Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/25/2006 - Adopted Board RecordsACTION NO. A-042506-1 ITEM NO. E- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 25, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Request to amend the by-laws of the Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) and appoint Rebecca Owens as the Finance Department representative SUBMITTED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval of the changes to the by-laws and the appointment of Rebecca Owens as the representative from the Finance Department. The new program will be brought back to the Board of Supervisors for approval in a few weeks. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) was started in 1989 to provide a retirement type benefit to Public Safety volunteers as a means of promoting recruitment and retention of the volunteers. The program is managed by the Roanoke County Public Safety Volunteer Benefits Board of Trustees (LOSAP Board of Trustees) which has been comprised of the Chairperson of the Fire Chiefs Board, the Chairperson of the Rescue Chiefs Board, the Roanoke County Risk Manager, a volunteer fire representative, a volunteer rescue representative, and two volunteer representatives at large. Article II Section 9, of the by-laws indicated that Board Members serve a four-year term with no more than two consecutive terms. During the budget deliberations with the Board of Supervisors, the LOSAP Board of Trustees advised that the annual contribution of $200,000 allocated to the LOSAP program was insufficient to cover the program and suggested that the LOSAP program as a retirement program be capped as of December 31, 2005, and that a new benefit program be established beginning 2006. Also, there are four members of the Board of Trustees whose terms expired on January 1, 2006, but continue to serve until their replacements have been appointed by the Board of Supervisors. These four members include Leon Martin, Volunteer Member at Large; Mike Gee, Volunteer Fire; Craig Sheets, Volunteer Rescue Squad; and Brian Garber, Volunteer Member at Large. Leon Martin and Mike Gee are completing their second four-year term and would normally not be eligible for re -appointment. Due to the capping of the retirement program and the establishment of the new program, it is respectfully requested that the by-laws for the LOSAP program be revised so that the two consecutive term limit be eliminated so that there will be a smooth transition between the two programs. It is further recommended that a member of the Roanoke County Finance Department (Rebecca Owens) be appointed as a member of the Board of Trustees to assist in managing the financial aspects of the program. The attached copy of the constitution and by-laws incorporates the following changes for approval by the Board of Supervisors: Article II, Section 1 Adds the phrase "a member of Roanoke County Finance Department" which will allow this person to sit on the Board of Trustees. Article II, Section 9 Removes the phrase "with no more than two consecutive terms." This change will allow the re -appointment of the members who have served two terms already and will allow them to assist in transitioning from the LOSAP retirement program and to establish the new reward program. Any appointment to the LOSAP Board of Trustees will continue to come to the Board of Supervisors for approval, but will not carry the two -term limit. Article II, Section 10 Adds the phrase "the member of the Roanoke County Finance Department" to the list of the members previously exempted from term limits because their appointment is based on other status such as Chief of the Fire Chiefs Board, etc. The request to approve the amendment below was added at the meeting by Mr. Chambliss. Article III, Section 3 Adds the sentence "In the event of a tie, the Chairperson will serve as the tie breaking vote." With the addition of the member of the Roanoke County Finance Department to the Board, there will now be an even number of members and this gives the Chairperson the ability to vote in the event of a tie. These changes have been endorsed by the Volunteer Fire Chiefs Board, Volunteer Rescue Chiefs Board, and the LOSAP Board of Trustees. This action of revising the By- laws is desired to allow the appointment of the nominees for the LOSAP Board of Trustees listed on the agenda of the Board of Supervisors today. 2 FISCAL IMPACT: This change to the by-laws does not constitute a fiscal impact. The contribution to the LOSAP program is included in the budget. The new program will be defined and returned to the Board of Supervisors for approval and funding in the budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the changes to the LOSAP by-laws so that the appointments may be made to the LOSAP Board of Trustees. In addition, staff recommends that Rebecca Owens be appointed as the representative from the Finance Department. Once the new program is designed, it will be returned to the Board of Supervisors for approval and funding. VOTE: Supervisor Church motion to approve staff recommendation. Motion Approved cc: File John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Rick Burch, Chief, Fire & Rescue 3 Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Church ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Wray ® ❑ ❑ cc: File John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Rick Burch, Chief, Fire & Rescue 3 ROANOKE COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY VOLUNTEER BENEFITS BOARD OF TRUSTEES CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS ARTICLE I TITLE AND OBJECTIVES Section 1 This group shall be known as the Roanoke County Public Safety Volunteer Benefits Board of Trustees (hereafter referred to as LOSAP Board of Trustees). Section 2 Its objective is to be the ultimate authority on management, policy making decisions and eligibility in the benefits program. ARTICLE II BOARD MEMBERS Section 1 The LOSAP Board of Trustees shall consist of the Chairperson of the Fire Chiefs Board, the Chairperson of the Rescue Chiefs Board, the Roanoke County Risk Manager, a member of Roanoke County Finance Department, a volunteer fire representative, a volunteer rescue representative, and two volunteer representatives at large. Section 2 The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson are voted into office by the Board of Trustees. Section 3 The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be elected in January of each year. Section 4 The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall serve the board from the time of election until time of the next election. Section 5 In the event of death, resignation or removal from office, the vacant office shall be filled at the next regular business meeting by a simple majority of board members present. Section 6 In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice -Chairperson will preside over the meeting. Section 7 The secretary for the board shall be the Volunteer Coordinator. Section 8 Board liaisons shall be requested to serve by the Board of Trustees. Section 9 Board Members will serve a four-year term Section 10 The Roanoke County Risk Manager, Member of the Roanoke County Finance Department, Chairperson of the Fire Chiefs Board, Chairperson of the Rescue Chiefs Board, the Volunteer Coordinator and the board liaisons shall be exempt from term limits and their term indefinite through the duration of their position. Section 11 All new board members, with the exception of board liaisons and the Volunteer Coordinator, shall be confirmed by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at a regular business meeting. Section 12 If, after expiration of a term, a position on the board is unable to be filled by a new member, the said existing board member will continue to serve until the new member is appointed and confirmed by Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. Section 13 A representative of the Fire Chiefs Board and a representative of the Rescue Chiefs Board shall be allowed to attend Board of Trustee meetings in the absence of the Chairperson of the Fire Chiefs Board or in the absence of the Chairperson of the Rescue Chiefs Board. ARTICLE III DUTIES Section 1 The chairperson shall preside over meetings. Section 2 The Vice -Chairperson shall act in the absence of the chairperson by assuming all the chairperson's duties. Section 3 All members of the Board of Trustees shall be voting members, with the exception of board liaisons, the Volunteer Coordinator, and representatives of the Fire and Rescue Chiefs Board, should they attend a meeting. In the event of a tie, the Chairperson will serve as the tie breaking vote. Section 4 Board liaisons shall serve as advisors to the Board of Trustees. ARTICLE IV MEETING RULES Section 1 Meetings will be held on the third Thursday of every month at 1900 hours. Section 2 A quorum shall consist of the voting members present. ARTICLE V ELECTION PROCEDURES Section 1 Elections shall be held in January of each year. Section 2 The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson are voted into office by the Board of Trustees. ARTICLE VI BY-LAWS Section 1 No alterations or amendment shall be made to this constitution and by-laws unless prepared in writing and presented at regular meeting. Section 2 The amendment, revision, or alteration shall be reviewed by the Board of Trustees. Section 3 The Board of Trustees shall read the amendment, revision, or alteration at two consecutive regular business meetings before votes are cast. Section 4 An amendment, revision, or alteration shall be acted upon and adopted or rejected by a majority vote of the voting members present at a regular business meeting. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 RESOLUTION 042506-2 OF SUPPORT FOR A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION FOR PARK IMPROVEMENTS AT WHISPERING PINES PARK (CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT) WHEREAS, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), provides funds to assist political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia in acquiring and developing open space and park lands; and WHEREAS, there are urgent needs within Roanoke County to develop park land; and WHEREAS, this area is deemed a development priority by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and shall be referred to as Whispering Pines Park; and WHEREAS, in order to obtain funding assistance from DCR, it is necessary that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors guarantee that a proportionate share of the cost thereof is available. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Roanoke County Board of Supervisors that the County Administrator is hereby authorized to cause such information or materials as may be necessary to be provided to the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) and to enter into such agreements as may be necessary to permit the formulation, approval and funding of the Whispering Pines Park Project. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors give its assurances that the funds needed as the proportionate share of the cost of the approved program will be provided, up to $100,000. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors gives assurances that the General Provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (L&WCF) and the Virginia Outdoor Fund Fiscal Procedures will be complied with in the administration of this project. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will operate and maintain the public recreation facility in good condition and will provide permanent project acknowledgement signs of the participating funding agencies and that this signage will clearly state that the said facility is a "public" recreational facility. I AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors shall dedicate the metes and bounds of the Whispering Pines Park properties, in perpetuity, for public outdoor recreational purposes in accordance with the Land and Water Conservation Fund (L&WCF) Act. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors gives its assurance that all other applicable federal and state regulations governing such expenditure of funds will be complied with in the administration, development, and subsequent operation of Whispering Pines Park. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Department of Conservation and Recreation is respectfully requested to assist in approval and funding of the Whispering Pines Park Project in order to enhance the standard of public recreational enjoyment for all our citizenry. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holtdfi, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Pete Haislip, Director, Parks, Recreation, & Tourism Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 042506-2 adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, April 25, 2006. Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk 61 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 RESOLUTION 042506-3 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: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for April 25, 2006, 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 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes —April 11, 2006 2. Ratification and confirmation of appointments to the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors and the Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire and Rescue 3. Request to adopt resolution amending and readopting guidelines for the implementation of the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 4. Request from the schools to accept and appropriate funds totaling $20,000 for grant funds and contributions 5. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $4,500 from two Division of Motor Vehicle mini -grants 6. Request from the Information Technology Department to receive and appropriate reimbursement in the amount of $6,657.60 for time/resources committed as part of the 800MHz Rebanding project 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Dr. Lorraine Lange, Acting School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Lt. David McMillan, Grant Coordinator Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology K j . . % ACTION NO. A -042506-3.a ITEM NO. J-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 25, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Ratification and confirmation of appointments to the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors and Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire and Rescue SUBMITTED BY: Diane S. Childers, CMC Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors Mr. S. James Sikkema, Executive Director, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, has advised that at their meeting on April 6, 2006, the Board voted unanimously to nominate Daniel E. Karnes to complete the three-year term of John Hudgins, member at -large who has resigned. The unexpired term that Mr. Karnes will complete will expire on December 31, 2006; and his first three-year term will begin January 1, 2007 and expire December 31, 2009. Mr. Sikkema has requested that the County ratify the appointment of Mr. Karnes since the member at -large appointments must be ratified by the County, the City of Roanoke and the City of Salem. Ratification of Mr. Karnes' appointment has been placed on the consent agenda. 1. Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire and Rescue The following four-year terms expired on January 1, 2006: (1) Leon Martin, Volunteer Member at Large; (2) Mike Gee, Volunteer Fire; (3) Craig Sheets, Volunteer Rescue Squad; and (4) Brian Garber, Volunteer Member at Large. The Volunteer Fire and Rescue Chiefs Board has recommended that each of these representatives be re- appointed for an additional four-year term that will expire on January 1, 2010. Confirmation of these appointments has been placed on the consent agenda. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved cc: File Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare File Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire and Rescue File E Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Church ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Wray ® ❑ ❑ cc: File Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare File Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire and Rescue File E AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 RESOLUTION 042506-3.b AMENDING AND READOPTING GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PUBLIC- PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2002 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County determined that it is in the best interest of the County to adopt procedures for the implementation of the Public - Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 pursuant to the provisions of Section 56-575.16.4 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2003, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Resolution 051303-4 which adopted procedures for the implementation of the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the best interests of the County to amend these previously adopted procedures to incorporate recent amendments to the Code of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby adopts the attached Guidelines for the Implementation of the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 as amended. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /��Q A",-, Brenda J. Ho ton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Attorney Pat Chockley, Purchasing 2 I. Introduction The Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002, as amended, (the "PPEA") allows responsible public entities to create public-private partnerships for development of a wide range of projects for public use if the public entities determine there is a need for the project and that private involvement may provide the project to the public in a timely and cost- effective fashion. For purposes of the PPEA, the County of Roanoke is a "responsible public entity" that "has the power to develop or operate the applicable qualifying project." Individually negotiated comprehensive agreements between a private entity and the County will define the respective rights and obligations of the parties. This document sets forth the procedures to guide the private partner(s) and the County in the application of PPEA. The approval of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County is required for the County to enter into a comprehensive agreement pursuant to the PPEA. In order for a project to be considered under the PPEA, it must meet the definition of a "qualifying project." The PPEA contains a broad definition of "qualifying project" that includes public buildings and facilities of all types; for example: (i) An education facility, including, but not limited to, a school building, any functionally -related and subordinate facility and land to a school building (including a stadium or other facility primarily used for school events), and any depreciable property provided for use in a school facility that is operated as part of the public school system or as an institution of higher education; (ii) Any building or facility that meets a public purpose and is developed or operated by or for any public entity; (iii) Improvements, together with equipment, necessary to enhance public safety and security of buildings to be principally used by a public entity; (iv) Utility, telecommunications and other communications infrastructure; (v) Technology infrastructure, including, but not limited to, telecommunications, automated data processing, word processing and management information systems, and related information, equipment, goods and services (vi) Any improvements necessary or desirable to any unimproved County owned real estate; or (vii) A recreational facility; and (viii) Certain service contracts. The PPEA establishes requirements that the County shall adhere to when considering proposals received pursuant to the PPEA. The County Administrator may receive and consider proposals in strict accord with the procedures specified in this document. In addition, the PPEA 3 specifies the criteria that must be used to select a proposal and the contents of the comprehensive agreement detailing the relationship between the County and the private entity. II. General Provisions A. Proposal Submission A proposal may be either solicited by the County or delivered by a private entity on an unsolicited basis. Private entity proposers will be required to follow a two-part proposal submission process consisting of an initial conceptual phase (Part 1) and a detailed phase (Part 2). The initial phase of the proposal should contain specified information on proposer qualifications and experience, project characteristics, project financing, anticipated public support or opposition, or both, and project benefit and compatibility. The Part 2 detailed proposal must contain specified deliverables. The PPEA allows private entities to include innovative financing methods, such as the imposition of user fees or service payments, in a proposal. Such financing arrangements may include the issuance of debt instruments, equity or other securities or obligations, including, if applicable, the portion of the tax-exempt private activity bond limitation amount to be allocated annually to the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to the federal Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 for the development of education facilities using public- private partnerships, and to provide for carryovers of any unused limitation amount. Proposals should be prepared simply and economically, providing a concise description of the proposer's capabilities to complete the proposed qualifying project and the benefits to be derived from the project by the public. Project benefits to be considered are those occurring during the construction, renovation, expansion or improvement phase and during the life cycle of the project. Proposals also should include a scope of work and a financial plan for the project, which contains enough detail to allow an analysis by the County of the financial feasibility of the proposed project. For specific applications, the County may request, in writing, clarification to the submission. The PPEA is intended to encourage proposals from the private sector that offer the provision of private financing in support of the proposed public project and the assumption of commensurate risk by the private entity, but also benefits to the private entity through innovative approaches to project financing, development and use. However, while substantial private sector involvement is encouraged, qualifying facilities will still be devoted primarily to public use and typically involve facilities critical to the public health, safety and welfare. Accordingly, the County shall continue to exercise full and proper due diligence in the evaluation and selection of operators for these projects. In this regard, the qualifications, capabilities, resources and other attributes of a prospective operator and its whole team should be carefully examined for every project. In addition, private entities proposing projects shall be held strictly accountable for representations or other information provided regarding their qualifications, experience or other contents of their proposals, including all specific aspects of proposed plans to be performed by the operator. 0 B. Affected Local Jurisdictions Any private entity requesting approval from, or submitting a conceptual or detailed proposal to, the County must provide other affected units of local government with a copy of the private entity's request or proposal by certified mail, express delivery or hand delivery, after the County determines whether to accept such proposal. Affected local jurisdictions shall have 60 days from the receipt of the request or proposal to submit written comments to the County at either or both the conceptual and detailed phases. Comments received within the 60 -day period shall be considered in evaluating the request or proposal; however no negative inference shall be drawn from the absence of comment by an affected local jurisdiction. C. Proposal Review Fee No fee will be charged by the County to process, review or evaluate any solicited proposal submitted under the PPEA, other than what are considered reasonable and incidental permit, utility, and related fees during the construction stage of the project. The County shall receive an analysis of the proposal from County staff or outside advisors or consultants with relevant experience in determining whether to enter into an agreement with the private entity. The County shall charge a fee of one-half of one percent (0.5%), not to exceed $50,000, of the estimated present value cost to the County of the proposal, but not less than $5,000, to cover the costs of processing, reviewing, and evaluating any unsolicited, Part 1 proposal or competing unsolicited Part 1 proposal submitted under the PPEA, including a fee to cover the costs of outside attorneys, consultants and financial advisors. This fee shall not be greater than the direct costs associated with evaluating the proposed qualifying project. "Direct costs" include (i) the cost of staff time required to process, evaluate, review, and respond to the proposal, and (ii) the out-of-pocket costs of attorneys, consultants, and financial advisors. For purposes of initial processing of the proposal, the County shall accept the $5,000 minimum fee with the balance due and payable prior to the proposals proceeding beyond the initial review stage. Such sums shall be paid with certified funds, and shall be deposited with the Treasurer of Roanoke County in a special fund known as the PPEA Fund. The fund shall be established for such purpose, and deposits to the fund shall be apportioned to defray the direct cost of proposal review(s). ■ If the cost of reviewing the proposal is less than the established proposal fee, the County may refund to the proposer the excess fee. ■ If during the initial review the County decides not to proceed to publication and conceptual -phase review of an unsolicited proposal, the proposal fee, less any direct (itemized) costs of the initial review, shall be refunded to the private entity. ■ If the County chooses to proceed with evaluation of proposal(s) under the PPEA, it shall not do so until the entire, non-refundable proposal fee has been paid to the County in full. D. Freedom of Information Act Generally, proposal documents submitted by private entities are subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"). In accordance with § 2.2-3705.6 of the Code, such 5 documents may be released if requested, except to the extent that they relate to (i) confidential proprietary information submitted to the County under a promise of confidentiality or (ii) memoranda, working papers or other records related to proposals if making public such records would adversely affect the financial interest of the Commonwealth or the private entity or the bargaining position of either parry. Subsection 56-575.4 G of the PPEA imposes an obligation on the County to protect confidential proprietary information submitted by a private entity or operator. When the private entity requests that the County not disclose information, the private entity must (i) invoke the exclusion when the data or materials are submitted to the County or before such submission, (ii) identify the data and materials for which protection from disclosure is sought, and (iii) state why the exclusion from disclosure is necessary. A private entity may request and receive a determination from the County as to the anticipated scope of protection prior to submitting the proposal. The County is authorized and obligated to protect only confidential proprietary information, and thus will not protect any portion of a proposal from disclosure if the entire proposal has been designated confidential by the proposer without reasonably differentiating between the proprietary and non-proprietary information contained therein. Upon receipt of a request that designated portions of a proposal be protected from disclosure as confidential and proprietary, the County shall determine whether such protection is appropriate under applicable law and, if appropriate, the scope of such appropriate protection, and shall communicate its determination to the proposer. If the determination regarding protection or the scope thereof differs from the proposer's request, then the County will accord the proposer a reasonable opportunity to clarify and justify its request. Upon a final determination by the County to accord less protection than requested by the proposer, the proposer will be accorded an opportunity to withdraw its proposal. A proposal so withdrawn should be treated in the same manner as a proposal not accepted for publication and conceptual - phase consideration as provided in section IV.A.2 below. E. Applicability of Other Laws The applicability of the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the "VPPA") is as set forth in the PPEA. In soliciting or entertaining proposals under the PPEA, the County shall also comply with all applicable federal laws and applicable state and local laws not in conflict with the PPEA. Likewise, in submitting proposals and in developing, executing or operating facilities under the PPEA, private entities shall comply will all applicable federal laws and applicable state and local laws. Such laws may include, but not necessarily be limited to, contractual obligations which require Workers Compensation insurance coverage, performance bonds or payment bonds from approved sureties, compliance with the Virginia Prompt Payment Act, compliance with the Ethics in Public Contracting Act and compliance with environmental laws, workplace safety laws, and state or local laws governing contractor or trade licensing, building codes and building permit requirements. Expenditure of County funds in support of a comprehensive agreement requires an appropriation in the County budget or other appropriation(s). The PPEA process should not be used to create County -supported debt. Comprehensive agreements involving any form of County -supported debt, require specific, project -level approval by the Board of Supervisors. III. Solicited Proposals With the written authorization of the County Administrator a Request for Proposals (RFPs) or an invitation for competitive sealed bids may be issued, inviting proposals from private entities to develop or operate qualifying projects or to design or equip projects so constructed, improved renovated, expanded, maintained or operated. The County shall use a two- part proposal process consisting of an initial conceptual phase (Part 1) and a detailed phase (Part 2). The RFP shall invite proposers to submit proposals on individual projects identified by the County. In such a case the County shall set forth in the RFP the format and supporting information that is required to be submitted, consistent with the provisions of the PPEA. The RFP should specify, but not necessarily be limited to, information and documents that must accompany each proposal and the factors that will be used in evaluating the submitted proposals. The RFP shall be posted on the County's electronic procurement website. Notices shall also be published in the Roanoke Times and World News, a newspaper of general circulation. Pre -proposal conferences may be held as deemed appropriate by the County. Any proposal submitted pursuant to the PPEA that is not received in response to a RFP or invitation for sealed bids shall be an Unsolicited Proposal under these procedures, including but not limited to (a) proposals received in response to a notice of the prior receipt of another Unsolicited Proposal, and (b) proposals received in response to publicity by the County concerning particular needs when the County has not issued RFP or invitation for sealed bids, even if the County has encouraged the submission of proposals. IV. Unsolicited Proposals The PPEA permits the County to receive, evaluate and select for negotiations unsolicited proposals from private entities to develop or operate a qualifying project. From time to time the County may publicize its needs and may encourage interested parties to submit unsolicited proposals subject to the terms and conditions of the PPEA. When such proposals are received without issuance of an RFP, the proposal shall be treated as an unsolicited proposal. Unsolicited proposals should be submitted to the County Administrator by delivering six complete copies, together with the required review fee. A working group may be designated by the County Administrator to review and evaluate all unsolicited proposals. A Decision to Accept and Consider Unsolicited Proposal; Notice 1. The County reserves the right to reject any and all proposals at any time. 2. Upon receipt of any unsolicited proposal, or group of proposals, and payment of the required fee by the proposer or proposers, the County should determine 7 whether to accept the unsolicited proposal for publication and conceptual -phase consideration. If the County determines not to accept the proposal, it shall return the proposal, together with all fees and accompanying documentation, to the proposer. 3. a. If the County chooses to accept an unsolicited proposal for conceptual -phase consideration, it shall post a notice on the County's electronic procurement website, and in such other public area(s) as may be regularly used for posting of public notices, for a period of not less than 45 days. The County shall also publish, at least once, the same notice in the Roanoke Times and World News, a newspaper of general circulation in the County, providing notice of pending or potential action in not less than 45 days. In addition the notice shall also be advertised in Virginia Business Opportunities and on the Commonwealth's electronic procurement website. At least one copy of the proposals shall be made available for public inspection. The County may provide for more than 45 days in situations where the scope or complexity of the original proposal warrants additional time for potential competitors to prepare proposals. b. The notice shall state that the County (i) has received and accepted an unsolicited proposal under the PPEA, (ii) intends to evaluate the proposal, (iii) may negotiate a comprehensive agreement with the proposer based on the proposal, and (iv) will accept for simultaneous consideration any competing proposals that comply with the procedures adopted by the County and the provisions of the PPEA. The notice will summarize the proposed qualifying project or projects, and identify their proposed locations. Copies of unsolicited proposals shall be available upon request, subject to the provisions of FOIA and § 56-575.4 G of the PPEA. C. Prior to posting of the notices provided for in this subsection the County shall receive from the private partner or partners the balance due, if any, of the required project proposal review fee. d. In addition to the posting requirements in sub -section a., for thirty (30) days prior to entering into a comprehensive agreement, the County shall provide an opportunity for public comment on the proposals. This public comment period may include a public hearing in the sole discretion of the Board of Supervisors. At the end of the public comment period, no additional posting shall be required. B. Initial Review by the County at the Conceptual Stage (Part 1) After reviewing the original proposal, and any competing proposals submitted during the notice period, the County Administrator may recommend to the Board of Supervisors: (i) not to proceed further with any proposal, (ii) to proceed to the detailed (Part 2) phase of review with the original proposal, (iii) to proceed to the detailed (Part 2) phase with a competing proposal, or (iv) to proceed to the detailed (Part 2) phase with multiple proposals. 0 In the event that more than one proposal will be considered in the detailed (Part 2) phase of review, the County Administrator shall recommend to the Board of Supervisors whether the unsuccessful private entity, or entities, shall be reimbursed, in whole or in part, for costs incurred in the detailed phase of review. In such case reasonable costs may be assessed to the successful proposer as part of any ensuing comprehensive agreement. V. Review of Solicited and Unsolicited Proposals 1. Only proposals complying with the requirements of the PPEA that contain sufficient information for a meaningful evaluation and that are provided in an appropriate format will be considered by the County for further review at the conceptual stage. Formatting suggestions for proposals at the conceptual stage are found at Section VI A. 2. The Board of Supervisors will determine at the initial review stage whether it will proceed using: a. Standard procurement procedures consistent with the VPPA; or b. Procedures developed that are consistent with procurement of "other than professional services" through "competitive negotiation" as the term is defined in § 2.2-4301 of the Code of Virginia (competitive negotiation). The Board of Supervisors may proceed using such procedures only if it makes a written determination that doing so is likely to be advantageous to the County and the public based upon either (i) the probable scope, complexity or priority of project, or (ii) the risk sharing including guaranteed cost or completion guarantees, added value or debt or equity investments proposed by the private entity; or (iii) increase in funding, dedicated revenue source or other economic benefit from the project that would otherwise not be available. When the County elects to use competitive negotiations, its written determination should consider factors such as risk sharing, added value and/or economic benefits from the project that would not be available without competitive negotiation. In addition, the written determination should explain how the scope, complexity, and/or priority of the project are such that competitive negotiation is determined necessary. The Board of Supervisors has determined that the analysis of a request by a private entity for approval of a qualifying project shall be performed by County employees. The Board reserves the right to engage the services of qualified professionals to provide it with an independent analysis of any proposal. The costs of such analysis shall be recovered from the Proposal Review Fee, Section II C. 9 V1 Proposal Preparation and Submission A Format for Submissions at Conceptual Stage (Part 1) The County requires that proposals at the conceptual stage contain information in the following areas: (i) qualifications and experience, (ii) project characteristics, (iii) project financing, (iv) anticipated public support or opposition, or both, (v) project benefit and compatibility and (vi) such additional information as may seem prudent which is not inconsistent with the requirements of the PPEA. Suggestions for formatting information to be included in proposals at the Conceptual Stage include: 1. Oualification and Experience a. Identify the legal structure of the firm or consortium of firms making the proposal. Identify the organizational structure for the project, the management approach and how each partner and major subcontractor ($100,000 or more) in the structure fits into the overall team. All members of the private entity/offeror's team, including major subcontractors known to the proposer must be identified at the time a proposal is submitted for the Conceptual Stage. Identified team members, including major subcontractors (over $500,000), may not be substituted or replaced once a project is approved and comprehensive agreement entered into, without the written approval of the County. Include the status of the Virginia license of each partner, proposer, contractor, and major subcontractor. b. Describe the experience of the firm or consortium of firms making the proposal and the key principals involved in the proposed project including experience with projects of comparable size and complexity. Describe the length of time in business, business experience, public sector experience and other engagements of the firm or consortium of firms. Describe the past safety performance record and current safety capabilities of the firm or consortium of firms. Describe the past technical performance history on recent projects of comparable size and complexity, including disclosure of any legal claims and litigation, of the firm or consortium of firms. Include the identity of any firms that will provide design, construction and completion guarantees and warranties and a description of such guarantees and warranties. C. For each firm or major subcontractor ($100,000 or more) that will be utilized in the project, provide a statement listing all of the firm's prior projects and clients for the past 3 years and contact information for same (names/addresses /telephone numbers). If a firm has worked on more than ten (10) projects during this period, it may limit its prior project list to ten (10), but shall first include all projects similar in scope and size to the proposed project and, second, it shall include as many of its most recent projects as possible. Each firm or major subcontractor shall be required to submit all performance evaluation reports or other documents which are in its possession evaluating the firm's performance during the 10 preceding three years in terms of cost, quality, schedule maintenance, safety and other matters relevant to the successful project development, operation, and completion. d. Provide the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of persons within the firm or consortium of firms who may be contacted for further information. Provide a current or most recently audited financial statement of the firm or firms and each partner with an equity interest of twenty percent or greater. £ Identify any persons known to the proposer who would be obligated to disqualify themselves from participation in any transaction arising from or in connection to the project pursuant to The Virginia State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act, Chapter 31 (§ 2.2-3100 et seq.) of Title 2.2. g. Identify proposed plan for obtaining sufficient numbers of qualified workers in all trades or crafts required for the project. h. Provide information on any training programs, including but not limited to apprenticeship programs registered with the U.S. Department of Labor or a State Apprenticeship Council, in place for employees of the firm and employees of any member of a consortium of firms. Provide information on the level of commitment by the firm or consortium of firms to use Department of Minority Business Enterprise firms in developing and implementing the project. j. For each firm or major subcontractor that will perform construction and/or design activities, provide the following information: (1) A sworn certification by an authorized representative of the firm attesting to the fact that the firm is not currently debarred or suspended by any federal, state or local government entity. (2) A completed qualification statement that reviews all relevant information regarding technical qualifications and capabilities, firm resources and business integrity of the firm, including but not limited to, bonding capacities, insurance coverage and firm equipment. This statement shall also include a mandatory disclosure by the firm for the past three years any of the following conduct: (A) bankruptcy filings (B) liquidated damages (C) fines, assessments or penalties (D) judgments or awards in contract disputes (E) contract defaults, contract terminations (F) license revocations, suspensions, other disciplinary actions 11 (G) prior debarments or suspensions by a governmental entity (H) denials of prequalification, findings of non -responsibility (I) safety past performance data, including fatality incidents, "Experience Modification Rating," "Total Recordable Injury Rate" and "Total Lost Workday Incidence Rate" (J) violations of any federal, state or local criminal or civil law (K) criminal indictments or investigations (L) legal claims filed by or against the firm k. Worker Safety Prop, ams: Describe worker safety training programs, job -site safety programs, accident prevention programs, written safety and health plans, including incident investigation and reporting procedures. 2. Project Characteristics a. Provide a description of the project, including the conceptual design. Describe the proposed project in sufficient detail so that type and intent of the project, the location, and the communities that may be affected are clearly identified. b. Identify and fully describe any work to be performed by the public entity. C. Include a list of all federal, state and local permits and approvals required for the project and a schedule for obtaining such permits and approvals. d. Identify any anticipated adverse social, economic and environmental impacts of the project. Specify the strategies or actions to mitigate known impacts of the project. Indicate if an environmental and archaeological assessment have been completed. e. Identify the projected positive social, economic and environmental impacts of the proj ect. f. Identify the proposed schedule for the work on the project, including the estimated time for completion. g. Identify contingency plans for addressing public needs in the event that all or some of the project is not completed according to projected schedule. h. Propose allocation of risk and liability for work completed beyond the agreement's completion date, and assurances for timely completion of the project. i. State assumptions related to ownership, legal liability, law enforcement and operation of the project and the existence of any restrictions on the County's use of the project. 12 j. Provide information relative to phased or partial openings of the proposed project prior to completion of the entire work. 3. Project Financing a. Provide a preliminary estimate and estimating methodology of the cost of the work by phase, segment, or both. b. Submit a plan for the development, financing and operation of the project showing the anticipated schedule on which funds will be required. Describe the anticipated costs of and proposed sources and uses for such funds. Include any supporting due diligence studies, analyses or reports. C. Include a list and discussion of assumptions underlying all major elements of the plan. d. Identify the proposed risk factors and methods for dealing with these factors. e. Identify any local, state or federal resources that the proposer contemplates requesting for the project. Describe the total commitment, if any, expected from governmental sources and the timing of any anticipated commitment. 4 Project Benefit and Compatibility a. Identify community benefits, including the economic impact the project will have on the County and local community in terms of amount of tax revenue to be generated for the Commonwealth and the County, the number jobs generated for Virginia residents and level of pay and fringe benefits of such jobs, the training opportunities for apprenticeships and other training programs generated by the project and the number and value of subcontracts generated for Virginia subcontractors. b. Identify any anticipated public support or opposition, as well as any anticipated government support or opposition, for the project; c. Explain the strategy and plan that will be carried out to involve and inform the general public, business community, local governments, and governmental agencies in areas affected by the project; d. Describe the compatibility of the project with local, regional, and state economic development efforts. e. Describe the compatibility with the County's comprehensive plan, zoning ordinances, local infrastructure development plans, capital improvements budget and annual budget. 13 B Format for Submissions at Detailed Stage (Part 2) If the County decides to proceed to the detailed phase of review with one or more proposals, the following information, where applicable, shall be provided by the private entity unless a waiver of the requirement or requirements is agreed to by the County: 1. A topographical map (1:2,000 or other appropriate scale) depicting the location of the proposed qualifying project; 2. Conceptual site plan indicating proposed location and configuration of the project on the proposed site; 3. Conceptual (single line) plans and elevations depicting the general scope, appearance and configuration of the proposed project; 4. Detailed description of the proposed participation, use and financial involvement of the County in the project; 5. A list of public utility facilities, if any, that will be crossed by the qualifying project and a statement of the plans of the proposer to accommodate such crossings; 6. A statement and strategy setting out the plans for securing all necessary property. ; 7. A detailed listing of all firms that will provide specific design, construction and completion guarantees and warranties, and a brief description of such guarantees and warranties; 8. A total life -cycle cost specifying methodology and assumptions of the project or projects and the proposed project start date. Include anticipated commitment of all parties; equity, debt, and other financing mechanisms; and a schedule of project revenues and project costs. The life -cycle cost analysis should include, but not be limited to, a detailed analysis of the projected return, rate of return, or both, expected useful life of facility and estimated annual operating expenses. 9. A detailed discussion of assumptions about user fees or rates, and usage of the proj ects. 10. Identification of any known government support or opposition, or general public support or opposition for the project. Government or public support should be demonstrated through resolution of official bodies, minutes of meetings, letters, or other official communications. 11. Demonstration of consistency with the County's comprehensive or infrastructure development plans or indication of the steps required for acceptance into such plans. 14 12. Explanation of how the proposed project would impact local development plans of each affected local jurisdiction. 13. Description of an ongoing performance evaluation system or database to track key performance criteria, including but not limited to, schedule, cash management, quality, worker safety, change orders, and legal compliance. 14. Identification of any known conflicts of interest or other disabilities that may impact the County's consideration of the proposal, including the identification of any persons known to the proposer who would be obligated to disqualify themselves from participation in any transaction arising from or in connection to the project pursuant to The Virginia State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act, Chapter 31 (§ 2.2-3100 et seq.) of Title 2.2. 15. Detailed analysis of the financial feasibility of the proposed project, including its impact on similar facilities operated or planned by the County. Include a detailed description of any financing plan for the project, a comparison of that plan with financing alternatives available to the County, and all underlying data supporting any conclusions reached in the analysis of the selection by the private entity of the financing plan proposed for the project; 16. Additional material and information as the County may reasonably request. VII. Proposal Evaluation and Selection Criteria Some or all of the following items may be considered in the evaluation and selection of PPEA proposals. In selecting proposals, all relevant information from both the Conceptual Stage and the Detailed Stage should be considered. The County reserves the right at all times to reject any proposal at anytime for any reason. A. Qualifications and Experience Factors to be considered in either phase of an agency or institution's review to determine whether the proposer possesses the requisite qualifications and experience may include, but are not necessarily limited to: Experience, training and preparation with similar projects; 2. Demonstration of ability to perform work; Demonstrated record of successful past performance, including timeliness of project delivery, compliance with plans and specifications, quality of workmanship, cost -control, claims and litigation history, and project safety; 15 4. Demonstrated conformance with applicable laws, codes, standards, regulations, and agreements on past projects; 5. Leadership structure; 6. Project manager's experience; 7. Management approach; 8. Project staffing plans, the skill levels of the proposed workforce, apprenticeship and other training programs offered for the project, and the proposed safety plans for the project; 9. Financial condition; and 10. Project ownership. B. Proiect Characteristics Factors to be considered in determining the project characteristics may include, but are not limited to: 1. Project definition; 2. Proposed project schedule; 3. Operation of the project; 4. Technology, technical feasibility; 5. Conformity to laws, regulations, and standards; 6. Environmental impacts; 7. Condemnation impacts; 8. State and local permits; and 9. Maintenance of the project. C. Proiect Financing Factors to be considered in determining whether the proposed project financing allows adequate access to the necessary capital to finance the project may include, but are not limited to: 16 I . Cost and cost benefit to the County; 2. Financing and the impact on the debt or debt burden of the County; 3. Financial plan, including overall feasibility and reliability of plan; operator's past performance with similar plans and similar projects; degree to which operator has conducted due diligence investigation and analysis of proposed financial plan and results of any such inquiries or studies. 4. Estimated cost; and 5. Life -cycle cost analysis; and 6. Identity of any third parry that will provide financing for the project and the nature and time of its commitment. D Proiect Benefit and Compatibility Factors to be considered in determining the proposed project's compatibility with the County's comprehensive or development plans and zoning ordinance include: 1. Community benefits, including the economic impact the project will have on the County and local community in terms of amount of tax revenue to be generated for the Commonwealth and the County, the number jobs generated for Virginia residents and level of pay and fringe benefits of such jobs, the training opportunities for apprenticeships and other training programs generated by the project and the number and value of subcontracts generated for Virginia subcontractors. 2. Community support or opposition, or both; 3. Public involvement strategy; 4. Compatibility with existing and planned facilities; and 5. Compatibility with local, regional, and state economic development efforts. E. Other Factors 1. Proposed cost of the qualifying facility; 2. The general reputation, industry experience, and financial capacity of the private entity; 3. The proposed design of the qualifying project; 17 4. The eligibility of the facility for accelerated selection, review, and documentation; 5. Local citizen and government comments; 6. Benefits to the public; 7. The private entity's compliance with a minority business enterprise participation plan or good faith effort to comply with the goals of such plan; 8. The private entity's plans to employ local contractors and residents; and 9. Other criteria that the Board of Supervisors deems appropriate. VIII. Comprehensive Agreement The Board of Supervisors shall approve any comprehensive agreement entered into pursuant to the PPEA between the County and a private entity. The County shall accept no liability for developing or operating the qualifying project prior to entering into a properly executed comprehensive agreement. Each comprehensive agreement shall define the rights and obligations of the responsible public entity and the selected proposer with regard to the project. The scope of the comprehensive agreement shall include but not be limited to: 1. The delivery of maintenance, performance and payment bonds or letters of credit in connection with any acquisition, design, construction, improvement, renovation, expansion, equipping, maintenance, development or operation of the qualifying project, in the forms and amounts satisfactory to the County; 2. The review and approval of plans and specifications for the qualifying project by the County; 3. The rights of the County to inspect the qualifying project to ensure compliance with the comprehensive agreement; 4. The maintenance of a policy or policies of liability insurance or self-insurance, each in form and amount satisfactory to the County reasonably sufficient to insure coverage of the project and the tort liability to the public and employees and to enable the continued operation of the qualifying project; 5. The monitoring of the practices of the operator by the County to ensure proper maintenance; 6. The terms under which the private entity will reimburse the County for services provided; 7. The policy and procedures that will govern the rights and responsibilities of the County and the operator in the event that the comprehensive agreement is terminated im or there is a material default by the private entity including the conditions governing assumption of the duties and responsibilities of the private entity by the County and the transfer or purchase of property or other interests of the private entity by the County; 8. The terms under which the private entity will file appropriate financial statements on a periodic basis; 9. The mechanism by which user fees, lease payments, or service payments, if any, may be established from time to time upon agreement of the parties. Any payments or fees shall be set at a level that is the same for persons using the facility under like conditions and that will not materially discourage use for the qualifying project; a. A copy of any service contract shall be filed with the County. b. A schedule of the current user fees or lease payments shall be made available by the private entity to any member of the public upon request. c. Classifications according to reasonable categories for assessment of user fees may be made. 10. The terms and conditions under which the County may contribute financial resources, if any, for the qualifying project; 11. A periodic reporting procedure that incorporates a description of the impact of the project on the Commonwealth and the County; and 12. Such other terms as the County may find necessary and convenient, that are agreed to by the private partner(s). Any changes in the terms of the comprehensive agreement as may be agreed upon by the parties from time to time shall be added to the comprehensive agreement only by written amendment. Parties submitting proposals understand that representations, information and data supplied in support of, or in connection with proposals plays a critical role in the competitive evaluation process and in the ultimate selection of a proposal by the Commonwealth. Accordingly, as part of the Comprehensive Agreement, the private entity and its team members shall certify that all material representations, information and data provided in support of, or in connection with, a proposal is true and correct. Such certifications shall be made by authorized individuals who have knowledge of the information provided in the proposal. In the event that material changes occur with respect to any representations, information or data provided for a proposal, the prospective operator shall immediately notify the County of same. Any violation of this section of the Comprehensive Agreement shall give the County the right to terminate the Agreement, withhold payment or other consideration due, and seek any other remedy available under the law. 19 A copy of the Comprehensive Agreement shall be submitted to the Auditor of Public Accounts within 30 days of its execution. 20 ACTION NO. A -042506-3.c ITEM NO. J-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 25, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the schools to accept and appropriate funds totaling $20,000 for grant funds and contributions. APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County Schools requests that the Board accept and appropriate the following grants and contributions: Roanoke County Schools collaborates with Family Service of Roanoke Valley to implement both school-based and after school service learning opportunities for our students. One hundred students are enrolled in Service Learning for the 2005-2006 school year. Teachers and Family Service of Roanoke Valley staffs will work with students through the direction of the Service Learning Advisory Board to expand projects and activities. A grant award in the amount of $10,000 was received from the Academy for Educational Development for the State Farm Good Neighbor Service -Learning initiative and should be appropriated to the Service Learning program. 2. Roanoke County Schools and Bedford County Schools have a partnership and have established the Roland E. Cook Alternative School. The student assistance coordinator at the school was part-time. Bedford County contributed $10,000 to make the position full-time. The Alternative School budget will be increased by $10,000. 0 FISCAL IMPACT: The Service Learning Program budget will be increased by $10,000, and the Roland E. Cook Alternative School budget will be increased by $10,000. ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the acceptance and appropriation of funds in the amount of $20,000 as outlined above. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved cc: File Dr. Lorraine Lange, Acting School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Church ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Wray ® ❑ ❑ cc: File Dr. Lorraine Lange, Acting School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. A -042506-3.d ITEM NO. J-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 25, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $4,500 from two Division of Motor Vehicle mini -grants SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: James R. Lavinder Chief of Police Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following two grants from the Division of Motor Vehicles have been awarded to the Roanoke County Police Department: 1. Mini -grant in the amount of $1,500 that will be used to support the Police Department's efforts in working with the Blue Ridge Crash Investigation Team. The funds will be used to purchase small equipment that will be used to conduct traffic investigations. No matching funds are required. 2. Mini -grant in the amount of $3,000 that will be used to support the Police Department's efforts in reducing drivers operating motor vehicles while under the influence of alcohol. These funds will pay officers overtime to conduct DUI check points in Roanoke County. No matching funds are required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the acceptance and appropriation of two Division of Motor Vehicle mini - grants in the amount of $4,500 to the Police Department budget, as detailed above. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved cc: File Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Lt. David McMillan, Grant Coordinator Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Church ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Wray ® ❑ ❑ cc: File Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Lt. David McMillan, Grant Coordinator Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. A -042506-3.e ITEM NO. J-6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 25, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Information Technology Department to receive and appropriate reimbursement in the amount of $6,657.60 for time/resources committed as part of the 800MHz Rebanding project SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Elaine Carver IT Director Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Funds in the amount of $6,657.60 were received from Sprint/NEXTEL as reimbursement for time/resources committed by Roanoke County Communication Shop to complete the planning for Phase I of the 800MHz Rebanding project. FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends accepting and appropriating Sprint/NEXTEL funds in the amount of $6,657.60 to reimburse the Information Technology Communication Shop for time/resources committed to complete the Phase I planning for the 800MHz rebanding effort. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved cc: File Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Church ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora ® ❑ ❑ Mr. Wray ® ❑ ❑ cc: File Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 RESOLUTION 042506-4 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Wray to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Sz" Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-5 TO DENY REZONING .369 ACRES FROM R-1, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO C-1, OFFICE DISTRICT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A BEAUTY SALON LOCATED AT 3722 COLONIAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 77.18-3- 31), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE APPLICATION OF JUDY TAYLOR WAGNER WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 28, 2006, and the second reading and public hearing were held April 25, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 4, 2006; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: On motion of Supervisor Wray to deny the rezoning, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor McNamara A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-6 TO REZONE 94.229 ACRES FROM AG -3, AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE DISTRICT, TO PRD, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, TO CONSTRUCT A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 3672 STERLING ROAD AND THE 3800 BLOCK OF STERLING ROAD (TAX MAP NOS. 89.00-3-12 AND 89.00-3-6), VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT UPON THE APPLICATION OF LOBLOLLY MILL, LLC WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 28, 2006, and the second reading and public hearing were held April 25, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 4, 2006; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 94.229 acres, as described herein, and located at 3672 Sterling Road and in the 3800 block of Sterling Road (Tax Map Numbers 89.00-3-12 and 89.00-3-6) in the Vinton Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of AG -3, Agricultural Preserve District, to the zoning classification of PRD, Planned Residential Development District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Loblolly Mill, LLC. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing conditions which are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference and which are set out in detail in the attached Exhibit A entitled "The Planning and Design Documents for Loblolly Mill—A Planned Residential Community, Roanoke County, VA, Vinton Magisterial District, prepared for Loblolly Mill, LLC, 119 Norfolk Ave., Roanoke, VA 24011, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc., Roanoke, VA, Project #R0500414.00, dated January 18, 2006, revised April 17, 2006" which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Tax Map No. 89.00-03-12 Parcel One containing 90.22 acres as shown on a survey made for Harry P. Turner by W. I. McChee, CPE, dated April 30, 1959, a copy of which is attached to a deed recorded in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Deed Book 618, page 236. Parcel Two being a 10 -foot strip along the west side of the property being conveyed to the Grantors by deed from Annie Laura Turner and shown as the easterly one- half of the 20 -foot roadway on the survey made by T. P. Parker, SCE, dated July 25, 1959, a copy of which is recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1233, page 1181. Tax Map No. 89.00-3-6 Containing 3.808 acres, being Lot B-1 as shown on Boundary Line Adjustment Plat of Turner Boundary Line Adjustment #2 recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 29, page 56. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: 2 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: Supervisor Church A COPY TESTE: 61.t� g. 74� Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney [c3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-7 DENYING GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A USED AUTOMOBILE SALES BUSINESS LOCATED AT 7400 SUNNYBROOK DRIVE, SUITE 6 (TAX MAP NO. 27.14-4-5) HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE PETITION OF KEVIN AND JENNIFER COOK WHEREAS, Kevin and Jennifer Cook have filed a petition for a special use permit for the operation of a used automobile sales business to be located at 7400 Sunnybrook Drive, Suite 6 (Tax Map No. 27.14-4-5) in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 4, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 28, 2006; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 25, 2006. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: On motion of Supervisor Flora to deny the special use permit, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: A"t'-A Q. �vi--- Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-8 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DRIVE-IN AND FAST FOOD RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 4504 CHALLENGER AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 40.14-1-2.09) HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE PETITION OF SONIC RESTAURANTS, INC. WHEREAS, Sonic Restaurants, Inc. has filed a petition for a special use permit for the construction of a drive-in and fast food restaurant to be located at 4504 Challenger Avenue (Tax Map No. 40.14-1-2.09) in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 4, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 28, 2006; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 25, 2006. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Sonic Restaurants, Inc. for the construction of a drive-in and fast food restaurant to be located at 4504 Challenger Avenue in the Hollins Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan, as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) Substantial compliance with the concept plan prepared by Parker Design Group dated 2/15/06. (2) Freestanding sign shall be limited to monument -type. Maximum height shall be 12 feet 6 inches. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: &U41 -A. Q 7�/a� Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-9 TO REZONE .92 ACRES FROM C-1, OFFICE DISTRICT, TO C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A PERSONAL IMPROVEMENT SERVICE LOCATED IN THE 4600 BLOCK OF BRAMBLETON AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 86.08-4-16.2), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE APPLICATION OF CHE TORRY WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 28, 2006, and the second reading and public hearing were held April 25, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 4, 2006; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing .92 acres, as described herein, and located in the 4600 block of Brambleton Avenue (Tax Map Number 86.08-4-16.2) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Che Torry. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) The development of the site shall be in substantial conformity to the Concept Plan and Proposed Elevation concept plan dated February 28, 2006, subject to those changes that my be required by the County during comprehensive site plan review. (2) Hours of operation shall be from 6 a.m. —10 p.m., Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. — 5 p.m. Saturday, and 12 p.m. — 5 p.m. on Sunday. site. (3) A professional engineer must design and seal the retaining wall plans for the (4) There shall be no roof top mechanical equipment. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the westerly right-of-way line of Brambleton Avenue (U.S. Route 221) at the southeasterly corner of Titan Park approximately 140 feet from the southwesterly intersection of Brambleton Avenue & Pleasant Hill Drive (Route 1548), being the northeasterly corner of the Tract A of Queens Court (PB10, Page 97) after a conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia in Deed Book 1314, page 1099; thence continuing with the westerly right-of-way line of Brambleton Avenue S. 280 12' 09" W 391.94 feet to a point on the northeasterly corner of N/F Benjamine D. Owen & Susan L. Schauweaker; thence leaving said right-of-way and continuing along the northerly line of said Owen property N. 590 34' 05" W 104.63 feet to a point at the southeasterly corner of N/F Judith E. Orourke (DB 1640, page 734); thence leaving the line of Owen and continuing along the easterly line of said Orourke property and the line of Lots 3, 4 & 5 of said Queens Court plat N. 270 45' 05" E 370.23 feet to a point on the southerly line of Titan Park; thence leaving the line of said Orourke property and Lots 3, 4 &5 and continuing with the southerly line of said Titan Park S. 71' 07'38" E 108.91 feet to the Point of Beginning containing .9277 acre. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None 2 A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 ORDINANCE 042506-10 AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF TWO 50' ROADS LOCATED BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND 11 AND LOTS 17 AND 18 ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUCK MOUNTAIN ROAD AND SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF THOMAS H. BEASLEY SUBDIVISION IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 61, LOCATED IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Beasley Subdivision plat prepared by C. B. Malcom, dated February 11, 1948, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 61, ("the Beasley Plat") established two unnamed streets 50 feet in width and approximately 300 feet in length located between Lots 10 and 11 and Lots 17 and 18 to provide ingress and egress access from the north side of Buck Mountain Road to the remaining property of Thomas Beasley; and, WHEREAS, the property immediately adjacent to and surrounding the two described unnamed streets, consisting of a tract of 60.69 acres, adjoining Buck Mountain Road, Virginia Secondary Route No. 679, in Roanoke County, is now owned by Al M. Cooper Construction, Inc ("Cooper Construction"), as evidenced by a deed from Old Heritage Corporation, recorded as Instrument No. 200415900 in the aforesaid Clerk's Office on August 24, 2004; and, WHEREAS, Cooper Construction has recorded contemporaneously with the aforesaid deed a current plat of this property, designated as "Plat Showing Property of Old Heritage Corporation Being Tract 1 B-1 (60.069 AC.) (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 87.20- 01-09), prepared by Lumsden Associates, PC, dated August 22, 2004, and recorded in Plat Book 28, Page 44, which indicates that the 60.69 acres owned by Cooper Construction has not yet been developed and that the two unnamed roads have never been utilized and serve no purpose; and, WHEREAS, the above described streets or roads are more clearly indicated as "ROAD" "TO BE VACATED" in two locations on "Plat Showing Two Unnamed Roads — To Be Vacated by Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia", dated 3-7-2006, prepared by Roanoke County Department of Community Development and attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, no other property owner will be affected by the vacation of these two unnamed streets and that their existence imposes an impediment to Cooper Construction's development of its property adjoining these previously dedicated streets; and WHEREAS, the developer, as the Petitioner, has requested that, pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate those two rights-of-way, each designated as "Road" on the plat of the Thomas H. Beasley Subdivision, Plat Book 3, Page 61, as now shown on the attached Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 11, 2006, and the second reading and public hearing was held on April 25, 2006. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 4 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on April 11, 2006, and a second reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on April 25, 2006. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County Charter, the subject real estate (two unnamed streets 50 feet in width and 300 feet in length) are hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interests in real estate renders them unavailable for other public use. 3. That those two unnamed streets, 50 feet in width and approximately 300 feet in length, being designated and shown as two roads "TO BE VACATED" on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, said streets being located between Lots 10 and 11 and Lots 17 and 18 on the north side of Buck Mountain Road and having been dedicated on the subdivision plat for Subdivision of Thomas H. Beasley and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 3, page 61, in the Cave Springs Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. 4. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners. 5. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 9 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor Wray to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Altizer, Flora, Wray NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /Aet-e-& 6 - da'�� Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Ordinance 042506-10 adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, April 25, 2006. Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk E INS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT SURVEY TAX/ 8720-01-09 EXISTING TRACT 1B-1 60.069 AC. cv LEGEND F-77-7, ROAD TO BE VACATED J ` �50.00, 0 650.05. CIV cl 4JW AM vw 0018 409 2C)O. 42, Rt g Pt. 2050 ecus U 4M.S KTJ ,t +t:C.R / ti 0 '� 21 77 1§7 Jpl J6 1 17 IV Fir ,"17 4LFF.! AP No. — 87.20 EXHIBIT A" in- 001 TAX M SCALE: -2 PLAT SHOWING TWO UNNAMED ROADS - TO BE VACATED BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA PREPARED BY- ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 3-7-2006