HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/11/2012 - Regular
September 11, 2012
551
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe
Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of September 2012. 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 Flora called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call was
taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Richard C. Flora; Supervisors Michael W. Altizer,
Eddie “Ed” Elswick and Charlotte A. Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Supervisor Joseph B. “Butch” Church
STAFF PRESENT:
B. Clayton Goodman III, 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
In observance of 9/11, the Presentation of the Colors was made by Jason
McNamara, Roanoke County Police Department, Kelly Stoots, Roanoke County Fire and
Rescue Department, Joseph Mullins, Roanoke County Sheriff’s Office and Neil Leftwich,
Western Virginia Regional Jail. The invocation was given by Brian Clingenpeel,
Chaplain, Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department. The Pledge of Allegiance was
recited by all present.
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
1. Proclamation declaring the month of September 2012, as the ninth
th
(9) annual National Preparedness Month in the County of
Roanoke(Bill Hunter, Assistant Director of Communications and
Information Technology)
In attendance for this proclamation were: Elaine Carver, Acting Director of
September 11, 2012
552
Communications and Information Technology; Bill Hunter, Assistant Director of
Communications and Information Technology; Roy Davis, Lead Communication Officer,
Joe Stump, Division Chief and Director of Emergency Management. Roy Davis spoke
briefly on the importance of preparedness. All Supervisors offered their thanks.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Request to approve holiday schedule for calendar years 2013 and
2014 (Joseph Sgroi, Director of Human Resources)
Mr. Sgroi outlined the request for approval of the 2013 and 2014 holiday
schedule and using the floating Columbus Day for December 24, 2013 and December
26, 2014.
Chairman Flora moved to approve the holiday schedules for calendar years
2013 and 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
2013 Holidays
New Year's Day Tuesday, January 1
Martin Luther King Day Monday, January 21
Presidents' Day Monday, February 18 -> Floating
Memorial Day Monday, May 27
Independence Day Thursday, July 4
Labor Day Monday, September 2
Monday, October 14 ->
Observed Tuesday
Columbus Day
12/24/13
Veteran's Day Monday, November 11 -> Floating
Thanksgiving Day Thursday, November 28
Day after Thanksgiving Friday, November 29
September 11, 2012
553
*Apply Columbus Day Floating Holiday on
Christmas Eve
Tuesday, 12/24/2013
Christmas Day Wednesday, December
25
2014 Holidays
New Year's Day Wednesday, January 1
Martin Luther King Day Monday, January 20
Presidents' Day Monday, February 17 -> Floating
Memorial Day Monday, May 26
Independence Day Friday, July 4
Labor Day Monday, September 1
Monday, October 13->
Observed Friday
Columbus Day
12/26/14
Veteran's Day Tuesday, November 11 -> Floating
Thanksgiving Day Thursday, November 27
Day after Thanksgiving Friday, November 28
Christmas Day Thursday, December 25
*Apply Columbus Day Floating Holiday on
Day after Christmas
Friday, 12/26/14
2. Resolutions to accept and appropriate grant funds from the
Virginia Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2011-2012
and fiscal year 2012-2013 Transportation Enhancement Program to
help finance the engineering and construction of the Eastern
Section of the Roanoke River Greenway (Doug Blount, Director of
Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Lindsay Blankenship, Greenway
Planner)
September 11, 2012
554
Ms. Blankenship outlined the request for resolutions to accept and appropriate
the grant funds for fiscal years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. Supervisor Altizer inquired if
a donation can be used toward the County’s match with Ms. Blankenship responding in
the affirmative.
(a) Resolution to accept and appropriate grant funding from the Virginia
Department of Transportation for the fiscal year 2011 – 2012
Transportation Enhancement Program to help finance the design
and construction of the eastern section of the Roanoke River
Greenway
RESOLUTION 091112-2 TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
GRANT FUNDING FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2011 – 2012
TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM TO HELP
FINANCE THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
EASTERN SECTION OF THE ROANOKE RIVER GREENWAY
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Board
construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a request by resolution be
received from the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in order for the Virginia
Department of Transportation program to establish an enhancement project in Roanoke
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, as follows:
1. That it requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to establish a
project for the construction and development of approximately two point seven (2.7)
miles of the Roanoke River Greenway in eastern Roanoke County from the Roanoke
City line to the Blue Ridge Parkway.
2. That the total estimated project cost is $4,970,475. The costs associated
with the first phase of the project (which will address project design, engineering and
permitting, and private land acquisition along the proposed greenway corridor) are
estimated to be $904,275. The costs associated with the second phase of the project
(construction) are anticipated to be $4,066,200.
3. Roanoke County has received fiscal year 2011-2012 grant funding in the
amount of $237,000. In accordance with VDOT’s Enhancement Program Policy,
Roanoke County hereby agrees to provide matching funds in the amount of $59,250,
which is twenty percent (20%) of the total project costs. The form of matching funds may
come from local cash, private contributions, donations of goods and services and/or land
value.
September 11, 2012
555
4. That if Roanoke County subsequently elects to cancel this project the
County hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the
total amount of costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is
notified of such cancellation.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
(b) Resolution to accept and appropriate grant funding from the Virginia
Department of Transportation for the fiscal year 2012 – 2013
Transportation Enhancement Program to help finance the design and
construction of the eastern section of the Roanoke River Greenway
RESOLUTION 091112-3 TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
GRANT FUNDING FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2012 – 2013
TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM TO HELP
FINANCE THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
EASTERN SECTION OF THE ROANOKE RIVER GREENWAY
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Board
construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a request by resolution be
received from the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in order for the Virginia
Department of Transportation program to establish an enhancement project in Roanoke
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, as follows:
1. That it requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to establish a
project for the construction and development of approximately two point seven (2.7)
miles of the Roanoke River Greenway in eastern Roanoke County from the Roanoke
City line to the Blue Ridge Parkway.
2. That total estimated project cost is $4,970,475. The costs associated with
the first phase of the project (which will address project design, engineering and
permitting and private land acquisition along the proposed greenway corridor) are
estimated to be $904,275. The costs associated with the second phase of the project
(construction) are anticipated to be $4,066,200.
September 11, 2012
556
3. Roanoke County has received fiscal year 2012-2013 grant funding in the
amount of $152,000. In accordance with VDOT’s Enhancement Program Policy,
Roanoke County hereby agrees to provide matching funds in the amount of $38,000,
which is twenty percent (20%) of the total project costs. The form of matching funds may
come from local cash, private contributions, donations of goods and services and/or land
value.
4. That if Roanoke County subsequently elects to cancel this project the
County hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the
total amount of costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is
notified of such cancellation.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance to vacate and relocate a part of a fifteen foot (15’) wide
drainage easement dedicated by the subdivision plat of Hampshire
recorded in Plat Book 30, page 181, and crossing lots 5, 6 and 7.
Property formerly dedicated by Cotton Hill Land Company, L. C.
and currently owned by A. R. Development, L.C., (Lot 5 Tax Map
No. 096.07-15-05.00-0000 & Lot 6 Tax Map No. 096.07-15-06.00-
0000) & Palm Heritage Corp. (Lot 7 Tax Map No. 096.07-15-07.00-
0000), Cave Spring Magisterial District (Arnold Covey, Director of
Community Development)
Mr. Covey explained the need for the ordinance was to better utilize the
development of all three lots.
Supervisor Moore moved to approve the first reading and establish the
second reading and public hearing for September 25, 2012. There was no discussion.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
September 11, 2012
557
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance approving a lease with StellarOne Bank for thirty-two
(32) parking spaces of a lot located at 200 East Calhoun Street in
Salem, Virginia (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the ordinance approving the lease with StellarOne
advising this was the second reading and there were no changes from the first reading.
There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 091112-4 APPROVING A LEASE WITH
STELLARONE BANK FOR THIRTY-TWO (32) PARKING SPACES
OF A LOT LOCATED AT 200 EAST CALHOUN STREET IN
SALEM, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Department of Social Services (employing over
ninety (90) people and providing services to Roanoke County, the Town of Vinton and
the City of Salem) is housed in the former Salem Bank and Trust Building located at 220
East Main Street, Salem, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the first floor of the Salem Bank and Trust Building is leased by
Roanoke County to StellarOne Bank; the Bank owns nearby property, which includes a
parking lot located directly adjacent to the Department of Social Services offices and the
Department’s existing on-site parking area consisting of thirty-four (34) spaces; and
WHEREAS, staff has negotiated a lease of thirty-two (32) additional parking
spaces from the Bank for use by the employees and clients of the Department of Social
Services; and
WHEREAS, no other suitable parcels or tracts of land are available for lease or
sale to use for parking facilities to serve Social Services staff and clients near the Salem
Bank and Trust Building.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Sections 2.01 and 2.03 of the Charter of
Roanoke County, the County is authorized to acquire property, including the lease of real
estate; and,
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke
County, the acquisition of any interest in real estate shall be accomplished by ordinance,
the first reading of this ordinance was held on August 28, 2012, and the second reading
of this ordinance was held on September 11, 2012.
3. That the execution of an agreement with StellarOne Bank to lease thirty-
two (32) parking spaces in a parking lot located at 200 East Calhoun Street, Salem,
Virginia, for use by Social Services staff and clients is hereby authorized.
September 11, 2012
558
4. That the lease term shall commence on November 1, 2012, and continue
for a period of two (2) years, with the option to renew for an additional successive one
(1)-year periods, upon the same terms and conditions contained in the agreement,
unless terminated as provided in the agreement.
5. That the base rent shall be the sum of $720.00 per month ($22.50 per
parking space), with a $25.00 per month annual increase upon renewal of the lease after
the initial two (2)-year term.
6. That payment of rent shall be made from the funds available in the Salem
Bank and Trust Account.
7. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is
authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of the Board of
Supervisors in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the lease of this property, all
of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney.
8. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following
roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance amending Chapter 2 “Administration” of the Roanoke
County Code by the addition of Article VII “Closed Landfill,
Institutional Controls”, and prohibiting certain activities for the
purpose of protecting the integrity of the remedial measures at the
Dixie Caverns Landfill Superfund site (Paul M. Mahoney, County
Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney explained this is the second reading of this ordinance and
there are no changes from the first reading. The goal is to put into place protective
measures.
Chairman Flora opened and closed the public hearing. There were no
citizens to speak. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 091112-5 AMENDING CHAPTER 2
“ADMINISTRATION” OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY
THE ADDITION OF ARTICLE VII “CLOSED LANDFILL,
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS”, AND PROHIBITING CERTAIN
ACTIVITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE
September 11, 2012
559
INTEGRITY OF THE REMEDIAL MEASURES AT THE DIXIE
CAVERNS LANDFILL SUPERFUND SITE
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance is scheduled for August 28, 2012,
and the second reading and public hearing is scheduled for September 11, 2012.
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 2 “Administration” is amended by the addition of a new Article VII
“Closed Landfill, Institutional Controls” as follows:
§2-150. Background and Legislative Intent
A. Roanoke County operated the Dixie Caverns County Landfill as a disposal site for
municipal refuse, solvents and fly ash from 1965 to 1976. From 1967 to 1975 electric
arc furnace air emission control dust (fly ash) from Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation
was disposed at this site. When this landfill was closed in 1976 it was not capped. The
site lies on a relatively steep ridge complex between two steep valleys, each of which
contains an intermittent stream. The property consists of approximately 74.9 acres, 39
acres of which were used for the landfill, located at Dixie Caverns in Roanoke County,
Virginia, together with undeveloped land, and is identified as Tax Parcel Number 063.00-
01-14.00-0000 (hereinafter referred to as "Dixie Caverns Landfill").
Four areas at this landfill required remediation: a drum disposal area, the solvent
contaminated sludge pit, the fly ash disposal area and a stream area. In 1987 Roanoke
County entered into a Consent Agreement and Order with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to clean up this site. A removal action was performed in 1988 to dispose
of the drums and the contaminated sludge from the sludge pit.
Dixie Caverns Landfill became a Superfund Site when it was listed on the National
Priorities List in October 1989.
The Site was the focus of two Removal Actions and two Records of Decision (RODs).
The only waste remaining at the Site is contained in a landfill area of the Site specifically
constructed for it, as “concrete-like” stabilized blocks, and in a small pocket of fly ash-
contaminated sediments, securely entombed deep in an inaccessible stream bank.
This site was delisted from the National Priorities List in September 2001.
§ 2-151. Definitions.
Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the meaning of the following terms and
phases used in this Ordinance shall be as follows:
A. "Property" shall mean the real property located within the property identified as
the Dixie Caverns Landfill, as more specifically described as Tax Map Parcel Number
063.00-01-14.00-0000.
B. "Owner" shall mean the Person, custodian, guardian, trustee, caretaker, executor
administrator in whose name the deed for the Property, or any portion thereof, is titled.
C. "Person” shall mean any individual, partnership, company, corporation,
association, corporate political body, joint ownership or any other entity.
§ 2-152. Prohibition.
September 11, 2012
560
It shall be unlawful for any Owner, lessor, lessee or occupier of the Property, or any
other Person to engage in any activities on the Property that would in any manner
disturb or interfere with the environmental remedial systems at the Property, including,
without limitation, the landfill cap, gas vents, monitoring wells, leach ate
collection and conveyance system, and security measures, such as fencing, that
prevent access to the Property. The prohibited activities include, but are not limited to
the following:
A. Digging in or disturbance of the landfill cap, tampering with hardware or
equipment associated with the gas vents, monitoring wells, leach ate collection and
conveyance systems or the security fencing.
B. Any use of leach ate generated at the Property including, without limitation, any
activities that could cause exposure to contaminants in the leach ate via ingestion, vapor
inhalation or dermal contact.
C. Digging in or disturbance of the landfill cap including, without limitation, any
activities that could result in contact with contaminants in the soils at the Property
through ingestion, inhalation or dermal contact.
D. No digging and/or construction at the Monofill where the stabilized sediments and
soils are located.
E. Ground water monitoring wells should not be disturbed, and no drinking water
wells should be installed.
F. The leach ate collection system and leach ate collection tanks should not be
disturbed.
§ 2-153. Permitted Uses.
The Owner is permitted to use the Property for its firing range, driving range, other
related training facilities and any other lawful uses, so long as these uses do not disturb
or interfere with the environmental remedial systems at the Property or as otherwise
prohibited by Section 2-152.
§ 2-154. Enforcement - Violations and Penalties.
A. In addition to any other remedy available under law or in equity, any Person
convicted of a violation of this Article shall be subject to a criminal fine in an amount
not to exceed $1,000.00 per day per violation or suffer imprisonment for a period of not
more than 30 days, or both, together with costs of prosecution. Each 24-hour period
during which a violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Enforcement of
this Ordinance shall be brought by action filed in the General District Court or Circuit
Court for the County of Roanoke. The County Attorney may assume the prosecution
with the consent of the Commonwealth’s Attorney All fines and penalties collected for
violation of this Ordinance shall be paid over to the County General Fund. Nothing in
this section shall prohibit the County from enforcing the provisions of this Ordinance by
any other remedy available at law or in equity. The remedies provided herein shall be
cumulative and concurrent and shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the
township at law or in equity.
September 11, 2012
561
Section 2 - Severability. In the event that any section, sentence, clause, phrase or word
of this Ordinance shall be declared illegal, invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction, such declaration shall not prevent, preclude or otherwise
foreclose enforcement of any of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.
Section 3 - Repealer. All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances inconsistent herewith or in
conflict with any of the specific terms enacted hereby, to the extent of said
inconsistencies or conflicts, are hereby specifically repealed.
Section 4 - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after the
date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following
roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
IN RE: APPOINTMENTS
1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee (appointed
by District)
Supervisor Charlotte Moore recommended the re-appointment of Gene
Marrano to serve an additional one-year term, which will expire on August 31, 2013. Mr.
Marrano will be representing the Cave Spring Magisterial District. Confirmation of this
appointment has been placed on the Consent Agenda.
2. Economic Development Authority (EDA) (appointed by District)
Supervisor Eddie “Ed” Elswick recommended the reappointment of
Linwood Windley to serve an additional four-year term, which will expire on September
26, 2016. Confirmation of this appointment has been placed on the Consent Agenda.
3. Roanoke County Community Leaders Environment Action
Roundtable (RCCLEAR) (appointed by District)
Supervisor Eddie “Ed” Elswick recommended the appointment of James
Gray to serve a three-year term, which will expire on August 31, 2015. Mr. Gray will be
representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Confirmation of this appointment has
been placed on the Consent Agenda.
September 11, 2012
562
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
RESOLUTION 091112-6 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM J- CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September
11, 2012, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and
concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
through 4 inclusive, as follows:
1. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Gary L. Bryant, Parks Crew Leader, upon his retirement
after more than eighteen (18) years of service
2. Request to appropriate $47,587.45 to Roanoke County Schools for the Career
and Technology Education Program
3. Confirmation of appointment to the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)
Review Committee; Economic Development Authority (EDA) (appointed by
District) and the Roanoke County Community Leaders Environment Action
Roundtable (RCCLEAR) (appointed by District)
4. Resolution authorizing recordation of a deed restriction designating a new
variable width permanent storm water management reserve area for
stormwater management, access and maintenance on property owned by the
Board of Supervisors at the Green Ridge Recreation Center, Catawba
Magisterial District
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
RESOLUTION 091112-6.a EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO
GARY L. BRYANT, PARKS CREW LEADER, UPON HIS
RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN EIGHTEEN (18)YEARS OF
SERVICE
September 11, 2012
563
WHEREAS, Gary L. Bryant was hired on April 18, 1994, and has worked as a
Laborer, Parks Maintenance Worker, Motor Equipment Operator I and Parks Crew
Leader during his tenure with Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bryant retired on September 1, 2012, after eighteen (18) years
and four (4) months of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County; and
WHEREAS, during his time serving Roanoke County, Mr. Bryant Served as a
Parks Maintenance Equipment Operator I for the care of our parks and county
maintained properties by operating large mowing equipment, loaders, graders, tractors,
and specialty equipment that offered the public the safe and attractive use of our ball
fields, greenways, playgrounds, shelters, and landscaping, and where as he last served
as a Parks Crew Leader to work with and supervise park staff for the continued care of
park facilities to improve the quality of life for the citizens of Roanoke County and our
visitors; and
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 GARY L. BRYANT, for eighteen (18) years and four (4)
months 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 roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
A-091112-6.b
A-091112-6.c
RESOLUTION 091112-6.d AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF A
DEED RESTRICTION DESIGNATING A NEW VARIABLE WIDTH
PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT RESERVE AREA
FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, ACCESS AND
MAINTENANCE ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AT THE GREEN RIDGE RECREATION CENTER,
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Roanoke County has constructed the Green Ridge Recreation
Center located on County owned property on Woodhaven Road, Catawba Magisterial
District; and
WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke desires to permanently designate and restrict
the use of portions of its property for purposes of a reserved area for stormwater
September 11, 2012
564
management, access and maintenance, identified as comprising portions of Tax Map
#026.18-01-15.00 as necessary for the completion and occupation of the County’s Green
Ridge Recreation Center, as shown on the plat entitled “Map of Access and Stormwater
Management Reserve Area” prepared by Roanoke County Community Development
Department dated August 2012 and attached as Attachment A; and
WHEREAS, the proposed designation of this certain reserve area for purposes of
stormwater management, access and maintenance, 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 RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.1-1701 of the Code of
Virginia, the County of Roanoke, as a public body defined in Section 10.1-1700 of said
Code, may acquire and designate property to be retained for use as open-space and for
the preservation of such real estate. A reading of this resolution was held on September
11, 2012.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the interest in real estate to be restricted and preserved for public uses shall be
permanently reserved and dedicated in connection with the construction of Roanoke
County’s Green Ridge Recreation Center.
3. That the recordation of a permanent deed restriction for purposes of
designating and setting apart a stormwater management, access and maintenance area,
as the reserve area designated on the above-mentioned map, on the County’s property
(Tax Map #026.18-01-15.00) on which is located the Green Ridge Recreation Center, is
hereby authorized and approved.
4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such
documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this deed
restriction, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney.
5. That this resolution shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
IN RE: CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Noah Tickle of 1603 Frosty Lane in Salem, Virginia stated he has been a
Roanoke County resident since 1956. He statedregardless of the past votes, now is
time for a motion to defund ICLEI; That can be done, yet, the money stops the junk box
stops playing until a later date. Do more research. No one that really understands
September 11, 2012
565
would remain aligned with ICLEI. Patriotic Americans understood the true nature of this
creature, as those that know do, they would see this sugar coated tentacle of the United
Nations; globalist and their efforts for global governance under the World Socialist Party.
There are now seventy, card-carrying members of the American Socialist Party in our US
Congress. That's a matter of fact, he has the list. Number one, it is foremost
unconstitutional. Does that matter anymore; does the Declaration of Independence
matter anymore? Our local people are as intelligent as any on planet earth; can we not
self-govern without being propped up by some crutch from the United Nations. The real
mentality with that is if something goes wrong, it is time to play "the Blame Game." It will
be said, we did not do that, we did not build that; finger pointing; they built that; the
United Nations did it. The German people sat back and allowed themselves to be
deceived by Hitler; that turned out really bad for our German cousins back home. Our
folks ran away from over there long ago. The Commonwealth of Virginia and local
governments are authorized to operate under the Constitution of Virginia; not a charter of
a UN accredited, non-government organization. In fact under Article 1, Section 10 of the
United States Constitution, States are prohibited from implementing foreign political
initiatives through its prohibition of States to engage in treaties, alliances or
confederations. Play with ICLEI is illegal; that is the reason States and locals are
eliminating ICLEI from their areas. His efforts here are not about sports minded win or
losing. His efforts rather are directed to protect and preserve our Constitution and the
liberty thereof. ICLEI is illegal; that will eventually be fully understood. Trolling for
spending money from an unconstitutional source should never be done.
Mike Bailey stated he was from the Hollins area and apologized for having
to leave as soon as he speaks. He advised he heard on the news this morning of an
interview from a gentleman that has written a book again accusing President George
Bush for the events of 911 that we honored today by saying he did not appropriate more
money to prevent the threats of attack against our nature that our intelligence people
were warning him about. Those were bad times and we never thought such a thing
would happen. He stated he is not here to point fingers; he thinks the President gave us
the leadership to respond as a nation to a terrible idea of hatred and has led us through
some difficult times. Today, we honor the men and women who have devoted their lives
to our safety, our policeman, our firemen and all those people in public service who
spend every day trying to keep us safe. He implored the Board and our citizens to
review budgets in the work sessions to honor these men and these women by employing
a fiscal philosophy of not spending what we do not have, not borrowing in order to have
what we do not need so that should the time when we are asked by these same people
to help them serve us, we will have the financial stability to do so. He thanked the Board
for honoring these men and women in this way.
Dave Gresham of Hardy, Virginia stated he had hoped Supervisor “Butch”
Church would be in attendance because although the remarks are directed at the entire
Board, they are primarily directed at Mr. Church. On July 27, 2012, at the 7:00 p.m.
meeting the Board adjourned for a closed session and promised to resolve the issue of
September 11, 2012
566
sectarian prayers. At 9:40 p.m., the Board returned and announced a new policy of
nondenominational prayer as soon as one could be written. On August 14, 2012, he
came in and thanked the Board for making that hard choice, but Butch Church
announced that no such decision had been reached so here we are again; at least that is
what he reads in the papers, that this is still going on. It seems to him that the Board has
reneged on its word. More than that, it needs to be understood that when you set a
precedent for Christian prayers in places paid for by tax payer money, which is one
hundred percent of us, then Muslim prayers must also be allowed and there are
communities that are primarily Muslim, not many, but there are a few in this country. Do
you want Christians feeling pressure at those meetings to get on their knees and face
Mecca? He does not think so, because if you force Christianity in the local government
then Muslim groups can do the same thing at their local government functions. In short,
the Board is causing strife and sowing the seeds of discord when you violate the neutral
ground, the sacred neutral ground that government institutions are supposed to be. He
stated he does not think the Board is smarter than Jefferson, Madison or Monroe the
founding fathers that framed the constitution and First Amendment, church and state
must be separate since government is funded by everyone’s tax money. Jimmy Carter
and Ronald Regan and every president before them insisted that government must be
strictly neutral when it comes to religion. He stated he is not here to attack the Board or
its religion. He is here to repel your attack on him and his religion and everyone else
who is a captive audience in these meetings while you proselytize using our money.
There are other good reasons why most of the founding fathers rejected the divinity of
Jesus in favor of deism. He mentioned some of them at the July meeting and he got no
response from anyone. For example, in the Book of Numbers, Chapter Thirty-One,
Verses Seventeen and Eighteen the author makes God say that the Israelites should
exterminate an entire nation even the elderly and babies except they could keep the
virgin girls for themselves. What that means is that orphans, owned as sex slaves by
murders of their families is presented thus as the word of God. The founding fathers did
not think so, and neither do millions of other citizens like himself who choose love and
the golden rule. Ideas that carry their own authority. Do you really think that God told
Abraham to kill his son; we put people in jails or asylums who set out to do such a thing.
A real God would be too good to ask that of us and too almighty to need to. Do you
really think no woman may instruct a man as it says in the Book of Timothy? Are you
saying your wife is too stupid to teach you anything? When did our mothers become
morons? As grown men are we really to go through our entire adult life and learn
nothing from half the world. Ms. Moore would not even be able to sit on the Board and
that would be a shame. What of the supposed words of Jesus himself who said in the
Book of Matthew, “people who pray in public are like pharoses doing only to appear
pias.” The idea of love and the golden rule carries its own authority and we are aware of
this twin truth from our earliest youth. Many people have been mislead by priest crafters
who add fiction to this great pearl to use us for power and revenue. In fact, Jesus got
killed for trying to end the God business based on Moses’ teachings and it is not his fault
September 11, 2012
567
they turned him into a new and improved moneymaker. Jesus did not invent love and
the golden rule. He merely discovered the authority of those principles like a multitude of
others before and after his day. In fact, and this is for the Christians, the scriptures claim
that an angel of Jesus said these words, “Go and tell my brethren I am ascending to my
God and your God.” This implies Jesus saw us as equals. It is only the priest crafters
that put him above us so they could be above us in his absence; just as they did with
Moses before him. The advocacy of Jesus’ superiority to all of us is literally the only
thing that Christian religion agrees on, which is required so they can milk us. These are
some of his beliefs to which you may disagree, yet the fact remains that there is nothing
more personal to each of us than our own spirituality, the way we commune with the
universe. So isn’t it wrong for the Board to use publicly funded facilities to force your
own particular religion on others? If Mr. Church was here he would say to him that he is
well aware that love is the most important thing here. Let’s say for the sake of argument
that he was one hundred percent right on this topic, which is virtually an impossibility,
even if he was, it would not matter. Calculators are smart, computers are smart what
really matters is who loves the most, who creates the most love and he would not dare
compare himself to him, he may be a much greater light than him. To mollify the burden
that he is carrying on this thing because he is grieving over this thing, but he is messing
up what should be done. He acknowledges it comes from the heart perhaps that he
really has this issue. He fully acknowledges that who loves the most, who creates the
most love is the greatest light. All these things he says may be true but do not really
matter ultimately, but this needs to be neutral ground to protect us all.
Bill Gregory of 3312 Pamlico Drive stated he pulled up an article this week
under Freedom Advocates dated March 28, 2011 and it says, “Property owners in the
remaining part of 8.5 square mile area, Hialeah and South Dade in Dade County, Florida
have been subjected to attacks on their private property rights by the Department of
Environmental Resources Management (DERM) along with ICLEI - Local Governments
for Sustainability and various government officials. Harvey Ruvin, Miami Dade Clerk of
the Court, was Vice Chair of the Executive Committee of ICLEI, a non-elected position.
He is also Chair of the County's Climate Change Advisory Task Force (CCATC). He, with
the Mayor of Miami Dade County appoints the Financial Director. He also serves on the
Executive Council of CCOC (Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corps) which discusses
budgetary business for the 67 clerk offices in Florida. He has the power and contacts to
help implement United Nations Agenda 21 policies that take people's rights away in the
name of the "environment." Pam Evans says, "Miami Dade County is run by a
government that is proud to be a model city for ICLEI.” The article goes on to say,
“Among the leaders of harassed and intimidated landowners, is Aida Fernandez. She,
along with others, took part in a hunger strike in an effort to defend their rights as
property owners. She created the website http://www.mylandgrabbyderm.com in order to
get the word out and explain her mission. Many heartbreaking stories have evolved
through the tyranny of DERM. Property owners have been ordered through Cease and
Desist orders by DERM to remove crops, not mow their lawns, remove all soil on their
September 11, 2012
568
property, to cap rock and let it re-vegetate, as well as paying fines and fees.” The article
continues a couple of paragraphs later, “The residents of the Everglades are not the only
property owners under attack in Florida. In the case “Stop the Beach Renourishment Inc.
v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,” coastline landowners faced the
threat of losing property rights. An article published by the Ayn Rand Center in January
2010 discusses the problem.http://blog.anyrandcenter.org/florida-case-highlights-
erosion-of-property-rights/ The case was settled in June 2010,
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-1151.ZS.htm.” He stated he thought the Board
would be interested in hearing that story.
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Altizer moved to receive and file the following reports. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Church
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Reserves
3. Reserve for Board Contingency
4. Annual Report of the County of Roanoke Local Finance Board
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Moore stated she would like to take a couple of minutes and
read two appreciation letters about the energy audits that Roanoke County did for
citizens. The first letter is from Hope. “My home electric bill had become a tremendous
burden on my budget. Being retired and on a fixed income, the $400 plus monthly bills
were increasingly harder to pay. I really did not think there was an option available to me
that she could afford to ease this burden. I did not even know that home energy audits
existed until I saw the news program that talked about the free audits offered by
Roanoke County. I called and received one of the free audits, which I certainly could not
have afforded otherwise. The gentleman who conducted the audit was most courteous
and helpful with his suggestions. I was able to implement most of his suggestions myself
and only had to contract out two of the recommendations. I am happy to report that my
electricity usage has decreased each month since then from twenty to forty percent (20
to 40%) based on the previous year’s usage. This means more funds available for other
uses in my household, such as medicine and the increasing cost of gasoline. I am glad
to have been a part of the program and am thankful for all that I have received.” The
September 11, 2012
569
next one is from a business; the Froth Coffee Shop on Starkey Road received a small
business energy audit last winter. This audit allowed them to see all the things they
could do to save energy. After the process, they switched out an electric griddle for a
more efficient gas model. They also plan on making other improvements as funds
become available such as weather stripping doors and installing energy efficient lighting.
Thank you both for sharing your stories. She also thanked RCCLEAR for working so
hard to save our citizens money.
Supervisor Altizer stated at the last Board meeting we had a request to
investigate what we could do with mopeds, especially with a lot of the speeding, reckless
driving, no registration, how to run these people down to catch them and Mr. Mahoney
was going to look at that and see what we could do. It is his understanding, there are
some powers that we have, but they are somewhat complex. It is his request that at a
meeting in October to hold a work session and bring in Mr. Hutchins, the Treasurer and
the Police Department and see if it makes sense to do something or a variation thereof
with the mopeds or whether it is too cumbersome to address.
Supervisor Elswick stated his condolences to Chief Hall, whose father
unexpectedly died; that is a traumatic time for all families when this sort of thing
happens. Also, he stated we are always thanking people and making resolutions of
appreciation. He would like citizens to understand the degree to which many County
employees are working extra hours and doing things that citizens are not necessarily
aware of. We have some very committed County employees including our teachers who
in spite of what some people think only work a few hours a day, those hours extend well
into the night as they do extra work associated with teaching school. He wants people to
realize just how dedicated most of our County employees are and the kind of dedication
they have and the hours that they put in to service the communities.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
At 3:52 p.m. Chairman Flora recessed to the following work sessions on
the fourth floor.
1. Work session on a Landscaping Project at the Colonial
Avenue/Penn Forest Boulevard Roundabout (Megan Cronise,
Principal Planner)
In attendance for this work session were Megan Cronise, Principal Planner
and Jason Snow of T.J.S. Enterprises, Inc. The work session was held from 4:04 p.m.
until 4:10 p.m. Ms. Cronise went through a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is
on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Altizer inquired if
the concrete was decorative concrete with Ms. Cronise responding in the affirmative.
Supervisor Moore thanked Mr. Snow for volunteering to adopt the roundabout. There
was no further discussion.
September 11, 2012
570
2. Work session to discuss highest ranking Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) projects for fiscal 2013-2014 (B. Clayton Goodman
III, County Administrator)
In attendance for this work session were B. Clayton Goodman III, County
Administrator; Dan O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Joyce Earl, Director of
Social Services; Patience O’Brien, Assistant Director of Social Services, Diana
Rosapepe, Director of Library Services, Elaine Carver, Acting Director of
Communications and Information Technology, Brent Robertson, Director of Management
and Budget; Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance and Laurie Gearhart, Assistant
Director of Finance. The work session was held from 4:11 p.m. until 5:32 p.m.
Mr. Goodman explained that the work session was to discuss the CIP
Program and how the Board might want to proceed with the opportunity in 2013-2014 to
look at the possibility of borrowing money. Additionally, staff would like to discuss three
of the larger projects in the CIP. Mr. Goodman then introduced our visitors from the
Town of Vinton: Mayor Brad Grose, Councilman Doug Adams and Anita McMillan for
Planning. He then turned the meeting over to Brent Robertson to discuss the CIP
projects.
Mr. Robertson stated this was the opening gun of our fiscal 2013-2014
budget. He reviewed a CIP Committee Ranking (a copy of which is on file in the office to
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors). He explained this ranking was done last
winter/early spring. The prioritization is a citizens based perspective of the capital needs
of the County. It was never intended to replace the Board of Supervisors responsibility
for approving capital and capital projects. It is really just to serve an input for the Board
to consider when looking at the capital needs of the County. The projects have also
been tiered, 1, 2, 3 and while the prioritization process utilizing an empirical ranking
process it is still the result of a subjective in the eyes of the CIP Committee. These
different levels serve as a grouping of projects that have been deemed the most
important, next, etc. In some cases, there are only a few percentage points different. As
far as process for next year, the departments will be updating the CIP projects and
submitting new projects at the end of this month for the next budget year. He advised
that several of the CIP members have been reappointed and he is not sure at this point
whether or not he wants to have them reevaluate the projects since they just went
through the process.
Mr. Goodman then advised there were three projects staff would like to
discuss: Social Services building; Vinton library and an Enterprise Resource Plan for our
financial systems and turned the meeting over to Dan O’Donnell and Joyce Earl. Mr.
O’Donnell explained staff has done an analysis with a professional architectural and
engineering firm, Thompson and Litton, and they have provided numbers as to the cost
of renovation or a new building.
Ms. Earl advised Social Services moved to the current building in 1979.
September 11, 2012
571
They have increased their staff by sixty-eight percent (68%) since that time. As they
have grown, they have done a number of small renovations and have utilized every
space. She advised case loads have increased. For example the food stamp program
has increased thirty-three percent (33%). Staff has indicated they like the location due to
the close proximity to the Courthouses as they spend an average of two to three hours a
week there. The County Attorney spends an average of six hours a day in the
Courthouse. She advised Thompson and Litton did a three-pronged analysis, one if you
had the entire building would it house everyone and allow for future growth, which they
determined there is enough space in the building. The second prong was the building
structurally sound, with the outcome being the building is sound. The third area of
concern was a parking evaluation and based on the recent lease, there are over a
hundred spaces. The concern they have for this project is they serve a clientele that are
for the most part an “unheard voice” that is very important to serve. They are here today
asking for consideration to be able to serve them better.
Mr. O’Donnell stated in addition to the space needs, the condition of the
facility is pretty dismal. When it was built, they did not use a conventional, commercial
HVAC system; there are twenty-one (21) residential heat pumps in the building. Those
systems are worn out; the air flow is horrible. It does not have good conditions for either
workers or clientele. The reason they do not have enough space is due to the fact they
do not occupy the first floor; it is leased to StellarOne. The analysis looked at if they had
the whole building could it be renovated and have enough space and the answer was
yes. He indicated page seven of the handout is a budget for renovating the building;
$8.4 million. He indicated he had a debate with Mr. Goodman as to why they would
renovate a $2 million building and the answer is location, location, location. This budget
is based on an assumption that the building would be renovated one floor at a time.
There are other alternatives listed on page five and six, including looking at other vacant
facilities.
Supervisor Altizer inquired what is the annualized rent with Rebecca
Owens responding approximately $125,000 to $150,000. She further indicated they do
not need the funds to sustain the operation. Mr. O’Donnell stated there was over $1
million in the fund; it is a self-sustaining building fund. Mr. Goodman responded the fund
is needed to pay off the debt on the building. Supervisor Altizer then asked what the
realized value of the building as it sits currently. Mr. Goodman advised based on the
City of Salem’s tax assessment is approximately $2 million. When government’s do
assessments for government buildings, they do not worry about the value because it is
not taxable. One of the things they might want to do is to get an appraisal. There was a
discussion to building something new based on square footage only, please see page
nine. New construction for the square footage needed is $13 million. Supervisor Altizer
inquired what the square foot is needed with Mr. O’Donnell advising approximately
36,000 sq. ft.. Mr. Goodman also advised there were people renting on the second floor
who would also need to be removed. Supervisor Altizer inquired what the rent was with
Ms. Owens advising a small amount, approximately $20,000.
September 11, 2012
572
Supervisor Elswick stated staff stated location, location is important, but to
him that is a terrible location. When the clients cannot find a place to park, people that
the County is serving cannot find a place to park then it is a terrible location. He advised
as far as he is concerned, this ought to be the number one project. The volume of
clients is going to grow dramatically and we ought to be prepared to handle it. He does
not see how we can continue to handle it in that current location and we ought to look
very hard at an alternative location; obviously a building that we own. He stated he
hoped we would have continuing evaluations before a decision is made. Mr. O’Donnell
explained one of the things the new leases do is finally provide enough parking spaces,
however, they are short-term leases. Supervisor Elswick asked why we needed to be
close to the courthouse; what percentage of our client interface with the courts as well as
Social Services. Ms. O’Brien advised it is based on the staff; half of the staff interfaces
with the Court and are in Court five days a week. She indicated that was paramount to
the service staff. Ms. Earl responded if they moved out of Salem, they would have to
drive back into Salem to go to Court and find parking. It would be very time consuming
for staff.
Mr. Goodman advised this was the first of many meeting and as questions
are asked by the Board an analysis will be done as to how much it would cost.
Supervisor Elswick inquired if the Courthouse could be moved. Supervisor
Altizer responded not without a voter referendum. Supervisor Elswick stated that there
was a small town in Kentucky that received $60 million from the federal government with
five thousand people in the town. It was his suggestion that we ought to at least ask for
it. Mr. Goodman responded staff would be happy to ask if that was the direction of the
Board, but most likely it would be Appalachian Regional Commission.
Supervisor Altizer inquired how many clients are for Salem with Ms. Earl
responding approximately one-third, of which Salem pays for. Supervisor Altizer asked if
Salem decided to do their own, what size building would be then be needed. Chairman
Flora said it appeared that you would need 24,000 feet. Mr. O’Donnell inquired if you
lose a third of the clientele, do you really use one third of the work or are there
economies of scale. Ms. Earl responded a lot of the smaller localities are merging
throughout the State; you would have two directors, all of administration would be
doubled up. She indicated the State of Virginia is actually going the other way and trying
to merge. Chairman Flora stated he did not know if economies of scale would apply to a
locality as large as Roanoke County. Mr. Goodman stated he believed working in a
collaborative effort with the cities of Salem and Roanoke has made sense and would try
to maintain.
Chairman Flora stated when staff starts evaluating where we need to be
there are two things that seem to float to the top; the cost and the convenience to the
clients. He is hearing that staff is putting the convenience of the employees above the
convenience of the clients and feels that should be in reverse. Most of the people you
serve do not have transportation. How many employees are working Comprehensive
Services with Ms. Earl responding three. Chairman Flora indicated he felt that was
September 11, 2012
573
efficient. There is no question that Social Services need a better home. The question is
where is it going to be; a lot of factors will need to go into it.
Supervisor Altizer stated he felt there was no doubt they need a new home,
someway, somewhere. He indicated it is like an octopus with a lot of legs in trying to
accommodate the clients, the City of Salem and it should be noted that none of the
existing Board members will be here and consider what happened with the jail. This
decision really needs to be well thought out for growth, mendicancy and expansion. The
biggest mistake is too small with no room to expand.
Mr. Goodman inquired of the Board what additional information or what
would they like staff to look at that would enable the Board to be better informed.
Supervisor Elswick stated he would like to see pursuing asking for grants from the State
and Federal as an area-wide facility. There would be tremendous savings if
consolidated.
Supervisor Altizer stated he is not sure what Salem is willing to do. Mr.
Goodman explained he has had several conversations with the City manager. They
want to continue and maintain the relationship; general area of Salem. There is point if
we get too far removed from Salem they think they would need to go independently.
Supervisor Altizer asked if Mr. Goodman felt he needed to know that before you know
how far to go. Mr. Goodman responded they can look for the additional funding; contact
our local congressman and DSS at the State level. Additionally, staff can get into more
concrete negotiations with Salem. Further, staff can do an analysis of the parking and
show we can meet the needs. Lastly, we need to look at a site away from Salem Bank
and Trust where we can build a facility that will meet our current need of 36,000 sq. ft.
and have some additional land that we could expand on if necessary and cover the
necessary parking. Staff can look at several sites and obtain preliminary pricing and
come back to the Board.
Supervisor Elswick stated he is in agreement as well as the Courthouse.
Chairman Flora stated if you are going to move the Courthouse, you would
need to plan on spending $100 million. He stated he had no problem being in Salem, he
just thinks it is very important to have a facility all encompassing; your parking, adequate
access to the public. It also asked that staff take a look at ownership. There is a certain
way if the government owns the building the reimbursement is different if someone else
owns, i.e. an industrial development authority, economic development authority. They
can charge a fair-market rent and the State has to pay their share. He emphasized staff
should do an evaluation of several sites using the criteria that has been talked about and
if it needs to be weighted, do so.
Supervisor Altizer also stated he does not have a problem being in Salem,
but has a problem putting $8.5 million in the existing building. For the long term, he
stated he does not think that is a recovery you can ever expect to get back.
Supervisor Moore stated she would like to see statistics on where most
everyone lives; geomapping. Ms. Earl stated typically there is one third from Vinton,
Salem and Roanoke County. A number of years ago, they located a sub office in Vinton
September 11, 2012
574
because she was convinced it was necessary due to travel. They received very little
support from the clients even asking if they had to go to that office. It was not
successful. Supervisor Moore asked if they lived close to a bus line, etc.
Mr. Goodman advised staff would start working on right away and bring
back to the Board fairly quickly.
Mr. Goodman then advised Mr. and Mrs. Forbes were also in attendance
from Vinton. He advised there were several representatives from Vinton because it is a
very important project to the Town of Vinton. He then gave a brief background
concerning the agreement Roanoke County entered into with the Town of Vinton on the
purchase of the property; 50/50. He advised this is a downtown improvement project.
He advised that the agreement that was entered into with the Town of Vinton was to start
the project by 2018. There were 200,000 people going to the Vinton library. He added
there is a lease on the property that will run until July 2014. The lease payments are
going into a fund for the Vinton Library.
Ms. Rosapepe advised the existing building is a 1969 wonder and with the
completion of the South County Library, people want to know when their library will be
done. She advised the South County library serves a lot of teens and tweens; Vinton
has a problem with the teens and tweens that they would like to assist with. Additionally,
economic development can improve with a new library. The new library is based
$20,000 square feet based on circulation and will fall behind South County slightly above
Hollins and larger than Glenvar. The amenities they would like to offer would be more
public space, reader seating, more book stocks, better lighting, improved children’s
library, tweens and teens, larger meeting room, computer labs, strong technology
backbone. This building does not lend itself for rehabbing. This library would be an
improvement and encouragement for downtown Vinton; public libraries are a great
service to citizens. This is the type of project the citizens’ love. Vinton’s circulation went
up ten percent (10%).
Chairman Flora advised there is no question regarding the need. The only
thing he would caution would be underestimating what you might be able to do. This will
be a destination location. This building will be a community center for downtown Vinton.
He would expect you would need to have everything that is in South County, just on a
smaller scale. This would be a nice anchor for that side of town. He anticipates this will
make a huge economic difference. We own the land and it is all ready to go. He asked
if any money had been set aside for engineering with Mr. Goodman responding in the
negative. He stated staff needed to do that so they can be ready to go with the time
comes. It is a high priority project, almost shovel ready.
Supervisor Altizer advised he felt this is an exciting project. The amount of
people that showed up when it was announced was impressive. What comes back to
him when traveling around the old library with parents dropping their children off, now
they will be able to go together. Hopefully, they will come out and go to the different
things downtown. There needs to be a reason for all the people in downtown Vinton that
own the buildings to do something with those buildings renovate or get out; sell them to
September 11, 2012
575
somebody else and let somebody else reinvest in that Town and let’s get vibrancy going.
He stated he thinks the biggest thing that has happened so far was when the Town and
County came together and agreed to purchase this land, he believed that showed a
commitment to some folks and enabled the $750,000 grant. We have been telling the
people in East County, it is an economic development project. It is a destination,
revitalization. He advised quite frankly he is glad for them and would like to see some of
the things happening in downtown Roanoke happen in downtown Vinton. They are
bringing jobs in and causing people to be able to invest their money in people who own
property, renting it and being able to get a fair-market rent. This has a lot of legs to it
with regarding to positive things. He advised he thinks it is going to bring the community
together and a destination. He reiterated he did not want to underestimate the use and
what it is going to be. He thinks it is going to be more. It grew ten percent in the little
building and if you put all these people downtown, 300,000 people will have to spend
money, especially if most of them are women and we give them a few shoe shops. It is
going to take a while. We need to start the process now of bringing the community in,
the downtown community development people and our staff and let’s start looking at
what this library should look like, get the input from the citizens on what they want to see.
He stated he thinks they are going to hear the same thing as what was heard with the
other libraries. We have a unique opportunity, downtown, not on a busy highway. It will
take a different approach to look at it. He would hope that it would be placed on the next
Board meeting agenda to appropriate some money to start doing some preliminary
architectural and engineering and get some consultants in, start engaging the
community. Once that word gets out, he thinks it will engage the business community,
the Chamber of Commerce downtown. We have not had a great deal to cheer about
from a economic development perspective, either the Town of Vinton or Roanoke County
in the last good while and thinks it is time to do some things we think can do and get a
return on our investment.
Supervisor Moore stated she totally agrees, she can envision downtown
Vinton looking like the City of Salem with condominiums that are above the business
shops, like Roanoke City has. People can walk to the library; just make sure it has a
coffee shop. She stated it is a great project and she can envision the growth of Vinton
from it. It is a start, a beginning. She can see a lot of businesses relocating there
because of the library.
Chairman Flora stated just keep in mind this is much more than a library, it
is going to be an economic engine for downtown Vinton. He is in full support.
Supervisor Elswick inquired if this is the number one library project with Ms.
Rosapepe responding in the affirmative. Supervisor Elswick asked if it was that way
three years ago with Ms. Rosapepe responding this library and Mt. Pleasant have been
“neck and neck” for years. She advised a lot of Mt. Pleasant’s issues were addressed
when Roanoke County was able to purchase the property. Supervisor Elswick then
asked if they were ahead of Glenvar with Ms. Rosapepe responding negatively. She
advised that according to the Library Board they have always ranked them in the
September 11, 2012
576
following order: South County, Glenvar and then Vinton and Mt. Pleasant. Supervisor
Elswick asked if Mt. Pleasant was as bad as Vinton with Ms. Rosapepe responding
negatively stating they have gone to a rented space. Supervisor Elswick remarked
Vinton sounds as bad as Glenvar was. Ms. Rosapepe stated it was getting close and
she would be glad to take him through. Ms. Rosapepe advised the Vinton library is
better than Glenvar, but it is over forty (40) years old. Supervisor Elswick asked if she
was okay with the location being downtown. Ms. Rosapepe responded it is much more
accessible and had access from several directions, seems to be a good location. It
really suits the Town of Vinton. She indicated it is a slight departure for them because
they are a suburban library system. They have been doing a lot of research on what the
best methods are in approaching an urban library. She remarked one of the things they
are anxious to do when the time is appropriate is talk to the citizens, the business
community and the locality to see what they are envisioning so it can be incorporated
into the project similar to Glenvar. Supervisor Elswick then asked if she was choosing a
location for the Vinton library that is where she would put it with Ms. Rosapepe
responding in the affirmative. Supervisor Elswick remarked every community needs
churches, schools and a library.
Mr. Goodman then turned the session over to Rebecca Owens for
discussion on the financial enterprise resource program who advised they would be
changing the title to Integrated Financial Systems and turned the meeting over to Laurie
Gearheart for an explanation. Ms. Gearheart explained this system included the
financial package, which is called performance that is used for general accounting,
purchasing, budget, capital assets management and they also use Lawson Software
which is now called Encore for our human resources and payroll. Additionally they have
a home-grown interface that allows Lawson to feed into performance. She advised they
have been using the current financial system since 1990. She advised they love the
system, however unfortunately within the past five to six years it has been sold three
times. It is now getting to the point where the most recent acquirer sent out a notice
stating they would no longer commit resources to any new development. That is usually
a red flag when a software company advised they are not going to make anything new,
just maintain. Also, they advised there was no guarantee that they will continue to
maintain it to ensure it runs on newer technology. Roanoke County uses Sequel as its
platform; staff would like to move to Sequel 2008, however, our financial systems people
are telling us to only maintain it at 2005 to make sure that the stability stays the same. It
used to be that Performance was used by several localities throughout the United States.
Now, the list is getting shorter and shorter because everyone is moving off the system or
in the process of. Based on past experience and research with other localities, this will
be a large project. This is the backbone of Roanoke County and how staff functions
every day. Based on research, it usually takes approximately two to three years in order
to document your business processes properly, write the request for proposal, interview
vendors, and proper time to install the new software. She advised they are not asking
for funding today, just setting the stage. She advised the County cannot use bond
September 11, 2012 577
proceeds to purchase software and they have several options to funds. Additionally, the
Schools usually pay fifty percent (50 %) of projects of this nature. All fiscal agents are on
this system. Additionally, because software systems are so expensive there are several
financing options and additional research will need to be done. Supervisor Elswick
asked if staff knew how many companies there are that provide this type of software with
Ms. Gearheart responding there are right many. She stated the problem is that
because Roanoke County has had this system for so long and were the "beta" side for
this company, they received a number of "bells and whistles" they really wanted.
Supervisor Elswick asked if they have discussed with other localities and is there one
company that is consistently being used more. Ms. Gearheart advised they are
continually discussing with other localities. She advised there were several companies
out there. Mr. Goodman advised it would be a tremendous amount of work and still
maintain their current workload. Ms. Owens advised they would now begin starting the
process.
Ms. Owens then went through the availability of funds spreadsheet, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Goodman
advised staff would do whatever the Board would want to do or the Board could take the
money and do nothing and pay off debt.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Flora adjourned the meeting at 5:33 p.m.
itted by:
Approved by:
Deborah C. eo s Richard C. Flora
Clerk to the d C hairman
578 September 11, 2012
PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY