Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/13/2007 - Regular February 13, 2007 97 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 February 13, 2007 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of February, 2007. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER was taken. Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call I MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph P. McNamara, Vice-Chairman Richard C. Flora, Supervisors Michael W. Altizer, Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Michael A. Wray (arrived 3:27 p.m.) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan 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 Rabbi Ronald Kopelman, Beth Israel Synagogue. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. 98 February 13, 2007 REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Hodge requested the addition of Item R-4, ratification and approval of agreement with Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy. There was a consensus of the INRE: Board to add the item. INRE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS .L Introduction of Fred W. Hutchins. Roanoke Reaional Director for Senator Jim Webb. (Elmer Hodae. County Administrator) Mr. Hodge advised that Mr. Hutchins is the regional representative for Senator Jim Webb. He is a resident of Botetourt County and a graduate of Roanoke College with a B.A. in Political Science. He noted that Mr. Hutchins previously has worked for Delegate Onzlee Ware, Governor Warner, and Governor Tim Kaine. Mr. Hutchins offered his assistance to the citizens and Board In addressing any matters that the Board has before the federal government. He stated that his phone number is 772-4236 and his email is fred hutchins@webb.senate.Qov. He indicated that Senator Webb has family roots in Southwest Virginia and will do anything he can to promote the natural, historic, and cultural aspects of this area. He stated that one of Senator Webb's top priorities is to work with Congressmen Boucher, Goode, and Goodlatte to promote economic development initiatives in the area. Supervisor Church requested that Mr. Hutchins provide a business card to each Board member when they are available. February 13, 2007 99 2. Proclamation declarina the month of February 2007 as School Board Appreciation Month in the County of Roanoke Chairman McNamara presented the proclamation to Marion Roark, School Board Chair. Dr. Lorraine Lange, School Superintendent, was also present. INRE: BRIEFINGS .L Briefina from Total Action Aaainst Poverty (TAP) reaardina current proarams and activities. (Dick Robers. Vice-President of Business Affairs) Mr. Hodge introduced Mr. Robers and advised that he served on the Board of Supervisors in the late 1980s as the representative for the Cave Spring Magisterial District. He noted that many significant issues in the County were addressed at that time including the approval and construction of Spring Hollow Reservoir, consolidation efforts, and development of the Smart Road at Virginia Tech. Mr. Robers thanked the Board for their generous support of TAP, and he stated that TAP serves many low to moderate income individuals within the community through grants from localities. He invited the Board to participate in a tour of TAP, which currently operates 35 programs, and to also visit the Dumas Hotel which has been fully renovated. He recognized Ellen Brown, Director of the Transitional Living Center, who was also present at the meeting. 100 February 13, 2007 INRE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Reauest to adopt resolution authorizina acceptance and appropriation of donations from the Rotary Club of Roanoke Vallev and other individuals and oraanizations for Proiect Lifesaver of the Roanoke County Police Department. (Tarek Moneir. Deputy Director of Development) R-021307-1 Mr. Moneir advised that staff recommends that the Board accept an initial donation and approve an agreement with the Rotary Club of Roanoke Valley in support of the Roanoke County Police Department's Project Lifesaver. He stated that he will briefly outline the recommendations, and advised that Police Chief Ray Lavinder and Officer Rick Crosier were present to provide an overview of Project Lifesaver. Mr. Moneir reported that the Rotary Club of Roanoke Valley wishes to provide financial support to the Project Lifesaver Program, which is operated by the Roanoke County Police Department, as one of its community service projects. He stated that Project Lifesaver is a proven program administered by the Police Department using radio technology to help save and protect individuals In our community who suffer with Alzheimer's disease, Down's syndrome, and Autism. He indicated that this agreement is for an initial term of three years terminating on December 31,2009, and the agreement may be renewed from year to year in writing by the President of the Rotary Club of Roanoke Valley and the County Administrator. Mr. February 13, 2007 101 Moneir advised that the Rotary Club will donate an initial sum of $1,000 upon the approval of this agreement, to be followed by approximately $9,000 by the end of the current fiscal year. He stated that in addition to himself, the following representatives of the Rotary Club were present at the meeting: Catherine Masick, President; Everett M. Werness; Jess Bird, and Pete Lampman. Officer Rick Crosier advised that Project Lifesaver is a very effective program that places electronic tracking equipment on individuals who have a tendency to wander, which can be the result of Alzheimer's disease, Down's syndrome, or Autism. He reported that this reduces search times from hours and days to minutes. He indicated that the costs of searches have been lowered significantly through use of this equipment. Officer Crosier stated that there are currently 20 participants in the Roanoke County program, and he advised that staff is eager to work with the Rotary Club on this project. Ms. Masick presented a check in the amount of $1,000 to Chairman McNamara. The Board expressed appreciation to the members of the Rotary Club for their support of the Project Lifesaver program. Mr. Hodge recognized the efforts of Mr. Moneir in facilitating this partnership. Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None 102 February 13, 2007 RESOLUTION 021307 -1 AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF DONATIONS FROM THE ROTARY CLUB OF ROANOKE VALLEY AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS FOR PROJECT LIFESAVER OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Roanoke Valley (RCRV) has requested to support the Roanoke County Police Department's Project Lifesaver as one of its community service projects by financial contributions over an initial three-year period; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Police Department wishes to enter into an agreement with RCRV to create a cooperative relationship for sponsorship and support of the Department's Project Lifesaver and to provide a mechanism to receive funds from RCRV, as well as other individuals and community organizations who may wish to support Project Lifesaver, by establishing a designated escrow account under the control of the County's Finance Department; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County desires to accept donations on behalf of Project Lifesaver from RCRV and other individuals and organizations and to ensure that such donations are used specifically for equipment or supplies needed by individuals who are qualified to participate in this program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1) The Roanoke County Police Department is authorized to enter into an agreement with the Rotary Club of Roanoke Valley (RCRV) to support the Project Lifesaver program, and the County Administrator is authorized to execute such agreement on behalf of the Police Department in such form as shall be approved by the County Attorney. 2) The Treasurer of Roanoke County is authorized to establish an identified escrow account to hold such funds as may be donated by RCRV and other organizations and individuals for the specific purpose of paying for equipment or supplies, or both, for the benefit of individuals qualified to participate in Project Lifesaver and to disburse such funds as may be directed by the Chief of Police or his designated representative. 3) The initial One Thousand Dollar ($1,000.00) donation from RCRV upon the execution of the aforementioned agreement, and any subsequent donation for Project Lifesaver, is hereby received and duly appropriated for the purposes of said program. 4) This resolution shall be in effectfrom its passage. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None February 13, 2007 103 IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second readina of an ordinance amendina and re-enactina sections of Article !h County Vehicle License. of Chapter 12. Motor Vehicle and Traffic. of the Roanoke County Code to delete provisions for vehicle decals and to enact! vehicle license fee as permitted ~ state law. (Kevin Hutchins. Treasurer) Mr. Hutchins reported that this is the second reading of an ordinance to amend and re-enact several sections of Article II, Chapter 12, of the Roanoke County Code to eliminate the vehicle decal requirement and enact a vehicle licensing structure for 2008 in its place. He stated that the first reading and public hearing were held on January 23, and he advised that there have been no changes to the ordinance since that time. He referenced the attachment which was included with the report which illustrates that the change is revenue neutral. Mr. Hutchins advised that staff recommends adoption of the ordinance. Supervisor Flora noted that he was not present for the discussion that occurred at the first reading, and he inquired if citizens would still be able to replace a decal for the $1 transfer fee. He noted that there are times when a decal may need to be replaced due to damage to a vehicle and under the current method, the decal can be replaced for a $1 transfer fee if a portion of it is presented to the County. Mr. Hutchins advised that if the decal is being replaced due to damage to the vehicle, there is no additional charge; however if the vehicle is replaced, the fee would be charged. He 104 February 13, 2007 stated that the vehicle licensing fee is a flat fee per vehicle per year. Supervisor Flora noted that he raised the concern in December regarding situations where a person may have to replace their vehicle due to circumstances beyond their control, such as the car was no longer operational, and he questioned if under this situation, the individual would have to pay an additional $20 fee. Mr. Hutchins confirmed that this was correct. Supervisor Flora requested clarification regarding why the County could not give the individual credit for having already paid the tax once. Mr. Hutchins advised the following: (1) The Treasurer's Office no longer needs vehicle decals for enforcement purposes; however, the revenue received from decal fees is important to the County and part of the process of converting to the new system was ensuring that there was a replacement revenue stream in place. (2) If the same principles employed currently under the decal system were applied to the vehicle licensing system, the change would not remain revenue neutral; further, there would be a negative impact to the Town of Vinton. Supervisor Flora inquired if Mr. Hutchins is stating that the tax goes with the car and not the owner; thus if he sells his vehicle, the tax goes with the car and he loses that amount. Mr. Hutchins indicated that two different taxes are being discussed: the personal property tax and the vehicle licensing fee. He inquired if Supervisor Flora was referring to the vehicle licensing fee. Supervisor Flora responded in the affirmative. Mr. Hutchins stated that there would be a proration of the personal property tax; however, the vehicle licensing fee is attached to the vehicle and this amount would be February 13, 2007 105 lost. Supervisor Flora inquired if he is exempt from paying the tax if he purchases a car for which the taxes have already been paid. Mr. Hutchins responded that this was not correct and advised that the tax would have been registered under the previous owners' personal property and can not be transferred. Supervisor Flora stated that he will not be able to support this recommended change. He stated that it is grossly unfair to double tax citizens simply because they may have to get rid of a vehicle. Mr. Hutchins stated that he understood this concern and noted that staff made every attempt to illustrate the potential impact and he noted that 15% of the population will actually experience a decrease, this being for vehicles with a higher rated gross weight. He stated that there was a percentage of the population that has the potential to pay more tax, and staff took extreme measures to verify the data and minimize the impact to citizens. He stated that there are two categories that will be impacted and with respect to the vehicle licensing fee, approximately 5,000 out of 98,000 citizens have the potential to be impacted by this change; however staff anticipates that this number will actually be lower. The current personal property system does not allow for the tracking of transfers of decals for individuals who move to Roanoke County from another locality, and these transfers are included in the estimated 5,000 individuals who might be impacted. Mr. Hutchins stated that there is approximately 5% of the population that has the potential to be impacted, but realistically it is probably more in the range of 3.5% to 4%. 106 February 13, 2007 Supervisor Flora stated that it seems that the County is lowering the tax on expensive vehicles where people can afford to pay the tax; however, individuals with lower value cars that may have to replace their vehicles will have to pay double. Mr. Hutchins indicated that he disagreed with this statement because staff had evaluated other potential methods that could have been implemented but those would have involved a tax rate increase to cover the revenue shortfall. He stated that it was determined that other possible methods would have created a more extreme inequitable impact to some citizens, and this is the reason that the proposed model is being recommended. Mr. Hutchins also stated that of all localities who have eliminated decals, 80% have used this type of fee structure; the remaining 20% raised their tax rate to accommodate the loss of revenue. Supervisor Wray requested an explanation regarding what has occurred in localities where this method has been implemented. Mr. Hutchins reported that with respect to collection rates, localities throughout the Commonwealth have seen a 1 % to 1.5% decrease in revenue collection for the first year only. He stated that this is likely due to the fact that having a decal requirement encourages individuals to pay taxes during a specific time frame; therefore, the County receives increased revenues during the months of May and June. However when a vehicle licensing fee program is implemented, the receipt of the revenues is stretched out over an 8 to 12 month period. He stated that the new system creates a time deferral for receipt of the revenues; however this primarily affects the first year only. By the second year, all localities that February 13, 2007 107 were surveyed advised that there has been an insignificant amount, less than one-half of one percent, decrease in collections. Supervisor Wray inquired if there is any additional impact to the County to collect and monitor the new process. Mr. Hutchins indicated that there is a trade-off in staff time for the Treasurer's Office. He noted that the decal system is very time consuming for a two to three month period; therefore, staff time will be gained to implement other programs. He also indicated that the other programs such as federal and state debt set-off are already in place and being handled with existing staff; therefore, staff time will be gained to work on and implement these programs to a higher degree. He stated that a very large portion of the County's revenue collections, approximately 70% to 80%, is derived from these programs. Supervisor Church voiced concerns about the potential for citizens to have to pay an additional $20 fee when they trade vehicles. He inquired if it is correct that vehicles weighing 4,100 pounds would remain at the lower fee. Mr. Hutchins responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Church stated that he is not certain how many individuals own vehicles in this category, and indicated that he still has reservations regarding the additional $20 fee. Supervisor Church inquired about the cost to set up this new process. Mr. Hutchins reported that actual set up costs will be derived during the initial HP migration that will occur in January 2008. He stated that the estimated cost is approximately $35,000 to $50,000 if the County utilizes a decal system; the cost to implement the 108 February 13, 2007 vehicle licensing fee is approximately $15,000. Supervisor Church questioned whether the cost to the County will decrease. Mr. Hutchins responded that the County's cost will decrease if a vehicle licensing fee is used versus trying to implement a decal system under the new computer format. Supervisor Church inquired about the potential impact to revenues if a prorated fee structure is implemented. Mr. Hutchins advised that although he did not have this information with him, he recalls that there is approximately a $300,000 loss of revenue to the County if a prorated fee system is implemented. He further advised that there will be an even greater impact to the Town of Vinton. Supervisor Church questioned what contributes to the additional $300,000 cost. Mr. Hutchins stated that it is the result of taking a decal system that is per vehicle, determining the terms for each individual, and how to apply this based on a fee structure. He cited examples of variables that had to be considered such as owner of the vehicle, whether they are new to the locality, the locality they came from, whether the locality was pro-rating or non pro-rating, etc. Supervisor Church questioned whether the existing method, which allows for a $1 replacement fee, could be employed. He stated that if this action is approved, he would like to see the Board look at a way to improve this system in the coming year so that it does not penalize citizens. Mr. Hutchins stated that the County realized that there was an opportunity to pursue elimination of decals in 2008 due to the HP migration project. He advised that staff is currently in the midst of contract negotiations and direction is needed from the Board at this time in order to firm up February 13, 2007 109 pricing. He advised that since the new method will not be implemented until 2008, it allows some flexibility to consider possible modifications to the ordinance that would address the concerns expressed by the Board. Supervisor Church recommended that staff evaluate this further to determine if there is a scenario that would be more cost advantageous for the citizens. Supervisor Altizer inquired how many decals are normally prorated. Mr. Hutchins referred to the chart that was provided with the agenda materials, and he provided the following data for 2005-2006: (1) Free decals: 1,445 (no impact to these citizens); (2) New vehicle purchases with decal transfers: 5,836 (out of 97,839 total); (3) New vehicle purchases with prorated decal transfer fee: 6,146 (impact between $1 and $19.99). These are individuals who purchased an additional vehicle mid-year. Mr. Hutchins noted that approximately 1,000 of the 5,836 decal transfers were likely the result of individuals who moved to Roanoke County from another locality. Supervisor Altizer inquired if the issues being addressed are the result of trying to make the change revenue neutral, or is there a problem with implementing the new method and still allowing a $1 transfer fee. Mr. Hutchins advised that it is likely the result of both factors; however, the larger impact is due to trying to remain revenue neutral. Supervisor Altizer inquired how much flexibility is available with the system being purchased to tailor it to meet the County's needs. Mr. Hutchins advised that the existing system is very complex and in negotiating with the software vendor, there is 110 February 13, 2007 limited flexibility to make modifications because of the need to integrate the data into the accounting system. He stated that a full customization of the system would exceed $100,000; further, the system needs to go live by January/February 2008 for billing in April 2008. To pursue a full customization of the system would jeopardize the integrity of implementing the new process in 2008. Supervisor Altizer inquired if this ordinance is adopted today in order to allow the process to move forward, can staff retain the ability to adjust the system to allow for proration in order to prevent a negative impact to the citizens. Mr. Hutchins stated that he anticipates that this could be negotiated with the vendor, but emphasized that this process needs to begin immediately. He noted that any proposed changes will need to be addressed by several departments. Supervisor McNamara stated that approximately 98,000 decals are going away and we must consider how this change will impact citizens. He indicated that the proposed method is almost perfectly revenue neutral, and he noted that this was the direction given to Mr. Hutchins. He stated that the Board can implement a prorated fee; however, the goal was to impact as few citizens as possible. He stated that this method has no impact to 85% of County citizens; approximately 15% will have a positive impact; and approximately 5% will have a slight negative impact. He stated that if the vehicle licensing fee is increased slightly to maintain revenue neutrality, individuals may come out ahead in years where they trade vehicles; however if they did not trade vehicles, they would be behind under this type of method. He stated that any time you can February 13, 2007 111 eliminate steps in government, increase efficiency, and maintain revenue neutrality, the change makes sense. He advised that the 4,000 citizens who might be negatively impacted in a year when they purchase a vehicle can be positively impacted in years when they do not purchase a vehicle. Supervisor Wray noted that citizens would like to eliminate decals and the Board wants to be as revenue neutral as possible; however, the Board also understands that when an individual needs to change a vehicle they will incur an additional fee. He inquired if there was still time available to work through possible modifications if the ordinance is approved today. Mr. Hutchins responded in the affirmative, but stated that it would not be the scenario he would recommend implementing. Supervisor Church concurred with the comments made by Supervisor Wray, and he requested that staff examine options that would not penalize citizens and might more closely mirror the current $1 transfer fee system currently in place. Supervisor Church stated that he was not certain how to phrase the motion, but that he would recommend proceeding with adoption of the ordinance so that the implementation process can continue but to also include an evaluation of how to make modifications that will have less impact on the citizens. Chairman McNamara stated that Supervisor Church had moved to adopt the ordinance with the caveat that the Board could revisit the ordinance at a future date. 112 February 13, 2007 Chairman McNamara indicated that any ordinance adopted by the Board can be revisited at any time. Supervisor Wray stated that he would like clarification regarding the action being taken. Supervisor Flora stated that the Board is adopting the ordinance as presented. Supervisor Wray requested additional clarification. Chairman McNamara stated that in their comments, the Board can indicate that they would like an evaluation of the process or this can be phrased as part of the motion. Supervisor Wray stated that he would like for the motion to include language regarding a review of the procedure. Supervisor Church concurred with this recommendation. Mr. Hodge noted that Paul Mahoney, County Attorney, had to leave due to an emergency. He stated that it might be appropriate to defer action on this matter for two weeks to allow further examination. He stated that we need to ensure that any actions taken meet the necessary legal requirements. He stated that if it is not possible to legally accomplish the objectives desired by the Board, then we need to know this information. Supervisor Church withdrew the motion to adopt the ordinance with the caveat that the Board could revisit the ordinance at a future date. Supervisor Church moved to defer action on this matter until February 27, 2007. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: February 13, 2007 113 AYES: NAYS: IN RE: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara None APPOINTMENTS 1..: Grievance Panel Chairman McNamara advised that the three-year term of Karen Ewell will expire on February 23,2007. 2. Leaaue of Older Americans - Advisory Council Chairman McNamara advised that the one-year term of Beverly Eyerly will expire on March 31, 2007. 3. Roanoke Reaional Airport Commission Chairman McNamara advised that the four-year term of Arthur M. Whittaker, Sr., expired on February 11, 2007. Supervisor Wray advised that Mr. Whittaker had informed him that he would be willing to serve an additional term, and he moved to re-appoint him and add his name to the consent agenda for confirmation. Chairman McNamara advised that this appointment was among those scheduled to be discussed in closed meeting. Supervisor Wray withdrew the motion. 4. Western Virainia Water Authority Chairman McNamara advised that John Williamson has submitted his resignation from the Board effective November 16, 2006. 114 February 13, 2007 INRE: CONSENT AGENDA R-021307 -2 Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the consent resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 021307-2 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM 1- 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 February 13, 2007, 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 4, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes - January 23, 2007 2. Request from the schools to accept and appropriate grant funding totaling $27,559.79 3. Request from the schools to accept and appropriate grant funding totaling $52,298.00 4. Request from the Fire and Rescue Department to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $57,571.50 for two grants from the Virginia Department of Health 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 Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None February 13, 2007 115 INRE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L Reauest to schedule! work session on February 27. 2007. to discuss the Secondary Roads System Six-Year Improvement Plan for fiscal years 2007-2013 and review the Revenue Sharina Proaram for fiscal year 2007-2008. (Philip Thompson. Deputy Director of Plannina) It was the consensus of the Board to schedule the work session on February 27,2007. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Flora moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Continaency 4. Telecommunications Tax Comparison Report 5. Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of January 31. 2007 6. Proclamations sianed ~ the Board 116 February 13, 2007 IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Altizer: He expressed appreciation to the Board for supporting an increase in the hours at the Mount Pleasant and Bent Mountain libraries. He stated that the Mount Pleasant library has experienced more than a 100% increase in usage as a result of this change. Supervisor Flora: He advised that he had previously raised concerns regarding situations where there are 15-20 individuals living in a single family home. He requested an update regarding staff actions to address these concerns. Mr. Hodge reported that a group of staff members have been designated to address this issue, and they are approaching it from several aspects including enforcement of code violations, as well as vehicle violations. Mr. Hodge indicated that there has been some success in dealing with the issues that can be addressed under the existing County Code; however, he noted that it may be necessary for the County to consider amendments to the Code. He stated that the County is also working with the neighbors to increase awareness of the issues. Mr. Hodge recommended that staff present a report to the Board in the next 30-60 days. Supervisor Flora stated that this issue will not go away and will only continue to grow. He stated that the County can not allow neighborhoods to deteriorate, and we need to protect existing homeowners from these types of activities. February 13, 2007 117 Supervisor Wrav: (1) He inquired about the status of internet filters being used in the County's libraries. Mr. Hodge stated that the County must balance legal requirements that protect freedom of speech while also ensuring that we protect the users of the library. He indicated that the filters used by the County are the same ones used throughout other library systems. He noted that tightening the restrictions on the filters might prohibit the availability of legitimate searches. (2) He stated that he received an email concerning a situation with a leaking roof that had been covered with a tarp for over one year. He requested clarification regarding the County's jurisdiction over this type of matter. Mr. Hodge advised that he would have staff investigate and respond back to Supervisor Wray regarding this matter. (3) He requested an update on the recycling trailer at Cave Spring Middle School. Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services, advised that the new trailer is in place and press releases have been sent out advising citizens of its availability. She indicated that the responses have been positive, and advised that the trailer is being monitored to ensure that it is emptied in a timely manner and the area around the trailer is kept clean. Supervisor Wray expressed appreciation to staff for their efforts in this regard. (4) He thanked Billy Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation, for his handling of citizen inquiries regarding reassessment notices. 118 February 13, 2007 Supervisor Church: (1) He also expressed appreciation to Mr. Driver for his prompt response to citizen inquiries. (2) He stated that he has been ill recently, and he apologized to citizens who may not have received a prompt response to their inquiries. Supervisor McNamara: (1) He noted the discussions regarding assessments, and indicated that the value of real property in Roanoke County is increasing at a strong rate. He stated that people want to live in Roanoke County because it is a great place to live and do business. (2) He thanked the Employee Advisory Committee for inviting him and Supervisor Flora to their meeting today. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 4:28 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to probable litigation, namely, Cardinal Criminal Justice Training Academy; Section 2.2-3711 A (3) discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for public purposes, namely County garage; and Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion regarding the appointment of specific public officers, namely appointments to the Grievance Panel, Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, and the Western Virginia Water Authority. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None February 13, 2007 119 IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to present the conceptual plans for the new South County Library. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Diana Rosapepe, Director of Libraries) The work session was held from 4:43 p.m. until 5:41 p.m. Staff present included the following: Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Diana Rosapepe, Director of Libraries; and Michael Meise, Assistant Director of Libraries. The following members of the Library Board were also in attendance: Lisa Boggess, James Nelson, and Toby McPhail. Others attending included Phyllis Tilden, Friends of the Library; Sheila Umberger, Director of Libraries - Roanoke City; Janis Augustine, Director of Libraries - City of Salem; Ricky Lawrence, OWPR Architects; and Jay Roberts, Department of Environmental Quality. Diane Hyatt recognized the following students with the Insight Internship Program who were present at the work session: Adam Barton, Lauren Goetsch, and Betsy Graves. Ms. Hyatt advised that ten parcels were initially considered as potential sites for the new South County Library. Each site was ranked based on criteria and additional engineering work was then conducted. As the evaluation process was carried out, all properties other than the Merriman Road site were deemed unfeasible for various reasons. The proposed site on Merriman Road will incorporate the existing wetlands which will be used to enhance the project. 120 February 13, 2007 Ms. Rosapepe reported that the new site is approximately 2.8 miles from the current 419 Library and is less than a five minute drive from the existing library branch. She displayed an aerial map illustrating the location of the property and where the building will be situated on the site. She noted the placement of raised walking trails through the wetlands that will feature learning areas. She noted that the proposed raised trails will have minimal impact on the wetlands. Mr. Lawrence outlined the 100 year flood plain area and noted that it will be modified slightly with grading, thereby completely removing the building from the flood plain. Ms. Rosapepe advised that the first floor of the library will be 16 feet above the flood plain. There was general discussion with respect to Merriman Road and safety concerns. Ms. Rosapepe advised that the intersection of Merriman Road and Meadowlark Road is on the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Six-Year Improvement Program and she indicated that VDOT is aware of the proposed plans for the new library. Mr. Hodge advised that revenue sharing funds may be utilized for these road improvements and he indicated that staff plans to pursue grant funding for development of the wetland trails. Ms. Hyatt advised that wetland development is not included in the budget for the project, and that grant opportunities will be explored for this purpose. There was also discussion regarding possible use of a turn lane at the entrance to the library site, and Mr. Lawrence advised that this would be determined by VDOT. February 13, 2007 121 Ms. Rosapepe reviewed the floor plans for the new library. With respect to design of the young adult area, Ms. Rosapepe advised that they are interested in seeking the input of young adults regarding amenities to be included in this area. Supervisor Altizer suggested that staff evaluate the possible inclusion of a genealogy room in the new facility. Ms. Hyatt distributed a timeline for the project, and advised that site work will begin in October 2007. Building construction is anticipated to begin in April 2008, with project completion in September 2009. In response to Supervisor McNamara's inquiry regarding anticipated increases in circulation, Ms. Rosapepe advised that the increase could be in the range of 20% to 40% based on results of prior remodels. She further indicated that due to the significant level of changes being proposed, the increase could be even greater than anticipated. Mr. Hodge inquired if the members of the Library Board would like to comment on the proposed site and design. Ms. McPhail stated that the Merriman site was not initially favored by the Library Board; however once plans were presented, she feels that there are many opportunities available due to the wetlands and she voiced support for the site. Mr. Nelson stated that he is very aware of the conditions at the current library and the fact that the facility is no longer feasible for the amount of circulation. He voiced support for a larger facility and noted the need to move forward with the project. 122 February 13, 2007 Supervisor McNamara voiced concerns regarding the traffic that will be generated through the neighborhood. He inquired if staff has considered keeping the 419 library site open. Mr. Hodge stated that there is a need for additional administrative space for County personnel and one possible use for the 419 facility would be to accommodate overflow from the Administration Center. Ms. Rosapepe stated that although the site on Route 419 is convenient, having one central library will better serve the population, address safety concerns currently at the 419 site, and provide a higher level of services to citizens. Mr. Hodge advised that staff will further investigate this possibility and examine any staffing needs. Supervisor Flora recommended selling the existing site and using the funds to purchase additional office space for any overflow needs. Supervisor Wray inquired about the timeline for making this information and site renderings available to the public. Ms. Hyatt advised that staff will conduct community meetings as we move to the detailed design phase, and she indicated that the drawings and proposed floor plan will be posted on the County's website. She also indicated that an RVlV segment is being planned. 2. Work session for discussion of proposal received for the desian and construction of ! Multi-Generational Recreation Center under the Public Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell. Assistant County Administrator) February 13, 2007 123 The work session was held from 5:43 p.m. until 6:10 p.m. Mr. O'Donnell reported that the Board approved the Part I proposal from First Choice Public Private Partners in November 2006. Subsequently, the County advertised for competing proposals that were to be received by February 6, 2007. No other proposals were received. Mr. O'Donnell indicated that at this point, the Board has two options: (1) move the proposal forward to the Detailed Design Phase; or (2) stop the process. He noted that the information contained in the Part I proposal remains proprietary, and therefore many of the details of this proposal can not be discussed in open session. Supervisor McNamara recommended that the matter be discussed in closed session. Mr. O'Donnell advised that with respect to the preliminary proposal, he could report that the estimate is higher than the original cost estimate provided by Mr. Younger, PROS Consulting. He further noted that modifications to the scope of the project have since been discussed, including the addition of two gyms, a 50-meter pool with 8 lanes, and an ice rink. Supervisor McNamara inquired if these alternatives were included as options in the original proposal. Mr. O'Donnell advised that they were not; however if the Board decides to move to Phase II Detailed Design, these could be added as alternates. He indicated that recent changes in the Public Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA) law would allow First Choice to request that the County enter into an interim agreement that might require the County to pay for some of the additional design costs. Supervisor McNamara stated that if we can not 124 February 13, 2007 evaluate possible scope changes without increasing design costs, he is not willing to move forward. The Board voiced support for keeping the core scope of the project as originally defined and requesting an evaluation of the potential costs for the following possible alternatives: a 50-meter competitive swimming pool with 8 lanes; two additional gyms (for a total of four); and an ice rink. There was a consensus of the Board that these estimates should be provided at no additional cost. Mr. Haislip noted that these proposed modifications will increase the footprint of the building and will not only increase costs but may require additional land. Supervisor Altizer stated that he is having difficulty supporting the addition of an ice rink due to the increase in capital costs that will be experienced. Further, there will be a requirement for additional parking spaces and the available acreage is limited. Bill Upthegrove, representative of Roanoke Valley Ice Advocates, stated that he hopes that he has elevated the awareness of the need for an ice rink in the Roanoke Valley. He advised that their organization can operate a facility; however, they can not afford to build one. He stated that skaters from Roanoke County, Roanoke City, and Salem would comprise 70% of the users of the rink. He requested assistance in developing a cost estimate for their organization to proceed with trying to secure a new facility, and also the designation of a County liaison to work with their organization. Mr. Hodge recommended that the organization approach Roanoke College for potential February 13, 2007 125 partnership opportunities and that they also explore available properties that could be purchased. Mr. O'Donnell stated that the next steps are as follows: (1) a vote by the Board regarding whether to move the proposal to Phase II Detailed Design; and (2) an appropriation of the $50,000 fee to allow hiring a construction management firm to develop the formal scope and negotiate a comprehensive agreement, if the Board decides to move forward with the project. There was a consensus of the Board to move forward with the project. INRE: CLOSED MEETING The closed meeting was held from 6:25 p.m. until 6:50 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-021307 -3 At 6:50 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 021307-3 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. 126 February 13, 2007 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 McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Reauest to adopt resolution proceedinQ to the detailed desiQn phase for the construction of! new Multi-Generational Recreation Center under the provisions of the Public Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) R-021307-4 Mr. O'Donnell advised that on November 14, 2006, the Board of Supervisors voted to accept the Part I conceptual proposal from First Choice Public Private Partners for publication and conceptual design phase review for the design and construction of a Multi-Generational Recreation Center to be located on property owned by English Construction along Wood haven Road. He stated that First Choice Public Private Partners is a partnership of English Construction Company and Moseley Architects. Mr. O'Donnell indicated that the Multi-Generational Recreation Center was a February 13, 2007 127 major recommendation in the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Master Plan and would serve as an anchor for a new 198-acre business park which would be visible from 1-81 and 1-581 in North Roanoke County. He reported that staff advertised for competing proposals as required by the PPEA legislation; however, no competing proposals were submitted by the deadline of February 6, 2007. Mr. O'Donnell advised that under the PPEA legislation, the Board of Supervisors may now vote to move the First Choice proposal to the detailed design phase in order to determine if the project should proceed past the conceptual design phase. He stated that moving the project to the detailed design phase causes no financial obligation on the part of the County. The Board of Supervisors will have the ability to determine if the project is to be pursued after a tentative comprehensive agreement is negotiated. Mr. O'Donnell noted that recent changes to the PPEA legislation require that the tentative comprehensive agreement be open for public review two weeks before the Board of Supervisors considers it for approval. He advised that it is contemplated that the detailed design proposal would be received by the County in June and a tentative comprehensive agreement be negotiated by the end of August 2007. With respect to the fiscal impact to the County, Mr. O'Donnell reported that there is no obligation made on the part of the County at this point in the process to fund any cost for the project. First Choice has submitted a $50,000 proposal fee to the 128 February 13, 2007 County, and these funds will be used to defray any County costs for reviewing the detailed design proposal and negotiating a tentative comprehensive agreement. There was no discussion on this item. Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 021307-4 PROCEEDING TO THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW MUL TI- GENERATIONAL RECREATION CENTER UNDER THE PUBLIC. PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2002 WHEREAS, the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA) allows the Roanoke County to create a public-private partnership to develop projects for public use; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 051304-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County; which were amended by Resolution 092606-2.c; and WHEREAS, First Choice Public Private Partners had submitted an unsolicited proposal under the provisions of the PPEA to construct a multi-generational recreation center for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 111406-1 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the First Choice Public Private Partners unsolicited proposal for publication and conceptual phase consideration and it invited the submission of competing preliminary proposals; and WHEREAS, the County Administrator has reviewed this proposal and has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that it proceed to review this proposal at the detailed design phase. 1. That there is a public need for a multi-generational recreation center for Roanoke County. 2. That it chooses to accept the proposal from First Choice Public Private Partners to proceed to the detailed design Phase 2 proposal review pursuant to Section VI. B. of the County's procedures for the construction of a new multi-generational recreation center. February 13, 2007 129 On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Reauest for authorization to enter into an aareement with ! construction manaaementlowner's representative firm for review of the Multi-Generational Recreation Center detailed desian phase. neaotiation of ! tentative comprehensive aareement with First Choice Public Private Partners. and appropriation of $50.000 to the proiect. (Dan O'Donnell. Assistant County Administrator) A-021307 -5 Mr. O'Donnell advised that this is a request to appropriate the $50,000 fee received from First Choice Public Private Partners to allow the County to enter into an agreement with a construction management firm to assist in the negotiation of the comprehensive agreement and to develop the scope for the Part II proposal. There was no discussion on this item. Supervisor Flora moved to approve staff recommendation (authorize the County Staff to enter into a contract with a construction management/owner's representative firm to assist In detailed design phase review and negotiation of a tentative comprehensive agreement, and authorize appropriation of the $50,000 received from First Choice Public Private Partners). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: 130 February 13, 2007 AYES: NAYS: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara None 3. Reauest to proceed with the detail desian of the new South County Library on the Merriman site. (Diane Hvatt. Chief Financial Officer) A-021307 -6 Ms. Hyatt advised that in September 2004, staff began looking for a site for a new South County library. She indicated that ten potential sites were identified, ranked, and evaluated based on criteria set by staff and the Library Board. On August 9, 2005, these sites were reviewed with the Board of Supervisors and at the conclusion of that meeting, the Board asked staff to get a professional evaluation of the suitability of four of the sites. Ms. Hyatt reported that the Merriman site has remained as the one site that was available, affordable, and usable. She noted that the site does have wetlands and land in the 100 year floodplain; however, the library building itself will be completely out of the floodplain and the wetlands. She indicated that extensive test borings have been conducted to make sure that the soils are suitable. Rather than mitigating the wetlands, they are being built into the plan as an educational and recreational feature of the site. The wetlands will be enhanced and featured with walking paths that will connect to the parks on both sides of the property. She advised that this will also add to the passive recreation areas as outlined in the Parks, February 13, 2007 131 Recreation, and Tourism Master Plan. Staff will work with Parks, Recreation and Tourism to find grant funding to develop this area. Ms. Hyatt advised that the 56,000 square foot building will include over 13,000 square feet of community space which can be closed off from the remainder of the library for after hours use. This section will include a large meeting room that can be subdivided into smaller rooms, an auditorium, coffee shop with a drive-up window, a large computer lab, and the Young Adults section. The library will contain a themed children's area, a quiet reading room, individual study rooms, a variety of computer access stations, as well as the traditional fiction, non-fictions, audio-visual, and reference sections. Ms. Hyatt reported that at this time, no additional appropriation is required to proceed with the project. Staff is requesting that the Board approve proceeding with the detailed design of the library on the Merriman site based on the information presented in work session today. Supervisor Wray stated that in the work session, it was determined that the conceptual plans would be placed on the County's website for review by citizens. Supervisor McNamara stated that he intends to support the new library; however, he is not doing so with the intent of closing the existing Route 419 library. He stated that the current Route 419 site retains usefulness as a branch library and noted that it is in the right location despite the fact that it is too small. He further stated that he 132 February 13, 2007 does not think the site that has been chosen is suitable for a headquarters library, but rather would be better suited as a branch location. Supervisor Wray moved to approve staff recommendation (approval to proceed with the detail design of the library on the Merriman site). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None 4. Ratification and approval of aareement with Cardinal Criminal Justice Academv. (Elmer Hodae. County Administrator) A-021307-7 Mr. Hodge noted that Sheriff Gerald Holt and Police Chief Ray Lavinder were also present at the meeting. Mr. Hodge advised that this is a request to ratify and approve an agreement that was signed earlier this week with Cardinal Academy. He stated that this action would be contingent upon approval by Cardinal Academy and execution of the agreement provided to the Board. He advised that the agreement allows the Roanoke County Sheriff's Department to withdraw from the Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy in order to meet the training requirements of the Sheriff's Office, while also addressing the needs of Cardinal Academy. He stated that staff feels that this agreement moves Roanoke County closer toward establishment of our own independent training academy, which has been an objective for a number of years. He noted that the Roanoke County Police Department has been independent of any February 13, 2007 133 academy since 2001, and the Sheriff took action to withdraw from the academy in 2006. He advised that there is a five-year window in which you must withdraw, and the Sheriff has complied with this requirement. He stated that the withdrawal request was voted on by the Cardinal Academy Board; however, it did not meet the two-thirds required membership vote. The agreement pending before the Board requests a re-vote of Cardinal Academy which is scheduled for Thursday, February 15. Mr. Hodge advised that there is no additional request for staff or funding associated with this request. He indicated that the Sheriff's Office and Police Department staffs are certified as trainers, and they can train many of the new recruits. He advised that the new public safety center is a state-of-the art facility that will meet the County's needs for training. He indicated that the building is on a 40-acre site that would be suitable for training purposes. Mr. Hodge reported that with 130 police officers and 110 Sheriff's deputies, Roanoke County is home to one of the largest law enforcement communities west of Richmond. He stated that this is significant because many localities of this size already have their own training academy. He indicated that communities of larger size develop specialized training needs that are better served by having the flexibility provided by an independent training academy. He stated that at the present time, the Roanoke County Police Department partners with Roanoke City due to shared common borders. He stated that the Police Department has found it advantageous to participate in classes with the City of Roanoke, as well as other agencies throughout the State of 134 February 13, 2007 Virginia. Mr. Hodge also noted that an independent academy would allow for partnership opportunities with the Fire and Rescue Department, thus satisfying federal agency requirements for National Incident Management System (NIMS) training. Mr. Hodge indicated that during the next five years, transition payments to Cardinal Academy can be taken from the funds already included in the Sheriffs budget for training. He stated that no additional facilities, staffing, or funds are being requested. He advised that the County's request for an independent training academy is currently pending in the General Assembly. If for some reason the request is not approved, it will be re-submitted to the General Assembly next year. There was no discussion on this item. Supervisor Church moved to approve the staff recommendation (ratify and approve the agreement with Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy contingent on a favorable vote by Cardinal Academy on February 15th to allow the Sheriff's Office to withdraw). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Wray, Church, Altizer, Flora, McNamara NAYS: None INRE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting at 7:08 p.m. Submitted by: Approved by: &mo ,~, tL4/ij) Diane S. Childers, CMC Clerk to the Board ~~ l ep P. McNamara ~Ohairman