HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/12/1992 - RegularrF
A
s ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~
.a38
ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
PLANNING RETREAT
ACTION AGENDA
AUGUST 12, 1992
3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC SERVICE CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM
A. RECONVENE
RCONVENED AT 3:05 P.M.
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
NEW BUSINESS
,off ~.~,~
1. Request for Authorization to Execute an Administrative Order for Consent
for Removal Action for the Cleanup of the Dixie Caverns Landfill Site.
R-81292-1
HCN MOTION TO ADOPT RESO WITH SUBMITTAL LETTER EXPRESSING
CONCERN FOR THE APPROACH AND OUR EFFORTS TO COMPLY IN THE PAST.
AYES-HCN,BLJ (WITH PRF{IUDICE),FM,LBE
NAYS-EGK
2. Request for Authorization to Execute aCost-sharing Agreement with Roanoke
Electric Steel regarding Cleanup of the Dixie Caverns Landfill Site.
A-81292-2
BLS MOTION TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ALONG THE TERMS OUTLINED
URC
3. Request to Hire Outside Legal Counsel for Easements and Rights of Ways
A-81292-3
HCN MOTION TO APPROVE
URC
TOPICS SUGGE5TID BY BOARD MEMBERS AND ELD~IIIt HODGE
1. The Book, "Reinventing Government"
® aeoyaee Paoer
-~
ECH TO CHECK ON AUDIT OF LIGHTS AT BALLFIELDS
LBE ASKED THAT REQUEST BE MADE TO VML AND/OR VACO TO CONDUCT A
STATEWIDE SALARY SURVEY
BOARD ASKED FOR REPORT ON SUGGESTION BOX
EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 A (3) to discuss
consideration of the acquisition of real property for public purposes.
HCN MOTION AT 5:45 P.M.
URC
BI.J LEFT FOLLOWING EXECUTIVE SESSION
CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
R-81292-4
HCN MOTION AT 6:25P.M.
URC
2. County Board Organizational Structure
NO CONSENSUS FOR CHANGE
3. Explore and Hotel Roanoke
HCN UPDATED BOARD ON EXPLORE
4. Cable TV Update
PRESENTED BY AMG
5. Development of CIP
PRESENTED BY RETA BUSHER
6. Sewage Treatment Plant Expansion
PRESENTED BY CLIFF CRAIG
ADJOURNMENT
FM MOTION AT 8:20 P.M.
UW
. ~ pORN ~,~
a ~
Z , p ('~
o a? l~ I.~1Y~~~ l~~ ~ TY~~1~~Q
ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
PLANNING RETREAT AGENDA
AUGUST 12, 1992
3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC SERVICE CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM
A. RECONVENE
B. NEW BUSINESS
lff.UPJ 6 7fE 1f/g' Rm~'
1. Request to Hire Outside Legal Counsel for Easements and Rights of Ways
2. Request for Authorization to Execute an Administrative Order for Consent
for Removal Action for the Cleanup of the Dixie Caverns Landfill Site.
3. Request for Authorization to Execute aCost-sharing Agreement with Roanoke
Electric Steel regarding Cleanup of the Dixie Caverns Landfill Site.
C. TOPICS SUGGESTID BY BOARD MIIVIBERS AND EL1VIIIt HODGE
1. The Book, "Reinventing Government"
2. County Board Organizational Structure
3. Explore and Hotel Roanoke
4. Cable TV Update
5. Development of CIP
6. Sewage Treatment Plant Expansion
D. ERECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 A (3) to discuss
consideration of the acquisition of real property for public purposes.
E. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
F. ADJOURNMENT
® Regded Paper
AT AN ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992
RESOLUTION 81292-1 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER BY~CONSENT FOR REMOVAL ACTION FOR
THE CLEAN-UP OF THE DIXIE CAVERNS LANDFILL AS REQUESTED
BY THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") has determined that the conduct of a removal action to
abate, mitigate and/or eliminate the release or threatened release
of hazardous substances at Dixie Caverns landfill is necessary to
protect public health, safety and welfare, and,
WHEREAS, during sampling and testing at the site it was
determined that certain contaminants may have migrated into stream
surface waters and sediments, and,
WHEREAS, EPA has determined that a removal action is
appropriate to abate, minimize, stabilize, mitigate or eliminate
the release or threat of release of hazardous substances at or from
the site.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute on behalf of the County an "ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER BY CONSENT
FOR REMOVAL ACTION."
2) That the County Administrator is further authorized to
execute such agreements as may be necessary to accomplish the
purposes of this Consent Order.
3) That the Board finds that an emergency exists, and that
purchases of goods, materials or services may be made without
1
competitive sealed bidding or competitive negotiation.
4) $100,000 is hereby appropriated from the General Fund
Unappropriated Balance to accomplish the purposes of the Consent
Order and staff will return for further appropriation as necessary.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution with
submittal letter expressing concern for the approach and our
efforts to comply in the past, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson (with prejudice), Minnix, Nickens,
Eddy
NAYS: Supervisor Kohinke
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. All n, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
Clifford Craig, Director, Utility
Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance
Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget
Elaine Carver, Director, Procurement
2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. ~ '° ~"
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: August 12, 1992
AGENDA ITEM: Request for authorization to execute an
Administrative Order for Consent for Removal Action
for the cleanup of the Dixie Caverns Landfill as
requested by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY'
The Board is requested to authorize the County Administrator
to execute on behalf of the County an Administrative Order by
Consent for Removal Action. The Board is also requested to
authorize the County Administrator to execute such contracts or
agreements as may be necessary to implement this proposed removal
action. Finally, the Board is requested to declare that this is an
emergency and that such contracts may be secured without
competitive sealed bidding or competitive negotiations.
BACKGROUND'
The County operated the Dixie Caverns Landfill site from 1965
until 1976. During a portion of its operation, Roanoke Electric
Steel Corporation (RES) disposed of flyash at the site. In 1983,
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a
preliminary assessment of this site identifying three areas of
concern: the flyash pile, the sludge disposal area, and the drum
disposal area. As a result of these initial investigations, EPA
proposed this site for inclusion on the National Priority List on
January 27, 1987. On October 4, 1989, EPA finalized the inclusion
of this site on that list.
In September of 1987, the County signed a Consent Agreement
and Order with EPA to conduct a removal action at the three
disposal areas at the site. The County successfully completed the
removal activities in the drum area and the sludge pit.
EPA initially approved the County plan to treat the flyash
using RES's proprietary stabilization process. In the fall of 1989
and prior to initiation of full scale treatment, EPA directed the
County to halt activities on the treatment of the flyash.
1
In September of 1991, the EPA directed the County to utilize
a different process to treat the flyash pile. Since that time
representatives of the County and RES have been negotiating a
Consent Decree to implement a final approved treatment of the
flyash pile. In July of 1989, EPA initiated a Remedial
Investigation and Feasibility Study to determine the full extent
and impact of the contamination at the site. As part of the RI/FS,
surface water and sediment samples were obtained from small streams
adjacent to the northern portion of the site. Testing of these
samples identified three contaminants of potential concern: lead,
cadmium, and zinc. Because of the high concentration of
contaminants found in the sediment of the streams receiving flyash
runoff, EPA determined the need for an expedited remedial response.
EPA has also determined that the migration of these metals from the
flyash pile into the stream surface waters and sediment may present
an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health, or
welfare, or the environment. Because of this threat or potential
threat to the public health, or welfare, or the environment, a
removal action is appropriate to abate, minimize, stabilize,
mitigate, or eliminate the release or threatened release of these
substances from the site.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
On July 15, 1992, the County received a draft Removal Order to
accomplish the proposed work. On July 22, 1992, representatives of
the County and RES met with representatives of EPA in Philadelphia
to discuss the draft Consent Decree for the remedial action and the
draft Removal Order. EPA has indicated that the County and RES
must execute the Removal Order by August 14, 1992, or EPA shall
undertake unilateral action. Despite County and RES protests
concerning the nature and scope of the work required, the long
delay in addressing this issue occasioned by EPA actions, and
sudden rush by EPA to finally address this problem over the past
three weeks, the County does believe that its citizens deserve
protection from the potential health hazard and should enter into
the Order.
Within 21 days of the execution of the Consent Order, the
County shall submit a response action plan that will accomplish the
following items:
1. Identify the extent of lead, zinc, or cadmium
contamination exceeding risk based levels in stream
sediments.
2. Identify alternatives to mitigate the effect of the
contamination in the stream sediment.
3. Implement the EPA approved alternative.
2
4. Identify the extent of lead, zinc, or cadmium
contamination exceeding risk based levels in soils
adjacent to and beneath the flyash pile.
5. Remove, treat, or dispose of contaminated soil.
6. Install erosion and sedimentation controls.
7. Remove, dispose of, or treat contaminated water.
8. Prepare and implement a health and safety plan.
9. Propose a schedule for implementation.
Because of the limited period of time EPA has allowed to
accomplish this work, and because of EPA's determination of the
threat or potential threat to the public health, or welfare, or
environment, an emergency is deemed to exist. This declaration of
an emergency would authorize the County to award contracts to
accomplish the work required without competitive sealed bidding or
competitive negotiations.
The County must notify EPA of the consultants, contractors,
sub-contractors, or other persons who will be responsible for
developing the action plan for accomplishing the work required
under this Removal Order.
FISCAL IMPACTS•
The extent of the fiscal impact is unknown at this time.
Representatives of the County, RES, and Olver, Inc. are attempting
to prepare a draft action plan that would include estimates of
costs to implement the removal action. Unofficial estimates of
cost indicate that the fiscal impact could approach $1 million.
Under a separate Board report, the Board will be requested to
authorize the execution of a cost-sharing agreement with RES.
It is recommended that the cost to implement this Removal
Order be appropriated from the General Fund Unappropriated Balance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the
attached resolution. This resolution authorizes the following
action:
1. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute on behalf of the County an "Administrative Order
3
by Consent for Removal Action."
2. That the County Administrator is further authorized to
execute such agreements as may be necessary to accomplish
the purposes of this Consent Order.
3. That the Board finds that an emergency exists, and that
purchases of goods, materials, or services may be made
without competitive sealed bidding or competitive
negotiations.
4. $100,000 is hereby appropriated from the General Fund
Unappropriated Balance to accomplish the purposes of the
Consent Order and staff will return for further
appropriation as necessary.
Respectfully submitted,
~ . y~~
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
Action
Approved ( )
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
to
Motion by
Vote
No Yes Abs
Eddy
Johnson
Kohinke
Nickens
Minnix
4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE
ORDER BY CONSENT FOR REMOVAL ACTION FOR THE CLEAN-UP OF
THE DIXIE CAVERNS LANDFILL AS REQUESTED BY THE UNITED
STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") has determined that the conduct of a removal action to
abate, mitigate and/or eliminate the release or threatened release
of hazardous substances at Dixie Caverns landfill is necessary to
protect public health, safety and welfare, and,
WHEREAS, during sampling and testing at the site it was
determined that certain contaminants may have migrated into stream
surface waters and sediments, and,
WHEREAS, EPA has determined that a removal action is
appropriate to abate, minimize, stabilize, mitigate or eliminate
the release or threat of release of hazardous substances at or from
the site.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute on behalf of the County an "ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER BY CONSENT
FOR REMOVAL ACTION."
2) That the County Administrator is further authorized to
execute such agreements as may be necessary to accomplish the
purposes of this Consent Order.
3) That the Board finds that an emergency exists, and that
purchases of goods, materials or services may be made without
5
competitive sealed bidding or competitive negotiation.
4) $100,000 is hereby appropriated from the General Fund
Unappropriated Balance to accomplish the purposes of the Consent
Order and staff will return for further appropriation as necessary.
c:\wp51 \age~a\dixie\admin.ord
6
ACTION NO. A-81292-2
ITEM NO. y "~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: August 12, 1992
AGENDA ITEM: Request for authorization to execute a cost-sharing
agreement with Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation,
Dixie Caverns Landfill Site
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY'
Representatives of Roanoke County and Roanoke Electric Steel
Corporation (RES) have negotiated a cost-sharing agreement for the
Dixie Caverns Landfill Superfund Site. The purpose of this
agreement is to determine who will pay how much of the costs to be
incurred under the remedial action consent decree and the
administrative order by consent for removal action. These costs
are attributable to cleaning up the flyash pile, contaminated
soils, contaminated water and stream sediments at and adjacent to
the Dixie Caverns Landfill Site.
BACKGROUND'
In October of 1988 the County and RES entered into a "clean up
cost-sharing and confidentiality agreement." Under this agreement
each party agreed to pay 50~ of the eligible expenses to implement
the work plan for the Dixie Caverns Landfill for the excavation,
treatment and disposal of the flyash pile. This work plan called
for on-site treatment of the flyash by a proprietary stabilization
process that RES had developed and that EPA and the Virginia
Department of Waste Management later conditionally approved for RES
in response to its delisting petition for disposal and treatment of
flyash at its factory. EPA approved the work plan in April of
1988.
The County and RES acquired equipment, constructed on-site
stabilization and disposal facilities and began operations,
incurring approximately $400,000 in costs. In 1989, the Virginia
Department of Waste Management (VDWM) raised certain questions
about the approved work plan, and at its request, EPA directed the
County and RES to halt operations.
Finally in September of 1991, EPA selected a new method for
accomplishing this remedial action (based upon the issuance of new
1
EPA regulations in August of 1991). Since EPA issued its decision,
the County and RES have been negotiating with EPA concerning the
proposed remedial action, the work required to implement this
action, and the possibility of convincing EPA that the on-site
stabilization and disposal process developed by RES is a superior
solution to implement this remedial action.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Since EPA has directed the County to suspend removal actions
associated with the flyash in accordance with the 1987 consent
agreement and order, and since EPA is now directing the County and
RES to execute consent decree to implement remedial actions at this
site and since EPA is directing the County and RES to execute an
administrative order by consent for removal action for the
contaminated soils under and adjacent to the flyash pile,
contaminated water and sediment off-site, the 1988 cost-sharing
agreement between the County and RES must be amended to address the
changed circumstances.
The cost-sharing agreement between Roanoke County and RES
provides that each party will pay one-half of all costs that they
are required to pay under the consent decree and the removal
consent order. RES will reimburse the County's share of costs in
excess of $1 million with certain percentages of net profits from
RES's marketing of its proprietary trade secret treatment
technology. The parties will use their best efforts to minimize
costs under the Consent Decree and to obtain credit for the
$400,000 they have already expended under the original consent
order.
FISCAL IMPACTS'
This cost-sharing agreement with RES shall benefit the County
in two ways. First, it provides that each party will pay one-half
of all costs that they are required to pay by EPA. Second, this
agreement provides that the County may be reimbursed a portion of
its costs from the net profits derived from RES's treatment
technology.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the
County Administrator to execute this agreement with RES on behalf
of the County.
2
.~
Respectfully submitted,
Tb~~
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
Action Vote
No Yes Abs
Approved (x) Motion by Bob L. Johnson to Eddy x
Denied ( ) execute contract along the Johnson x
Received ( ) terms outlined Kohinke x
Referred Nickens x
to Minnix x
e:\wp51 \agenda\dixie\res. agr
cc: File
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
Clifford Craig, Director, Utility
Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance
Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget
3
p,-81292-3
ACTION NO' .~
ITEM N~BER
D OF SUPER~IISORS OF RC NT R
ORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
MEETING OF THE BOAR
RO
JOURNED
,RGINIA HELD AT THE
ust 12, 1992 al Assistance
Aug
1 D~ Hire Outside Le
Requessem nts and Rlghts °f Ways
.DA ITEM • f or Ea
,S COMMENTS:
COUNTY ADMZNIST~'TOR
recently
ORMp'TION' of major pr°j ects s Office
INF a leg
y OF a number Attorn Y al
SUER undertaken b th of °theYmore t oacqu sitiOns
Roanoke COUre ext nsive l hasl deve °peWay and Basemen ents and
regal easem
which a backl e are rights °f or property has workbe
a result- the road projects Th legal staand should
of
Astters• Most and rojects• a manner a is spent
ma drainage utility p a timely their tiT° deeds
for for these in much of other of
acquisitions handle H°Wever- eats and stages
ently tO efforts' on of easemin carious al staff
for their and complete ects ar t 's leg The
diliq
c ~hedmajor prO~ects- These pr°~ b the COUn Y counsel.
critical. e handled Y al pttorneY~s
has now become would b by outside leg County
on and some e handled wwil witheontracted out.
wh pee others wOUtalltY staff will be
e rojects
Engineering and e which P eeable future
Off ice t° determin the (ores de legal
ed to decrease tact for oeasements and
workload is d thate the basis to comp dralnage and utility
The I recommea per document road,
and or our
tance °n f
aasis way necessary
r fights-Of - exceed
projects.
ected to 000
is not exp $10 ,
FISCAL IMPACT ~ unknown althOUghe 1 staff is rear estlnq eted tIf
tim e comp
cost is At this As al F nd f~ stheir p° the B
The total ent• oard
er docum ency Band. to
$450.00 Board COnreimburse the Genstaff will bring
from theFun funds a necessary
Util tlonal ar
addi request.
another
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to
contract with outside legal counsel for assistance in completing
easements, property acquisitions and rights-of-way for road,
drainage, and utility projects. Further, the staff requests an
appropriation of $10,000 from the Board Contingency Fund to cover
costs incurred for the outside legal work.
~~ ~~~~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
Approved (x )
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred ( )
To ( )
ACTION
Motion by: Harry C. Nickens
VOTE
No Yes Abs
Eddy x
Johnson x
Kohinke x
Minnix x
Nickens x
cc: File
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
Clifford Craig, Director Utility
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance
Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget
AT A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992
RESOLUTION 81292-4 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS
HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia has convened an executive 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 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia
requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that such executive 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
executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified
in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed
or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the certification
resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Executive Session
County of Roanoke
FY1993-97 Capital Improvement Program
General Instructions
FY1992-93
1. The Project Request Form should be completed for each capital
project proposed by your department regardless of whether or
not it is a new project. Although a project may currently be
included in the adopted CIP for FY1992-96, it must be updated
and again evaluated against all other proposed projects in
relation to long-term County goals, objectives and cost
effectiveness .
2. Please provide ten copies of your Project Request Forms to the
Department of Management and Budget on or before January 6,
1992.
3. All new requests not reflected in last year's CIP may only be
introduced in the third year of the CIP (FY1994-95). In other
words, new projects will not be included in the proposed
FY1992-93 capital budget unless it is an emergency situation.
4. For the purpose of the CIP process, a capital project is one
requiring a total expenditure by the County of $25,000 or more
and has a useful life of 7 years or more. No grouping of
similar projects will be allowed to meet the $25,000 per
project dollar minimum. Each project must be evaluated
individually based upon its own merits. The CIP Review
Committee will evaluate the possibility of grouping similar
projects on a case-by-case basis.
Capital projects submitted for inclusion in the CIP should not
also be included in the departmental budget within target nor
as an addback. Only capital projects valued at less than
$25,000 should be funded within target. CIP projects will be
approved as a package and funded through the Capital Fund for
monitoring purposes.
5. Funding for projects should be phased over a 2 or 3 year
period. When requesting funds for your project, follow the
guidelines provided below:
Project Yr 1 - Request all land costs, architectural and
engineering design-related work.
Project Yr 2 - Request entire estimated construction costs of
the project.
Project Yr 3 - Request all furnishing and equipment required
to open the facility.
If construction is projected to take less than 12 months, you
may want to include furnishings and equipment funding in Year
2 of your request.
1
6. Please indicate a funding source where you know sources are
available outside the County, for new projects, or for changes
to previous projects. It is not necessary to denote that you
believe a project should have lease purchase funding, as
opposed to current operating revenue funding. The Departments
of Finance and Management and Budget will make the decisions
with regard to local financing alternatives.
7. Cost estimates should be prepared in FY1992-93 dollars
regardless of when expenditures are proposed. The Budget staff
will adjust for inflation as appropriate. All numbers. should
be rounded to the nearest thousand dollars.
8. If projects are jointly proposed by two or more departments,
only one set of forms should be prepared and submitted for each
joint project. You are encouraged to look for and utilize
opportunities to jointly propose facilities.
9. A ten member CIP Review Committee has been established to
review all CIP projects submitted by the departments. The
Review Committee will be comprised of the following
individuals:
• Director of Management and Budget
• Director of Planning and Zoning
• Assistant County Administrator (1)
• Representative from each Team (5)
• School Board Representative
• Employee Advisory Committee Representative
10. The CIP process will begin with the submission of the Project
Request Forms on January 6, 1992. The Board of Supervisors
will set budget and CIP priorities at their Annual Retreat in
mid-January. (Proposed calendar is included in your packet.)
The Department of Management and Budget and the CIP Review
Committee will then review all Project Request Forms for
completeness and accuracy. If there are any questions or the
form is not complete, the department that submitted the project
will be notified and an interview scheduled with the Review
Committee. If the department does not provide the necessary
information, the project will be deferred (not included ~ the
CIP to be submitted to the Board of Supervisors).
11. A two-tier ranking system will be utilized to evaluate eligible
CIP projects. The first ranking would use a qualitative
approach (Urgent, essential, Necessary, etc.). These
definitions can be found in your packet of information. The
departments must provide this first level of ranking and then
prioritize all of the department's projects from first to last,
the highest priority being 1.
The CIP Review Committee will then rank the projects using a
numerical scoring system which will allow us to prioritize the
projects under each of the qualitative headings.
2
County of Roanoke
FY1993-97 Capital Improvameat Program
Instructions for Completing the CIP Project Request Form
FY1992-93
Please read the instructions carefully before filling out the
Project Request Form. A~1 questions s u ~ answered. Questions
considered not applicable should be indicated as such (N/A). If
space provided is not adequate, please attach additional
information as needed.
If you have any questions regarding this form or the CIP process,
please do not hesitate to call Reta Busher or Brent Robertson at
772-2021, or Terry Harrington at 772-2068.
1. Department: Identify the Department(s) requesting the
project.
2. Project Title: Identify the specific Project being requested.
This should be a specific location or project
such as Playground Renovations at Green Hill
Park.
3. Project Number: Leave blank. To be completed by the Department
of Management and Budget.
4. Project Status: If this is a new project and has not formerly
been included in the adopted CIP FY1992-96,
indicate by checking "New". If the project is
a resubmission, identify the page in the
adopted CIP FY1992-96. If the project has been
funded or partially funded, please indicate the
progress that has been made to date.
5. Departmental Indicate the level of need for this project by
Rank: selecting one of the following rankings:
(Definitions of rankings have been included in
your packet.)
• Urgent (U)
• Essential (E)
• Necessary (N)
• Desirable (D)
• Acceptable (A)
• Deferrable (DEF)
6. Departmental Indicate the priority of this project within
Priority: your department. Highest priority would be one
and the lowest would be prioritized last
(Ex: 1, 2, 3, etc.). No project can have the
same priority.
7. Project Be as specific as possible when explaining
Description/ what the project is. Indicate whether the
Location: Project maintains, replaces enhances or
expands County facilities or service levels.
This description should not advocate, but
state factual information only. If the
1
project is the construction of a new building,
indicate square footage, acres of land
required, functions for primary areas of the
facility. Discuss things such as parking,
roads, drainage, easements, water and sewer
needs, etc.
A clearly readable map identifying the project
location must be submitted with this form.
The address of the location (where
appropriate) should also be included on the
form.
8. Project Explain w_y a project is needed. Indicate
Justification: what benefits will be derived, character of
the area served, and the number of people to
benefit. The justification should identify
how the project fits into the overall County-
wide or departmental plan. Factors such as
safety, Federal, State or local regulatory
requirements, impending development should all
be discussed. The justification should
discuss the cost/benefit analysis - how the
benefits of this project outweigh the costs.
Describe anticipated cost savings and
increased efficiencies, being as specific as
possible.
9. Project Indicate the preferred project completion
Schedule: schedule including the start date and
completion date and any important milestones
in between.
10. Project Origin:
11. Relationship
Comprehensive
Plan:
12. Impact/Project
Not Funded:
Indicate where and by whom the need for this
project originated.
Indicate how the project is related to any
long-range plans such as the Comprehensive
Plan. Please be specific.
What are the specific impacts if the project
is not funded.
13. Project Indicate any project alternatives that might
Alternatives: temporarily or permanently solve the issues
involved if the funding was unavailable for
a prolonged period of time.
14. Project Cost: All project cost estimates should be provided
on this form. The cost estimates should be
broken into the cost areas identified. Costs
should be spread over a 2-3 year period. Cost
estimates should be prepared in FY1992-93
dollars, the Department of Management and
Budget will calculate applicable inflation
factors. Round all costs to the nearest
$1,000.
2
Project Funding: Indicate all sources of funding which could
be used to pay for the cost of this project.
These include but are not limited to:
reimbursement .from the State, grants,
developer contributions, and
interjurisdictional agreements.
Total project cost less total project funding
will equal the net local cost of the project.
Indicate any current funding already
appropriated to the project and the amount of
any additional funding necessary over the next
five year period.
15. Operating Budget Reflect the additional cost to the County of
Impaat: running this facility. The operating budget
impact of the capital budget must correspond
to an incremental request for a target
increase for that fiscal year. It is
important to include such impacts as
electricity, routine and major maintenance,
personnel, etc. even though these costs may
be budgeted under another department.
Subtract any operational savings which may
result from this project for a net impact on
the operating budget.
16. Personnel Estimate the personnel needs of the completed
Requirements: project. Present personnel needs as Full-
Time Equivalents (FTE). Under "Titles" list
out types of employees and/or title of these
positions for each year.
17. Notes/ Provide detailed information regarding how you
Assumptions: derived project cost and funding estimates.
For example, land acquisition costs are based
on land at $10,000 per acre; costs per square
foot are estimated at $134/sq. ft. Project
revenues should reference specific fees, State
aid, etc.
18. Other Comments: Self explanatory.
3
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: November 19, 1991
AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Revised Capital Improvement Program:
Review Process and Calendar of Events
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
The Capital Improvement Program: FY 1992-1996 was the first five
year CIP approved by the Board of Supervisors since FY 1986-1987.
Each year, it is the County's intention to reevaluate and update
the CIP, extending the useful life of the County's capital planning
into the future, The CIP is prepared by the Department of
Management and Budget in conjunction with the Department of
Planning and Zoning. Its implementation rests with the Board of
Supervisors through its adoption of the CIP and incorporation of
projects annually in the County's capital budget. Thus, an item's
inclusion in the CIP does not necessarily indicate a funding
commitment by the governing body.
With the development of the "team approach" to decision making,
staff submitted the CIP process to the Facilities Management Team
for review. Based upon the Team's evaluation of the criteria and
process used in FY 1991-1992 and based upon a survey of nine other
Virginia counties, the Facilities Management Team prepared for
Board approval, a report of their recommended changes to the CIP
process. The survey of other Virginia counties is attached for
your review.
Staff believes these recommendations will better structure the CIP
review process, and will provide the necessary guidance for those
County Departments that submit CIP projects.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The Facilities Management Team CIP recommendations are as follows:
1
1. A ten member CiP Review Committee would be established. to
review and rank all CIP projects submitted by the department
directors. It is proposed that the Review Committee would be
comprised of the Directors of Budget and Planning, a
representative of each of the five "Teams", an Assistant
County Administrator, a School Board Representative, and an
Employee Advisory Committee member. The Departments of
Planning and Budget would provide staff support for the
Committee.
The Facilities Management Team believes that the Review
Committee approach is in keeping with the new organizational
structure and will increase representation, ownership and
support in the CIP process.
2. The CIP period should remain at five years.
The five-year time horizon seems to be typical among the
jurisdictions surveyed.
3. The definition of a "capital project" for inclusion in the CIP
would change from $50,000 and a seven year life, to $25,000 and
a seven year life.
The Team interpret's this definition to mean that no grouping
of similar projects would be allowed to meet the $25,000
minimum. Each project must be evaluated individually based
upon its own merits. The CIP Review Committee would evaluate
the possibility of grouping similar projects on a case-by-case
basis.
Also, capital projects submitted for inclusion in the CIP would
not be submitted in the departmental operating budget. Only
capital projects valued at less than $25,000 would be funded
within target. CIP projects would be approved as a package and
funded through the Capital Fund for monitoring purposes.
4. Repair and maintenance items and vehicle replacements would
continue to be eligible for inclusion in the CIP.
It was the consensus of the Facilities Management Team that
routine maintenance and repair items should not normally be
funded through a CIP. However, given the magnitude of the
County's maintenance and repair needs, the Team believed that,
for now, the CIP is the only feasible way of setting priorities
for, and the funding of these needed improvements.
It was also the consensus of the Team that a vehicle
replacement policy should be developed in the future. However,
because of the economic downturn and the County's current
inability to fund a vehicle replacement account, vehicle
2
replacements over $25,000 in value should continue to be
included in the CIP process. -~
5. New CIP projects must be submitted for funding no earlier than
the third year of the CIP. Bacceptions would be allowed for
emergencies.
In FY 1991-1992, projects were submitted for funding in any of
the five CIP years. Requiring that projects be submitted no
earlier than the third year forces departments to think long-
range when evaluating their capital needs. The survey of other
Virginia localities indicated that approximately one-half of
those surveyed had similar requirements.
6. That a two-tier ranking system be utilised to evaluate eligible
CIP projects. The first ranking would use a qualitative
approach (urgent, essential, necessary, etc.). These
definitions can be found on page 6 of this report. The second
ranking would be numerical or quantitative and would prioritize
the projects as first, second, third, etc. under each of the
qualitative headings based on its numerical scoring.
All but one of the localities surveyed, currently uses the
qualitative approach. One locality is considering a change to
a quantitative method, but has not yet done so.
If the two-tiered ranking system is approved, the quantitative
ranking methodology would need to be developed by the
Facilities Management Team and reviewed by the Planning
Commission. Staff would anticipate bringing the proposed
methodology to the Board for approval within 45 days.
7. Recommend that the Board approve the attached CIP calendar for
FY 1992-1993.
This proposed calendar of events
calendar so that capital funding
conjunction with the normal budget
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the adoption of
proposed calendar of events as
Management Team.
corresponds to the Budget
decisions can be made in
process.
the revised CIP process and
prepared by the Facilities
3
Respectfully submitted,
Reta R. Busher
Director, Management
and Budget
Terrance L. Harrington
Director, Planning and Zoning
-------------------------------------------
ACTION
Approved ( )
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Ref erred ( )
To
Approved by,...
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
Motion by:
--------------------
VOTE
No Yes Abs
Eddy
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
4
W
Q ~
8
4
°f
U G
= 6
3 ~
i
0
6 4
U
~jts
o¢C
•
~yQ~
6
6 ~
u
Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
W V g Q W
U W ci CD 2_ QQ ~ ~ ~ _
4 7 m W Z yJ ^ W
~'Q~v a ~to~ ~ ~`3{f3=] d~~~ $z ~ Z~ iQs ~d o{"s~' ~ ~J`
4 ~ ~ ~ 2 ` < W Z ~ `+ ~ y~~ ~ ¢4 W ~5y
o~ 2 1y- U W (~J s W ~ ~ R3 ~ ~ y~ ~ ~ _ ~ U ~ O ~' <a p
7~ Z W ~ ~ = s ~ y Q ¢ ~ ~ ~ O
o~ o o Y< m ~ `x~
s
W~
N Ol Ol ~ ~ : W R~ <Z r~y ~roj
W W W ~ ~ D W ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ `
z z z g ~ua~~~ z o~~ <~ z
z
g & Z ~~~~ g ~~ ~
~a~
Wow
W(j ~ ~ j
O O' O O ] O ti ~ ~ Z Z
Z Z Z Z G Z Z
W N ~ _
1 ~ V Q
W= W
~ '.
W
7
CC
d~
L~ g ~
~ a W
Z 6
OJ Z
F
~
_$
~ O Z
~~
g
~
a
' z
_
~ ~
W
~
Ra ~Q`
$
Y.~
~ ~ W
~ T
WWZ
F
~ ~ ~
$ _
` W
S
's
5
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DEFINITION OF RANKINGS
FY 1992-93
Urgent Projects (U)
Projects that cannot reasonably be postponed; projects that would remedy a
condition dangerous to public health, welfare, or safety; projects required to
maintain a critically needed departmental program; projects needed to meet an
emergency situation.
Essential Projects (E)
Projects required to complete or make fully usable a major public improvement;
projects required to maintain a minimum standard as part of a continuing
departmental program; projects for which outside funds for over 65 percent of the
costs are available for only a limited period.
Necessary Projects (N)
Projects that should be carried out within a few years to meet clearly
demonstrated anticipated needs; projects designated for replacement of
unsatisfactory or obsolete facilities; projects designated for remodeling for
continued use. '
Desirable Projects (D)
Adequately planned projects needed for the expansion of current departmental
programs; projects designed to initiate new programs that are considered proper
for a progressive community in competition with other communities; projects for
the conversion of existing facilities to other uses.
Acceptable Projects (A)
Adequately planned projects that could be used for ideal operations, but that can
be postponed without detriment to present operations if budget reductions are
necessary.
Deferrable Projects (DEF)
Projects that are definitely recommended for postponement or elimination from
immediate consideration in the current capital program since they are questionable
in terms of overall needs, adequate planning, or proper timing.
6
11/19/91
COIINTY OF ROANORE
PROPOSED CALENDAR OF EVENTS
FY1993-1997 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FY1992-93
Date Activity
November 19, 1991 Present proposed CIP Process to Board
of Supervisors.
November 29, 1991 Distribute CIP forms and instructions
to Department Directors and
Constitutional Officers.
January 6, 1992 CIP Project Request Forms submitted
to Department of Management and
Budget.
January, 1992 Board of Supervisors to set CIP
priorities for FY1992-93.
February, 1992 CIP Review Committee (Taskforce,
_ Team) to review CIP Project Requests
for accuracy, completeness and rank.
March, 1992 Present draft CIP to Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors.
April, 1992 Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors to hold Public Hearings
on CIP.
May, 1992 Adopt CIP for FY1993-FY1997.
7
County of Roanoke
FY1993-1997 Capital Improvement Program
Project Request Form
FY1992-1993
1. Department:
2. Project Title:
3. Project Number:
4. Project Status:
New First Year in CIP
Resubmission Page#~ FY1992-96 CIP
In Progress (Describe)
5. Departmental Rank (Urgent, Essential, etc.) Explain:
6. Departmental Priority (1,2,3, etc.):
7. Project Description/Location (Attach Map):
8. Project Justification:
1
9. Project Schedule (start date, completion date, explain any date
changes):
10. Project Origin (Civic Group, Board Request, County
Administrator Request, Team Request, Department Request,
Other):
il. Project Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan:
12. Impact If Project Not Funded:
13. Project Alternatives:
2
W
U
Z
Q
CO
Q °i
O °'
i
8
i
~O
2
Q
~ Z
O
~
~ ~
a
O
Z
O
Z
~
C
O
E -
~
~
~
..
:~:::
:: _
H
v ~
LL
~
"'
° ~ m ~ •
c
C
Q
~ ~
m v
2
~
d
~ss~
..
,.
~
s:
..
a
~
Y a
~
~
~ p c ~ t p +~i i: ~ ~ t ~ Z
c
c
LL
~QQ
t7
m
0
T
J ~
~ ~
0 y
H [L
W
I
~
}
LL
I
~
}
LL
I
}
LL
1
~
}
LL
1
y
~ ..~
c
~
r :
:~
::~ ~ r
m
« :::~:~i:~ ~
c
m
U ..
: `i:
c
(~ o
m ~ c : ~
Z ~ ~:: ~
~
' L
~ ::
ro `
~ > m
m ~ W :
•
: c
o O s; N ~
m O
U ~ > ~ o
~ O
H L
VJ i / ~~~~~~~~~ ~
~:
n
m
In
N
m
a
r
ti
H ~
Oy
~ (L
^
O
D
LL
i
~
}
LL
~
}
LL
~
}
LL
N
}
LL
~
F- ~jj W
~ ~ ~
l
~ L
~ ~
E- ~ M
r
W
C
m
m
c
c
0
a
m
17. Notes/Assumptions for Cost Estimates and Additional Personnel:
18. Other Comments: (Highlight Changes from FY1992-96 CIP)
Submitted By:
Title:
Date:
~1
~' /
~~~
MEMO - 7/24/92
To: Supervisors
From: Lee B. Eddy
Subject: County Government Structure
At least one member of the Board (Minnix) expressed interest in the
memo of 7/16/92 reporting on my conversation with the new at-large
chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. Fuzzy
suggested that the general subject of Board structure be discussed
sometime during our retreat on August 11 or 12.
For the benefit of our two new Board members, and as a refresher
for the others, I am attaching copies of information on this
subject distributed during the redistricting discussions in early
1991.
The June, 1992 issue of the UVa Newsletter features an article on
the structure of Virginia city and town governments. Many of the
broader observations apply to larger counties as well as to
municipalities. Among the 41 cities, 16 have mayors elected at
large, and 25 have mayors elected by the council. I will place my
copy of the UVa Newsletter in the Supervisors' office, in case
anyone cares to look at it.
copy: Elmer Hodge, Paul Mahoney
Encl.
MEMO - 3/11/91
To: Supervisors
From: Lee B. Eddy
Subject: Redistrictinct
Based on the State Board of Elections data furnished with Paul
Mahoney's memo of 5 Feb., 1991, I have prepared the attached
analysis of the various structural arrangements that now exist
among Virginia County Boards of Supervisors. I was surprised to
find there are 23 different combinations among the 95 counties.
The most prevalent number of Board members is five, there being a
total of 43 in the state. The next most prevalent number of Board
members is seven, there being 20 in the state.
cam. counties elect one or more at-large members. In Fairfax and
Prince William counties the at-large member serves as Board
chairman. I was surprised to see that 23 counties have boards
comprised of an even number of members (4, 6 or 8). Two counties
have elected tie breakers.
The boards for some of the nearby counties are constituted as
follows:
Alleghany: 5 district members
Augusta: 7 district members
Bedford: 7 district members
Botetourt: 5 district members
Craig: 3 district members
Floyd: 5 district members
Franklin: 7 district members
Henry: 6 district members
Montgomery: 7 district members
Pittsylvania: 7 district members
Pulaski: 5 district members
Wythe: 6 district members
plus a tie breaker
plus 1 at-large
cc: Elmer Hodge, Paul Mahoney, Elizabeth Leah, Terry Harrington
LBE FOI File
ANALYSIS OF VIRGINIA COUNTY GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES
Tot. No.
Board No. District At-Large Elected Tot. No.
Members
------ Districts
--------- Members
-------- Members Tie Bkr
----- Counties County Names
3
3
3 --- -------
- - --------
5 --------------------
3 - - 3 - 1 Highland
6 SUBTOTAL
4 4 4 - - 9
4 3 4 - - 1 Essex
10 SUBTOTAL
5 2 5 - - 1 Prince George
5 3 5 - - 1 Middlesex
5 3 3 2 - 1 Giles
5 3 3 2 1 1 Greene
5 4 5 - - 3
5 5 5 - - 33
5 - - 5 - 3
43 SUBTOTAL
6 3 6 - - 2 Northampton, Wise
6 5 6 - - 1 Sussex
6 5 5 1 - 2 Carroll, Russell
6 6 6 - - 4
6 6 6 - 1 1 Henry
10 SUBTOTAL
7 6 6 1 - 3
7 7 7 - - 17
20 SUBTOTAL
8 7 7 1(Chair) - 1 Prince William
8 8 8 - - 2 Loudon, Prince Edward
3 SUBTOTAL
9 5 9 - - 1 Accomac
9 8 8 1(Chair) - 1 Fairfax
9 9 9 - - 1 Mecklenburg
3 SUBTOTAL
~Edd ur es. election
,~ y g _.
for r
. boa d chairman
'' BY M ~KYMAN ~ district, Eddy said
' Of course there is the risk that a
chairiaaa elected at-large would
'~ ' ~ Roanoke County Supervisor ~ to "throw his weight around" oa
:~ ~ Lee Eddy said Wednesdayy that at the board, he said. "I&you dot the '
~ ~ lent one member of the Bosrd of wrong person is than position, it
.Supervisors should be elected at- could be a disadvantage for the i
;• ~ to str+engthea the county s county. . - ,
P~ . c litdiwm. its deWngs anth other 1o- ~ tupernsor'to_.
. ._ Eddy is the fast
~cly call for sa at-large elation
Noway aA five members are o}' r Cam,
~theboard hol~aa ~ January, ~ opportunity to make a
rJioetiag at which a chair~mam oho- - cue ~ comp this spnag when,
`r_e_suit, Eddy said, the : ~g~~~ ~ ~~~s~+
!-~ has ~ ~ttle ~tatuf oiltsidC district UYW ~. ....;l:'.S i; sl , o~g
~ board ~~, :..~....._ # __.. ~ t .'?here w~is a mixed reaction
Aa at-largo chairman elected ~r~~y from others on the
,~ ~ for a font-yea term, the sane u the Bid of Supervisors.
~mayon of ~anoke and Sateai are, ,:. gu~~sor H - .
would ~tve the County "a little afore . srrY Nickens
. ~ clout to dealiaa with other local . d~ t like Eddy's suggestion. •`I
•goverameits," a said. ~'t thinlcyou gain. status bybeiag
~` ~ ~ That also would ;elated atlarge by u
. ~ iesideats an elated ~ ~~ chairman more t~harn a : y' he
ropraeatative ~,,~~y~ gain states by represent.
~+om which.to sak help~other thaw ;-,~ ; :.., F,. ,~. _. ~ . ~ . • . _. = ~-.
A .the supervisor who represents their ' , '' p~.EgSE SEE lDDY/83 .
t y eta ~,~ ~''~.-
- { `' _
~.~ ..,', s 'F' ~'. + .~ r
J' ,3
redistrict' sand that ~ ~'
- ` _ ia~ uggested ~ . y ulual .ia 'don, be
E ~y _. that m~t art'satisfied with th ~ ° r
~. a stn- otriapact and Conti~uous.and have
~ .., N ~ ~_, tus quo, he'said:, "It's servedstis well c~irly observable boutic~(aries. Mi-
FgOM Pq E~ B 1 t ~ ~-: ,for quite a bong Time. We need some notify voting strength` nttislr not be
iyct .;, ~. s'~ ' L -+lmpetu3 before WC C '
ing the citizens of Roanoke County. ~Se it." ~ uted. ;
and putting 'forth posi`Rons that'. . A oo'~q~.- ~~ ~up ofd the supervisors. ve'said
merit respat•" ~'"'strar- Elizabeth Leah, County that neighborhoods such. astNorth
Supervisor Bob Johnsen said..: ~ racy :Paul Mahoney and Plan- ~~ which now4 "
he was "Mind of inaletween." - ' Director Teny Harrington - the,Catawba and H"o >wta~aten
There's ao .doubt, he said;: that a `~Y~6 redistncting plans and ~ _ should not lk~~ded.
chairman elected at-large would `'"~~make recommendations to the Other than that; ~~;~ the
have more prestige. , ,, supervisors in a, month or so , , , , supervisors are free tq~consider a
~ ~ ~~, ~`~ :i~ . ~,j~ tr_%" •i ~ ~` r..Ae .t :, Variety Of altCrnatlVes.# ,~
Bat only a coupYe of~people -~~ t.Thc county is bound bX certain
showed up in January wliea the su- ~ nqu~meats when it~ redis- '•'?~e size of~h~ b~ard~ d be
pemsors had a public hearing on tricts• ..Vona increased to seven mem6eis Edit ex-~
- ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ , g . districts m la, to allow for the atrlarge elegy
- -- -'~ - "'--'-~' ~ ~ _ ~ iz o€'a chairman and .posaibiy a
;~ . •. ~. ~ ~„ chairman. .::=- r ri<
Eddy said he likes the~idea of a
'igo~ember board,. `.`bro. I want
- ~ ~„ + :~ t; , ~ ~ Amy options opeaWe don't
_ ~,
}i
"
Co-> ~s
x
a~s ,v
.rW j
S'~ l Y,'f'. Y' H
~
.4 y
a.
<~
e
P
.. T~
-w-
Q
4"7C Tr
~n y
! ~ ~~,
L
. v", V F.
' ,~
Q`~ ~•J y
~
. ,. -.
~ P s". Y
_ - '. .
~."
20
~`~"EICCtiOIIS. Three COU~It~Ea haVC
o-member boards -=-~#irfax,
~enburg and Accotnaclc'Oth-
efa'T1aVC thrCC-membeii'boarda.
' `~ At least two counties - Fair-
~ fair. and Prince William -have
elections for chairman. A
few other 'counties have at-large
elections for board members, but it
~ ~ :.ywasa't: clear. from the information
ita~uCiaev.. obtained '~tiev= thn~
REDISTRICTING (ZTr~ 4->91 q~
A chance to improve
government structure
By LEE B. EDDY
IN 1991 Virginia counties must
modify their Board of.Supervisors'
election districts to adjust for the
1990 census data. Federal and state.
laws require that election districts be
of equal population (within 5 -per-
cent), becontiguous, compact, and
have a stmng community of interest.
In Roanoke County, a commit-
tee of staff personnel has developed
maps shov-nng boundaries based on
four, five, six and seven districts. By
consensus, the four-district and
five-district plans appear to best
meet the redistricting criteria. Geo-
graphical barriers, major road loca-
tions, the doughnut shape of the
county, and the Vinton area of influ-
ence limit the number and types of
plans that make good sense.
Roanoke County's government
has comprised five districts and five
board members for many years.
Among Virginia's' 95 counties,
boards of supervisors now range in
size from three to nine members,
some having multimember districts
aad~ome having., one or more at-
large members :~ ~ #-~~ )
Fairfax and Prince William
counties have seven or eight single-
member districts, plus one member
elected at large who serves as board
chairman., `lroudoun County has
eight single-member, districts. Hen-
rico and Chesterfield counties each
have five• single-member districts.
Augusta; Bedford, Franklin, Mont-
gomery and Pittsylvania counties
each have seven single-member dis-
tricf3' Ia ally'43 .Virginia wunties
havi~'five-member boards and 20
have ~ seven-member boards. Odd
numbers predominate, tareduce the
possibility for. tie rotes. In every
county,.. othe~;than- )~airf~x and
Prink Wt~Iiam" counties the cliair-
raan is elected"annually t~rom among
,: the ~ietss: ~'~" rya
p.m. tonight at the Roanoke County
Administration Center. Anyone
with an opinion on how the county
should be governed for the next 10
years is urged to attend and speak at
this meeting. The final redistricting
plan, as approved by the. Board of
Supervisors, must. be submitted to
the U.S. Justice Department to veri-
fy compliance with the Voting
Rights Act. -
I have suggested that county su-
pervisors consider changing from
five to seven members and .having
the board chairman elected at large
by the voters. These changes could
be accomplished by establishing five
magisterial districts plus two at-
large members, one of whom would
serve as board chairman for a term
of four years. Alternately; a plan
with four district members and one
~at-large chairman could be consid-
ered. :~ ~ ..
A five-district, seven=member
board would allow citiuns to vote
for and be represented by three peo-
ple,. rather than one. An: elected
chairman would strengthen'that po-
sition and make it comparable to the
. - mayor of a large city. Having:serv~d
:~`as Roanoke County's`6onrd chair-
man in 1968 and 1971, I am well
aware of the limitations associated
. with cone-year term for that posi-
lion.
•All things considered, I favor
the -concept of a board chairman
elected by the people. County gov-
ernments are ~ .becoming more like
cities all the time, and having a
strong chief elected official. would
enhance the county's ability to, deal
effectively with other localities and
with state. agencies, .:d3.>,,t;;~;;
Fairfax ..and.. Prince .William
counties have already recognized
..the potential;advantage in this gov-
ernmental structure. T]ie 1991 re-
~~ ~ .::... ~ ~€ ; ine~ or our gov-
." dme ~ ~ s 6 D{o=: ~ erti ent.:: = _ :~ -'.` - ~ ~;
oess ; ff a si if~cant opportunity ~-
for ,of'aro~'al '."'~,Unforamatety~ a serious tyvah~.
govetnmet''3:~by j~nodxfying the num- ' anon ta~no{'~lcely finless the Board `
ber of the dis- o~:Supervisoia;hear: a groundswell
tri bphing one of; sftQport' from cil~zens: ,Thh'. re-
or~ e seats, andlor by vai~ag attitude seems to refl~'Cf°.the'
changing i'he way the board chair- philosophg: "If it ain't broke, don't
man is selected. This is a once-in-a- fix it." But we can't know what's
decade opportuiritj,-~tb'~improve theme. ~ an~ ~tt~~ a careful look at
~c v 71i-.:ar.: i.
all-reasot>a' alE~>~natives.
responsiveness a~o~tetnmeat to : , -
its citizens, a~chance to fine-tune-the '~ - ~ '
nuts and bolts of a democratic sys- " ~~"' "" ''` '
n- ','.' a~~'i:, _~,~'~ a~'` „~.-~ .~~ ~-, -' ~s B: Edd~is a Windsor Hills z
».
"REINVENTING GOVERNMENT" BY OSBORNE & GABLER 8/12/92
SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS TO ROANOKE COUNTY
(DERIVED FROM 13-PAGE SUMMARY)
1. Schools:
a. Allow choice of schools by parents and students, subject to
availability of space and provisions for transportation. Provide
good, objective information on which parents/students can base
their choices.
b. Reward the most successful schools with additional funding,
higher staff salaries.
c. Measure success based on number of student applications,
results of test scores, parental satisfaction, drop-out rates, etc.
d. Develop strong parent and business support for individual
schools.
2. Volunteers:
Use volunteers for recycling, energy audits, park management,
library services, recreation programs, etc.
3. Private Firms: Consider for full or partial services for:
--------------
a. Refuse and/or leaf collection.
b. Real Estate Assessments.
c. Engineering Design.
d. Vehicle Repair.
e. Radio Repair.
f. Computer Services.
g. legal services.
h. Public information.
i. Buildings and grounds maintenance.
j. Park maintenance.
Note: Prevent any private firm from becoming a monopoly.
4. Separate "decision making" from "doing": Same list as above.
----------------------------------------
5. Participation by the Community:
-------------------------------
a. Establish councils for each magisterial district to (a) solve
problems and disputes, (b) do long-range planning, (c) assess
services, (d) set priorities, (e> other.
b. Periodically organize a "Futures Commission" to look at
trends and long-range goals.
6. County Departments:
-------------------
a. Provide a clear mission statement for each department.
b. Eliminate line-item budgets (but not line-item accounting).
Include all indirect costs.
c. Set budget reduction goals (adjusted for inflation and
population). Allow departments to keep budget surpluses (for
designated purposes).
d. Break large organizations into smaller units, each with a
purpose (decentralize).
e. Promote competition.
f. Provide a "seed fund" from which departments can borrow
(against their budget) for experimental programs.
7. Personnel:
a. Develop broad classification and pay systems.
b. Pay market salaries. Provide good quality work places.
c. Base pay on performance.
d. Base promotions and layoffs on performance, not seniority.
e. Let managers hire and promote the most qualified.
f. Recruit aggressively.
g. Simplify the appeal process.
h. Allow employees to evaluate their managers.
8. Measure Outcomes (not inputs):
a. Refuse collection, b. recycling, c. assessments, d. auto
repair, e. building inspections, f. animal control, g. parks and
recreation, h. libraries, i. schools, j. engineering design, k.
planning and zoning, 1. legal services, m. radio repair, n.
computer services, o. maintenance, p. other.
9. Establish importance in the following priority:
-----------------------------------------------
a. Citizens (customers)
b. Employees who deal directly with citizens.
c. Managers.
10. Conduct surveys to determine citizen (customer) satisfaction:
-------------------------------------------------------------
a. Suggestion boxes.
b. Departmental surveys.
c. County-wide surveys.
d. Schools
e. Customer choices.
11. Enterprise Functions:
---------------------
a. Set up a separate organization in Parks & Recreation to
provide programs for non-senior adults. Require fees to cover all
costs.
b. Make water and sewer services self-sustaining.
12. Miscellaneous Economic Considerations:
--------------------------------------
a. Provide an "economic impact statement" for each major
expenditure, to evaluate long-term costs/benefits.
b. Establish an employee or team award program for suggestions
that result in cost savings without sacrificing service levels.
13. General Considerations:
-----------------------
a. Check legality of proposals vs. current state law.
b. Designate an individual or a team to pursue these concepts
and make specific recommendations for implementation.
c. Coordinate/consult with School Board and staff.
MEMO - 8/5/92
To: Supervisors
From: Lee B. Eddy
Subject: Board Retreat - Aug. 11 & 12
In planning for a retreat discussion on the Osborne-Gabler book
"Reinventing Government", I have developed a summary of those
elements that may have application to Roanoke County. A copy of
that summary is attached. I apologize for the length, but this
book has a lot of meat, in my opinion.
I deeply hope the Board and staff will give serious consideration
to some of the recomendations in the book. Mr. Hodge has already
started with his team approach and "flattened" organization.
copy: Elmer Hodge, Mary Allen
attach: Summary for each supervisor and Mr. Hodge
SUMMARY OF "REINVENTING GOVERNMENT" BY OSBORNE AND GABLER
POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS TO ROANOKE COUNTY
PREFACE
1. We believe deeply in government.
2. Civilized society cannot function effectively without effective
government.
3. People who work in government are not the problem; the systems in which
they work are the problem.
4. Neither traditional liberalism or conservatism has much relevance to
the problems of today's governments. Government must be reinvented.
5. We believe in equity - equal opportunity for all.
"Entrepreneurial government" describes the new model of government. An
entrepreneur uses resources in new ways to maximimize productivity and
effectiveness.
The three sectors of service are public, private and volunteer (third).
Entrepreneurs are "risk takers", but they define risks and minimize them.
They pinpoint opportunity and exploit it.
The central failure of government is one of means, not ends.
INTRODUCTION
Public institutions are becoming more lean, decentralized, innovative,
flexible and adaptable. They use competition and customer choice.
Hierarchal chains of command don't work very well.
Bureaucracies are bankrupt. They regulate the process and ignore the
outcome. They were based on a few knowledgeable managers at the top and
many less informed workers at the lower levels. Now we live in an
information society where information is available to almost everyone.
Today's society demands institutions that empower citizens rather than
just serving them.
Customers want quality and choice. A Michigan agency adopted the slogan
~~
"Customer service is our reason for being .
Entrepreneurial governments search for more efficient and effective ways
of managing. Rising practices include contracting for services,
performance measurements, participatory management, impact fees, and
strategic planning. Most do the following:
* Promote competition between service providers.
* Empower citizens by pushing control out of the bureaucracy into the
community .
* Measure performance, focusing on outcomes rather than inputs.
* Are driven by goals (missions), not by rules and regulations.
* Redefine clients as customers, and offer them choices.
* Prevent problems before they occur.
* Decentralize authority, embracing participatory management.
* Prefer market mechanisms to bureaucratic mechanisms.
- 1 -
* Catalyze public, private and volunteer sectors to solve community
problems.
Total Quality Management (TQM), developed by W.E. Deming primarily for
private business, focuses on results, customers, decentralization,
prevention, and a market approach.
The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping
from the old ones.
CHAPTER l: CATALYTIC GOVERNMENT; STEERING NOT ROWING
St. Paul, Minnesota used private development banks to finance affordable
housing. They used volunteer organizations to operate recycling programs,
perform energy audits, manage parks. They turned garbage collection over
to the private sector. They used volunteers in parks, recreation centers
and libraries. They created partnerships with foundations. The city
defines problems and assembles resources for others to use in addressing
them.
Dialog is more important than the agenda item - getting people talking and
working and thinking about who we are and where we want to be going.
Government can be a deal maker, pulling public and private sectors
together.
Use government for what it does best: raising resources and setting
societal priorities through a democratic political process. Utilize the
private sector for what it does best: organizing the production of goods
and services.
Mario Cuomo said "It is not government's obligation to provide services,
but to see that they are provided."
Government's role is to "steer" institutions to health. Any attempt to
combine governing with "doing" on a large scale paralyzes the
decision-making capacity. Having decision-making organs actually "do",
also means very poor "doing".
Governments that focus on steering make sure other institutions are
delivering services and meeting the community's needs. Entrepreneurial
governments are shifting to systems that separate policy decisions from
service delivery.
Divesting rowing from steering leaves governments operating basically as a
skillful buyer, leveraging the various producers to accomplish policy
objectives.
Contractors know they can be let go if their quality sags. Civil servants
know they cannot.
Steering organizations can experiment and learn from success.
Typical government employee turnover is 10$ each year. Attrition,
shifting employees, and requiring contractors to hire can minimize
employee layoffs.
Non-profit and volunteer agencies (third sector) are well suited to
handling social services.
- 2 -
Privatization is one answer, not "the" answer. When governments contract
with private business, they shift the delivery of services, not
responsibility for services.
CHAPTER 2: COMMUNITY OWNED GOVERNMENT
People act more responsibly when they control their own environments than
when they are under the control of others.
When communities are empowered to solve their own problems, they function
better than communities that depend on services provided by others. Use
community boards with volunteer mediators to resolve everyday conflicts.
Communities have more commitment to their members than service delivery
systems have to their clients.
Communities understand their problems better than service professionals.
Professionals and bureaucracies deliver services; communities solve
problems. Communities are more flexible and creative than large service
bureaucracies.
Communities are cheaper than service professionals. They enforce
standards of behavior more effectively.
St. Paul organized 17 elected district councils that acted as sounding
boards for city government, set priorities for public investment,
initiated projects and delivered services. "We're solving our own
problems."
CHAPTER 3: INJECTING COMPETITION INTO SERVICE DELIVERY
The issue is not public vs. private. It is competition vs. monopoly.
"With bidding you cut out all the fat."
Merit pay for teachers undermines morale. Merit pay for schools is
another matter.
The most obvious advantage of competition is greater efficiency.
Competition rewards innovation. Monopoly stifles it. Competition boosts
the pride and morale of public employees.
Efforts to minimize the pain of layoffs, such as "no layoff" policies, are
critical.
New york City's Sanitation internal repair shops compared their costs with
those of private shops, by posting charts of profits or loss. Then they
started contracting their services to others.
Cities often spend 20~ of the cost of a service on contract management.
They have to hire new people with particular expertise.
In contracting for services, Phoenix ties reimbursement closely to
performance and puts withholding clauses in all its contracts.
The low bid is usually not a good bid.
A danger is that a private contractor will gradually develop a monopoly.
- 3 -
Phoenix always keeps two of its garbage districts public, so it will
always have the capacity to compete.
Corruption is difficult when a system meets
1. The bidding is truly competitive.
2. Competition is based on hard information
performance.
3. Contractors are monitored carefully.
4. A relatively nonpolitical body is set up
Privatization works best
they want done, generate
performance, and replace
performance levels.
72$ of local officials r
favorable". Contracting
the following criteria:
on cost and quality of
to perform these tasks .
when public agencies can define precisely what
competitionfor the job, evaluate a contractor's
or penalize those who fail to achieve expected
ate the quality of their contracted services "very
saved local governments between 15 & 30~.
It is important to separate service from control.
Make all service bureaus revolving funds, relying on the income generated.
Typical public agencies don't eliminate obsolete bureaus or cud costs
because there is no incentive to do so. Competition is the permanent
force for innovation that government normally lacks.
America is the only major developed country in which there is no
competition within the school system. Seven U.S. states offer students
the option of attending a school in a different district.
Competition breeds accountability. The keys to a high level of school
success are parental control, clarity of mission, strong leadership, and
the degree of freedom and respect offered the teachers. Competitive
schools need autonomy from external control.
Hold schools accountable through the mroachpisotoscharOterynewmschoolsn can
force all schools to improve. One app
created by teachers, parents or private organizations.
In systems with school choice, the administrators and teachers are working
for the 95$ who remain, not the 5$ who leave.
Through competition, failing schools are improved. Failing management is
replaced. True competition means competition for students and funds.
An aggressive information program is necessary to make school choice work.
Unregulated markets generate inequities.
On average, private contractors and public agencies pay comparable wages,
but contractors offer fewer benefits. Governments are usually more
aggresive in hiring minorities and women.
Public employees vote at twice the average rate.
CHAPTER 4: MISSION DRIVEN GOVERNMENT
Never tell people how to do things. Tell then what you want them to
- 4 -
achieve and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.
Most public organizations are driven by their rules and budgets, not by
missions.
When things go wrong, politicians respond with a blizzard of new rules. A
business would fire the individuals responsible.
Rules and red tape prevent bad things from happening. They also prevent
good things from happening. Excessive rules are suffocating to public
employees. Rule-driven governments may prevent some corruption, but at a
price of monumental waste.
Bureaucracies are often happy to trade less money for more local control.
Mission-driven governments:
a. are more efficient than rule-driven governments.
b. produce better results.
c. are more innovative.
d. are more flexible.
e. have higher employee morale.
To slough off the obsolete, governments have done the following:
1. Sunset laws. You need to measure results.
2. Review Commissions. They periodically examine all systems.
3. Zero-based budgets. They are too cumbersome for annual use. Maybe do
every 5 years.
4. Ask each department to list ideas for 10~ budget cuts. Let the policy
body decide whether to implement them.
Budgets control everything an agency does. They are onerous and
omnipresent, useless and demeaning. They suck time away from real work.
They trap managers in yesterday's priorities, which becomes tomorrow's
waste.
Budget line items are often absurdly narrow. Smart public managers spend
every penny of every line item. If they don't their budgets are cut the
next year. Our budget systems actually encourage managers to waste money.
Fairfield, California eliminated line item budgets and allowed managers to
keep what they didn't spend. Each department budget is the same as the
previous year plus factors for inflation and population growth. Managers
use line items to track expenditures, but council does not see or vote on
them.
Mission-driven budgets give every employee an incentive to save money.
They free resources to test new ideas. They give managers the autonomy
they need to adjust to changing circumstances. They simplify the budget
process. They save money on auditors and budget officers. The free the
policy body to concentrate on important issues.
Modern personnel systems provide the following:
1. Broad classification and pay systems.
2. Market salaries.
3. Performance based pay.
4. Promotion and layoffs by performance, not seniority.
5. Management freedom to hire the most qualified.
6. Aggressive recruitment.
- 5 -
7. Streamlined appeals for employees who are fired.
Basic Strategies for Public Entrepreneurs include:
a. A clear mission statement.
b. Breaking large organizations into smaller units, each with a purpose.
c. Spinning off new teams and organizations.
d. Organizing by mission rather than turf.
e. Creating a culture around the mission (catch phrase).
f. Creating permission to fail.
By making corruption nearly impossible we also make quality performance
nearly impossible. Entrepreneurial governments rely on information about
results of spending to detect fraud and abuse.
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS-ORIENTED GOVERNMENT; FUNDING OUTCOMES, NOT INPUTS
---------------------------------------
Entrepreneurial governments fund institutions according to outcomes, not
inputs, so they become obsessive about results.
The ultimate test in government is not peformance, but re-election.
Entrepreneurial leaders develop new ways to measure & reward outcomes.
Sunnyvale, California measures the quantity, quality and cost bf every
service they deliver. They use a set of goals, community condition
indicators, objectives and performance indicators. There is no approval
process for hiring. Council sets policy: what level of service, how many
units will be produced, what unit cost. Successful unit managers receive
a bonus of up to 10$ of their salary. In 5 years they averaged a
productivity increase of 4~ each year. They use 35 to 45$ fewer people
than other cities of similar size. Employee salaries are higher and taxes
are lower.
What gets measured gets done. The simple act of defining measures helps
clarify goals. If you don't measure results, you can't tell success from
failure.
If you can't see success you can't reward it. If you can't reward success
you are probably rewarding failure. Rewarding failure creates bizarre
incentives.
If we expect nothing from people we usually get it. But if we expect
effort in return for what we give, we usually get that.
If you can't see success, you can't learn from it. Entrepreneurial
governments constantly try new things, to find out what works and what
doesn't. But you have to measure results to identify success. If you
can't recognize failure, you can't learn from it.
If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support. When spending
is conditioned on results, voters and politicians will respond.
Governments can use information to determine employee pay, as a management
tool, and to tie spending to results.
Traditional rewards to managers for meeting annual goals do not work well,
because these goals are usually not related to customer satisfaction.
To avoid the fear element, reward groups rather than individuals. In
Visalia, California, groups that improved productivity were allowed to
- 6 -
keep 30~ of the savings. The current thinking is toward merit pay for
groups of teachers, not individuals.
Deming's Total Quality Management states:
a. 15$ of the problems in most organizations are caused by workers and
managers.
b. 85~ stem from broader systems: education, budgets, personnel system,
etc.
c. Organizations can solve problems most efficiently if employees are
involved in developing solutions.
There are two ways to budget for results.
1. Reward excellence based on measured outputs and outcomes.
2. Sunnyvale's approach: define a level of quantity and quality.
Military depots set a target of 10~ productivity increase each of the
first two years, and 3~ each year thereafter. Beyond that, they could
invest any surplus any way they wanted (increased salaries, new equipment,
etc.)
A resource management system must include: 1) knowledge of full costs, 2)
unified (non line-item) budget, 3) decentralized control of dollars and
personnel, 4) freedom from unnecessary regulation, 5) accountability for
mission results.
A modern budget system must be mission driven, decentralized, and results
oriented.
CHAPTER 6: CUSTOMER-DRIVEN GOVERNMENT;
---------- ---------------------------
MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE CUSTOMER, NOT THE BUREAUCRACY
------------------------------------------------------
Democratic governments exist to serve their citizens.
Most public agencies strive to please interest groups. The greatest
irritant most people experience in their dealings with government is the
arrogance of the bureaucracy.
Entrepreneurial governments listen to their citizens through customer
surveys and focus groups. They offer choices.
Under Deming's TQM, the typical organization is turned upside down:
1. Customers are most important.
2. Those who serve customers directly are next in importance.
3. Management serves those who serve customers.
One police department in Madison, Wisconsin sent a questionnaire to every
35th person encountered, asking to rank (5-1) the officers as to concern,
helpfulness, knowledge, quality of service, professional conduct, how well
they solved the problem, whether they put the person at ease.
There are many ways to listen to the voice of the customer:
a. Customer Surveys (individual services)
b. Customer Follow Up
c. Community Surveys (overall services)
d. Customer Contact by Employee.
e. Customer Contact Reports
f. Customer Councils
- 7 -
g. Focus Groups
h. Customer Interviews
i. Electronic Mail
j. Customer Service Training
k. Test Marketing
1. Quality Guarantees
m. Inspectors
n. Ombudsmen
o. Complaint Tracking System
p. 800 number (state wide)
q. Suggestion Boxes or Forms.
The best way to make public service providers respond to the needs of
their customers is to put resources into the hands of the customers and
let them chose. Customer-driven systems force service providers to be
accountable to their customers.
Gallop polls showed that adults who believe parents should be able to
choose the public schools for their children increased from 12$ in 1980 to
62$ in 1990. A majority of teachers said that would help their students.
Customer-driven systems waste less because they match supply to demand.
They empower customers to make choices, and empowered customer's are more
committed.
Schools of choice have lower drop-out rates and fewer discipline problems.
Customer-driven systems create better opportunities for equity, but only
if information on costs and quality is accessible to all customers.
Traditional public systems are designed for the convenience of
administrators and service providers, not customers.
Continuity of leadership is critical in transforming public systems.
Political successors are often adversarial.
A customer-driven system should be "user friendly", transparent and
holistic.
CHAPTER 7: ENTERPRISING GOVERNMENT; EARNING RATHER THAN SPENDING
---------- -----------------------------------------------------
Charge citizens for using tennis courts. Charge a high fee for adult ball
teams. Let sponsors pay for the advertising they get.
Fairfield, CA built a golf course on land donated by a developer. The
developer built homes around the golf course. Both benefited.
The best way to raise nontax revenue is simply to charge fees to those who
use public services. Public opinion polls always favor user fees over
taxes. User fees work best when it is for a "private good" rather than a
"collective good", and when fees can be collected efficiently.
You should think like an investor, and maximize your long-term return.
Some suggest developing an "economic impact statement" for long-term
investments.
You need to give managers an incentive to make money. Mission-driven
budgets allow departments to keep part or all of surpluses. Budget
- 8 -
formulas are necessary to prevent raids on their hard-earned profits.
Some cities give employees a ~ of any savings or earnings that result from
their ideas. Riverside, CA set up a $100,000 seed fund to make small
loans to departments for new intitatives. Managers can secure investment
capital only if they have some prospect of generating a return. If that
return fails to materialize, the loss comes out of their budget.
Most governments have no idea how much it costs to deliver the services
they offer. Budgeted costs typically exclude "indirect costs" such as
administrative overhead, capital costs and employee fringe benefits.
Rather than have employees document their time on each job, it is more
efficient to have accountants go in retroactively, to determine what the
real costs are for each service, then use that data for the next year.
CHAPTER 8: ANTICIPATORY GOVERNMENT; PREVENTION RATHER THAN CURE
---------- ----------------------------------------------------
Anticipatory governments force politicians to look at the 10-year
implications of all spending decisions, to maintain the programs and
infrastructure they build.
"The smart person solves problems. The genius avoids them." We spend
most of our money responding to fires, not preventing them.
Scottsdale, AR requires sprinklers in every new building, including
residences. It reduced fire losses, insurance rates, and fire department
costs. It saves infrastructure costs ( smaller water pipes, storage
systems, pumps, etc.).
A citizens Futures Commission analyzes trends, develops alternatives, and
establishes recommendations and goals for the community.
"Alternatives for Washington" (state) used conferences, a series of
questionnaires each based on feedback from the previous one, TV programs,
statewide questionnaires, opinion surveys, cost/benefit study teams, and
town meetings.
"Strategic Planning" is the process of examining an organization or a
community's current situation and future trajectory, setting goals,
developing a strategy to achieve those goals, and measuring the results.
For a government you also need a consensus.
Tokyo develops 3 to 4-year administrative and fiscal plans, in great
detail. The annual budget process then conforms to the 3 to 4-year plans.
The important element is not a "plan", but "planning". Strategic Planning
promises only that decisions will be made with foresight. It can
deteriorate into meaningless exercises that waste time and money, and can
become an actual barrier to innovation.
Politics forces elected officials to go for fast-term payoffs, instead of
thinking and acting long-term.
Sunnyvale projects all revenues and costs, for capital and operations,
over the next 10 years. This helps flag problems that loom ahead.
One secret is to recast things that aren't politically acceptable in the
- 9 -
normal context, and change the context to create a different way of
looking at them.
Trust in the long-range forecasts is critical.
Long-range planning should flag the impact of a decision regarding one
department on all other departments.
Government accounting methods ignore what assets are owned, their state of
repair and their value. Accrual accounting shows depreciation; cash
accounting does not. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB)
will require governments to use accrual accounting starting in July, 1994,
but it will exclude depreciation.
CHAPTER 9: DECENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT;
---------- -------------------------
FROM HIERARCHY TO PARTICIPATION AND TEAMWORK
In today's world, things simply work better if those working in public
organizations have the authority to make many of their own decisions.
Centralized controls and consolidated agencies generate more waste, not
less.
Decentralized institutions have the following advantages:
1. They are more flexible.
2. They are more effective.
3. They are more innovative.
4. They generate higher morale, more commitment, and greater productivity.
Not "command and control", but "conferring and networking" become the
mandatory modes for getting things done. Waste is created by removing the
sense and fact of control from the only people close enough to the problem
to do something about it.
Organizations that decentralize have to articulate their missions, create
internal cultures around their core values, and measure results.
Manufacturing businesses that embrace participatory management typically
increase their productivity 30 to 40$.
Madison created an experimental police district under which the employees
selected their own officers, developed staffing and work schedules, etc.
Studies show that schools in which principals and teachers have
significant authority are more successful that those in which the
important decisions are made by central administrators.
The issue in all organizations is the quality of the top managers.
A study showed the greatest barriers to productivity improvements were
"governmental regulations", "institutional opposition", and "political
opposition".
Labor-Management committees have worked well where unions are strong. The
best way to secure labor cooperation is to adopt a no-layoff policy.
Governments don't have to guarantee "the" job; they can guarantee "a" job.
The most serious resistance to teamwork and participatory management often
- 10 -
comes from middle managers.
Participatory organizations find they must
their hierarchy. Participatory management
1. Quality Circles.
2. Labor-Management Committees.
3. Employee Development Programs.
4. Attitude Surveys.
5. Employee Evaluation of Managers.
6. Innovation Champions.
7. Reward Programs.
eliminate layers and flatten
can include:
A primary roadblock to innovation is segmentation. Teams are able to
break down turf walls, fostering collaboration across departments.
Teams hold employees to high stnadards. Those who don't perform fall by
the wayside because of peer pressure.
Paticipatory management encourages employees to share information and
confront underlying issues. Productivity has to be built from below.
In Minnesota they created a STEP program which solicited suggestions from
teams and chose the most promising.
Projects run by teams do much better than those run b y individuals.
Decentralization requires a firm commitment from the top.
Efforts to improve productivity usually undermine both productivity and
morale. Efforts to improve morale by empowering employees usually
heighten both morale and productivity.
Entrepreneurial organizations pay their employees well and work to improve
the physical quality of their work place. They also invest heavily in
training.
CHAPTER 10: MARKET ORIENTED GOVERNMENT;
----------- ---------------------------
LEVERAGING CHANGE THROUGH THE MARKET
------------------------------------
Bureaucracies naturally tend to spend their time and attention building
and defending turf, not in managing well.
Markets are self correcting. To work effectively and fairly, markets
require supply, demand, accessibility, information, rules and policing.
Local governments can place their cash balances in banks that pursue
specific lending strategies.
Entrepreneurial governments need to embrace markets and empower
communities.
CHAPTER 11: PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
School principles for entrepreneurial government:
1. Greater choice for parents and students.
2. A system of accountability that focuses on results rather than
compliance with regulations.
- 11 -
3. Decentralization of authority and decision making responsibilities to
the school site.
4. A personnel system that provides rewards for success with students and
real consequences for failure.
5. Active, sustained parental and business community involvement.
See pages 314-319 for details of a revised school system.
Factors that support a fundamental change to entrepreneurial government:
a. A crisis. b. Leadership
c. Continuity of Leadership d. A Healthy Civic Infrastructure
e. Shared Vision and Goals f. Trust
g. Outside Resources h. Models to Follow
APPENDIX A: ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY SERVICE OPTIONS
----------- ------------------------------------
36 Alternatives:
1. Legal Rules and Sanctions 2.
3. Monitoring and Investigation 4.
5. Tax Policy 6•
7. Subsidies 8.
9. Loan Guarantees 10.
11. Franchising 12.
13. Public-Public Partnerships 14.
15. Public Enterprise 16.
17. Insurance 18.
19. Public Investment Policy 20.
21. Information 22.
23. Volunteers 24.
25. Impact Fees 26.
27. Convening Non-Govt Leaders 28.
29. Seed Money 30.
31. Voluntary Associations 32.
33. Quid-Pro-Quo 34.
35. Sale/Exchange/Use of Property 36
Regulation or Deregulation
Licensing
Grants
Loans
Contracting
Public-Private Partnerships
Quasi-Public or Private Corporations
Procurement
Rewards, Awards, Bounties
Technical Assistance
Referral
Vouchers
Catalyzing Non-Governmental Efforts
Jawboning
Equity Investments
Co-Production or Self-Help
Demand Management
. Restructuring the Market
The following criteria can be used to judge
1. Service Specificity.
2. Availability of Producers.
3. Efficiency and Effectiveness.
4. Size of Organization Necessary to Provide
5. Benefits vs. Costs.
6. Responsiveness to Consumers.
7. Susceptibility to Fraud.
8. Economic Equity.
9. Equity for Minorities.
10. Responsiveness to Government Direction.
11. The Size of Government Needed.
Tasks Best Suited To Each Sector:
A. Public Sector:
1. Policy Management
2. Regulation
3. Enforcement of Equity
4. Prevention of Discrimination
5. Prevention of Exploitation
6. Promotion of Social Cohesion
B. Private Sector:
alternative arrangements:
the Service.
- 12 -
1. Economic Tasks
2. Investment Tasks
3. Profit Generation
4. Promotion of Self-Sufficiency
C. Third Sector (Volunteer & Non-Profit)
1. Social Tasks
2. Tasks that Require Volunteer Labor
3. Tasks that Generate Little Profit
4. Promotion of Individual Responsibility
5. Promotion of Community
6. Promotion of Commitment to Welfare of Others
APKPENDIX B: THE ART OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
------------ ----------------------------------
There is a vast difference between measuring process and results.
There is a difference betweeen measuring efficiency and effectiveness.
There is a difference between "program outcomes" and broader "policy
outcomes".
Do both quantitative and qualitative analysis. ,
Watch our for "creaming" (using the most productive citizens and leaving
the rest for others).
Anticipate powerful resistance.
Involve providers and employees in developing the correct measures.
Subject measures to annual review and modification.
Don't use too many or too few measures.
Watch our for perverse incentives.
Keep the measurement function in a politically independent, impartial
office.
Focus on maximizing the use of performance data.
- 13 -
v ~`
~o
~a
~o
M~
~ ~~er
J
Alter a yy'oy°re c
t~a~ sa'c' y.~e G~i
C 2 e6,`1 a
;~~,'~ ,y99 g X51
gyp: Cl vSt 5 ~ ~sser~l~ ea5ecper ~ o~~g
p1~' .e,,lg is C es~~ ~g`~
~. ~aSe~er e ~ eG 5: Qgo4 Jroa~,
9~' ; °.~ ~~'so7 pSC g, ~ e,~es fiat
~ 15 f°s 51 s l ga~~n~' er ~
elo • sea `~ I ~ ~i i~ pc
$ ec'~l WISISI ~a sy~e
o~~~z yes Zra~ A4C~ 4s°av
4/ g1 a~ B '
oar o4es g°~ r°~'e ~
g 4s goa la
~ ,c ~ ~ r~ 5I 5 I~ nor ,~,~,a
~ yla W I has
T~ea~~er ~a1r ~e rl
Wa„~es 15 SJ,p' ~a
e~ S ~
~ °~~ L W I vl ~ le~al~lre
v~5;ya, 55;yo ~'e Wa
eGn Yas~ n1sea ~sa4 ~ ~o
4 alley `~ ~e r,~e `~ e`I Te°n
da1~ 5r~° ~°~ V a~,l
Ze 5e~~ 11re '~
Seale
% ~~ i
,~ ~ ~~ ~. ~
;% ,, ~ ,'
~ ~ ~ ;~
/ i~
~ ~
i ~ ~
,' ~
~ ~ % ~ ~ ~~
,~`
~' ,.
~ ~ ~' ~ ~
~ ~
f, ~ , ~'
~;
~ :~ }s:.
l ~ 3t: :.
,z
s 'J``
i i
t ~ r ~e
f ~ ~ ~ /
i
r ~
~ ~
~'
~ ~
~ r
r f
ti f
i I~ I
~ ` ~ ~/
t ! `° ~ ~~
a y ! /~
a ,! r
fl !~ j
i ~ ~ q ~ it -- ~ a ~ -~ ~1 ~ ."
. ti
i Q U m j ~; C~ Q: roc :p \ ~ _ 1 i \
r
~ C V O ~, U O ~. ~, ` n r ,r h I
IJ c / O •r 1 ~
~ ~ I V r7. C j ti. ~ y .V y ~ r
~~ I~ ~ ~~~~ ti ~ ~ /~
m ~ c~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ i ~
~ cq ts, rr / ~ ~~ ! V
~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ i F.,
~ ~' ~ ~ ~
m ~ ~ ~ ~ ;
~s ~ ~
~ o z ~
.a' ..~ °q o ~ ~c
x ec
s ~ ~ ~ ca O
J C G a W
~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~
x vE", m ~ ~ 2 ~ 5 ~
~ v ~ o w ~ `„ ~''
l :U m cri: oS
1 ~ Z ~ ~
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Addre
ssees Below
FROM Elmer Hodge
DATE : ~L~i~`b~~ o ),.,
August 6 1992 _ d"~~J
RE: Board of 'S
_____ -------- upervisors Retreat
The Boar -------__ ____
e
wills be1nTed Wednesday Avisors will h ----------------
Maureen poplste ork in ugust 12. Theold a retreat
approa h 11 focus non oo Traanong Unl ntY' t akin or TuesdaysTmeetday
g the In
ur first year f ted, will lead Transition,g
the bookeCts for discus implementation ofethd Deng
am
structure, se~?nventing s Gov °n Wednesda
Roanoke age tre ernment Y, August 12
• Cable TV U atment plant ex County Board well include
The plate and Develo Pansl°n, Ex organizatio
the fieetin Pment of CIP, plore and n
RCAC on
Tues Hote
nd lw~ 1 held in theegion wi h dinnere held in the 1
begin at nference at 5 p.M. Communit
3 P.M, room at the Wednesda ,Y Room at
* Mary Allen Those attending wil1bbec Serv's meeting
Anita Hamme as follows enter
`TOhn Chamb rstrom Anne M
* Jeff Liss
,~ Balon
F D~ebie Pitts
Gardner cGraw
Nanc Smith
Y Bailey
Diane Hyatt
Tim Gubala
Keith CCook
Please plan to attend
1esday only
Do arse Green
paulMYers
~. Mahone
~ Jim Jones Y
~ Karen DaCosta
~ Diana Wilson
Paul Grice
* Elaine
Terr Carver
Y Harrington
George Simpson
Reta Busher
this meeting.
~~ o~ ~~
< N A .~,,,jr .~-i .~i .~i .P-~ .~ .fir .~.~ a^C
U II ~~pp pp Yy~~ ~~pp
n 0~ t'n ~~ T q Q' b N n
Q v' `d n O~ O. O~ ~ ~ ~ P~ O ti
py ~-1 r-H
~ ~~ d d d d d d~ d d d d ..'
"---
~ ~~~~~~~
m
~ ~ ~ .,
~~~~~~
$~8~~~~~~~~N
Q
4 O
'~' ~~ ~ vbv'~ s~ ~~~a~da~doCo
M O ~D N p~ ~~( tn~ pn~ .r N pf\.
pp ~~pp tf~~ v~ vN~ ~~p~ (.I
~ G "'~ M Q~ O R Q Op N N ~O .N+
GG ~ 7 ~f `d (~ OG OG O~ O. C ti ~-i f~J
h~
I I ~I ~^~~~~~~~~~~~
~ t~ ° ~ e b '"~ ;° r e
~~
c o .-i eJ e~1 rl ~ M c~i .~.i ~~', M
~ ~°~~~o~~~~~~
e~f cS ~.; ~d n a6 06 a a o
'.
Q O R ~O N ti
LZ? n n f~ ~--~ CO A N R h O~ O N
C O .i e~1 ed tJ tai t+i c~i
t7 7 7
eat cwt ~.; ~ ~ a '^ o ~.,
0 0 0
0 .p
`O ~ 00 O~ e^-i VI
~~ ~~~~~
X47 Q~ ~.t ee~~~ N~ ((rte~; Q ~ v ~.; ~.; ,.;
O~ N P f~ O$~ N t'~ .n .-~ ~ J
f` ~ O
a a
a6v:a $0~`"~ a o
°~ ~Q ~ -~
a e~f vj ~ ~ ~ 3
~ N N N f7 M~ f7 t~1 C~ Q
0 0 0
~p
~~ ter; a r: ~°"n~~~ 3 ~ o ~ ~ ~~ ~ U
r~r ~~r ~~+ ti .Qi vi 1~ n n ~ 3 ~ 'O
^' r, .. ., G aamt~' O G, q tC0
Q~nvo^o ~ ooa °% c u ~ v a u ~ 'c~
ra. c~t`~ n ~i r' a6c~i h t~ ~ v ~ ~c y ~ °~ y y y~ ~.., o c
J N M P'I O 7 R V~ y~ 1n '~ ~ .4 V V
op vl p~ ~bp pp,, T ^~ C VVgg '~
C ~ O N `PO ~~ n c P N ' ~ ~7+~ ~ C C ~ 'J
O. ti .~-' ti
p ~D \O P O O .Mi p c0 N N ynj ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ W'.~ ~ ~ p, ~u w .Q Q'
Z N f~~p~p N ~ p~
M M Q 7~P h h vl `O `O `G V ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y
'~°•~ S'v°~°~`a3" ~cc`3~~o{a~°{oo~.,o ~O 3~~'~°+~~rco~°Cg ° y~~c~+ a~ ~,~ .~
~ C •~-~ ~ ti ti ~ •~-~ N N N ~ ~ LV V ~ J /-. '~~"' -~ W ~ u V ~ C
8 I~ {QV; ~p p, t+~ tr~Np >° a0 :7 ,9 o V ~ U ~ ~
`O ^ ^' b O N o0 N (~ a ~ ~ ~ L~ V ~ V ~ ~ s E 'p `t7i s ~ V
Ri ~ ~ c °~~ Ada .-rl~.-o ~ 'E ~ a $ °'s ~ °' u ~ .°, a c c
of v~ ~p b [~ .. '9 C~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ 'O V G. e~ 10
.-. is L' ~ a a, ~ L+ :J ~ y 0"
Ica v:°~ ~hc$~o~o~~N o V~ ~,c ~ °~.~ u °° ~.a c a'
N to ~ t7 ~ ~ ,s ~ G~. CJ U Y ~ _ S V .`f ~ ~c
Month/
Year
Jul 89
Aug 89
Oct 89
Nov 89
Dec 89
Jan 90
Feb 90
Mar 90
Apr 90
May 9p
Jun 90
Jul 90
Aug 90
Sep 90
Oct 90
Nov 90
Dec 90
Jan 91
Feb 91
Mar 91
Apr 91
May 91
Jun 91
ALLpCATED CAPACITY
Vinton
Allocate
d ca VS, STP
FLAWS
(MGD)
BOtetourt acit
1.62 (MGD) Salem
(MGD)
Rke. Co.
1, g 0 (MGD)
6.65
Monthl Flo
ws 9.00
Total plant
Flout MGD
Rainfall Past Three
Fiscal Yea
(I Vin
to rs
49.05
34.61
38.30
39.19
35.03
35.02
41.90
42.44
39.33
37.39
37. O1
32.49
33.30
34.35
29.24
40.40
33.03
33.93
40.20
33.65
44.50
39.29
33.26
32.01
aches)
10.09
1.65
8.94
4.13
3.86
2.60
2.33
2.76
3.42
2.07
7.45
0.83
(MGD)
2.06
1.58
l.gg
1.86
1.71
1.73
1. 7g
1.96
1.74
1.64
1.86
1.68
tourt
Bote Sale
(MGD) (MGDI
•24
•27
•29
•27
•26
•23
•38
•48
•47
•44
•44
•39
3.80
4.42
1.86
9.89
1.08
3.79
3.55
2.10
7.58
2.49
2.88
2.42
33.08
31.35
29.51
3p• 08
30.35
33.95
33.60
34.78
34.88
34.23
37.63
37.69
Flow meter
7.22
2.31
0.15
0.04
2.51
3.91
2.51
3.75
2.54
4.89
6.06
6.87
1.74
1.64
1.67
2.17
1.62
1.69
1.96
1.74
2.19
1.79
1.75
1.71
1.69
1.69
1.46
1.47
1.52
1.37
1.36
1.62
1.67
1. 7g
1.79
2.00
readings not
Vinton
'•10/3,60 Botetourt
1'90/3.26
crosschecked
•39
•39
•39
•48
•39
•40
•52
•54
•49
•51
•50
•41
•56
•55
•43
•42
•42
•38
•37
•42
•47
•44
•41
• 62
10.63
6.26
11.24
8.84
6.97
6.85
7.65
8,34
7.56
7.84
7.63
6.35
7.14
6.62
6.94
10.28
4.86
5.54
9.14
5,28
6.42
7.63
5. 7p
5.66
Rke. City
(MGD)
15.83
Rke. Co.
(MGD) Rke.CtY
(MGD)
6.82
5.17
7.59
7.18
5.91
4.69
5.62
5.30
5.39
5.32
5.46
4.69
29.30
X1.34
17.20
X1.04
20.08
X1.32
26.47
26.46
24.17
22.15
X1.62
19.38
4.74
4.21
4.53
8.01
4.49
6. O1
7.46
5.51
8.25
4.94
4.85
4.41
5.46
5.42
4.19
4.33
4.85
5.68
7. O9
6.96
8.97
7.08
9.01
8.94*
with billing
5.24
5.04
4.72
4.67
4.90
4.97
5,27
5.55
5.65
6.74
7.52
7.38*
records.
19.20
21.49
15.71
19.46
~1. 65
20.29
21.12
20.58
27.15
24.42
20. 46
19,82
20.13
18.65
18.71
19.19
18.66
X1.65
19.51
20.23
18.12
X1.59
18.90
18.75
Salem - Month Wet
Mont
9.00/15.43 9 0/16.80 Rke. Ct h
19.20/32.91 42, 0/72
• DO
rHE yO1CE F
RON~ HELL ~ 1I ~' ~ ~
Safe I
guards f
BY ROBERT G. LEE O~ ~' • e aI
r'de all channels to br ~~~ Ves
writ COWGRESS is attemptin ernment information °adcast gov- needed
ble systems gislation regulatin g to Although cal govern
tionshi ~ including their g ca- Fmergene a very effective
Ps with rela_ existed for Bro Yste way t° send ent ens to
mg f
emerg
S1On statio °ver-the. adcast S to those ca
cY informao a exists there. Da rin
ns. So air televi- do Years, m as given ble vi
time elders who at n
Congress believe the members of T n ~s required n° EBS coordin _
Y in which g t of toent do B-
lions should i at new here is nod 'Radio is b d channels that~~t be watchin ed
swept through
prey nclude safe re$°la- evice for deteYpasse are not pan of cable h
is station' th
Peer M dwes~s
ent undue local guards to t}1een °r under wh rritining co This EBS.
trusion at circ was not on the s news d
oPeratio cable_
ns, tnto Bove °mepan - cablencomPanon 's warrantedaThe mg Th se°ccurrere e9ually'dbturbs ing in from the °g oftwrsters movs
rep rt
At the sa Y in the decision, sa1's it h Ong cable and ed within the ex •
° s were ov
rriden n's
me ti as nO voice enviro television regulatory
Communications 't1e' the Federal 4. Because the nment, and the r
the I~ ~ g°Vetnm °terruptl
which has COmmissi not entire) new svstem x, are even more amtficatio syste
day_to-day res OD' Apri121 Y read as disturbing, ns do that had mesa eta '
for enforce Ponsibilit y °n the g bout a to on
and cable went of broadcastiny Providep a scP' esentative of r~ciiv ster whohrng Prevents an to the nd was,b adY moo thro ~ _
u is g b Pt of sties
Pdatin rules, grapplin Y an o erator at the oRS to be read casting onloarns how from blank- east of townen' coo
11eS g'tatestncttons and penal technical center. m's s any and
aimed cable syste other ur channel °ad' Wpgm
Y Howled
hoax preventing so.called whose v The technician hoax he wishes all the at
broadcasts on r O1Ce was heard Prevents a bi _ • Nothing perfect. We do kes any claim tofbe
Central and adro and TV, Person available was [he onl ernment fro g brotherfi
have H'estern to read it. y like the nt deciding heeingov- tensive ex hOWever, have ex
hundred?enenced two so rrgmia 5• A misunderstandi content of doesn't through enPeertence in sortie -
year floods i called the scri casts at 6:30 netw
8
cade. We n the last Pt resulted' ng about the tonight an rgency informs
residents are °r news_ and con a Y[
dory de- What was as n a serious error. Nothinall with his oµ,nd blocking er in a c lm, factualcts to the view-
ng heav thus one floo read 20 feet g enables messy manner.
Y rains. It appeared we crest att20 Feet ould have been~bw~e integtity °p this me to protect the is We hav the future,
disasters on a threshold of rll Nothin disturbin a seen and it
u1dAPri1 21. another er's flood sta The Roanoke Riv- this in ursiables Cox able to esist leav full g~ Wh'~hewe full
1 sho sa $e rs 10 feet. Y control Y and
esty, that WDB1'is rth all due mod- 6' Good intentions letter nbednto its business. quest our trans signal that
most-v' Y far the hole thin , drove the l Printe these use or muter, its subse-
cable 1eWed channel on single accou g Over-the- d recent) events in a trolled underm'suse cannot be con-
cast sYste p lenews-1 °f vi nt f~;n n avers air3cpe ce~I t'g maga ane ublic n, Broadc na relief. existing law.
has almost aOs r Pnnci ewin Roanokee' 7 in atio We need --
all other bro much audience as Count , ager oP The operations ast-
nels adcast and cable Y LO- a station i man- -
comb{ned. We chap- called to tell me the s ~tnt, l~;ch., R~ert G. ~e is
guard our credibilityreWere and 9eneralman pfesidentand
APriI 21 me problem Television, Inc9erof WDB,1
monitor and r n intense efforPent
depend on eport to people who
floodin _ ss lust what risk of
hundred year PeCjflcally, another
flood .
I believe our repoRin was Present.
the other local stations and that of
reasoned and reassuring,
was calm,
At least three times during
Prime time on the events
Gabler saw the this station on Cox
snow. qn omi oDBJ signal
Voice then uniden ~fied
announced thatrode our signal and
would crest ov the Roanoke River
above flood sta err:ight at 20 feet
that 20 feet ge. Roanokers know
ceeds the ab°ve flo
This was tragic floodind stage ex-
serious stufgf! qnd 85•
seemed WpBJ had just said so 't
Unfortunately, a series ofprob-
erros had led to dissemination of
neous information by someone
with control over our signal,
°ne we didn't know existed.
ess to sa , Some'
Y the station's tele Need-
7egan to ring, That Phones
ubsequent inv evening, and in
'arned several thin tigation, we
1. We h gs:
rsolutely ave known that we have
no control over a cable
in rtnrealize four srgnal. We just
~trol" what "absolutely no
really means.
ce frls wasn't just us. The same
,en a m hell and the same snowy
Ppeared simultaneously on
'Y other cable channel.
3' COX Cable, under the pres-
ofrecent Franchise renewal
floss, granted loc
ne-
- which alreadal g°Vern-
' channel _ a new p~odua ion
Y and the ability to take con_
'the entire system and over-
EMERGENCY OVERRIDE SYSTEM OPERATING pR
OCEDURES
Representatives who
Emergency Override S are trained and authorized
ystem: to activate the
Town of Vinton:
Brad Corcoran, Town Manager
Work: 983-0607
Home:
Mary Beth La
Work: 983_0613n~ SPecial Programs Coordinator
Home: 362-2362
County of Roanoke:
Larry Logan, Emer
Work: 561-8070 gency Services Coordinator
Home:
Pager: 985-1948
Anne Marie Green, Public Information Of
Work: 772-2010
Home: 389-2705 facer
City of Roanoke:
Wanda Reed, Emer e
Work: 981_2425 g ncy Services Coordinator
Home: 344-1333
Pager: 983-5712
Michelle Bono, Public Information Offic
Work: 981-2333
Home: 366-7601 er
Procedures for Activation
1• Before activatin
listed g cable override, at least o
representatives from
contacted and each ne of the above
aPProximate advised of the content icipality should
time messa a of the be
g will be sent, message and
2• The message should
understandabilit be in a written
Y, accuracy and clarity form to ensure
3• If the its
message is weather
system you must contact the related, prior to
and read the National Weather activating the
accuracy, message to a representative t Service
here to verify its
4• The message can not be longer than 3 minutes
should be approximately 30 to 60 seconds. ~ and ideally
5• The message should be repeated twice, one right afte
other. r the
6• The message must start with the following words:
THE FOLLOWING IS AN EMERGENCY MESSAGE FROM
BEING BROADCAST OVER THE COX CABLE ROANOKE EMERGENCY) ERRIDE
SYSTEM.
~• Be sure that the message includes the action citizens should
take, even if it is only as basic as tuning to their local
news station for additional information.
8• REMEMBER! This system is only to be used in the event of a
life-threatening emergency.
9• The above listed representatives have information on how to
access this system. If the information card is ever lost by
- any of these individuals, Cox Cable should be notified
immediately so that the access code can be changed.
aENE~4,L~ 8 TEMEN OF DOT~ES~
Performs difficult professional work related to the management,
directing, and broadcasting aver the Roanoke Valley Government
Access Channel including work related to design of studio, purchase
of initial equipment and other tasks related to the start-up of
operation; does related work as required.
DISTINaUI$HINa FEATURES OF THE CLASS:
An employee in this position is responsible for the preparation and
dissemination of information to the public through video and audio
production, broadcasting and video taping on the government access
television channel; which is performed under the general
supervision of the Roanoke Valley Cable Television Committee.
EXAMPLES OF WQRRi (illustrative Oniyf
Serves as teahnieal advisor to 1vca1 governments on matters related
to the dissemination of information on the local government access
channel, including purchase of equipment and design of studio
space.
Prepares, disseminates and updates information through electronic
character generation.
Produces features, specials and other television programs.
Broadcasts public meetings.
Coordinates and schedules programming activities, balancing
requirements of three local governments and two school systems.
Manages studio operations, hires and supervises volunteers and
part-time personnel.
Operates video and related television production equipment.
REOUIRED RNO'NILED(3E. BRILLS AND ABILI~'IES:
Thorough knowledge of the practices and principles of public
relations, radio and television production.
ACCEPTA$LE EDUCA'Y'IQN ANl~_LXPERIENCE:
Education equivalent to a four year (Bachelors) degree from an
accredited college or university with major coursework in English,
communications, journalism, ar related field; Some experience in
the operation of a television broadcast channel, mass communi-
cation, film production and in the supervision of personnel.
ADD TIQNAL REQUIREMENTS:
Must possess a valid Virginia Driver's License and have a good
driving record.
Rev. 8/11/92
Mary Allen
Board Retreat
I don't have any specific issues that I'd like to discuss at the retreat,
but I do have a request.
If we can, I'd like to get iced tea with our meals and I don't care for the
sweetened ice tea, I like the unsweetened ice tea. Then when the weather
cools off, at some of our later meetings, maybe we could have coffee. I've
got to quit drinking soft drinks.
Ed Kohinke
Attending first day of Board Retreat:
Board Members 5
Mary Allen
Anne Marie
Anita H.
Don M.
Elmer H.
Paul M.
Maureen Poplstein
Dan Moore
Jeff Balon
Jim Jones
Debbie Pitts
Karen DaCosta
Steve McGraw
Diana Wilson
Gardner S.
Paul Grice
Nancy Bailey '
Elaine .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r tYeX'
Diane H.
Terry H•
Tim G.
George Simpson
John Cease
Brenda Holton
Keith Cook
Reta Busher
Total 32
C~~
_.
--~
.S .~~--
~ ~~
,~ ~
~m~
~ ,~ ~cz_,-,~--•r~
~~~
sue- h
,o~, rr~
~c~
~~
~~
~~
~~~~ ~
~~~ ~~
~~.~. w
~~
~~~~~,~~
~~ ~
-C~-a-~
-.~: y~-
~3 v
RETREAT AGENDA
TEAMWORK IN ROANOKE COUNTY: MAKING THE TRANSITION
~~ ~~'c,~ -- a /~~,~,. ~%..~ rn '~
~. INTRODUCE PRESENTERS
Define each presenter's role and responsibility within the meeting
-- Don Myers -- Assistant County Administrator
-- Steve McGraw -- Clerk of Circuit Court
--Jeff Balon -- Parks and Recreation
-- Karen Dacosta -- Parks and Recreation
-- Anita Hammerstrom -- Human Resources
TI. DEFINE MEETING OBJECTIVES ~C~,
~~il. ICE BREAKER EXERCISE t , °~ "~~"'' ~li,~r/'~~..
,'N. REVIEW CONCEPT OF TEAMWORK ~ ~~~~
-- Theory
-- Benefits
VJ WHERE THE COUNTY WAS A YEAR AGO ~~ ~??~r ~ = ' ~ ~ ~~+~~
The restructurin of overnment. ~`~ ~~
a
~,.,..
r ~ ~ ~ ~
VI.~ TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS ,~-~~ '~'~i~ ~sC?~~-w- `~_G~~,
-- Circuit Court Clerks ice - _~ ~ `y ~ ° ~L~1-a~-~-~ ~ `~~~
1 -- Parks and Recreation -- ~~ ~"''"~ ~~K
-- Human Resources E . .~ ,, ^,~
off' ~ '~~~t.~rn~ lA.~.,, - :~ ~ C~C..O"
n ~~
VII WHERE TO GO FROM HERE ~}'~ ,~~ ) ~ ~,~
~„~„ ~ F Y~, ~-
Review seven steps of: Making The Transition to a Teamwork
Environment. Define accomplishments and develop a plan for
implementing e~ac~h phase
~ ,~ ~ ~ _
~ 71~1•FF: CONCLUSION `~~ a~(,~-L, ,.'
~~~
f X '"
~`J
O~ ROANp~.~
~ , A ~ ,~'
a ~~~~u~~
u~~~ ~~
1 a ESOP ss
sFSgU1CENTENa~P~ DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
a BeautijulBeginning
MEMORANDUM
TO: ELMER C. HODGE, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: ANITA HAMMERSTROM, TRAINING COORDINATOR ~'
RE: TEAMWORK TRAINING
DATE: June 5, 1992
Roanoke County
ALL-AMERICA CITY
'' I I'
1979
1989
D. K. COOK
DIRECTOR
I have talked with Maureen Poplstein with Training Unlimited. She
gave me the following information regarding the cost of the
training for the Gang and the Board of Supervisors:
Gang Approximate time: 16 - 17 hours
Number of Participants: 25 people
Training Date: September, 1992
Location: Community Room
Total fee: $2625 ( This is $105.00 per participant
and includes instructor fees, workbook,
and book )
Board of Supervisors
Approximate time: 12 hours
Number of Participants: 8-10
Training Date: Late August or early
September, 1992
Location: To be determined
Total fee: $1750 ( This is $175 per participant
and includes instructor fees, workbook,
and book)
If you have any questions regarding this information, please
contact me.
~ ' ~ _.
~ - ':~ , y Z ,~~~. ~.~ '~ , .
P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 2 4018-07 9 8 (703) 772-2018
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
~~~
FROM Mary Allen
DATE: June 29, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
Au ust was NOT a convenient weekefhasaasked that e
The first week m g week (August
members to schedule the summer BS arod evenings n the fol owing
move the retreat to two afternoon
10-14).
icate below your preference for the two days and return to me as
Please ind
soon as possible.
_ nda August 10 and Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon
Mo y~
session)
Au ust 11 (following the afternoon session) and Wednesday,
Tuesday, 9
August 12
_ Wednesday, August 12 and Thursday, August 13
Thursday, August 13 and Friday, August 14
CC: Elmer C. Hodge
MEMORANDUM
~~_ ~~~ Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
~~~ `~ ~~~
.~pf- Mary Allen
DATE: June 29, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
The first week in August was NOT a conv {ni ~~. Hodkefhasaasked that we
members to schedule the summer Board Retrea 9
move the retreat to two afternoons or evenings the following week (August
10 - 14).
Please indicate below your preference for the two days and return to me as
soon as possible.
~ Monday, August 10 and Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon
session)
'~ Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon session) and Wednesday,
August 12
`/ Wednesday, August 12 and Thursday, August 13
Thursday, August 13 and Friday, August 14
CC: Elmer C. Hodge
~ ~~ ~~
~.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
./r~/t~v
FROM Mary Allen
DATE: June 29, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
The first week in August was NOT a convenient week for all five Board
members to schedule the summer Board Retreat. Mr. Hodge has asked that we
move the retreat to two afternoons or evenings the following week (August
10 - 14).
Please indicate below your preference for the two days and return to me as
soon as possible.
Monday, August 10 and Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon
session)
Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon session) and Wednesday,
August 12
Wednesday, August 12 and Thursday, August 13
Thursday, August 13 and Friday, August 14
CC: Elmer C. Hodge
Number: 156181 Posted: 07/01/92 07:53
Type: Regular Message Received:
Subject: Board of Supervisors Retreat
From: MHA - Mary Allen
To: ABH - Anita Hammerstrom
Anita:
Since Dr. Nickens would be on vacation the first week in August, ECH did
not want to schedule the retreat that week.
I have sent another memo to the Board asking which days they would like to
schedule the retreat during the second week of August (8-10 through 8-14).
Hopefully I'll receive some responses by Monday (July 6)
I called Maureen Popelstein on Monday, and she said that was fine. She
will hold that week open until she hears from you or me.
Mary
MEMORANDUM
~~seJ,~/
TO: Lee Eddy ~ l~
Bob Johnson „1
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens ~,,,~p,~,C..~l , % `~ ~-
// ,'
FROM Mary Allen ~1~~~~~~'~
DATE: June 23, 1992 ~~"'~`~ ~ `~~'~
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
Mr. Hodge and I are in the process of setting up the summer Board Retreat. His
tentative plans are to have an eight hour retreat with four hours one evening and
four hours the following evening. Several of you have indicated that you were not
interested in attending the retreat on a weekend.
Tentatively, the retreat is scheduled for two afternoon/evenings during the week
of August 3 through 7. Please indicate below your preference for the two days
and return to me.
Monday, August 3 and Tuesday, August 4
,~ C_ /1
Tuesday, August 4 and Wednesday, August 5 ~ ~ v~ ~ Cx ~ < <% ~
Wednesday, August 5 and Thursday, August 6 ~ ~~~ ~ J ~
~~ ~~
Thursday, August 6 and Friday, August 7
CC: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator t ~, ~ ~
MEMORANDUM
~° ~'?
~~ Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
-- Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
dFRO'I~""~ Mary Allen
DATE: June 23, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
Mr. Hodge and I are in the process of setting up the summer Board Retreat. His
tentative plans are to have an eight hour retreat with four hours one evening and
four hours the following evening. Several of you have indicated that you were not
interested in attending the retreat on a weekend.
Tentatively, the retreat is scheduled for two afternoon/evenings during the week
of August 3 through 7. Please indicate below your preference for the two days
and return to me.
Monday, August 3 and Tuesday, August 4
Tuesday, August 4 and Wednesday, August 5
Wednesday, August 5 and Thursday, August 6
Thursday, August 6 and Friday, August 7
y`~ .
-.
CC: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
FROM Mary Ailen
DATE: June 23, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
Mr. Hodge and I are in the process of setting up the summer Board Retreat. His
tentative plans are to have an eight hour retreat with four hours one evening and
four hours the following evening. Several of you have indicated that you were not
interested in attending the retreat on a weekend.
Tentatively, the retreat is scheduled for two afternoon/evenings during the week
of August 3 through 7. Please indicate below your preference for the two days
and return to me.
Monday, August 3 and Tuesday, August 4
Tuesday, August 4 and Wednesday, August 5
Wednesday, August 5 and Thursday, August 6
Thursday, August 6 and Friday, August 7
CC: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator
~ aoaN ~.
F
a
~~
z
8
P.O. BOX 29800
ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ELMER C. HOOGE
LFE 8. EDDY. CHAIRMAN
(703) 772-2004 wINO50R HILTS MAGISTERU-L DISTRICT
EDWARD G. KOHINKE. SR.. VICE-CHAIRMAN
GTAW6A MAGIi'TEItl11L DISTRICT
BOB L JOHNSON
MOUJNS MAfi1sTE11U1L DISTRICT
H. ODELL FUZZY MIN NIX
M E M O R A N D U M G~ ~~~ ~ DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTiON MAGISTLRLIL DISTRICT
K107-92 (7os) 772-zoos
TO: Lee Eddy
FROM Edward Kohinke ~~~ ~~ r~ ~`~ ; //1-
Catawba District Supervisor
DATE: July 29, 1992
SUBJECT: RETREAT
Please disregard my recent request to put the police department on
the retreat agenda. I am not an advocate of re-integrating the
sheriff and police departments, and do not want my concern about
specific law enforcement problems in my district to be viewed as
negativism or pessimism towards the police department.
Other than increasing the number of officers we have on the force,
which will facilitate the resumption of patrols in my district,
there is really nothing else about law enforcement in the Catawba
District that needs to be discussed at the policy making level by
the whole board. I feel that this is something that should be
monitored as we go along and doesn't need to be an item for a
planning retreat.
Finally, my desires for the retreat are more general than specific.
I really don't want to have one in the first place, so I hope that
whatever we talk about will be positive, substantive, and
constructive. I would also hope to avoid abstract discussions, and
in reviewing your recent material on structural changes in County
government, I would tend to shy away from discussions in this area
unless change proposals would definitely lead to a better delivery
of services at a lower cost.
EGK/bjh
cc: Members, Board of Supervisors
Elmer Hodge
Mary Allen
® A«.yd.e PaP.r
O~ AOAN ~~
~ ' •, A
2 L7
J, a=
rasa
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ELMER C. HODGE
(703) 772-2004
~7 W.
nw~~
---.->r~,.r--
DATE:
SUBJECT:
P.O. BOX 29800
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798
MEMORANDUM
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Mary H. Allen ~r'~
July 28, 1992
Board Retreat -August 11, 12, 1992
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN
WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR., VICE-CHAIRMAN
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
BOB L. JOHNSON
HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
(703) 772-2005
Plans are being finalized for the Retreat on August 11 and 12 as follows:
August 11, 1992 -Community Room
Retreat will begin following the regular Board meeting. There will be a presentation
on the teamwork approach in Roanoke County. Dinner will be provided.
August 12, 1992 -Community Room
The session will begin at 3:00 p.m. and will last until approximately 7:00 p.m. A box
dinner will be provided.
If there are any issues you wish to discuss at the Retreat, please list them below
and return to me. They will be added to the agenda. Thank you.
1. ~`~.
~,
)1
2. Cove ~, ~' ~. ~~rd d rs~~zc~~"~ or ~ 1 S~-r~.~'hY~
..3 . Lp~ w C r '~ r G-e w, ~,.,,~"
CC: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator
® Recycled Paper
~ rAOANp~~
h, ~
_ ~ 9
~ ~
O i
• a
~ 38
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ELMER C. HODGE
(703) 772-2004
TO:
FROM
DATE:
SUBJECT:
~~r~~~ .~r~ ~
~~~.~..~
P.O. BOX 29800
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798
MEMORANDUM
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Mary H. Allen ~~'a'
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN
WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
EDWARD G. KOHINKE, $R., VICE-CHAIRMAN
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
BOB L. JOHNSON
HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
July 28, 1992
Board Retreat -August 11, 12, 1992
(703) 772-2005
Plans are being finalized for the Retreat on August 11 and 12 as follows:
August 11 1992 - Community Room
Retreat will begin following the regular Board meeting. There will be a presentation
on the teamwork approach in Roanoke County. Dinner will be provided.
August 12 1992 -Community Room
The session will begin at 3:00 o.m. and will last until approximately 7:00 p.m. A box
dinner will be provided.
If there are any issues you wish to discuss at the Retreat, please list them below
and return to me. They will be added to the agenda. Thank you.
~;
~'.
e `
t r.
~~ J 'A
1- ~~ !~+
`~~ J.rl~i ~",.
~l1~
~ /
., ~
,,r "
~1~ ~
CC: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator
® Recyded Paper
~r u ~h ~ ~ ~.,~Lc ~
~Q AOAh '~F
L
z
1 38
P.O. BOX 29800
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN
ELMER C. HODGE MEMORANDUM WINDSOR FALLS MAGISTERAL DISTRICT
(703) 772-2004 EDWARD G. I(OHINKE, SR., VICE-CHAIRMAN
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
BOB L. JOHNSON
HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX
TO; Members of the Board of Supervisors CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
FROM Mary H. Allen ~r'~ (7os) 772-loos
DATE: July 28, 1992
SUBJECT: Board Retreat -August 11, 12, 1992
Plans are being finalized for the Retreat on August 11 and 12 as follows:
August 11, 1992 -Community Room
Retreat will begin following the regular Board meeting. There will be a presentation
on the teamwork approach in Roanoke County. Dinner will be provided.
August 12, 1992 -Community Room
The session will begin at 3:00 q.m. and will last until approximately 7:00 p.m. A box
dinner will be provided.
If there are any issues you wish to discuss at the Retreat, please list them below
and return to me. They will be added to the agenda. Thank you.
CC: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator
® Recyded Paper
~ ,~,~,,
0~ A AN ,YFL
~~ ~~
o
a
t s
COUNT`S ADMINISTRATOR
EUAER G. HODGE
(703) '772'2004
TO:
FROM
DATE:
SUBJECT:
at
C~~ixx~#~ ~f ~t~~x~a~
P.O. BOX 29800
ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 2~1g'O79S
MEMORANDUM
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
~ pF B. EDDY. CHAIRMAN
WiND50R HILLS MAGISTERIAL- ~~~
EDMfARD G. KOHINKE. SR.. VIGE'GHAIRMAN
Cp,TAWeA p,IAGW'TERIA~- DISTR~T
~B ~„ JOHNSON
HDWNS MAGIST6RIA1- M~RNIX
H.ODELL.~Z~ DISTR~
CAVE SPRING MAGISTER
1-TARRY C. N~~~
K105-92 ""~`°" MAGISTER~-
~~ ~j ~ /~ • (703) 772-2005
Lee Eddy
Edward Kohinke ervisor
Catawba District Sup
July 27- 1992
I,p,W ENFORCEMENT IN ROAriOKE COUNTY
law enforcement a topic Of discussion
would like to make County
our retreat in August. would like to have addressed:
There are
1.
2.
3.
Elmer Hodge Chief of Po1,ydeaPal~
John Cease,
several specific concerns I ,~ romise" being
romised, the P system.
a ing far more Tthamnop a to gD to a new
We are p Y cost hout my district
that it would read perception throng if not less
the widese ting about the same as,
However, are g
is thaunder the old system.
than, exception,
this is not of 1 the Catawba
For those of us in the thew rural areas on a
are not currently patrolled
it is a reality:
Magisterial District ersonnel shortage"-
routine basis due to a "P u which make me feel
o ing P
Other smaller issues keep P PP the
' force my belief that his aof f icers (and
uneasy, and rein Cease and Very high)
my respect is for Chief than the
respect for t more s oversight gome
believe me- my needs Administrator.
police department our County
supervision provided by but are not at the old
e~~ of ice to
of these ow g er issues inc u lin ness
the alleged "firing rofg our p ,
the foil seeming unveil g on Wildwood
YMCA camp, the ate of mailbox bashing
deal w the tletter of rom Mr . Fot i , etc .
Road,
EGK/b7h Board of Supervisors
cc: Members,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lee Eddy
Bob Johnson
Ed Kohinke
Fuzzy Minnix
Harry Nickens
FROM Mary Allen ~~~
DATE: June 29, 1992
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Retreat
The first week in August was NOT a convenient week for all five Board
members to schedule the summer Board Retreat. Mr. Hodge has asked that we
move the retreat to two afternoons or evenings the following week (August
10 - 14).
Please indicate below your preference for the two days and return to me as
soon as possible.
Monday, August 10 and Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon
session)
Tuesday, August 11 (following the afternoon session) and Wednesday,
August 12
Wednesday, August 12 and Thursday, August 13
Thursday, August 13 and Friday, August 14
CC: Elmer C. Hodge