Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/13/1985 - Special ~o Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24015 June 13, 1985 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being an adjourned meeting from June 12, 1985, which was an adjourned meeting from June 11, 1985. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McGraw called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Steven A. McGraw; Vice-Chairman Athena E. Burton; Supervisors Alan H. Brittle, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: Supervisor Minter (arrived at 5:24 p.m.) IN RE: E911 DISCUSSIONS The following people were present from surrounding localities: Randy Smith, Assistant City Manager of Salem; Harry Haskins, Chief of Police of the City of Salem; David Bowers, Roanoke City Councilman, (left at 4:30 p.m.); Bill Clark, Roanoke City Director of Public Works; Al Beckley, Roanoke City Manager of Communications; George Snead, Roanoke City Director of Administration of Public Safety; John Hubbard, Roanoke County Superintendent of Public Facilities; Warren Trent, Coordinator of Emergency Services for Roanoke City; Tommy Fuqua, Fire and Emergency Services Coordinator of Roanoke County; Paul Mahoney, Roanoke County Attorney and Acting County Administrator; George Nester, Town Manager of Vinton; Harry Franks, Data Processing rl -¿ 1 ' June 13, 1985 Coordinator for Roanoke County; John Chambliss, Superintendent of Fiscal Management of Roanoke County; steve Ayers, Universal Communications; Mike Kavanaugh, Roanoke County Citizen; John Schearr, C & P Telephone; Don Reed, C & P Telephone; Mr. Red Cable, Director of Communications for Roanoke County, Parker Foley, Salesman, Sperry Computers. Supervisor Brittle reported that Roanoke County has been working on its E911 system since January and the system is due to begin operation in October 1987. Supervisor Brittle feels that there is a need to examine the one system approach so that a public safety officer will have the most complete information when calls are received and so that the citizens will get the results of best efforts of all localities. He also feels that the more the systems are integrated, the less likely for an error to occur in an emergency response. Supervisors McGraw and Burton, both voiced their support for the system. Roanoke City Councilman, David Bowers, reported that the city is on a different frequency but that is just a technical matter that can be disposed of and that the enhanced delivery of public safety services should be the issue. Harry Haskins, Chief of Police of the City of Salem, reported that there would be no cost savings since Salem would have to hire additional personnel, supplemental police officers and more experienced dispatchers. Chief Haskins was also concerned that if the something happened to the building, the entire Valley would lose communications. Supervisor Brittle reported that the Baltimore district has their system located in the basement of a building. Supervisor Nickens reported that the Board had discussed placing the system in a bunker type building. Supervisor Nickens felt that the localities should be able to overcome the technical problems involved in consolidating this system and should be able to to devise a system so that employees will not be charged to only one locality. Supervisor Nickens Q ~ June 13, 1985 also felt that fiscal location should not be a problem and also that there will be no cost savings except where construction is concerned, but that should not be the issue. Randy Smith presented a list of things to consider: 1. Most emergency operations plans call for certain agency heads to meet at the Emergency Operating Center in time of disaster to coordinate emergency services. with one consolidated center, this would be impossible to accomplish since dispatchers' functions would be removed from each jurisdiction. 2. Each police agency, rescue squad, and fire department has its own set of operating procedures, protocols and policies, plus there is no common radio frequency among all Valley police agencies, rescue squads, or fire departments. Changing radio equipment to accomplish common frequencies would be very expensive to accomplish. 3. Training new employees for a consolidated center would be a most difficult task due to the different policies and procedures, as well as the problem of having to be familiar with the geographic and street layout of the entire Valley. 4. There is a question of legal liability should an error be made in the handling of calls. 5. Certainly legitimate questions are: a. Where would such a new center be constructed? b. Who would build it? c. Who would run it? d. How would equipment for the center be purchased? e. What type of equipment would be bought? 6. If the dispatchers who would staff a consolidated center remained employees of their respective jurisdictions, control over these employees may be lost. ~3. June 13, 1985 7. If one center were used for the entire Valley and a disaster or terrorism struck the center, the entire Valley would be without communications. 8. In the City of Salem, the dispatchers on duty also serve a Desk Sergeant function after hours for those citizens who come to the Public Safety Building with questions or concerns plus the Salem Center, as does many other communications centers, serves as a control and call back point for public works after hours. Chairman McGraw felt that the final decision would be left to the elected officials of each locality and also that even if the consolidation cost a little more, it would be better for safety of all concerned. Chairman McGraw also felt that most of the problems are technical and can be worked out. Supervisor Nickens suggested that a committee be established of technical people of Roanoke County, Roanoke City, City of Salem, and Town of vinton that would look at concerns and questions provided by Randy Smith to report back to the Valley governments. George Nester, Town Manager of Vinton, reported that the Council would be glad to look at any alternatives but they will experience staffing problems. Bill Clark, Roanoke City Director of Public Works, reported that he would present the suggestion to council and will report back to the County. Randy Smith, Assistant City Manager of Salem, reported that in December, 1984, Council rejected the idea of consolidating the E9ll service but that he would present the idea once again at the June 24 meeting. Michael Kavanaugh suggested to the Board that setting up another committee to study this prospect would be a repeat of the study performed in December. June 13, 1985 · ,/!J 4 ,< ,.,.~' Supervisor Nickens suggested that the County proceed with the E9l1 system with an effective date of October 1987, that each political subdivision continue to pursue the alternative they had chosen before this meeting and that the localities attempt to have technicians to look at issues regarding a common frequency for animal control and bands for emergency services. Supervisor Nickens moved that the County proceed with the time frame of October, 1987. That the current committee not be asked to evaluate their December, 1984, final report but that the Board communicate with the chief elected officials for each political subdivision asking participation in creating a technical committee to look at common radio band with common frequencies for different service areas for valley-wide use. The other political subdivisions to proceed with their time frame for instituting E911. Supervisor Burton requested that Supervisor Nickens add to his motion that the communications experts of each locality consider the coordination of equipment. Supervisor Nickens agreed to include this in his motion and called for questions. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw NAYS: None Chairman McGraw brought up the concerns of John Willey, County Assessor, regarding surplus property. Paul Mahoney, County Attorney, requested that the Board authorize him to advertise all the surplus property that the County currently holds for the July 9, 1985, meeting. He feels that this would speed the process by which potential buyers could actually have possession of the property. Supervisor Minter moved to authorize Paul Mahoney to advertise all surplus property for public hearing at the July 9, 1985, board meeting. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: 8 4 5 ~ ' June 13, 1985 AYES: Supervisors Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Supervisor Minter moved to adjourn at 6:05 p.m. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. ~C(,~~ Chairman \ \ \