6/4/1985 - Regular
~
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Roanoke County Administration Center
3738 Bramb1eton Avenue, SW
Roanoke, Virginia 24015
June 4, 1985
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County
Administration Center, this being the first Tuesday, and the
first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of June, 1985.
IN RE:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman McGraw called the meeting to order at 1:14 p.m.
The roll call was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Steven A. McGraw: Vice-Chairman
Athena E. Burton: Supervisors Harry C.
Nickens and Alan H. Brittle
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Gary J. Minter
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Supervisor Nickens moved to go into Executive Session
pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-334 (a), (1), (2),
(4), and (6). The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE:
OPEN SESSION
Supervisor Burton moved to return to Open Session at
4:50 p.m. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSIONS
County Attorney, Paul Mahoney, reported that the Board
had met with VVKR during Executive Session concerning change
order 11 for metal detectors at $11,600.00: change order 12 for
.-. r!"" n-
0' ;) u
June 4, 1985
plants at $5,200.00: change order 13 for signage for $11,800.00:
change order 14 for miscellaneous charges requested by the
judicial staff, court services, and district clerk for $5,280.06:
and change order 15 for additional metal detectors at $24,800.00.
Mr. Mahoney recommended to the Board that they take official
action to reflect the discussions that were held during Executive
Session with Dan Bolt and VVKR. Mr. Mahoney reported that VVKR
has agreed to pay a negotiated contractor's fee of $400.00 for
change orders 12 and 13 and that no architectural and engineer's
fees will be charged against the County for those items.
Mr. Mahoney also recommended that the Board rescind Resolution
85-57 which combines the items on new change orders 11 and 14 and
that the Board further authorize Paul Mahoney to execute change
orders 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, reflecting the change per change
orders 12 and 13 that the $200.00 fee to the contractor be
deleted and that VVKR would pay those items. Supervisor Nickens
moved to spread a resolution to rescind Resolution 85-57 and to
authorize Paul Mahoney to execute on the behalf of the Board
change orders 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, with the understanding that
the $200.00 for change orders 12 and 13 ($400.00) be deleted from
paYment that the County would make to the contractor and that
this would be bourne by VVKR.
RESOLUTION 85-192 RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NO. 85-57 AND AUTHORIZING CHANGE ORDER
NO. 11 AND CHANGE ORDER NO. 14 TO THE
COUNTY'S CONTRACT WITH CREATIVE
CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY
COURTHOUSE
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Resolution No. 85-57 adopted on April 23,
1985, authorizing Change Order No. 11 to the County's contract
with Creative Construction & Development Corporation for
construction of the Roanoke County Courthouse be, and hereby is,
rescinded: and
51
June 4, 1985
2. That Change Order No. 11 be, and hereby is,
authorized as follows:
1) Metal detector for Courtroom A-227
Total
$11,600.00
$11,600.00
3. That Change Order No. 14 be, and hereby is,
authorized as follows:
1) Add signal buzzer to the Jury Room call
light, arrangement located in Bailiff's
Area, A-2l1.
$ 591.40
2) Provide duplex receptacles above the casework
countertop in District Court Area, Room A-110
and District Judge's Area, Room A-16l.
230.58
3) Provide additional railings to three (3)
security stairs serving tunnel areas to
raise height to approximately 42" to provide
additional safety for Bailiffs.
3,055.58
4) Provide acoustical title ceilings to cover
exposed construction below stair landing in
Stair #5, Room D-l03, as per Supplemental
Instructions No. 17. 189.53
5) Relocate override timer for the HVAC system
in the Court Services Area. The override
times will be relocated from the Court Services
Director's Office to Room D-124. 776.13
6) Paint all aluminum gallery gates in all
Courtrooms. 436.84
Total
$5,280.06
2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized and
directed to execute the necessary change order documents upon a
form approved by the County Attorney.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens and the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Minter
RESOLUTION 85-193 AUTHORIZING CHANGE
ORDERS NO. 12, 13, AND 15 TO THE COUNTY'S
CONTRACT WITH CREATIVE CONSTRUCTION &
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
¡:52~
June 4, 1985
1. That Change Orders No. 12, 13, and 15 to the
County's contract with Creative Construction & Development
Corporation for construction of the Roanoke County Courthouse be,
and hereby is, authorized as follows:
1) Change Order No. 12: Plants and pots $ 5,200.00
2) Change Order No. 13: Signage 11,800.00
3 ) Change Order No. 15: Metal detectors 24,800.00
Total $41,800.00
2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized
and directed to execute the necessary change order documents upon
a form approved by the County Attorney.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens and the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisor Nickens, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Minter
Supervisor Nickens requested that the Board add the Bee
Ordinance to the agenda and that it be addressed at the 7:00 p.m.
session. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NA YS : None
ABSENT: Supervisor Minter
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Report on Septic System Problems in Roanoke County
- Dr. Nancy Welch, Roanoke County Health Department, reported
that the main concern from the public health perspective relates
to the connection into a central system in the Applewood area.
Supervisor Nickens asked if the County could legally require
homeowners to connect to a sewage system. Dr. Welch reported
that there is a local ordinance that if the sewer lines border
the property they do have to connect. Mr. Moe Owens, Sanitarian
Supervisor, reported that Cherokee Hills and Applewood
subdivisions are experiencing the worst problems. Supervisor
June 4, 1985
~~~3
,~
Nickens directed staff to research Cherokee Hills and Applewood
and meet with developer to see if there is some cost sharing that
the County could enter into even where there are currently
developed areas. Dr. Welch suggested an ordinance with a
starting date allowing citizens who want to hook onto the system
to do so but beyond that point, the citizens that have not hooked
onto the system, that have failure which requires modification of
the system requires them to hook onto the system. John Hubbard,
Superintendent of Public Facilities, reported that his department
has a continuing list of several areas within the County with
problems which are on the list of CIP projections. He reported
that they may be able to solve the problem in Applewood but that
Cherokee Hills would be an extension unbearable to the County
alone.
2. E911 Report - Supervisor Brittle presented an
outline to the Board of the E911 system. He reported that the
Roanoke Valley Regional E911 Committee recommended that all four
valley governments institute the E911 System by 1987, that
funding come from a tax on consumers' telephone service, and that
all governments initiate a CAD (Computerated Dispatching System).
The County E911 Committee has made site visits to Chesterfield,
Henrico, and Baltimore Counties to obtain information on
facilities design, operational procedures, and the CAD system and
related equipment. Mr. Brittle reported that equipment costs
would be approximately $850,000. The E911 committee recommended
to the Board that they proceed with the E911 System with a
computerated dispatch. Mr. Brittle reported that he hopes that
the County will be on line by October 1987 since Roanoke City and
Salem will be on line at that time and the localities should
start at the same time. This committee has also recommended
Brambleton Avenue as the site for the system, data processing,
and possibly the Sheriff's Department. Mr. Brittle reported that
a bunker type building has been discussed to house the system.
754,
June 4, 1985
This would allow later additions to the top of the building. Mr.
Brittle reported that to meet the deadline the County cannot
continue to wait to start this project. Mr. Harry Franks,
Director of Data Processing, reported that if the County chooses
an independent system, they will have to purchase different
equipment than if they chose a consolidated system. Mr. Franks
also stressed to the Board that they should select the type of
software and then the equipment to coordinate with that
particular software. Supervisor Nickens moved that the Chair
call for an immediate meeting of at least two elected officials
of each of the four political subdivisions involved to discuss
the potential for a consolidated E911 System in the Valley no
later than June 30, 1985. Supervisor Burton respectfully
suggested that Supervisor Nickens' motion be amended to include
the entire governing bodies instead of two elected officials.
Supervisor Nickens also requested specific written documents
since the County will be presenting the program. Supervisor
Nickens agreed to accept Supervisor Burton's amendment to his
motion. He also suggested a personal communication inviting each
political subdivision to attend this meeting. The purpose of
this meeting would be for the County to present its position and
its costs and the will of the Board in the hopes that the other
localities would come prepared to do the same. Supervisor
Nickens called for questions on his motion. The motion carried
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Minter
Chairman McGraw directed Tommy Fuqua, Fire and
Emergency Services Coordinator, and Sally Turner, Administrative
Analyst, to devise the letter to the surrounding governments.
IN RE:
RECESS
foe
~). t)
'""'"" .
June 4, 1985
Chairman McGraw called for a dinner recess at 6:06 p.m.
IN RE:
RECONVENEMENT
Chairman McGraw called the meeting back to order at
7:15 p.m.
IN RE:
BEE AND POULTRY ORDINANCE
Supervisor Nickens presented the Bee Committee report.
He reported that at its meeting the committee had agreed upon
setback distances of 10, 20, and 20 feet. The committee then
informally met at a later time and the setback distances of 10,
40, and 40 were set. Supervisor Nickens suggested that the
proposed ordinance be amended under Item B - Article IV - Bees -
to read "that if the landing platform of a hive faces an
adjoining lot line, there is to be a flight path barrier
consisting of fence, etc." He also reported that there was no
deviation projection. He suggested that an owner wishing to have
more hives than allowed under the ordinance would have to obtain
a Special Exception permit with a fee. Supervisor Nickens moved
that the setback distances be set at 10, 40, and 40. That under
Item B-strike "and is within ten (10) feet of any. . ." and
add "an adjoining lot line." Also creating an additional
paragraph to allow for deviation as far as number of hives when
there is not sufficient square footage of land. Supervisor
Burton stated that she is concerned about the setback distance
with apiaries located in residential areas instead of
agricultural areas. She reported that she felt the ordinance
should state a minimum of 50 feet from adjacent property and lOO
feet from the property line and 100 from a house.
Supervisor Brittle called for questions on the motion.
Supervisor Nickens restated his motion to read: to approve the
ordinance as presented by the County Attorney, with a 10/40/40
foot setback and under "B", the wording should be "that the
I nh'\TQi(""li~n'Q n-Ffi(""lt:>_ nr l~hnr~""nr'\T Tnr ....ht:> nnrnnQt:> nr Q....nrlu
756~
June 4, 1985
landing platform of a hive faces an adjoining lot line" the rest
of paragraph B to remain as is and a Section D be included that
says "If there are any deviations from the number of hives (an
7 5 ~
June 4, 1985
public nuisance, and any person suffering injury or damage
therefrom may seek the correction, removal, or abatement of such
nuisance through appropriate suit in equity.
2. This ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens that the distances be set as
10/40/40 that Section B of the ordinance be changed deleting "and
is within ten (10) feet of" and replace with "adjoining". That a
Section D be added to allow anyone wanting more bees than allowed
per square foot be directed to apply for a special exception
permit through the Board of Zoning Appeals. The motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, and Brittle
NAYS: Supervisors Burton and McGraw
Supervisor Minter moved to refer this ordinance to the
Planning Commission for "fine tuning". The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: Supervisor Brittle
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the prepared
resolution concerning the priorities for Revenue Sharing
Allocations for highway purposes.
RESOLUTION 85-87 RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NO. 85-55 AND REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION
TO ALLOCATE CERTAIN FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO ITS SECONDARY
ROAD PLANT MIX PROGRAM IN ROANOKE COUNTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia
authorizes an allocation of State funds for the maintenance,
improvement, construction or reconstruction of the systems of
~t~tp hiahw~v~ in thp rnmmnnwp~lth nf viraini~_ ~n~ ....h~i- ....ht:>
Y
June 4, 1985 ~r ~-~
NAYS: Supervisors Burton and McGraw
ORDINANCE 85-123 AMENDING CHAPTER 5,
ANIMALS AND FOWL, OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY
CODE CONCERNING THE KEEPING OF BEES
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl, of the Roanoke
County Code be amended as follows:
ARTICLE IV. BEES
Sec. 5-37. Beekeeping - distance from property lines; flight
path barrier; number of hives per lot size.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to .keep or
place an apiary or cause or allow an apiary to remain (1) closer
than ten (10) feet to the property line of adjoining property of
anyone other than the person maintaining the apiary or his
immediate family, or (2) closer than forty (40) feet to any house
or other building used for residential purposes by anyone other
than the person maintaining the apiary or his immediate family or
any apartment, hotel, motel, office, commercial establishment,
church or school, or (3) closer than forty (40) feet to any
public highway, street or avenue.
B. If the landing platform of a hive faces adjoining
any lot line, there shall be a flight path barrier, consisting of
a fence or plantings six (6) feet in height, located in front of
the hive.
C. The keeping of honeybees shall be allowed as an
accessory use on any lot at the ratio of four (4) hives per
10,000 square feet.
D. Special exceptions to the provisions of this
ordinance may be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals pursuant
to the provisions of Section 15.1-495 (f) 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended.
Sec. 5-38. Beekeeping - water supply for bees.
Every person owning, possessing or controlling an
apiary shall maintain within fifty (50) feet of each apiary an
adequate accessible and useable supply of fresh water for the
bees.
Sec. 5-39. Beekeeping - exceptions.
The provisions of this article shall not apply to the
keeping of bees within an educational institution, museum,
physician's office, or laboratory for the purpose of study,
observation, or medical research or treatment, provided that such
bees are not permitted to fly at large.
Sec. 5-40. Penalties; violations declared nuisances.
Any person convicted of violation of any provision of
this article shall be guilty of a class 4 misdemeanor. In
addition, any violation of this article is hereby declared a
Fits
~, ~°
June 4, 1985
public nuisance, and any person suffering injury or damage
therefrom may seek the correction, removal, or abatement of such
nuisance through appropriate suit in equity.
2. This ordinance shall be in full force andl
effect from and after its passage.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens that the distances be set as
10/40/40 that Section B of the ordinance be changed deleting "and
is within ten (10) feet of" and replace with "adjoining". That a
Section D be added to allow anyone wanting more bees than allowed
per square foot be directed to apply for a special exception
permit through the Board of Zoning Appeals. The motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, and Brittle
NAYS: Supervisors Burton and McGraw
Supervisor Minter moved to refer this ordinance to the
Planning Commission for "fine tuning". The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: Supervisor Brittle
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the prepared
resolution concerning the priorities for Revenue Sharing
Allocations for highway purposes.
RESOLUTION 85-87 RESCINDING RESOLUTION
N0. 85-55 AND REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION
TO ALLOCATE CERTAIN FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO ITS SECONDARY
ROAD PLANT MIX PROGRAM IN ROANOKE COUNTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia
authorizes an allocation of State funds for the maintenance,
improvement, construction or reconstruction of the systems of
State highways in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that the
Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation shall make an
equivalent matching allocation to any county for designations for
such purpose by the governing body of up to 25~ or $500,000.00,
whichever is greater, of federal revenue sharing funds received
I~
1
June 4, 1985
75!
by it during the current fiscal year.
In addition an equivalent
amount from County general funds in lieu of federal revenue
sharing funds may be utilized for these purposes. Total State
funds allocated on a statewide basis for these purposes shall not
exceed $5 million in any fiscal year.
2. That the Board hereby appropriates the sum of
$102,809.00 from revenue sharing funds or County general funds
for the 1985-86 fiscal year budget to match those funds allocated
by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
pursuant to Section 33.l-75.l to be utilized for secondary road
improvements in Roanoke County, Virginia.
3. That it is the intent of the Board to expend the
$102,809.00 in matching funds as follows: $46,132.00 to be
allocated for the elimination of hazardous roadway conditions
situated in the Counties of Roanoke and Botetourt in the Hollins
Community Development area: $50,000.00 to be expended for the
secondary road plant mix program in Roanoke County: and the
balance of remaining matching funds to be utilized for secondary
road improvements in Roanoke County.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens and the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
Supervisor Minter moved to approve the prepared
resolution regarding the appropriation for overtime funds for
compliance with the Fair Labor Standards. Supervisor Burton
requested that Supervisor Minter amend his motion to reflect
$399.00 instead of $1,000.00 and change the FICA to $28.00.
Supervisor Minter accepted Supervisor Burton's request for
amendment and asked that his motion be amended.
Resolution Number 85-88
On rrvtion made by Supervisor Minter, the General Appropriation Resolution
f Roanoke County, Virginia, adopted June 14, 1983 be, and is the same hereby
nded as follows to becane effective
ACCOUNI' NUMBER
IOCRFASE
(DECREASE)
li?,60
...
.
June 4, 1985
--
Class: Expenditures
Fund: General
Dept. : Parks and Recreation
Object: OvertiIœ 03-6-07100-10020 $ 5,404
FICA 03-6-07100-20010 38l
Dept. : Planning and Zoning
Object: OvertiIœ 03-6-08l00-l0020 4,669
FICA 03-6-08l00-200l0 330
Dept. : Superintendent of Deve10pœnt
Object: OvertiIœ 03-6-08107-10020 250
FICA 03-6-08107-20010 18
Dept. : Personnel
Object: OvertiIœ 03-6-01203-10020 399
FICA 03-6-0l203-200l0 28
Dept. : Employee Benefits
Object: Reserve for New positions 03-6-09l02-l00l6 (11,479)
To record additional funds needed to cœq;>ensate for overtime faY in conjuncture
wi th the Fair Labor Standards Act.
On motion of Supervisor Minter and the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS
Supervisor Minter requested a report on the total funds
expended on the evaluation of tax exempt properties for
accounting costs and legal fees by the next meeting.
County Attorney, Paul Mahoney, requested the Board to
consider a special meeting on June 27, 1985, for consideration
and a public hearing of the Comprehensive Plan at 4:00 p.m. Rob
Stalzer, Director of Planning, reported that two or three work
sessions are need to present the Comprehensive Plan to the Board.
He requested that the Board meet in work session during the third
week in June. Supervisor Nickens suggested that the Board meet
on June 12, 1985, from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and set the public
hearing on June 27, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. If the Board does not
complete the work session, a meeting will be called on June 13,
1985. The Board concurred with Supervisor Nickens' suggestion.
-
76I~
June 4, 1985
IN RE:
BUDGET WORK SESSIONS
Supervisor Brittle moved that the budget be approved as
submitted by the staff earlier this week and further that
unclassified salaries be approved as submitted by Keith Cook,
Director of Personnel, this afternoon. The motion failed by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Brittle
NAYS: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Burton, and McGraw
John Chambliss, Superintendent of Fiscal Management,
presented a budget update to the Board. This report showed the
three major areas of revenue sources that may need to be
adjusted for the 1985-1986 fiscal year: Revenue Sharing (75
percent level); transient occupancy tax - anticipate additional
$220,000 in revenue: business license tax estimate is $250,000
low based on the current year's collection and $250,000
additional revenue could be achieved by revising the business
license rates.
Supervisor Nickens moved to place in the appropriate
budget category $152.30 for Mr. Pollard and $282.04 for Mr.
Woolwine both employed at the County garage.
Supervisor Burton requested that Dr. Nickens include in
his motion to make payment retroactive from July 1, 1984.
Supervisor Nickens amended his motion as follows: to
place in the appropriate budget category $152.30 for Mr. Pollard
and $282.04 for Mr. Woolwine, both employed at the Roanoke County
Garage, to be retroactive from July 1, 1984. Supervisor Nickens
called for questions on his motion. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Supervisor Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
None
62
June 4, 1985
Supervisor Brittle moved that the unclassified salaries
as previously presented by Keith Cook, Director of Personnel, be
approved and that the budget be approved as recommended by staff.
After discussion Supervisor Nickens reported that he
would like to offer a substitute motion.
Supervisor Minter moved to stop the clock at 8:57 p.m.
The motion carried by the following voice vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: Supervisor Brittle
Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to allow
the Board to come up with the additional $950,000 needed for the
School Board budget, that the Board adopt what has been presented
by John Chambliss, Superintendent of Fiscal Management, with the
revenue coming from Federal Revenue Sharing at $375,000: the
transient occupancy tax at $200,000; an increase in the business
license tax projected to raise $250,000 additional funds plus
what has been anticipated as being $250,000 under budgeted from
the business license tax and elimination of trash collection fees
!
and the part-time position for Animal Control, which rescinds I
Resolution 85-78 dated May 2l, 1985. Any funds remaining to be
placed in the general fund. Supervisor Nickens called for
questions on his motion. The motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
None
Supervisor Nickens moved that the unclassified salaries
not exceed an 8 percent (8%) increase on the average. Supervisor
Brittle called for questions on Supervisor Nickens' motion. The
motion failed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens and Minter
NAYS: Supervisors Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
Supervisor Burton requested that the Board discuss the
unclassified salaries in Executive Session.
June 4, 1985
3
Tommy Fuqua, Fire and Emergency Services Coordinator,
was present to request three new positions for his department.
He reported that he and Supervisor Burton had spoken with Mr.
Sellari about recruiting employees of Seaboard Farms. Mr.
Se11ari was very receptive to the idea and is willing to allow
Mr. Fuqua to talk with the employees during working hours.
County Attorney, Paul Mahoney, reported that he had met
with Mr. Paxton, Salem City Manager, regarding the Fire Service
agreement. Mr. Paxton related to Mr. Mahoney that it was his
understanding and that of the Salem City Council that the 1953
contract had been terminated. Mr. Mahoney does not believe the
contract has been terminated since there was no formal Council
action terminating that agreement and there was no correspondence
stating that it had ended. Mr. Paxton felt that the implication
of correspondence and telephone conversations from Mr. Flanders,
former County Administrator, was that of termination. Mr.
Mahoney related to Mr. Paxton that it was his understanding that
the contract was still in effect even though to some extent it is
out of date. The County is currently paying $6,000.00 to keep
the fire truck at that station plus paying actual costs
(gasoline, oil, etc.). Mr. Paxton reported to Mr. Mahoney that
the City Council was adamant that they wanted the vehicle out of
Station I in Salem since they will be purchasing a new fire
engine. The City of Salem has not started the specification
process of purchasing the new engine. Mr. Mahoney reported that
he has no indication of termination by action taken and suggested
that the County negotiate a mutual aid agreement with Salem. Mr.
Paxton informed Mr. Mahoney that the City of Salem is considering
a reimbursement contract allowing continuation of service to
crisis areas in the County that the Salem engines could reach
faster than the County engines. This contract would be for
reimbursement of the rental of the fire engine and the cost of
manpower. Mr. Paxton also reported that a study performed by the
764
June 4, 1985
City of Salem showed that 3 1/2 man weeks were spent fighting
fires in the County. The reimbursement contract would prove to
be cheaper for the County than paying the $6,000.00 per year.
Mr. Mahoney reported that the County still considers this
contract in full force and effect and will continue to adhere to
its provisions and that City Council will have to terminate the
contract by formal action.
Director of Personnel, Keith Cook, reported to the
Board that the salaries of the Supervisors cannot be raised until
they go into another population group of over 80,000.00 but they
may increase their salaries up to 5 percent (5%) per year for an
inflation factor. A five percent (5%) increase would increase
the salaries by $345.00. Supervisor Minter moved to raise the
future salaries of board members by 5 percent (5%) to be prepared
for public hearing as an ordinance to be heard on June 25, 1985.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
None
Supervisor Nickens suggested that the pay grade for the
Economic Development Specialist be upgraded to $23,000.00.
Mr. Cook reported that Tim Gubala, Superintendent of
the Department of Development, had indicated to Mr. Cook that he
would run the program with the current employees. Supervisor
Nickens moved that the air pollution control matter be held over
to July 11,1985. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
Supervisor Nickens moved that attachment 2, as
presented by Keith Cook, incuding Pay Grade 23 of the Economic
Development Specialist be approved. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve attachment l, with
the Board members' salaries reflecting the five percent (5%}
June 4, 1985
f
5~
increase subject to the public hearing. That the County Auditor
position be set at the maximum salary. That the Commonwealth
Attorney's supplement be continued at the same rate. That the
Sheriff's supplement be increased by 4 percent (4%) The School
Guard crossing personnel to be increased by 4 percent (4%). That
the Planning Commission salaries be set at $2,400 with the
Chairman's salary being set at $3,000.00. That the supplement
for the Chief Deputy (Sheriff's Department) also be increased by
4 percent (4%). The motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
Mr. Cook asked the Board to review the VPI & SU
Extension salaries. He reported that under the contract the
County pays one-third of the salaries for several positions, 50
percent for one position, and 90 percent for one position. Mr.
Cook reported that he would like to present the salary list to
the Board after he has had a chance to speak with Mr. Chambliss
and Mr. Gobble.
Supervisor Brittle reported that the Sheriff reported
that his request for the polygraph examiner would satisfy him.
He needs this position more than the other new positions listed.
Supervisor Nickens suggested that the polygraph equipment be
purchased from a grant received by the Sheriff's Department.
After discussion, Supervisor Nickens suggested that this matter
be brought back to the Board when the VPI & SU matters are
brought before the Board.
Supervisor Minter moved to approve a secretarial
position in the Commonwealth Attorney's office for the victim
Witness Program. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
Supervisor Nickens moved that the reclassifications and
upgrades be approved on Attachment 3 with the addition of MEO I
at a lOG going to Equipment Maintenance at 13 E and that the
766
June 4, 1985
Board hold the decision on the Air Pollution and Zoning position
until the Board has an opportunity to discuss with Mr. Gubala,
Superintendent of the Department of Development. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Brittle, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: None
IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION
Supervisor Nickens moved to go into Executive Session
pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-334 (a), (1), (2),
(4), and (6). The motion carried by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Supervisors Nickens, Minter, Burton, and McGraw
NAYS: Supervisor Brittle
IN RE: OPEN SESSION
Supervisor Minter moved to return to Open Session. The
motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE:
ADJOURNMENT
Supervisor Brittle moved to adjourn. The motion
carried by a unanimous voice vote.
-kc.v q,/h4r'~
Chairman