The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1/28/2014 - RegularJanuary 28, 2014 45 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 fourth Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January 2013. 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: OPENING CEREMONIES Before the meeting was called to order a moment of silence was held. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph P. McNamara, Supervisors Al Bedrosian, Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Charlotte A. Moore and P. Jason Peters MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator; Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; and Deborah C. Jacks, Deputy Clerk to the Board IN RE: BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on Roanoke County's Facility Naming Policy (Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism) Mr. Blount provided the briefing as requested by Supervisor Bedrosian. Supervisor Church inquired if something was done in honor of a fallen army veteran, from North Roanoke with Mr. Blount responding in the affirmative. He then asked if it was at Shell Park with Mr. Blount responding in the affirmative stating it 46 January 28, 2014 was for Jesse Clowers and was done for the football field at Shell Park. Supervisor Church then asked if we did something for a young man who was in either Iraq or Afghanistan with Mr. Blount responding he does not recall. Supervisor Church stated he thought that the Board has done something and asked Mr. Goodman to look into. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if all the fields have been named for people that are deceased with Mr. Blount responding in the affirmative. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked has there been discussion when you want to name something for a field and this has come up, for someone that's still alive. Mr. Bount responded we have had two requests in the last eight years for an individual that was actually, it was the same request and in both cases. He advised the Board denied the request based on the previous practice of the Board not to name facilities after living individuals, and to his knowledge that is the only two (2) requests that have been received for living individuals for our sports facilities. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked for Mr. Blount's personal thoughts adding if the question that's come up is about people that are, you know, 40 years of service and why are we waiting until they pass away and I can see both sides of this issue. Chairman McNamara asked Supervisor Bedrosian to refrain from asking for opinions of staff as they are here to provide information, not to provide guidance. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked when we decided not to name after living people was it based on a policy with Mr. Blount responding it was based on a practice; not a policy. Supervisor Bedrosian then stated so there is no policy in effect with Mr. Blount responding in the affirmative. Supervisor Church then inquired of Mr. Mahoney if he could explain the basis on this practice; he believed there was a discussion concerning pros and cons. Mr. Mahoney responded he believed the Board in the past had struggled with the issue, and quite frankly, it came down to a concern that if you name a facility for example if you name a facility after me, after he retires, and then he goes out and commits a crime, that is an embarrassment to the County, and to the Board. If you spend thousands of dollars erecting signage, are you going to go back up and rip down all that signage and put up new signage, and unfortunately, we have seen in other parts of the country, those kinds of embarrassing problems occur. Again, if it's the pleasure of the Board, he thinks Mr. Blount has provided in the agenda packet copies of policies that other jurisdictions have adopted. Supervisor Moore asked Mr. Blount if he had an advisory committee that works with him on making decisions and have they discussed this, and what was their outcome; have you discussed other options they could do for people still living? Mr. Blount responded that we have two different advisory groups that we work with. First is the presidents of all of our recreation clubs, and so we did discuss the issue with them, and discussed a wide variety of recognition issues because we do believe that we need to have some type of formal recognition process for our coach, coaches, significant January 28, 2014 47 volunteers for our recreation clubs, because our department is built off of utilizing volunteers and if we didn't have volunteers, we wouldn't be able to provide many of the recreation, especially athletic services, that we do. We talked about potentially having an annual award for an individual; we also discussed doing some type of commemorative bench project for each of the key parks. We also talked about having what you would consider a wall of fame, in each one of the parks where you have the concession stands and some clubs have different type of things that they put up on the walls of these buildings, and we could do some type of plaque to where each of the clubs could recognize people on an annual basis, so we did discuss that with our president's council. We also discussed it with the recreation advisory commission, which assists us with looking at all aspects of parks, recreation and tourism and we discussed the same options with them and they were very supportive. They were concerned about naming sports field facilities after living individuals, and they actually passed a motion that they would not support it, that they felt that we needed to go in a different direction of having to where we're honoring more folks on an annual basis in terms of doing it one person for one field. We have approximately forty (40) different athletic facilities, and one of the concerns they had was that we potentially could name all of these facilities without a policy and without some type of evaluation criteria that we could potentially name all of our facilities in a very short period of time. Supervisor Bedrosian asked Mr. Mahoney if he feels there would be a conflict, for example, if we said that we would name some with the person still alive and we could possibly name others, when someone passed away, could you see that we'd have to either go one way or the other? The person that's going to get it named after they pass away, are they not as worthy as a person that is getting it named while they're still alive, would you have to either go one way or the other on a policy. Mr. Mahoney responded that it has been the custom of the Board that has evolved over a period of time and if the Board wants to change that, it is within the Board's discretion. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he is trying to think it through in his mind, with legal advice, if you were going to have a policy it seems like it would have to be one way or the other. He stated he guessed you would be sending a different message out to the community, one you're going to do while you're still alive, one when you passed away, it would make sense to have a different policy. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution amending R111213 -2 adopting standards of conduct for the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) Mr. Mahoney advised at the last meeting any amendments would be 48 January 28, 2014 submitted by various Board members. Those amendments numbers 9, 10, 11 and 12 have been submitted by various Board members. Supervisor Church stated just for the fast forward from behind, we had a meeting very briefly, in November where there was a question whether or not it really was passed, and at our last meeting it was decided to bring up any problems and for Board members to add any amendments, which are items 9, 10, 11 and 12; is that correct with Mr. Mahoney responding in the affirmative. Supervisor Church continued by advising Supervisor Bedrosian had noted that in our current parliamentary book that we each have, some of that is marked under decorum, but he was concerned, and thought it prudent for our Board since we now have a Code of Conduct that we should make it meaningful, and common sensical. For example, if we have anyone coming before our Board, that we have a financial or personal interest with, that the Board member would just simply abstain from voting on it and he thought that would keep everybody clear and above Board, which was his concern on those two items, 9 and 10. Supervisor Bedrosian stated that he had added number 12, and you know and he knows that there are probably rules already regulating accepting gifts. Are we allowed as Board members to accept any kind of gifts from people that we do business with, or work with or that you know are here to influence us in ways and directions to go, are there rules about that? Is it a State rule? Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative stating the General Assembly adopted the State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Action and that act sets out the rules and that Act does several things. It has some very specific definitions prohibiting conducts and basically there are three different rules. The first rule in his opinion is easy. You cannot accept a bribe. You would think that you didn't need to say that, but in the Conflict of Interest Act, thou shall not accept a bribe and that is whether it's money, whether it's a loan, whether it's a t- shirt, in other words, would that item influence you in the performance of your duties, and so that's a flat out simple prohibition. The second kind of situation is if you have a personal interest in a contract. For example, if you had a business, and that business was trying to do business with Roanoke County, you were the owner of that business, you had an interest in that contract that was coming before the governing body, you are not allowed to participate in that transaction. The third area is personal interest in a transaction. Each of those categories has some very specific definitions in the State code. So yes, there are pretty strict limitations in the state code; those limitations have penalties (criminal penalties and civil penalties, i.e. a fine). In certain instances, like bribery, if you are convicted that is considered malfeasance and you could lose your position as an elected Board member. Mr. Mahoney further explained what Virginia has is more of a disclosure state; each state has different rules. There are also different rules for the federal employees and Congressman, people who work in the White House. The intent of the Virginia approach is every year when the Statement of Economic Interest is completed; you January 28, 2014 49 would show if you accepted gifts, if you exceed either $50 or $100 in gifts, you are supposed to show that in your disclosure form. That is a way of saying to the citizens, through transparency to the citizens, that you have accepted certain kinds of gifts. Also, in this same statement, you are supposed to show your business interests, where your investments are, if you have loans, if you have an ownership interest in businesses and this is where the trigger of a three percent (3 %) ownership interest in the business or $10,000 of salary or $10,000 of income from that business. So, to reiterate, Virginia's approach is one of transparency. The second part of that is if a matter comes before the Board for a vote, when you file your statement of economic interest is really looking at the prior year. So, if something comes before the Board you have a contract in or a personal interest, you are supposed to identify the interest. This can be done orally either at the time the matter comes before the Board or in writing, which is filed with the Clerk. According, this is another aspect of disclosure that the Virginia Act provides for. Mr. Mahoney advised on the concerns that he would raise with respect to Supervisor Church's amendments is that the General Assembly has said the State and Local government conflict of interest Act supersedes all ordinances, all Charter amendments and all other laws. What the General Assembly wanted to do is establish one set of rules that were uniform and consistent for all public officials throughout the Commonwealth. Additionally, he stated he thinks that is what paragraph number 7 that is in the existing policy already addresses; it reiterates in effect what you have to do under the Conflict of Interest Act. Where that becomes critical is that if you are looking at a penalty and the penalty is :Thou shall not vote, thou shall not participate in a transaction before the governing body, in effect, you have disenfranchised citizens if that Board member cannot participate, which is why the State rules of when you can do things and when you cannot. Even with the State rules, there may be a disqualification, but those disqualifications are narrow and specific. So, when you look at an extreme remedy of disqualifying a person from being able to participate in a transaction, there is a problem. There is one exception under the Act, the General Assembly gave authority to local governing bodies to adopt a local ordinance, not a resolution and that ordinance allows the governing body to set monetary limits on acceptance of any gift and also required disclosure. It also sets out a penalty and if you did not do that, then you were subject to a civil fine and he believes the fine is $500 or two (2) times the value of the gift, whatever is greater. Mr. Mahoney clarified by stating he thinks the concern is if give you a campaign contribution of $50 today and then two (2) years from now an Attorney comes forward and am representing an applicant for rezoning, would that disqualify you from voting on that rezoning. He stated he thinks that is one of the issues that you have to grapple with because if you are in a disqualification situation, then he would suggest your policy is in conflict with the State Act and the State Act is limiting in terms of what those situations are, i.e. whether you would be disqualified, when you would be disqualified. Does that make sense? 50 January 28, 2014 Supervisor Bedrosian then stated in the last two weeks when he was talking with Ms. Green as it came up at a meeting and it was surprising, because he works for a Corporation and he could never, ever take somebody in government out to eat and pay for their way or take them on a trip. He advised he could never do that; he would be fired. So, when it came up and he got emails that indicated they had heard this and it started triggering him that if a member of our staff, and it was an elected official also given a trip at no cost and yet they will be someday voting on it. For example, we will be voting on ICLEI today and that organization takes and Board member and another staff member on a trip at no cost, does that influence their vote. Not, they have to make a decision on that, will that influence the way they will vote. He stated he is just trying to be objective. He continued by stating, obviously, he stands on one side of the issue regarding ICLEI, and he thinks he would be influenced if he was taken on an all expenses paid trip and then he has to vote on whether or not to continue membership. So, this prompted him to think, what are our limits here on what we should be accepting as Board members and Department heads. Mr. Mahoney stated under the State law it is set out in three categories. Category one is if this is a contract or this transaction is solely applicable to you, your business, your property then yes, you are disqualified and you cannot do that. Category number two is if that matter before the governing body affects three or more groups or individuals or people, you would be allowed to participate and vote, but you would have to disclose that. You would need to say, "I am a member of this small group, but I believe I can still vote on this matter; I can give a fair consideration of it." The example that is given from the Attorney General several years ago what if you had three Attorneys in town and one of the Board members or city council members or town council members was an Attorney, if you were to adopt, let's say, an increase in the business license tax, that only affected Attorneys, well, you could vote on that, but if there are only two Attorneys in town, you could not vote on it, because that was less than the magic number that was set out under the Code. The third area is where it affects the public at large. Each one of the Board members, each one of you owns real estate, and every year you vote on the real estate tax levy, so yes, you can vote on that, even though that affects your personal interest, what your tax rate is going to be, whether you increase it or decrease it, but since that affects the public at large, you're allowed to do that. So the State allows you to participate and vote on those kinds of transactions, but typically, what you would have to do is you would have to disclose that, and you would have to make that representation public. He stated he thinks the example for Roanoke County had been in the past, we had several Board members who had spouses who were school teachers. So they were voting on the school budget and they were able to do that, they had to make disclosure, public disclosure, again, public transparency, and they also indicated that they could fairly and objectively consider the matter that was before the governing body, but what Virginia's approach is, January 28, 2014 51 it's one of the disclosure and transparency and you let the voters know, hey, these are my interests, this is the property I own or these are the businesses I'm involved in or these are the relationships I'm involved in and you make those disclosures and then it's up to the individual Board member to make that disclosure public, and then to make a determination as to whether or not you could vote on that. Supervisor Church stated he wanted to make sure he understands, because sometimes we can get lost in the legalese. If a personal relationship, etc is divulged and written in our Statement of Economic interest, like a school teacher, then we could vote on that because in our discussion we had at the last meeting, when he asked where does it fall when I say I have a close buddy in the Police Department, we are inseparable and the police is asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars several times a year. He stated he would think prudently he would just simply abstain and you agreed with him the last time we had this discussion. If I have a personal relationship and if it is not financial it would not be a criminal act, but you made sure of this, but the prudent person would say the best thing to do was abstain. Mr. Mahoney responded, as he has indicated to him and perhaps other Board members in the past, there are two ways of looking at things. The first approach is the lawyer approach and you parse the words and the phrases that are set out under the Conflict of Interest Act. However, I have also talked to Board members and have said, yet an action may be legal under the Act when the Roanoke Times puts you on the front page of the newspaper, yes, you did not do anything illegal, or immoral, the embarrassment is still there. So, what he has said to Board members is if it has the appearance of a conflict, not an actual conflict, but just the appearance, he would advise and counsel any Board member that if, in your belief, you ought to abstain from that transaction, then go ahead. He stated he thinks that is the safer thing to do. He stated the difficulty he has with respect to personal relationships is that it is somewhat subjective and undefined. For example say you and I belong to the same church and we are on the building committee or the personnel committee because we have haired a new pastor then later, I come in with something totally separate from church business, but you and I have had this longstanding personal relationship because we are both in the same church. Would that disqualify you? Another example, if you are a member of the Rotary Club or Kiwanis or Moose and I was a member of the Moose and we were active members, we have a relationship, personal relationship, would that disqualify me. If I was a volunteer firefighter or a rescue square member and I was a Board member, does that mean I cannot vote on buying a new fire engine or building a new fire station. Supervisor Church asked how could it be better defined with Mr. Mahoney responded he does not know and that is his concern. Again, it if is a disqualification, that is probably the most serious penalty. Supervisor Church then stated it is not a Conflict of Economic Interest, but the question he put to Mr. Mahoney at the last meeting was if I had this relationship and 52 January 28, 2014 they were coming not for $50, but thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars at that podium and I said I would tell my friend, "I am not voting on this" and you responded that is right. I feel personally that I do not want to go there, that is the point he is making and you agreed. Is that correct? Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Peters stated he is a member of the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue and has been for twenty -one (21) years. Given what you have just said, would it be inappropropriate as Chief Burch will before us shortly to ask for $134,000 for a new ambulance for the Hollins Department? Would it be inappropriate for me to vote on that? Mr. Mahoney responded under the State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act, he does not believe it would be inappropriate or illegal for you to vote on it. Supervisor Peters then asked but if the Board adopts this policy, one could argue that subparagraph 9 or 10 would indicate that you should not vote on it. Additionally, it is known that he is in the banking world and deal with a lot of people and a lot of finances. Given the way number 9 is written, that would put me out of voting for a lot of things, is that correct? Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative assuming you had close relationships whether it was personal or financial. Supervisor Peters responded when he is dealing with people's money, he had a pretty good relationship with them. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he just needs to understand because a lot of things are being talked about here. He then stated he would just ask directly. If he were a single guy and was dating a head of a department and that department came up and asked for money, would I be able to vote. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Bedrosian then stated if you were married and your spouse came before you, because that applies to immediate family and the other aspect of immediate family is children. Mr. Mahoney clarified if a member of your family who is still living in the same household, i.e. an adult child 22,24,25 and he or she moves out of the house, then the immediate family prohibition does not apply. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked as the County Attorney is he okay with taking a trip somewhere when you are voting on membership. Mr. Mahoney stated yes in two parts. One, that is has been disclosed to the Board and number two, do you believe as an individual Board member that the trip was provided to you in order to influence you in your vote? Number three, he stated he thinks it's one thing if the Board authorizes staff members to go investigate, you know, you want to go look at other libraries in other jurisdictions or you want to look at other facilities in other jurisdictions. Staff does that, but the Board members are making the ultimate vote at the end of the day. So, he stated he thinks in that context, if you have under the State law, that disclosure, that transparency, then for your purposes, for your vote, he thinks the Board is doing that on its own regardless of what staff may recommend to you. Chairman McNamara stated Section 114 of the County Board of organization allows any Board member to bring up any item to be discussed at a future January 28, 2014 53 Board meeting. We are discussing the rules of conduct and standards of conduct for the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at the request of the gentleman from Catawba at the last meeting. We discussed some form of this resolution at the November 12, 2013 Board Meeting. The prior Supervisor of Windsor Hills added items 7 and 8 and subsequently voted against the entire resolution. On January 14, 2014, the Board reaffirmed the resolution, and for our January 28, 2014, meeting, the supervisor from Catawba added items 9, 10, 11, and 12. The Supervisor from Hollins asked to remove 2, 4, 5 excuse me, Supervisor from Catawba had an interest in adding 9, 10, and 12, Supervisor from Hollins had an interest in leaving 2, 4, and 5 and adding number 12 and my suggestion is we've discussed standards of conduct long enough as a Board. He stated he thinks every amendment that has occurred since the original resolution was presented on November 12, 2013, is gamesmanship, so with that in mind, Chairman McNamara then moved Item E1, Resolution amending Standards of Conduct for Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to include items 1 through 6. Chairman McNamara then reiterated that the motion is on the resolution that is presented is the rules of conduct being amended to include items 1 through 6, which again, from his perspective are appropriate and the only ones that were truly believed to be important, and the rest of it is politics. Supervisor Church stated he takes exception to the Chairman's description of gamesmanship. When citizens of Roanoke County elect him to bring forward things that are common sense, that look after what a prudent person would do, it's not politics. To the contrary and he was ready to make a motion, but the gentleman to his left was talking about a motion and he was ready to make a motion to approve this. This defies logic. You people that are sitting here defy logic to have a Board member take part in a vote; it's not gamesmanship, no politics, nothing to gain here. He is not getting any money from this. For those of you sitting here and those at home, ask yourself if it is not gamesmanship for politics. This is something that an average prudent person would want to do, so on record, he takes exception to that. The chairman has made a motion, but leave out stereotyping, which is part of the previous one, and let's stick to the basics of serving the citizens. Supervisor Moore stated she would just like to add that we represent our citizens to the best of our ability. We took an oath to do that and in order to do that appropriately, we must all get along and respect each other as a Board. She stated she thinks this code should be something simple, easy to read. We've all agreed that we already do all of these things, 1 through 6, so she does not have a problem with signing or going by code 1 through 6; she is good with that. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he has one simple point. The only issue he has against this is that it's ambiguous and that's his problem with all of these. The only ones that seem to have teeth are the ones we're adding because they're specific about relationships and stuff like that. The other stuff where we're all trying to do what's best 54 January 28, 2014 for Roanoke County, those kinds of terms, who decides all that? He added that he does think that is why the issue that he has right now is who is going to decide that we are doing this right. Treat everybody with respect, so if somebody doesn't feel like they're being treated correctly, we are representatives of the people, and he thinks sometimes you fight for an issue, and you discuss and stuff, and so that's why he just looks at it and thinks, what does this really mean, we're just adding several more documents, and who knows what it really means, it is very ambiguous. That's my opinion. Supervisor Peters stated he is going to point out a couple of items as Mr. Bedrosian just pointed out, it is ambiguous and we should already be doing it. However, since our last Board meeting, there have been two violations, a violation of item 1 that stated that closed sessions should stay in closed session and it did not. Additionally item 5 talks about treating let me read directly from it, "The members agree to treat all persons with respect, courtesy and fairness." In his opinion, that did not happen right here in our Board room when our Boardroom turned into an interrogation room of our General Services Manager because of a personal feeling. That is all; it is something that we need to address, put behind us and move on. Supervisor Church stated he concurs completely with Supervisor Peters, we had a closed session on a Tuesday night and on Wednesday morning the entire building here knew about it and He would like to know how. We finished about 9:00 p.m. and only six people were in attendance, the County Attorney and five Board members. So, he concurs and would love to know and would be the first in line to take a polygraph. RESOLUTION 012814 -1 AMENDING R111213 -2 ADOPTING STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR THE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution R111213 -2 to adopt standards of conduct to provide guidance to the Board members in the conduct of the public's business; and WHEREAS, these standards summarize some of the ethical obligations undertaken by each Board member upon his or her election to this position; and WHEREAS, working for the common good of all the citizens of Roanoke County is the Board's primary goal; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors wishes to amend these standards by incorporating items 9 through 12. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors hereby adopts the following as standards of conduct to be followed by members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in the transaction of public business and in Board meetings. January 28, 2014 55 1. The members agree to maintain confidentiality regarding matters discussed in Closed Session. The members agree that the consequences of failing to maintain confidentiality following a Closed Session could result in harm to the County and public censure. 2. The members agree to focus on issues with no personal or verbal attacks or stereotyping of the other members. 3. The members agree to focus on what is "best" for all of Roanoke County and its citizens and leave partisanship behind. 4. The members agree to listen before judging and to respect the other person's point of view. 5. The members agree to treat all persons with respect, courtesy and fairness. 6. The members agree to share information that is relevant to matters under consideration by the Board. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Peters, McNamara NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA 1. The petition of Carol Lachowicz to rezone approximately 15.72 acres from PRD, Planned Residential Development, District to AG- 3, Agricultural /Rural Preserve, District, located in the 7600 block of Apple Grove Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for February 25, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. The petition of Daniel Smith to obtain a special use permit for a restaurant, drive -in or fast food (snow cone stand) in a C -1, Low Intensity Commercial, District, on approximately 0.33 acre located at 3540 Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District 56 January 28, 2014 Supervisor Moore moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for February 25, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation in the amount of $300 awarded to the Roanoke County Police Department from the Knights of Columbus Council #562 for Project Lifesaver (Howard B. Hall, Chief of Police) Chief Hall outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Moore moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $134,000 to Fire and Rescue for a fifty percent (50 %) matching grant from the Virginia Department of Health (Grant #WV- CO3/12 -13) for the purchase of a four (4) -wheel Drive (Richard E. Burch, Chief of Fire and Rescue) Chief Burch outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Bedrosian moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 3. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a grant in the amount of $65,000 to Roanoke County Public Schools from the Grant Award for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Grant (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) Ms. Owens outlined the ordinance. Mr. Bedrosian asked to explain why this time is not in the budget and if January 28, 2014 57 this was a onetime grant. Mrs. Owens explained this was coming from the State. Supervisor Church stated this was for fiscal 2013 -2014. Supervisor Church moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 4. Ordinance accepting and appropriating an award in the amount of $22,500 to the Roanoke County Public Schools from the 2013/2014 National Board Certification Incentive Award (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) Ms. Owens outlined the ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 5. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $10,000 to the Economic Development Department from Appalachian Power for marketing the Center for Research and Technology (Jill Loope, Director of Economic Development) Ms. Loope outlined the ordinance. Supervisor Church asked if this was a grant or a donation. Ms. Loope responded this was a donation. There was no further discussion. Supervisor Church moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 6. Ordinance amending Ordinance 62789 -4 authorizing the County Administrator to appoint the Clerk to the governing body and to perform certain duties as specified (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) Mr. McNamara stated he would like to remind everyone that the questions should pertain to the change in authorization of the County Administrator of delegating 58 January 28, 2014 certain powers of the Clerk. Those are how the questions should be phrased. They should not be personnel related or discuss any personnel currently with the staff or any type of public evaluation of any of the people that are currently employed with Roanoke County. Supervisor Bedrosian asked for clarification stating in 2010 that was when we made a change from what it used to be and what it used to be was that the Board appointed a Clerk under the authority of the County Administrator. Mr. Mahoney responded under the direction of the Administrator was what it was up until 2010. So, the Board would appoint that person, but it is under the direction of the County Administrator because he wants to be very specific about what that means. The Clerk works for the five (5) Board members and takes the minutes, etc. but the day to day direction is supervised by the County Administrator. So, that person is serving two people. Mr. Mahoney stated up until December 2010, that was the case. Supervisor Bedrosian stated so the problem was serving two people since he was not here in 2010. He stated he could see if you are serving two people and one is your boss and the other one is who you are serving on a day to day basis. Is that a conflict; is that why it changed? What was the reason for the change in 2010? Mr. Mahoney stated he believed that could be described as one of the justifications for that change, yes. Supervisor Bedrosian restated so in 2010 it changed to now the Board still appoints that person, the Clerk, and the County Administrator really has no direction at all over that person. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Now, we are going to go back. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. What is the reason for going back? The issue is now we are going back. Is there an issue in that structure, not the person, just in how it is set up? Mr. Mahoney responded he understood that it was the direction of the Board to clarify those lines of responsibility and authority. Supervisor Bedrosian stated they were clear though, the lines of responsibility were that the position of the Clerk reported to the Board and at the direction of the Board. That seems to be clear. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative stating but you had an ordinance that was in place from 1989 that provided for a different method, or a different process than what the actual practice was post 2010. Supervisor Bedrosian responded but he thought we changed something to make in 2010. Mr. Mahoney responded the ordinance was never amended. The ordinance is still in existence today and that ordinance says today serves at the pleasure of the Board but under the direction of the Administration. The practice was changed, but the ordinance was not. What you have is a conflict between the actual practice versus what the 1989 ordinance provided. Supervisor Bedrosian stated we could go either way; we could then amend it so that it is under the direction of the Board and we appoint. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative; you could amend the 1989 ordinance to conform to current practice. He stated he thinks the Board considered that it was rejected by the Board. It was brought to the Board; the Board debated it but did not amend the 1989 ordinance, the previous Board. Supervisor Church stated this is the first reading so basically the decision or hours of discussion today is not going to really finalize anything. Mr. Mahoney January 28, 2014 59 confirmed Supervisor Church was correct. Supervisor Church stated more citizens can weigh in at second reading. He added Supervisor Bedrosian asked a real pertinent question and it begs an answer. He asked Mr. Goodman under the current situation the Clerk works at the pleasure of the Board and under the supervision of our Board, but something is missing here because the Board does not supervise our Clerk, we do not sign time sheets, payments, etc. Who does this? Mr. Goodman responded we work together in his office to address those issues. Mr. Goodman stated that is a yes. So, really it is a conflict already because we do not do daily supervision, but time sheets, purchases in the department, etc. somebody has to do that, the Board has not done it. So, already we have another animal running off. It is not clear, but we should address this and many more at the second reading because in this Board member's opinion, it is not broken, it has worked fine and we tried the other side of it prior to 2010 and it failed miserably. The citizens were just left out; they had no feeling of belonging to their own government, but that is for a larger discussion at the second reading. Supervisor Peters stated he had a question of Mr. Mahoney asking if we have a resolution and an ordinance that are conflicting, which supersedes at this point? Mr. Mahoney stated from a lawyer's perspective, he would suggest that the ordinance should take precedence, but the practice of the Board since 2010 as reflected in the resolution is different. So, the resolution is different and the practice is different. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for February 25, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $15,000 from the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the Marine Corps League to Camp Roanoke from the 18 annual Marine Mud Run (Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism) Mr. Blount outlined the ordinance. Representatives from the Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the Marine Corps League were in attendance to present the check to Chairman McNamara. All Supervisors offered their thanks. There were no changes from the first reading. ORDINANCE 012814 -2 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $15,000 FROM THE U.S. MARINE CORPS RESERVE UNIT AND THE MARINE CORPS LEAGUE TO CAMP ROANOKE FROM THE 18 ANNUAL MARINE MUD RUN 60 January 28, 2014 WHEREAS, Roanoke County and the Marine Corps League have a partnership to host the annual Marine Mud Run at Green Hill Park; and WHEREAS, the Mud Run is a fund - raising event for the Marine Corps League and was held on September 21, 2013; and WHEREAS, The Marine Corps League makes an annual donation to Camp Roanoke for camp improvements; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading was held on January 28, 2014. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sum of $15,000 is hereby appropriated from the sources and for the purpose of replacing the dining hall flooring and men's and women's bathhouse flooring at Camp Roanoke. 2. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a grant in the amount of $9,888.17 from the U. S. Department of Justice's Bulletproof Vest Partnership for the Roanoke County Police Department (Howard B. Hall, Chief of Police) There were no changes from first reading and no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -3 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,888.17 FROM THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ROANOKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) has awarded the Roanoke County Police Department a fifty percent (50 %) matching grant to assist in the purchase of protective vests for law enforcement and correctional officers. The U.S. Department of Justice will fund fifty percent (50 %) of the cost of each vest up to a total of $4,944.08 of federal funds. The period for this grant funding is April 1, 2013 thru March 31, 2015; and January 28, 2014 61 WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading was held on January 28, 2014; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sum of $4,944.08 is hereby accepted and appropriated from the Department of Justice's Bulletproof Vest Partnership to the Roanoke County Police Department; and 2. That the matching sum of $4,944.09 is hereby appropriated from the Roanoke County Police Department's 2013 -2014 budget for the grant; and 3. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 3. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a grant in the amount of $348,250 from the Virginia Attorney General's office for the Roanoke County Police Department (Howard B. Hall, Chief of Police) There were no changes from first reading and no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -4 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $348,250 FROM THE VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TO THE ROANOKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, in July 2013, the Roanoke County Police Department applied for a grant with the Virginia Attorney General's office in the amount of $539,482; and WHEREAS, in December 2013, the Department was awarded $348,350 from a federal asset forfeiture against Abbott Laboratories; and WHEREAS, the funds are to be used to purchase in -car video cameras and radar units. Additionally, some of the funding is to be set aside for unbudgeted needs that may arise during the construction of the Roanoke County Criminal Justice Academy; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading was held on January 28, 2014; and 62 January 28, 2014 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sum of $348,250 is hereby accepted and appropriated from the Virginia Commonwealth Attorney General's office; and 2. These funds are to be allocated as follows: In -car cameras, $219,000; Radar Units, $30,000 and Academy Contingency Fund, $99,250. Any funds not needed for the Academy project will be used to purchase additional cameras and radar units; and 3. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 4. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $18,322.50 to the Clerk of the Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2013/2014 (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) There were no changes from first reading and no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -5 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $18,322.50 TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/2014 WHEREAS, Technology Trust Funds, representing fees collected by the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's office have been received from the State in the amount of $18,322.50; and WHEREAS, the funds have been earmarked for the purpose of maintenance; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading was held on January 28, 2014; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sum of $18,322.50 is hereby accepted and appropriated from the Commonwealth of Virginia; and 2. These funds are to be allocated to account 102817 -5850 in the Clerk of Circuit Court; and 3. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. January 28, 2014 63 On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the conveyance of three (3) parcels of land located between the Spring Hollow Dam and the Roanoke River to the Western Virginia Water Authority (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) There were no changes from first reading. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this agenda item. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -6 AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF THREE (3) PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED BETWEEN THE SPRING HOLLOW DAM AND THE ROANOKE RIVER TO THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY WHEREAS, by Ordinance 062204 -13 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County approved the execution of an Operating Agreement with Roanoke City and the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) providing for the operation of a full- service water and wastewater authority; and WHEREAS, the Operating Agreement provided for the transfer from Roanoke County and Roanoke City to the WVWA of the water and wastewater facilities; including all of the real estate owned by the localities and used for these purposes; and WHEREAS, the property to be conveyed by Roanoke County to the WVWA was set out in Exhibit B to the Operating Agreement; and WHEREAS, three (3) parcels owned by Roanoke County were omitted from Exhibit B and not conveyed to the WVWA; and WHEREAS, this ordinance corrects that omission by authorizing the conveyance to the WVWA of those three (3) parcels located between the Spring Hollow Dam and the Roanoke River; and WHEREAS, the real property to be conveyed to the WVWA is being made available for other public uses in accordance with Section 16.01 of the County Charter; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014; and the second reading and public hearing was held on January 28, 2014. 64 January 28, 2014 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the conveyance by Roanoke County to the WVWA of three (3) parcels of real estate located between the Spring Hollow Dam and the Roanoke River and identified as Tax Map Nos. 072.00 -01- 18.00, 073.00 -01- 06.00, and 073.00 -01- 07.00 is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents, in a form as approved by the County Attorney, as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this ordinance. 3. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Ordinance declaring property located at 3060 Ivyland Road, Roanoke, Virginia; Vinton Magisterial District as blighted property. As a result of this action, Roanoke County may repair, demolish or remove the structure to cure the cause(s) of the blight (Joel Baker, Building Commissioner) Mr. Moneir outlined the ordinance and explained the owner contacted Community Development to see what he could do, however no good faith effort was made. Mr. Preston was in attendance earlier but could not stay due to the weather. Supervisor Church stated he would like to pass the Board's condolences to Jeff Bailey's family from the Community Development Department. We lost a long- time employee at a young age. Since Mr. Moneir is from that department, he thought it would be appropriate to send out our heartfelt condolences to the family; we hate to lose anybody in Roanoke County, especially one that is so unexpected. We acknowledge with deep and sorrowful hearts. Mr. Moneir advised Mr. Bailey has been with the department for twenty -three (23) years and passed away this past week -end unexpectedly. He was a very fine engineer and kind person. We will miss him. There were no changes from the first reading. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this agenda item. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -7 DECLARING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3060 IVYLAND ROAD, ROANOKE, VIRGINIA; VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT AS BLIGHTED PROPERTY. AS A January 28, 2014 65 RESULT OF THIS ACTION, ROANOKE COUNTY MAY REPAIR, DEMOLISH OR REMOVE THE STRUCTURE TO CURE THE CAUSE(S) OF THE BLIGHT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has adopted a Spot Blight Abatement Policy ( "the Policy ") pursuant to Section 36- 49.1:1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Policy, the Roanoke County Building Commissioner has made a preliminary determination that property located at 3060 Ivyland Road is blighted; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Building Commissioner properly noticed the owner in accordance with the Policy and as required by law; and WHEREAS, the owner failed to respond with a plan; and WHEREAS, the owner has failed to remedy this blighted condition; and WHEREAS, the plan proposed by the Building Commissioner shall remedy the blight is in accordance with the County's Planning and Land Use Guidelines: WHEREAS, it is estimated that the cost to cure this blight shall not exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000); and WHEREAS, the first reading of the ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading and public hearing was held on January 28, 2014; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, as follows: 1. That the Board affirms the findings and recommendations of the Roanoke County Building Commissioner. 2. That the property known as 3060 Ivyland Road (Tax Map No. 080.01 -02- 06.01 -0000) is hereby declared blighted as authorized by Section 36- 49.1:1 of the Code of Virginia. 3. That the owner has failed to remedy this blighted condition; and 4. That the County Administrator or his designee is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to implement the spot blight abatement plan to repair this property. 5. That the owner of this property shall be billed for the cost of blight abatement including administrative costs. If the owner fails to pay for the abatements costs, these costs shall be submitted to the Treasurer of Roanoke County to be collected by any manner provided by law for collection of local taxes. Further, a lien shall be recorded among the land records of Roanoke County to recover the County's costs and expenses. 6. That the sum of up to Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) be appropriated from the Board of Supervisor's contingency fund to cure the blighted property. 7. That the Board determines that it is not necessary to acquire this property by eminent domain in order to cure the blight. 8. That this ordinance is effective from and after the date of its adoption. 66 January 28, 2014 On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 3. Ordinance authorizing the lease to the School Board of Roanoke County for one (1) year (plus option to extend for additional one (1) -year periods) of an 11.335 acre portion of the old William Byrd High School site (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) Mr. Mahoney advised ordinance is unchanged. He indicated after the first reading, he held further discussions concerning the environmental liability that the Board expressed concern about at the first reading. Please refer to Section 7 of the draft lease. The outcome was that a sharing of any environmental costs will come out of the sale of the property. Additionally, he indicated the County will provide a comparable replacement facility for the buses. After the first reading, he held further discussion concerning environmental liability. Chairman McNamara recognized Dr. Lorraine Lange, School Superintendent, Dr. Marty Misicko, Director of Operations and and Drew Barraneau, Chairman of the Roanoke County School Board. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this issue. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -8 AUTHORIZING THE LEASE TO THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY FOR ONE (1) YEAR (PLUS OPTION TO EXTEND FOR ADDITIONAL ONE (1) -YEAR PERIODS) OF A PORTION OF THE OLD WILLIAM BYRD HIGH SCHOOL SITE WHEREAS, by Ordinance 061113 -6 adopted on June 11, 2013, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the conveyance of the Old William Byrd High School property containing approximately 17.829 acres from the County School Board; and WHEREAS, the deed conveying the school property to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County was recorded in August of 2012; and WHEREAS, the School Board of Roanoke County has submitted a proposal to lease a portion of the Old William Byrd High School property from the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors finds that leasing a portion of this property to the County School Board will benefit the community; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: January 28, 2014 67 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the disposition of the herein - described real estate was held on January 14, 2014; the second reading and public hearing was held on January 28, 2014; and 2. That the lease of a portion of the Old William Byrd High School property consisting of approximately 11.335 acres of land (Tax Map #060.11 -04- 17.00) located on Highland Avenue and Gus Nicks Boulevard in Vinton, Virginia is hereby authorized and approved; and 3. That it is in the County's best interests to lease this property to the County School Board of Roanoke County for one (1) year with additional one (1) -year lease terms. This lease is subject to the provisions of Section 2.03 and 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter. The annual rental for this property is One Dollar ($1.00); and 4. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrators, either of whom may act, are authorized to execute, deliver and record the Lease, and any other documents on behalf of the County and to take all such further action as any of them may deem necessary or desirable in connection with this project. The form of the Lease is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes as the County Administrator may approve, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery thereof, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 4. Ordinance accepting the conveyances to Roanoke County of a drainage easement from John M. Thomas, Sarah G. Thomas, Steven T. Bratcher, Sr. and Tammy P. Bratcher, a right -of -way and temporary construction easement from the School Board of Roanoke County, and a right -of -way and temporary construction easement from Shirley S. Boon, Farmington Drive Highway Project, Windsor Hills Magisterial District (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) There were no changes from the first reading. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this agenda item. There was no discussion. 68 January 28, 2014 ORDINANCE 012814 -9 ACCEPTING THE CONVEYANCES TO ROANOKE COUNTY OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM JOHN M. THOMAS, SARAH G. THOMAS, STEVEN T. BRATCHER, SR. AND TAMMEY P. BRATCHER; A RIGHT OF WAY AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FROM SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY; AND A RIGHT OF WAY AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FROM SHIRLEY S. BOON - FARMINGTON DRIVE HIGHWAY PROJECT, WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia Department of Transportation is constructing a project to improve and replace a bridge culvert under Farmington Drive, State Route 1652, UPC 94794; and WHEREAS, this project requires the vacation and abandonment of various existing sewer easements, the acceptance of new sewer easements, and the relocation of sewer lines by the Western Virginia Water Authority; and WHEREAS, this project requires the acceptance of a new drainage easement, new fee simple right -of -way to be added to Farmington Drive, and temporary construction easements from various property owners by the County; and WHEREAS, at their meeting on January 23, 2014, the School Board of Roanoke County declared a portion of Tax Map Parcel # 076.20 -06 -16.00 to be surplus property, thus allowing the Board of Supervisors to obtain ownership of the property upon approval of this ordinance and recordation of a deed; and WHEREAS, the County School Board desires to transfer this real estate to the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Section 22.1 -129A of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading and public hearing was held on January 28, 2014. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the acquisition and acceptance from the School Board of Roanoke County of real estate containing 1,109 square feet for right of way to be added to Farmington Drive and a temporary construction easement containing 22,711 square feet being a portion of Tax Map #076.20 -06 -16.00 is hereby authorized and approved (See Attachment 1). 2. That the acquisition and acceptance from Shirley S. Boon of real estate containing 1,301 square feet for right of way to be added to Farmington Drive and a temporary construction easement containing 1,157 square feet being a portion of Tax Map #076.20 -06 -15.00 is hereby authorized and approved (See Attachment 2). 3. That the acquisition and acceptance from John M. Thomas and Sarah G. Thomas of real estate for a new drainage easement containing 842 square feet being a January 28, 2014 69 portion of Tax Map #076.20 -05 -25.00 is hereby authorized and approved (See Attachment 3). 4. That the acquisition and acceptance from Steven T. Bratcher, Sr. and Tammey P. Bratcher of real estate for a new drainage easement area containing 1,089 square feet being a portion of Tax Map #076.20 -05 -26.02 is hereby authorized and approved. (See Attachment 4). 5. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrators, either of whom may act, are authorized to execute, deliver and record the deeds, and any other documents on behalf of the County and to take all such further action as any of them may deem necessary or desirable in connection with this project. The form of the deeds is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes as the County Administrator may approve, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery thereof, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 6. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 5. Ordinance authorizing the conveyance of a waterline easement to the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) on property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 026.16 -02- 14.05 -0000) for the purpose of interconnecting a waterline (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) There were no changes from the first reading. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this agenda item. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 012814 -10 AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF A WATERLINE EASEMENT TO THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY (WVWA) ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERIVSORS (TAX MAP NO. 026.16 -02- 14.05 -0000) FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERCONNECTING A WATERLINE WHEREAS, the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) has requested that the County grant a new waterline easement across County property (Tax Map No. 70 January 28, 2014 026.16 -02- 14.05 -0000) said new waterline easement to adjoin an existing waterline easement currently located on the same parcel; and WHEREAS, the new waterline easement will facilitate an increase in fire flow and improve the overall system in this general area; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 14, 2014, and the second reading and public hearing was held on January 28, 2014. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the granting of a new waterline easement to the WVWA across County property located off Peters Creek Road at is intersection with Airport Road and further described as Tax Map No. 026.16 -02- 14.05 -0000 containing 1,720 square feet and shown on the attached plat prepared by the Western Virginia Water Authority dated November 19, 2013, is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrators, either of whom may act, are authorized to execute, deliver and record the deeds, and any other documents on behalf of the County and to take all such further action as any of them may deem necessary or desirable in connection with this project. The form of the deed is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes as the County Administrator may approve, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery thereof, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 3. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Bedrosian to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA RESOLUTION 012814 -11 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: January 28, 2014 71 That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for January 28, 2014, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 2 inclusive, as follows: 1. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Margaret Whitlock, Tax Clerk II — Commissioner of the Revenue, upon her retirement after more than thirteen (13) years of service 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Roanoke Valley — Alleghany Regional Commission (Regional Stormwater Management Committee); Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission Water Supply Policy Committee; Roanoke Valley Sustainability Consortium; Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Committee; Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission - Metropolitan Planning Organization (Alternate Member); Virginia Association of Counties (Liaison Board Member) and Virginia Association of Counties (Legislative Contact) On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012814 -11.a EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO MARGARET G. WHITLOCK, TAX CLARK II - COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE, UPON HER RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTEEN (13) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Margaret G. Whitlock was hired on August 7, 2000 and served as Tax Clerk I and II in the Commissioner of the Revenue's office; and WHEREAS, Ms. Whitlock retired on January 1, 2014: after thirteen (13) years and five (5) months of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County; and WHEREAS, during her time serving Roanoke County, Ms. Whitlock earned her designation as Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue after completing the Career Development criteria as required by the Commissioner of the Revenue's Association and administered by the Weldon Cooper Center of the University of Virginia; and 72 January 28, 2014 WHEREAS, Margaret focused on making the Roanoke County taxpayers comfortable, both on the phone and while visiting the Commissioner's office. Margaret provided helpful, timely and accurate assistance with local and state taxes possessing knowledge and confidence to comply with the Code of Virginia and business requirements; and Ms. Whitlock served honorably and possessed the charm of a true public servant. 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 MARGARET G. WHITLOCK for thirteen (13) years and five (5) 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 McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None A- 012814 -11.b IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS Mr. Bedrosian stated he would like to request a work session for the next time we meet on just how we set up our meetings for the Board of Supervisors. He brought this up last time that he felt that a lot of people had come to talk and as the meetings go long they do not have a chance to talk until the end. Also, we start at 3:00 p.m. when a lot of people are at work if there was a way that we could have more people (who are our bosses) come as we are conducting business. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Moore moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: January 28, 2014 73 AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara 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 December 31, 2013 5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and Encumbrances as of December 31, 2013 6. Accounts Paid — December 31, 2013 7. Treasurer's Statement of Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of December 31, 2013 IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 4:36 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2 -3711 A Personnel, namely discussion concerning appointments to the Roanoke Valley Regional CATV Committee; Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission; Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission - Metropolitan Planning Organization; Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission and Section 2.2- 3711.A.7, Consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to probable litigation, namely, G &H Construction, where such consultation or briefing in open meeting would adversely affect the negotiating or litigating posture of the County. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara. NAYS: None The closed session was held from 6:03 p.m. until 6:11 p.m. At 4:38 p.m. Chairman recessed to the 4t" floor for work session and closed meeting. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss the South Peak retaining walls (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) Mr. Covey provided a PowerPoint presentation, which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. The work session was held from 4:40 74 January 28, 2014 p.m. until 5:07 p.m. Supervisor Peters asked when the storm drain failure was and Mr. Covey explained where all the storm drains were on the property. Mr. Peters then asked are the buildings being built on fill dirt or shelving. Mr. Covey explained on virgin soil and if a landslide were to occur, it would affect the hotel. There was no further discussion. The work session was held from 4:50 until 5:07 pm 2. Work session to discuss budget development for fiscal year 2014/2015 (W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) Mr. Robertson went through a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Goodman stated that this budget is based on the prior Board's guidelines and based on the fact there are three new Board members wanted to get input as to their direction and guidelines. Supervisor Moore asked if any feedback has been given as to what services would need to be reduced by the Directors. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he thinks government budgeting should be done as he budgets at home. He advised he has a different perspective and wants to reduce debt. He explained he would also like to reduce the tax rates by one or two (1 or 2) cents to go back to the citizens. He further advised if you grow the budget it should be that you have grown the economy and would like to look at education as well. Chairman McNamara stated he would like to look at a two percent (2 %) increase for the employees and look at out -of -line departments. He added also on the back burner would look at more effective healthcare. He advised he would like to look at the schools truly as our partner and have better health care distribution. He would like to see some type of regional basic service to lower healthcare costs with a bonus structure and a higher deductible. Supervisor Church inquired about how much would be needed for schools. Supervisor Bedrosian asked about frozen positions. Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator advised stormwater costs will be discussed in meetings the following weeks and on the website. The work session was held from 5:10 p.m. until 5:50 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION At 7:02 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. January 28, 2014 75 RESOLUTION 012814 -12 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 Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Flora, Church, Elswick, Altizer NAYS: None Chairman McNamara announced there may be some folks at home that have interest in items we have on our agenda this evening that are unable to attend the meeting for whatever reason. If that's the case, if he sees unanimous approval of the Board, what the Board would like to do is if citizens have comments they would like the Board to consider tonight but are unable to attend to speak at our meeting for logistic reasons or weather - related reasons, send your thoughts to the Clerk to the Board, which is an email of bosp_roanokecountyva.gov The Clerk can receive that information and then what the Board will do since he thinks most of the discussion is going to be relative to public hearing U1, which is a resolution to discontinue membership with Local Government for Sustainability or ICLEI, is after we hold the public hearing for U1, we will take a five (5) minute break and allow the Clerk to forward to all of Board members correspondence she has received in our meeting up to then. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution recognizing Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Company for fifty (50) years of service (Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire and Rescue) 76 January 28, 2014 Chief Burch outlined the resolution. In attendance for recognition were Division Chief Joey Stump, Volunteer Recruiter Jennifer Sexton, Chief Woody Henderson, Assistant Chief David Carroll, Assistant Chief Donnie Rickman and Lieutenant Mike Glass. The Clerk read the resolution and all Supervisors offered their thanks. RESOLUTION 012814 -13 RECOGNIZING FORT LEWIS VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY FOR FIFTY (50) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, the Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Department began running calls in 1963 in West Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Volunteer Chief George Fore played a critical role, helping establish the official charter, recruiting volunteers and providing leadership, until stepping down in 1963 when Chief John Garrett became the first Volunteer Fire Chief; and WHERAS, the Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Department station was originally built on property, which Richfield Retirement Center now occupies; and WHEREAS, Fort Lewis Fire Department's first piece of apparatus was a 1950 Dodge fire truck, purchased by Roanoke County and initially housed at Salem Fire Station #1; and WHEREAS, in the late 1960s, Fort Lewis purchased their first two tanker trucks, "Tanker 9 -1" and "Tanker 9 -2 ", which were converted oil tankers. Roanoke County purchased the first brand new fire truck for Fort Lewis in 1972 —a Ford /Oren; and WHEREAS, in 1981, the Fort Lewis Fire Department, along with the Fort Lewis Volunteer Rescue Squad, moved into a newly -built station on West Main Street, U.S. Route 460, where they remain today; and WHEREAS, Roy Crowe served as Volunteer Fire Chief from 1979 until his untimely death in 1993, at which time Woody Henderson assumed the role and has continued to provide noble leadership for twenty years in this position; and WHEREAS, in 2009, the Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Company, along with career (paid) Roanoke County Fire & Rescue Department staff rescued sixty -three (63) stranded motorists from Interstate 81 after a historic snowfall dumped sixteen (16) inches of snow on December 18, 2009, paralyzing traffic. Motorists were gathered in fire department vehicles and shuttled to the Fort Lewis Station where volunteers distributed food and water, as well as provided shelter and makeshift beds. The next morning, firefighters helped motorists free their cars and created alternate travel routes so those stranded to return to their homes; and WHEREAS, currently, Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Company covers almost fifty (50) square miles and the entire Roanoke County portion of Interstate -81 for extrication response, as well as approximately ten miles for fire and rescue emergency calls; and January 28, 2014 77 WHEREAS, today, the Fort Lewis Volunteer Fire Company has thirty (30) volunteers, who primarily serve from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., Monday through Friday and 24 -hours on weekends and holidays, while sixteen (16) career (paid) staff provide 24/7 ambulance services, as well as Monday- Friday daylight fire support. On average, volunteers respond to over 400 calls a year and the station as a whole handles over 1,600 emergency calls each year, compared to 63 calls during their first year of service. 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 FT. LEWIS VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY for fifty (50) years of dedicated service to Roanoke County. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution appointing B. Clayton Goodman as Clerk to the Board of Supervisors (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) Mr. Mahoney advised this was a resolution appointing Mr. Goodman as Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Moore stated she would just like to comment first. This is an administrative personnel matter. This change would shift the responsibility and the authority of this position to the County Administrator. This resolution will help clean up the 1989 ordinance and would shift the responsibility of also job evaluations to the County Administrator. When an employee does a good job they deserve to be recognized and the way that we recognize an employee is do a job evaluation on the performance. The five Board members here aren't here on a daily basis but the County Administrator is. So it would make it also easier for an employee to contact the County Administrator who is here in the building rather than try to contact five (5) Board members. We just approved two grants at the afternoon session giving 20 teachers cumulative an incentive based on an evaluation and that is the kind of things that people who do a good job, some of the benefits that they would receive. The best use of our time as supervisor is to respond and help our citizens. The County Administrator should know what's going on in our County because they are here to manage the County. Our job is to set policies and the administration implements these policies. I think that the County Administrator by receiving this authority to be responsible on a daily basis for a Clerk would be the right procedure that we should do. Chairman McNamara advised he had two people signed up to speak and 78 January 28, 2014 if he has unanimous consent of the Board, he will allow the two people to speak. Max Beyers stated this is something that really is none of his business. The Board has their right to pick out who they want to work for them. He wouldn't be here but our good friend Chase Purdy put an article in the paper and he asked his supervisor why he had the position he has and he explained it to him and he will leave it up to him to explain the reasons he gave me. He stated he has been in bureaucracy all my life. He knows how to get his questions answered. He goes to the County's community responders, the action desk to a supervisor on up the line to Clay Goodman and has found that gets things done most of the time. But what about the day he wants to talk to somebody if he has a problem to a person who is accountable to me and reportable to me and that is a supervisor. You guys don't get a whole lot of money for what you do and you don't have a staff. He advised he thinks he has been working with the County and the current system is very good to have somebody you can depend upon, somebody he can depend upon to provide questions, answer questions, get in contact to you, facilitate my access to you and to get things done through my supervisor and if he was sitting where the Board is he would want some kind of administrative support. You don't have it. You don't have a secretary. You don't have anybody that works for you and this person does that because many things that he deals with he wants to be confidential between you and me. You know, Clay and his staff are not political. By definition they shouldn't be. But you guys are by definition. So things that he talks to you and maybe some things he don't want to share and the access to a Clerk, which he has used in the past and access to a Clerk is vital. He would think if he were you, he would want somebody like that directly under his control on the administrative side, supervision and things like that, which can be worked out administratively. But he thinks the person should report to you and thinks the system that you have right now is working very well and you ought to leave it alone. Chairman McNamara reminded the audience because of the number of comments if they could hold their applause. James Garris of 3108 Honeywood Lane and has been there for over twenty (20) years stated he strongly objects to the appointment of our County Administrator to this position for the following reasons. This Board needs someone to go and do certain tasks, certain research, certain things that you will ask for and citizens are going to have interaction with you through this person and those need to have a level of privacy and confidence. Putting it with the County Administrator simply won't do. We also can have this person handle routine tasks be it weekly time sheets signed, evaluations done, that can be handled through the Chairman or the Chairman coordinating with each of you so many times a year. He thinks to say that we need someone to do these types of supervisory tasks and it has to be the Administrator is weak and shows the lack of leadership the prior Boards have demonstrated. He noticed in Roanoke County we have had a tendency to give power to the County Administrator January 28, 2014 79 and other bureaucratic department heads. This may be a function that technically you have a part -time job up there and outside interests outside of that and he can understand that tendency but that doesn't mean we should go there with that resolution. He asked that you change the language of the 1989 ordinance to reflect that you can appoint the person that you wish and if they answer directly to you through the Chairman. He thinks this will be a better separation of powers between the County Administrator powers and the Board's powers. Chairman McNamara then opened the floor to discussion. Supervisor Church stated that he strongly objects to this change, this resolution and he wants to go into a little bit of detail. As far as evaluations, when this was brought up before he just at random asked some of the employees in this building just by chance have you had an evaluation. No; he stopped at five, no, no, no. So that's really kind of a moot point here. The reason that this position has not had an evaluation is a good question. We've done it in the past. We do evaluations for the County Administrator and the County Attorney. He stated he is not the sharpest pencil maybe that you find in the store, but he has a lot of common sense and honesty and openness and when something is not broken what are we doing? What are we trying to fix that's not broken; that's worked just fine? The Roanoke Times was mentioned and once again they almost out did themselves. They got half of the article true. They always leave out the part that they don't want you to know and you can check that every time. This is more important in my opinion than a lot of things we've had on this Board including tonight's issue with ICLEI, with all due respect to that. This is an item that separates you the people from your government. This is your government. We work for you and more importantly we tried this other system as recently as 2010. Guess what, it failed miserably. Citizens were running away from us in droves. They were discouraged from coming. There is no privacy, no communication and we can count time and time again. They have gone to community meetings and they report back to a Board member and said look we're not told the truth, we were misled, we were misinformed. When they did contact the Clerk's office those calls were routed and that's a fact. This was the previous Administrator. I'm not speaking about Mr. Goodman here. Board members hardly ever got the real situation and I'm not trying to call anybody a fox, anybody a hen but it's like having the old story where they have the fox guard the hen house. It's your government and by doing this we're adding another layer of government between you and your government. In 1989, it was a mess and we've had history dictate to us that the reasons that are proposed in order to make this change are not really valid. This is not supposed to be a personnel issue. It's a position, but in fact we don't have robots working in positions. We have guess what, human beings. So if I'm sitting at home and I see a Board action that the Clerk's job is given to the County Administrator I would think like most of you. What happened? What was wrong? What's the first impression? Those of you that are here tonight you're able to hear this 80 January 28, 2014 but we've got probably 90 some thousand people that will not hear and see what you will see tonight. We've had an open communication without any draw backs. I'll speak as the position. I don't think there's a Board member sitting here tonight or those in the past that's had any problem with the performance of that position. As a matter of fact contrary to what the Roanoke Times said there wasn't that issue going on in the past, as recently as 2009 and 2010. Contrary to what the Roanoke times says it was a unanimous consensus of the Board to make that change of a position of the personnel, unanimous consent. It wasn't because any one Board member had anything to do with it. They want you to think that. It takes three (3) votes on this Board to do anything. So you're wise enough, you're smart enough to see the writing on the wall. At our last meeting I commented on the Roanoke Times, yes I know you would buy your ink by the gallon but right is right and wrong is wrong. Put the entire story in there. So here we are discarding a system that has worked perfectly. When the person that's not really personnel took over the job in 2010 there were three (3) people working that position, three people. Our Board was about a year behind in the minutes. Chairman McNamara interjected that Supervisor Church is going to personnel. Supervisor Church responded no he is not; he is making sure that he is not. He is saying the person doing the job has been unquestioned. He wasn't going anywhere near the name of the personnel even though we do have a person in that job. So citizens have had a feeling of trust and openness. You can ask trust me, we five Board members; we would hear it left and right. Folks call us about dogs that bark too loud, junk cars in yards, shot guns being fired in your neighborhood. You call us about anything and everything and you should. Make no mistake about it; we would have heard from you if we had a broken system we would have heard in droves. The emails I have received have been one hundred percent (100 %) do not change. Everybody can't be wrong. If you folks here tonight could know the entire story you wouldn't want to have any part of it. Supervisor Peters stated for the ones who don't know we are in our earlier session today an ordinance has already been put out there to have a public hearing February 25th regarding this ordinance. At this point, he looks at this resolution as cleaning up our mess. As the County Attorney told us earlier right now it doesn't work. We have an ordinance that says one thing and a resolution that says something else. Next month we'll deal with the ordinance and how we're going to word it and change it but right now we need to get everything back in line. That's what this is about tonight. This is not a personnel issue; to him all we are doing is house cleaning Chairman McNamara stated he would just like to add a comment or two. Not only does he think this improves our access and capability to citizens, we are the access to the citizens. He carries a cell phone as does every Board member and to the best of my knowledge everybody's cell phone number is on the County website. To his January 28, 2014 8 knowledge, the entire time he was on the Board when we had a Clerk that reported through the County Administrator, the Clerk essentially performed the exact same functions that the Clerk is doing now. The difference is the Clerk was receiving proper evaluations, proper trainings, different things and what more the Clerk was the integral part of the management team and he looks forward to this resolution and to our current Clerk being part of that management team. He thinks it's an improvement for the Clerk's position. He thinks it's an improvement for the Board and to classify this action as somehow pertaining or diminishing the capability of citizens to reach Board members or to get opinions across, he does not see that connection at all. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he thinks that sometime when we talk we can lose the people in the audience so he just wants to make sure he clarifies this. At this point in time, there's a separation of powers. In government you need a checks and balance. You need a separation of powers and he thinks everybody no matter what your perspective is we would all agree with that. We have that in the federal government. We have different levels or branches of government and they all check each other and all are separate. It is not that it's not that we don't trust each other, but it's good to have balance and checks. Currently we have in local government two sides basically and not that they're at each other's throats but there's two sides. There is the elected official side and then there is the administrative side in this building and we have 900 employees of the administrative side. Mr. Goodman has an administrative assistant. He has nothing to do with Ms. Cochran. She is with Clay. He cannot say what all you work on. It's not my business, it's not my area. On our side, on the elected official side it would be nice if each one of us could have an administrative assistant. There's a lot of stuff that goes on. It would be nice, but that's impractical. It's too expensive. So we have one Clerk divided among the five (5). That should stay on this side; that's really what this is all about. It's not about evaluations or training. It's about where that person should stay and it needs to stay on this side with the Supervisors over there and Mr. Goodman's assistant needs to stay on his side. Again, it's not about not trusting others. It's a balance of power. It's great; it work well that way. We all do have cell phones and we all can be contacted, but he works for a living. He has a regular forty (40) hour a week job. You may not be able to contact me, so you contact the Board of Supervisors and it goes to the current Clerk. Anything you email that current Clerk is in confidence on this side of the aisle, which is good. It's a good thing that it's on this side, because we can evaluate it then we can maybe go talk to the administration and say, hey, what's going on. If it's not then there's no confidence between us and the people. The message would go to the administration and whatever would happen would happen and they don't have the checks and balances and he think if anything else to date it is about the checks and balances between the two sides. In our case we have basically two branches and that is what the issue is. Once we remove that he thinks we're on dangerous ground. What Supervisor Peters said is 82 January 28, 2014 today we're fixing up stuff. What you do today though determines unless I'm mistaken that the County Administrator will now have the say on who the Clerk will be. Right? So we now lose this. If today's resolution is passed today right now we as the Board lose having the Clerk not only she'll still work for us but after today she will not any longer. We will not have direction over her and have her be accountable just to us. We lose that tonight. Is that understood? We lose that tonight. Mr. Mahoney can I ask you? If this is passed that position will no longer be under our position. Mr. Mahoney stated he does want to clarify one comment Mr. Bedrosian. If the Board members are sent a communication either in writing or by email and it goes to all five (5) Board members it is not confidential. It is not private. It is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. So there is no privacy with respect to that kind of communication. There are maybe a handful of exemptions or exceptions from that but if the Clerk or the County Administrator or any other department head sends an email or a letter to all five (5) Board members that's a public record and that is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Supervisor Bedrosian continued stating he is assuming if somebody sends something to the Administrator or to his assistant that's also under the Freedom of Information act? Mr. Mahoney responded that there is a limited exception for items that are designated with what they call working papers. So if a staff member is working with the County Administrator and they're still developing a document or a proposal as long as that is still held by the County Administrator and has not been conveyed or transmitted to the Board members that would be defined as the working papers. Apart from that if that is disseminated beyond those working papers exemption it's subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Supervisor Bedrosian commented he guessed you make my point. He thinks we're dealing in minutiae here. His thing is an everyday conversation, not something that somebody would want to do something on. It's just every day conversation. His thought is that person should be on this side. He thinks it's just for a balance and a check of powers. That's his opinion. Supervisor Peters then asked Mr. Mahoney if someone is sending us an email or does this pertain to letters as well. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmation stating if citizens send you letters, send you emails those are public records and subject to disclosure under the act. Supervisor Peters continued stating so in the premise that I'm listening to is we have someone in our administration we can't trust and that's the way it's coming across to me but he will leave that alone. His question to you is would you reiterate what you said this afternoon. We have an ordinance that says from 1989 one thing a resolution from 2010 that says something else and the ordinance will supersede the resolution in your opinion. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative stating the January 28, 2014 83 ordinance will provide a clearer mechanism and as you mentioned clean up or a sort of housekeeping kind of manner to address that. If the Board never adopts the ordinance amendment, if it's second reading the Board and its wisdom decides not to adopt the ordinance what you have here with this resolution is consistent with what the Board has done four or five (4 or 5) times since 1989. You've appointed by resolution four or five (4 or 5) Clerks in that time period. This resolution is consistent with that. His recommendation to the Board with respect to the ordinance is to clean up that confusion, to clean up that conflict. Supervisor Peters then stated he means no disrespect to Mr. Church who was there in 2010, the past Board did it wrong. The resolution should have gone back into the ordinance and corrected all of it back in 2010? Mr. Mahoney responded either that or the ordinance should have been amended at that time. Supervisor Peters stated that is what he meant and Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Peters stated so this is a great debate and we can talk about it all day long but it's a housekeeping issue and on the 25th the debate can go from there. Supervisor Church stated with all due respect and he has always said debate is healthy in the correct manner. The debate is not about next February 25th. Whatever we do tonight changes, make no mistake about it, who is Clerk. There's discussion going on. Now maybe he is a little simple but we can only have one Clerk. If we pass this then Clayton Goodman is Clerk. What do we call the current Clerk now? He would like to have an answer to that. What do we call her? Just a, you know, what? You can't have but one Clerk. To ask a rhetorical question, since 1989, twenty -five (25) years as gone by. We've got kids that old. We haven't blown a gasket. Our motors haven't fallen off the joints. His question is why now. He suggests there's more to this. Simply the 1989 ordinance is not the question. Let me give you a little bit of history since I'm the senior member. You have employees that talk to you, have confidence in you and say hey Mr. Church in the supermarket. Let me tell you what I've heard from more than five (5) people. They have management meetings from time to time. You have directors anywhere from twenty to forty -five (20 to 45) people. More than a few times the comments have been made from employees to be careful about what you say because the Clerk to the Board is in here and she's going to want the Board to know this. What does that say to you on this surface if I'm accurate, which he knows he is. What does that say to you? Be careful. We're not talking about personal communications. What we're talking about is basic communication about who runs the government. He doesn't think we run the government. No sir, my constituents run me. Our past history and I'm not going into personnel, but our past administration, he is sorry but when you give the keys to the vault, the money, the combination and security alarm that's too much. Why would we dare go down that road when nothing is broken? So make no mistake about it, it may look like we're just doing a little thing today. Right 84 January 28, 2014 now in his opinion if we appoint Mr. Goodman or anybody else Clerk then we don't have a Clerk. Everything else is just a formality. What we do on the 25th of February, some of us don't need to show up. He means it's a done deal. The game is over. So this is critical. This is critical to your government to keep an open line where, you know, hey, theoretically our Clerk has been working at the pleasure of our Board. Earlier this afternoon guess what? It was talked about from that podium that we get supervision and asking our County Administrator is not really accurate. It's working fine. Little things like time sheets, purchasing toner cartridges or whatever. Mr. Goodman already approves. What is the deal here? He would like to make a suggestion that he thinks common sense and logic should apply here at the very worst, the very worst this Board should lay this on the table for six (6) months. Keep in mind we have three (3) Board members and with all due respect a lot of things happen in 4 years and two others have been here a meeting and a half, a meeting and a half. To make a decision so critical, common sense says lay this on the table for six (6) months. Let these folks see there's not a problem. What's 6 months? They can easily do an evaluation. We all can. Trust me in this job you can do an evaluation in thirty (30) days because we interact all the time; junk happens. Chairman McNamara stated Supervisor Church's substitute motion would be if a primary motion is already been made. Chairman McNamara then asked Supervisor Church if he wished to make a motion to lay it on the table in which case there would be a debatable motion that you can make at this point. Supervisor Church then asked if a motion has been made; with Chairman McNamara responding in the negative. Supervisor Church commented he would hold off. Supervisor Moore stated that number 3 on the resolution states that the County Administrator may appoint such deputies to carry out the duties of the Clerk and dedicate powers and duties to such persons as deemed appropriate. So things would not change except the authority and the responsibility. Everything else, the structure and the procedure would go as they are now. Chairman McNamara moved to approve the item and added the following comments. This is not a citizen issue. This has nothing to do with citizens or how citizens are being represented. This has nothing to do with the Board of supervisors and how responsive we are to citizens or whether there's a clarification, differentiation between the government side and administration side. It's in his opinion a better way to run the Clerk's position. We have not been operating the last three (3) years, actually for a number of years with the authority, the authority, the hiring, but the evaluation is two different people. So you have somebody signing expense reports, providing some guidance but that person the Clerk position doesn't report to the County Administrator. If the County Administrator is made Clerk the County Administrator has that capability and he would expect him to exercise to immediately delegate the responsibilities of Clerk to a different person, the current Clerk. So he doesn't see it anywhere near the January 28, 2014 85 way it's being presented tonight. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he thinks the comment was made that it's just the authority change; that is the whole issue, the authority. You know why do we even need a Board? Why not just let the administration run it? Why not just have an administration and they just do everything and if you have a question you call the administration to get it done? There's a reason you have elected officials. It is to keep the administration in line. Why do you not just have elected officials? Because we would promise everything and not being able to deliver and that's why you have an administration that keeps the check on us. That is why you have this type of a government. I'll tell you what; if you let the County Administrator takeover that position then they take a big chunk of the authority over to the administration side. He has not seen anything broken with the way this has been done and again he is the new person on the Board. So maybe his thinking is a little nongovernment, but it just raises a sense of suspicion of why is it changing. It seems to work so well. It's a good balance. Why would you then take somebody from this side and move them over to that side, a very important position? Why would you do that if nothing is broken? Those are my final comments. Supervisor Peters stated the only comment he has to that is you may be new to government but you need to also understand the County Administrator works for us. We are elected officials and we appoint our County Administrator and he is that employee for us. So that's what you also need to remember. This is not some employee who just can run away with the vault and keys and camera and everything else. He works for us. So that's the only comment he has on that. Supervisor Church stated he has a substitute motion to make but before he makes it again with all due respect, we're respectful people. What we don't know we can't do anything about and with that being said he would like to make a substitute motion we lay this on the table for six (6) months and let the cooling time prevail that common sense and evaluations be done because in my heart he feels this is going to be a dreadfully wrong decision and you folks make no mistake about it are going to be directly affected. The substitute motion was denied by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church NAYS: Supervisors Moore, Peters, McNamara RESOLUTION 012814 -14 APPOINTING B. CLAYTON GOODMAN III AS CLERK TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 86 January 28, 2014 WHEREAS, by Ordinance 62789 -4 adopted on June 27, 1989, the Board of Supervisors authorized the appointment of a separate individual to serve as Clerk to the Board; and WHEREAS, said ordinance also provided that if the Board chooses not to appoint a separate individual as county clerk, then such duties and responsibilities shall be performed by the County Administrator; and WHEREAS, Section 15.2 -1538 of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, provides for the appointment of a Clerk for the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Section 4.01 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that the County Administrator shall have all the powers and carry out all of the duties prescribed by Title 15.2, Chapter 15 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and in addition, such other powers, duties and responsibilities as may be established by the board of supervisors; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board hereby appoints B. Clayton Goodman III as Clerk to the Board of Supervisors effective immediately. 2. That B. Clayton Goodman III shall exercise all of the powers and fulfill all of the duties of Clerk to the Board of Supervisors as provided in Section 15.2 -1539 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. 3. That the County Administrator may appoint such deputies and assistants to aid in carrying out the powers and duties of the clerk, and may delegate said powers and duties to such persons as deemed appropriate. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Peters, McNamara NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING 1. Resolution to discontinue membership with Local Governments for Sustainability ( ICLEI) (B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator) The following citizens spoke: Bill Modica of 1546 Creek Lane, Salem, Virginia stated he would like to start by saying he is sorry he had to be here tonight. The whole issue of whether to stay involved with the ICLEI program has been considered before and resolved already. This hearing to revisit the decision is neither helpful nor necessary and he is sorry you January 28, 2014 87 have to spend time on it and all these folks here tonight have to spend time on it. This program was created to help municipal governments, universities and similar agencies to monitor and evaluate their energy footprint and the impact on air and water quality. It contains suggestions to help save energy, to lower operating costs, monitor quality of life impacts and improve efficiency. Contrary to what some here will tell you tonight it does not require you to give up any of your regulatory duties. It does not impose any limits on the government's authority and it is not a United Nations plot to interfere with local or regional civil liberties. The dues that Roanoke County spends allows you to share data and learn from other successes and involve citizens on how things are managed and paid for. The data collected can be used or ignored by you and by the County staff however you want to. There are no imposed mandates. The members of the RCCLEAR committee volunteer their time and knowledge to help. They don't get paid. They don't receive any outside compensation and they're definitely not on the UN payroll. They don't want to turn the business of County government over to any agency outside our borders. They deserve your support and I dare say your appreciation. Whether you believe the earth is warming or cooling or just going through cyclical changes really doesn't matter. ICLEI is just a tool to better evaluate the changes and to better understand their impacts. Do not yield to uninformed critics often folks with a political agenda. Continue your support and membership in ICLEI for the sake of your constituents, our children and all those who live and visit in the Roanoke valley. Bob Crawford stated he resides at 6620 Shingle Ridge Road. The issue of whether Roanoke County should continue to subscribe to membership in ICLEI can easily be decided on the cost benefit of the County. Staff has repeatedly reported the ongoing benefits to the County significantly outweigh the small annual membership fee. Membership provides technical consultation and software and training of practical applications and conservation measures such as efficient use of energy or other resources. In other words we got reduced cost of government by applying the evaluations, systems choices or other tools our ICLEI membership provides and with no strings attached. Local opponents cite their denial of their opinion on climate change. What were the contributions of human activities to it? And they supplement their opposition with conspiracy theories about loss of rights and alien government takeover. Since, however, there's no evidence of loss of rights or threat to our government association with ICLEI membership these fears may be set aside. Regarding issues of climate science no local consensus is actually needed in order to justify continuing the County's use of this environmentally responsible program which offers net cost savings as ICLEI's measures typically do. Max Beyer of 2402 Coachman Drive in Roanoke Virginia stated some County staff and RCCLEAR members and other speakers have painted ICLEI membership as some kind of independent benign apple pie kind of organization that merely serves the community and presents no danger to its values. A review of the charter as of 88 January 28, 2014 June 2011 dispels this illusion. First, its mission statement defines it as a movement. Specifically it's a worldwide movement of local governments to achieve global sustainability with special focus but not the only focus on environmental conditions. May I point out that membership circumscribes the County's involvement and commitment to that organization and ICLEI is tied with Agenda 21 as you've been told many, many times. Second, it is an urban oriented movement. Its general mandate is to build an active and committed municipal membership. There's already a building momentum to move Roanoke County to its roots to a fully urban community. Two years ago, this Board's Chairman enjoined us to get with the program and embrace the County becoming a full blown centrally planned locality; you know who I'm talking about. Even the local Roanoke Times reported the County as a municipality. I suppose they envision us becoming a clone of Roanoke City. Is that what citizens' want? To me this is wrong. ICLEI is not only a resource for environmental information but more importantly it is a vehicle for propaganda in my opinion. In its work mandate, it states it shall mobilize and provide support to the local initiatives that address specific problems of local and global things and provides a five (5) step guideline for community activists, which are community members or municipal staff, again the word municipal in an action plan creating messages for your mayor or chairman and selling climate action to your elected officials. Guidelines include identifying the right stakeholders to engage and credible messengers to indoctrinate and that's my word, the community. Now I don't have a problem with free speech, but I have a problem with the County paying for membership that's a blatantly biased organization. It gathers information on local actions. It's stated work mandate and members are to evaluate and report on the impact of local actions. This County has provided information to ICLEI. It promotes expansion of government into our lives. A steady work mandate is to promote the role of local government as a necessary innovator and implementer of sustainability environments. If the promoters recognize the name as a focal point for divisiveness and changed its name and I called the local governments for sustainability a long time ago. So in summary many of us believe ICLEI is worse than a disease. I respectfully ask you withdrawal this as other counties have done and your local republican committee members have requested. Janet Schied of 1453 Wolf Creek Drive in Vinton stated she is the Vinton magisterial representative of RCCLEAR and served as a chair last year. She is speaking of support in Roanoke County maintaining its membership in ICLEI. There are many reasons for this and the most important is the critical connection between the good work that RCCLEAR does and the software that ICLEI gives us. Can RCCLEAR exist without ICLEI? Yes. They can continue to educate Roanoke County citizens on ways to conserve energy and save money. We can continue to give away free home energy audits and provide resources to our citizens who want to know how to reduce their home or business energy's costs, but without ICLEI we can't measure our impacts January 28, 2014 89 and you can't manage what you don't measure. So without the software tools that ICLEI provides that allows us to measure our impacts we don't know if we are having a positive impact or not. We don't know if we're reaching our goals. There's no accountability for RCCLEAR then. No way to know if we're effective. I think that all Boards and all committees should be accountable and able to prove their usefulness. In addition to the software, ICLEI provides technical resources to save our Roanoke County citizens money. Now let me talk for a minute about what ICLEI does not do. I have read on facebook pages and listened in this room to the most extreme paranoia about ICLEI. It's a nonprofit organization. It is not a puppet organization of the United Nations. It does not seek to control local government and their citizens. Roanoke County has voluntarily become a member of ICLEI. Everything Roanoke County does with them is totally voluntary. Yes, ICLEI helps us through the use of their software to measure our results. That does not mean that they are telling us what our results must be nor are they taking control of the County or citizens homes. They are not dictating to us how we can live our lives. The County's involvement is about being good stewards of our environment. It has nothing at all to do with ICLEI wanting to control Roanoke County or its citizens. In doing some research for my comments tonight I read an email, which I think you each received from Bob Blankenship. He says globally they have helped their customers reduce co2 emissions by 48 million tons. This is the equivalent amount of CO2 emissions in twelve (12) large coal fired power plants. By 2015 they expect to reduce it by 75 million tons. They obviously make sustainability a priority there. They seek to reduce CO2 emissions and they measure their progress towards those goals. In addition, as an important business partner with Roanoke County, they ask the County to do the same thing. I did some research on another global blue chip company that you all are probably familiar with, Xerox. They state in their environment sustainability document they view it as a way of doing business. "Reducing energy use and protecting the climate is our primary focus. Xerox uses a sustainable calculator to evaluate customer's use of document technology and identifies environmental benefits for energy and paper use, solid waste, water and air." If we can agree that there are negative environmental impacts to emitting chemicals into the air, water and oil the only effective way to manage these emissions is to measure them. Like a budget, if you don't know where your emissions are coming from it is very difficult to make an effective change. If it's okay for a global company like Xerox to set goals for greenhouse gas emissions and use a calculator to measure their progress, why not Roanoke County. Michael Apostolou stated he lives in Roanoke County and thanked the Board for providing him with this time. He stated he would like to endorse the County's continued participation in the ICLEI association. We have had multiple reports from people who are not receiving a financial benefit that they have saved the County money. It provides previous and continuing impacts on attracting dynamic companies and individuals into our area that will continue to support a high quality of life in our 90 January 28, 2014 County. Perhaps most importantly citizens have stated on multiple occasions that good quality of their air and water are an integral part of their feelings of the quality of life living here. There have been objections raised about association with ICLEI having some hidden agenda behind it but from the period of time that I have followed all of you in the newspapers and in your public comments, I believe I'm speaking with other people like myself who have run enterprises and are able to discern information that is helpful to their management duties and being able to set aside information that is not helpful for perhaps serving as some greater agenda of other entities which are not our County. The silence involved behind this company has been labeled by the pentagon from 2004 as a very important national security item. James Powell, who has been appointed by Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush, has done research on the internet and I provided a handout showing his search from late 2012 through 2013 to show the huge amount of peer reviewed publications endorsing that there is a process of climate change and there's a significant human contribution to it. Mr. Powell, when asked further about this, appears not to have agenda of his own or a political position but has strongly endorsed that we keep abreast of movements in this area. It does not appear that he's had any coercion that he's had to follow an agenda by someone else, but has said if he's found evidence that would support other explanations for changes in climate over time he would certainly be the first one to rush out, publish a paper and receive plenty of accolades, if there was evidence that you can make solid conclusions upon. I grew up in the County. I received my education here. I've come back here to live. I would like to endorse that as part of the continuing quality of life in the County that the Board Chairman McNamara interjected a point of order not called by someone in the audience. If the audience could please be quiet. In return the folks that are speaking we try to give everybody their fair amount of time to speak. Let's try to work at the green light, yellow light, red light. When the red light is blinking that means you're over time. Wrap your remarks up. It's not our intent to try to cut people off mid sentence or be hard and fast to a 3 minute time but that is what we're trying to accomplish in a general sense. He then asked Mr. Apostolou to wrap up his remarks. Mr. Apostolou continued by stating his wrapping up comment is the Board has already given its dear precious resources to generate policies for effective future for this County. I would like to endorse that continuing ICLEI membership would be a useful tool for the Board. Supervisor Peters asked while they are coming up can we use the buzzer system? He stated he knew they used that at the Planning Commission meetings to kind of let the speaker know. Linda LaPrade stated she is from the Cave Spring district. We established the connection between ICLEI and the UN through UN documents. There are additional documents. I have some for you. The UN commission on sustainable development is a January 28, 2014 91 study of responses by local authorities to Agenda 21. It was a survey prepared by ICLEI with the United Nation's policy coordination. Now what does that mean for Roanoke County? One supervisor called it a moot point as to whether or not the UN and ICLEI are associated but I don't think it is because I looked back at your application when you signed up as members of ICLEI and this is stated. Your jurisdiction will be considered a full member. All members are governed by the ICLEI charter. I would like to make note that it says you will provide advocacy for these things. That is not the role of government here. It will work to achieve an effective division of responsibilities within the various spheres of government. The list of ICLEI partners is long and the list of partners is those who work with ICLEI to further their agenda. They include the national association of counties, they include the US conference of mayors, and they include the environmental protection association and the sierra club, all ICLEI partners. We've been told this doesn't cause any harm. Perhaps you should tell that to the citizens of California as Senate Bill 1 is brought up. I gave that to you last time and what that does is to give an NGO authority to take any land for any efficient use, whatever that might mean. The state of Alabama passed a law. The name was the property rights protection law. There were 600 members in ICLEI there are now less than 450. We are not encouraging the waste of energy. We simply believe that we can do this in Roanoke County without ICLEI, without its potential risks. It's that simple. Ronald Reagan stated the government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives. That's what we are asking you to do, protect the people. Christina Siegel of 964 Locust Ridge Lane in Callaway stated she is the director of Clean Valley Council and has served for 4 years on the Citizens for Clean and Green committee, which is the Roanoke city example of RCCLEAR. She lives in a solar powered home. I'm here to support tonight and encourage Roanoke County's continued participation in ICLEI. The more we can reduce our use of fossil fuels and conserve energy through improved efficiency and increase the use and support of alternative renewable energy, the better chance we have of improving our air quality, our water quality and environmental and human health as well as saving money and resources. The work that RCCLEAR and groups like citizens for clean and green with the support of the tools like ICLEI, has been tremendous in the past few years and with very little, they've done a lot. The volunteers have worked very hard. Had I had that information when I began my experiment with solar power eleven (11) years ago, I would have made far fewer mistakes and could have done a lot more. But let me give you a brief example of what you can do when people know what is possible out there. In ten (10) years I was off the grid and made no payment to AEP. I paid off my system in five (5), which I was energy free five (5) years. In the last one (1) and a half years I decided to go grid. In that time my average rate of electrical charge is $4.33 a month. don't experience power outages, I always have power and live in the Vinton mountain area, and we have frequent power outages. We may have one tonight but I will have 92 January 28, 2014 power. My house does not freeze because of the passive solar design. It has never dropped below 54 degrees. In a recent 6 degree day without any additional heat inside my house it was 75 degrees. There was no other source of heat. No electrical, nothing else but the sun coming through my windows and heating my floors. And on that same day, I was making enough electricity, all a small amount, but I was selling back to the power system. It was a day the grid was impacted and they were talking on the radio of there being an over abundance of people putting efforts on the grid because of all the use that day. I contributed back to the grid and did not use any energy. There's so much that we can do. RCCLEAR, with the tools provided by ICLEI through its membership, are diligently working to make a difference and to help people understand the things that can be done by regular citizens like myself. I hope you will continue supporting ICLEI and supporting the efforts of this hard - working group, RCLCEAR. Robert Egbert stated first of all he would like to say, "thank you for the jobs you do." He added he has disagreed with the Board over the years on a few things. He has been a resident at 3571 Bradshaw Road in Roanoke County in the Catawba district for over twenty -four (24) years and all in all I'm satisfied with the way you operate and the things you do. One of the good things that you've done is become a member of ICLEI and I hope you will continue. Previous speakers have enumerated the good things about ICLEI and why the County should continue so I won't repeat that. One of the things I need to address though is the United Nations. I'm not worried about the United Nations interfering with my property rights in mason's cove. I own an acre and a quarter of property and the United Nations can't get anything done right so I don't think they're going to interfere with the way I live in Roanoke County. I have a greater fear, what the general assembly happens to be doing right now in Richmond or perhaps what congress is doing but I'm not worried about the United Nations. Just to summarize, yes I do believe that human caused global warming is a problem, and we need to do something about it. Anyway, thank you for what you've been doing. Please continue your membership in ICLEI and RCCLEAR. Michael Leigh of 6273 Smokey Ridge Road in Roanoke Virginia stated let me tell you a little something about himself. He has been a resident of Roanoke County since 2007. He is a conservative and although not a republican I voted republican in every election. I believe in smaller government and individual freedoms. I have an engineering degree and worked in industries related to the energy sector including wind and nuclear power. I am very practical and I use facts and probability to make decisions that are important to me. I'm also a veteran. I am a retired navy commander who served 20 years in active duty and reserves; I'm a patriotic American who served the military to protect ourselves as Americans. Why do I tell you this about me? You may be surprised when I tell you I'm on the RCCLEAR committee and strongly believe we should continue our membership in ICLEI. Our fellow students have come forward to say the membership should end. I strongly disagree with their opinion and three (3) January 28, 2014 93 arguments I most often hear. First, that we shouldn't be wasting taxpayer money in these tight budget times. As someone that believes in smaller government, I can appreciate that argument but membership in ICLEI costs $1,200 a year in a $367 million budget. To put that in perspective, it's 16 cents on a family budget of $60,000. The second argument I've heard about is it's tied to the UN and Agenda 21 and we're going to lose freedoms and sovereignty. To help me understand this argument, I had a discussion with someone who firmly believes this is happening. I have also read the applicable portions of Agenda 21 and have done research on ICLEI and I can find no credible reason whatsoever to believe this. As a veteran who supports the freedoms we hold dear in this country, if I thought our membership in ICLEI would put us on a path of losing our freedoms I would be the first person to tell you we should drop our membership. Finally the argument that there is no truth to global warming. Despite overwhelming signs to the contrary and man's consensus by climate scientists somehow this persists. Based on my research, I believe global warming is occurring and there's a human contribution. If I didn't, why would I still want to you maintain the membership for this reason? For a small amount of money the membership provides, the County with resources to implement programs designed to save energy and money to County residents and help us track our progress so if you believe in conserving energy, saving money, preserving resources and improving the environment around us your decision is an easy one. I encourage you to maintain our ICLEI membership. Rudy Vietmeier of 460 Bluebell Lane in Roanoke stated when Attorney General Mark Herring decided against defending Virginia's same sex marrying act because he wanted to be on the right side of history. I come here tonight to support the membership in ICLEI for the same reason. I want Roanoke County to be on the right side of history. Future residents of Roanoke County will look with pride if we're on the right side of history and feel embarrassment if we are not. Issues like this will be enacted upon all over the world whether this County participates or not. For us it becomes a question of whether this County puts its shoulders to the wheel and participates in this important endeavor or does it drag its feet and end up on the wrong side of history creating the perception that progress was made over our objection. Let our futurisms take pride in being a part of the community that stepped up to the plate and did its part. Toward that end, I urge the Board to continue its membership in ICLEI. Noah Tickle of 1603 Frosty Lane in the Catawba Magisterial District stated he has been a Roanoke County resident for fifty -six (56) years. According to well known Virginia lawyer and college professor "the threat of ICLEI blessed cartel for local governments around the world I contend that a local government in the United States cannot be a member of a group that advocates foreign policy aims or objectives abroad ". I now suggest the supreme court of the United States would agree. If the state probate code or the probate courts cannot establish its own foreign policy local governments cannot join an organization that has foreign policy goals. The fact that our 94 January 28, 2014 present administration agrees with ICLEI today does not mean a future one might disagree tomorrow. Such an enlightened administration does not need local governments attempt to go undermine globalists in other nations. We speak with one voice abroad and the Attorney general says no Virginia municipality can legally assess ICLEI in their foreign policy goals. Hence they must withdraw. I called on liberty activists throughout the commonwealth to urge these cities to follow the lead of Maryland and simply get out of ICLEI and urge their Attorneys to make such a ruling. The globalists have taken a huge hit over a community of 1,150,000 residents in a blue state drawing from ICLEI. Supervisors with dollar sign eyes cannot see this. They're in for the spending money. ICLEI is illegal and unconstitutional as I have stated several times before. Then too, I have indicated many times so listen up again. The world socialist party plus the club of Rome equals sustainability plus the UN equals Agenda 21 and the local council environmental initiatives aka ICLEI all of these partners plus their interest in take it all down man, occupy and such elk are out to destroy our documents. The shining city on the hill to institute something akin to the communist manifesto either knowingly or unknowingly serving up their green Kool -Aid of many flavors to do so. Ignorance of the highest order, not knowing is destroying the very thing that has spoiled and coddled them all their lives. They are spinning in graves because of the destruction of all they worked so hard for. Allow me to finish with a quote of big daddy of all socialist, Alexander King, "In searching for a new enemy to unite us we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortage, famine and the like would fit the bill. All of these dangers are caused by human intervention. The real enemy then is humanity ". Such an ungodly evil deception directed at the sheep. Bill Gregory of 332 Pamlico Drive in Roanoke stated he has been a resident for twenty -one (21) years. Our friends on the other side of this issue have repeatedly told this Board there's a consensus among scientists regarding human clause climate change. There's a Forbes article that I hope you were given entitled Global Warming the Consensus Claims. Read that article and ask the friends on the other side of the issue about the contents of that article. At the last Board of Supervisors' meeting, the Director of General Services stated the main member benefit is access to the software. ICLEI has a software program that allows you to calculate how much energy Roanoke County uses and this is information from VDOT, Highland Gas and Highland Propane. So you put all these things about road miles traveled and how much electricity was used and that kind of thing and you can receive information as to how much pollution is caused, was caused by each of those different categories. She went on to state the software is the only software that allows to you calculate what a community is using in energy. If you're not going to calculate that you're not going to find out what you're doing is making a difference. And finally one of the things she said was there's no other software out there that calculates what the community uses. January 28, 2014 95 spent about an hour yesterday researching emissions inventory software tools. I found an emission software tool similar to ICLEI, CACP software. It's called URBEMIS. It doesn't require $1,200 membership fee. It's free. Please see the report prepared for the unified air pollution control district. In the report, you will find an evaluation of various emission software CACP and URBEMIS being urban emission was evaluated. It was recommended by the report. CACP is being used by ICLEI. Lastly, please do your research. Their own website states the UN environment program hosted the founding congress for ICLEI charter at the UN headquarters in 1990. Chairman McNamara commented the Board did receive the documents that you prepared. Kristin Peckman of 8131 Webster Drive stated she is from the Hollins Magisterial District. She stated she is a person concerned about the environment in which she lives and the environment she will hand over to future generations but she also have a supervisor that thinks we have to save money above all. So setting aside conspiracy theories and even the scientific validity of climate change, let's just look at the dollars and cents. What does this $1,200 annual fee membership in ICLEI buy us? How much has Roanoke County saved in utility costs alone? I'm sure this information is available to you. Air pollution has been reduced. We have avoided being sanctioned by the EPA for nonattainment of the ozone standards. If we had reached that nonattainment level we would have been sanctioned with fines and requirements to retrofit such things as gas stations and industrial plants. Furthermore, reduction in air pollution means better health for all of our citizens and ill health for our fellow citizens costs us all in higher insurance premiums. The ICLEI software has enabled RCCLEAR to provide assistance to citizens to help them reduce their impact on co2 and other air pollutions and to help them also save money in energy costs. Their energy and accompanying financial savings will improve the economy for all of us. So finally I'm asking you to please retain membership in ICLEI. Bob Peckman of 8131 Webster Drive stated he has a PHD in physics if that means anything. I think the real problem here is whether we believe in science and science is not a religion where we apply ethics and principles to shape what we believe. Science is a systematic observation of what is in the world around us. We collect all the facts and form the simplest explanations possible to explain them. If we observe one fact that's not explained then we have to form a better explanation. But the fact must be real and also observable. So whether or not we believe in global warming or evolution or that the earth revolves around the sun, none of this should have any influence on the Board of Supervisors. The evidence for global warming becomes more overwhelming every day. The freezing cold weather we have experienced today, the freak mild weather last week, these are examples of what global warming predicts. We can't prove that any individual event is due to global warming but we can show that we would not have all of these events without global warming. There are many things in science 96 January 28, 2014 where we cannot see every event and positively link every event to a cause. We're satisfied using our electronic devices even though we can't see any electrons. All we can see is the evidence of their presence. Global warming is a new event. We have applied theories that explain everything else and we have seen that they fit with the levels of co2 in the air. We add up the new levels of co2 that we are producing and they match what we see in the air. This is not belief. This is not even rocket science. It's like balancing your check book. What are the implications of responding to global warming? Say we put better insulation in our buildings, we burn less fuel, we make less co2 and we burn less money and have more to distribute into the economy. We also produce less mercury and poison, less of the world's food supply and we poison less of the forests with acid rain. Does this go against anyone's beliefs? Then there's the noise about the United Nations taking over the world, and forcing us to live the way they want us to. The UN can't make us do anything, not one thing. There's no harm in listening to others in this world and making our contributions. There is no harm in respecting others in the world. Because this membership is chicken proof and seems in the long run that we need to stop being influenced by extreme ideology and we need to do what's economically smart for Roanoke County. Chairman McNamara reminded everyone to address the Board as a whole as opposed to any individual Board members. Nell Boyle of 6516 Henry Farms Road in Roanoke Virginia stated she is here today to ask for your continued support of ICLEI. I would like to outline why the program is good for business and economic development in Roanoke County. On January 23, 2014, the New York Times published an article on coke cola and climate change called industry awakens to the threat of climate change. The article begins... "Coke cola has always been more focused on the economic bottom line than economic warming but when the company lost an operating license in India due to a serious water shortage in 2004 things began to change." It goes on to discuss the challenges coke is facing globally trying to access water and sugar that they need to produce their product. The article continues, coke reflects a growing view among American businesses and mainstream economists who see global warming as a forest that contributes to low gross domestic products, higher food and commodity costs, broken supply chains and increased financial risk. Based on this information, Coke as well as many other organizations, are adapting their business practices to address the effects of climate change. In the Roanoke valley our local economic development organizations are being asked by potential new businesses about sustainable practices in the region including regular measurements of our emissions. Participation in ICLEI makes a clear statement that we are measuring and monitoring our air quality and taking steps to improve our environment. In closing, I would like to remind you several years ago the Roanoke valley came dangerously close to becoming an EPA nonattainment zone. A nonattainment zone indicates poor air quality rising at a January 28, 2014 97 dangerous level. Falling into this category has serious implications on economic development, restricting growth and loss of potential funding. Participation in ICLEI with its widely recognized measurement software shows the EPA and new potential business that is we're making every effort to improve our air quality and reduce pollution. James Garris of 3108 Honeywood Lane in Roanoke Virginia stated he does believe in global warming as a major manmade cause, however, he does not believe in a conspiracy to rob any government of its sovereignty. He also does not believe big foot or any other conspiracies involved with ICLEI. He also doesn't think you should join it either and that's a strange position to take so I would like to tell you briefly why. First, all the ideas, the programs and the data of the organizations in ICLEI can be found by researching on the internet. So you don't have to be a member to gain the knowledge. Second, we also could have businesses and citizens get together with the County and come up with a whole bunch of good ideas on our own. In fact, he actually would encourage you to do that. We also do not do the obvious thing. I'll give you one plainly obvious. We have police cruisers that are big fuel guzzlers, very inefficient and in other parts of the country or Europe they go with alternative energy cars. Why couldn't we do that? We probably could. We don't need a membership in this organization to do it. Finally there's the controversy. When you get this many citizens even if it's not a majority this upset, this concerned and this suspicious, it's probably a good idea to discontinue the membership and proceed on our own and I think the citizens and this government is fully capable of doing that. Finally, Mr. Chairman, request you're about to take a vote on this issue and in order to avoid a lawsuit I request you have the actual Clerk, which is Mr. Goodman, record that vote because the person currently taking the minutes and recording the vote in his understanding no longer has a job title or accurate job description. Dan Crawford of 2311 Kipling Street in Roanoke stated a question might arise. What's this guy from the city doing coming here to Roanoke County noseying in our business? The answer to that question brings us face -to -face with the issue. What is it? What you introduce into the atmosphere affects me and everyone else. What I introduce into the atmosphere affects everyone else. It is now a global issue. We don't talk about Virginia warming we talk about global warming because here it comes. It's all over. It is devastating. It is costly and it is undeniable. Mankind's role in this, science is clear as we introduce primary co2 into the atmosphere we create an unstable environment. Atmosphere is really hard for us to grasp just what that means. We go out and look at the sky. It seems to go on forever. That's the sky. That's not atmosphere. Atmosphere is thin, it is fragile. We do impact it every day. Science tells us if earth were the size of a basketball we would dip it in water and if brought up, the film on the water would be equivalent to the thickness of our atmosphere. People hike and walk places on this planet that are so close to the atmosphere they have to have a 98 January 28, 2014 bottle of oxygen to survive. It's thin, it's fragile and we are changing it. We measure this change in carbon dioxide. At the beginning of the industrial revolution, industrial age it was 280 parts per million. Several decades ago scientists told us it exceeded 350 parts at grave risk. 2009, 280. Last we may hit 400 and we are screaming up in parts per million carbon dioxide and just like science predicts, destabilized climate. Every year we're experiencing greater numbers of catastrophic devastating weather events; every year. We've already had one this year. Just last week in the entire 48 states the lower 48 the average high temperature on one day was 22. It was 10 degrees warmer in Canada and parts of Alaska. Unprecedented, historic, costly and it is not even February yet we're already talking about what are we going to do? We're going to run low on propane. We have fuel problems. We've got problems; mankind has problems. I'm here saying stay the course. I appreciate the work Roanoke County has done to lower the carbon footprint. ICLEI is one of the primary tools in that effort. Stick with it. I thank you for the effort and thank you for this moment and wish us all well, wish us luck. Brian Lang of 6752 Quail Place in the Hollins District thanked the Board for their service and patience in dealing with this issue and for listening to all the input you're receiving. I think that if Roanoke County were to end its membership in ICLEI it would send an incorrect message. It would be wrong in two ways. First of all, it would send the message that Roanoke County is not a dynamic community where progressive companies should locate. Secondly, it would send the message for the wrong reasons. It would send the message based on input from people who believe rather fringe opinions about hard science and about the United Nations' inability to affect local governments within the United States. The only way the United Nations could impact life directly in Roanoke County would be if our local government, you five (5) individuals were not doing your jobs and I don't think that's going to happen. Another thing I think needs to be kept in mind when maintaining membership in ICLEI is if you were a dynamic employer, a growing business looking for a location to cite a new plan or headquarters and had to choose around the country and you saw several of them who can tout the specific things they are doing that are in favor of reducing carbon emissions versus a locality which couldn't point to membership in ICLEI anymore because they have taken a step backwards we look at Xerox was mentioned earlier. It's not just Xerox. It's every major American company and every major foreign company. We just received notification last year in Roanoke County of a group employing nearly one hundred (100) people in Roanoke County at above average salaries and wages; a German company. Germany has been making a very aggressive transition toward renewable energy. These things matter in that culture and if they were to come to Roanoke County and receive the message well we're not really aligned with progressive ideas on the environment. We would rather take a step backward and ignore the hard science. I think it would make, whether it's that company or any other major company, it would make them less likely to choose Roanoke County as a place to employ people. I January 28, 2014 gg hope you will take that into consideration. John Brill of 1727 Memorial Avenue in Roanoke City stated before I get to my prepared comments it's been said many times that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Mr. Brill stated he know this Board has been presented before with scientific evidence demonstrating that carbon is not a greenhouse gas that it is an indicator that greenhouse warming has occurred but that it is not a driver of warming and so with that hard scientific proof to continue to assert that is a religious belief. But my comments here are for the benefit of the republican members of the Board of Supervisors Mr. Bedrosian, Mr. Peters and Mr. McNamara. Congratulations by the way on your recent elections. In January of 2012 the Republican National Committee passed the following concerning the United Nation's Agenda 21. "Whereas it's a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism beings social engineering and global political control initiated at United Nations Conference on Environmental Initiatives held in Brazil in 1992 and whereas the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives through local sustainable development policies such as smart growth, wide land project, regional visioning projects and other green or alternative projects and whereas this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical sustainable development views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual choices and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment and whereas, according to united policies they described the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources accorded us by society and the environment to which would be accomplished by socialists, communist redistribution of wealth. National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice. Now therefore be it resolved that the Republican National Committee recognizes that the insidious nature of the Agenda 21 and thereby exposes the dangers of the plan and therefore further resolved that the United States government is legally bound by the United Nations 21 treaty. It has never been endorsed by the US Senate and be it further resolved that the state and local governments across the country be well informed of the implications of the implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for sustainable development and we endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant money attached to it and therefore be it further resolved that upon approval of this resolution, the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of the Republican members of congress all the Republican candidates for congress and so forth at the 2012 Republican party convention and to recommend adoption in the republican platform of 2012 disposition to affirm at the 2012 Republican National Convention opposition." I'm over my time, but we are strongly rejecting UN agenda 21. So opposition to Agenda 21 and ICLEI is for the Republicans and I hope you will take this into consideration. Jim Woltz of 10564 Sugar Camp Creek Road stated he has been a 00 January 28, 2014 resident for over forty (40) years. ICLEI, if you go to the internet you can certainly pick up ideas on both sides and some radical ideas on both sides. Go to their site, it's a feel good, sound good, website and I think everybody's going to have a hard time debating whether we have global warming. It was zero degrees at my house this morning and minus 8 last week but we're not here to debate that part of it. It's certainly cheap enough its $100 a month, almost too good to be true. It reminds me of a sign, here get your free cruise but there's a hook or agenda at the end. I'm not here to debate the value of ICLEI. I haven't studied enough to know the in -depth reasons good and bad about it. I do think that sometimes resolutions get passed on feel good intentions, but they can have some troubling results. Recently, I was privileged to listen to a presentation from a group that had done a study for the Roanoke Valley and clean air and clean water were in the top four (4) of those issues. What I wanted to do, I asked did you have a profile of the people that were asked the questions from the rural, urban, agricultural people, were they residential background? They didn't know the background of the person asked. I then asked well how did you ask the question about clean air and clean water. Certainly if you ask somebody, if you're in favor of clean air 99.9 percent would say, "yes I am." If you ask, however, would you give up your fireplace, a TV or wood stove, your 1950 Chevy and the outside furnace I'm thinking the results would be different. Same with clean water, if asked a question about clean water everybody would say yes. If asked if you would you give up to the local government control of your springs, your creeks, your streams, your well and your pond and let us dictate some new rules as to the quantity of your water that you receive from your land and the answer would probably be different also. The person didn't know the profile or how the questions were asked, so I really didn't get an answer to that. All would say though is a lot of times these things surface to the top of the list. Laws gets passed and restrictions recent made and potential property -owner rights are lost or the use of those are lost and I've been investing in Roanoke County land since I was 23 years old and I just ask that you carefully dig into all the issues with this and you make, as I'm sure you will, a good judgment call about whether to continue this or not. Weigh out the impact that it has on all citizens both those in the rural areas that have land and use their land and make sure that they're not impacted with the results of this. Chairman McNamara thanked Mr. Woltz and apologized for not having his name right; as he was reading off a list. He then thanked Mr. Woltz for his service on the Planning Commission. Mark Hanson of 184 Vista Lane in Fincastle, Virginia stated he is a former member of RCCLEAR with a Roanoke County company. The $1,200 spent on membership in ICLEI is multiplied many times on the positive effects of saving money for the County and home owners. Renewable energy and efficiency is like mom and apple pie so why is the tea party against it. The small amount that the County spends on $1,200 annually benefits many times over and also helps energy efficiency and poor January 28, 2014 101 people. So I'm just requesting that you stay with ICLEI. On the comment on being cold here it's cold here but setting heat records in California and South Africa. So the polar vortex is not only twisted due to the climate change when you view it from the North Pole but anyway, thanks for having me. Don Witt of 4101 Eagle Circle in Roanoke asked the Board if they are tired yet. I've been through this before. I served on the Roanoke planning commission for 19 years so I've kind of gone through this on landfills and a few other issues so I know what you're going through. As a planning commissioner, I tried to look at both sides of the issue in order to make a judgment. So when I looked at this question I asked, really what is the issue here? It's not that the United Nations police is coming to Roanoke County and dictate sustainability requirements. The issue to me is does the County want to manage its environment and do the residents of Roanoke County want a sustainable community or not? For me, I would say yes, and I believe the majority of residents in Roanoke County would also say yes and I believe that ICLEI is a tool to help us going in that direction. But one of the things I would like to do is kind of point out some of the sustainability strategies that the County has done in the past, successful ones. The County built spring hollow reservoir a sustainable water resource that is sustainable for years to come. That source has allowed companies that track industry in that the companies that need dependable water can get it in Roanoke County. The County participated in a system which is an ICLEI strategy or encouragement and today this system attracts high paying jobs, companies want to promote the quality of life in Roanoke County and this is one of the best jewels in the quality of life in Roanoke County. There are over 30,000 users of the greenways in one month. So it's acceptable. In working on stormwater management, this is sustainable requirement. Obviously, it's designed to mitigate millions of dollars in flood damage and not to mention loss of productivity. And you're also looking at broadband. I think ICLEI is helping you get through that. We would not have these assets if the County did not have a vision to develop sustainable strategies. It has made the community a better place to live. How we go about this in the future and how much the government is involved is the real question but I believe in banding a tool such as ICLEI is not the direction we should be going. Mike Barruntos of 3159 Berry Lanes stated he lives down the street here. Let me just begin by letting you all know I'm disabled, even though I don't have my cane I take a lot of medication so I may not make sense sometimes. I hope I can express my thoughts. I know I'm not going to make sense to those who are in favor for the other side, but I would like to thank you all for the opportunity to let me share my opinions, thoughts on this ICLEI matter. Right now it's on a voluntary basis; I can see some disagreement where this is just getting the foot in the door and someday we're going to be amazed to have to comply with regulations, burdensome regulations. Everybody has been talking about the UN; not only the UN but Roanoke County. It will start with 02 January 28, 2014 studies, which I read one and it wasn't a scientific study and some day we're not going to have a right to an opinion or have a right to be able to come here and voice our concerns because it's going to be mandated what we set our thermostats on and water and all that. This is just a foot in the door. I mean that's my opinion, you know. But I'm originally from Kansas. I moved here about seven (7) years ago. I just went through a divorce and I gave my wife the house and we lived by Edgewood and I'm just a little Mexican, but I didn't need any scientific studies to tell me I might save some money if I, you know, put, what do you call it, put the stuff in the attic. You know? I can't think right now. Anyway I changed the windows and I did save money, but I didn't have anybody to tell me to do that. I took care of my own business. I don't know if that's just innate to Kansas or does Virginia have people can think? Am I the only person here with a computer and television? I mean, wasn't it just a few years ago, about the scientists at the epicenter of all this global warming was proven to be a fraud and the scientific so called scientific studies were erroneous and the scientists' studies opposed global warming and they were rejected and weren't published in the scientific community. This is all about money and control. I remember reading several years ago how England invested their entire country's money into global warming and they want global warming to be. Here is Al Gore flying in his jet all over the world and making millions of dollars putting fear in people's lives. I just hope you guys in Roanoke, I lived here ten (10) years and it's a nice little town. Mostly from northern Virginia but I just want to close, I read a book by an economist. I forget the title. Anyway, he focuses on the matter of why progressives like to feel good. They like to feel good about control other people's behavior; like Bloomberg. And, you know, Virginia and I'm a citizen here we need to be able to have our own volition to do and think what we please. You know? And I'm sure with the right information people would make the right decision. Chairman McNamara stated he was going to recess until 9:22 p.m. It will give the Clerk an opportunity to provide us any correspondence that we received in the email discussion and will also give everyone a chance to stretch their legs. Following that short recess we will begin the discussion on this topic and in all likelihood that will probably take a lot of time so it's probably good we take a little recess. You're all more than welcome to stay and participate in watching our discussion. Participate is probably not the right word. There will not be an opportunity for citizen's involvement in the discussion but you're certainly all very welcome to stay and watch the proceedings. At 9:30 p.m., Chairman McNamara called the meeting back into session and closed the public hearing. He commented he would like to thank those that did take time over the last few hours to drop us a message through the email system Supervisor Moore stated she does not know how much she can add to the comments that have been made here tonight. Whether one believes in climate change or not we should all be good stewards of the earth and tenants of how to leave the earth for the next generation. The air we breathe has no boundaries. We have the January 28, 2014 103 opportunity to keep the air clean. We are all affected by our own actions. I heard on the national news last week that California was having issues because China's smog was blowing to California. The carbon dioxide that emits from our vehicles every day goes into the atmosphere. This has been proven to be a fatal toxin. Think about the millions of vehicles that emit this toxic gas and where does it go. The membership allows us to learn from others and allows us to measure our progress and I am very supportive of remaining in ICLEI. Supervisor Bedrosian stated first of all he does appreciate hearing the comments on both sides. He stated he thinks this is our community and this is the way we have to do it. Sometimes you'll hear comments, well, you know, it's a shame we have to come out and talk about this. Well I don't think it's a shame at all. I think it's the right thing to do. The community has to gather together and discuss something that obviously is an issue. People have an issue with this; it's been going on for years. Now as he is listening and writing notes and is hearing a common theme and I think they're valid. So let me just walk through a couple of them. Everybody talks about the virtues of a clean environment. Come on, I mean how can we dispute that? Right. One side would almost be saying to the other you guys don't want a clean environment and we do. Let's dispel that. Everybody wants a clean environment. Everyone wants clean air. That is something he thinks we all agree on. The difference he thinks is there's not just one choice or one way to get there and he thinks that's the difference. Everybody that comes up associates clean air, clean water with ICLEI, really? When did that happen? There are lots of choices. We've heard about people and many different organizations that do this type of work. We talked about Xerox, Xerox does that too. It's a private company that does that. It's great. There are so many other companies that are in that field. Now I think what ICLEI does is it centralizes everything into a government form and that's what I think gets people nervous, when government starts doing it and we say it's voluntary. That was also a theme that was brought up. He would like to go back to the source documents and this was actually creating ICLEI milestone 1 greenhouse gas emissions inventory. There was created by part of the group writing these documents and when you go back and say okay so we say it's voluntarily, now, here are the 5 points of this voluntary program. Conduct emissions inventory, adopt a target, develop a plan, implement policies rules, regulations, laws and monitor. Well what part is voluntary? Folks, he thinks we need to have this healthy debate. We can't just say it's voluntary when we go back and I'm not taking, you know, I'm not taking over people's words. He is just going back to this like going back to the constitution. He is going back to the source document for ICLEI for Roanoke County. Doesn't sound voluntary to me when you itemize it like that. We talked global warming. This issue has come up all night long and one theme he also hears is even if it's not happening isn't it good to help the environment? If it's not happening, this organization says their number 1 benefit and priority is to reduce the local community's contribution to global 104 January 28, 2014 warming. I don't want to be a member of an organization where we're saying well we may not even believe what they stand for and their priorities, it's not really that important. It may or may not be happening. That's what a lot of people are saying tonight. This group is stating it's their number one thing and he thinks it is people's personal opinion. He thinks climates fluctuate. Obviously it's snowing outside today. When it's hot people say this and climates change all the time. We have been doing this since the 70's. We had the freeze scare and we've been going on and on and on. It seems like it directs policy. There's always got to be a crisis in our communities in America for things to get done. Well he thinks that's just natural. So he thinks that is important to know the philosophy of the company you're dealing with, extremely important to know that. He does not think we just brush it aside. He advised he thinks you have to then say no. I absolutely believe in manmade global warming and that's why I want to stay with them because that's what they believe. Everything we move towards is going to be based on their premise, this is what they believe. Somebody said we were governed by their charter. It was read here too. Once you're part of ICLEI, you're part of the charter that they have and that's what they think. Currently from what I heard too was the trend is people are dropping off the bandwagon. People are hearing about this and people are removing themselves because what happens when you have all of these mandates and regulations and monitoring you are heading in a certain direction and you need to say that's where we want to go or that's not where we're going to go. The big issue about freedom too and I think we talked about cost savings. Everybody agrees that was a common theme. Who doesn't agree with cost savings? So many people came up and talked about things they're doing and I applaud that. The question is whether that should be a government mandated, government dictated government driven or should it be your own personal freedom? If I want it drive my Ford SUV and burn gas and spend the money I should have the right to do that. If I want to crank my heat up at my house I should be able to do that. I think it's my own personal choice, and I think everybody should have their own personal choices in life to make. Because the alternative is we all have to do it and it can't be voluntary. We all have to walk in the same path and that's something I think we need to seriously consider; that's why I would vote to say remove us out of ICLEI. When you say that it doesn't mean okay now let's start polluting and I think that's the sense we all get. No. Look at other organizations, what they can do that's not as controversial as this organization is by their own documents. I would like to stop there and open it up for others for discussion. Supervisor Church stated he is a believer in clean air and clean environment. He does not think anyone is not. He has said on at least five or six (5 or 6) occasions that he also believes we have very capable people in Roanoke County that can do the same thing and that's his take on this. Would the people that are so anxious to continue to be a conservationist would they be just as energetic if we remove ICLEI? January 28, 2014 105 Of course you should be. ICLEI is not a magic cure in my opinion. We've got people and low and behold there's software out there. We're not going to stop cleaning up our environment if we drop out of this organization. The $1,200 is not the issue. Someone made a comment about 16 cents, he's probably right. That's never been the issue in my opinion. Contrary to what the Roanoke Times wants you to think they like to paint the picture and they're here tonight and who knows what is in tomorrow morning's paper but they like to pick out anyone. He has been the poster boy for ten or twelve (10 or 12) years but that's okay and they like to talk about what happened in 2007. What they forgot to put in the article was all five (5) of us Board members in 2007 really didn't know what it was. It sounded good, clean up, clean air, clean water. No harm. Because he voted yes the first time along with four others, he is a flip flopper, whatever that means. But it's just a fact of life that what's real and what you read in the printed media are worlds apart. We are carefully and religiously capable of taking care of Roanoke County without an organization with the letters UN. UN has always been an organization that he is afraid of and thinks most Americans would if they look at the history of the UN and every involvement with the United States of America and any involvement with anything we've ever participated in you cannot count on them. Never. They're not our ally in almost every case. So why do we want the UN or any other outside organization outside of the United Stated involved? Why do we need them? The answer is clearly we don't need them. Those of us that are very willing to save the environment and he is one of them. Who wants to ride behind an exhaust pipe with exhaust coming in your windows? Nobody. Who wants to drink dirty water? One of the speakers said nobody. It's just that we have an opportunity to say to any organization anywhere we're very capable of taking care of this situation. Global warming whether you believe in it or not, we don't need someone pushing the buttons for Roanoke County. There have been a lot of things in the history of this country that began with a small door opening and one foot in the door and suddenly years later half of our nation is so regretful with what happened. Why even take this chance. Supervisor Peters stated this is his first statement and please don't print this the wrong way in the paper is if we're the County announced they were going to stop trash collection people would go, you're crazy. But if we said Roanoke County is going to stop collecting trash but we have another company that will do it because it's a cost savings will keep the roar down to a minimum. I guess this is a personal issue to me and I will get through my notes here because I believe this is an issue for citizens of Roanoke County. After our last public meeting, we were upstairs to a work session we listened to Jake Gilmer with Livable Roanoke valley. In his presentation he showed us the initiatives the commission is working on. I believe he said they were in connection with Virginia Tech to provide clean air, water, preserve natural assets. Now here we're meeting again based on personal feelings. The reason why it keeps coming back up and there's nothing to substitute the item that we're proposing to remove. He wanted to 106 January 28, 2014 remind everyone that our dues are paid through October. We owe it to our citizens to find a suitable replacement. Whether you like it or not there are benefits to ICLEI and again we owe it to our citizens to exhaust all avenues before removing this. He believes that we should be stewards of the environment as we've heard tonight because it does affect us. Where you stand on global warming to him is irrelevant. It's about taking care of the world around us. Personally as a citizen he would expect this Board to exhaust all avenues. Just short a few years ago, (3 years ago) he was treated for lung issues himself. I have family with asthma and I have a daughter who was born with underdeveloped lungs. So I was out in the hallway and basically put on the spot of well you're this and you should vote this and blah blah blah this is personal to me. I'm not stuck on the conspiracy theory. To me it's personal. We're heading into muddy water. The ICLEI item is a budget item. If we get rid of it in the budget that's fine. He appreciates everyone's input tonight but believes that as a Board we need to address the concerns. We heard the concerns of clean air, clean water and if we open the flood gate to review every line item in a public hearing we as a Board will never accomplish anything. The reason he says this is because we are in the midst of placing one of the most significant taxes on Roanoke County citizens that has happened in a long time, a stormwater fee. You can dress up a pig but it's still a pig. It's a tax. In the meanwhile, he wants staff to provide to this Board with a suitable replacement. Mr. Chairman with that said I make a motion that this will be put into the budget process that we will review the line item at that time and that is his motion. Chairman McNamara stated to clarify the motion; Supervisor Peters is essentially laying the item on the table until budget development time. Supervisor Peters advised that's correct and it also gives our staff the time to bring back to us if it's with Liveable Roanoke Valley and Mr. Gilmer with his connection with Virginia tech. He stated he thinks we owe it to the citizens. The motion passed with the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Peters, McNamara NAYES: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Noah Tickle of 1603 Frosty Lane stated he has changed this a little bit on it but due to the comments and things that has been made tonight he would like to add that carbon deception is as storm water deception. It's all about the tax and it comes down to you all and you have to deal with it. That's the way it is. Every life form is for good environmental stewardship. However, when a socialist model is attempting use in our constitutional republic and it's illegal it must not be used. All life forms share each other's chemistries to complete the most godly of all, carbon life cycles. They live inside January 28, 2014 107 of us. They live outside of us. We all live together. So who among us is going to control the sun? That is global warming. That is climate control. Chairman McNamara asked Mr. Tickle to please pertain his comments to something besides ICLEI because we've already heard the ICLEI and closed the public hearing on the ICLEI. Mr. Tickle responded his comments were about the climate control and things like that. He not going to say anything about ICLEI and how about the fact that he has three (3) minutes? He was given three (3) minutes. The day the deception clowns turn the heat up and down from the sun, he will listen to their so called superior intellect and look at their sheep skins bought off with taxpayer money to crank out the deception we see in their political circus. Without the sun we are chilling at minus 350 plus degrees Fahrenheit below zero. The carbon here on planet earth was created billions of years ago by super nova suns of certain size throughout the galaxy. Carbon is a very strong structure. God's nature uses carbon because of this. It is much like we use reinforcement bars and fibers in our mini - concrete structures. That is why the godly form of carbon molecular carbon dioxide commonly referred to as CO2 is used by plants to provide life on earth. It is God's plan. Without plants there would be no life on planet earth. Without carbon dioxide there would be no life on planet earth. It is the same, yet we have the ignorance among us trying to deceive us with their ignorance deceptions that is CO2 is bad. To avoid these ignorant types farmers for years now are moving farming into greenhouses to increase CO2 levels up to three (3) times more than there is outside in the atmosphere. To give healthy plant growth atmospherically, we need more than four (4) times the present, approximately 400 parts per million. Well during the time when plants were big and animals were big the count was approximately 1500 parts per million. It is right now at a count of about 400 parts per million. The atmosphere is in a starvation cycle. We need more CO2 in the atmosphere. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Moore stated she would like to thank everyone for coming out tonight and braving the weather. We appreciate your comments and reports. Be safe going home. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he also appreciates hearing both sides of an issue. It's great to do that. That's what a representative republic is all about and so he also appreciates everybody coming out and speaking what's on their mind, what in their heart and what they believe. Supervisor Church stated first he wants to offer condolences again to the Bailey family who at age 59 passed away, which is much too early and offer his prayers that God will be with you and your family during this tremendous upheaval and sorrow in your family life. It pales in comparison, but he wants to say thank you and offer his 08 January 28, 2014 congratulations to Northside High School. We had two (2) buses yesterday morning before the sun came up with band members and cheerleaders and approximately one hundred (100) people and headed to the State capital to be awarded on the floor of the House and the senate with resolutions and by the way they are the State football champions this year, and he meant to mention they're the only school in the history of Roanoke County ever to have a state football championship. We overcame injuries. The kids were so excited when the new governor came out and warmly took the time to shake their hands and have photos taken with individual players. We had a football out there, but we couldn't quite pass it around but on the steps of the capital. These are things these young people never forget and they'll have photos that they will keep forever. The staff came out along with and I was grateful to Senator Ralph Smith, Senator John Edwards and our Delegate Chris Head. They took the time to come out of their busy agenda items in the Capital and to mingle with the players the cheerleaders and families. This is something so meaningful and we had a wonderful trip and the lunch. Every single person, the players, cheerleaders and families felt this was such a wonderful experience to go to our State capital where the government in the USA began. Congratulations to the principal again and his staff and guidance of Coach Torrence and I think I was allowed to say we're going to do it again next year. Supervisor Peters stated he too wants to thank everyone for their comments tonight. He knows it's been a heated debate over quite some time. He knows that we have spent a lot of time as a Board over the last two meetings, but he is hopeful and prays that we can get on with County business. We have a lot of, in his opinion, very large issues facing us that we need to get to business. Again, thank you for your time tonight. He hopes everybody has a safe trip home. Chairman McNamara stated just a few things just from a good news perspective. If you're not aware, Roanoke County is evaluated from a debt perspective and we're AA1, AA plus; both essentially AA ratings. AAA rating eludes Roanoke County principally because of the revenue intakes. Our mixture is eighty -five percent (85 %) residential and fifteen percent (15 %) commercial. In order to get an AAA rating, we would need to have something closer to a seventy- thirty (70/30) split, so that's not something that happens overnight. It's something we certainly are looking for but we are proud of the County and the debt rating that we have currently. He did not comment on the ICLEI debate since the question was called, since a motion was called to lay on the table is no longer debatable at that point. I want to point out a few things. First off Mr. Garris's comment. I hope I don't misquote you. I think his comment was we're spending an awful lot of time on ICLEI when perhaps there are other more important things we should spend our time with. That comment resonates. The gentlemen from Vinton alluded a little bit to that. We have a lot there's a lot to running a County and the amount of the divisiveness of the ICLEI program is something that I think we can find another solution. To provide similar benefits without the divisiveness that comes with that program. Do I think that the citizens are against ICLEI? Generally speaking I don't January 28, 2014 109 think they are. I had a good fortune of knocking on probably better than a thousand doors or maybe more during the election cycle,and I ask folks what concerns you about our government if they give me a chance. What bothers you? And I heard a lot of things. I did hear debt. I did hear they don't like taxes. I did hear storm water issues. I did hear I heard an awful lot of different things that people thought we could do better and that's good. I didn't hear ICLEI. Not one single time. So I don't think it's nearly the citizen's issue that some might believe it is. I think the citizens of Roanoke County want us to provide good sound government at the best and reasonable cost to them as a taxpayer, use their taxes as investments, investments, good investments for Roanoke County for their citizens to move Roanoke County forward, to make Roanoke County desirable for business and industry, to leave Roanoke County as a better place for their children than they have and that's what our goal on this Board is I believe. That's my personal goal and I think the appropriate motion was made and I was very happy to support that motion. One other thing then I will close. We are treading on a dangerous precedent if we're going to take a line item out of a budget midway through a budget and start debating it because there are an awful lot of line items on that budget and I can assure you that we can go down this dais from left to right and you're going to find 3, 4, 5, 6 things in that line items in that budget that each one of us firmly believes doesn't belong in that budget. So if each one of us takes 4, 5, 6 things and rounds up folks to speak for it and speak against it and we're going to do that and rehash a budget every single meeting we aren't going to get the work that we were put on this dais done. We will not get it done what we need to do for Roanoke County. I thank you all for your patience tonight. Thank you to staff for sticking with us and thank you for those that could not make it that did send us emails. We did read them in the break and I look forward to our next meeting. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m. Deputy Clerk Approved by: 110 January 28, 2014 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY