12/13/2011 - RegularDecember 13, 2011 715
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the
Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the only
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of December 2011. Audio and video
recordings of this meeting will be held on file for a minimum of five (5) years in the office
of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.
IN RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Church called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call
was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph B. "Butch" Church; Supervisors Michael
W. Altizer, Eddie "Ed" Elswick, Charlotte A. Moore and
Richard C. Flora
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator; Diane D.
Hyatt, Assistant County Administrator; Daniel R. O'Donnell,
Assistant County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County
Attorney; Teresa H. Hall, Director of Public Information and
Deborah C. Jacks, Clerk to the Board
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by Dr. Michael Palmer of the Green Ridge
Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present.
IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS
Supervisor Elswick requested to add to the agenda a discussion as to
whether or not to rescind the large wind and utility ordinance to decide if the Board
wants to make modifications to the ordinance that would increase the possibility of a
better way of life for any citizen living near a windmill. Chairman Church asked Mr.
Mahoney to advise the Board of its options regarding adding this agenda item.
716 December 13, 2011
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney advised there were two options;
Supervisor Elswick could add to today's agenda with unanimous consent or to schedule
on the printed agenda at the next meeting, January 10, 2012. Supervisor Elswick
requested it be discussed today as to whether or not the Board wants to rescind the
ordinance because he has some suggestions as to particular sections of the ordinance
he thinks would make sense to revise.
Supervisor Altizer requested if Supervisor Elswick has some items to bring
forward, in order to give the whole Board appropriate time for review, he would ask
Supervisor Elswick to add this item to the agenda for the January 10, 2011, meeting
and provide to the Board today or through email what he proposes so the Board would
have adequate time to take a look at what he is proposing. Supervisor Elswick
responded January 10, 2012, would be fine, adding the Board has spent a lot of time on
the ordinance and a lot of other people have as well and due to pressure to get an
ordinance approved and as a result that the Board might have picked numbers they do
not have the expertise to substantiate. So that the Board knows what he is proposing for
January, if the County gets a special use permit at that point in time, expert analysis be
prepared by individuals or companies approved by County personnel and paid for the
applicant that would advise the Board as to the impact it would have at various locations
from people's houses as to what it would do to their current noise level and whether or
not it would cause an increased noise level for the people who have to live there. There
were no objections.
Supervisor Elswick then requested to add to the January 10, 2012,
meeting discussion on the benefits from belonging to ICLEI and decide if the Board
wants to continue to be a member of the ICLEI organization. There were no objections.
Chairman Church verified with Mr. Mahoney this would be a new business item.
B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator added a new business item
of a request to grant an additional Christmas Holiday on Friday, December 31, 2011.
There were no objections.
IN RE: BRIEFINGS
1. Briefing on the results of the 2012 General Reassessment (Billy
Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation)
Mr. Driver provided the Board with a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of
which is on file in the Clerk office. He indicated this presentation is timely as individual
property assessment notices will be mailed on or before January 3, 2012. There were
no questions or discussion.
2. Briefing on closing the Headquarters Library for two weeks,
December 17, 2011 - January 2, 2012 (Diana Rosapepe, Director of
Library Services)
December 13, 2011 717
Ms. Rosapepe provided a short briefing concerning the closing of the
Library headquarters located on Route 419 after forty (40) years in service on
December 16, 2011. The new South County Library will open on January 3, 2011. In
the interim two week period, 136,000 items will be transferred to the new location along
with new technology, cross training and orientation for staff. She indicated the website
will be updated.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolution to allow the Director of Library Services to establish
fees for the use of library meeting rooms based upon
recommendations for the Library Board and approval of the
County Administrator (Diane D. Hyatt, Assistant County
Administrator; Diana Rosapepe, Director of Library Services)
Ms. Hyatt explained the resolution and added it would be similar to what is
done for Parks and Recreation. There was no discussion. Chairman Church briefed
the Board on the meeting he and Mr. Goodman had attended earlier in the day whereby
various legislators discussed this issue.
RESOLUTION 121311 -1 TO ALLOW THE DIRECTOR OF
LIBRARY SERVICES TO ESTABLISH FEES FOR THE USE OF
LIBRARY MEETING ROOMS BASED UPON
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE LIBRARY BOARD AND
APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
WHEREAS, the Library Board has adopted policies and fees for the use of the
community meeting rooms inside County libraries; and
WHEREAS, with the opening of the new South County library the fees for the use
of rooms within this new library will be increased; and
WHEREAS, the Library Board and County staff requests the Board of
Supervisors to authorize by resolution the authority of the Library Board and Director of
Library Services to adopt policies and to establish fees for the use of community
meeting rooms inside Roanoke County libraries.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County as follows:
1. That the Roanoke County Library Board is authorized to adopt policies for
the use of community meeting rooms inside Roanoke County libraries.
2. That the Roanoke County Director of Library Services is authorized to
establish fees for the use of community meeting rooms inside Roanoke County libraries
based upon recommendations from the Roanoke County Library Board and subject to
final approval by the Roanoke County Administrator.
718 December 13, 2011
3. That all revenues from the fees for the use of community meeting rooms
and the rental of library facilities shall be appropriated by the Board of Supervisors to
library operations.
4. That the effective date of this resolution shall be January 1, 2012.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
2. Resolution requesting the General Assembly of Virginia to
maintain the moratorium on mining uranium and during the 2012
General Assembly session (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the resolution. There was no discussion.
Supervisor Elswick commented that any major undertaking that could be detrimental to
the environment or to citizens' way of live should be looked at the same vein and that
independent, scientific studies would have to demonstrate they are safe and make
sense.
RESOLUTION 121311 -2 REQUESTING THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA TO MAINTAIN THE MORATORIUM
ON MINING URANIUM DURING THE 2012 GENERAL
ASSEMBLY SESSION
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, recognizes
that clean water, clean air and a healthful environment are critically important resources
of the County and its surrounding region; and
WHEREAS, the future economic development of our County and region are
closely related to this region's healthy and pollution -free environment and natural beauty
that currently make it so desirable as a destination for visitors and new residents; and
WHEREAS, in 1983 the potential for mining uranium in the Virginia counties of
Pittsylvania and Orange was proposed whereby the Virginia Assembly issued a
moratorium on the mining and milling of uranium, which remains in effect today, until the
industry could prove that it is capable of performing such activities without hazardous
impacts to the natural resources and public health of the Commonwealth; and
WHEREAS, a company known as Virginia Uranium, Inc., has proposed mining
and milling the uranium ore at the Coles Hill Deposit in Pittsylvania County, Virginia,
stating to its investors that it will seek legislation to repeal the moratorium in the 2012
session of the Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the mining operations proposed by Virginia Uranium, Inc. could
result in large quantities of airborne radioactive dust and in highly mobile radioactive mill
December 13, 2011 719
tailings which must be stored as sludge in ponds and eventually in dewatered tailings
piles that can retain eight -five percent (85 %) of their original radioactivity for thousands
of years; and
WHEREAS, it is possible that these sludge ponds and tailings pile confinement
structures could fail, resulting in the release of radioactive materials into surface waters
and the surrounding environment; and
WHEREAS, unlike almost all uranium mining operations in North America that
are currently located in arid regions or in areas remote from population, the Coles Hill
site is in the Roanoke River basin, which serves as a drinking water source for over one
million people in Virginia and North Carolina including several military bases, a source
that would face increased risks associated with uranium mining and milling and storage
of radioactive wastes; and
WHEREAS, over sixty -five (65) communities, agencies and organizations
throughout the region have gone on record as being opposed to the lifting of the
moratorium on uranium mining until it can be shown it can be done without hazardous
impacts to natural resources and public health; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia,
1. That the Virginia General Assembly maintain the moratorium on mining
uranium indefinitely or until the industry provides proof through an independent scientific
study that it is capable of performing such activities without hazardous impacts to the
natural resources and public health of the Commonwealth.
2. The scientific study must be provided by a person or persons that are not
affiliated with, employed by, or hired by Virginia Uranium Incorporated, its agents or
employees, or any person or company that is involved in uranium mining or milling.
3. That the Clerk to the Board is directed to send a copy of this resolution to
each member of the County's legislative delegation, the Virginia Association of
Counties, the Virginia Municipal League and to all groups currently studying uranium
mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
3. Resolution adopting additional legislative initiatives for the 2012
session of the Virginia General Assembly and petitioning the
General Assembly to favorably consider the topics and issues
addressed herein (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Chairman Church announced that he would allow citizen speakers
concerning this agenda item to speak before the vote was taken. Mr. Mahoney outlined
720 December 13, 2011
the resolution and explained the two items under discussion. B. Clayton Goodman III,
County Administrator advised the Board regarding the transient occupancy tax issue.
He explained the Board has been provided with information from the Roanoke Valley
Convention Visitors Bureau (CVB) regarding a two -step process they would like to see
an increase in funding in order to do more marketing for the Roanoke Valley as a whole.
The first step would be considered during the budgetary process whereby Roanoke
County would increase its percentage paid the CVB from the five percent (5 %) current
occupancy tax in Roanoke County. They are requesting Roanoke County consider
going from the current two percent (2 %) to five percent (5 %), which will require
approximately $140,000 additional funding. During that conversation, Mr. Goodman
advised the CVB this would be done through the budget process. If the Board is
considering this, he would recommend that it be funded over a period of time, because
these kinds of funds cannot be picked up at one time. The second request, step two, is
to ask the City of Salem, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County to consider
increasing the occupancy tax by two percent (2 %). Currently, Roanoke County is five
percent (5 %); the cities are currently at seven percent (7 %) and would go to nine
percent (9 %) under the proposal. There has been a great deal of discussion about this.
There is some opposition to the proposal and there has been some modification of the
proposal. Basically, staff is asking to go to the General Assembly to raise the rate, it
cannot be done like the cities. Chairman Church asked Mr. Goodman if and when
Roanoke County petitions the General Assembly, then and only then would it come
back to the Board. Mr. Goodman stated it is his understanding if permission is received
from the General Assembly, the County would have to conduct a public hearing, review
with the public and then the Board would decide whether to raise it at that time.
The following citizens spoke on this agenda item.
Ssunny Shah stated he lived in Roanoke County and has businesses in
Roanoke County; one of his hotels is on 6520 Thirlane Road. He stated he also has
hotels in Roanoke City and Botetourt County. He states he supports this move to
increase the tax, which will bring extra money to the industry and will be paid by the out -
of -town guests staying in the hotel industry. So, it is not going to be a burden on the
local tax payers, but coming from the out -of -town people. He stated money is needed
to market the Roanoke Valley and make it a destination point where people are going to
come and spend a good amount of vacation time here. There is a good marketing plan,
but no funds. This money will help us to market our product, which will help bring more
people in. It will help the restaurant industry, gas stations, grocery stores; everything
will be pretty much helped by this extra money. Generally the return on the money
spent on marketing according to the industry is for every dollar spent, ten dollars are
returned; that is a pretty good reason. This will definitely help our industry that is
struggling in this economy right now. The main thing, this will be first time all the three
governments have come together and want to do something for the tourist industry and
he thanked the Board for considering it. He stated he is sure Roanoke County will
benefit from the tax increase. Roanoke City has been seven percent (7 %) for a year
December 13, 2011 721
and Salem is seven percent (7 %), the County is only five percent (5 %). So there is a
gap there and if the tax revenue can be increased, it will be good for the industry.
Bart Wilner stated he is the Chairman of the Board of the Roanoke Valley
Convention Tourism Bureau and lives in the City of Roanoke on 2709 Crystal Spring
Avenue. He advised he took over the Chairmanship on July 1, 2011, and brought in
Landon Howard, the new Executive Director, about twenty (20) months ago. Mr. Wilner
stated Mr. Howard has done more for the CVB in the last twenty months than what has
been done in the last ten years. He has wonderful ideas. Tourism is a huge, huge
business and we need to recognize that. We employ over 7,000 people in the tourism
business. We have revenues over $650 million, but we have a budget of $1.3 million.
He stated he has met with all of the Board members individually and will not go into
details; $1.3 million is not enough. They have met with the professionals, as he called
them, Clay Goodman, Chris Morrell and Kevin Boggess from the three governments
that the Board is very familiar with. They have had many meetings with them and they
are all on board about how to get this budget up. The easiest way is to have an eight
percent (8 %) lodging tax in all three jurisdictions. He further advised there had been a
meeting last Friday about how to do that and of course one of the obstacles is right
here. He advised they need the Board's support to then take it to Richmond and of
course Richmond is only going raise the ceiling to whatever you ask for. Roanoke
County will then have to come back and have its own hearings about whether or not to
increase it or not. The two cities, Salem and Roanoke, can increase it immediately.
They have met with the Delegates that go to Richmond and they are very interested in
this. They are asking the Board to invest in this. This is for the next twenty to thirty (20-
30) years. This is about getting serious about funding tourism. The budget is currently
$1.3 million; the other budgets in our region go from $3 million to $5 million to $12
million, all over the map. They are not a player; they have some very exciting things to
do. They have brought consultants in and they have come here because of Virginia's
Blue Ridge and really want to get this thing marketed in the right way and of course,
they need the Board's support to do it. Our Board has supported this; they have five (5)
hotel people on the Board; four of them have supported it. So, they even have hotel
people supporting it. Thank you very much and they really need the Board's support.
Landon Howard stated he lives at 6123 Flamingo Drive, a citizen of
Roanoke County and very glad to be a citizen of Roanoke County. First, he thanked the
Board from the bottom of his heart, for their support. He stated they could not do this
without the Board. He advised Clay Goodman and his staff has been wonderful in
supporting what they are trying to get done. He identified the members of the CVB and
staff in the audience and asked them to hold up their hands. He stated they have been
looking forward to this now for a long, long time. Two years ago, he was interviewing
for this job and his one worry and his wife told him enroute back to Mobile. "You gotta
get all three governments to work together." She said you have to think about that
before you accept the job and he is here to tell you that all three governments see the
necessity of tourism and building a consumer brand for this community. We have got to
722 December 13, 2011
let people know outside of a hundred mile radius who we are; not only for tourism but
for economic development too, it is about messaging. So, he does not know how
passionate he needs to be about it, it is his job to be passionate, but they can get the
job done put this place on the map with the Board's help. He stated he knows people
do not like tax increases, he has been doing this job for twenty -eight (28) years. He
does not like tax increases, but he can tell you unless you go over a threshold and we
will not be going beyond our competitors, already Virginia Beach, Norfolk, and
Richmond all of those different communities are at eight percent (8 %). So, when they
get meeting planners and event people and sports people in here, they are used to
paying that eight percent (8 %). He stated he knows there are a few studies out there
that say if you go up on taxes; it will drive customers away; that is not true. He told the
Board that he knows from twenty -eight years of experience and he would not lead us
down that direction if he thought that was the case. The CVB has near unanimous
support, with the exception of one person on his Board that supported this. They have
met with every member of the Salem City Council and they have given them their
support, every member of the Roanoke City Council have said they will vote one
hundred percent (100 %) behind this and he is pleading with the Board to give them the
chance to go to Richmond and let them sell it; they will sell it. They will meet with the
delegates and with the Senate. He further advised he has spoken to the Governor
about this and he will tell you that they can get the job done, but he needs the Board's
help. Thank you.
Bhupesh Patel stated he lives in Roanoke County and has a business in
Roanoke County, which is the Holiday Inn — Tanglewood. — 4468 Starkey Road and he
stated they really support Roanoke as a designation and what is being proposed for
Step 1, they are a hundred percent (100 %) in agreement with that because you need
the funding to run the show. He advised they have a challenge with Step 2, as
Roanoke City and Salem City, as a County they have very limited business resources
that comes to Roanoke County before they come to Roanoke County because there are
options. Roanoke County cannot be the same as the City and County that is number
one. Step 2, they need to rethink on that and he hopes they are right as they are
thinking by raising the tax is not going to impact the business. They did a survey with
the hotel owners association and he believes the Board has the PowerPoint
presentation. He indicated the hotel owners support Step 1, but need to rethink Step 2,
as he does not feel the County is ready for that much of a tax increase.
Dharmendrah Patel stated he has businesses in Salem, and is also a
future business owner for Roanoke County as he has a piece of land on Plantation and
plans to build a hotel, sometime in the future as soon as the economy allows him to do
that. He stated he is the one Board member that Mr. Landon mentioned that is against
this. The reason that he opposes this was that originally it was a two percent (2 %) tax
increase, which would be nine percent (9 %), the highest in the State of Virginia.
Secondly, he was put on the spot, when he represents fifty (50) hotel owners, not only
from the County from Salem City and Roanoke City. He stated he represents their
December 13, 2011 723
interests on the CVB Board. His comment to them was before they disassociate with
this, he would like to go back and have a conversation with the hotel owners and see
what is a compromise, a workable solution. What is a win -win situation for the CVB, the
hotel owners and for the Counties or Cities, because the problem is that when you
increase the tax, there is data that we have provided that shows it does impact
business. Additionally, to go out with the highest tax in the State gives the wrong
impression. They wanted to work with a win -win situation and noted that Landon does
have a plan, he has a reason, and how do they support him. They came up with a
workable solution and presented it to Mr. Howard last week and also presented it to Mr.
Goodman. He stated they are willing to come half way there and work on this and as
long as there is accountability, there is a plan that says yes this will succeed and how it
will succeed, because in any business, in his business, if someone comes to him and
says give me a $1 million, he would say okay show me how you are going to spend that
$1 million, where is the business plan, where is the accountability, none of that was
planned out, so how do we go back and address those issues. There needs to be a
compromise. We absolutely support additional funding; we absolutely support that first
step. Maybe if you look at it from where he came from, all of the money that the City
collects goes to the CVB or you could not have a CVB there. So, the point is where the
funding comes from, and how it is spent, accountability. So, if this revenue is directed
from the lodging industry, then it should be used to increase the occupancy of the hotel
so these funds should be represented by a committee that is represented by hotel
owners along with the County representatives and also the CVB so that it makes sense.
The hotel owners are here to work on a solution that is workable for all parties, cities,
hotel owners and the CVB. Landon has a great reason, but at the end of the day there
needs to be an exit plan, commitment and accountability.
Kirtesh Patel of 2126 Innsbrooke Drive in Salem, Virginia stated he thinks
the idea is great, Salem, Roanoke and Roanoke County do need an identity, however,
the idea of raising tax is very difficult, at least at this point. He knows there are studies
out there that states it does decrease occupancy, and there are studies that state it
increases occupancy, so they are not sure which study is correct — that is to be
determined. However, if they increase the tax and the study that shows that occupancy
will decrease, then there will be a domino effect. People are not going to stay here,
they are going to stay in other counties or Christiansburg and if they do not stay here
then restaurants are going to get effected. It can hurt them, so they agree with Step 1
and with the plan that to market this area as a destination, either it's parks, or
conventions. Increasing tax is needed for funding it, but must it increase that much that
this area will be the highest in the State? Can we go step by step? Can you do half
one and have everybody can work towards a solution. He really wants the Board to
think about it and how it is possible. He stated he is in a "catch 22 ", because he likes
the idea on paper and it looks good and they do need something, but they do not want
to jump the gun and aim too high that when you fall down it will hurt a lot. The point is
let's go slowly and then we can see and if it works, then let's do it. If it doesn't work,
724 December 13, 2011
then you can track back and that is what he is asking, that is what we spoke with Mr.
Goodman too. Please think of this as a business and the citizen's money. This is a tax
increase, somebody is paying for it.
Supervisor Altizer asked Mr. Goodman if the item in regard to the
legislative program asking for Roanoke County to go up an additional two percent (2 %)
with Mr. Goodman responded in the affirmative. He then asked the Chair if he could do
something a little unorthodox, with the Chair's permission. He asked of all the hotel
owners that are in attendance; to show him the hands if they believe we need to do
something. He stated what is before the Board today, he wants to take a few minutes to
explain the process and he understands exactly what each has said, for and against
this. The process the Board is here today to look at doing is asking the General
Assembly to give us permission to go up a maximum of two percent (2 %). As the
Chairman said earlier, if the Board ever elects to do this or if they get granted two cents
and it is penny that is what it is. He stated the Board can sit here and agree to let this be
a part of our legislative agenda, but if the group of hotel owners are divided, it is dead, it
will be dead in Richmond where it counts the most. He stated what he wants to hear if
they are a believer that something needs to be done and if Roanoke County were
granted the rate increase that would be a discussion for another day and a compromise
and communication to come to a conclusion at that point, because without the first part,
there will be no second part. State legislators are going to talk to you, they are going
to see who is for and who is against and if you talk against the proposal and you are
divided, it will fail in Richmond. There will never be an opportunity to compromise, to
talk or to accomplish anything, no matter anyone's good will. Before he casts his vote,
he wants to know if they are a unified voice that something needs to be done, the two
percent (2 %) is acceptable for the Board to ask for as a cap, keeping in mind at a later
date, it will be a negotiated process with everyone's input at what that should be and
whether it should be staggered over a period a time should there be a sunset clause, if
it does not bring in everything they say. He stated he thinks there are some good
people running the CVB, and Landon Howard is doing a good job and he understands
they do not want to do things if there is no positive end result for the investment. He
stated if they are divided, he feels the Board may as well vote "no" now because he
does not want to be embarrassed when it goes to Richmond and it is voted down just
because there is no consensus.
Supervisor Elswick stated it sounds like a good idea that other people
would be paying taxes that citizens would normally have to pay and it would generate
more tourism and hotel owners would have a higher occupancy rate and anyone staying
in the area would not even notice a dollar or two addition to the rate. It sounds like it is
not going to hurt anybody that much and it would help a lot of people. Landon
mentioned his wife was concerned about getting all the localities work together and the
three government organizations can work together, they just need a little motivation and
Landon is doing a real good job of motivating. The Board is expecting they are going to
be a fine asset for the area. He stated he would think there would be some extensive
December 13, 2011 725
recommendations and a business plan that comes out of the CVB as to where the extra
money is going to be applied and what benefits it is going to bring to the people and the
hotel owners in the area. Also, he asked the CVB to look at the area itself and make
recommendations as to other places in the County that should be looked at in terms of
fixing the way they look or the way they have been handled; for recommendations of
actions that should be taken to improve the County appearance to people when they
first come through it. We appreciate what they are trying to do.
Supervisor Moore advised after reading over the proposal, it looks like
they have been talking and they will continue to talk and you have taken a good step
forward on working out a plan. This is step 1 that we are going to have to make a
decision on today and she knows if it gets to step 2, all of you will continue to work on
this.
Chairman Church stated he sees business people and citizens and wants
every single one of them to do well. As long as he has been in the area, all of his life,
there have been directors come through for the CVB, different leadership in Roanoke
City and Roanoke County and the one thing that has been discussed over the years is
what an asset we have here, what can we make it become, how can we leave a better
place for not only our children and grandchildren, but yours as well and he does not
believe we will accomplish that by doing nothing, but he does understand where each
are looking from. Our decision today is whether to take this forward to Richmond, the
people we spoke with this morning and their counterparts covering Southwest Virginia.
with the potential for Roanoke County to grow into that destination. There are many
hotels in Roanoke City, and there are many more in Roanoke County and Salem.
There is a sports marketing process in Salem City; that is where their revenue comes
from. Roanoke County has a new facility at Green Ridge where people come in and
bring their children to tournaments, which is a big business. He explained no matter
how bad the economy is there are parents that will take children to soccer, basketball
and baseball. When they come and play their ball games, they have eight to ten hours
of each day to do something. We want them to go shopping, we want them to stay at
your hotels and eat at your restaurants. Today's vote is important, because if the Board
does not go to step 1, nothing is accomplished.
RESOLUTION 121311 -3 ADOPTING ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE
INITIATIVES FOR THE 2012 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA
GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND PETITIONING THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY TO FAVORABLY CONSIDER THE TOPICS AND
ISSUES ADDRESSED HEREIN
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on October
11, 2011, adopted a legislative program resolution for the 2012 session of the Virginia
General Assembly; and
726 December 13, 2011
WHEREAS, the Board has identified additional legislative initiatives for the 2012
session of the Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution for additional legislative initiatives
for the consideration of the Virginia General Assembly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that the following additional legislative initiatives are submitted for its
legislative program for the 2012 session of the Virginia General Assembly for its
favorable consideration and adoption.
1. Transient occupancy tax — Currently Roanoke County's transient
occupancy tax is capped at five percent (5 %). It is requested that Section 58.1 -3823 of
the Code of Virginia be amended to allow Roanoke County to impose a transient
occupancy tax not exceed seven percent (7 %). The Convention and Visitor's Bureau
(CVB) has requested the County to allocate additional funds from this tax to support its
operations. If this increase in the transient occupancy tax were approved, Roanoke
County could enter into an agreement with the CVB to allocate these additional tax
proceeds to its operations.
2. Economic Development Authority Membership — Current State Code limits
industrial development authority /economic development authority boards to seven
members. It is requested that Section 15.2 -4904 of the Code of Virginia be amended to
increase the membership of these boards to ten (10) members within the discretion of
the local governing body.
That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send an attested copy of
this resolution to Governor McDonnell, Senator John S. Edwards, Senator Ralph Smith,
Delegate Greg Habeeb, Delegate Chris T. Head, Senator Stephen D. Newman,
Delegate Onzlee Ware, Stephanie Moon, Roanoke City Clerk; Members of the Roanoke
City Council; Kevin S. Boggess, Clerk for Salem City Council; Members of the Salem
City Council; Clerk for the Town of Vinton; Members of the Vinton Town Council and the
Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission, and the Virginia Association of
Counties.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
Supervisor Altizer commented during his vote, "Are you united as a
business group in what we are petitioning today that you support with an outcome to be
determined later if it is granted, are we in agreement ?"
December 13, 2011 727
4. Request to appropriate $25,000 to Roanoke County Schools from
the Commonwealth of Virginia (Dr. Carol Whitaker, Assistant
Superintendent of Personnel; Kim Thompson, Assistant
Supervisor of Personnel)
A- 121311 -4
Dr. Whitaker outlined the request. There was no discussion. Supervisor
Church moved to approve the staff recommendation to appropriate $25,000 to Roanoke
County Schools. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
5. Request to grant an additional Christmas Holiday on Friday,
December 23, 2011 (B. Clayton Goodman III, County
Administrator)
I_QiPAb1(i`W
Mr. Goodman explained the request. He advised the Commonwealth of
Virginia has already announced this as a State holiday. He contacted the City of Salem
and the Town of Vinton and they are both also granting this additional day. There was
no discussion. Supervisor Flora moved to approve the staff recommendation to grant
an additional holiday on December 23, 2011. The motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the purchase of approximately 14.4 acres
of real estate (Tax Map No. 56.01 -01- 17.00) located along West
Riverside Drive and adjacent to the Roanoke River from LSW
HMW Family Limited Partnership for public use as a recreational
amenity in the Catawba Magisterial District and reallocation of
$20,000 from the Parks and Recreation budget for such purpose
(Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism)
Mr. Haislip outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion. Chairman
Church moved to approve the first reading and scheduled the second reading for
728 December 13, 2011
January 10, 2012.
2. Ordinance to accept the conveyance of approximately 9.15 acres
of real estate located at 10148 Tinsley Lane known as Bent
Mountain School from the Roanoke County School Board to the
Board of Supervisors (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion.
Supervisor Elswick moved to approve the first reading and scheduled the second
reading for January 10, 2012.
3. Ordinance authorizing the lease to Bent Mountain Center, Inc. for
one year (plus option to extend for additional one -year periods) of
the Bent Mountain Elementary School (B. Clayton Goodman III,
County Administrator)
Mr. Goodman outlined the ordinance. Supervisor Elswick stated this is
something that everyone is aware of and staff has been working on for the last year or
so and citizens on the mountain have traveled to a number of locations with similar
facilities to ascertain the management techniques they have used and put hundreds of
hours into forming an organization and electing people to be Board of Directors and
officers of the organization and preparing themselves to manage a community center.
He stated he thinks this will be an asset to the County, it may take a year or two for it to
really get off the ground, but feels it will be a tremendous asset over the years to come.
Supervisor Altizer asked Mr. Goodman if the citizens group had received
their 501(c) 3 with Mr. Goodman responding they have filed, but have not received. He
advised the Board that Annie Krochalis was in attendance to answer any questions.
Ms. Krochalis stated she lives at 9428 Patterson Drive in Bent Mountain and advised
they will use the Bent Mountain Women's Club 501(c) 3 until the new one goes through.
She advised the paperwork takes about a year to process. Supervisor Altizer asked
Mr. Mahoney if there was a conditional 501(c) 3 that is issued first. Mr. Mahoney
responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Altizer asked if all the IRS paperwork has been
sent in yet for the citizens group. Ms. Krochalis responded they cannot send in until
they get back the incorporation; they are in process, but have not received everything
back. Supervisor Altizer stated he would like to "throw something out for the Board to
consider ". He stated to authorize the lease before certain other things is somewhat in
the reverse of the way the Board would normally do things in approving a lease. He
stated he has thought about the capital end of it, which he thinks has given some Board
members and himself some problems. Some other things that he has thought about are
the way Roanoke County has funded things before. First, until the conditions to the
501(c) 3 are met, he does not feel the Board should be giving permission for a lease.
Secondly, he thinks the lease could change if the Board adopts any of what he is about
December 13, 2011 729
to ask them to consider. In his district, they have Craig Avenue and the County puts in
about a $15,000 a year in operating expenses and the County puts in about $15,000 in
the Catawba Center. The Board is asking the citizens to raise $30,000 a year, which is
what the operating expenses are projected to be. He stated he thinks it would be fair
and would ask the Board to consider to treat that building the same as some of the
others and pickup $15,0000 a year of that money; not just year one, but year two, three
etc. The citizens group that is going to be formed would come up with the other
$15,000 and /or $16,000, $18,000 if the $15,000 amount escalated over the years. He
would certainly want to see in the lease, there are some major capital expenditures that
could go along with that building, there is an understanding that to do those it would
have to follow through the normal process of the Board that goes with capital projects
and there may be a possibility of time that it might have to be shut down awhile until
funds are approved from a capital standpoint. He reiterated that the capital issue is an
issue and would hope that everyone would understand. He thinks that once the lease is
done, the Board is not going to kick the citizens out. He reiterated the 501(c) 3 needs to
be in place.
Chairman Church stated he was glad Supervisor Altizer had brought this
forward and to make it comparable.
Supervisor Elswick just wanted to let Supervisor Altizer know there are
two 501(c) 3 in existence and when the people organized they wanted to make sure that
all elements of the community were represented in terms of management. The Board of
Directors has Fire and Rescue, the Women's Club, the Civic League as well as citizens
and within the Board of Directors there are two 501(c) 3s they can temporarily operate
under.
Supervisor Flora stated he wants to make sure he understands the
proposal. One, prior to approving any lease, the organization is incorporated and has
their corporate papers in hand, they have their 501(c)3, even conditional in hand, the
County will fund fifty percent (50 %) of the $30,000 operating costs, the lessee will pay
the other $15,000 or whatever. His question is should they have proof of financial ability
to pay that $15,000 before the lease is approved, because there is no sense in opening
up and starting something if the money is not there to fund it.
Supervisor Altizer stated Supervisor Flora was exactly right. There needs
to be a business plan and he thinks the business plan could be more defined on how
they are going to raise $15,000 to $16,000 that would be a part of the submission.
Supervisor Flora stated he is not sure why the citizens group has not
gotten all this done because in less time than we have been actually talking about this,
two private organizations in Craig County have incorporated, gotten their 501(c)3 and
have received their money and they are rolling. He does not understand why it is taking
Bent Mountain so long to get all this gone.
Ms. Krochalis responded that they are using a pro -bono attorney and
asked Supervisors Altizer and Flora if they required a 501(c) 3, proof of financial stability
and incorporation for the community centers in Catawba and in Vinton. She indicated
730 December 13, 2011
they are going this as a community with a Board of Directors, with a 501(c) 3 affiliation
with an incorporation filed because they do not have anything from Roanoke County.
She stated she thinks the Board is placing a bar for them to hop over that is a lot higher
than is required in other districts. Bent Mountain does not have Parks and Recreation
providing services for them even though they own this land because they want to wait
and see what happened. They cannot move forward when they do not know who they
will be signing a lease with. She stated she has been to this Board, the School Board
and has been to every meeting as this Board has. It is an interesting process, but she
thinks they have had to meet a much higher standard and are having to provide their
own classes and services whereas more land was just purchased for Catawba, the
Board just did something else for Southwest County and Bent Mountain traditionally has
to pay more and she asked the Board to consider are they doing that again. She
explained they paid for one half of the library addition; she does not see people going
door to door in Penn Forest to pay for the new library. So, she is just asking the Board
to look at where they are placing this bar for what is basically an abandoned building on
the Parks and Recreation property to be used by the citizens who live there, who have
maintained the garden, the trail, who have put in the park behind there, all that has been
done by the citizens. She stated she thinks they have established a track record,
particularly with raising funds for the library, over the years. The Women's Club 501(c)
3 provides services to the library every year and scholarships, etc. The First and
Rescue is a 501(c) 3, again a volunteer group. The pattern has been to become
incorporated in a 501(c) 3. Is that only a pattern for Bent Mountain? It is a pretty high
bar, but they will meet it.
Supervisor Moore stated she thinks it be great for the citizens on Bent
Mountain to have a community center, on the other hand, she really thinks we have a
school that has been boarded up, Roanoke County is being asked to be landlord and
the citizens groups is asking to be lessees and also are asking to have subleasing, and
there is no business plan from anyone as to how much rent the County will receive,
which really thinks is good business practice to have a business plan on anything the
County does. So, she concurs with Supervisor Altizer and Supervisor Flora. She stated
she is good with the fifty percent (50 %), she thinks that is fair because it is being done
for other recreational centers.
Supervisor Altizer stated he could sit there and tell you that if the folks who
lived down around the Craig Center, if they wanted to increase the operating expense
there by $15,000, that he would expect them to do the same thing for an expanded use.
They use that building. The building closes at a certain time. The Bent Mountain Group
would pretty much be allowed to have the keys and use the building as they see fit, any
time of day. The citizen group does do a lot there and he appreciates the hard work,
but there are also other organizations within some of these recreation centers that do
the same thing and maybe it is not as public. So, does he think an extra benchmark is
being set; absolutely not. He thinks the Board is doing the right thing by investing the
same amount of money into that recreational center for the folks on Bent Mountain that
December 13, 2011 731
has been done in other districts. He thinks as things go forward, quite frankly, he will
say that the old William Byrd High School will be surplused to Roanoke County and
some of the folks in Vinton might say there is going to be a high benchmark for that
building, especially if you look at the five to six million dollars to be able to do something
with that building. He stated he thinks the Board is being fair, he thinks they are trying
to do what is right for each locality and invest in every community.
Supervisor Elswick stated he appreciated what Ms. Krochalis had to say
and he understands what the other Board members are asking for, however, what he
does not understand is the Board has been discussing this lease for months and if you
wanted a business plan, it would have been nice if you would have asked us for it back
then. There is something he would really like to get across. The people in the outlying
areas, Catawba, Bent Mountain those people do not take advantage of some of the
amenities that are in the urban areas. They are not going to drive twenty miles to the
recreational center. The County is paying $1.8 million a year just for the recreational
center and there are a lot of other things that Roanoke County is spending money on
that urban people take advantage of and he is not saying anything against those, but
those are the kinds of things that Counties do. He stated he does not think the Board is
appreciating the difficulties that people in the rural areas have in traveling to what the
entertainments are in the urban areas and he would think that considering the amount
of money spent in the urban areas, a $30,000 investment in our rural areas for
something that people are going to volunteer to keep up and to manage and turn into a
County asset would only be fair to those people who also pay taxes and if the Board is
going to ask for a business plan for Bent Mountain then he would expect that to be
applied equally to any other venture of this type that is in this County and not single out
Bent Mountain as being the only place that has to comply with such a requirement.
Supervisor Altizer stated with all due respect to Supervisor Elswick, a
business plan was asked for about a year ago.
Supervisor Moore stated at the joint School Board meeting a year ago that
was one of the first things asked for a County staff was willing to help with that.
Supervisor Altizer stated he thinks a motion on his part is not appropriate
right now other than getting the consensus of the Board in meeting the conditions that
the Board have stated they would like to see; an agreement that the County is going to
fund $15,000 of $30,000 on an ongoing basis not just on the first year of operation and
a lease agreement to reflect all that, the 501(c) 3, at least the temporary certificate in
place and a business plan. Supervisor Altizer then asked Ms. Krochalis if part of the
reason the citizens group has not moved forward with the 501(c) 3 is because of the
expense and then the worry about whether or not the Board would approve a lease at
that time? Ms. Krochalis responded in the affirmative and advised they have a
temporary agreement for the 501(c) 3 and also did not know if they would be doing this
with the School Board or this Board. Supervisor Altizer then stated if that is a
consideration for the group in getting this done and hesitation about whether this Board
would approve a lease or not, he suggested to the Board that the Board should
732 December 13, 2011
reimburse up to $2,000 if they fail to approve a lease in the future, for attorney fees for
filing for the 501(c) 3. The citizens group would not get that back if the Board approves
a lease. He stated there were a lot of things to discuss; the Board has talked at length
concerning the parameters of what they are really looking for and getting, language in
the lease, talking about capital and explaining how that would happen in the process.
He stated he would like to table this to a future date until administration has the items
discussed today and then bring it forward at that point.
Chairman Church commented this issue has gone, for various reasons, a
long time. He can appreciate what has been said about requirements. He does recall a
request for a business plan. Ms. Krochalis remarked it had never come to her as the
Chairman of the Board. He then asked Mr. Goodman to verify, which Mr. Goodman
responded in the affirmative. He stated he does not think the consensus of the Board is
going to change from what has been mentioned today. He further commented he
knows the Bent Mountain group is not going anywhere, there are legal requirements
that must be met, but hopes the Board will try to make something workable for the
citizens group. He does not recall the details about the Catawba Center because it was
done before he was elected, but the fact is he wants the Board to try and walk on even
terms. He does not know where the ball has been dropped, but would like to see this
resolved as quickly as possible in order to help these citizens.
Supervisor Elswick stated he felt there should be consistency, if there are
other such centers in Roanoke County, whatever the Board asks of the people on Bent
Mountain, it would also ask of the people in the other areas. He does not think the
Board should go overboard and demand citizens to prepare business plans or other
fancy ways of expressing what they are going to do when they are not normally
accustomed to doing those kinds of things and thinks the Board needs to give them
assistance. If the Board is asking for a business plan, the citizen's group needs to be
told exactly what staff wants to see in the business plan; they have already talked to Mr.
Conner who is in charge of Fiddlefest, who is interested in coming up there. There has
been a great deal of discussion about a lot of things that could happen. He stated he
guessed he was through because other Board members seemed to be having a
separate conversation. "Let's vote on whatever we are going to vote on."
Chairman Church stated as a point of order, Supervisor Altizer was getting
his attention to recognize Supervisor Flora only.
Supervisor Elswick stated to move on as it was obvious what was going
on.
Supervisor Flora inquired of Mr. Goodman if Roanoke County had leased
the Catawba Center to a private corporation, giving up control. Mr. Goodman
responded in the negative. Mr. Flora inquired if Roanoke County leased the Craig
Center to a private corporation, giving up control. Mr. Goodman responded in the
negative. He stated that is the big difference.
Ms. Krochalis responded this was being done per the request of the
Board, adding they did not need to be a 501(c) 3 or a corporation except Roanoke
December 13, 2011 733
County asked them to. She advised they want a recreational center, like in other areas.
Roanoke County has asked them to go into business to get the same County services
that everybody else gets. The $15,000 would be great, appreciate receiving on an
annual basis, however, the $30,000 is what it takes to just pay the utilities. Who pays
the utilities for your folks Mr. Flora, Mr. Altizer? Chairman Church advised all questions
needed to be directed to the chair. Mr. Goodman or Mr. Mahoney may have the
answers, but does not want to debate this all night. A decision needs to be made. He
inquired of Mr. Goodman if he had answers to the concerns Ms. Krochalis just
mentioned? Mr. Goodman advised Catawba was formed over twenty -five (25) years
ago and has been maintained by the County and has been operated by the County; the
Catawba Ruritans and Civic group meet there and they do utilize the facility and the
grounds, etc. Craig Avenue has been operating program from Roanoke County, Parks
and Recreation for the past twenty years. He stated it is a little different, he
commented he was the one who brought up of the idea of the lease and they would
incorporate because they stated they wanted to come forward and pay for it and they
could raise money to pay for it, especially due to the tight budget. A meeting was held
with the citizens in eastern Montgomery who did similar things. At the end of the day,
he was the one thinking about the lease and asking them after a period of time to raise
the funds, etc. Chairman Church responded Mr. Goodman should not take the blame
and asked Mr. Mahoney he would like to have this resolved in favor of a community that
is trying their best in his opinion to make this work. If the Board did proceed with these
and it appears the consensus it not to, but he is in favor of proceeding and putting a little
trust in the community and try to work with them. If the Board proceeded with this
contingency 501(c) 3, what kind of jeopardy would Roanoke County be in, "are we
beating an ant with a sledgehammer?" Mr. Mahoney responded as Mr. Goodman and
he understood the direction of the Board from some of the previous work sessions,
there was an interest on the part of the Board to lease the property to the community
group, Bent Mountain Community Center, subject to several conditions, they
incorporate, they secure their provisional IRS 501 designation and so he thinks that is
where staff was proceeding in terms of drafting a lease and then bringing to the Board
the first reading of an ordinance. As he understands the discussion of the Board, many
of the items the Board members have raised, could be inserted into the lease document
and address the concerns the Board members have raised. Historically, what has been
done in the past is have a fairly generic first reading of an ordinance and at the second
reading, the lease would be included and would incorporate many of the details that the
members have raised today.
Chairman Church explained that is why he has brought this up and would
like to move forward, if possible. Accordingly, he inquired of Mr. Mahoney would staff
have time in his opinion to incorporate all of the above mentioned things in time. Mr.
Mahoney responded in the affirmative, stating he believes staff has a lease agreement
that has been thrashed out and thinks there have been some ideas that have been
raised today that are different, so staff would need to revise the document, but believe
734 December 13, 2011
there would be something available by the meeting in January, with the holiday season,
it would not be January 10, 2011, but to the second meeting in January. Chairman
Church asked the Board if they could proceed on this because he wanted to make
something work for the community.
Supervisor Altizer then inquired of Mr. Mahoney if the citizens group can
obtain a 501(c) 3 in that time frame. Mr. Mahoney responded that he has never
secured one, but has been advised when the paperwork is completed; a provisional
designation would be received from the IRS. How long that period of time takes, he is
not aware, but is his understanding though that the final would not be received for two
years.
Supervisor Flora inquired based on the conditions that would be put into
the lease, if it were approved at second reading, would that preclude the organization
from taking control of the building before they have all of these things done. Mr.
Goodman responded if it is a condition of the lease that they have these items, it would
be his understanding that they could not go into the building until they provide those
documents and proof.
Chairman Church reiterated that he is trying to make something work
instead of tabling.
Supervisor Moore inquired of Mr. Mahoney if the lease under second
reading includes any rents that would be paid to the organization, would they have time
to get those together as far as the business plan. Mr. Mahoney responded he would
like to discuss further with Mr. Goodman; there are a variety of ways that can be
addressed; inserting into the lease is one fashion, on the other hand it could be a
separate appropriation and separate action by the governing body. Mr. Goodman
stated in the proposed lease, any subleasing of the property would have to be approved
by Roanoke County. His experience at other locations, the local government has to
approve any subleasing of the property to make sure the use is compatible and
appropriate and also to address what is happening to the funds. He added all funds
would go back into the building.
Chairman Church asked Mr. Mahoney if he could offer a substitute motion
with the yield of Supervisor Altizer. Mr. Mahoney inquired if there had been a first
motion. Chairman Church advised the only thing that had been talking about was not to
proceed on this one.
Supervisor Elswick moved approval of first reading with the condition that
the current lease be revised to incorporate the items the other Board Members have
asked the community to do. Supervisor Altizer advised he wanted to make sure that
Supervisor Elswick's motion incorporates Roanoke County will pay $15,000 ongoing
and it is not a one -year venture. Mr. Goodman stated the lease would include
conditions of article of incorporation be acquired, a temporary 501(c)3, a business plan
and include in the lease some reference in regard to CIP for future funding for capital
with regard to use of the building. Mr. Altizer stated and up to $2,000 for any legal work
to do the 501(c) 3 that was begun after today's date. The motion carried by the
December 13, 2011 735
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
Chairman Church recessed at 5:03 p.m. for a ten minute break.
4. Ordinance authorizing and approving execution of a lease
agreement with Valley Communications for tower space to place
two (2) dish antennas and associated equipment at 2811
Sycamore Drive (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services)
Ms. Green outlined the ordinance and advised the lease date should be
February 1, 2012, instead of January 1, 2011. There was no discussion. Chairman
Church moved to approve the first reading and scheduled the second reading for
January 10, 2012
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance amending Chapter 13. — "Offenses- Miscellaneous"
providing for an urban archery deer season in Roanoke County
(Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the ordinance and reviewed the changes from the
first reading. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 121311 -6 AMENDING CHAPTER 13. -
"OFFENSES- MISCELLANEOUS" PROVIDING FOR AN URBAN
ARCHERY DEER SEASON IN ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, human /deer conflicts are increasing in Roanoke County and these
conflicts have caused damage to vehicles and personal property; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of local ordinances prohibiting the discharge of firearms
have created large tracts of land that act as sanctuaries for unregulated growth of deer
populations; and
WHEREAS, archery deer hunting is an effective and quiet method for harvesting
deer in urban settings; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors finds that establishing an urban archery
deer season in Roanoke County would minimize these human /deer conflicts and would
be an effective deer management option;
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on November 15, 2011
and the second reading was held on December 13, 2011.
736 December 13, 2011
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Article I. -In General of Chapter 13.- Offenses - Miscellaneous be
amended by the addition of a new section, Section 13 -5.5. -Urban archery hunting
season to read and provided as follows:
Section 13 -5.5. -Urban archery hunting season.
Archery deer hunting is permitted within the county limits by licensed hunters
during an approved Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Urban Archery
Season. In addition to the urban archery season, archery deer hunting is also allowed
during the early archery deer season, the general firearms deer season, and the late
archery deer season. Licensed archery deer hunters must abide by all applicable
sections of the Virginia State Code and Virginia Hunting Regulations (including bag
limits and tagging /checking requirements). It shall be unlawful and a Class 1
misdemeanor for any person, while hunting deer during the county's archery season, to
violate any of the following additional county restrictions:
(a) Any person discharging a bow shall, at all times, while engaged in such
activity, have in his possession written permission from the landowner(s) to
discharge such a weapon on his premises.
(b) No person shall discharge a bow from, over or across any street, sidewalk,
alley, near primary or secondary highways, roadway, or public land or public
place or near a public school and county /town /regional parks within the
County limits or toward any building or dwelling in such a manner that an
arrow may strike it.
(c) No person may discharge a bow unless from an elevated position of at least
ten (10) feet above the ground.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in hunting with a bow or to
discharge arrows from bows within one hundred (100) yards of a dwelling
house or occupied building not his or her own. A "bow" includes all
compound bows, crossbows, longbows and recurve bows that have a peak
draw of less than ten (10) pounds or that are designed or intended to be used
principally as toys. The term "arrow" means a shaft -like projectile intended to
be shot from a bow,
2. That this ordinance shall be full force and effect from and after January 1,
2012.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance approving the new Intergovernmental Agreement
between the City and County of Roanoke for joint use of the 800
December 13, 2011 737
MHZ Radio System (Bill Greeves, Director of Communications
and Information Technology)
Mr. Greeves explained the ordinance. There were no changes from the
first reading and there was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 121311 -7 APPROVING A NEW INTER-
GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ROANOKE AND THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE FOR THE JOINT
800 MHZ PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke previously entered
into an Intergovernmental Agreement dated December 17, 1997, for the purpose of
expanding the County's existing 800 MHZ trunked radio communication system ( "the
System ") to serve both the County and the City's fire, police, emergency and other radio
communications needs pursuant to Section 15.2 -1300 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended; and
WHEREAS, that original Intergovernmental Agreement was for a term of fifteen
(15) years and was set to expire in 2012, and said Agreement has been previously
amended in October 2001, September 2005 and October 2009, in connection with
operational details for the System and the FCC rebanding project; and
WHEREAS, the County completed its transition to the digital radio platform in the
fall of 2009 and has subsequently worked cooperatively with the City on the transition of
its public safety channels to the same digital radio technology and
WHEREAS, the implementation of digital radio systems in both jurisdictions
provides for a jointly owned and operated public safety radio system for the enhanced
safety and welfare of the entire Roanoke Valley while continuing the 50/50 cost sharing
arrangement provided for in the original Agreement and its amendments; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the full integration of a joint radio system, the County
and City staff have negotiated a new Intergovernmental Agreement to provide a clear,
description of services, responsibilities, roles, ownership of property and cost of
services to maintain the System as a joint system of the County of Roanoke and the
City of Roanoke under the term of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on November 15, 2011
and a second reading was held on December 13, 2011
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Joint Use of the 800 MHZ
Radio System between the County of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke is
approved.
738 December 13, 2011
2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute the
Intergovernmental Agreement for the Joint Use of the 800 MHZ Radio System
upon such form as approved by the County Attorney.
3. That this Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
3. Ordinance authorizing conveyance of a variable width water and
sanitary sewer line easement to the Western Virginia Water
Authority to be located within a public right -of -way known as
Green Tree Lane, said right -of -way having been dedicated to the
Board of Supervisors, Catawba Magisterial District (Joe
Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney)
Mr. Obenshain outlined the ordinance and advised there had been no
changes from the first reading. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 121311 -8 AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A
VARIABLE WIDTH WATER AND SANITARY SEWER LINE
EASEMENT TO THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY
TO BE LOCATED WITHIN A PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY KNOWN
AS GREEN TREE LANE, SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY HAVING BEEN
DEDICATED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CATAWBA
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) requires an easement
for underground water and sewer lines within the public right -of -way known as Green
Tree Lane to provide water and sewer service to the area, all as shown on the plat
entitled "VARIABLE WIDTH WATER AND SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT EXHIBIT
FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY, GREEN
TREE LANE, COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA," (Exhibit A) dated 11/7/2011; and
WHEREAS, Green Tree Lane was dedicated in fee simple to Roanoke County by
subdivision plat of Section 9, North Lakes Subdivision, dated February 28, 1972, and
recorded in Plat Book 8, page 15 in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed right -of -way will serve the interests of the public and is
necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Roanoke County.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
December 13, 2011 739
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 November 15, 2011, and a
second reading was held on December 13, 2011.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the interest in real estate to be conveyed is hereby declared to be surplus, and
is hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to WVWA for the
provision of water service.
3. That donation to WVWA of an easement for underground water and sewer
lines and related improvements, within the easement area designated on the above -
mentioned map, on the County's property known as Green Tree Lane to provide water
and sanitary sewer service to the area is hereby authorized and approved.
4. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be
necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the
County Attorney.
5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Moore, Flora, Elswick, Church
ABSTAIN:
Supervisor Altizer
NAYS:
None
IN RE:
APPOINTMENTS
1. Library Board (appointed by District)
Supervisor Elswick reappointed Sarah McClure to represent the Windsor
Hills Magisterial District for a four -year term, which will expire on December 31, 2014.
Confirmation was added to the Consent Agenda.
Chairman Church reappointed Diana Beamer to represent the Catawba
Magisterial District for a four -year term, which will expire on December 31, 2015.
Confirmation was added to the consent agenda.
2. Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau Board of
Directors (appointed by the County Administrator)
B. Clayton Goodman III appointed Douglas Bount to fulfill Thomas "Pete"
Hailsip's term of office vacated by his retirement. Mr. Bount's term will expire on June
30, 2012. Ratification of this appointment was placed on the Consent Agenda.
740 December 13, 2011
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
RESOLUTION 121311 -9 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM I- CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for December
13, 2011, designated as Item I - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and
concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
through 8 inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of minutes — October 25, 2011; November 15, 2011
2. Resolution establishing a meeting schedule for the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County for calendar year 2012
3. Request to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $8,003 to the
Sheriff's Office from State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP),
approved by the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance
4. Confirmation of appointments to the Library Board (appointed by District) and
the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau Board of Directors
(appointed by the County Administrator)
5. Request for authorization to negotiate a contract for a construction project
where the lowest bid is within ten percent (10 %) of available funds — Glenvar
Library Construction
6. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Blas Cotto, Custodian, upon his retirement after more
than six (6) years of service
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 121311 -9.a ESTABLISHING A MEETING
SCHEDULE FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2012
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That for calendar year 2012, the regular meetings of the Board of
December 13, 2011
741
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, are set forth below with public hearings
scheduled for 7:00 p.m. unless otherwise advertised.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, February 28, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, March 13, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, April 10, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, April 24, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, May 8, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, May 22, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, June 26, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, July 10, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, August 14, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, August 28, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, September 11, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, October 9, 2012 at 3 pm
Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 3 pm and 7 pm
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 3 pm
2. That the organizational meeting for 2013 shall be
held on Tuesday,
January 8, 2013, at 2:00 p.m.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
A- 121311 -9.b
A- 121311 -9.c
A- 121311 -9.d
RESOLUTION 121311 -9.e EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO BLAS COTTO, CUSTODIAN, UPON HIS RETIREMENT
AFTER MORE THAN SIX (6) YEARS OF SERVICE
WHEREAS, Blas Cotto was hired on October 15, 2005 as a Custodian; and
742 December 13, 2011
WHEREAS, Mr. Cotto retired on December 1, 2011, after six years and one
month of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County; and
WHEREAS, during his time serving Roanoke County, Mr. Cotto always exhibited
an attitude of friendliness, care, respect and consideration of coworkers and others;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Cotto was dedicated to the employees working in the Roanoke
County Public Safety Center and will be greatly missed by them; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Cotto was a dedicated and reliable employee who often assisted
others in performing their job duties;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of
the citizens of Roanoke County to BLAS COTTO for more than six (6) years of capable,
loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy
and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
The following citizens spoke.
Mr. Ron Keith Adkins of 3057 Timberlane Road in Roanoke County and
brought Chief Burch and two others with him: Denise White, President of Management
Company, Coordinated Services Manages that manages Edinburgh Square and resides
at 5151 Mason Park Drive in Roanoke and Jennifer Sink who resides at 556 Oney Road
in Vinton and advised she is the manager of Edinburgh Square. Mr. Adkins advised the
reason they were here was on November 20, 2011, a Sunday night, there was a fire in
the Edinburgh Square Retirement Center. He advised he does not know if the Board is
familiar with Edinburgh Square; it is a 144 unit building located on the corner of
Hershberger and Plantation. It is a retirement center and has been in business for
twenty -five (25) years. He stated he was helpful along with several other people to get
this built and to provide a quick background it is jointly owned by the Mountdale Lodge
#49 of the Oddfellows and the League of Older Americans. Unfortunately, Mr. Shannon
Able, who was going to be here had to leave early. He is Director of Senior Citizens
and he and himself and a number of other people sit on the Board. The point is there
was what could have been a bad fire out there and they wanted to tell the Board and
everyone in Roanoke County how well the Roanoke County Emergency Services
responded. The Fire Department, the Police Department, the Rescue people were all
there. The entire facility, 144 units had to be evacuated and wanted to let the Board
December 13, 2011 743
know the Fire Department of Roanoke County does an extremely good job of opening
steel doors without keys. They did a great job and would like the Fire Chief to comment
on this. Chief Burch advised this was truly a joint effort in this particular area. There is
automatic mutual aid with Roanoke City. Roanoke City units were right there as
Roanoke County rolled in on this call. The new station being across the street, there
was a very quick and rapid response. There was a challenge that night; the fire was
contained fairly quickly because of the sprinkler system, but there was quite a bit of
smoke and they had to do forceful entry into apartments to make sure everyone was
safe. There was excellent cooperation with the residents. They were totally evacuated;
it was not freezing cold that night, but time was needed to do something and they
cooperated with us. This was certainly a success story and a joint effort as always
among everyone involved.
Mr. Adkins stated they are here to put a face to the people that run it. He
advised he had been on the Board for twenty -five (25) years; he is the president at the
present time. He just wanted to have Denise White and Jennifer Sink here as well as
the Fire Chief. Again, he advised they are there to say thank you to all of the people in
Roanoke County that did an excellent job and that includes all of the Police, Fire,
Rescue Departments and the management of Roanoke County; without their help it
could have been a lot worse as everyone might recall some years ago, there was some
lives lost in another retirement center in Roanoke. "Thank God, this did not happen at
this time." It is a nice location and the Board is invited anytime if they would like to take
a look. Again, thank you for everything you have done.
Ms. White stated they wanted to convey their appreciation for all the Fire
and Police Departments did and to Roanoke County for having the wisdom to build the
firehouse right across the street from Edinburgh Square and know they can count on
the Fire Department and along with being efficient and quick responding, they were very
patient and very helpful to our elderly residents, which goes above and beyond the call
of duty; it was very much appreciated.
Ms. Sink advised they hung around for several hours that night. She
advised she had one particular resident, who is in her 90's and can be rather needy and
they stayed with her until one of the staff was able to be with her.
Mr. Adkins again stated what a wonderful job they did. He went out the
next morning and he was impressed on how they were able to get into a couple of
apartments. Again, they just want to put a face who they are, what they do and where
in Roanoke County. Hopefully, that operation will be out there for many, many years to
come.
Chief Burch remarked this was better than any Governor's Award they had
received.
Chief Burch remarked this was Pete Haislip's last meeting and thanked
him for his lively competition.
IN RE: REPORTS
W A
December 13, 2011
Supervisor Flora moved to receive and file the following reports. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Reserves
3. Reserve for Board Contingency
4. Treasurer's Statement of Accountability per Investment and
Portfolio Policy as of October 31, 2011; November 30, 2011
5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of
November 30, 2011
6. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and
Encumbrances as of November 30, 2011
7. Accounts Paid — November 30, 2011
IN RE: CLOSED MEETING
At 5:29 p.m., Chairman Church moved to go into closed meeting following
the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2 -371. A.1.Personnel,
namely discussion concerning appointments to the Roanoke County Planning
Commission; Roanoke Valley Resource Authority and Western Virginia Regional Jail
Authority. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
The closed session was held from 6:18 p.m. until 6:23 p.m.
At 5:30 p.m., Chairman Church recessed to the 4 floor for work session
and closed meetings.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session to discuss Vinyard Park II (Doug Blount, Associate
Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism)
In attendance for this work session was Doug Blount, Associate Director
of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and
Tourism; Allen Hayes, Parks, Recreation and Tourism; B. Clayton Goodman III, County
December 13, 2011 745
Administrator; the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Board: Max Beyer, Hollins, Fred
Corbett, Cave Spring; Roger Foutz, Vinton; Paul Bailey, Windsor Hills and Mike Roop,
Vinton.
Mr. Bount gave a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the Clerk to the Board. He explained Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley
Soccer Club (also known as Roanoke Star) entered into a twenty year lease (initial 10
year lease with two- 5 year extensions) for the development of the Vinyard II Park in
1994 and the Vinyard II Park lease will expire on December 31, 2014. Mr. Blount then
asked for direction from the Board based on the options presented.
Supervisor Altizer inquired if there is a process in place if anyone wants to
utilize our fields, they can go through and sign up for time, or reserve fields with Mr.
Bount responding in the affirmative and stating this is done on a annual basis. There
are currently thirty -one (31) different clubs granted additional time. Mr. Haislip
remarked this amounted to $19,500 last year. Mr. Altizer stated what he is looking at is
the restriction. He knows the problems the County has in Vinyard I from a parking
perspective. He stated he thanked Roanoke City for building a new bridge, but there
has been a lot of interest from citizens in East County who know what a great facility we
have at Green Hill. They are looking to have certain types of things at that field. It is
twenty (20) acres. For example, the rub it, touch it and feel it type of events for the
children and having other types of events there that will help blend with the revitalization
of Downtown Vinton to draw big crowds so that people with go down to Vinton and hope
come to these big events and then go downtown and shop with our businesses as well
as the interest of our recreational clubs and how they would need the field. To him, and
he is only one Board member, he just wants to be explicit in his thoughts that he wants
any of the group here that are thinking about an request for proposal (RFP) or whatever,
he just wants them to understand from his standpoint if staff does that there is no
guarantee of any kind of guaranteed use. The use would be only after Roanoke County
finishes planning for whatever they would have for that given year. He does not see
how staff can go that route, with the population that has grown in East County, with the
revitalization projects being done for downtown and bringing more types of things to
East County that is going to bring different types of individuals as they do in Green Hill
Park. Staff needs to look at that field as an economic generator. He just wants
everyone to understand that he cannot support a lease that gives anyone exclusive use
and staff cannot give guaranteed use of when those dates may be after the County side
and whatever is available is out there because things have changed over the past
twenty (20) years. It has been a good relationship with the Stars, now it is a different
scenario and staff is looking at different things; of wanting to do new things and multiple
things. Staff does a great job with Green Hill and everybody has expressed an interest,
the whole community has, about doing the same type of things.
Mr. Haislip responded he is glad Supervisor Altizer said what he did
because the relationship with the Roanoke Stars has been a very good relationship and
he thinks it has been a win -win for both organizations and when they meet with the
746 December 13, 2011
Roanoke Stars and it has been emphasized with all the groups that moving forward the
public /private partnerships are still going to be very, very important. He does not think
anybody can do it alone today or at least not as well in years past. He thinks there is a
lot of opportunity available. The County has partners all around and there is still room
for partnerships here.
Supervisor Altizer stated they needed to diversify the use of that field for
many different reasons.
Supervisor Flora stated one of the slides showed in Vinyard I there are
seven (7) fields, which does not have adequate parking so you can only use three (3) at
a time. Mr. Haislip responded that is during soccer and football season in the fall. Allen
Hayes advised there were three (3) regulation soccer fields and regulation football fields
there. When multiple games are played on the evenings they are played on the hour
slots so there is a 6, 7 and 8 o'clock game. There will be 6, 8, 10 teams there coming
and going and during that transition period of play traffic is backed up and calls are
received from Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) so staff typically tries to
limit the scheduling to three (3) of those four (4) fields during that fall season. He
believes the Booster Club does that as well in the baseball season, while they have four
(4) fields; they try to only schedule three at a time. Mr. Haislip has addressed that in the
past with parking lot improvements, etc.
Mr. Haislip advised when Roanoke Catholic came on, the parking was
expanded. He advised if one thing has changed in the years that he has been involved
in park design and development is parking lots have doubled in size. Mothers are
working, grandparents want to come to the game and all of a sudden each family
generates three cars, whereby in the old days it was one car or one and one half (1 %).
It is amazing that the parking footprint as you develop a facility just grows and grows
and grows. Staff is stuck down there now between the road and the river.
Supervisor Flora asked for clarification regarding "fall ", where does most
of the participation in those fields come from. Is it fall or spring? Mr. Hayes responded
it is very close, you will find forty to fifty (40 to 50) baseball and softball teams that will
play in the spring season which is April 1 St to sometime around the middle of June.
Additionally, there will be another forty to sixty (40 to 60) depending on the age groups
assigned to that park in the fall. It is pretty much those one hundred and twelve (112)
teams that utilize them in combination with Mount Pleasant and those kinds of areas
that utilize it as well. It is fairly well split as far as fifty percent (50 %) used in the spring
and the other half in the fall. Supervisor Flora stated it sounds like you have a problem
both spring and fall with Mr. Haislip responding in the affirmative. Mr. Hayes advised
the issue in the fall is the roster sizes of fall sports are so much larger. Supervisor Flora
stated it seems that is what you really want to use your fields for, to maximize as many
people as you can get in there because that is where the economic benefit comes from
and if you are having to idle four (4) of your fields then you are losing a lot of
participation. He asked if they have tried to add parking, is there anywhere? Mr. Haislip
responded there is an issue that they deal with it. If you go to Shell Park for example
December 13, 2011 747
and Forest Park, these are overdeveloped parks and Vinyard is approaching that itself.
When you go to that Park and it is so crowed because you cannot find a place to park,
the fields are crowded and there are people on the track. It is a good thing, but at the
same time there is a tipping point that it turns into a negative experience and you do not
want to go there, it is a zoo. Supervisor Flora inquired if too many fields were put there
to start with. Mr. Haislip advised no, it is a balance of scheduling. Mark will tell you that
he does not mind leaving a field to rest; in order to maintain the grass so he will say it is
a two -edged sword. Staff is trying to watch out for the tipping balance. This is why a
new big playground was built at Starkey to try to move people away from Shell. Staff
has looked internally at some design options, in order to utilize both sides and expand
parking and move things around to solve that problem without tipping the balance into a
negative experience.
Supervisor Moore asked if they have ever checked with any of the
industrial businesses located there to see if you could coordinate something with them.
Mr. Haislip responded in the negative because there are 24/7 shifts. Mr. Haislip
responded they are surviving. It has been seen at Shell, Starkey, Waldron Park and
when you get the big transition in turnover.
Supervisor Altizer responded there was no utilization. Mr. Haislip advised
in the contract, it is stated Roanoke County can have access, but it has never been
used.
Supervisor Moore stated she agreed with Supervisor Altizer and thinks it
would be a great idea to incorporate this and to steer more activity to Vinton and to have
more things there like Green Hill.
Supervisor Flora remarked it seems the first priority should be to our own
program. Our own programs benefit one hundred percent Roanoke County students;
that is who paid for it and that is where he thinks staff needs to prioritize to make sure
our children have a place first, anything left over is okay. The problem with the RFP
process is you end up with one group and there are really two groups that are certainly
interested. It seems like there is a mechanism right now where they can buy into some
of the available space, maybe staff should look at the fee schedule and see if it is
competitive and put a higher value on intense times. He stated he also agrees with
Supervisor Altizer and the property should be made use of and should be geared to
generate economic development regardless of whether it is the sports program or any
other type of economic development.
The work session was held from 5:40 p.m. until 6:05 p.m.
2. Work session to review the status of fiscal year 2012 -2013 budget
development (B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator)
In attendance for this work session were B. Clayton Goodman, County
Administrator, W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget; Rebecca
748 December 13, 2011
Owens, Director of Finance; Diane Hyatt, Assistant County Administrator and Dan
O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator.
Mr. Robertson went through a PowerPoint presentation to review
preliminary fiscal year 2013 projections and the information that staff would be starting
with negative revenue projections. Supervisor Altizer inquired regarding the personal
property line which is showing zero, but showing an $130,000 adjustment, which is the
equivalent of 1,200 new vehicles with Mr. Robertson responding it was a catch -up line
for an unbudgeted amount.
Mr. Robertson advised the real concern from the Revenue Team is the
estimate of the 2013 revenue. He advised the number they are using is another one
percent (1 %) reduction. He explained all other items are conservative.
Mr. Goodman indicated the health reserve is at the amount as approved
by the Board.
Mr. Robertson explained these numbers were exclusive of what the State
might change.
Ms. Hyatt advised the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) number is an
actual number and will not change.
Mr. Robertson indicated the VRS Life insurance increase was a surprise.
Mr. Goodman explained he felt it was important to show up front the
impact of a three percent (3 %) salary increase.
Supervisor Altizer asked what was driving healthcare with Ms. Owens
advising they have used ten percent (10 %) based on historical trends. Staff is currently
working through the process and different alternatives. Ms. Hyatt advised there was a
meeting scheduled on February 1, 2012, which health insurance will be discussed.
Mr. Goodman commented the Board has indicated in the past no tax
increase, minimize reduction of services to the citizens and no layoffs. He stated it is
going to be extremely difficult to continue to follow these guidelines. The bottom line is
that staff will make this work, but will need to focus on what the core services need to be
provided and look at services provided and what can and cannot be done without. In
addition, he advised that the normal letter for contributions would need to include the
possibility of reductions. Supervisor Altizer suggested the sterner language should be
there could be reductions, but feels the Board will not be looking at any increases.
Chairman Church stated staff needed to send the message not to expect any increase
and possibly a decrease.
Supervisor Moore asked for assistance with the streetlight moratorium.
Chairman Church advised he felt that based on what staff has indicated regarding this
year's budget, it should wait. Supervisor Moore stated it is only $400.00 a year and the
citizen is experiencing break -ins, etc. Chairman Church stated these streetlights were
not put in for safety and asked Mr. Covey for verification. Mr. Covey responded these
streetlights were put in for motorist safety.
Supervisor Altizer asked Mr. Covey to look for instances where there are
lights that no longer needed with Mr. Covey responding they are already looking at.
December 13, 2011 749
It was the consensus of the Board to discuss at a future work session.
The work session was held from 6:30 p.m. until 6:52 p.m.
IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
At 7:00 p.m., Chairman Church moved to return to open session and
adopt the certification resolution.
RESOLUTION 121311 -10 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 member's
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 Chairman Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
1. Resolution of congratulations to the Northside High School
baseball team for winning the Virginia High School League
(VHSL) Group AA State Championship
In attendance for the recognition were Lorraine Lange, School Superintendent,
Dominick McKee, Assistant Principal; John Michael Deeds, Assistant Principal; James
"Butch" Tyree, Athletic Director; Coach Ed Culicerto and the members of the Northside
High School baseball team. All Supervisors offered their congratulations. After the
750 December 13, 2011
recognition, the team presented Chairman Church and Supervisor Flora with an
autographed baseball.
RESOLUTION 121311 -11 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE
NORTHSIDE HIGH SCHOOL BASEBALL TEAM FOR WINNING
THE VIRGINIA HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE (VHSL) GROUP AA
CHAMPIONSHIP
WHEREAS, team sports are an important part of the curriculum at schools in
Roanoke County, teaching cooperation, sportsmanship and athletic skill; and
WHEREAS, the Northside High School baseball team won its first Group AA
State Championship this year, beating Tunstall 4 -0 on June 11, 2011, at Radford
University; and
WHEREAS, Northside High School won the VHSL Group AA Region III
Championship on June 10, 2011, at Calfee Park in Pulaski, by defeating York by 6 to 4;
and
WHEREAS, the Northside Vikings earned their first trip to a State championship
game by defeating Cave Spring High School in the Group AA semifinal game by 12 to
11; and
WHEREAS, the Northside Vikings finished their season with an outstanding
regular season record of 14 wins and 6 losses and a final record of 21 wins and 8 loses;
and
WHEREAS, the Vikings are under the dedicated leadership of Head Coach Ed
Culicerto and Assistant Coaches Ben Creasy, Patrick Weddle, Jimmy Winterer, Kelly
Dampeer, Stan Adams, David Culicerto, Aden Martin and Score Keeper Jim Wolfe.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby extend its sincere congratulations to the
members of the NORTHSIDE HIGH SCHOOL BASEBALL TEAM: Tray Bayse, Sam
Carruthers, Matt Culicerto, Todd Dunbar, Tyler Fisher, Tyler Goodman, Jonathan Hale,
Zach Hamilton, Adam Hardister, Cory Lewis, Parker Linden, Lucas Nowlin, Ben
Plunkett,Tyler Rowsey, Logan Stanley, Brett Tuck and Tyler Wolfe.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends its best
wishes to the members of the team, the coaches, and the school in their future
endeavors.
On joint motion of Chairman Church and Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution,
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
December 13, 2011 751
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES
1. The petition of Glenn Reed to rezone approximately 13.7 acres
from AR, Agricultural /Residential District to AV, Agricultural
Village District and to obtain a special use permit for the purpose
of a gas station /convenience store located at 9651 Bent Mountain
Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District (Philip Thompson, Deputy
Director of Planning)
Mr. Thompson explained the rezoning request for a school /office building,
convenience store and gas station. The Planning Commission held two public hearings
and several citizens spoke, with two citizens in favor. The Planning Commission
approved 5 -0 to approve with one proffered condition. Mr. Rodney Pierson of Pierson
engineering was in attendance to answer any questions.
Citizens speaking during this public hearing were as follows:
Karen Scott of 8443 Poor Mountain Road on Bent Mountain stated she is
an administrator and teacher at Bent Mountain Christian Academy and they have need
for more space for students because they are going to outgrow the facility where they
current are quickly. She explained they have need for an affordable facility in the
present area and are currently drawing students from up to twenty -five (25) miles away
and three counties and have students from grades K through 9. Bent Mountain is a
rural community of Roanoke County and it is on Route 221 and everyone has been on
Route 221 and that is an especially great site because it is a straight portion of Route
221 that this area is off of and it is a convenient location. The school will not be entering
and exiting right off Route 221, but off of Tinsley Lane. This is a particularly good spot
for this facility.
Dennis Humston of 11107 Rocky Road in Bent Mountain advised his
comments are in reference to the store. Years ago he was on the committee for the
long -term zoning, which promoted very hard the rural community and rural areas of
trying to get things to benefit the area. Mr. Reed is planning on a store, the things we
do not have is auto - diesel on Bent Mountain. They do not have good access to and
from a store with the road being what it is. The best access will be for trucks and
trailers, which he has a problem. When you are in a rural area and pulling a trailer, farm
machinery, etc, the stores there do not have that. He is also planning on having
hardware, with things being the way they are, you have to come all the way to Roanoke
to find any kind of hardware whatsoever and there are no restaurant facilities for
prepared food, which he plans on having in his store. So with that in mind, he cannot
see where this would not be a good fit for this community.
Kevin Poff of 6699 Bent Mountain Road in Roanoke stated he owns a
certain piece of property, which he indicated on the map. When he bought the property,
Mr. Reed put into his contract that he would not protest against his property. He is not.
752 December 13, 2011
He told him that he was going to build a store on the Route 221 side. He did not tell him
about the school. If he had known Mr. Reed was going to build a school, he would not
have bought it. His property cost $38,500; now it is worth nothing. He reiterated he is
not protesting what he wants to do with the other part of his land, but is it necessary to
crowd a person that is going to build a house when the economy improves. He advised
he bought the property for his wife with intentions to do that. He indicated Mr. Reed has
the driveway to the place right on top of his property. Mr. Poff stated if he could just
move it over, he does not even have to plant any trees, he lives in the trees and would
rather not have any trees. Mr. Poff stated he is sure Mr. Reed is going to build a nice
place, but just do not crowd him with it. That is all he has asked. There is all that other
land on the end; this is a lot of stuff he wants to do to put on that little bit of land. All he
is asking Mr. Reed do is move it over so it will not be so crowded on one end.
Supervisor Elswick inquired is there was any possibility to move the
driveway? All of the things that are planned make sense for the mountain and for the
community and Mr. Poff is apparently the only one that is upset. Mr. Pierson advised
they would like to move it away from Mr. Poff but that location has been identified and
specified by the Virginia Department of Transportation and that is where it has to go. If
it is moved any further, it will not meet VDOT's site distance and their requirements.
VDOT dictated where that entrance is located and at the first Planning Commission
meeting the road and the school were closer to Mr. Poff's property and did not have a
buffer yard. Since then, a buffer yard has been included and the road has been moved
and the school further away from his property and towards Bent Mountain Road to try to
negate some of the concerns that he has. The School has been placed based on the
drain field, the well, the stormwater management and some other things would go. The
school has been placed right in the middle of the property, which from a design
standpoint would like to keep it towards a property line, one side or the other to facilitate
if something in the future would come up. The owner has decided to do the best he can
for Mr. Poff and to move the building toward the center of the property, the road and the
entrance is out of their hands.
ORDINANCE 121311 -12 REZONING 13.7 ACRES FROM AR,
AGRICULTURAL /RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO AV,
AGRICULTURAL/ VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICT, FOR
PRIMARY /SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AND
GENERAL OFFICE USE AND TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE LOCATED AT 9651
BENT MOUNTAIN ROAD, WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT (TAX MAP NO. 103.00 -02- 21.00), UPON THE
APPLICATION OF GLENN REED
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 27, 2011,
and the second reading and public hearing were held December 13, 2011 ; and,
December 13, 2011 753
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held public hearings on
this matter on October 4, 2011 and December 5, 2011; 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 Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Glenn
Reed for a convenience store located at 9651 Bent Mountain Road in the Windsor Hills
Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2005 Community Plan, as
amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2 -2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended, and that it shall have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding
neighborhood or community, and said special use permit is hereby approved.
2. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing
approximately 13.7 acres, as described herein, and located at 9651 Bent Mountain
Road (Tax Map Number 103.00 -02- 21.00) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is
hereby changed from the zoning classification of AR, Agricultural /Residential District, to
the zoning classification of AV, Agricultural/Village Center District.
3. That this action is taken upon the application of Glenn Reed.
4. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the
following condition which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby
accepts:
(1) The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site
plan prepared by Pierson Engineering and Surveying, dated November
28, 2011, and the architectural renderings prepared by Interactive Design
Group dated July 18, 2011.
5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows:
Being 13.7 acres of real estate located at 9651 Bent Mountain Road and
further described as Tax Map No. 103.00 -02- 21.00.
6. 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 Elswick to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance declaring 5915 Garner Road, Roanoke, Virginia (Tax
Map Number 86.20 -02- 05.00) as blighted, authorizing spot blight
abatement and appropriation of $10,000, Cave Spring Magisterial
754 December 13, 2011
District (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney advised there were no changes from the first reading. Mr.
Mahoney outlined the need for the ordinance and advised Mr. Joel Baker, Building
Commissioner was in attendance to answer any questions. Mr. Mahoney cautioned if
the Board approves and a lien is placed, the recovery of public funds may take quite a
while until the property is sold. He also advised this is a different undertaking and this is
an approach that the Board wants staff to pursue; he feels there will be many other
similar properties that would fall within this category Countywide. Supervisor Altizer
inquired what was meant by the statement the roof no longer provides adequate
protection from the elements. Mr. Baker advised the roof is so deteriorated that the
shingles are actually crumbling at the touch. The owner over the last couple of years
has attempted to protect the building somewhat with tarps and plastic, but the present
time there is a reason to suspect because of what is seen on the carport, which is open
construction that similar damage has occurred to the house itself, because water has
penetrated through the debunk shingles and probably rotted quite a bit of the roof
sheeting over the main portion of the house as well. Supervisor Altizer inquired if
Roanoke County has been inside the house and actually looked to see if there is
damage to carpet, to walls, and would the estimate of $10,000 go higher? Mr. Baker
responded that is not what the "blight" effect is, which applies to the exterior
appearance of the property as well as attempting to stop any further deterioration, which
a new roof would do. He stated they expect and there is a cushion built into that
$10,000, which would allow for replacement of roof sheeting, plywood, etc. Mr. Baker
feels they can cure the blighted problem, get the property back to a status of where it is
not a detrimental influence to the neighbor and how the individual copes with the interior
of the house, it is not rental property, it is owner occupied and as long as the person is
safe, County will fix what is causing the problems. Supervisor Altizer stated he is more
concerned about what may support the roof. Mr. Baker stated he does not see that
happening.
There were no citizens to speak on this issue. Supervisor Moore stated
this is unfortunate but necessary situation. This needs to be done in order to protect our
citizens and the community. She stated she would like to re- emphasize this is a prime
example of why she would like to revisit the building maintenance code.
ORDINANCE 121311 -13 DECLARING 5915 GARNER ROAD IN
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (TAX MAP 86.20 -02- 05.00) AS
BLIGHTED; AUTHORIZING SPOT BLIGHT ABATEMENT; AND
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
WHEREAS, Section 36- 49.1:1 of the State Code authorizes any locality to
acquire or repair any blighted property by purchase or through the exercise of the power
of eminent domain; and
December 13, 2011 755
WHEREAS, the locality shall have the power to recover the costs of any repair or
disposal of such property from the owner; and
WHEREAS, the Chief Building Official of Roanoke County has determined that
5915 Garner Road in Roanoke, Virginia, is blighted and has provided the owner of this
property with notice as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Chief Building Official has determined that this residential
structure endangers the public's health, safety or welfare because this structure is
dilapidated, deteriorated, or violates minimum health and safety standards; and
WHEREAS, the Chief Building Official recommends that the Board consider the
acquisition or repair of this blighted property under the "spot blight" process; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on November 15, 2011;
and the second reading and public hearing was held on December 13, 2011.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED as follows:
1. That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County declares 5915 Garner
Road (Tax Map No. 86.20 -02- 05.00) as blighted as authorized by Section 36- 49.1:1 of
the State Code.
2. That the spot blight abatement plan for the repair of this property is hereby
approved.
3. That the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) be appropriated from the
Board of Supervisor's contingency fund to remove the dilapidated carport structure and
to install a new roof on the main structure.
4. That the County Administrator or his designee is authorized to take such
actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to implement the spot blight
abatement plan to repair this property and to recover the costs of any repair or disposal
of this property from the owner or owners of record, including placing a lien on this
property bearing interest at the legal rate of interest and recording this lien among the
land records of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County.
5. That this ordinance is effective from and after the date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
3. Ordinance establishing a special assessment for the South Peak
Community Development Authority regarding the financing of
certain public infrastructure improvements (Paul M. Mahoney,
County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the ordinance and the reasons this is required. He
indicated Mr. Penny and Mr. Habib were in attendance to answer any questions. There
was no discussion. There were no citizens to speak on this item.
756 December 13, 2011
ORDINANCE 121311 -14 ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT FOR THE SOUTH PEAK COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGARDING THE FINANCING OF
CERTAIN PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board ") of Roanoke County, Virginia
(the "County "), in accordance with the provisions of Article 6, Chapter 51, Title 15.2 of
the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "CDA Act "), created the South Peak
Community Development Authority (the "CDA") by Ordinance enacted August 24, 2010
(the "Ordinance "); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15.2- 5158.A.5. of the CDA Act, the Board has
the power to establish a special assessment on property within the CDA District; and
WHEREAS, the Board has previous approved a certain agreement with Slate Hill
I, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, as owner and developer of the land within the
CDA (the "Developer") pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding dated the 1 St day
of February, 2011 (the "Memorandum of Understanding "); and
WHEREAS, the Board has previously approved a certain agreement with the
CDA and the Developer pursuant to a Development, Acquisition and Financing
Agreement (the "Development Agreement "); and
WHEREAS, the CDA proposes to issue its bonds in an initial series (the "Bonds ")
to finance a portion of the public infrastructure improvements benefiting the CDA District
as described in more detail in the Memorandum of Understanding and Development
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of a special assessment on property within the
CDA District and the actions contemplated by the Memorandum of Understanding and
Development Agreement will benefit the citizens of the County by promoting increased
employment opportunities, a strengthened economic base and increased tax revenues
and additional business opportunities; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on November 15, 2011
and the second reading and public hearing was held on December 13, 2011, after
notice published as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. Special Assessment. By agreements between the Developer and the
Board pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding and the Development
Agreement, special assessments to pay the costs of public improvements to benefit
property within the CDA District are hereby established and apportioned in accordance
with the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Assessments ( "RMA ") in
substantially the form presented to the Board at this meeting. The CDA Board is
authorized to approve or to provide for the approval of a Special Assessment Roll
allocating the special assessment among the tax parcels within the CDA District in
December 13, 2011 757
accordance with the RMA. The CDA shall cause notice of the special assessments to
be reported to the County's Treasurer or other County official responsible for the
collection of taxes. The special assessments shall be liens on the taxable real property
in the CDA District in accordance with the provisions of Virginia Code Sections 15.2-
2404 et seq. In accordance with Virginia Code Section 58.1- 3965.2 the Board of
Supervisors hereby provides that if any special assessment levied pursuant to this
ordinance is delinquent, proceedings for the sale of the real property subject to such
special assessment are authorized to be instituted on the first anniversary date on
which the special assessment became due to the extent provided under Section 58.1-
3965.2.
2. Severability. If any part, section, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or
any individual assessment levied hereby, is declared to be unconstitutional or invalid for
any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of any other portion hereof or
assessment hereunder.
3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church
NAYS: None
IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Noah Tickle of 1603 Frosty Lane in Roanoke County stated the following.
"Merry Christmas by now ICLEI has deceived many more unsuspecting folks. Yet many
thousands deceived are beginning to understand that ICLEI is an outgrowth of the
International UN Agenda 21, from what was first presented by the Vice President of The
World Socialist Party. We now know ICLEI must go. It does not fit the American
Dream, owning a home and land for privacy to go with it. ICLEI considers the American
Dream, using their word play, "unsustainable "; that will not play when the real American
patriots wake up. We yet have Our Constitutional Republic. Can you imagine what
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison would think of ICLEI. It is too incredible to
imagine; unbelievable... They knew the insanity of top down governance. They were
Anti - federalist. If I could tell them right now about the Dillon Rule that came into
existence after they took their last breath they would for sure turn over in their graves.
We must get back to our original Constitutional Republic. Please listen. We are fast
loosing the American Dream. So, ICLEI believes in global warming, lower the Co2
"WHAT" Now, they are insisting on 50% reductions. Are they trying to starve out
Earth's seven billons by doubling the increase of the Co2 count that we now have would
increase crop production by 30 %. Is there "yet ", any common sense. Doubling the
present Co2 count is "NOT" dangerous. Mine safety is 5000; at present we are about
350. Thomas Paine, a great American hero wrote about common sense. Please,
please, may "We the People" of our Constitutional Republic have some, not the Figgie
758 December 13, 2011
pudding this time, but some good common sense. We do not need a socialist project in
our midst. ICLEI must go. Again, Merry Christmas and God bless America."
Linda LaPrade of 5509 Will Carter Lane in Roanoke advised she is here
again to ask the Board to sever ties with ICLEI. The UN Climate Summit in Durban,
South Africa just concluded. ICLEI was a prominent presence there with a full agenda,
and since the Board has chosen for Roanoke County to be a member of ICLEI, the
Board agrees to enforce their decisions. These are the goals they wanted to be passed:
1) an "International Climate Court of Justice" to enforce an international legal framework
to "guarantee compliance" for climate goals set by the UN. 2) Enforcement of a "historic
debt" owed by developed countries to pay developing countries. One proposal wants
these industrialized countries to pay into a UN account the amount of money that
country budgets for "defense, security and warfare" combined. Although these strict
policies did not pass, the framework was set by passage of the following proposals: 1)
a legal enforcement of Climate Change activities will be instituted by 2015; 2) by May,
2012 economy wide targets of emission limitations will be submitted to the UN for
review; 3) A Green Climate Fund will be established during 2012 for developing
countries and 4) future goals will be established by IPCCC (yes the scandal ridden one)
assessment reports. ICLEI, therefore the Board, "aims to design and implement a global
climate regime ". Is this the organization the Board wants to support with our money?
Last month, a work session was held for the Board to learn more about ICLEI activities
presented through RCCLEAR. Only one member asked any meaningful questions at all.
How are ICLEI's goals going to be met? What will a 30% reduction mean to the
citizens? So, now as a FOIA request, Ms. LaPrade asked the following questions which
she believed should have been asked. How was the four hundred (400) tons of carbon
emissions savings derived? If through ICLEI software, what independent safeguards are
in place to assure reasonably accurate data measurement and computer generated
projections that can be relied on? Was there a follow through with the 60 homes
inspected? Did they choose to implement all suggestions and if so what was the
average cost. If they did not or if a follow up was not done, there were no savings to
document. No probing questions; no concrete answers, just a pretty power point
presentation. The Board may think we will give up and go away and it will not have to
take any stand. We will not. We will be back for however long it takes for the Board to
recognize the full consequences of being a member of ICLEI. It is past time for you to
do what is right for our County.
Bill Gregory of 3312 Pamlico Drive stated he has been a County resident
for nineteen (19) years advised ICLEI provides the clean air and climate protection
software to its members across the Country, including our County, to determine current
green -house emission levels and predict further greenhouse gas levels. The program
allows the user to set reduction targets and track how progess is being made to meet
these goals. Has the Board considered asking RCCLEAR if ICLEI provided this
program to a politically mutual engineering or scientific outfit that regularly validates
these programs to determine if the algorithms used in the program are reasonable and
December 13, 2011 759
error -free. He stated he is not so sure that this program has been validated in this
manner, based on his own research so far. On another topic, ICLEI has a few dozen,
mostly progressive leaning partners, according to the website. A few mentioned include
the Center for American Progress, Green for All and One Sky 350.org, this is just three
of these partners. Center for American Progress (CAP) is a progressive NGO,
campaign link to George Soros and Van Jones. Van Jones is on the Center for
American Progress Board of Directors. One of One Sky's goals is to reduce global
warming pollution at least eighty percent (80 %) by 2050. The Roanoke Valley Cool
Cities Coalition is a member of One Sky and One Sky recently merged with 350.org.
Lastly, Green For All was founded by Van Jones, a self avowed communist. Van Jones
once commented, "I met all of these young radical people of color, I mean really radical
communist and anarchists and it was like this is what I need to be a part of. I spent the
next ten years of my life working with a lot of these people I met in jail trying to be a
revolutionary. I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28 and then the verdicts came down on
April 29 By August, I was a communist." Green for All is associated with One
Nation's, OneNationWorkingTogether.org and the One Nation rally held in October of
last year. One Nation has the following entities partnering under its umbrella, the
Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Code Pink and the
International Socialist Organization to name a few. He advised he was stationed in
Germany in the army when the wall came down in October of 1989. He witnessed East
Germans leaving their oppressed communist country for several months after the wall
fell. He is concerned that ICLEI is partnered with communist organizations and he
believes the Board should be concerned as well. Thank you.
John Brill of 1727 Merriman Avenue in Roanoke City. He stated when
people talk about greenhouse gases they are talking about carbon dioxide, CO2. The
reason people site carbon as a greenhouse gas is because it is believed that carbon
indirectly drives atmospheric humidity and the formation of cirrus clouds, both of which
are very effective at preventing heat from venting into space. If increases in carbon in
the atmosphere cause more clouds to be created and thus trap more heat leading to
more warming then this should be able to demonstrate through study and predicted
through climate computer models, but this is not the case. He advised he will quote here
portions of a news report from this past summer. "Dr. Roy Spencer, U.S. Science Team
Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua
satellite, reports that real -world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple
assumptions" in the computer models of climate change. "The satellite observations
suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the
climate models show. There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts
that is especially big over the oceans. In addition to finding that far less heat is being
trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show
the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer
models predicted. Real -world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are
not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer
760 December 13, 2011
models have predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that
for twenty -five (25) years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and
indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted." So
alarmist computer models are bunk. These, by the way, are the very models that groups
such as ICLEI site when they advocate their policies. But what does drive cloud
creation? If not carbon dioxide then what? The European Organization for Nuclear
Research, otherwise known as CERN, earlier this year conducted experiments to put to
test the theory that cosmic rays react with water vapor in our atmosphere and create
clouds. They have "confirm[ed] that cosmic rays spur the formation of clouds through
ion - induced nucleation." So scientists have proven that cosmic rays spur cloud creation;
and as it turns out the sun regulates how many cosmic rays reach earth. Activity on the
sun in the form of sun spots generate solar winds (sun's magnetic field). Solar winds
have a tendency to "blow" away cosmic rays and keep them from reaching the earth.
Depending upon how much the sun is active determines how many clouds get formed
here on earth. None of this is included in climate models of ICLEI and like organizations.
If they did then they would have to concede that all the policies they advocate to be
foisted upon the citizens of Roanoke County are based on junk science. He stated he
hopes that the Board of Supervisors will keep this information in mind in the future. He
has provided links in his transcript so that you may verify the information I have
presented here. Thank you for your time.
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Flora advised Supervisor Moore and himself had the pleasure
of riding in the Roanoke City parade last Friday evening; they had a great time. It was a
lot of fun; a little chilly, but it was fun and we enjoyed it. It was well received.
Supervisor Elswick wished everyone a Merry Christmas.
Supervisor Moore wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a very happy,
wonderful holiday. She advised it was very wonderful riding in the Roanoke City parade
on Friday night. We saw a lot of people, a lot of people from Roanoke County were
there and it was incredible seeing smiles and the excitement on the children's faces.
She stated she was glad they went and represented Roanoke County well.
Supervisor Altizer wished everyone on the Board and all of the staff and
citizens of Roanoke County a Merry Christmas and the best in the coming New Year.
Just to keep everyone up -to -date, Senator Smith is working on legislation to help tighten
the cannabis drug to tighten it up a little better and to give our lab people a little bit more
flexibility in testifying. This is a dangerous drug. People are profiting from it in Roanoke
County and across this valley and we need to do everyone we can to stop it.
Chairman Church wished everyone a Merry Christmas, and thanked staff,
Board members; they have had a pretty successful year. Also, wanted to express
appreciation for serving as Chairman. He stated he would like to see someone else in
this chair next year and have made that known to some Board members. As a matter of
December 13, 2011
761
fact with a comment to Supervisor Moore. He stated he would like to see someone in
the chair that has not served before. So, he stated he thinks she is ready and she has
had four years under her belt. He stated he wished her luck if that is the choice and
speaking for himself, just his opinion, may be the first lady chair. He does not know if
that is accurate or not, it may be, if it is he would congratulate her. He advised he thinks
the Board has a lot of faith in each other.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Church adjourned the meeting at 8:10 p.m.
Submitted by: Approved by:
Deborah d. J cks oseph B. "Butch" Church
Clerk to the Bard Chairman
762
December 13, 2011
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
1