HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/12/2010 - Adopted Board RecordsAT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
RESOLUTION 101210-1 ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR
THE 2011 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND
PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO FAVORABLY
CONSIDERTHE TOPICS AND ISSUES ADDRESSED HEREIN
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has identified
major legislative issues of Statewide concern to be considered by the 2011 session of
the Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution as its Legislative Program for the
2011 session of the Virginia General Assembly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that the following legislative initiatives are submitted for its legislative
program for the 2011 session of the Virginia General Assembly for its favorable
consideration and adoption.
1. Comprehensive Services Act - It has been suggested that the
Commonwealth of Virginia will impose a cap or limit on its share of the cost for this
program. There would be no cap or limit on the costs paid by localities. Many initiatives
under this program are State-mandated. A cap or limit on the Commonwealth's share
would shift these cost burdens to localities. Roanoke County opposes this suggestion,
and requests your support in opposing this approach to balancing the Commonwealth's
budget.
2. VRS - In 2010 the General Assembly adopted legislation authorizing
Virginia Retirement System transitional benefits. This legislation did not address the
fact that school divisions participating and not participating in this program are in the
same pool for allocating costs. In other words all school divisions will pay for the few
school divisions that decide to participate in this program.
Local governments participating in VRS each pay their own rate based upon their
own experience and usage.
Roanoke County requests your support in correcting this legislation so that only
those school divisions participating in the program are assessed their costs.
Page 1 of 3
3. Synthetic cannabinoid, synthetic marijuana or "spice" is sold in shiny foil
packages and marketed as herbal incense. When smoked it produces a high similar to
marijuana. Approximately 11 states have adopted laws making synthetic cannabinoids
illegal. In Virginia spice is legal and unregulated.
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to adopt legislation declaring
spice and synthetic cannabinoids to be controlled substances under Title 18.2 of the
Code of Virginia.
4. In 2010 the General Assembly adopted House Bill 1010 which became
Chapter 877 of the 2010 Acts of Assembly. This legislation could be interpreted to
reverse the Commonwealth's position that internet gambling is illegal and to allow
internet gambling.
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to amend this legislation,
correct this erroneous interpretation that internet gambling is now legal in Virginia, and
declare internet gambling to be illegal.
5. The General Assembly should fully fund its unfunded liabilities in the
Virginia Retirement System and restore VRS to an actuarially sound status.
6. The Governor's Commission on Economic Development and Job Creation
recommended that the Machinery & Tools Tax be repealed, and that the BPOL tax be
changed from a gross receipts tax to a net income ("relative profitability") model. It was
recommended that the Department of Taxation assess the fiscal impact of such a
recommendation.
It is not fiscally prudent to proceed with these recommendations without a viable
fiscal impact statement, and without offering local replacement revenues.
The potential loss of local tax revenue from these recommendations exceeds $8
million for Roanoke County. Roanoke County opposes these recommendations, and
requests the General Assembly to reject them.
7. Transportation Funding. The Board requests the General Assembly
provide funding for the widening of I-81, construction of I-73, and improvements to U.S.
Routes 11 /460 and 220.
8. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to reject proposed
legislation that would usurp local zoning power and authority, such as imposing
retroactive restrictions on proffered conditions in support of conditional zoning, the
location and signage permissible for privatized liquor stores, or transferring the review
and approval of alternative energy sources to the State Corporation Commission.
9. Local Government State Funding and Mandates - As the General
Assembly produces an annual budget, it is requested that if the General Assembly is
Page 2 of 3
required to further reduce local government funding that it also investigate the need to
reduce or eliminate state mandates in relationship to the budgetary cuts.
That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send an attested copy of
this resolution to Governor McDonnell, Senator John S. Edwards, Senator Ralph Smith,
Delegate H. Morgan Griffith, Delegate Onzlee Ware, Delegate William Cleaveland;
Stephanie Moon, Roanoke City Clerk; Members of the Roanoke City Council; Kevin S.
Boggess, Clerk for Salem City Council; Members of the Salem City Council; Clerk for
the Town of Vinton; Members of the Vinton Town Council and the Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission, and the Virginia Associa~kion of Counties.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A Q'OFiY TESTE:
De'I~orah C. Jackal/
Deputy Clerk to tKe Board of Supervisors
cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
Page 3 of 3
ATA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER,
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
RESOLUTION 101210-2 ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE REQUEST FOR
THE 2011 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO
DECLARE "SPICE" AND SYNTHETIC CANNABINOIDS ILLEGAL IN
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has identified
major legislative issues of Statewide concern to be considered by the 2011 session of the
Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution requesting action by the 2011
session of the Virginia General Assembly.
WHEREAS, eleven other states have adopted legislation making synthetic
cannabinoids illegal; and
WHEREAS, Delaware health officials have issued warnings about the use of
"spice" following numerous recent drug related hospitalizations; and
WHEREAS, the symptoms of "spice" use include tachycardia (elevated heart rate),
elevated blood pressure, anxiety, numbness and tingling, vomiting, hallucinations,
tremors and seizures; and
WHEREAS, there have been reports of similar hospitalizations in the Roanoke and
New River region.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia adopt
legislation declaring "spice" and synthetic cannabinoids to be illegal and to be a
controlled substance under Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia.
Page 1 of 2
2. That this Board requests the City Councils of the City of Roanoke and the
City of Salem, the Boards of Supervisors of Botetourt County and Montgomery County,
and the Town Councils of the Town of Vinton, Town of Blacksburg, and the Town of
Christiansburg to join it in adopting similar resolutions requesting action by the General
Assembly on this matter.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A CQIP'Y TESTE:
Det~Qrah C. Jacks
Deputy Clerk to the oard of Supervisors
cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
Stephanie Moon, Roanoke City Clerk; Roanoke City Council
Kevin S. Boggess, Clerk for Salem City Council; Salem City Council
Clerk for the Town of Vinton; Members of the Vinton Town Council
Clerk for the County of Botetourt Supervisors; Botetourt Board of Supervisors
Clerk for the County of Montgomery Supervisors; Montgomery Board of Supervisors
Clerk for the Town of Blacksburg; Members of Blacksburg Town Council
Clerk for the Town of Christiansburg; Members of Christiansburg Town Council
Page2of2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
RESOLUTION 101210-3 APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE RECOM-
MENDATION OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY BONDING COMMITTEE TO
SET OCTOBER 12, 2010, AS A PUBLIC HEARING IN ANTICIPATION
OF DECLARING THE DEVELOPER OF QUAIL RIDGE SUBDIVISION,
SECTION 8, TO BE IN DEFAULT AND TO AUTHORIZE OFFICIALS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY TO EXERCISE ITS RIGHTS UNDER THE
DEVELOPER'S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AGREEMENT
AND THE ACCOMPANYING EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
BOND
WHEREAS, W2 Enterprises, LLC, a Virginia limited liability corporation (hereafter
"W2 Enterprises"), as developers of Section 8 of Quail Ridge Subdivision (hereafter
"Quail Ridge SID") in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of Roanoke County, on or
about July 27, 2006, entered into an Erosion and Sediment Control Agreement
(hereafter "E & S Agreement") with the County of Roanoke and provided an Erosion and
Sediment Control Bond secured by Erie Insurance Company (hereafter "Erie
Insurance"), to insure the construction and maintenance of certain erosion and sediment
control facilities in connection with the development of Quail Ridge SID; and
WHEREAS, W2 Enterprises has failed to substantially comply with its legal
responsibilities under the aforesaid E & S Agreement and a balance of $10,000.00
remains on deposit with Erie Insurance to secure the completion of the requirement
under this agreement; and
WHEREAS, the remaining tasks to be performed to comply with W2 Enterprises,
LLC's Agreement include, but may not be limited to, the correction of erosion and
sediment control; and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Department of Community Development has
received a formal cancellation notice from Erie Insurance of its intention to cancel the
existing erosion and sediment control bond for "NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM" as of
October 20, 2010, and has mailed a letter to W2 Enterprises, dated September 15,
2010, requiring a response by September 30, 2010, and documentation of steps to
complete their responsibilities or to renew or replace the said bond, but no response
has been received from W2 Enterprises or Erie Insurance as of this date; and
Page 1 of 4
WHEREAS, the Bonding Committee for Roanoke County meeting on September
20, 2010, at the Roanoke County Administration Building considered the documentation
as to the status of this subdivision project and the failure of contacts with W2
Enterprises to secure compliance and renewal of the subject bond and voted to
recommend that the developer be declared in default and that the County take all
necessary actions to collect the outstanding bonded proceeds; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Board of Supervisors on October
12, 2010, to consider the recommendation of the Bonding Committee and to accept
testimony and proposals from W2 Enterprises and Erie Insurance.
NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That W2 Enterprises LLC is legally bound into the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with the Erosion and Sediment
Control Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, for the construction and maintenance of
certain control measures in accordance with the plans for Quail Ridge
Subdivision, Section 8, dated July 27, 2006, and all subsequent revisions thereof
as approved by the County of Roanoke.
2. That W2 Enterprises LLC has failed to substantially complete the erosion and
sediment control facilities and measures as required by the aforesaid Agreement
and that the anticipated cost for completion of said facilities and measures equals
or exceeds the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00}.
3. That Erie Insurance Company has provided the County of Roanoke and W2
Enterprises with a notice of its intention to cancel the existing erosion and
sediment control bond effective October 22, 2010, for non-payment of the annual
premium for this bond by W2 Enterprises LLC.
4. That authorized representatives of Roanoke County have attempted without
success to obtain a response or agreement from W2 Enterprises LLC for the
completion of its legal obligations to the County and the public under the
aforesaid Agreement and for the renewal or adequate replacement of the erosion
and sediment control bond for this project.
5. That the Bonding Committee for Roanoke County has recommended that W2
Page2of4
Enterprises LLC be declared in default under the terms of its Erosion and
Sediment Control Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, and that Roanoke County
exercise its legal rights and responsibilities to obtain the remaining bonded
indebtedness being held for the County's benefit.
6. That W2 Enterprises LLC is hereby determined and declared to be in default for
its failure to substantially and adequately complete the requirements imposed
upon it by the aforesaid Erosion and Sediment Control Agreement.
7. That Erie Insurance Company has executed and entered into Erosion and
Sediment Control Bond No. Q91 7770137 V, executed July 27, 2006, as surety
for W2 Enterprises LLC for Quail Ridge, Section 8, Project Number 00-SB--
00076, on which the remaining balance is Ten Thousand Dollars and No Cents
($10, 000.00).
8. That the officials and staff of Roanoke County are hereby authorized, on behalf
of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to draw upon the
aforesaid Erosion and Sediment Control Bond, dated July 27, 2006, Bond No.
Q91 7770137 V, for all funds secured thereby for the County of Roanoke as
beneficiary and to take all actions, legal or otherwise, to enforce the legal rights
and responsibilities of the Board of Supervisors in connection with the
development of Quail Ridge Subdivision, Section 8, by W2 Enterprises LLC.
9. That the County Administrator, the Director of the Department of Community
Development, his staff and agents, and the Office of the County Attorney, are
hereby authorized to take such action, including the initiation and pursuit of such
legal proceedings, as may be necessary to fully assert and defend the rights and
obligations of Roanoke County in this regard.
10. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from the date of its adoption.
Page 3 of 4
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A QORY TESTE:
Debarah C. Jacks
Deputy Clerk to the oard of Supervisors
cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development Services
Page 4 of 4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
ORDINANCE 101210-4 AMENDING SECTION 30-23-2, NON-
CONFORMING USES OF BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES OR LAND, OF
THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO MODIFY
PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING
NONCONFORMING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN COMMERCIAL OR
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, Section 30-14 of the Roanoke County Code and Section 15.2-2286
of the Code of Virginia provides that whenever the public necessity, convenience,
general welfare, or good zoning practice requires, an amendment to the zoning
regulations or district maps may be initiated by resolution of the governing body; and
WHEREAS, the Board requests this amendment in order to address concerns
with respect to the expansion of an existing residential structure located in a commercial
or industrial zoning district, and to initiate by resolution the procedures to amend these
sections of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on
October 5, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 28, 2010,
and the second reading was held on October 12, 2010.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Section 30-23 be amended to read and provide as follows:
SEC. 30-23. -NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES; GENERALLY.
(A) Within the zoning districts established by this ordinance, or by future
amendments which may later be adopted, or by legitimate and legal actions
Page 1 of 6
taken by the board of supervisors or any other governmental agency, there exist,
or may exist lots, parcels, structures, uses of land and structures, and
characteristics of site design and/or use, which were lawful before this ordinance
was adopted or amended, but which would be prohibited under the terms of this
ordinance, or future amendment. Such structures, uses, and characteristics, or
any combination thereof, are considered nonconformities, and are hereby
declared by the board to be inconsistent with the character of the districts in
which they occur.
(B} Nonconformities are permitted to remain until removed, discontinued, or
changed to conform to the provisions of this ordinance. It is the intent of this
ordinance that the continuance of nonconformities should not be indefinite, and
that the nonconforming uses, structures, or characteristics should gradually be
removed.
(C) Nothing shall be construed to grant conforming status to uses or
structures that existed as legal nonconforming uses prior to the adoption of this
section or amendment thereto, unless such uses and structures now conform to
all applicable provisions of this ordinance.
Sec. 30-23-1. -Nonconformities; Establishment of Vested Rights.
(A} Nothing in this ordinance shall be deemed to require a change in the
plans, construction or designated use of any building on which actual
construction was lawfully begun prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or
amendments thereto, and upon which actual building construction was carried
out diligently. Actual construction is hereby defined to include the placing of
construction materials in permanent position and fastened in a permanent
manner. Where excavation or demolition or removal of an existing building has
begun in preparation for rebuilding, such activities shall be deemed actual
construction provided the work has been carried out diligently.
Sec. 30-23-2. -Nonconforming Uses of Buildings, Structures or Land.
(A} Where, at the effective date of this ordinance, or amendment thereto,
lawful use exists of buildings, structures or land, individually or in combination,
which use is no longer permissible under the terms of this ordinance as enacted
or amended, such use may be continued provided:
1. The use is not discontinued for more than two (2} years, or;
2. The use is not converted or replaced, in whole or in part, by a use
permitted in the district regulations, or;
3. The buildings or structures containing the nonconforming use are
maintained in theirthen structural condition.
Page 2 of 6
(C) No nonconforming use shall be moved in whole or in part to any portion of
the lot or parcel unoccupied by such use at the time of the adoption or
subsequent amendment of this ordinance.
(D) No building or structure not conforming to the requirements of this
ordinance shall be erected in connection with the nonconforming use of land.
(E) Where nonconforming use status applies to a building or structure,
removal of the building or structure shall eliminate the nonconforming status of
the building or structure or land.
(F) Any legally established use which existed prior to the adoption of this
ordinance, or any subsequent amendments, shall not be considered a
nonconforming use where a special use permit is now required for establishment
of such use. The use shall be allowed to continue operation, as well as
reconstruct or structurally alter the building or structure without the necessity of
obtaining a special use permit. However, approval of a special use permit shall
be required, in accordance with Section 30-19, when either of the conditions
below are present, in the opinion of the zoning administrator.
a. There is a ten (10) percent or greater net increase in the square
footage of the use or structure proposed for expansion or enlargement; or
b. The expansion or enlargement will substantially alter the site design
and layout as it relates to circulation, parking or other site characteristics
so as to adversely affect surrounding properties.
c. This section shall not apply to broadcasting towers and associated
antenna allowed by right as set forth in section 30-87-2(B).
(G) A manufactured home park legally established prior to June 1, 1986 that is
not designated with the R-MH overlay district shall be allowed to continue
operation in conformance with the provisions contained in section 30-82-9(L)
provided the use as a park has not been discontinued for a period of more than
two (2) years.
(H) Notwithstanding (A) through (G) above, a nonconforming manufactured
home existing on an individual lot of record that has served as an active dwelling
Page3of6
for at least six (6) months may be replaced with another manufactured home
provided:
(1) The replacement home is installed on the lot within two (2) years of
the removal of the home to be replaced, and;
(2) The replacement home is installed in approximately the same
location on the lot, and is installed to comply with the district setback
regulations for principal structures, and;
(3) The installation of the replacement home complies with the use and
design standards for manufactured homes contained in section 30-82-
5(B).
(I) If anon-conforming residential or commercial building or structure is
damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster or other act of God, such building or
structure may be repaired, rebuilt or replaced to eliminate or reduce the non-
conforming features to the extent possible without the need to obtain a variance.
If such building or structure cannot be repaired, rebuilt or replaced except to
restore it to its original non-conforming condition, then the owner shall have the
right to do so. The owner shall apply for a building permit and any work done to
repair, rebuild or replace such building or structure shall be in compliance with
the Uniform Statewide Building Code and the County's floodplain regulations.
Unless such building or structure is repaired or rebuilt within two years of the
date of the natural disaster or other act of God, such building or structure shall
only be repaired, rebuilt or replaced in accordance with the provisions of this
ordinance. If the non-conforming building is in an area under federal disaster
declaration and it has been damaged or destroyed as of a direct result of
conditions that gave rise to the declaration, then the owner shall have an
additional two years to repair, rebuild or replace the building or structure.
Sec. 30-23-3. -Nonconforming Buildings and Structures.
(A} Where a lawful building or structure exists at the time of passage or
amendment of this ordinance, which could not be built under the terms of this
ordinance by reason of restrictions on area, bulk, lot coverage, height, yards, or
other characteristics of the building or structure, or its location on a lot, such
building or structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful
provided:
1. No building or structure shall be enlarged in any way which
increases or extends its nonconformity.
Page 4 of 6
2. Any building or structure which is moved for any reason or for any
distance, shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the district in which
it is located after it is moved.
Sec. 30-23-4. -Nonconforming Site Designs.
(A) If a zoning permit is requested for any type of modification to an existing
structure or site, no legal non-conforming site design planned, approved and
constructed prior to the adoption of this ordinance shall be required to comply in
full with the provisions of this ordinance. Only those site improvements directly
related to or affected by the modified use, structure or activity shall be required to
comply in full with the provisions of this ordinance.
Sec. 30-23-5. -Nonconforming Lots of Record.
(A~ A lot of record that is nonconforming due to lack of adequate frontage,
width, depth, or area may be developed, provided the development proposed on
the lot is in accordance with the applicable use and design standards contained
in the district regulations.
(B~ Any lot of record that is nonconforming because it has no public street
frontage may be developed, or an existing structure on the lot may be expanded,
provided the county reviews and grants a special use permit for the proposed
development, expansion, and use in accord with the standards and procedures
contained in Section 30-19 of this ordinance. This provision shall not apply to the
use and development of such parcels for any agricultural and forestry use type,
or for single family or two family dwellings.
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A C P TESTE:
Deborah C. Jacks
Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Page 5 of 6
cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John Murphy, Zoning Administrator
Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development
Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development
Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning
William Driver, Director of real Estate Valuation
Page 6 of 6
ACTION N0. A-101210-5.a
ITEM N0. J-2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: October 12, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of designation of voting delegate to the Virginia
Association of Counties (VACo) conference to be held
November 7-9, 2010
SUBMITTED BY: Deborah C. Jacks
Deputy Clerkto the Board
APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman III
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The Board has appointed Richard C. Flora as the voting delegate for the November 7-9,
2010 Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) annual conference. Confirmation of the
appointment was placed on the Consent Agenda.
VOTE:
SupervisorAltizer moved to approve the staff recommendation.
Motion approved.
Yes No Absent
Ms. Moore ~ ^ ^
Mr. Altizer ~ ^ ^
Mr. Flora ~ ^ ^
Mr. Elswick ~ ^ ^
Mr. Church ~ ^ ^
ACTION N0. A-101210-5.b
ITEM N0. J-3
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: October 12, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Request for approval of revised Bylaws forthe Community
Policy and Management Team (CPMT}
SUBMITTED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell
Assistant County Administrator
APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman, III
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The original bylaws for the Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT), the
appointed board that determines appropriate services for eligiblechlldren with behavioral
or intellectual disabilities, were originally approved in 1996. Since then, several changes in
Virginia law have occurred making several references to the Code of Virginia obsolete.
Updating thesecode referencesand updatingthe namesofthestateagencies referenced
make up the majority of the changes to the bylaws. Also, the draft eliminates the CPMT
Board position for Youth Haven II, a County program that was eliminated in the late 1990's.
All of these changes are administrative in nature and does not impact the CPMT decision
making process currently in use.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact from the recommended changes.
RECOMMENDATION
The CPMT Board voted to approve the changes on September 23, 2010, and recommends
that the Board of Supervisors gives final approval. Staff concurs with this recommendation.
Page 1 of 2
VOTE:
SupervisorAltizer moved to approve the staff recommendation.
Motion approved.
Yes No Absent
Ms. Moore ~ ^ ^
Mr. Altizer ~ ^ ^
Mr. Flora ~ ^ ^
Mr. Elswick ~ ^ ^
Mr. Church ~ ^ ^
cc: Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator
Patience O'Brien, Department of Social Services
Page 2 of 2
ACTION N0. A-101210-5.c
ITEM N0. J-4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: October 12, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Appointment of ParentAdvocates to the Community Policy and
Management Team (CPMT}
SUBMITTED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell
Assistant County Administrator
APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman, III
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
According to the bylaws of the Community Policy and Management Team, the Board of
Supervisors may appoint two parent advocates to serve on the CPMT Board. There are
currently two vacancies for these positions for three year terms expiring June 30, 2013.
Staff has discussed two potential candidates with the CPMT Board Members and the
CPMT has recommended their formal appointments be made by the Board of Supervisors.
These are at large appointments.
The recommended parent advocate CPMT appointees are as follows:
Mr. Rob Jesse - Mr. Jesse was raised in the foster home system and he and his wife
currently serve as foster parents. He is an active participant in the regional foster care
training program. He is a resident of Southwest Roanoke County.
Ms. Ann Bohon - Ms. Bohon raised her children in Roanoke County and has been
recommended by Special Education staff in the Roanoke County Public School system .
She serves as the Chair for the Special Education Advisory Board. Ms. Bohon lives
Southwest Roanoke County.
Page 1 of 2
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Rob Jesse and Ann Bohon to serve as Parent Advocate
Representatives on the Roanoke County Community Policy and Management Team for
the unexpired three year terms ending June 30, 2013.
VOTE:
SupervisorAltizer moved to approve the staff recommendation.
Motion approved.
Yes No Absent
Ms. Moore ~ ^ ^
Mr. Altizer ~ ^ ^
Mr. Flora ~ ^ ^
Mr. Elswick ~ ^ ^
Mr. Church ~ ^ ^
cc: Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator
Patience O'Brien, Department of Social Services
Page 2 of 2
ACTION N0. A-101210-5.d
ITEM N0. J-5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
October 12, 2010
Request to appropriate grant funds in the amount of $12,588
to the Clerk of Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of
Virginia received in fiscal 2009/2010 and paid out in fiscal
2010/2011
Steve n A. McGraw
Clerk of Circuit Court
B. Clayton Goodman III
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
This is grant moneygiven to Roanoke Countythrough the Library of Virginia to repairten
old Deed Books and Land Surveyor Books. In order to make these funds available to the
Clerk of Circuit Court, the State revenues must be appropriated and the related
expenditure appropriation made to the Clerk of Circuit Courts Capital Fund set up
specifically for these grant monies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact-100 percent state funds
ALTERNATIVES:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends appropriation of funds in the amount of $12,588.
Page 1 of 2
VOTE:
SupervisorAltizer moved to approve the staff recommendation.
Motion approved.
Yes No Absent
Ms. Moore ~ ^ ^
Mr. Altizer ~ ^ ^
Mr. Flora ~ ^ ^
Mr. Elswick ~ ^ ^
Mr. Church ~ ^ ^
cc: Steven A. McGraw, Clerk of Circuit Court
Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance
Page 2 of 2
ATA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
RESOLUTION 101210-5 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN
ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR
THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J-CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
Thatthe certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for October 12,
2010, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred
in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5
inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of Minutes -September 28, 2010
2. Confirmation of designation of voting delegate to the Virginia Association of
Counties (VACO) conference to be held November 7-9, 2010
3. Request for approval of revised Bylaws for the Community Policy and
Management Team (CPMT)
4. Appointment of Parent Advocates to the Community Policy and Management
Team (CPMT)
5. Request to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $12,588 to the
Clerk of Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of Virginia
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A COY TESTE:
De`~orah C. Jacks
Deputy Clerk to th Board of Supervisors
Page 2 of 2
ATA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2414
RESOLUTION 101210-6 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS
HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a
closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance
with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the
Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was
conducted inconformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, thatthe Board of Supervisorsof Roanoke
County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge:
1. Only public business matters lawfully exempt from open meeting requirements by
Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies,
and
2. Onlysuch public business matters aswere identified inthe motion conveningthe
closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A C~J~Y TESTE:
Deborah C. Jacks (~
Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors