HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/13/2012 - RegularNovember 13, 2012 637
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 for the month of November 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
taken.
Chairman Flora called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call was
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard C. Flora; Supervisors Michael W. Altizer,
Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Eddie "Ed" Elswick and Charlotte
A. Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator; Daniel R.
O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Paul M.
Mahoney, County Attorney; and Deborah C. Jacks, Clerk to
the Board
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by Reverend Father Peter A. Day of the Holy
Trinity Greek Orthodox Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present.
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
1. 2012 Digital Counties Survey Recognition (Elaine Carver, Acting
Director of Communication and Information Technology)
In attendance for this recognition were Elaine Carver, Acting Director of
Communication and Information Technology; Gray Craig, Web Content Manager; Diana
Wilson, Assistant Director of Information Technology; Robin Edwards, Application
Architect and Paige DeSilvey, Lead Communications Officer. Ms. Carver outlined this
was the ninth year Roanoke County was in the top three finalists.
638 November 13, 2012
All of the Supervisors offered their congratulations.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Presentation of results of operations for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2012, and request to appropriate $202,222 (Rebecca
Owens, Director of Finance)
A- 111312 -1
Ms. Owens gave the Board a brief presentation on the June 30, 2012,
year -end results.
Supervisor Church commented he expects revenue to be flat or down for
the next fiscal year and noted; everyone was working together to create savings and
reduce expenditures. He thanked the financial department for putting everyone
together. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the staff recommendation to
appropriate $202,222, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
2. Resolution adopting a Legislative Program for the 2013
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)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the resolution and gave a brief outline for each
topic. He noted there has been some success in the past due to Eldon James and Sue
Roland.
Supervisor Altizer inquired when does the Board need to get this ratified
and sent to our area delegates? Mr. Mahoney responded the session begins on
January 9, 2013; Delegates and Senators will probably be traveling to Richmond on the
8 He stated he thinks the earlier the better is a benefit for Roanoke County. The pre -
filing bill deadline is December 3, 2012, which is before the next Board meeting. If there
were any initiatives to amend the County charter, Charter bills have to be introduced on
the first day of the session. At the same time, the General Assembly has not set its
schedule yet, but usually the closing date for filing any bills is usually about two weeks
to two and one half weeks into the session, so he is guessing that January 25, 2013
would be the last day for introducing any legislation. The Board could wait and do a
final resolution on December 11, 2012, he just thinks as a practical matter staff likes to
meet with members of the local delegation after the Board has established their
November 13, 2012 639
initiatives before they leave for Richmond.
Supervisor Altizer stated the only place he was going is that if something
transpired between now and the next Board meeting rather than having another letter
with a single or just a couple of items that may come up could be encompassed with
this resolution and sent out all at one time. He stated he just wanted to get a feel for
whether or not if we sent the letter out after the 11 is that very harming to what we
already have on here so he would like to see if they could squeeze out a few more days
for all of the Board members to be able to think about anything we wanted to think about
and they have one more bite at the apple to put something on this list. The Board could
adopt this list.
Mr. Mahoney reminded the Board that last year the Board adopted its
legislative program in late October and then came back and adopted additional
resolutions dealing with uranium mining and the transient occupancy tax in December.
He noted if the Board were to look at the transient occupancy tax initiative with the
Convention and Visitors Bureau that was a very successful initiative even though it was
later than we typically have.
Supervisor Church stated he wanted to call attention to our first initiative to
amend the Roanoke County charter; Roanoke County requests the general assembly to
amend either State code or the Roanoke County charter to shift the responsibility to
raise taxes to support public education to the elected school board. Once again the
ugly monster called school closing has reared its head in the newspapers and once
again it is rumored it would be in his area, the Glenvar, Northside Catawba area.
Hopefully, this item going to Richmond will address and maybe put this item to rest for a
while. It is becoming an annual, repeating theme. Last year, for example, there was an
article in the newspaper about the possible closing of Mason's Cove elementary, a
multi - million dollar, brand new school. Hopefully, this item on the initiative will go a long
way to help the school side help determine its destiny and maybe ease some of the
pressure. As the Chairman of the school board said during the State of the County
Address, "the closing of a school is tearing the very heart out of our community." He
stated he could not agree more. There are people that have called him countless
number of times that moved here before their children became elementary school age
and are here to enjoy the benefits of a local school like Ft. Lewis Elementary. He stated
he thinks it should be last item that the Board considers.
Chairman Flora stated he was at the VACo conference earlier today and
actually their legislative agenda includes a lot of what Roanoke County already has.
Most counties are not really asking for much, they just want to be protected so they do
not lose any further support from the State. In our case, we do not want to pay back
anymore Aid to the Commonwealth than Roanoke County already has, which is roughly
a half a million dollars a year. Not all the news was bad, there appears to be
speculation that the Governor wants to move more money into K -12 and higher
education. The question then comes up where is the money coming from because they
are not going to have any new revenue. Education might be a winner, but someone
640 November 13, 2012
else is going to be a loser. He stated he received an email earlier today and there
appears to be some sentiment in the Senate that devolution of the roads is not such a
good idea right now. The economy is not good and as far as the County is
concerned, timing will never be good. The State brags about a surplus, but if you add
up all the money that localities have given back to the Commonwealth, tagged as Aid to
the Commonwealth, it pretty much makes up the bulk of their surplus.
There was no further discussion.
RESOLUTION 111312 -2 ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
FOR THE 2013 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, has identified
major legislative issues of Statewide concern to be considered by the 2013 session of
the Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution as its Legislative Program for the
2013 session of the Virginia General Assembly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that the following legislative initiatives are submitted for its legislative
program for the 2013 session of the Virginia General Assembly for its favorable
consideration and adoption.
1) Amend Roanoke County Charter
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to amend either State Code or
the Roanoke County Charter to shift the responsibility to raise taxes to support
public education to the elected school board.
2) Amend 58.1 -3916
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to remove the requirement to
pay interest on refunds for erroneous tax assessments and payments if the error
is not the fault of County.
3) Legal Notices
Roanoke County requests the General assembly to eliminate the requirement for
publication of legal notices in newspapers. Roanoke County spent over $18,000
in legal notice publication costs last year. Paid circulation of newspapers is
dropping. More citizens are getting their information from the internet.
4) Local fines and penalties (Items 40 #2c, 139 #8c, 3- 6.04 #2c).
Under the 2012 budget amendments, all fines and fees from General District
Courts, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Districts Courts, and the Magistrate
system would be deposited directly into the State treasury. The Auditor of Public
Accounts would determine those localities in which total fines and fee collections
exceed forty percent (40 %) of the total collections. The State Comptroller would
November 13, 2012 641
deduct one -half of the amount in excess of forty percent (40 %) and deposit those
local fines and fees into the Literary Fund. Only then would the Commonwealth
return the remaining fines and fees to local governments, after deducting its
administrative expenses.
This is a bureaucratically expensive and confusing system, which will probably
be amended and corrected in the 2013 session. Roanoke County believes that
there is a better solution to increase funding for the Literary Fund without all of
the delay and bureaucratic expense.
5) AOSS (Alternative On -Site Discharge Systems)
a) To operate effectively these systems must be designed, inspected and
maintained. To eliminate any one of these three elements creates the
potential for a public health risk and environmental hazard for the owner and
his /her neighbors. When these systems fail, localities will often be the only
remaining party left to clean up the mess. Roanoke County requests that the
General Assembly return to localities the authority to regulate these systems.
b) When the owner of an AOSS refuses to correct deficiencies identified during a
required annual inspection, or when an owner cannot afford to repair or
replace a failed AOSS, then allow localities to impose civil penalties and as a
last resort the authority to repair and place a lien on the property.
c) Authorize a portion of the State permit fees for AOSS to be used for loans to
owners who cannot afford to repair.
6) CSA
Current biennial budget appears to impose a cap on certain mandated "wrap
around" services. The administration has attempted to identify these services as
"non- mandated ", but local governments and House Appropriations staffs have
opined that the services intended to be covered by this language do meet criteria
for "mandated" services, and therefore should be considered as "sum sufficient ".
Although the amount appropriated appears to be sufficient at this time, the future
expenses are unknown. This action sets a precedent in capping the expenses
related to treatment of mandated services.
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to:
a) Amend the 2012 legislation to allow for local designees to be named to the
State Executive Council.
b) Do not shift onto local governments and real estate taxpayers the expense of
federal penalties, when the Commonwealth fails to meet its obligations for
human services programs, including adequate administrative funding,
technology, training and technical assistance necessary to properly do the
job.
c) Support a requirement that the State Executive Council and the
Comprehensive Services Act follow the Administrative Process Act in
promulgating, amending or repealing regulations.
642 November 13, 2012
7) Local Government State Funding and Mandates — As the General Assembly
reviews the biennial budget, it is requested that if the General Assembly is
required to further reduce local government funding that it also investigate the
need to reduce or eliminate State mandates in relationship to the budgetary cuts.
For the past three years the General Assembly has required local governments
to either arbitrarily cut State - supported local programs or to appropriate funds to
the Commonwealth to pay an additional portion of these required costs. State
revenues have improved while local government revenues have remained
stagnant (being substantially reliant upon real estate assessments).
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to eliminate the requirement for
"local support for the Commonwealth" (current year amount $556,580 and next
year $456,285), and to repeal of the State's fiscal year 2013 ($50 million) and
fiscal year 2014 ($45 million) reductions in Aid to Localities. Instituted in fiscal
year 2009, these reductions are in addition to program specific cuts such as
State budget reductions in K -12 public education, constitutional officers, human
services and public safety.
8) Roanoke County supports legislation to correct deficiencies in the "Licensing and
Regulation of Cable Television Systems" legislation (2006 Acts of Assembly,
Chapters 73, 76, Section 15.2- 2108.19, et seq.). These corrections should
strengthen the opportunity for local governments to enforce commitments by
cable operations, assure upgrades in technology, enhance penalties for failure to
comply with any ordinance and provide an efficient and inexpensive method to
revoke non - performing franchises.
9) Line of Duty Act
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to fully fund the Line of Duty
Act (LODA) obligations that were authorized, by the Code of Virginia, prior to
budget language changes in fiscal year 2010 -2012. Those budget changes
mandate the former State LODA program to be a locally funded program.
10) Circuit Court Judges
Currently the 23rd Judicial Circuit has authorized six (6) circuit court judges. Two
of these judges have decided to retire in early 2013; however, the General
Assembly has decided not to appoint new judges to fill judicial vacancies. Failure
to fill these judicial vacancies will adversely impact the citizens of this judicial
circuit by delaying the timely resolution of civil disputes and the resolution of
criminal charges. Justice delayed is justice denied. Therefore Roanoke County
requests the General Assembly to fill these judicial vacancies immediately.
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 Onzlee Ware, Delegate Chris Head,
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
November 13, 2012 643
the Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission, and the Virginia
Association of Counties.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
3. Resolution establishing a policy regarding opening invocations
before meetings of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County
(Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the proposed resolution. He advised he had
forgotten to strike the language "who hold no religious beliefs" from section K.
Supervisor Church advised this has been a long ordeal and wanted to
thank Richard Mast from Liberty Counsel and Brett Harvey from the Alliance for
Defending Freedom.
Supervisor Elswick inquired if the sentence that was struck means that an
atheist could not do the invocation? Mr. Mahoney advised if any citizen comes forward
and asks the Clerk to be added to the list, Roanoke County would allow any person to
come in and provide that invocation or moment of silence or any solemnizing message.
It is not the role of Roanoke County to sensor that kind of speech. He stated he thinks
what may happen in the future though is if you have someone who comes and uses that
period of time before your meeting begins to mock or disparage any other religious
belief then the Board may have to confront the very difficult issue of not inviting that
person back again in the future. The point is to give a solemnizing process to begin
your meeting. The idea is to keep a very open, diverse policy neutral approach.
Supervisor Moore thanked Mr. Mahoney for all his hard work on this issue
and thanked all the citizens that came to the meetings, sent emails and phone calls in
helping the Board get this resolution resolved. She stated she thinks it is a good
resolution and it will allow anyone who wants to come and give an invocation an
opportunity to do so.
Chairman Flora thanked Mr. Mahoney for his hard work. He stated what
they have is a document that represents what is defined in the political process as the
art of compromise and that is exactly what we have done. We have compromised and
come to a reasonable conclusion.
There was no further discussion.
RESOLUTION 111312 -3 ESTABLISHING A POLICY
REGARDING OPENING INVOCATIONS BEFORE MEETINGS OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
644 November 13, 2012
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors ( "the Board ") is an elected legislative and
deliberative public body, serving the citizens of Roanoke County, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Board wishes to solemnize its proceedings by allowing for an
opening invocation before each meeting, for the benefit and blessing of the Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board now desires to adopt this formal, written policy to clarify
and codify its invocation practices; and
WHEREAS, our country's Founders recognized that we possess certain rights
that cannot be awarded, surrendered, nor corrupted by human power, and the Founders
explicitly attributed the origin of these, our inalienable rights, to a Creator. These rights
ultimately ensure the self - government manifest in our deliberative bodies, upon which
we desire to invoke divine guidance and blessing; and
WHEREAS, in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), the United States
Supreme Court validated the Nebraska Legislature's practice of opening each day of its
sessions with a prayer by a chaplain paid with taxpayer dollars, and specifically
concluded, "The opening of sessions of legislative and other deliberative public bodies
with prayer is deeply embedded in the history and tradition of this country. From colonial
times through the founding of the Republic and ever since, the practice of legislative
prayer has coexisted with the principles of disestablishment and religious freedom." Id.,
at 786; and
WHEREAS, the Board desires to avail itself of the Supreme Court's recognition
that it is constitutionally permissible for a public body to "invoke divine guidance" on its
work. Id., at 792. Such invocation "is not, in these circumstances, an `establishment' of
religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of
beliefs widely held among the people of this country." Id.; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court also famously observed in Zorach v. Clauson,
343 U.S. 306, (1952) "We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a
Supreme Being." Id., at 313 -14; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court acknowledged in Holy Trinity Church v. United
States, 143 U.S. 457 (1892), that the American people have long followed a "custom of
opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most conventions with prayer... " Id., at
471; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court has determined, "The content of [such] prayer is
not of concern to judges where ... there is no indication that the prayer opportunity has
been exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or
belief." Marsh, 463 U.S. at 794 -795; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court also proclaimed that it is not the job of the courts
or deliberative public bodies "to embark on a sensitive evaluation or to parse the content
of a particular prayer" offered before a deliberative public body. Id.; and
WHEREAS, this Board is not establishing a policy that defines the Constitutional
limits for permissible public invocations, this Board intends to adopt guidelines that are
consistent with the guidance provided by the several courts that have considered the
validity of public invocations; and
November 13, 2012 645
WHEREAS, this Board is only bound by the decisions of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the United States Court of Appeals in several federal
circuits have provided general guidance to help ensure that policies concerning pubic
invocations are consistent with the Constitution; and
WHEREAS, in Simpson v. Chesterfield County Bd. of Supervisors, 404 F.3d
276 (4 Cir. 2004), cent. denied, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit specifically approved as constitutional the invocation policy of a county board
making a number of key findings, including the facts that the Simpson policy:
(1) Established a practice of compiling a list of local monotheistic
congregations, "with addresses taken primarily from the phone book,"
whereto the county clerk would send an invitation each December
addressed to the "religious leader" of each congregation, Id., at 279; and
(2) Required the county clerk to schedule respondents to the invitation "to
give the invocation on a first -come, first -serve basis," Id.; and
(3) Thus, "made plain that [the county board] was not affiliated with any one
specific faith by opening its doors to a wide pool of clergy." Id., at 286; and
WHEREAS, the Fourth Circuit showed little concern that the invocations before
Board meetings in Simpson included prayers that were "traditionally made to a divinity
that is consistent with the Judeo- Christian tradition," Id., at 280, because Marsh also
considered, and found constitutionally acceptable, the fact that the prayers in question
fit broadly within `the Judeo- Christian tradition. "' Id., at 283 (quoting Marsh, 463 U.S. at
793); and
WHEREAS, the Fourth Circuit's ruling in Simpson can be distinguished from its
earlier decision in Wynne v. Town of Great Falls, 376 F.3d 292 (4 Cir. 2002), cent.
denied, where a town Board "improperly `exploited' a `prayer opportunity' to `advance'
one religion over others." Id., at 298 (quoting Marsh, 463 U.S. at 794); and
WHEREAS, the Board intends to avoid the unique circumstances that rendered
the practices at issue in Wynne unconstitutional, including the facts that:
(1) The Town Council "steadfastly refused" to allow any "deity associated with
any specific faith other than Christianity" to be invoked, Id., at 300, n.5;
and
(2) Town Council members publicly chided and "ostracized" those who
refused to participate in their prayers, Id., at 295; and
(3) The refusal to participate in prayers "adversely affected [a citizens] right to
participate in the Council meetings." Id., at 299, n.4; and
WHEREAS, The Fourth Circuit's ruling in Joyner v. Forsyth County, 653 F.3d.
341 (4 Cir. 2011), approved the practice of following a neutral policy that invites
religious leaders from diverse religious institutions serving the local community to
voluntarily offer an invocation before public meetings, but required the council to
proactively discourage "sectarian references" while finding that "occasional sectarian
references" do not violate the Constitution; and
646 November 13, 2012
WHEREAS, the Board intends, and has intended in past practice, to adopt a
policy that does not proselytize or advance any particular faith, or show any purposeful
preference of one religious view to the exclusion of others; and
WHEREAS, the Board intends to adopt a policy that will not show a purposeful
preference of one religious view over another by not permitting the faith of the person
offering the invocation to be considered when extending an invitation; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court recognized in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. at
786, this country's history and tradition of opening sessions of deliberative public bodies
with an invocation and affirmed in Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984), that "Our
history is replete with official references to the value and invocation of Divine guidance
in deliberations and pronouncements of the Founding Fathers and contemporary
leaders." Id., at 675, and the Board believes that clergy that serve the local community
are peculiarly suited through training, tradition, and public service to petition for divine
guidance upon the deliberations of the Board, and to accomplish the Board's objective
to solemnize public occasions, express confidence in the future, and to encourage the
recognition of what is worthy of appreciation in society. See Lynch, 465 U.S. at 693
(O'Conner concurring); and
WHEREAS, the Board accepts as binding the applicability of general principles of
law and all the rights and obligations afforded under the United States and Virginia
Constitutions and statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that the Board hereby adopts the following written policy regarding
opening invocations before meetings of the Board, to wit:
1. It is the intent of the Board to allow a private citizen to solemnize the
proceedings of the Board of Supervisors. It is the policy of the Board to allow for an
invocation, which may include a prayer, a reflective moment of silence, or a short
solemnizing message, to be offered before its meetings for the benefit of the Board.
2. Although the invocation may be listed in the program or schedule of
events on a separate introduction page, it shall not be considered an agenda item for
the meeting or part of the public business.
3. No member or employee of the Board or any other person in attendance
at the meeting shall be required to participate in any prayer that is offered.
4. The prayer shall be voluntarily delivered by an eligible member of the
clergy in the County of Roanoke, the Counties of Montgomery, Botetourt, Bedford and
Franklin, the Town of Vinton, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem. To ensure that
such person (the "invocation speaker ") is selected from among a wide pool of the
region's clergy, on a rotating basis, the invocation speaker shall be selected according
to the following procedure:
a. The Clerk to the Board (the "Clerk ") shall compile and maintain a
database (the "Invocations List ") of the religious congregations with
an established presence in the County of Roanoke, the Counties of
November 13, 2012 647
Montgomery, Botetourt, Bedford and Franklin, the Town of Vinton,
and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem.
b. The Invocations List shall be compiled by referencing the listing for
"churches," "congregations," or other religious assemblies in the
annual phonebook publication distributed by the company that
holds the telecommunication franchise for the Roanoke Valley,
research from the Internet, and consultation with local chambers of
commerce. All religious congregations with an established
presence in the local communities of the County of Roanoke, the
Counties of Montgomery, Botetourt, Bedford and Franklin, the
Town of Vinton, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem are eligible
to be included in the Invocations List, and any such congregation
can confirm its inclusion by specific written request to the Clerk. In
addition, the County shall solicit the participation of any private
citizen or religious congregation through the County's website and
on Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV).
C. The policy is intended to be and shall be applied in a way that is all -
inclusive of every diverse religious congregation in the County of
Roanoke, the Counties of Montgomery, Botetourt, Bedford and
Franklin, the Town of Vinton, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem.
The Invocations List is compiled and used for purposes of logistics,
efficiency, and equal opportunity for all of the community's religious
leaders, who may themselves choose whether to respond to the
Board's invitation and participate. Should a question arise as to the
authenticity of a religious congregation, the Clerk shall refer to
criteria used by the Internal Revenue Service in its determination of
those religious organizations that would legitimately qualify for
I. R. C. § 501(c)(3) tax - exempt status.
d. The Invocations List shall also include the name and contact
information of any chaplain who may serve one or more of the fire
departments or law enforcement agencies of County of Roanoke,
the Counties of Montgomery, Botetourt, Bedford and Franklin, the
Town of Vinton, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem.
e. The Invocations List shall also include the name and contact
information of any religious congregation located outside the region
if such religious congregation is attended by at least one resident of
the County and such resident requests the inclusion of said
religious congregation by specific written communication to the
Clerk.
f. The Invocations List shall be updated, by reasonable efforts of the
Clerk, in November of each calendar year.
648 November 13, 2012
g. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this policy, and on or
about December 1 of each calendar year thereafter, the Clerk shall
mail an invitation addressed to the "religious leader" of each
congregation listed on the Invocations List, as well as to the
individual chaplains included on the Invocations List.
h. The invitation shall be dated at the top of the page, signed by the
Clerk at the bottom of the page, and read as follows:
Dear Religious leader,
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County makes it a
policy to invite members of the clergy in our region to
voluntarily offer an invocation before the beginning of its
meetings, for the benefit and blessing of the Board. As the
leader of one of the religious congregations with an
established presence in the local community, or in your
capacity as a chaplain for one of the local fire departments
or law enforcement agencies, you are eligible to offer this
important service at an upcoming meeting of the Board.
If you are willing to assist the Board in this regard, please
send a written reply at your earliest convenience to the Clerk
to the Board at the address included on this letterhead.
Clergy are scheduled on a first -come, first -serve basis. The
dates of the Board's scheduled meetings for the upcoming
year are listed on the following, attached page. If you have a
preference among the dates, please state that request in
your written reply.
This opportunity is voluntary, and you are free to offer the
invocation according to the dictates of your own conscience.
To maintain a spirit of respect and ecumenism, the Board
requests that the opportunity not be exploited as an effort to
convert others to the particular faith of the invocation
speaker, nor to disparage any faith or belief different than
that of the invocation speaker. The U. S. Court of Appeals
for the Fourth Circuit opined in Joyner v. Forsyth County,
653 F.3d. 341, 349 (4 Cir. 2011), that prayers at the
opening of legislative sessions "must strive to be
nondenominational so long as it is reasonably possible (;]
should send a signal of welcome rather than exclusion (;]
should not reject the tenets of other faiths in favor of just one
November 13, 2012 649
[, ... and may not] repeatedly suggest the government has
put its weight behind a particular faith." The Court further
instructed the deliberative body to "be proactive in
discouraging sectarian references" to avoid "occasional"
references from becoming too "frequent" when the
invocations are viewed as a collective. The County requests
that you comply with these court guidelines accordingly.
On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, 1 thank you in
advance for considering this invitation.
Sincerely,
Clerk to the Board
i. As the invitation letter indicates, the respondents to the invitation
shall be scheduled on a first -come, first -serve basis to deliver the
invocation.
j. In the event an eligible member of the clergy believes that the clerk
has not complied with the terms of this policy, the clergy member
has the right to have the matter reviewed by the Board.
k. Any private citizen, including those who do not belong to religious
congregation may request the Clerk to be added to the list of
persons delivering invocations.
5. No invocation speaker shall receive compensation for his or her service.
6. No guidelines or limitations shall be issued regarding an invocation's
content, except that the Board shall request by the language of this policy that
invocations in the form of a prayer, when considered collectively, should avoid having
"sectarian references" become too frequent and no invocation should proselytize or
advance any faith, or disparage the religious faith or non - religious views of others.
7. The Clerk shall make every reasonable effort to ensure that a variety of
eligible invocation speakers are scheduled for the Board meetings. In any event, no
invocation speaker shall be scheduled to offer an invocation at consecutive meetings of
the Board, or at more than three (3) Board meetings in any calendar year. If the
scheduled invocation speaker fails to appear, then the Board shall solemnize the
proceedings with a reflective moment of silence.
8. Neither the Board nor the Clerk shall engage in any prior inquiry, review
of, or involvement in, the content of any invocation to be offered by an invocation
speaker.
9. To clarify the Board's intentions, as stated herein above, the following
disclaimer shall be included in at least ten (10) point font at the bottom of any printed
program or schedule of events on the separate introduction page published by the
Board:
650 November 13, 2012
"Any invocation that may be offered before the official start of the Board
meeting shall be the voluntary offering of a private citizen, to and for the
benefit of the Board. The views or beliefs expressed by the invocation
speaker have not been previously reviewed or approved by the Board and
do not necessarily represent the religious beliefs or views of the Board in
part or as a whole. No member of the community is required to attend or
participate in the invocation and such decision will have no impact on their
right to actively participate in the business of the Board."
10. Shortly before the opening gavel that officially begins the meeting and the
agenda /business of the public, the Chairperson of the Board shall introduce the
invocation speaker and invite those who wish to show respect for the traditional
observances and /or the Board to stand.
11. This policy is not intended, and shall not be implemented or construed in
any way, to affiliate the Board with, nor express the Board's preference for, any faith or
religious denomination. Rather, this policy is intended to acknowledge and express the
Board's respect for the diversity of religious denominations and faiths represented and
practiced among the citizens of Roanoke County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this policy shall
become effective from and after January 1, 2013.
On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
4. Resolution accepting for publication and conceptual phase
consideration the unsolicited proposal from Shockey P3, LLC for
the design and construction of a Criminal Justice Training
Academy under the Public Private Recreational Facilities and
Infrastructure Act (PPEA) of 2002 (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant
County Administrator)
Mr. O'Donnell outlined the resolution.
Supervisor Elswick inquired how far along is staff in terms of completing
the negotiations with the City of Roanoke. Mr. O'Donnell advised they have met several
times; conceptually both Roanoke City and Roanoke County want to do it but nothing
has been written down; all verbal discussion. Supervisor Elswick inquired how can a
contractor submit a proposal when staff does not have anything in concrete yet as to
what we are going to do or how we are going to do it, what the building will look like.
Mr. O'Donnell advised under PPEA, they can submit anything they want, but we have
met and talked conceptually about how it would work; we do have some designs that
are proprietary that show how the building could be expanded. Essentially, what we are
November 13, 2012 651
talking about is leasing for the life of the expansion from the City at little or no funds and
sharing any operational costs with the whole facility that is conceptually how it would
work. Supervisor Elswick inquired if ultimately, PPEA contracts end up with the original
submission with Mr. O'Donnell advising sometimes yes and sometimes no. Supervisor
Elswick inquired if staff has only been working with one contractor solely with Mr.
O'Donnell explaining that is why staff publishes the ad to invite any competitors to come
in and also submit proposals so that it is a competitive process.
Supervisor Church asked Mr. O'Donnell to reiterate that this is just to
basically start the process with Mr. O'Donnell explaining this is simply to move the Part I
Proposal, publish the parts that are not proprietary so that any competitor can come in
and submit a competing proposal. There has been no decision on if this is a project
moving forward, just the process that starts the decision - making process. Supervisor
Church asked if this has anything to do with the site with Mr. O'Donnell advising not at
all. Someone could come in and submit a completely different concept with a
completely different site and staff would review and bring forward to the Board for
consideration.
Chairman Flora advised we have been talking about this academy ever
since the ITT settlement which actually has made available the funds to do this. What
happens is contractors and people who are involved in this type of process keep their
eyes and ears open when communities start talking about something like that; it triggers
their interest and then they try to get as much information as they possibly can and then
they submit an unsolicited proposal. In the end, staff has to advertise the project, solicit
additional proposals and the new proposals come in they get the same consideration
that the original unsolicited proposal gets and then it becomes very competitive and that
is when staff starts the negotiating process.
Supervisor Church asked Mr. O'Donnell to reiterate this money cannot be
used for anything else. Mr. O'Donnell explained the funds for this project came from the
federal government through a settlement that was made with the ITT Corporation in a
federal legal proceeding, which Roanoke County received a share of those funds
because our Police Department was involved in part of the investigation and staff
actually received a letter from the federal Department of Treasury saying what the
County could spend the money on and this is an appropriate use. The funds can only
be used for police capital improvements.
There was no further discussion.
RESOLUTION 111312 -4 ACCEPTING FOR PUBLICATION AND
CONCEPTUAL PHASE CONSIDERATION THE UNSOLICITED
PROPOSAL FROM SHOCKEY P3, LLC FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ROANOKE COUNTY CRIMINAL
JUSTICE ACADEMY UNDER THE PUBLIC - PRIVATE
EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF
2002
652 November 13, 2012
WHEREAS, the Public- Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002
(PPEA) allows the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to create a public - private
partnership to develop projects for public use; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 051303 -4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County adopted procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County;
and
WHEREAS, Shockey P3 LLC has submitted an unsolicited proposal under the
provisions of the PPEA to construct a Criminal Justice Academy as an expansion of the
City of Roanoke Police Academy; and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Administrator and Roanoke City Manager and
their respective law enforcement staffs have conceptually agreed that pursuing a joint
facility could provide substantial operational and economic benefit to both jurisdictions;
and
WHEREAS, the County Administrator has reviewed this unsolicited proposal and
has recommended to the Board of Supervisors this unsolicited proposal be formally
accepted for review.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That there is a public need for a Criminal Justice Academy facility for
Roanoke County.
2. That it chooses to accept the Shockey P3 LLC unsolicited proposal for
publication and conceptual phase consideration.
3. That it will proceed to use procedures developed that are consistent with
procurement of other than professional services through "competitive negotiation ", since
doing so is likely to be advantageous to the County and the public based upon either (i)
the probable scope, complexity or urgency of need, or (ii) the risk sharing, added value,
increase in funding or economic benefit from the project would otherwise not be
available. The scope and complexity of the development of a Criminal Justice Academy
requires an innovative approach, such as competitive negotiation, to the design and
construction of a new facility.
4. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is
directed to post and publish the required notice thus allowing an opportunity for
competing preliminary proposals to be submitted. Due to the complexity of the proposed
project and the County's desire to encourage competition, the notice shall state that
competing proposals must be submitted on or prior to January 31, 2013, to be
considered, rather than the minimum of 45 day allowed by the Commonwealth of
Virginia's Public Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act. The County
Administrator is also authorized and directed to take such other actions as may be
necessary to implement this resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
November 13, 2012 653
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. 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 and appropriation of funds
(B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator)
Mr. Goodman and Annie Krochalis outlined the ordinance, which was
originally brought before the Board in December of 2011. Mr. Goodman explained the
County has received the bylaws, articles and IRS tax exempt determination. This is an
updated lease and covers the gym, rest rooms and kitchens, but can be expanded. He
noted the financing is comparable to other communities and their community centers.
The Bent Mountain group will be on their own. Roanoke County will fund up to $15,000
on an annual basis and the community group fund everything else. He remarked this is
a very simple lease and Supervisor Elswick has asked for clarification by the next
meeting of what is considered major and minor maintenance items.
Supervisor Church thanked Mr. Goodman and Annie Krochalis on what
has been a long undertaking for a citizen group. He stated he recognizes how
important this is to her and the community. He stated he does not see anything that
would be of grave importance.
Supervisor Altizer stated it has been a long road and hopefully it gets to a
resolution. He inquired of Mr. Goodman back a year ago when talking about
appropriation of monies, he believed that he made the motion back then to make Bent
Mountain whole with the other communities and give $15,000 a year on a continuous
basis, not one -time funds. When he reads the lease in the context of monies, he is
seeing $47,000 here and really the intent as he remembers it was $32,000 the first year
and then $15,000 a year after that first year. Roanoke County would provide the seed
money of $32,000 to get it started and then it was $15,000 each year continuously after
that. The $32,000 was one time monies, but the way it is written it is $47,000. Mr.
Goodman advised it was the intent to make them whole with the other communities to
provide on an annual basis $15,000, not $32,000 plus $15,000, we will correct that.
Suaervisor Elswick commented that he would like to thank both Mr.
Goodman and Annie Krochalis for working so hard on this. He commented from a
County standpoint, this is not just a community center for Bent Mountain. The
anticipation is that as the group managing the facility becomes familiar with how to
conduct events and contacts are made with other organizations in the County, there will
be functions there that will be open to all citizens of the County. Floydfest, Fiddlefest
and those kinds of events probably started very small at one point. Bent Mountain and
654 November 13, 2012
this facility if left dormant would be an expense to the County and here is a group of
citizens who are saying, "let us use the facility with your assistance and in coordination
with Parks and Recreation and the County Administration and let us turn it into an asset
for the County." He advised he thinks it is a unique situation, it is a great neighborhood
and mountainous environment to conduct numerous kinds of events and it is a very
positive thing, not just for the people of Bent Mountain who will benefit from it, but
perhaps the whole County.
Supervisor Moore asked with regard to the business plan are there any
specific events that have already been scheduled for next year. Ms. Krochalis
responded they have used the outside, the park area, and held a fundraiser and then
held a flag raising for the community to honor the veterans in the area, which may
become an annual event since that is something no one else seems to be doing in our
area. For next year, technically they had discussed the first night celebration, which
starts on the 31 and ends on the 1 She advised they have been approached by
other groups, for example a community meeting group and there are people who spin
wool. There are certain groups who have expressed an interest, i.e. Friends of the Blue
Ridge Parkway. They have office furniture being donated and hopes to get computers
donated so they can do some teaching to augment the availability of the public library.
They have things planned, but no dates fixed because as we have discussed, they are
starting with the gym, etc and these others would require a meeting room or office
space. We can envision a calendar, but cannot commit until they have the keys. Mr.
Goodman explained part of that is his recommendation to the citizens group not to get
too far along. Get in the building first, get it up and running and deal with it on a small
basis. "If you build it, they will come." They are ready to move forward with setting up
committee meetings with the members who will work on scheduling activities using the
facilities open at that time. Ms. Krochalis stated they have a structure in place for that,
created the 501(c)3 and have divided everything up into a work plan like the
government has departments, i.e. programs, administration, grounds and maintenance.
So all these tasks have been sorted out. We have a program committee group that
keeps asking, "is it now, is it now."
Supervisor Moore then inquired with regard to the budget plan, there are
fifteen people that were going to support with $1,000 each and is there a written or
verbal commitment. Ms. Krochalis responded they originally asked community
members to sign if they would support, volunteer, etc. and they also did a survey. She
explained they did not ask them to "sign on the dotted line."
Supervisor Moore then asked with regard to the $5,000 for the grant is
there something specific they are going to try to use this for. Ms. Krochalis responded
they are going to apply for some grants, some through the Foundation for the Roanoke
Valley. She stated she would not presume to state they will receive them because they
are in a "Catch 22" stage where you cannot apply unless you are a nonprofit and now
we are and they are lined up to do so. Most of them start at the $5,000 level, which is
why they put that in.
November 13, 2012 655
Chairman Flora stated it was his impression that Roanoke County would
lease the building to them and they were going to do the development and run the
programs. They would be pretty much on their own. In reading their non - profit,
business plan, it does say in number three that the County Administrator will serve as a
liaison to the Board and in number five it also says that the Bent Mountain Community
Center Board, with the support of the Roanoke County Administrator, will develop
strategies for marketing the facility. So it sounds like in addition to the $32,000 in
the first year and $15,000 each year, Roanoke County is committing personnel to
help develop their programs. This is what is in their business plan, but it may not be
what staff has agreed to. Mr. Goodman responded what they are talking about is they
would use Mr. Goodman's contacts, i.e. he serves on the CVB Board and as they
develop programs and activities that might be something the CVB could advertise or
market. We would also allow them to work with other agencies, i.e. The Partnership
and various other organizations; act like a liaison trying to serve communications and so
forth. He does not envision doing the work, but to provide focus and communication
and sharing of information. At the end of the day, it still remains a Roanoke County
facility and we do have to have some participation and involvement in it because of our
responsibilities to make sure it is being properly used and so forth in accordance with
the lease and also with regard to Parks and Recreation policies and so forth. Chairman
Flora stated he just wanted to make sure that is not just a foot in the door and down the
road we end up running the programs through Roanoke County Parks and Recreation.
Mr. Goodman responded that is not the intent and Ms. Krochalis responded it is not
their intent as well.
Supervisor Moore inquired which department within Roanoke County will
be handing the financing, paying the bills, etc. Mr. Goodman responded finance would
be and a subaccount would be established so that there is accountability and can be
audited like everything else we do. Payments will be made directly to the vendor.
Chairman Flora inquired if there was a catastrophic event, another
derecho comes through and blows the roof off and requires a $75,000 to $100,000 to
replace the roof is Roanoke County obligated to do so. Mr. Goodman advised the way
the lease is written, if there is a catastrophic event, Roanoke County can shut it down.
If the community wants to raise the funds, they can, but it has to be budgeted in order
for staff to proceed. There is no mandate that we have to do it immediately. Mr. Flora
asked if this is where they get into the definition of major and minor. So if it is major
maintenance, Roanoke County is responsible, however if there are no funds then they
cannot be replaced and this has been reiterated to the community. Ms. Krochalis stated
she was in agreement.
On motion of Supervisor Elswick to approve the first reading and to hold the
second reading and public hearing on December 11, 2012 and carried by the following
roll call and recorded vote:
656 November 13, 2012
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of an existing twenty (20) foot
Stormwater Management Easement as shown on the plat of
Kingston Estates, recorded in Plat Book 26, page 16 in the
Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, said Stormwater
Management Easement located off Cambridge Court Road
between Lots 58 and 59 and the approval of the dedication of a
new variable width Stormwater Management Easement located off
Cambridge Court Road between Lots 59 and 60 of the said same
subdivision, Vinton Magisterial District (Arnold Covey, Director of
Community Development)
Mr. Covey outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion. On motion
of Supervisor Altizer to approve the first reading and to hold the second reading and
public hearing on December 11, 2012, and carried by the following roll call and recorded
vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
3. Ordinance authorizing the granting of an electric utility easement
to Appalachian Power (AEP) on property owned by the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 055.13 -01- 02.02) for
the purpose of an underground electric power line to the Glenvar
Library at 3917 Daugherty Road, Glenvar Magisterial District
(Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney explained the need for the ordinance. There was no further
discussion. On motion of Supervisor Church to approve the first reading and to hold the
second reading and public hearing on December 11, 2012, and carried by the following
roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
4. Ordinance amending Chapter 12 — Motor Vehicles and Traffic of
the Roanoke County Code by the addition of Article VII. Mopeds
(Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the ordinance and explained the Code provision for
bicycles and electric personal assistive mobility device or electric powered assisted
November 13, 2012 657
bicycles to use helmets only applies to age 14 and younger. This is why this was not
included in the draft ordinance. It could be added, if the Board wants.
Supervisor Elswick stated he would like to include the language for
bicycles and if you have never been on a curve in the middle of the night and someone
is riding a bicycle with black clothing, no lights on the bicycle then you would not
understand, but as a driver, he does not want to kill someone. Anybody that is not
wearing some kind of reflecting clothing or light on the bicycle or helmet is taking not
only their life in their hands, but probably the driver of the car, too. If there is any way
that the State will allow us to require bicyclist in Roanoke County to wear reflective
clothing or lights on their bicycles and helmets and whatever else to protect them and to
protect those of us who do not want to run over them he thinks it ought to be done. Mr.
Mahoney advised there is a provision in State law, 46.2.1015 and this is not a local
ordinance requirement, but a provision already in State code that is mandatory that
"Every bicycle, or its rider, shall be equipped with a taillight on the rear emitting a red
light plainly visible in clear weather from a distance of at least 500 feet..." and also
supposed to have "on the front emitting a white light visible in clear weather from a
distance of at least 500 feet to the front and a red reflector visible from a distance of at
least 600 feet to the rear." So there already is State laws that requires that and the
difficulty is with enforcement. Supervisor Elswick asked if Roanoke County can go
beyond that with Mr. Mahoney advising no. Supervisor Elswick advised that is too bad.
Supervisor Altizer asked Mr. Mahoney to confirm that he had stated
children 13 and under on a bicycle that is motorized, with Mr. Mahoney stating 14 and it
could be a bicycle or an electric personal assisted mobility device. Mr. Mahoney stated
the maximum fine is $25.00.
Supervisor Moore stated her intention was bicyclists who are riding on
Route 419 and other busy roadways when they get to a stoplight and all the motor
vehicles are stopped, but they go around and run the red lights. This is obviously a
violation. She stated she also thinks helmets would be safer for the bicyclist as well as
reflective gear, but thinks perhaps we should address the mopeds right now and then
work on this with some educational programs through the Police Department to educate
people more and maybe they as a group would come together and try to help educate.
Supervisor Flora commented he thinks there ought to be some things in
life that you can do without government regulations and it is a parental responsibility for
children at that age. He stated he thinks staff is good with what has been prepared.
Supervisor Altizer stated this will not be cure all, but later if things do not
change, the Board may need to license as a last resort. There was no further
discussion.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to approve the first reading and to hold the
second reading on December 11, 2012, and carried by the following roll call and
recorded vote:
658 November 13, 2012
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance approving a lease with USCOC of Virginia (US Cellular)
for a communications antenna tower at the Catawba Fire Station
(Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services)
Ms. Green outlined the ordinance and advised there were no changes
from the first reading. Chairman Flora open and closed the public hearing and there
were no citizens that spoke.
ORDINANCE 111312 -5 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A LEASE WITH USCOC OF VIRGINIA (US
CELLULAR) FOR A COMMUNICATIONS ANTENNA TOWER AT
CATAWBA FIRE STATION
WHEREAS, Ordinance 102897 -6 approved and authorized the execution of a
lease with Ohio State Cellular Phone Company, Inc. for a communications antenna
tower at Catawba Fire Station, Catawba Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, this lease is due to expire on March 31, 2013, and the company now
known as USCOC of Virginia has requested a new lease for this site; and
WHEREAS, counsel and staff for the parties have negotiated a new lease which
addresses mutual concerns of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 23, 2012; and
the second reading and public hearing was held on November 13, 2012.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows
1. That it is the County's best interest to lease a portion of this property to
USCOC of Virginia in order to provide a site for the location of a communications tower.
2. That the area to be leased by the County to USCOC of Virginia is
described as a parcel containing ten thousand square feet (10,000 sq. ft.) together with
an easement for access and utilities and is situated at the Catawba Fire Station in the
Catawba Magisterial District of Roanoke County, being a portion of Tax Map #7.00 -1-
29.
3. That the term of this lease shall be for five (5) years, with automatic
renewals of up to five (5) additional terms of five (5) years each, unless the Tenant
terminates. The rent will be $1,000 per month or $12,000 annually beginning on April 1,
2013. The rent increases by ten percent (10 %) each renewal term. The Tenant has the
right to sublease, but must pay the County twenty -five percent (25 %) of the revenue
derived from the subtenant, current or future.
4. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents
and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish
this transaction, all of which shall be upon a form approved by the County Attorney.
November 13, 2012 659
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
RESOLUTION 111312 -6 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 November
13, 2012, 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 7 inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of minutes — October 9, 2012; October 23, 2012
2. Request from the Roanoke County Sheriff's Office to accept and appropriate
funds in the amount of $7,528 for a grant administered by the U. S.
Department of Justice's Bulletproof Vest Partnership
3. Request to accept and appropriate $50,000 to the Roanoke County Schools
from Pepsico Foodservice Company
4. Confirmation of appointment to the South Peak Community Development
Authority
5. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Vicki L. James, Benefit Program Supervisor, upon her
retirement after more than nine (9) years of service
6. Request to approve a Motor Vehicle Driving Record Policy for the County of
Roanoke
7. Resolutions requesting acceptance of portions of Sierra Drive and Santa
Anita Terrace into the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)
Secondary System
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
A- 111312 -6.a
660 November 13, 2012
A- 111312 -6.b
A- 111312 -6.c
RESOLUTION 111312 -6.d EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO VICKI L. JAMES, BENEFIT PROGRAM SUPERVISOR, UPON
HER RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN NINE (9) YEARS OF
SERVICE
WHEREAS, Vicki L. James was hired on August 18, 2003, and has worked as a
Benefit Programs Specialist and a Benefit Programs Supervisor during her tenure with
Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Ms. James retired on November 1, 2012, after nine (9) years and
three (3) months of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County; and
WHEREAS, during her time serving Roanoke County, Ms. James worked eight
(8) of her nine (9) years as a Benefit Programs Supervisor. Vicki worked hard to
promote both compassion and empathy in the delivery of benefits to the citizens of
Roanoke County. She continually worked to improve the efficiency of the staff most
specifically in the areas of timeliness and accuracy. Vicki was an active member of the
Virginia Benefit Programs Organization serving as both President and Vice - President of
our local chapter for several years. Vicki contributed much during her tenure and we
appreciate her service to Roanoke County Department of Social Services.
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 VICKI L. JAMES, for nine (9) years and three (3)
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, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
I_Qi ``b1(i f+amv
RESOLUTION 111312 -6.f REQUESTING CHANGES IN THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT)
SECONDARY SYSTEM OF STATE HIGHWAYS, ROUTE 1876,
SIERRA DRIVE, UPC 54216 -VDOT PROJECT # 1876- 080 -500,
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
November 13, 2012 661
WHEREAS, the street(s) described on the attached VDOT Form AM -4.3, fully
incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of Roanoke County depicting additions in the secondary system of
state highways as a result of Project# 1876- 080 -500, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia
Department of Transportation add to the secondary system of state highways the
facilities described on the attached Form AM -4.3, pursuant to §33.1 -229, Code of
Virginia, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
guarantees a clear and unrestricted right -of -way, as described, and any necessary
easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be
forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 111312 -6.g REQUESTING CHANGES IN THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT)
SECONDARY SYSTEM OF STATE HIGHWAYS, ROUTE 1849,
SANTA ANITA TERRACE, UPC 54201 -VDOT PROJECT # 1849-
080 -500, HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the street(s) described on the attached VDOT Form AM -4.3, fully
incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of Roanoke County depicting additions in the secondary system of
state highways as a result of Project# 1849 - 080 -500; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia
Department of Transportation add to the secondary system of state highways the
facilities described on the attached Form AM -4.3, pursuant to §33.1 -229, Code of
Virginia; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
guarantees a clear and unrestricted right -of -way, as described and any necessary
easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be
forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
662 November 13, 2012
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
The following citizens spoke.
Susan Edwards of 4121 Givens Road in Salem thanked the Board and
County Attorney for work on the prayer resolution. Thank you for your work to provide a
plan that reduces the risk of suit by groups with the specific aim of eliminating prayer
from public events. These groups claim there is a wall of separation within the
constitution that protects them from having to tolerate being offended by a secular
reference in an invocation. Because there is protection of free speech within that first
amendment of our constitution, no one is protected from being offended from words of
other individuals. In life, we all hear words that offend us from time to time whether it is
on television, radio or in public places. We can take measures to insulate ourselves
from the frequency of coming into contact with offending words, but they are there. It is
not reasonable to expect government to prevent us from being offended without limited
the liberties of others. The proposed resolution provides a balanced approach to
preserving the tradition of solemnizing the proceedings of the Board with free speech
and fostering and inviting non - secular policy for involving the community and presenting
the invocations. Reviewing the draft presented today, she noted the resolution is based
on the model policy by Alliance Defending Freedom. Specifically for localities within the
fourth federal circuit court of appeals. She notes that the listing of individuals to be
invited to give the invocation has extended to well outside the Roanoke Valley and
commends the Board for that, for including Bedford, Franklin, Montgomery and
Botetourt Counties. The wording includes accommodations for those who do not
belong to a specific congregation or belief within our community, but gives them access
to approach the Board in that setting. By utilizing the Alliance Defending Freedom
model wording, the Board has made accommodation for the free speech rights of those
that will be giving our invocations. Thank you for your careful attention and your
deliberation on these issues and work to strike a reasonable balance to continue the
traditional practice and protect the County from suit.
Lisa Aquillo of 94 Keesling Avenue in Salem, Virginia thanked the Board
for passing the prayer resolution. She advised she is also here in opposition to the Tri-
Wizard Tournament that was held at Green Hill Park on November 3, 2012, which she
considers one important example of an issue in which the county should seek God's
guidance. She advised she realized that nothing can be done about what has already
taken place, but would like to ask that The Board refrain from holding any other events
like this in the future. The Tri- Wizard Tournament was nothing more than a wicked
event promoting the sin of witchcraft. The flyer for the event stated that the event was
November 13, 2012 663
taken "straight from the pages of the Harry Potter series." Harry Potter is a wicked book
that is all about witchcraft, and the author, J. K. Rowling, is quoted as saying that her
books are largely about death. The Harry Potter books, movies, etc. are pure evil. Some
of the activities for the event included potion making and a Quidditch tournament.
Quidditch is a game played by wizards in the Harry Potter series, and it even includes
the players riding on broomsticks. You could probably ask any child in this county who
rides on broomsticks, and I bet they could all tell you that witches do. Why would
Roanoke County want to promote witchcraft among our children? She realizes that
Harry Potter is very popular, but it should not be. Witchcraft is very real, and it is evil.
There is nothing innocent about Harry Potter as many people believe. It is not just a
book, not just a movie, and not just a game. It is an evil influence on all the children and
adults who embrace it.
Carina Aquillio of 94 Keesling Avenue in Salem, Virginia stated it is good
to see the Board again. She stated we and other people need to pray. We need to
pray before we eat. We need to pray before we sleep. We need to pray before we go
to our meetings. God can give us answered prayers. She wanted the Board to believe
that we always need prayer. Please do not stop praying.
Linda LaPrade of 5509 Will Carter Lane in Roanoke, Virginia thanked the
Board for their deliberations and the Board's intent in the prayer issue to protect the
rights and the freedoms of all citizens of this County. She appreciates the way the
Board did this, the deliberations and the decision made. Thomas Jefferson stated the
price of freedom is eternal vigilance. By attending meetings and being aware of
government at all levels brings with it vigilance and a desire for the highest standards.
This Board needs to hold every department and every report submitted to them to these
standards. Giving reports without substantiated, proven data that is not subject to an
audit trail does not work. It is not acceptable to us and it should never be acceptable to
the Board. We want to see, as citizens, and understand how figures are derived. We
want verifiable evidence supporting them. Accountability, proven accuracy and
transparency are necessary, whether it is from ICLEI reports, school board requests or
any other County department giving you an update. Government agencies never want
to relinquish funds and will often ask for more, but in this time of financial difficulty, any
expenditure request must be a need and not a want. Any data needs to be proven as
factual. You need to be doubly aware of NGOs and other groups that will lull you into
their plans under the guise of community building. Soon you will not be the decision
makers, they will be. You and all of your decisions need to be transparent, open and
free from any personal agenda and personal goals. These are the standards that
people require. The time has ended when the citizens of Roanoke County accept
reports because they sound good or blindly accept government decisions of NGO
wishes without strict scrutiny and lots of questions. This is our patriotic duty.
Barney Arthur of 204 Minnie Bell Lane in Vinton, Virginia stated he pastors
a small church, Mountain View Baptist Church over in Catawba so he has both ends of
the County covered. He stated he has spoken to the Board on a number of occasions
664 November 13, 2012
and would like to read two real quick scriptures in God's word. Psalm 111, verse ten,
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those
who do his commandments, his praise endures forever." The Book of Proverbs,
Chapter 1, verse 5, "A wise man will hear and increase in learning. A man of
misunderstanding will require wise counsel." Mr. Arthur stated he would like to praise
each and every Board member for being wise men and women and to seeking good
counsel. Many of the citizens here in the valley have come before the Board giving
wise counsel. Having been a law enforcement officer for thirty -three (33) years, he
would like to point out that law enforcement officers and attorneys have sometimes
been a mixture of oil and water, but our County attorney is a wise man who had a piece
of legislation that he was presenting to you. He heard counsel that there might be some
other way of doing things. He stood before the Board and said let's take a look at it and
the Board decided to do so. He stated he comes before the Board today wanting to
thank you for your wisdom. He advised he is only sorry that we are here at this hour
with all the media having already left because in the past it appears whenever he has
made a presentation it appears that he was up there fussing and jumping up and down,
etc. They heard that, but they are not here to hear him and other pastors who are willing
to come and thank the Board for their service and thank the Board for their wisdom.
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Church moved to receive and file the following reports. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Reserves
3. Reserve for Board Contingency
4. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of
October 31, 2012
5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and
Encumbrances as of October 31, 2012
6. Accounts Paid — October 31, 2012
7. Quarterly Report — Community Development Activities
8. Debt Information Report
IN RE: CLOSED MEETING
At 4:40 p.m., Chairman Flora moved to go into closed meeting following
the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2.3711.A.1, personnel,
November 13, 2012 665
namely discussion concerning appointments to the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare
Board of Directors; League of Older American Advisory Council and the Western
Virginia Regional Jail Authority and Section 2.2- 3711.A. 5 Discussion concerning three
prospective businesses or industries where no previous announcement has been made.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
The closed session was held from 6:10 p.m. until 6:40 p.m.
At 4:40 p.m., Chairman Flora recessed to the fourth floor for the following
work session.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session to review health insurance, health care reform and
potential of offering an optional health care plan for the 2013 -2014
fiscal year (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance; Joe Sgroi,
Director of Human Resources; Anita Hassell, Assistant Director of
Human Resources and Claire Holbrook, Vice President, Wells
Fargo Insurance Consulting)
In attendance for this work session were Claire Holbrook, Vice President
of Wells Fargo Insurance Consulting; Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance; Anita
Hassell, Assistant Director of Human Resources; B. Clayton Goodman III, County
Administrator; Kim Artherhults, representative of the EAC Team and Penny Hodge,
Roanoke County Schools.
Rebecca presented pages 1 through 8 of the PowerPoint presentation (a
copy of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board) and gave the Board an
overview. Ms. Owens did stress that if there were insurance increases in the coming
year, the County could not continue to fund.
Supervisor Elswick inquired with regard to the wellness incentives and
wellness clinic together Roanoke County is spending approximately $200,000 a year,
yet the number of employees is going down, our health insurance claims are going up.
This does not provide any evidence that the wellness clinic is really making a difference
at this point. Does staff have any way to rationalize the cost of claims going up and at
the same time providing a wellness clinic? Ms. Owens stated each year the industry
standard for what they are seeing in the health care report, actually costs going up is
anywhere from ten to fifteen percent (10 to 15 %). The total cost of the services that are
being provided to employees are going up; probably at a rate faster than what our
actual health insurance rate went up; that is part of it. We do have fewer people,
666 November 13, 2012
however the cost of medical treatment is more today than it was several years ago.
Also, with the clinic, the one report that staff initially saw from the provided of wellness
did actually prove that the County, maybe not so much savings, but it basically gave
examples of individuals who could have had catastrophic issues that they caught early
on. She stated while they are spending $200,000 on the wellness program, she does
think the employees are seeing a benefit just from a convenience standpoint and from
those potential claims that were avoided. Ms. Hassell stated that research that she has
looked at indicates that an employee health clinic needs to be in place for about five
years before you can see a significant savings that you can look at it and say, this is
working.
Supervisor Elswick asked to see an analysis taking out the impact of
inflation.
Supervisor Church stated when we had the original meeting; they gave us
a timeline to guarantee savings. Some of the costs are intangible and cannot be seen.
He asked if they were able to measure more accurately. Rebecca stated they have
received one report from the company that she will share with Mr. Goodman and the
Board that did actually identify specific costs that were avoided.
Supervisor Elswick asked for an independent analysis which Ms. Hassell
advised they could prepare. She stated that the average rate of increase in claims for
medical over the last few years has averaged about ten percent (10 %), but when you
look at Roanoke County's average increases they are much lower than that and some
of that is driven by bending the curve.
Ms. Holbrook stated the claims may go up, but not as steep as the
average organization. Unfortunately, sometimes that is the best we can hope for with
the cost of healthcare and the increases and we continually look for ways we can
intervene and the wellness program is a good step towards getting that and getting
more folks engaged in looking at their own personal health.
Supervisor Altizer inquired how many employees take advantage of the
clinic, how many visits have we had to the clinic in the fiscal year that just closed. Ms.
Hassell responded that she did not have an exact number, but it is about 65% of the
people who are on the health insurance plan who are enrolled in the wellness program.
Supervisor Altizer asked but how many are going to the clinic. Ms. Hassell stated she
has asked for those, but because of the closing of Living Well Health Solutions and
assigning the contract to HealthStat and she has actually asked for the clinic activity
reports from them, but has not received.
Supervisor Altizer stated to him that was one of the important numbers
and it is one of the biggest numbers where you can have cost avoidance. Ms. Hassell
stated the clinic is open 20 hours a week, so when the clinic first opened we were
advised by Living Well that was an appropriate number for our population size and
when the clinic operations were more stable, it was very much in use throughout the
year until you got into the summer months and it dropped off a little bit. There is no
recent numbers.
November 13, 2012 667
Supervisor Church stated Mr. Altizer made a good point; you are talking
about two things. When you are talking about cost savings, make sure you do some
sort of calculation of that employee and time lost to and from a doctor; needs to be
factored in because it is a real number.
Supervisor Altizer asked what the average cost of what the County is
paying for a visit for an employee to go there compared to the cost of going to a regular
doctor's office. There is a big cost savings. Ms. Hassell stated there are several
savings there, the time savings and also Living Well and Healthstat negotiate better
rates than a normal physician.
Supervisor Altizer asked how many days has our clinic been closed when
it should have been open. Ms. Hassell responded unfortunately, they have struggled to
keep it open with the nurse there. It was closed this last time for two weeks, we had a
temporary nurse. When LivingWell left, the nurse that we had who we were very happy
with; consistency and stability for many months. She has gotten another job and we
hired a temporary nurse that provided us coverage, but it was closed for two weeks.
Supervisor Altizer stated the problem is that we are looking at rising costs.
We are looking at wellness incentives going up $130,000 for the next year. If we cannot
build consistency in our planning so our people have the confidence, then we are never
going to get there. Ms. Hassell stated she agreed. If we do not fix that in his opinion we
are headed down a road that we are not going the savings we should have.
Mr. Goodman stated he worked at another locality with HealthStat, which
provided continuity. Hopefully, they will bring the continuity that he experienced before
whereby they actually expanded the clinic hours due to demand.
Supervisor Altizer stated we need to be there when our employees need
to be there.
Mr. Goodman advised he thought we would see a turnaround.
Ms. Hassell advised a new full time nurse was expected to start on
December 12, 2012, and staff could not agree more with the concerns expressed.
Supervisor Altizer commented if there is a reduction in the number of
hours, there should be a reduction in what we pay with Ms. Hassell advising if the clinic
is not open, the County is not paying. Ms. Hassell advised a new RFP for wellness will
be released for us to look at other vendors to see if we stay with HealthStat or someone
else.
Supervisor Church requested that a report be prepared quickly through
Mr. Goodman; do not let the Board wait three more months to know how we are doing.
Just let us know with a memo.
Ms. Hassell asked what the Board would like to see with Supervisor
Church responding a status report.
Supervisor Altizer commented that staff should not have to go through a
lot of red tape to find out the numbers; feels there should be some kind of daily
reporting. Ms. Hassell advised they have done normally monthly reports, but with the
change between LivingWell and HealthStat, there have been some bumps in the road.
668 November 13, 2012
She has requested this information and they are working to generate.
Claire Holbrook started with page 8 of the PowerPoint and reviewed High
Deductible Health Plans with Health Reimbursement Accounts.
Anita Hassell started with page 14 of the presentation and reviewed the
new health care reform and the requirements for Roanoke County.
It was the consensus of the Board for staff to proceed with researching an
optional, high deductible health care plan alternative for the 2013 -2014 fiscal year.
The work session was held from 4:55 p.m. until 6:00 p.m.
IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
At 7:00 p.m., Chairman Flora moved to return to open session and to
adopt the certification resolution.
RESOLUTION 111312 -7 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 Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
1. Presentation from the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the
Marine Corps League and appropriation of $20,000 proceeds from
November 13, 2012 669
the 17 annual Marine Mud Run (Doug Blount, Director of Parks,
Recreation and Tourism)
A- 111312 -8
Mr. Blount explained the event was the Marine Mud Run at Green Hill
Park in coordination with the Marine Corps. Commandant Michael Shepherd gave a
brief presentation and presented a check for $20,000, which is $5,000 higher than last
year's amount. All Supervisors offered their thanks.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the staff recommendation to
appropriate $20,000, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES
1. The petition of Jesus the Redeemer Church to obtain a Special
Use Permit in a R -1, Low Density Residential, District for the
operation of a religious assembly on approximately 5.671 acres,
located near the 6900 block of Wood Haven Road, Catawba
Magisterial District (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of
Planning)
Mr. Thompson outlined the petition for a special use permit for a two -
phased project. This petition was approved by the Planning Commission five to zero
with four conditions.
Chairman Flora commented there is an issue with parking on Wood
Haven Road, which is a separate issue and staff has been instructed to coordinate with
VDOT to find a solution.
Supervisor Church inquired of the pastor if he was familiar with the four
proffered conditions and if they can adhere to with the response being in the affirmative.
Chairman Flora opened and closed the public hearing. There were no
citizens to speak, however the following citizen spoke concerning Wood Haven Road.
Carlton Wright stated he may be speaking out of turn but he and his wife
live directly across the street at 6939 Wood Haven Road. Their headlights will shine
right in his front door. He stated they have no problem with that and the reason he is
there is out of frustration. He has tried for over five (5) years to get something done
about the solid white line that has created a parking lot down in front of his house and
on each side. He advised he had pictures if some of the Board members have not been
out there. He stated he met with VDOT on several occasions and the only solution they
670 November 13, 2012
had for him was to put in a circular driveway in the front of his house. He does not mind
telling the Board that frustrated him. He has widened his driveway in order to turn
around so he is able to pull out. There is Crosstimbers to the South, traffic coming up
Wood Haven Road. You try to make sure you are clear there. Traffic has tripled since
Green Ridge Rec. Center was opened; they belong to it and they like it and can be
there in two minutes. He does not have a problem with that, but the traffic has tripled on
that road. He stated he wished you could stand out there sometime. He was out there
this afternoon in the driveway because he was having some work done at his house.
The traffic was bumper to bumper; that is what they are contending with. If they are
going to come out of their driveway and there are cars parked over there on that solid
white line, there is no way that you are going to avoid somebody sideswiping someone
or a head -on collision. He advised he invites all of his guest to park in his driveway or
park their cars in the church driveway. He does not know what else to do. He has tried
and tried to get something done on this. It is like running into a brick wall. This is his
only solution to come to the Board and see if they can help. Mr. Mahoney said he
would try to, but trying to talk to VDOT is impossible. If you park in there and open your
door somebody is going to get their door torn off. There is no reason for this; they have
a house, a park and a driveway like he has. Why can't they use it? Why do we need to
create a parking place? Put signs up. Supervisor Church said something to him about
not having any money; he knows they do not have any money, but what they can do is if
they bring the signs out there, he would put them up. All we need is signs that say "no
parking" and let the police enforce. He has pulled out in front of cars thinking he had
the right -of -way clear and before he could get his car out, there was somebody right on
his door or his bumper, honking the horn and giving him the fist. He does not like that.
Please try to help him. He cannot believe that the Board does not have the authority.
VDOT comes out there and makes a joke out of him, saying "what is your problem."
They do not live there and he does and he has to sit there and see the traffic non -stop
up and down Wood Haven Road; and that is fine because that is what the road is there
for, but for crying out loud do not create a parking lot on the side of it. Supervisor Flora
saw it when he was out there today. It is not wide enough and if they are going to pull
out of their driveway and people when they come down through there and cars are
parked, they get over a little bit and somebody is going to get hit. He stated he knows it
is a safety issue and knows the Board does not deal with safety issues, but folks he
does not know what else to do. He has tried and tried and the County has helped him
in every way they can, but they do not get anywhere either. John Murphy has bent over
backwards trying to help him; getting me lined up with the right people to talk with. They
even sent someone from Christiansburg down here to talk to him. He wasted his time
by coming down here. Please try to help him.
Chairman Flora stated he has asked staff to get with VDOT.
Supervisor Church stated he understands what he is talking about and
there is a dual problem. Obviously he is right about the line and the parking, but he
really believes it is an enforcement issue. If we start putting some heavy -duty tickets or
November 13, 2012 671
have some vehicles towed away. Mr. Wright mentioned having the road widened; they
don't even widen some of the main highways because they really do not have the funds.
He just found out about this three weeks ago and understands that he is not in
opposition to the petition, but will add to the situation.
ORDINANCE 111312 -9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
FOR RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY ON A 5.671 ACRES LOCATED AT
6900 WOOD HAVEN ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 26.19 -01- 16.00)
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE PETITION OF
JESUS THE REDEEMER CHURCH
WHEREAS, Jesus the Redeemer Church has filed a petition for a special use
permit for religious assembly to be located at 6900 Wood Haven Drive (Tax Map No.
26.19 -01- 16.00) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on
November 5, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first
reading on this matter on October 23, 2012; the second reading and public hearing on
this matter was held on November 13, 2012.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Jesus the
Redeemer Church for religious assembly on 5.671 acres located at 6900 Wood Haven
Drive in the Catawba 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 with the following conditions:
a) The properties shall be developed in substantial conformity with the
concept plan dated December 27, 2010, titled "Preliminary Site
Plan for Jesus the Redeemer Church, Roanoke County, Virginia ",
prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, subject to those
changes which may be required by Roanoke County during
comprehensive site plan review.
b) All parking lot lighting shall be shielded "cut -off' types no more than
eighteen (18) feet high and arranged so glare is not cast onto
adjoining properties.
c) The freestanding signage shall be monument style with a maximum
height of seven (7) feet and a maximum width of thirteen (13) feet.
d) A single row of small evergreen trees, as specified in Section 30 -92
of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, shall be installed on the
672 November 13, 2012
eastern side of the driveway adjoining the row of duplexes for
approximately one hundred and seventy (170) feet.
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The provisions of this special use
permit are not severable. Invalidation of any word, phrase, clause, sentence or
paragraph shall invalidate the remainder. 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 Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Church, Elswick, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
The following citizens spoke.
Noah Tickle of 1603 Frosty Lane and Roanoke County residence since
1956 stated the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives, "ICLEI ", as it is
known ", is a socialist UN Trojan Horse. Now, a very long sugar coated tentacle from this
NGO non - governmental organization and an outgrowth of UN deception sustainability.
This particular Trojan horse is to have the public believe, "so they say" elemental
carbon and its oxidized form carbon dioxide is warming up the planet. The real
ignorance they attempt to perpetuate is that it is the fault of man, a carbon dioxide life
form. They all the while have been drinking a carbon dioxide soda and exhaling carbon
dioxide themselves as they are above the lowly carbon dioxide life forms that they are.
Arrogance and ignorance of the lowest form. Part of their bated breath formed by
carbon dioxide and says it is not nature's fault, not the planet, not the planet's
atmosphere, not solar system events, not the "real" environmental governance, that
light, bright thingy in the sky, "the sun ", not the galaxy, not even the universe, which by
the grace of God we are actually a carbon dioxide form of and a representative of our
universe, collected here by gravitational energy. All star dust from super novas of
various dead stars ICLEI would have, "We The People" believe this is all "OUR" fault.
This is so unbelievable. Sheep skinned folks with no common sense. We may expect
to come up with such silliness as ICLEI expects "We The People" to drink their Kool -Aid
as we cower and crawl to look at their sheep skins. They believe we are so low we will
believe any deception they put forth perpetuated by grants of taxpayer money, cooking
the books to indicate what they want the information to perpetuate. Their entire efforts
are to herd "We The People" around because they believe we have been bad little boys
November 13, 2012 673
and girls and have us live the way they would have us live; herded into the sheep pens
of UDAs, Urban Development Areas. It has absolutely nothing to do with elemental
oxidized carbon dioxide; that is their Trojan Horse deception of ICLEI, and their lies
about so called Global Warming. ICLEI must go; it is unconstitutional.
Doug Fowley of 5803 Bighorn Drive, SW stated he comes before the
Board as a Secular Humanist and an Atheist to share his thoughts on the practice of
opening public meetings with prayer. While prayer in government meetings may be a
time - honored tradition in America, it does not make it useful, it does not make it
constitutional and it does not make it right. What is the use of prayer? Given the variety
of religions in the world, it is hard to believe that there is only one true God. So which
one should we pray to? The efficacy of prayer cannot be scientifically proven. In 2006,
the largest study of the therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer found that intercessory
prayer had no effect on recovery from surgery. The study also found that patients who
knew they were receiving intercessory prayer fared worse that those did not know they
were prayed for. Nothing fails like prayer so why pray at these meetings. If the answer
that the majority of the Roanoke County citizens or their representatives on the Board
are in favor of the practice, then consider this his rejoinder. In the United States,
government policy is not a popularity contest. We live in a constitutional republic and a
representative democracy. A nation in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights
protected by law. The first amendment to our constitution pronounces that Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. The due process clause in the fourteenth amendment extends these
protections to State and local governments like Roanoke County. The equal protection
clause also in the fourteenth amendment requires that the Board of Supervisors defend
my freedom from religion. The Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals, which has
jurisdiction in Virginia, has ruled that sectarian government prayers are unconstitutional
allowing non - believers to excuse themselves from the invocation is not a remedy.
Rotating the invocation through various religious denominations is also not a solution
but one that he is pleased the Board has approved in the earlier session. You will
eventually find a religion whose prayer is as objectionable to the Board as any and all
prayer is to him. You will see the wisdom of prohibiting State sponsored prayer at these
meetings; anything else is a tyranny of the majority and the Board knows that is not
right. He stated he proudly served in the United States army, that's right he was an
"atheist in a foxhole." When he enlisted, he spoke an oath that went something like this,
"I Doug Fowley do solemnly affirm that I will support and defend the constitution of the
United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same." As a resident of Roanoke County for over twenty -five (25)
years, he respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors do the same. Do the right
thing; stop unconstitutional prayers at these meetings."
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
674
November 13, 2012
Supervisor Church congratulated Northside High School in the football
playoffs. Another week coming up; they were able to beat Rockbridge at Northside last
week in the first round of the playoffs and are now on to that easy team in Lynchburg
that is undefeated, the Brookfield Bees. They have been having a hard time with
Northside; we have played them the last five years in the playoffs and they have won at
least three of those. So good luck to the Northside Vikings going to Brookfield this
coming Friday night. Good luck to Coach Burt Torrence and Frank Dent the principal at
the school and all the fans for safe travel back and forth.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Flora adjourned the meeting at 7:37 p.m.
mitted by: Approved by:
Al I
eborah C. Jac# Richard C. Flora
Clerk to the Bo1Krd Chairman