiscal year 2005-2006. (Anthony Ford, Transportation Engineering Manager) A-091305-3 Mr. Ford stated that in December 2004, the Board approved $500,000 in matching County funds to go toward 13 transportation-related improvement projects. Since that time, the County has received verbal notification from VDOT that they have submitted a board report to the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) requesting approval of allocations for the fiscal year 2005-2006 revenue sharing program. In that report of particular note is the fact that Roanoke County will not receive the full $500,000 allocation requested. The reduced level of funding is the result of the CTB’s September 13, 2005 1014 expansion of the program to include cities and towns. Even though there was an increase in available state-wide matching funds from $15 million to $50 million and an increase in the maximum state participation to $1 million per locality, the amount of requests exceeded the available funds. Roanoke County will only receive $372,460 of the $500,000 matching funds requested from the state. This is a difference of $127,540 in state matching funds. Mr. Ford noted that these amounts are subject to change upon CTB approval which should occur on September 15. Mr. Ford advised that rather than reducing the amount allocated to each of the 13 projects included in the County’s revenue sharing program, staff recommends reducing the amount allocated to Hardy Road, Route 634 (priority project #15) to cover the disparity in funds. This money was previously allocated to Hardy Road in the FY 2005-2006 revenue sharing program to enable this project to stay in the six-year plan. He noted that VDOT mandates that projects must have a certain percentage allocated to them in order to remain in the plan. The reduction in funds for the Hardy Road project will be made up by reallocating $255,080 in funds that were previously allocated to the Shadwell Road project (priority project #13) thereby allowing the Hardy Road project to stay on schedule and remain in the six-year plan. Mr. Ford advised that staff feels that funds can be temporarily taken from the Shadwell Road project at this time because of the indefinite time frame and irresolute nature of the project, and he noted adjoining property issues, prospective buyer/developer input, etc. September 13, 2005 1015 Mr. Ford reported that the FY 2005-2006 revenue sharing program will total $744,920, including County and state matching funds, as opposed to the $1 million program initially anticipated. Of the $500,000 County funds that were approved to be allocated to the FY 2005-2006 program, $127,540 is unmatched by state funds and will not be allocated to the FY 2005-2006 program. Those unmatched dollars will be retained and rolled over in the Community Development budget to be used as County matching funds in future revenue sharing programs or for other transportation-related projects. Mr. Ford advised that staff recommends approving the reallocation of $255,080 from the Shadwell Road project (priority project #13), thereby allowing the Hardy Road project to remain in the six-year plan. Supervisor Church inquired if funding to all localities was adjusted accordingly. Mr. Ford stated that when the funding was opened up to cities and towns, many of them applied for the full allocation. He stated that due to the large volume of funding requests, all localities were pro-rated. He further noted that of the 13 projects on the 2005-2006 revenue sharing program, the top 12 were immediate projects that can be completed in the next two years and staff did not want to reduce funding for these projects. The Hardy Road project was on the 2005-2006 list to keep it on the plan and progressing. Supervisor Church inquired if other localities received monies that were lost by Roanoke County. Mr. Ford responded that cities and towns received some of September 13, 2005 1016 the funds that our locality could have used. Supervisor Church inquired if the other localities placed priorities on their projects to take advantage of the full amount. Mr. Ford advised that he was not sure of the intent of other localities; however, this was their first opportunity to participate in the program and many had large construction projects such as bridges that require substantial amounts of money whereas many of Roanoke County’s projects are smaller in scope. Supervisor Church noted that smaller projects are just as important and indicated that the County should express our displeasure with the allocation. Mr. Ford stated that he has been told that opening up the program to cities and towns was for one-year and a determination has not been made as to whether this will occur in future years. Supervisor McNamara questioned if the County is obligated to spend the $372,000. Mr. Ford responded in the affirmative and advised that these were allocated in December 2004 and have been set aside as matching funds. Supervisor McNamara noted that if all the reductions are pro-rated, how other localities spend their allocation should not affect Roanoke County. He questioned why we did not request $1 million and based on the pro-rated reduction, we would have received $500,000. Mr. Ford advised that the timing was bad. The County received notification that the program was being reformatted shortly after the Board approved the 2005-2006 revenue sharing plan, and there was insufficient time to re-evaluate the County’s program. Supervisor McNamara stated that when the size of the allocation increases, the County needs to be sharp with our response and attempt to alter our funding request. He inquired if the September 13, 2005 1017 County is obligated to spend the full $1 million if it is allocated. Mr. Ford responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Altizer noted that the fund was increased by $35 million; in the past, $15 million was dedicated to counties. Of the $15 million previously dedicated to counties, he inquired if this full amount went to counties this year. Mr. Ford advised that he was not certain but would obtain an answer to this question. Supervisor Altizer stated that the County needs to speak to our legislators regarding this issue. He indicated that if VDOT has opened this program up to cities and towns and if we find out that the $15 million did not go to counties but that some of it went to cities, he would have a problem with this because cities are under a separate state allocation plan. He noted that VDOT has also started preliminary discussions with counties about taking over secondary roads and he does not like what he sees. He stated that the transportation system is in trouble, counties are losing funding, and he questions whether the counties received their share of the $15 million. He voiced concerns about the way in which counties are treated by the state government as compared to how cities are treated. He advised that counties are no longer rural communities that provide very few services; yet we still have to operate under rules that are based on that concept. He stated that in reality, counties now provide all the same major services as cities. He indicated that he continues to hear talk about secondary roads being shifted to counties and often, responsibilities are shifted with no revenue attached. He stated that the Board will discuss rural addition roads in work session this evening and noted September 13, 2005 1018 that VDOT is now trying to enforce a rule that has been on the books for 43 years. This means that the County now has to decide whether to remove rural addition roads from the program or else fund them ourselves. He stated that he is not happy with the way counties are being treated, and that our legislative agenda should focus on transportation issues. Supervisor Wray stated that the state has painted us into a corner and we must be prepared. He requested that Mr. Ford clarify that the first 12 projects will proceed forward. Mr. Ford advised that the funds from the Shadwell Road project will be reallocated to Hardy Road and the other projects will proceed. Supervisor Church moved to approve staff recommendation (approve reallocation of $255,080 from Shadwell Road project (Priority Project #13 in the FY 2005-11 secondary system construction program), thereby allowing the Hardy Road project to remain in the six-year plan). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None Supervisor Church remarked that it is not a shell game but goes back to good faith bargaining from VDOT. He stated that you do not communicate one plan to the people and then at the last moment, change the plan. He indicated that the people have the power and when enough citizens contact their state representatives, you will see change. September 13, 2005 1019 3. Request to approve a Plan for K-12 Education Partnership between Roanoke County and the Art Museum of Western Virginia for students and teachers in the amount of $200,000 per year for up to ten (10) years. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) A-091305-4 Chairman Altizer recognized Drew Barrineau, Chairman of the Roanoke County School Board, who was present at the meeting. Mr. Hodge introduced the following individuals who were also present: Georganne Bingham, Director of the Art Museum; Deanna Gordon, former Superintendent of Roanoke County Schools; and John Williamson, representative of the local business community. Mr. Hodge stated that this project is an excellent opportunity for Roanoke County and the arts community. He advised that a work session was held on August 9 and this represents the consensus of that work session. In summary, it recognizes the Art Museum for its emphasis on education, the broader mission that they have established in recent years, and their accessibility to everyone in the valley. It is also an opportunity to form an association with Virginia Tech and other universities working with the Higher Education Center. It recognizes the importance of the arts to our community and the variety of artists who live in this area. Mr. Hodge stated that the arts are an important part of the quality of life in our community and contribute to the overall economy. It serves as a useful tool in the economic development efforts to recruit September 13, 2005 1020 businesses. He indicated that it represents a significant contribution and benefits Roanoke County students and teachers. The Art Museum, in working with Roanoke County and other localities, will develop the following programs: a specialty high school similar to a governor’s school; development programs for elementary school students; and teacher training programs. Ms. Gordon stated that education, the arts, and economic development are a package that cannot be separated. She outlined the following key components: (1) The Art Museum can provide programs of a regional nature and she noted that through regional efforts, programs that could not be developed by one area alone can be offered. (2) The art museum offers a different environment for students, and many County students have already been involved in art museum programs. Virginia Tech and seven other universities are participating in the program. (3) The Art Museum also supports family education opportunities. Mr. Williamson stated that Roanoke County has demonstrated a long history of partnering with other localities and he requested that the Board continue this spirit by participating in the project. He stated that it is important that the Art Museum partner with Roanoke County and other localities for the creation of the educational program. He indicated that it is not just a partnership, but an investment in education. He stated that we are beginning to see the importance of creative education in building and maintaining a competitive workforce capable of competing on a global scale. He requested the Board’s support on this item. September 13, 2005 1021 Mr. Hodge stated that if the Board still wishes to proceed, staff will need to work with the Art Museum to develop a contract that will be brought back to the Board for approval. In addition, they will work with County School Administration to develop the program outlined in the agenda packet, and he noted that this will be a collaborative effort between the schools, the Art Museum, and the County. He stated that we want representatives of the school system to be part of the governing board of the new specialty school, and this partnership would be based on the understanding that a specific number of County students would be allowed to take advantage of the program annually. He advised that Roanoke County would provide $200,000 in annual budget appropriations beginning in 2005-2006. The arts program would subsequently be evaluated annually for refinement and continued funding. Supervisor Altizer questioned if Mr. Hodge meant to state that funding would begin in fiscal year 2006-2007. Mr. Hodge responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Church stated that this program extends beyond the arts and voiced support for the program. Supervisor Wray stated that the Board is not as familiar with matters pertaining to education, and this is why the school system needs to be involved. He noted that the community and students will benefit from this endeavor. He inquired if the ten year funding period is for ten consecutive years. Mr. Mahoney responded that he does not know. Mr. Hodge advised that it is everyone’s hope that this will be an ongoing annual program, but stated that such a provision could be included in the September 13, 2005 1022 contract. Mr. Mahoney stated that in order to avoid a constitutional violation, the funding would have to be subject to annual appropriations. He advised that this Board cannot bind a future Board. For example, counties can only issue debt through a general obligation bond issue. This request would be subject to future annual appropriations by the Board. Supervisor Wray stated that he is excited about the educational component and the partnership with the Art Museum. Supervisor Altizer indicated that this is a great example of the Board’s emphasis on the education of our students. He stated that he is glad that Roanoke County is in the forefront of doing things which are in the best interests of its citizens. He indicated that as we bring young children into the arts program, they perform better in other areas of their school performance and increase their ability to participate in arts programs at the middle and high school levels. He commended the Board for their support of education. He further requested that the County Attorney provide the Board with updates as the program development continues. Supervisor Altizer moved to approve staff recommendation (authorization to proceed with the preparation of a contract with the Art Museum of Western Virginia to provide educational programming for the County as outlined in the “Plan for K-12 Education Partnership”). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: September 13, 2005 1023 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 4. Appropriation of $10,000 from the Board Contingency Fund to the American Red Cross to provide assistance to those impacted by Hurricane Katrina. (Joseph P. McNamara, Windsor Hills Magisterial District) A-091305-5 Supervisor McNamara stated that over the course of his term on the Board of Supervisors, the Board Contingency Fund has been utilized for unanticipated expenditures. He indicated that given the large scale of the devastation in the Gulf Coast area, he requested that a donation be made to the American Red Cross in the amount of $10,000 to help those impacted by Hurricane Katrina. Supervisor McNamara moved to appropriate $10,000 from the Board Contingency Fund to the American Red Cross. Supervisor Church stated that he and Supervisor Wray attended the September 11 ceremony in Salem and he noted that there were outreach efforts on many levels. He stated that this effort will be ongoing for several years, and that it is difficult to imagine not having a family, job, home, or pets left. He further stated that the Roanoke Times wrote an article about refugees and he stated that these individuals are American citizens and that they were not called refugees prior to this disaster. He voiced support for the appropriation. September 13, 2005 1024 Supervisor McNamara’s motion to appropriate $10,000 from the Board Contingency Fund to the American Red Cross carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of an ordinance amending Section 2.7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response of the Roanoke County Code providing for an increase in the flat fee from $100 to $250. (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) O-091305-6 Mr. Mahoney reported that this ordinance revisits a topic that has been before the Board several times. Last year, the Board amended this provision of the County Code in an attempt to lock in the maximum flat rate that could be charged in these situations to the General Assembly maximum amount. He stated that it was staff’s hope that by utilizing that language, the Board would not have to amend the ordinance whenever the General Assembly raised the maximum amount; however, the judges in General District Court want a specific dollar amount included in the County Code provision. He advised that he has discussed this several times with the judges and they disagree with the County’s approach; therefore to attempt to resolve the issue so that the County can collect the current maximum, the ordinance has been revised. Mr. Mahoney requested that the ordinance be adopted as an emergency measure and September 13, 2005 1025 waive the second reading due to the fact that there are several cases scheduled in General District Court tomorrow morning. He noted that to waive the second reading will require a four-fifths (4/5) vote. Supervisor Church stated that the County has had to go through broken glass to put this ordinance in place, and the purpose is to rectify a voluntary problem of individuals driving while intoxicated. Supervisor Wray requested clarification regarding the services provided. Mr. Mahoney advised that the General Assembly authorized localities to adopt an ordinance to recover response costs incurred for emergency dispatch to respond to accidents arising out of individuals driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Roanoke County adopted such an ordinance several years ago and requested that the General Assembly increase the original flat fee from $100 to $250 in an attempt to recover some of those costs, and this has been incorporated in today’s action. Mr. Mahoney stated that a report was included in the agenda packet which outlines the costs recovered to date. Supervisor Wray further inquired if the award can exceed the $250 flat fee. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative and advised that the first approach is the $250 flat fee; however in unique situations, the County can keep a detailed accounting of costs. This is done if an accident involves significant costs to the County and the ordinance allows the County to petition for a higher recovery fee. He noted that this method is, however, too burdensome to maintain for routine cases. September 13, 2005 1026 Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance and waive the second reading. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 091305-6 AMENDING SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE FLAT FEE FROM $100 TO $250 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County amended the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of Section 2.7 “Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired” providing the County with an opportunity to recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the 2004 session of the Virginia General increased the flat fee that a locality may bill from $100 to $250; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 13, 2005; and the second reading of this ordinance has been dispensed with since an emergency exists, upon a 4/5ths vote of the members of the Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to read and provide as follows: Chapter 2. Administration Article I. In General * * * * Sec. 2-7. Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired, driving without a license, and leaving the scene of an accident. (a) Any person who is convicted of violation of section 12-8 of this Code, or of Code of Virginia § 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266 or 29.1-738, when his operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft while impaired is the proximate cause of any accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or the provisions of Article 1 (Code of Virginia § 46.2-300 et seq.) of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 relating to driving without a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; or of § 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable in a separate civil action to September 13, 2005 1027 the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the county may bill a flat fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or to the maximum flat fee authorized by Code of Virginia § 15.2-1716, or a minute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. (b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. (c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy available to the commonwealth, the county, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein. 2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in responding to such accidents or incidents. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance and wave the second reading, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance approving the second amendment to the intergovernmental agreement for joint public safety radio system to authorize hiring a consultant for re- banding of the 800 MHz system. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) O-091305-7 Mr. Mahoney reported that this is the second reading of this ordinance and there have been no changes since the first reading. There was no discussion on this item. September 13, 2005 1028 Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 091305-7 APPROVING AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A JOINT PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEM WHEREAS, 15.2-1300, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, authorizes § agreements for the joint exercise of powers by political subdivisions of the Commonwealth; and WHEREAS, by Agreement dated December 17, 1997, amended October 1, 2001, the City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement for the establishment of a joint Public Safety Radio System; and, WHEREAS, from that date forward, the City and County have effectively operated their E-911 public safety radio systems as a joint, unified system for the protection and benefit of the citizens of both localities on an equal cost-sharing basis; and WHEREAS, as a result of an Order of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to address nation-wide problems of interference from wireless communications systems with public safety radio frequencies in the 800 MHz band, the City and County’s joint radio system will be required to carry out a reconfiguration or “rebanding” of its 800 MHz radio which will require substantial technical assistance, time and potential cost; and WHEREAS, the FCC has required Nextel corporation to pay for all costs, direct and indirect, associated with this “rebanding” process on a nation-wide basis, but with the further condition that localities enter into contracts with Nextel defining the scope of their responsibilities prior to incurring these costs in order to legally obligate Nextel to pay for or reimburse localities for their “rebanding” expenses; and, WHEREAS, because of the complex technical and potential legal issues which our two localities will face during the “rebanding” process, requires that the City and County hire a consultant to negotiate with Nextel for a contract and to assist with supervision of this “rebanding” process; and WHEREAS, an amendment to our localities existing Intergovernmental Agreement is needed to clarify the authority of the City and County to act jointly and September 13, 2005 1029 cooperatively in procurement of appropriate technical assistance in this legally mandated process and confirm the currently existing practice of equal cost-sharing of expenses related to our joint public safety radio system; and WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Roanoke, Virginia, will be requested to approve this Amendment Number Two to the existing Intergovernmental Agreement and the appropriate administrative departments of Roanoke County have requested approval of this Agreement by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on August 23, 2005, and the second reading was held on September 13, 2005. BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, as follows: Amendment Number Two to the Intergovernmental 1. That the Agreement for the Establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System , originally th dated the 17 day of December, 1997, between Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, for the joint procurement of technical services for the “rebanding” of the 800 MHz public safety radio system and the equal cost sharing of expenses and equipment related to this “rebanding” process and future operations of this system is approved and ratified on behalf of the County of Roanoke, Virginia. 2. That the County Administrator is authorized and directed to execute this Amendment Number Two to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System , on behalf of Roanoke County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 3. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 2. Second reading of an ordinance amending a lease with Ohio State Cellular Phone Company, Inc. for a communications antenna tower at Catawba Fire Station, Catawba Magisterial District. (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) O-091305-8 September 13, 2005 1030 Ms. Green advised that this is the second reading of the ordinance and there have been no changes since the first reading. There was no discussion on this item. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 091305-8 AMENDING A LEASE WITH OHIO STATE CELLULAR PHONE COMPANY, INC. FOR A COMMUNICATIONS ANTENNA TOWER AT CATAWBA FIRE STATION, CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Ordinance 102897-6 approved and authorized the execution of a lease with Ohio State Cellular Phone Company, Inc. for a communications antenna tower at Catawba Fire Station, Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County and Ohio State Cellular executed a Ground Lease in March of 1998 providing for a fifteen year term expiring on March 31, 2013 and base rent of $500 per month with annual increases based on the Consumer Price Index; the base rent as adjusted by the Consumer Price Index is currently $573.98; and WHERAS, Roanoke County has requested space on the tower for an antenna for the new fire and rescue paging system, along with space for the associated equipment on the ground; Ohio State Cellular has agreed to this request in return for a reduction of the base rent payment of $100 per month; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on August 23, 2005, and the second reading was held on September 13, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That Amendment Number One to Ground Lease dated March 24, 1998, (1) allowing Roanoke County to locate an antenna for the new fire and rescue paging system, along with space for the associated equipment on the ground; (2) providing for a new base rent effective July 1, 2005 of $473.98 per month; and (3) changing the adjustment date for the Consumer Price Index calculations to March 25, 2005 be, and hereby is, approved; and 2. That the County Administrator, or assistant county administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke September 13, 2005 1031 County as are necessary to accomplish this action, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None N RE: APPOINTMENTS I 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals) Supervisor Flora requested that the Clerk contact David M. Shelton, Jr. to determine if he is willing to serve an additional four-year term. 2. Economic Development Authority Supervisor Altizer nominated Stephen A. Musslewhite, Vinton District, to serve an additional four-year term that will expire on September 26, 2009. He requested that confirmation of this appointment be placed on the consent agenda. Supervisor Wray nominated Billy H. Branch, Cave Spring District, to serve an additional four-year term that will expire on September 26, 2009. He requested that confirmation of this appointment be placed on the consent agenda. There was a consensus of the Board to add the above confirmations to the consent agenda. 3. Grievance Panel The Clerk was directed to contact the Director of Human Resources to request a potential nominee for this vacancy. September 13, 2005 1032 IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-091305-9; R-091305-9.a; R-091305-9.g; R-091305-9.l Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the consent resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-9 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 13, 2005, designated as Item I - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 13, inclusive, as follows: 1. Resolution of appreciation upon the retirement of Carolyn A. Johnson, Sheriff's Office, after 25 years of service 2. Request from the Sheriff’s Office to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $5,088 for the purchase of bulletproof vests 3. Request from the schools to appropriate an increase in the Carl Perkins and state equipment entitlements for career and technical education in the amount of $17,231.84 4. Request from the schools to appropriate grant funds in the amount of $1,500 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts 5. Request from the schools to appropriate supplemental technology grant funds in the amount of $20,214.53 6. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate a Division of Motor Vehicle mini-grant in the amount of $3,000 7. Acceptance of a portion of Innsbrooke Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 8. Request from the Fire and Rescue Department to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $69,147.50 from the Virginia Department of Health for the purchase of two ambulances. September 13, 2005 1033 9. Request from the Fire and Rescue Department to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,828.00 from the Virginia Department of Health for the purchase of extrication equipment 10. Request to accept the donation of a new variable width drainage easement across property of Will J. Ross and Carol L. Greenwood, Villas at Castle Rock Subdivision, Windsor Hills Magisterial District 11. Request to accept the donation of a new 15 foot and variable width public utility easement across property of Scarlet H. Hensley, Lot 13A of the Villas at Castle Rock Subdivision, Windsor Hills Magisterial District 12. Request to adopt a resolution endorsing the candidacy of Wanda C. Wingo to serve as the Region 11 representative on the Virginia Association of Counties Board of Directors 13. Confirmation of appointments to the Economic Development Authority 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-9.a EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF CAROLYN A. JOHNSON, SHERIFF’S OFFICE, AFTER TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Carolyn A. Johnson was employed by Roanoke County on August 1, 1980, as a deputy sheriff with the Roanoke County Sheriff’s Office; and WHEREAS, Deputy Sheriff Johnson retired from Roanoke County on August 31, 2005, after twenty-five years and one month of service; and WHEREAS, Deputy Sheriff Johnson served as a training officer and as a member of the Staff Advisory Committee, and WHEREAS, Deputy Sheriff Johnson’s professionalism and integrity during her many years of service contributed significantly to the development of the Roanoke County Sheriff’s Office; and WHEREAS, Deputy Sheriff Johnson, through her employment with Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens CAROLYN A. JOHNSON of Roanoke County to for more than twenty-five years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and September 13, 2005 1034 FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-9.g REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF A PORTION OF INNSBROOKE DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Addition Form LA-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the representative for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Virginia Department of Transportation’s Subdivision Street Requirements, and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street(s) described on the attached Additions Form LA-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, after receiving a copy of this resolution and all outstanding fees and documents required of the developer, whichever occurs last in time. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 091305-9.l ENDORSING THE CANDIDACY OF WANDA C. WINGO TO SERVE AS THE REGION 11 REPRESENTATIVE ON THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Board of Directors representative from Region 11 is open for nominations at the VACo annual meeting in September 13, 2005 1035 November 2005; and WHEREAS, Region 11 includes the counties of Bedford, Botetourt, Craig, Giles, and Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Wanda C. Wingo has been involved in both the Virginia Association of Counties and the National Association of Counties for many years; has served on numerous committees, commissions, and boards during this time; and also previously served a term as President of the Virginia Association of Counties; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Wanda C. Wingo has expressed her intention to seek this position. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, fully endorses Mrs. Wanda C. Wingo’s candidacy in seeking the position of Region 11 representative on the Board of Directors of the Virginia Association of Counties. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Flora moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Jail Study Costs Report 6. Proclamation signed by the Chairman September 13, 2005 1036 IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church: (1) He stated that he and Supervisor Wray attended the September 11 remembrance ceremony in Salem. He thanked the City of Salem, Forest Jones, and City Council members for the invitation and their gracious treatment of the guests. He noted the significance of the ceremony and indicated that the City of Salem put tremendous effort into the ceremony. He voiced thanks to Melinda Payne for her efforts in developing the recognition service honoring September 11 victims and the recent victims of Hurricane Katrina. (2) He extended condolences to Brenda Holton on the recent death of her mother. (3) He thanked Anthony Ford for his prompt response to the inquiries received regarding cyclists in Catawba. (4) He stated that he wanted to go on record and advise that unless it is a matter of public safety or a dire emergency, he will not support eminent domain proceedings. Supervisor Wray: (1) He extended condolences to Brenda Holton and her family in the recent loss of Brenda’s mother. (2) He referenced a letter sent to Gary Johnson regarding ingress/egress for the Blue Ridge Parkway. He asked if Mr. Hodge would like to make any comments regarding this matter. Mr. Hodge stated that the interchange at Route 220 and the Blue Ridge Parkway will be impacted during the engineering and construction of I-73. He indicated that he thought that this issue had been resolved and that there would be another interchange convenient to the Route 220 area; however, he recently received a letter from the state historical association requesting a change in the wording of the agreement that would state that the September 13, 2005 1037 interchange would be “considered” rather than “guaranteed”. Mr. Hodge advised that he responded with a letter to VDOT stating that this is the replacement of an interchange, not the addition of a new interchange. He noted that an agreement had been reached regarding this matter and had been approved by the Board. He stated that the County objects to the proposed change and requests that the original language be left in place. Mr. Hodge recommended that our state and federal legislators be contacted regarding this matter. Supervisor Wray stated that words like “suitable” and “feasible” are not words that he likes to hear. He advised that he does not like word games and noted that commitments have been given to the citizens in that area. He indicated that he would not support this change and requested that Mr. Hodge follow up on this matter. (3) He stated that he received a letter from Mr. King, President of HHHunt properties (owners of Pebble Creek Apartments) concerning flooding due to culverts being undersized, ingress, and egress. He noted that this matter also involves Roanoke City, and he requested that Mr. Covey draft a response to the letter from Mr. King. (4) He advised that he has received calls regarding a new lake/pond on Merriman Road and mosquitoes in the area. He stated that this is not a new issue and requested that staff investigate this matter to determine why water is standing in the area. Mr. Covey reported that staff has visited the site and has worked with engineering regarding the size of the bank. He stated that the engineering calculations indicate that everything is safe. Supervisor Wray stated that regardless of whether it is safe, there will be flooding if it rains. Mr. Covey indicated that there is an overflow spillway to September 13, 2005 1038 accommodate additional rainfall. In response to Supervisor Wray’s inquiry regarding why it is still full, Mr. Covey advised that staff will check the site and verify that the overflow is not clogged. (5) He requested that Mr. Hodge check on addressing the plans for the Colonial Avenue road improvements. Supervisor Flora: (1) He noted that the recent edition of The Roanoker magazine listed the best places to retire but Roanoke County was missing from the list. He stated that according to The Roanoker magazine, Roanoke County is not a desirable place to retire. He requested that Mr. Hodge investigate what criterion was used to evaluate this listing. He noted that some economically depressed areas were on the list while economically prosperous Roanoke County was not. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 5:12 p.m., Supervisor Altizer moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (30) discussion of the terms or scope of a public contract where discussion in open session would adversely effect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the County, namely an agreement with the City of Roanoke concerning regional fire and rescue service delivery; and Section 2.2-3711 A (5) discussion concerning a prospective business or industry where no previous announcement has been made. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None September 13, 2005 1039 th IN RE: WORK SESSIONS (4 Floor Conference Room) 1. Work session with Eldon James and Associates, Roanoke County legislative liaison, to consider initiatives for the 2006 session of the Virginia General Assembly. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) The work session was held from 5:27 p.m. until 6:15 p.m. The following legislative issues were discussed: (1) Tobacco tax bill and a possible patron for this legislation. (2) The telecommunication tax bill, sponsored by Verizon, that would substitute a uniform, state-wide, revenue neutral tax for the multiple taxes at the local level. This legislation could have implications on the County’s E-911 tax. (3) Full state funding for educational programs. (4) Transportation funding and the impact to County citizens. (5) Proposals that would limit the real estate taxing authority of localities. There was a consensus of the Board to schedule a meeting before the end of 2005 with Mr. James and the area legislators. Supervisor Altizer requested that Mr. James develop a strategy to address the level of services that the County has to provide to its growing citizenry. IN RE: ABSENCE Supervisor McNamara left the meeting at 6:00 p.m. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING The closed meeting was held from 6:25 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. The closed meeting pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (30) discussion of the terms or scope of a public contract where discussion in open session would adversely September 13, 2005 1040 effect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the County, namely an agreement with the City of Roanoke concerning regional fire and rescue service delivery was not held. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS (CONTINUED) 2. Work session to discuss the County’s rural addition authority status and its relation to private road standards. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development; Anthony Ford, Transportation Engineering Manager) The work session was held from 7:00 p.m. until 7:48 p.m. Mr. Ford presented a Power Point presentation which outlined the history of the rural addition program and private road standards. He briefed the Board on changes to the rural addition program that are being implemented by VDOT. To remain eligible to receive rural addition funding, the County must come into compliance by January 1, 2006 in order to receive funding for the 2006-2007 fiscal year. Mr. Ford discussed the changes that would be required to come into compliance, and presented a comparison of the VDOT standards with County private road standards. Examples of affected projects and how other localities are responding to the change were also presented. It was the consensus of the Board to schedule a work session on September 27 to discuss the options available to the County. September 13, 2005 1041 3. Work session to provide an update on Roanoke Valley Greenways. (Liz Belcher, Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator) This work session was postponed until September 27, 2005. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-091305-10 At 7:50 p.m., Supervisor Church moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McNamara RESOLUTION 091305-10 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 1 042 September 13, 2005 IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Altizer adjourned the meeting at 7:51 p.m. until Monday, September 26,2005, at 5:15 p.m. for the purpose of a joint meeting with the Roanoke County School Board, School Administration Building, 5937 Cove Road, Roanoke, Virginia. Submitted by: Approved by: ~j~OJ£' ('jjjJild Diane S. Childers, CMC Clerk to the Board ~tlJu.¿ 74. (JLt¿ Michael W. Altizer Chairman