Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/25/2014 - RegularFebruary 25, 2013 137 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 February 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 an invocation was given by Pastor David Burgess of Belmont Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER was taken. Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:03 p.m. The roll call 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; Amy Whittaker, Public Information Officer and Deborah C. Jacks, Deputy Clerk to the Board IN RE: BRIEFINGS 1. Introduction of new County Public Information Officer (B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator) Mr. Goodman introduced Amy Whittaker, Roanoke County's new Public Information Officer. He advised Ms. Whittaker had worked at the American Red Cross prior to joining the County. 138 February 25, 2013 IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution amending the Smith Gap Landfill operating policies for the Host Community Improvement Fund for the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority (Bradshaw Citizens Association and Daniel D. Miles, CEO of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority; Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) Mr. Miles, and representatives of the Bradshaw Citizens Association were in attendance to answer questions. Ms. Green outlined the need for the resolution and Dan Miles explained the changes in the policy. Supervisor Peters asked just for clarification would they build a recreation center or similar. Mr. Miles advised yes, the Association would come up with a plan, present to the Resource Authority and then receive final approval from the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Church welcomed the members from the Bradshaw Citizens Association. He advised they are looking at several projects to enhance their community. Chairman McNamara inquired if the County is obligated to fund every year and can the contract be change. Mr. Miles advised in the affirmative stating it is part of the operating permit. Additionally, Mr. Miles noted now they are incorporated they can borrow funds. RESOLUTION 022514 -1 AMENDING THE SMITH GAP LANDFILL OPERATING POLICIES FOR THE HOST COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR THE ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted landfill permit conditions and operating policies on June 27, 1989, for the Smith Gap Solid Waste Disposal Facility; and WHEREAS, the operating policies provided for the creation of a host community improvement fund; and WHEREAS, this policy limits the use of this fund to improvements to the landfill agency property; and WHEREAS, Resolution 022409 -5 adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 24, 2009, amended the Landfill, Rail & Transfer Station Permit Conditions and Operating Policies for the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to read and provide as set out below; and February 25, 2013 139 WHEREAS, on July 12, 2011, Board of Supervisors approved the Public Improvement Plan as presented by the Host Community and approved by the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority and the Roanoke County Planning Commission NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the Operating Policies for the Host Community Improvement Fund for the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority are hereby amended as follows: Existing Policy A Host Community Improvement Fund ( "Fund ") will be established through the donations from the Landfill Agency for the purpose of public improvements for the Host Community. The Host Community is defined as the area within 5,000 feet of the landfill property along with the rail corridor. Donations will be made annually in amounts of $10,000; however, the Fund shall never exceed $150,000. The Fund shall be utilized for capital improvements having an estimated useful life of at least ten (10) years that will benefit the Host Community. The capital improvements must be located on public property within the Host Community and must be made available for public use. The Bradshaw Citizens Association, made up of citizens from within the Host Community, may develop a Public Improvement Plan ( "Plan "), with assistance provided, as needed and available, by staff of the Landfill Agency, for the express purpose of utilizing the Fund. Prior to implementing the Plan and the Landfill Agency expending any or all of the Fund, the Plan must be approved and authorized, in order, by: The Landfill Agency; the Planning Commission; and the Board of Supervisors. Amended Policy [Note: New lan_qua_ge in bold and underlined, proposed deletions are strikethrou_ghl A Host Community Improvement Fund ( "Fund ") will be established through the donations from the Landfill Agency for the purpose of public improvements for the Host Community. The Host Community is defined as the area within 5,000 feet of the landfill property boundaries along with the rail corridor. Donations will be made annually in amounts of $10,000; however, the Fund shall never exceed $150,000 $250,000.00 The Fund shall be administered by the Bradshaw Citizens Association through the process outlined below and shall be utilized for capital improvements and associated annual operating costs, having an estimated useful life of at least ten (10) years that will benefit the Host Community. The capital improvements must be located on public or Landfill Agency property within the Host Community and must be made available for public use by all residents of the Host Community The Bradshaw Citizens Association, made up of citizens from within the Host Community, shall may develop a Public Improvement Plans ( "Plan or Plans ") from time to time with assistance provided, as needed and available by staff of the Landfill Agency, for the express purpose of utilizing the Fund. Prior to implementing any the Plan and the Landfill Agency expending any or all of the Fund, all the Plans must shall 140 February 25, 2013 be approved and authorized, in order, by: The Landfill Agency; the Planning Commission if necessary and the Board of Supervisors. 2. That this policy amendment shall take effect immediately upon adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Request to approve participation in and conditions of the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCA) grant for fiscal years 2014 -2015 and 2015 -2016 and to allow participation by the City of Salem (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Tracy Buzzo, Program Supervisor) Mr. O'Donnell outlined the request. Tracy Buzzo was in attendance to answer any questions. Supervisor Bedrosian stated this allows us to budget early. Mr. O'Donnell advised it would go into next year's budget and the following year's budget. Supervisor Bedrosian inquired if that was normal with Mr. O'Donnell advising yes if it is the intent to fund. RESOLUTION 022514 -2 TO APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN AND CONDITIONS OF THE VIRGINIA JUVENILE COMMUNITY CRIME CONTROL ACT (VJCCCA) GRANT FOR FISCAL YEARS 2014 -2015 and 2015 -2016 AND TO ALLOW PARTICIPATION BY THE CITY OF SALEM WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has participated in the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) program in the past, allowing the Court Service Unit to provide direct services, substance abuse services and probation activities associated with the Juvenile Court; and WHEREAS, through the Juvenile Intervention Services Program of Roanoke County's Court Services Unit, the grant funds have been administered to assist the court by providing immediate and random urine screens, community service, restitution and providing intensive supervision such as Home Electronic Monitoring and Outreach Detention services and WHEREAS, the Court Services Unit of the Juvenile Court serves the youth of both the County of Roanoke and the City of Salem, and WHEREAS, the Court Services Unit desires to provide services through the Juvenile Intervention Services Program to serve the youth of both the County of February 25, 2013 141 Roanoke and the City of Salem utilizing the funding from the VJCCCA grant and other appropriate funds. Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County will participate in the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act for fiscal years 2014 -2015 and 2015 -2016 and will accept said funds, appropriating them for the purpose set forth in this Act until it notifies the Department of Juvenile Justice, in writing, that it no longer wishes to participate in the program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Administrator or the Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute a local plan on behalf of the County of Roanoke and City of Salem, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Roanoke will combine services and grant resources with the City of Salem, and the County, as operator of the Juvenile Intervention Services Program, will serve as fiscal agent for these localities. On motion of Supervisor Peters 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: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation to the Roanoke County Public Library in the amount of $500 from the William L. Whitwell Trust (Diana Rosapepe, Director of Library Services) Ms. Rosapepe outlined the request for the ordinance and advised there were no contingencies or stipulations other than the benefit of Hollins Library. Ms. Rosapepe advised the Hollins librarian was in attendance to answer any questions. Supervisor Bedrosian moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for March 11, 2014. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Ordinance accepting and appropriating funds in the amount of $28,713.10 to the Department of Social Services from the Virginia Department of Social Services (Joyce Earl, Director of Social Services; Jimmy Lyon, Business Process and Management Analyst) Mr. Lyons outlined the ordinance. Ms. Earl was in attendance to answer 142 February 25, 2013 any questions. Supervisor Church moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for March 11, 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 to amend and reordain Chapter 13, Offenses - Miscellaneous, of the Code of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, by adding section 13 -10.1, designation of police to enforce trespass violations (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) Chief Hall advised there were no changes from the first reading. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 022514 -3 TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 13, OFFENSES- MISCELLANEOUS,OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, BY ADDING SECTION 13- 10.1, DESIGNATION OF POLICE TO ENFORCE TRESPASS VIOLATIONS WHEREAS, §15.2- 1717.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, permits any locality by ordinance to establish a procedure whereby the owner, lessee, custodian, or person lawfully in charge of real property to designate the local law enforcement agency as a "person lawfully in charge of the property" for the purpose of forbidding another to go or remain upon the lands, buildings or premises as specified in the designation; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the County of Roanoke that designation of the police to enforce trespass violations at various locations in the County is necessary in order to preserve the health, safety and welfare of the public; and WHEREAS, the Chief of Police, in consultation with the Commonwealth's Attorney and the County Attorney, shall promulgate rules, regulations, and /or procedures for the acceptance, use and recission of such designation; and WHEREAS, the decision as to whether to accept or rescind any such designation is solely within the discretion of the Chief of Police or his designee, who may base his decision on factors including, but not limited to, resource levels of the police department and the proper allocation of resources; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 11, 2014; and the second reading of this ordinance was held on February 25, 2014. February 25, 2013 143 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows 1 . That Chapter 13, Offenses - Miscellaneous, is hereby amended and reordained by the addition of Section 13 -10.1 as set forth below: Chapter 13. OFFENSES - MISCELLANEOUS Section 13 -10.1. Designation of Police to Enforce Trespass Violations. (a) The owner, lessee, custodian, or person lawfully in charge of any real property may designate the County of Roanoke Police Department and its officers as a "person lawfully in charge of the property" for the purpose of forbidding another to go or remain upon the lands, buildings or premises of the owner, lessee, custodian, or person lawfully in charge as specified in the designation. (b) Any such designation shall be in writing on a form prescribed by the Roanoke County Police Department and approved by the County Attorney and 1 . Shall include a description of the land, building or premises to which it applies; 2. Shall reference the period of time during which it is in effect; and 3. Shall be kept on file in the office of the Chief of Police or in such other location within the police department as the Chief of Police deems appropriate. (c) Any such designation shall give the Roanoke County Police Department and its Officers the power and authority: 1. To determine if a person has the owner's, lessee's, custodian's, or person lawfully in charge's; permission to go or remain upon such property; 2. To issue "notices forbidding trespass" to person(s) without such permission; 3. To arrest person(s) found to be in violation of such notice; 4. To testify in court on behalf of the owner, lessee, custodian, or person lawfully in charge to enforce the notice forbidding trespass and the trespass laws. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect 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 2. Ordinance accepting and appropriating funds in the amount of $19,625 to the Roanoke County Public Schools Elementary Artistically Talented Program for fiscal 2013/2014 (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) 144 February 25, 2013 Ms. Owens advised there were no changes from the first reading. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 022514 -4 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $19,625 TO THE ROANOKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS ELEMENTARY ARTISTICALLY TALENTED PROGRAM FOR FISCAL 2013/2014 WHEREAS, each year the gifted art program collected tuitions for the after - school art programs and summer camps offered to students identified for the program; and WHEREAS, based upon revenues from previous fiscal years, $12,500 (conservative approximation) for after - school programs and $7,125 (conservative approximation) for summer camp tuitions, the budget should be amended to reflect these tuitions accurately as revenue; 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 February 11, 2014, and the second reading was held on February 25, 2014. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the sum of $19,625 is hereby appropriated to the County School Board of Roanoke County elementary artistically talented program for fiscal year 2013- 2014. 2. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Moore 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: APPOINTMENTS 1. Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP/VIP) The LOSAP /VIP Board of Trustees has re- elected the following: Jeff Edwards - -Fire Volunteer Representative (four -year term 2/2014 - 1/2018); Doug Adams- - Volunteer Member at Large Representative (four -year term 2/2014 - 1/2018). Staff has recommended the ratification of these appointments. February 25, 2013 145 IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Bedrosian asked that the item concerning the School Board be pulled and considered separately. There was no objection. RESOLUTION 022514 -5 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February 25, 2014, designated as Item I - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5 inclusive, as follows 1 . Approval of minutes — January 28, 2014 2. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Carol A. Brown, Deputy Sheriff, upon her retirement after more than ten (10) years of service 3. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Linda P. Powell, Tax Clerk III - Master Deputy, upon her retirement after more than thirty -two (32) years of service 4. Confirmation of appointments to the Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP /VIP); Roanoke Valley Regional CATV Committee; Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission; Roanoke Valley- Alleghany Regional Commission - Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission F � Req rn of Understand (MO U) between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and Roanoke County SGhee Board v Req u t to approve a Mernerand I I regarding the Revenue Charing CormuI-a 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 5. Request to approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and Roanoke County School Board regarding the Revenue Sharing Formula A- 022514 -6 146 February 25, 2013 Supervisor Bedrosian stated the Board had a joint meeting last Wednesday talking about this new formula we have to allocate money between Roanoke County and the schools and he sent out emails to his constituents and he got a lot of feedback from them about "they did not want know that ", etc. According, he advised he wanted to make comments based on the information he has received and his own thoughts on this because he has some concerns. He advised it is not necessarily just about the structure of this, but the spending that we do in its entirety. We had a discussion about debt when we were at this meeting that took a lot of time; everybody seemed to talk about the fact that it's bad and no one likes debt. But we keep doing these programs and spending money in such a way that we keep increasing our debt. Our debt has increased three fold in the last twenty years and that concerns him, so he always gets a little uneasy when we're getting ready to allocate money again and go down the same track. He advised he thinks this year we are going over the $10,000 mark in school spending. He advised he thinks the County has moved over the $10,000 mark per child in Roanoke County for education, just so you may know he is a home school dad so he has a little different perspective on this whole thing. He is looking at $10,000 a child and at the twenty (20) children in the classroom and that's about $200,000 being spent for every classroom in Roanoke County for the full day classroom. He then hears teachers complain that they're not making enough and a lot of people want salary increases and that was also something talked about. So he looks at the $200,000 being spent per classroom, based on a twenty (20) student per class and the teacher is only making roughly between $45,000 and $50,000. He looks at $150,000 of money being spent per classroom that is not about the teacher and that concerns him that there is a lot of money being spent that really has nothing to do with the teacher - student relationship. In this formula we have to assume that sixty -five percent (65 %) of the money we give to the schools is the labor piece, and correct him if he is wrong. So sixty -five percent (65 %) because they're heavily labor in schools, obviously, but then you actually look at a classroom and it looks like only twenty -five percent (25 %) of the money is actually going a teacher. So there is an additional forty percent (40 %) and he is wondering what are we spending money on for education? And a lot of these things tangle together, because you talk about building new buildings. So maybe this is where some of this money is going. So we look at the Glenvar School, and he is not picking on the Glenvar School, because it could be any school. It is just that the Glenvar renovation project seems to be the one on the table now. We're talking and there is no exact number but we're talking $20 plus million. If you look at the $20 plus million and you add it to the interest over the next twenty (20) years, and you get maybe $30 to $35 million, would that be a good number, off the top of his head if you look at $20 million and you look at either three or four percent (3 or 4 %) interest you are looking at maybe a million a year. Whatever the project is you're looking at $30 to $35 million over the February 25, 2013 147 length of the project, if that's roughly right. So if you look at that and then the fact that this particular school has six hundred (600) students and you do the math it is $60,000 a student for the term of the renovation, life of the renovation. Now, this is always a sticky point because everybody would always say, hey, don't you think our children are worth it? He advised he has five children, so they're definitely worth it, but when he looks at this cost and says wow, and the projections show that student enrollment is decreasing and will decrease for the foreseeable future just because the way people are not having as many children. So we're at 600, starting to go down, down and we're spending $60,000 per child, is that really where we should be spending money, and should we be spending that much money? Is that the right way to spend it? If we had unlimited funds, yes, but when you don't and all of the money you spend is debt money that's difficult for me. So in kind of summarizing this it bothers him because in two years, the last two years of our budgets and he combined them both with school and the County we have spent $20 million in interest payments alone, just interest in the last two years. Roughly $9 million one year and roughly 9 something for the other year. In two years it is $20 million worth of interest on our debt and our debt is $182 million now. So the cost of having this burden on us is extremely high, just in interest. Imagine what you can do with $20 million. It's just gone. It is money that just disappears, it produces nothing, buys nothing, does nothing. Interest goes away; it doesn't accomplish anything that concerns me. We said the most conservative estimate when we were in that meeting if we just do the Vinton library and then the Glenvar, no more debt and we pay down that, our debt will still increase from $182 million up to 185 million in two years, even if we did nothing else except Glenvar, Vinton and still paying off debt it still will increase. When he looks back at this whole memorandum we put together he would vote no on it because he thinks when we put together a plan it needs to be a plan that also looks at not just how we share and spend money, but how we reduce, and in a detailed way, reduce the debt that is causing such a burden on us and making us pay so much in interest, just interest alone. That's what he wanted to talk about tonight, it deals with the memorandum and also the spending of money, both the school and us, but a lot now with the schools and how much we're spending and this debt will increase. Supervisor Church stated as far as the Glenvar situation, everything was relative for everyone and those watching at home. The Glenvar High school is at a stage of fifty (50) years of age. They show the facilities that he was embarrassed just to look at a bathroom or anything. With that being said, obviously he is in favor of adequate and modern educational facilities for his area, but it would be the same for another area in likewise condition, realizing we can't come up with $20 million. We didn't talk about a price that night because we had contractors in the room and we don't talk about the amount because we have people ready to make bids. With that being said, he is supportive of it. It is unique, most unique in the entire County. We've got a middle school attached to a high school, attached. They are compromising. When you 148 February 25, 2013 have a cafeteria, for example serving meals to two locations out of a single hall. One thing to note and he thinks it is good we talk about debt, and during the budget we can address areas of concern. What he wanted to make a point is, you know, our areas, our families, our children, it is our turn. Mr. Bedrosian nothing against your area but Burlington and Mountain View were done a few years ago and Cave Spring middle school in Ms. Moore's area. We've got a chance to do something while he hopes the construction rates remain low. He uses his home, he knows he is going to spend double or triple, but he could not buy it if he had to buy it all to begin with. So we've got to take the step incrementally. Maybe somewhere in the next year or two or several years, we will have to recognize our debt load, but we've got a method already enhanced with these schools. He stated he thinks it is a good proposal, it happened right about the time he and Mr. McNamara were elected, before we had nothing and he think it's given us a way, an avenue where we can address the needs. Ms. Owens stated she sees the memorandum of understanding as dealing with the operating side. We've had an agreement like that for a very long time and this is really refining and revising that to account for the last several years with in adjustments that we do need make relative to operating. The debt is completely separate and we will be having future discussions on that and it has separate policies around that. Chairman McNamara stated he wanted to touch base on that and he is glad she said that because that was the very first thing he was going to talk about. Somehow or another we have taken the memorandum of understanding, which should be a great news item that is unique in the Commonwealth of Virginia, that creates a formula for two Boards to allocate revenues that is fair, that then allows each Board to utilize their own expertise and talents within their organizations to maximize what they can do with those allotted revenues. We have taken a formula that allows the Boards to work together to better serve our citizens. Now how we can turn this memorandum of understanding, which should be one hundred percent (100 %) good news item into a debt discussion, somehow befuddles him. But we have turned debt into a discussion at just about every meeting we've had since the beginning of this year we have talked about debt. We have talked about debt like debt is some evil, evil enemy. In talking, he does not have any debit in his household; we shouldn't have any debt in the County. Well there are ninety -five (95) counties in Virginia, and there are ninety -five (95) counties that have debt. There are thirty -nine (39) cities in Virginia and thirty -nine (39) cities that have debt. There are 500 companies in the Standard and Poor's 500 and there are 478 of them that have debt. Debt is not a bad thing. Debt is for a homeowner. We want to talk about how much a house costs when you buy it on debt. Well for a person the best way to reach financial security and soundness and safety is most likely home ownership. If you did not have debt you would never have homeownership. So you're not spending more money you're creating wealth that you can then pass on. He does not know anybody who has bought a house and paid cash for it that didn't inherit it. I'm sure it's February 25, 2013 149 been done, but it is not the typical way. To demonize debt like we have done, let him talk about these big numbers. Let's put the big numbers in perspective. After our Board meeting, or meeting with the school Board, Channel 10 talked about Roanoke County's huge debt burden that is going to prevent us from doing things we want to do. The very next story was Roanoke City got AA rated, what good news and what a good job they are doing with finances. Let's look at the facts, look at the localities around us, Lynchburg, Roanoke, Salem, Franklin County and Montgomery County. None of them are rated as high across the three rating agencies that Roanoke County is. We are the best rated. So the finance experts that know and understand something about debt believe we're managing debt effectively. If you want to look at a per capita debt of the best engines of economic growth in Virginia currently. The top ten (10) counties /cities from an economic growth perspective right now our debt level per capita is forty -seven percent (47 %) below theirs. Our debt level is higher than some. If you look at the ten (10) worst performing localities in the Commonwealth of Virginia, our debt level per capita is about fifty percent (50 %) higher. So it is all a matter of where you want to be. What we're talking about here is a memorandum of understanding that is a revenue sharing, unique, put together by the hard work of the staff so the School Board and Board of Supervisors and we will be talking about debt and where we go with debt in a follow up meeting two weeks from today. Chairman McNamara then moved approval and asked for discussion. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he would like to make a couple of points. The memorandum of understanding is the mechanism that allocates money to the schools and to Roanoke County to spend. He wanted to make a point about how much money does go to the schools and that is why he made the point about $10,000 a student and what that translates in to. Just because we have money and it's there and we divide it up this and this doesn't mean it's right. We're spending more money than we really should be spending and that's why it is $10,000 a student, $200,000 in the classroom. Maybe there are some issues there that we shouldn't be spending all of that money. So it's harder to separate operating from debt because operating expenses then do become part of the debt issue and the debt issue definitely becomes part of the operating. If you've got a debt like we do and we've spent $20 million in debt interest alone that could have been used to do things in the operation since it does effect, they both intertwine and to try to tear both of those things apart and say leave this over here and leave this over there they talk, they definitely go together. The other thing, this discussion of a mortgage versus what we spend in the schools he thinks is totally relevant. When a person has a mortgage they pay on it and it disappears when they get older; it is gone. We are in a mode of always having expenditures, debt that keeps rising, so he thinks it is more apt to say in a household when you buy something you're always buying thing for your house on debt. He thinks that's what we're doing; forget mortgage. It is more we are buying everything we want to buy, we're buying a car, debt; 150 February 25, 2013 Refrigerator debt and we extend it over 10 years, 15 years, so soon enough these payments get so high and that is an operational expense. When you have a line item in your operation that says $10 million or $9 million is just on interest payments and he is thinking how many firefighters could we hire for $10 million every year we're spending on interest. How many teachers can we give salary increases to? This is the issue we're going to get. It gets so tight we can't deal with the everyday operation because we have such a high debt load and high interest load. So those are my comments on it. Supervisor Peters stated he is going to respectfully disagree with the gentleman from Hollins. It is easy to talk about one house, how many houses do we have in Roanoke County. Are you willing to walk out to the folks in Glenvar, and nothing against Glenvar, but he was embarrassed for Mr. Church based on the pictures we saw the other night. Do we put that on hold? We're also paying off our debt, we learned that the other night as well; there is projects getting ready to drop off, but we're having to incur more debt to get a building built in 1964 up to where it needs to be today. He stated he takes issue with the $10,000 per student and he expressed this in our last work session that it is easy to use your household versus the Roanoke County schools but you're also not providing a nutrition system, a transportation system, you're not having to educate and provide the needs to handicapped students across our valley. So he stated he wants to commend Ms. Owens and Ms. Hodge from the school system on the work they have done. It is a great piece of work. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he does not like it when it comes to discussions about whether or not someone is doing a good job or not, this hasn't been a discussion about that. What is the credit rating of the federal government right now? Chairman McNamara stated it is AA. He stated he always hears these comments that we are AA or whatever we are and the federal government is $17 trillion in debt and is AA rated. He stated he just tries to keep everything in perspective we're all here to do the same thing, we're all looking out for our constituents making sure that we don't get down a road that's going to be difficult for our citizens to weather and is going to be a burden on them. He thinks that's what we're trying to do, and says it in that spirit. Chairman McNamara stated just one comment on the federal government. There is about four (4) or five (5) jurisdictions in the world that are AAA rated. He used to know them at one time, Australia, Canada, but anyhow four (4) or five (5). The United States government was one of them at one time. The reason the United States government is AA and not AAA is because of Congress. It was because Congress could not get along, could not work together to move the Country forward. It was not part of the Country's inability to pay or whether the Country was capable of the debt load but it was uncertainty of the government. He certainly does not want Roanoke County to ever be downgraded because of uncertainty in our government. Mr. Peters stated since we went down the pig path of debt, once again he would ask Mrs. Owens if she could clarify, we have a fund already set up between our two February 25, 2013 151 governments that's servicing this debt it's not necessarily coming out of our budget in a lump sum every year, it is being funded out of a separate entity, servicing our debt on the $182 million? Ms. Owens stated we have an agreement between the County and schools where both are budgeting and this past year it was $2.9 million each out of their operating that we were budgeting to put into that particular account takes the funding from both the county and the schools as well as other debt drop -offs that is funding both the principal and the interest payments on the debt that's due for the county and schools. Mr. Peters stated so the clarification that he is looking for and if he misunderstood last Wednesday, he will take the blame, but we did not, as Mr. Bedrosian said in the last two years, out of our operating monies we did not spend $20 million in interest payments. It came out of this fund that has been set up for years and years that we have been putting money into. Ms. Owens stated we do have a fund or account that has been set aside where we are accumulating money for the required debt and principal and interest payments. What came out of the school and operating county operating budget last year was the $2.9 million that was contributed into that account as well as from previous budget appropriations and so forth the debt drop -off and other sources of funds are being accumulated in that account to be able to pay the debt payments. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: Supervisor Bedrosian IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Moore moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: 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 January 31, 2014 5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and Encumbrances as of January 31, 2014 152 February 25, 2013 6. Accounts Paid — January 31, 2014 7. Treasurer's Statement of Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of January 31, 2014 IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 3:57 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 2.2- 3711.A.1, Personnel, namely discussion concerning appointment to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None The closed session was held from 5:07 p.m. until 5:23 p.m. At 3:58p.m. Chairman McNamara recessed to the 4t" floor for work session and closed meeting. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss Roanoke County's Stormwater programs — Part I, Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) ( Tarek Moneir, Deputy Deputy Director of Development) In attendance for this work session were: Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development; Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator; B. Clayton Goodman III, County Administrator and David Henderson, County Engineer. Mr. Covey provided a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Bedrosian commented so this was managed by the State and now is mandated to the locality. He then asked what is the associated cost. Mr. Moneir responded that costs would be issued at a later work session. Supervisor Peters inquired if the fees are set by the State, are all localities the same. Mr. Covey responded yes, but the Board has the discretion of modifying the local portion of the VSMP fees if it sees fit. Supervisor Peters then inquired if we know what Roanoke City is going to do, with Mr. Covey responding their fees will stay the same. Mr. Caywood advised this ordinance would contain the minimum requirements. Supervisor Peters then inquired what if the County did not do any of this February 25, 2013 153 with the response being a minimum $32,000 fine. Supervisor Bedrosian stated this is a recipe for more sluggish growth. Supervisor Moore inquired once a developer turns over to the HOA, does it go to individual homeowners with Mr. Covey responding it goes to the HOA. He added the committee is looking at other ways to get this done because some HOA's are not workable. Supervisor Bedrosian asked if the State was still working on with Mr. Covey responding in the affirmative advising staff will need to go back and modify and would be to our benefit. Chairman McNamara inquired if other localities have already started with Mr. Covey responding in the affirmative stating Roanoke County is in Phase II. Mr. Moneir responded there have already been fines in the six figure range. Mr. Goodman advised to go with the minimum and should not put a lot more restrictions in. He advised he would like to see more analysis on what the first phase did and how close to meeting the letter of the law and the outcome. Mr. Henderson advised the County has had MS4 permits for 15 years and every renewal is more invasive. He advised our permit is similar to Roanoke City's wastewater permit. Mr. Moneir advised the Stormwater Committee is getting ready for their meeting and will be brought before the Board for their recommendations. Chairman McNamara advised if a special skill set was needed with Mr. Moneir responding the inspectors would need to by certified by the DEQ. He does not anticipate additional staffing at this time. The work session was held from 4:19 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. 2. Work session on Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Citizen Review Committee's fiscal year 2015 -2019 report (W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) In attendance for this work session were member of the CIP Committee Jim Nelson, Martha Hooker, Chris Flippen, Max Beyers, and Jason Moretz. The committee reviewed the draft CIP document advising it was a working document to look at capital projects in adopting a budget. There were 30 of 36 projects ranked with three (3) previously approved - Financial system, Vinton Library and Social Services. There were three (3) projects from COMM IT; however, the Governance Committee ranks these projects. The members advised this was a collective set of a community's values. The work session was held from 5:27 p.m. until 6:10 p.m. 154 February 25, 2013 IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION At 7:01 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of congratulations to the Northside High School football team for winning the Virginia High School League (VHSL) Group AA Division 3 Championship The Clerk read the resolution. All Supervisors offered their congratulations. RESOLUTION 022514 -11 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO NORTHSIDE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM FOR WINNING THE VIRGINIA HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE (VHSL) GROUP AA DIVISION 3 CHAMPIONSHIP WHEREAS, team sports are an important part of the curriculum at schools in Roanoke County, teaching cooperation, sportsmanship and athletic skill; and WHEREAS, the Northside High School football team has won their second State football championship, having also won in 2009; and WHEREAS, Northside High School won the VHSL Group AA Division 3 Championship on December 14, 2013 by defeating James Monroe by 24 to 10 at Liberty University; and WHEREAS, the Northside Vikings finished their regular season with an outstanding record of 9 wins and 1 loss; and WHEREAS, the Vikings defeated Brookville 55 -14 in round 1 of the playoffs; defeated Monticello 33 -27 in round 2; defeated Magna Vista 19 -7 in round 3 to reach the State semi - finals; and WHEREAS, next Northside traveled to Loudoun Valley High School on December 7, 2013, and won 29 -14 to reach the State finals; and WHEREAS, the Northside Vikings are the only high school in Roanoke County history to win a State Championship in football, achieving this feat two (2) times; and WHEREAS, in addition to winning the State title, the Northside Vikings have won the Blue Ridge District Championship for the fifth year in a row; and WHEREAS, the Vikings finished the season with 14 wins and 1 loss and have become the pride of the North Roanoke Community and the entire County of Roanoke; and February 25, 2013 155 WHEREAS, the Vikings are under the dedicated leadership of Head Coach Burt Torrence, Assistant Coaches Keith Robinson, Joe Kormann, Tyler Brown, Byron Dowdy, Joey Taylor, Josh Burgess, Donald Tucker and Tommy Williard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby extend its sincere congratulations to the members of the NORTHSIDE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM: Eric Johnson, Harold Buckner III, Jelani Carter, Jaylen Hill, Nathan Arnold, Austin Fisher, Dominic Dunnaville, Sam Krizner, Tra'Jackson, Carlos Basham, Dontese Johnson, Marquel Hurt, Will Culicerto, Zach Large, Rahiim Cunningham, Steven Webb, Juwan Washington, Jo Jo Wampler, Ben Plunkett, Kalin Conn, Josh Hardister, Tyler Doyle, Tyrek Roberts, Ezra Waddey, Hayden Porterfield, Corey Williams, Graham Guth, Dallas Gibson, Michael Daniel, Marc Lee, Philly Bartkiewicz, Jacob Plaster, Dylan Moran, TJ Edwards, Aaron Freday, Sami Abed, Jose Dinsmore, Cameron Murray, DeAnthony Muse, Tyler Goldston, Nathan Rice, Trevor Wolfe, Jordan Palmieri, Garrett Louthen, Gabe Diaz, Justin Johnson, Nathan Gray, Sam Paitsel, Logan Kithcart, Chance Hall, Matt Russell, Rajeon Cofer; and Ball Boys: Nick Crawford, Landon Saul, Eli Taylor, Bryson Graybill; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends its best wishes to the members of the team, the coaches, and the school in their future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Church 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: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES 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 (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) Mr. Thompson outlined the rezoning petition and advised the Planning Commission had approved five to zero. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing. There were no citizens to speak on this item. 156 February 25, 2013 ORDINANCE 022514 -8 REZONING 15.72 ACRES FROM PRD, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, TO AG -3, AGRICULTURAL /RURAL PRESERVE DISTRICT, PROPERTY LOCATED ON APPLE GROVE LANE, WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (TAX MAP #095.03 -02- 33.00), UPON THE APPLICATION OF CAROL LACHOWICZ WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 2014, and the second reading and public hearing were held February 25, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 4, 2014; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 15.72 acres, as described herein, and located on Apple Grove Lane (Tax Map #095.03 -02- 33.00) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of PRD, Planned Residential Development District, to the zoning classification of AG -3, Agricultural /rural Preserve District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Carol Lachowicz. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: A parcel containing 15.729 acres located on Apple Grove Lane being further described as Tax Map #095.03 -02 -33.00 and more particularly shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. and denoted as New Tract A -1 of record in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 29, page 135. 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None February 25, 2013 157 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 (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) Mr. Thompson outlined the special use permit and advised the Planning Commission had approved five to zero with two conditions. Chairman McNamara inquired if this would this be allowed by right in the C -2 District with Mr. Thompson responding in the affirmative. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing. There were no citizens to speak on this item. ORDINANCE 022514 -9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A RESTAURANT, DRIVE -IN OR FAST FOOD (SNOW CONE STAND) IN A C -1, LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, ON APPROXIAMTELY 0.33 ACRE IN SIZE LOCATED AT 3540 BRAMBLETON AVENUE, CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Daniel Smith has filed a petition for a special use permit for a restaurant, drive -in or fast food (snow cone stand) to be located at 3540 Brambleton Avenue (Tax Map #077.10 -06- 11.00), in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 4, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on January 28, 2014; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on February 25, 2014. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Daniel Smith for a restaurant, drive -in or fast food (snow cone stand) on 0.33 acre located at 3540 Brambleton Avenue in the Cave Spring Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2005 Community Plan, as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2 -2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that it shall have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood or community, said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1) The site shall be developed in general conformance with the concept plan, identified as Exhibit A. 2) The restaurant, drive -in or fast food use shall not exceed three hundred (300) square feet. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this 158 February 25, 2013 ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The provisions of this special use permit are not severable. Invalidation of any word, phrase, clause, sentence or paragraph shall invalidate the remainder. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Moore 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 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. Mahoney advised this was the second reading of this ordinance. The first reading was held on January 28, 2014. Mr. Mahoney asked to correct the State code reference in the last three lines of paragraph three to Chapter Thirty -One of title 2.2. Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this issue. Supervisor Bedrosian asked for clarification, a yes or no vote on this ordinance means what exactly for those viewing. Mr. Mahoney advised what a yes vote with this ordinance would do is it would amend an 1989 ordinance for the Board, and what that would do is shift to the County Administrator the authority to appoint a Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. A no vote would continue in place the 1989 ordinance, which, the Board makes that appointment. The concern would be that the way the 1989 ordinance is drafted that the Board makes the appointment, but the individual employee would serve under the direction of the County Administrator and as we have discussed in the past for a division of responsibility and authority. Supervisor Church stated he was fine until Mr. Mahoney said the last two sentences. When you go back to the 1989 ordinance that was the crux of this entire issue. According to your office it was really not the ends didn't meet each other. The 1989 was inconsistent with what we were doing, so if this is voted no then you're saying the Board would appoint the Clerk; the Board has already appointed Mr. Goodman. I'm trying to clarify. Mr. Mahoney responded if the Board votes no then the 1989 ordinance stays in place and what 1989 ordinance cites is what he described. Supervisor Church then asked for clarification and that would mean Mr. Goodman is not the Clerk with Mr. Mahoney responding in the negative. February 25, 2013 159 Chairman McNamara then moved approval of item R3 with the following changes: change number one per Mr. Mahoney's discussion we could change the title to Chapter 31 Title 2.2; the second change on page one of three remove item 2 the appointment of a Clerk is subject to ratification and confirmation by the Board and asked for discussion. Supervisor Church asked for his clarification were there any other changes than what Mr. Mahoney had just mentioned? The Chairman mentioned another item? Chairman McNamara stated the motion did remove item 2 from the ordinance, the appointment of a Clerk is subject to ratification and confirmation by the Board. Supervisor Church stated so in layman's terms if our Board doesn't like an individual that Mr. Goodman appoints, we don't have to accept it? Is that correct? Supervisor Peters advised the Board would have no control over that. Chairman McNamara stated if Supervisor Church wanted a legal opinion we can bring the attorney back up. Supervisor Church inquired of Mr. Mahoney for clarification; he just wants to be sure exactly what that means. Mr. Mahoney stated as he understand the motion, which would be paragraph 2, paragraph two provides for a ratification and confirmation vote by the Board with respect to any selection or appointment of a Clerk by the County Administrator. Supervisor Church then stated we would have the final say so basically if Mr. Goodman appoints whoever. Chairman McNamara asked them to go through the Chairman. Supervisor Church stated he wanted to be sure of this; if the Board goes with Chairman McNamara's deletion, explain the consequences with a yes or no vote. Mr. Mahoney stated if paragraph 2 were deleted from the draft ordinance that would delete the ratification requirement. Supervisor Bedrosian stated if we are removing that, the Board would have no ratification; the Board is out of the picture. So, if Mr. Goodman appoints somebody and we did not like that person, we have no say. We are removing the Board from the entire picture so Mr. Goodman can select someone he wants as Clerk and it is not subject to confirmation by the Board. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Mr. Bedrosian then stated so the Board has gone from a position of appointing a Clerk and directing the Clerk to totally out of the picture where the County Administrator now selects the Clerk and we have no say in that selection. So, if he voted yes then he would be giving him the authority to appoint the Clerk and he would not have any say in it. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Church stated he now has a lot of discussion because suddenly this thing took on a whole new life. This is not, ladies and gentlemen, what he felt it was going to be and he is sure people watching from home, does not how many people with their hands up in the audience, whatever, it is not what they thought it was going to be. This thing has taken on more shapes than you can imagine. Number one he is not even sure why we should even be here today, but that being said his comments are about 160 February 25, 2013 what has transpired. We had a Clerk to the Board that our Board appointed that worked at the pleasure of our Board that was a buffer between the citizens and the administrator, a safety zone where you folks and we folks constantly would have open and transparent communication; you know what it worked fine. Now, in 1989 we had a situation where the administrator controlled the Clerk, chaos, complaints, little or no transparency. That's why we've changed it in 2010 so we would have a check and balance for the citizens and us. The Clerk does not report to anybody except we five Board members. In our previous meetings the reasons we're doing this were, "why are we doing this ?" Why fix something that's working great? I'm told the Clerk didn't get an evaluation. We can do an evaluation in 15 to 20 minutes. He checked around and there are lots of employees in this building that has not had an evaluation, so that is not valid. Secondly, more transparency was an issue that totally cannot be true. The transparency, there is a stone wall there and third, and maybe most glaring, with respect to my fellow Board members, we have three new Board members ladies and gentlemen, this is their third meeting, two and a half meetings, months, weeks and are willing to make a change so important in my opinion. Now, one of the new members, Supervisor Bedrosian has stated openly and has taken a cautious approach. Why would we do something like this so quickly? Why wouldn't we wait a while and evaluate? Folks there has got to be something else that you don't know and he does not know what's going on. Now we're asked to give away any and all rights to keep transparency and open government is before you. He stated he cannot live with that you shouldn't want any of us to live with that. You know, he is sorry, for the young people this is a learning experience because this is true government, but it should never be in any Board, any Board, congress down to the lowest people we are, it should never be where when the number three votes are reached if the other folks on the Board really shouldn't say anything, folks that's not right. He stated he has been on this Board longer than anyone, it is my 15th year and he has been on the down side of 3 -2 and 4 -1 votes many, many times, but we're always appreciative and recognizing each Board's opinion. This is not grandstanding or politicizing. There is nothing for me to gain. He is just asking you what would you do logically. Apathy is sitting on this country, look at the number of people we have here tonight. Some of them are here for just what you should be, but hopefully if the citizens knew wholeheartedly the rest of the story they would have this place packed. The citizens are the losers, make no mistake about it. ORDINANCE 022514 -10 DENYING THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE 62789 -4 AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO APPOINT THE CLERK TO THE GOVERNING BODY AND TO PERFORM CERTAIN DUTIES AS SPECIFIED February 25, 2013 161 WHEREAS, Section 15.2 -1538 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, authorizes the governing body of every locality to appoint a qualified person to act as Clerk to the governing body in order to perform certain record - keeping activities; and WHEREAS, Section 4.01 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that the County Administrator shall have all the powers and duties prescribed in Sections 15.2- 1539 and 15.2 -1541 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that such other powers, duties, and responsibilities may be established by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, upon the repeal of Section 15.1 -117, the powers, duties and responsibilities are now found in Sections 15.2 -1539 and 15.2 -1541 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 2014, and the public hearing and second reading was held on February 25, 2014. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the Board authorizes and delegates to the County Administrator the power to appoint a county Clerk. 2. He or she shall be Clerk of the Board and will serve as custodian of the corporate seal of the County and shall have such other duties as prescribed by general law or as the Board may prescribe. The Clerk shall in addition (a) record in a book to be provided for that purpose all of the proceedings of the Board; (b) make regular entries of all of the Board's resolutions, ordinances, and decisions on all questions concerning the raising of money; (c) record the vote of each Board member on any question submitted to the Board if required by any member present; (d) preserve and file all accounts and papers acted upon by the Board with its action thereon; (e) give information to persons presenting communications or petitions to the Board of the final action of the Board thereof; (f) publish or cause to be published all reports, notices, ordinances, or other documents required by this charter or by general law to be published, except as otherwise expressly provided; (g) maintain all disclosure forms as required by Chapter 31 of Title 2.2 of the State code; (h) prepare all papers and documents for the meetings of the Board; (i) issuance of solicitation permits pursuant to Chapter 19, Article II, Section 19.21- 19.27. 3. That the Clerk may, and with the consent of the Board, appoint one deputy and such number of assistants as the Board may authorize. Either the Clerk or the deputy Clerk shall attend all meetings of the Board. Any of the duties of the Clerk may be performed by the deputy. 4. That if the Board chooses not to ratify and confirm the appointment of a county Clerk, such duties and responsibilities shall be performed by the County Administrator. 5. Before entering upon the duties of this office, the Clerk shall give bond before the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County with surety to be approved by such Clerk in an amount to be fixed by the Board but in any case not less than Two 162 February 25, 2013 Thousand Dollars ($2,000), the premium for which bond shall be paid by the governing body out of the general County fund. 6. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after February 25, 2014. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, the motion failed on the following roll call and recorded vote and the adoption of the ordinance was denied. AYES: Supervisors Moore, McNamara NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church ABSTAIN: Supervisor Peters ORDINANCE 022514 -10 DENYING THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE 62789 -4 AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO APPOINT THE CLERK TO THE GOVERNING BODY AND TO PERFORM CERTAIN DUTIES AS SPECIFIED WHEREAS, Section 15.2 -1538 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, authorizes the governing body of every locality to appoint a qualified person to act as Clerk to the governing body in order to perform certain record - keeping activities; and WHEREAS, Section 4.01 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that the County Administrator shall have all the powers and duties prescribed in Sections 15.2- 1539 and 15.2 -1541 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that such other powers, duties, and responsibilities may be established by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, upon the repeal of Section 15.1 -117, the powers, duties and responsibilities are now found in Sections 15.2 -1539 and 15.2 -1541 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 2014, and the public hearing and second reading was held on February 25, 2014. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows 1 . That the Board authorizes and delegates to the County Administrator the power to appoint a county Clerk. 2. He or she shall be Clerk of the Board and will serve as custodian of the corporate seal of the County and shall have such other duties as prescribed by general law or as the Board may prescribe. The Clerk shall in addition (a) record in a book to be provided for that purpose all of the proceedings of the Board; (b) make regular entries of all of the Board's resolutions, ordinances, and decisions on all questions concerning the raising of money; (c) record the vote of each Board member on any question submitted to the Board if required by any member present; (d) preserve and file all accounts and papers acted upon by the Board with its action thereon; (e) give information to persons presenting communications or petitions to the Board of the final action of the Board thereof; (f) publish or cause to be published all reports, notices, ordinances, or other February 25, 2013 163 documents required by this charter or by general law to be published, except as otherwise expressly provided; (g) maintain all disclosure forms as required by Chapter 31 of Title 2.2 of the State code; (h) prepare all papers and documents for the meetings of the Board; (i) issuance of solicitation permits pursuant to Chapter 19, Article II, Section 19.21- 19.27. 3. That the Clerk may, and with the consent of the Board, appoint one deputy and such number of assistants as the Board may authorize. Either the Clerk or the deputy Clerk shall attend all meetings of the Board. Any of the duties of the Clerk may be performed by the deputy. 4. That if the Board chooses not to ratify and confirm the appointment of a county Clerk, such duties and responsibilities shall be performed by the County Administrator. 5. Before entering upon the duties of this office, the Clerk shall give bond before the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County with surety to be approved by such Clerk in an amount to be fixed by the Board but in any case not less than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000), the premium for which bond shall be paid by the governing body out of the general County fund. 6. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after February 25, 2014. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, the motion failed on the following roll call and recorded vote and the adoption of the ordinance was denied AYES: Supervisors Moore, McNamara NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian, Church ABSTAIN: Supervisor Peters IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church stated he wanted to thank the community of Northside for coming out this evening. He further added that he wanted to thank the folks for taking time to be a part of this local government. He stated we are not perfect; we never will be that is why we are elected by the people, but when we make a mistake his people always tell him to think about it. He added he is never going to get it right all the time, but he has 18,000 people that tell him the majority of what he should do. He stated he is so thankful that this Board did not approve this. Supervisor Peters inquired of Mr. Mahoney stating he does not think the main question was answered; where is the difference between the 1989 Ordinance and the proposed ordinance. He did not see any difference and he was trying to get to the Chairman before he was called on for a vote, but needed clarification from him as to what the difference was. Mr. Mahoney explained the difference was applicable to the appointment power. So with respect with the 89 ordinance the Board of Supervisors made the appointment with respect to the proposed amendment the County Administrator made the appointment. Supervisor Peters stated but under the 89 164 February 25, 2013 ordinance, if he is reading correctly it says appointed by the Board, in this case it is Mr. Goodman. Or we could choose who we wanted and they serve in the direction of the County Administrator. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Peters stated he guessed we've chosen that person. He stated he has had a hard time understanding why we are at the point we are when we chose who we wanted and he can delegate it to whomever he wants it to be, he hope that makes some sense because the first part of the 89 ordinance it states that the Board may appoint a county Clerk who will serve at the pleasure of the Board under the direction of the County Administrator. By resolution we did that at a prior meeting. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Peters stated that's my question to you. We've chose who it is to which he can delegate to whomever he wants it to be. What were we accomplishing in the new ordinance? Mr. Mahoney stated he thinks with respect to the new ordinance it was an attempt to clarify what was in the 89 ordinance where you might have a discordant effect between a Board making an appointment of one person and that person being under the direction of the administrator there would be a potential conflict. That conflict is obviated when the Board appoints the County Administrator to do that, but in trying to anticipate a future situation there is always the possibility that utilizing the old 89 ordinance could have come into a discordinant or conflict situation. The Board eliminated that last month when it adopted the resolution under the 89 ordinance to appoint the administrator as Clerk. The one difficulty is that under the 89 ordinance and the Board's resolution the administrator can only appoint a deputy. Supervisor Moore stated we would just like to remind everyone of the last stormwater community meeting. It will be held on February 27, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. at the Glenvar Library. It is very important that the citizens come and listen to what is going on so you can better understand it. Supervisor Bedrosian stated the two most exciting things tonight he thinks we're seeing two young entrepreneurs; he just can't get over it. He stated he loves seeing it because that's what our country is all about, so it's great, good luck and he and his family will be there for snow cones and whatever else. With regard to the Northside players, he thanked Supervisor Church for putting that together and seeing all of the work he has done; it is great. I love to see athletes competing at the level that they do, it is a level of excellence, so that's great, and so he appreciates that. Thank you for the discussion we've had tonight. He knows we've all had a good discussion, he thinks and that's what this is all about. All of the sides should come out and talk and let the people decide what the best track is, so thank you and he also wanted to remind people too if you don't get involved and don't tell your Supervisors what you want to happen it is not good, it never is good on any level of government and he just hopes there are a lot of people out there watching and that will watch. February 25, 2013 165 IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m. Approved by: rah P. McNamara irman 166 February 25, 2013 PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK